Page images
PDF
EPUB

SCRIBNER, BURNS.

lic money. I think that we will all agree that one of two things should be done; either that the debates and proceedings be published, or that the Journal of this body be published. The committee recommend that the Journal be not published, for if the debates and proceedings be published, there will be no necessity for publishing the Journal.

Mr. HOADLY. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. SCRIBNER. Certainly.

Mr. HOADLY. I would ask whether it is not contemplated by the majority of the committee, that the larger portion of the Journal, nearly the entire body of the Journal, shall be included with the debates; and secondly, whether the debates can be intelligible without the Jour nal, including all the reports, all the resolutions, and the yeas and nays upon every important question.

Mr. SCRIBNER. The report of the debates and proceedings of the last Convention contained so much of the proceedings of that body as was necessary to render intelligible the debates had upon those proceedings. As a matter of course, our debates, if published, will contain so much of the proceedings, as set forth in the Journal, as will enable those who read to understand what members have been talking

about.

[blocks in formation]

It is said that the debates of our General Assemblies are not reported. That is true; but their journals are printed. Look at the volumes which are issued by the House of Representatives and by the Senate each year, and I will ask any gentleman to say what the probabilities are as to the expenditure of the public money in the publication of the debates and proceedings of this body, as compared with the publication of the House Journal of 1871, which is but a fair sample. Then, add to that the executive reports and the public documents which are published each year by the General Assembly, and I venture to say it will cost nearly as much to publish the Journal of this body without the debates, as it will to publish the debates and proceedings combined, as proposed by this resolution. We would then save very little, in fact, in that direction.

[ocr errors]

[SATURDAY,

It con

cause of the worthless character of the volume
handed down to us by our predecessors. It oc-
curs to me that it is not exactly becoming in
this body to pronounce a judgment of that kind
upon the Convention of 1850-51, or to cast ridi-
cule upon the debates and proceedings of that
body. It does not become us to pronounce a
judgment of that kind upon that body.
tained many distinguished, many eminent men;
men whom the State has delighted, and still de-
lights to honor. And I will ask gentlemen of
this Convention to say whether, worthless as
those debates have been pronounced, they
would be willing to have them stricken from
existence? Does not every gentleman know
that they have been of value-every gentleman
of the legal profession at least-in the consider-
ation and examination of Constitutional ques-
tions? And do we desire that years hence,
when some question may arise as to what led
to this or that course of conduct in this body,
that the people who are to come after us shall
be left without any such assistance as may be,
and quite probably would be furnished by a
record of our debates and proceedings? I hope
not; I certainly hope not. With all deference
to the judgment and opinions of gentlemen
here, I trust the Convention will adopt the re-
port of the committee.

Mr. BURNS. I understand the yeas and nays have been called upon the resolution reported by the Convention. I propose, in a few words, to give my reasons for voting for that resolution:

I was a little pained at some of the remarks of the gentleman from Cuyahoga, [Mr. GRISWOLD], especially in singling out by name some of the members of the last Convention, and particularly applying to one of them a name which upon a street corner, or in a barroom, or out of doors, might do very well, perhaps, by way of joke. I refer to a venerable gentleman living in the western part of the State, Mr. Sawyer. I undertake to say that Mr. Sawyer is the equal of any man in the State, in the way of practical common sense. He does not, I believe, profess to be an educated, or a learned man. But I think his record in all the public bodies of which he has been a member, will compare, in the line of plain, practical common sense, with that of any man. He is an old man now; he is not here. I would modestly suggest that the use of his name in the manner in which it was used here was not quite in good taste.

A member of the last Convention, from Licking What next? It is true that the publication county, Mr. Case, was referred to: he is now will involve the employment of an official re-dead. I had the pleasure of his acquaintance porter, and to that extent we will incur an ad- while living. He was a man of education ditional expense. But is the State of Ohio, and culture, a man of sense and judgwhich we are all proud to say ranks the third State in this Union, for the first time to set the example of withholding the publication of its daily proceedings and debates? Sir, I am as much in favor of economy as any man on this floor, but I do not like to see this body adopt a course of conduct which may be regarded as parsimonious, on the score of mere economy. It is said that the report of the debates of 1850-51 was utterly worthless, and it is urged upon us that we now should determine not to have our proceedings and debates reported, be

ment. I apprehend the sayings of Mr. Case in the last Convention, if examined, will be found to be equal to those of any man in it; and I think the pages that record the sayings of Mr. Case are about as few as those of any gentleman in that Convention. We all revere the memory of the venerable Mr. Hitchcock, now deceased, a member of that Convention and a distinguished jurist. But enough of that. I propose to vote to publish the debates of this Convention, mainly for the reasons given by the gentleman from Lucas, [Mr. SCRIBNER]. I did

[blocks in formation]

not come here to immortalize myself one way or another. I came here to discharge my duties as understand them, and as I believe my constituents desire me to understand them. What I say, and what I do, I am willing should be put in an enduring form, whether read or not, whether sense or nonsense. And I desire the sayings and doings of the other members of this Convention to be put in the same enduring form. I think it would be lowering the dignity of this great State, if it should be said that in a spasmodic effort for retrenchment and reform, to save a few dollars, we denied the people of this and the other States of this Union, a knowledge of what may be said here while we are engaged in the work of altering and amending our pres ent Constitution.

I do not quite understand the gentleman from Hamilton [Mr. HOADLY] that we are not here to frame a new Constitution, as did the Convention of 1850. I think the powers of this Convention are quite as great as were those of the Convention of 1850. They had the power to frame a new Constitution; taking the old one for what it was worth; adopting as much of it as they found to be valuable, and rejecting what they found to have received the condemnation of the people. That is the position in which we stand here. I think we have the power, if we see fit to exercise it, to take the present Constitution in pieces, and adopt a very little of it, or a great deal of it, as we may see fit-to substantially make a new Constitution.

I do not desire to go into any other reasons for my vote. Whether the debates of this Convention shall be valuable or valueless for future reference, has very little to do with me. I am willing, however, to say that the debates of the Convention of 1850 are not valueless. When we take the utterances of such men as composed that Convention, I say that in many instances they are invaluable in construing the present Constitution. I might name some of them, some who are living, and some who are dead; but I will not. They have left upon record opinions with reference to the powers and effect of the present Constitution that are invaluable, not only for the courts but for lawyers. I have had occasion, in one or two instances, myself, to refer to them, and they aided me very much in the investigation of the snbject under consideration.

Mr. COOK. The main reason which will induce me to support this resolution is the fact that our labors must be submitted to the people, and they will desire to know the reasons why we incorporated certain provisions in this Constitution and left out others. They must be informed of the reasons for the changes proposed, or the reasons for retaining any portion of the present Constitution; and there is no way by which we can so directly and so cheaply inform the people of the reasons of our action as by publishing our debates. We must either give them this information directly from our lips, or they will receive it from the editors of newspapers, who may be prejudiced for, or biased against, the changes we may propose, and who will be without a knowledge of the reasons which operate upon us. The people may be induced to reject the best Constitution that may be formed, or to adopt the worst, without pro

per information. It is a matter, then, which comes right home to the people; and I know that my constituents desire to know what we are doing day by day, in order that when our work is submitted to them, they may be able to pronounce an intelligent judgment upon it. As to the publication of our debates in book form, I care much less about that. But I think those gentlemen who pronounce a judgment against the book containing the debates of the last Convention, are those who have had the least occasion to use it. There is no lawyer but can go into his library and say there are ten or twenty or one hundred books that he has not taken from his shelves for twenty years; yet he would not be induced to part with them, for the time might come when he would need them. With your State Library open to the bar of the State, when your Supreme Court is in session, I undertake to say there are books which have lain there undisturbed for years. But they may be invaluable as containing principles which are worth the cost of the books, when occasion requires their use. It is so with these books containing the debates of the last Convention. If gentlemen will look into the Ohio State Reports, shortly after the adoption of the present Constitution, they will find that learned judges did turn to the book of debates of the last Convention, and make use of it as a light to guide them in construing the Constitution. After having gone through with it, pronouncing decision after decision, making themselves familiar with the reasons given in that Constitution, they now use the book less than before.

So it will be on the commencement of business in our courts under the Constitution we may frame. The courts will desire the book of our debates; lawyers will read it; judges will examine it. It will be of value until they ascertain the philosophy upon which the new Constitution shall be based; and when that is once incorporated into the judicial decisions of the State, they will not so much need a reference to our book of debates.

These are the reasons which will induce me to vote for the publication of our debates. As to the immortality of which the gentleman speaks, I have no desire for it. And even he may outlive all the immortality that he would obtain by its publication. I apprehend that honorable gentlemen here are actuated by purer and better motives. Instead of this being a reason for gentlemen to talk, it will be a reason for them to think, to philosophize, and put nothing in that book but what is sound reason and accurate philosophy.

Mr. PEASE. I no not know but that this debate has been sufficiently prolonged, and I do not know that I can add a single idea to what has been said; but I feel that I can divide the responsibility between the gentlemen of this Convention who entertain the views that I propose to express. I am in favor of this publication. As has been said, I should not feel entirely satisfied with myself to leave this Convention with its work finished, and leave behind us no authentic record of what we have said and done, save what may appear upon the Journal of this body. Suppose that the bare proceedings, as recorded in our Journal, shall be published. How long will they be preserved?

[blocks in formation]
[graphic]

They will go out upon the wings of the morn- rendered to it. The expense of this publication ing, and when the dews of night shall have will depend upon the length of time the Confallen they will be no more. Twelve months vention may be in session. That we cannot dewould not pass round before you could not find termine until we get through. When we finish, a single record of anything that was done in a then we will know how long we have been in Convention the like of which, perhaps, will not session. I am opposed to the idea that we shall be held for twenty years. rely upon the services of the gentlemen of the press for the purpose of having our debates and proceedings published. I hope, therefore, that the report of the Committee will be adopted.

The objection to this publication, as I understand it, is put upon the ground of its expense. To a certain extent that is a valid objection. But it seems to me that if this Convention were to be managed, and its affairs to be controlled without money, the Legislature would hardly have sent us here. Has it ever occurred to gentlemen when they are talking about the length of time this Convention will be in session, or whether the alterations we may make in the Constitution shall be few or many; has it ever occurred to them that we do not know how extensive these changes may be?

It has been suggested that if we were a Convention sent here to tear things up by the roots, it would be proper enough to have a full record of our debates and proceedings. But it is said that we are here for a temporary purpose, to do some temporary thing. I do not desire to stay here any great length of time. The Legislature has seen fit to appoint this Convention; the people have seen fit to elect delegates to it. I know, by looking at the provisions of the present Constitution, that the Legislature of Ohio was under no absolute necessity of doing this thing. They had power within themselves, if they saw fit to exercise it, for there were but two or three changes required in the Constitution, to make those changes themselves, and submit them to the people. To illustrate; suppose their object was to change simply the judicial system of the State. They had the power to do that themselves; by a three-fifths vote they could have appointed a committee, had the proper amendments prepared, and then, without expense, have submitted them to the people of the State.

I think it is the expressed will of the people of the State of Ohio, through their delegates assembled in their Legislature, that more than this, perhaps, is required; that they thought that more than this might possibly be needed. It is for that purpose that this Convention has been called together. We are to look at this Constitution from its beginning to its close, and ascertain what amendment it may need. What shall be done, we can only tell when we have got through with our work.

That the different steps, the proceedings we have instituted here should be published, I have not the slightest doubt; it is due our people that they should be published; they require it of us. It is said that we are now living in the days of the newspaper and the telegraph; that we have no need of such a publication as this. I do not see that the necessity for such publication has thereby been reduced.

I have no positive assurance that these industrious gentlemen here, representing the press, will report our proceedings for their papers, or that the papers will publish them without more compensation than they will probably receive. I am not willing to leave it to such a hazard. I say let the Convention publish its own debates and proceedings, and I think this Convention should be willing to pay justly for the services

Mr. WILSON. I desire to make a remark or two in regard to some observations of the gentleman from Erie [Mr. ROOT]. What his observations had to do with my reasons for adopting this resolution I cannot see. I concur in the suggestion that perhaps no man ever thinks he, himself, ever talks nonsense. However that may be, one thing I think is demonstrated by the common experience of humanity; that he who talks a great deal must necessarily talk some nonsense.

I was utterly surprised at the self-sacrificing spirit of the distinguished gentleman from Erie County, for the reason that of all the opportunities for him to gain immortality, it seems to me this would be the best. I am quite sure I know of no one on whom I would thrust immortality more willingly than upon my venerable friend from Erie. It seems to me a Providential dispensation, as shown by history, that in all positions in life some fun and mirth shall be interspersed to soften the rigidity of things. Every thing, from a show up to a Convention, must have its " funny man," its man of mirth. It softens the rigidity of things that surround us in life. Well, my distinguished friend from Erie occupies that position in this Convention and in society. And for the benefit of future generations I trust that all the proceedings of this Convention will be reported in full. And I will have the impudence, as he may term it, to ask him to withdraw his objection to this resolution and let us have an opportunity to bestow immortality on him in his line; the best line of the kind I ever saw.

Mr. HITCHCOCK. I do not wish to engage at all in the discussion of this subject. But I desire to ask my friend from Cuyahoga [Mr. GRISWOLD] whose name appeared appended to the minority report, as I see there is no recommendation whatever in that report, what is the course proposed by him to be pursued in regard to the preserving of the action of this Convention, if the resolution should not be adopted. Does he propose to leave it entirely to the journal to be made by our Secretary, or will the question of the publication of the journal come up afterwards? Information upon that point may perhaps influence some of us here. the majority of the Committee except as to the employment of a stenographer. It is for the Convention to decide in reference to its journal. The debates, if published, will, of course, take substantially the place of the journal; so much of the proceedings must necessarily be included in the debates as will relieve the Convention from the necessity of printing the journal. We took no action upon the subject except simply to object to reporting and publishing the de bates verbatim.

Mr. GRISWOLD. We concur in the action of

[graphic]

MAY 24, 1873.]

HITCHCOCK, Rowland, CLARK OF R., TUTTLE.

Mr. HITCHCOCK. The point I called attention to was in reference to what was said by the gentleman from Lucas [Mr. SCRIBNER] in regard to the publication of the journal. The majority of the committee recommend no publication of the journal except so much of it as may be embraced in the debates. The gentleman from Lucas called attention to the fact of the probable expense of the publication of the journal, should it be published in full, as is the journal of the House of Representatives or of the Senate. I therefore asked this question in that connection, in order that we might vote understandingly.

Mr. ROWLAND. As the debates of this Convention may be published, and as the remarks of the gentleman from Cuyahoga [Mr. GRISWOLD] may go down to posterity, I desire to enter my protest against the allusions he made to a gentleman who represented Hamilton county in the Convention of 1852; a gentleman who is still living and one of our most distinguished citizens. I refer to the Hon. Charles E. Reemelin. While I have not always agreed with that gentleman, it is but justice to him to say that in extent of information, and in ability to grapple with great fundamental questions, he is to-day, as he was then, the peer of any man in

this Convention.

Mr. CLARK, of Ross. Permit me to say a few words more. Ít seems to me that our constituents who sent us here, intended that we should have our debates and proceedings published. They were perfectly aware that the debates of the Constitution of '50 and '51 had been published. That was a precedent, and they naturally would suppose that it would be followed by us, unless there were some good reasons for not doing so. I say therefore, it is a reasonable expectation of the people that our debates should be published. It is claimed here that the people will be fully advised by publications in the newspapers of what is said here. The newspapers are not going to publish our debates unless they are paid for it, and they will not be to blame for not doing so. The only way of preserving our debates will be by adopting this resolution and having them published as proposed.

on the score of expense, for no other strong reason seems to be urged against publishing these debates. Certainly, the people will not murmur at the cost of what may be of so much use to them.

Mr. TUTTLE. I desire to detain this Convention but a moment and only for the purpose of suggesting more distinctly, perhaps,one of the grounds which will influence me in casting my vote. It has already been suggested, and is well known to us all that this is not the final tribunal in determining what shall be done in reference to amending the Constitution. The people of is probable that our votes may be influenced and the State must act upon what we do here. If it determined in the light of discussion, it seems equally probable that the people might, in the same way, be influenced and enlightened. The discussion, the result of which may influence our determinations here, may have equal influence in determining the people in deciding whether or not that which we propose meets all the various views that are now entertained in the State upon many topics in regard to what ought to be done, and what is best to be done. I know it is said that newspaper publishers, enterprising men as they are, might possibly, if they thought it would pay, undertake this business of reporting at their own expense and enterprise. But I assume that if it ought to be done at all, the State ought to provide for the expense of it. It was done on a former occasion, and the debates were published, not merely by the State printers, but they were published by newspaper publishers, and within my recollection were circulated quite extensively through the community, and were read by all who took an interest in the matter while the Convention was in session. The people were perhaps just as well informed, or quite well informed in regard to the grounds upon which the action of that body was had as were the members themselves when that action was ready to be submitted to the people. I think they ought to have the same opportunity now. I think the publication of our debates would be beneficial, that it would tend to throw light upon the subjects considered by us, to bring about a unanimity of feeling and opinion among the people in regard to the subjects that are now agitated, and upon which they are greatly divided.

In addition to that, the people of the counties will expect to have copies of our debates sent to them to be preserved in the archives of the It has been suggested that we are not to do so county for further reference. Of course, there original a work as was done by the former Conis not a county in the State that has not one or vention. I do not know, really, how anymore copies of the former Constitutional Conven- body, at this stage of the proceedings, can tion. I have never myself heard of any com- tell how original or thorough our work plaint as to the expense of publishing those de- may be. We are authorized to make it as oribates. So far as I know, they regard them as ginal as we may see fit to do; and if, as valuable for purposes of reference. I had the very likely may be the case, we shall find a honor of being in the Legislature at the time great many things in the present Constitution the official reporter of that Convention, Mr. that need no change, we have but to say so and Smith, was elected. And as I recollect, there let them alone. In regard to those portions that was at that time no serious opposition what- we may change, we will introduce something ever to his election. He was elected by the Legis-new. It will be just as important that these lature, and the Convention afterwards thought it necessary that they should also elect him. For that reason, perhaps, the Legislature, when making provision for the calling of this Convention, made no provision for a reporter, but left the matter for the Convention itself to decide, thinking it entirely competent to do so. It seems to me that we should not hesitate at all

new things, so far as they go, shall be understood by the people, as it would be if we were going to change the whole Constitution. If we do but few things, the expense that has been complained of, the burden upon the people that has been referred to, I presume will be but comparatively light. I think, therefore, the objection upon that score falls to the ground.

YOUNG OF C., GRISWOLD, ALBRIGHT, ETC.

Mr. YOUNG, of Champaign. The few words I have to say is more as an explanation of the vote I shall give than anything else. I shall vote for the resolut cr as reported by the committee. I have hesi.. ted whether I should do so because of the expense, and because of another consideration that is a matter of a great deal of consequence to me. I fear the reporting and publication of our debates may extend the session of the Convention. But the publication will not be for mere ornament. I place my vote on this ground; it is the duty of the Convention to publish its debates so that the people may be informed of the reasons that have influenced us in the adoption of the amendments we may propose. That is all I have to say upon that point; this mere statement of that proposition I think is sufficient.

Secondly, it is the duty of the Convention to publish its debates, because in considering the amendments to the Constitution, what may have been said and done in the Convention will be considered as important in aiding the courts in their construction of the provisions of the new Constitution. It is the experience of every gentleman who has any experience or observation on the subject, that the debates of bodies like this, running back beyond the history of our own State, running back to the Convention which formed the Constitution of the United States, have always been referred to in construing the constitutional provisions under consideration. It is therefore the duty of this Convention to have its debates reported and published. I wish it might be avoided, first, because of the expense, and because I fear the session may thereby be extended. But I do not think we can avoid that duty, and I shall therefore vote for this resolution.

Mr. BEER. It is now pretty late, and it may be a very profitable way to employ the time of the Convention to continue the discussion on this subject. I therefore move that the Convention now take a recess until three o'clock this after

noon.

Mr. POWELL. I rise to a point of order. We passed a resolution the day before yesterday, that the Convention should meet each day at eleven o'clock, and that there should be but one session a day, until otherwise ordered. I therefore make the point of order that the motion for a recess is not in order.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The point of order is well taken. There is an order of the Convention now in force that there shall be but one session a day, and in order to take a recess that order must be suspended.

The question was upon adopting the first resolution reported by the committee, upon which the yeas and nays had been called. The resolution was as follows:

Resolved, That there be employed by the Convention a competent reporter, whose duty it shall be to make an accurate and faithful report of the debates and daily proceedings of the Convention. That the Committee on Reporting and Publication be authorized to invite and receive proposals from gentlemen qualified to discharge the duties of reporter as to the terms upon which they will undertake to perform said duties; and that said committee report to the Convention the proposals received, with such recommendation in respect thereto as may be deemed expedient.

The question was taken and there were yeas 61, nays 25, as follows.

[SATURDAY,

YEAS--Messrs. Albright, Alexander, Andrews, Baber, Barnet, Beer, Blose, Bosworth, Burns, Byal, Caldwell, Campbell Clark of Ross, Clay, Coats, Cook, Dorsey, Ewing, Foran, Freiberg, Gardner, Godfrey, Gurley, Hale, Hill, Hitchcock, Hostetter, Jackson, Kerr, Kreamer, McBride, McCormick, Merrill, Miller, Mitchener, Mullen, Neal, Pease, Phellis, Powell, Pratt, Rickly, Rowland, Sample, Scofield, Scribner, Shaw, Shultz, Smith of Highland, Townsend, Townsley, Tripp, Tuttle, Voorhes, Watson, Wells, West, White of Brown, White of Hocking, Wilson, Woodbury, Young of Champaign—61.

NAYS-Messrs. Bannon, Bishop, Carbery, Chapin, Clark of Jefferson, Cunningham, Greene, Griswold, Hoadly, Horton, Hunt, King, Mueller, O'Connor, Okey, Page, Philips, Root, Sears, Smith of Shelby, Thompson, Tulloss, Van Voorhis, Waddle, Weaver-25.

So the resolution was adopted.

substitute for the second resolution reported by The next question was upon the following the committee;

Resolved, That the official reporter be required to furnish daily to the printer of the debates (as soon as the same shall have been selected) the manuscript of his report of the debates and proceedings of the preceding day, or as rapidly as the said printer may be prepared to use it.

Mr. GRISWOLD. I desire to state that the minority of the committee, now the first resolution has been adopted, concur in the remainder of the report by the majority.

The substitute for the resolution was then

adopted.

The VICE PRESIDENT. No separate vote having been asked except upon the first resolution, the question will be taken upon all the remaining resolutions.

Mr. ALBRIGHT. There are some blanks to be filled in one of these resolutions. I move to fill the first blank in the fourth resolution by inserting the number 3000, as the number of the copies of the reports to be printed and bound. In connection with that I will state that I have before me estimates of the cost of an edition of 3000 copies, supposing the volume will not contain more than 1000 pages. If our session extend to but three months, it is fair to presume that the volume will not exceed 1000 pages. According to this estimate an edition of 3000 copies will be within $10,000.

Mr. ROOT. I would like to enquire of the gentleman from Guernsey [Mr. ALBRIGHT] whether it is the intention of the committee that the whole of the 3000 copies shall be bound in book form, or whether any portion of them are to be for the current use of the Convention?

Mr. ALBRIGHT. The edition of 3000 is to be in book form. There is another blank to be filled which will fix the number of copies for the use of members during the session of the Convention.

Mr. HOADLY. I would like to enquire whether the calculations made in the Committee Room as to the expense were not based upon an edition of 1000 copies; and were we not then advised by the gentleman from Guernsey [Mr. ALBRIGHT] and other practical members of the profession that to print a thousand copies would cost not less than $5000? And if 3000

« PreviousContinue »