nounced that there was a quorum present and called the Convention to order.

FEMALE SUFFRAGE.

Mr. DE FRANCE presented a petition from citizens of Mercer county in favor of female suffrage, which was laid on the table.

PROHIBITION.

Mr. CRAIG presented three memorials, requesting the Convention to incorporate into the Constitution a clause prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors, which were referred to the Cominittee on Legislation.

LIMITING DEBATE.

unless debate be restricted. The debate is instructive, and the question is very interesting; but it is one on which every man has made up his mind, and we are prepared to vote upon it. It is true that some amendment may require a little debate, but I have provided for that.

Mr. M'ALLISTER. Mr. President: I call for the reading of the resolution. It was not distinctly heard in this part of the Hall.

The CLERK again read the resolution. Mr. M'ALLISTER. Mr. President: I would simply say that I have for three days listened to the discussion on this subject without saying a word, and I

Resolved, That general debate be closed in committee of the whole on the section pending, but that any member offering an amendment shall be allowed five minutes to advocate it, and the same time shall be allowed to some one opponent.

On the question of proceeding to second reading a division was called, which resulted-forty-three in the affirmative and eleven in the negative; so the resolution was read a second time.

Mr. M'CLEAN. Mr. President: I hope that this motion will not be adopted. I consider the question now before the Convention as one of surpassing importance, and insist that every gentleman who desires to express his views upon it should have the opportunity of doing so. I hope, for this reason, therefore, that this resolution will not be adopted, and that the debate will not be limited.

Mr. BROOMALL. Mr. Chairman: I offered the resolution thinking that the House had fully discussed the measure that is now before the committee of the whole. The rule that I propose is known as the five minute rule, under which any gentleman, proposing an amendment, shall be allowed five minutes to advocate it, and any one opposing it allowed the same time for reply. Clearly the resolution ought to be adopted. After the full debate that we have had on this subject, certainly five minutes is sufficient to explain any amendment. I desire to see progress made in the work of this Convention. We have made but little headway, and we will not get through in five years unless gentlemen will submit to some such rule as this at some time. I foresee that the whole of this week will be used in discussing this very question

whose report is under consideration, a few minutes, to answer some of the numerous objections that have been made to it. I do not object to anything that will facilitate the work of the House at any time; but, under these circumstances, I submit that if the chairman of the committee is in duty bound to attend every day's session of the committee of the whole, and to hear all the arguments, with a view of answering any questions that may be asked him, I submit is it not his right that he should be permitted to make some remarks in reply upon the subject matter under discussion?

Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President: It seems to me that the proposition to cut off debate comes with a very bad grace from the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Broomall.) Granting the right which the chairman of the Committee on Suffrage, Election and Representation undoubtedly has to advocate his report, after it has been discussed upon the floor by other gentlemen, it is the right and the privilege of the humblest member of this Contion to express his views upon a question of such vital importance as this. I know that there are gentlemen here to-day who desire to speak upon this subject, and who desire to put their views on record. Not only so, but I have been waited on by a delegation of the county in which I live, desiring, nay, almost commanding, me to place myself right on the record on this question, and I trust I will be given an opportunity to do so.

Mr. BROOMALL. Mr. President: I desire only to say that this rule allows the gentleman a full opportunity of putting himself on record. Under this very rule it is provided that he be allowed five minutes to do so, and at this stage of this de

LEAVE OF ABSENCE.

Mr. KAINE. Mr. President: I ask leave, at this time, to ask leave of absence for my colleague, Col. Collins, of Fayette, for a few days from to-day.

Leave was granted.

Mr. W. H. SMITH asked and obtained leave of absence for Mr. Baer, of Somerset, for one week.

Mr. Boyd asked and obtained leave of absence for Mr. Darlington, of Chester, for a few days.

Mr. ELLIOTT asked and obtained leave of absence for Mr. Mann, of Potter, for a few days.

POSTAGE ON DEBATES.

Mr. NEWLIN. Mr. President: I desire to state, for the information of the House, that, in accordance with the resolution adopted last week, 1 addressed a note to the Postmaster General in relation to

mailing the Debates from Harrisburg, and have to-day received a reply stating that the necessary order had been issued.

PRINTING THE DEBATES DAILY.

Mr. DALLAS. Mr. President: I ask leave, at this time, to inquire of the chairman of the Committee on Printing (Mr. Newlin) what action has been taken on the resolution calling for information as to the arrangement of the State Printer to have the Debates published the day following that on which they are delivered. Mr. NEWLIN. Mr. President: I will state that no action has been taken, except that a copy of the resolution was fürnished by the Committee on Printing to the State Printer.

I would also take occasion, at this time, to correct a misapprehension that seems to exist in the minds of members of the Convention, of the exact position of the Committee on Printing and on Binding in relation to this matter of the Debates. The Committee on Printing reported a resolution sogn after the Convention met after the Convention met in Philadelphia, which, in detail, arranged fully for the very difficulties, and sought to provide in advance for the very troubles, which have since arisen, in the Convention. A motion was made in the Convention to strike out all after the word "resolved," and insert a resolution of instruction to the Committee on Printing, and that resolution carried. The Committee on Printing have since acted in accordance with that instruction, made a contract with the State Printer or with B. Singerly, which is the same thing, and re

ported that contract to the Convention, and it was approved.

The committee went just as far as the resolution of instruction permitted them to go, and, in fact, went even farther, by putting in the contract a provision that if the State Printer did not fulfil his contract to the satisfaction of the Convention they might either order the printing at his expense or annul the contract.

All of the provisions which were inserted in the original resolution of the committee, in relation to the time of delivery, and in regard to having the Debates on the desks of the members of the Convention on the day following their deprinter is not, nor has he been at any livery, were stricken out, so that the time, under instructions from this Convention to have the Debates on the desks of members the following day. The committee has, I know, been privately complained of, and the printer too, and for no just cause.

I will further state that until the fifteenth of January the Convention did not decide what kind of type should be used that when they did they adopted leaded minion, and the printer has had types specially cast for this purpose, and it took the founders, here in town, a week or ten days to get up the necessary type, which would bring the printing up to about the twenty-second of January, so that the printer has only had since the twentysecond of January to bring up the Debates, when the Convention was nearly

two months ahead of him.

THE BALLOT.

The PRESIDENT. The next business in order is the further consideration of the report of the Committee on Suffrage, Election and Representation.

So the Convention, as in committee of the whole, Mr. Lawrence in the chair, proceeded to further consider the report of the Committee on Suffrage, Election and Representation.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is upon the amendment to the first section, proposed by the gentleman from Somerset (Mr. Baer.)

Mr. HAY. I rise simply for the purpose of stating, that if the pending amendments are not approved by the committee, it is my intention to propose an amendment, to strike out in the second line the words, "may be open or secret, as the electors may prefer, and they," and for this reason, that it seems to me that the

first clause of this section is inconsistent with the remaining portion. The first clause provides that the ballots voted may be either open or secret, as the electors shall prefer, and it seems to me that that is inconsistent with the remaining clause of the section, which substantially requires that the ballot shall not be secret in any case, but shall be known at any rate, and under all circumstances, to the election officers. I can see no reason for retaining the second line of the section if the remaining clause is adopted by the committee.

Mr. M'ALLISTER. Mr. Chairman: I would say that I am instructed by the committee to substitute "folded" for "secret," so that it would read, "open or folded."

Mr. HAY. That, of course, will remove some objection to the language, but it does not remove the objection that the section is redundant in language and in.consistent in its different parts. I can see no reason for the insertion of the greater part of the second line. The voter of course can hold his ballot open as he approaches the polls now, but it is impossi'ble to put an open ballot into the box; it must be folded before it is put in. If that provision should be stricken out, it would read substantially as it does now, and it would include the fundamental ideas of the section, namely: The numbering of the ballot and the writing of the elector's name upon it. In my opinion, no measure will be more conducive to the detection, and therefore to the prevention of frauds upon the ballot-box than a provision for the identification of the ballots actually cast by legal voters. The section under consideration effectually provides for such identification, and believing that if adopted, it will secure to the citizens of this Commonwealth some protection against such frauds in elections as have heretofore disgraced our State by their perpetration in some localities, I shall vote for the section even if its present form be retained.

Mr. M'ALLISTER. Mr. Chairman: I have listened with considerable attention and with great interest to the discussion of the last three days, principally because of the importance of the section under consideration. I consider it the foundation stone of the various provisions intended to protect the lawful exercise of the right of suffrage. I am fully convinced that there is not a provision reported by the committee to

protect the right of suffrage against which more plausible reasons cannot be advanced than against the one now under discussion. I cannot over-estimate, I am sure, the importance of protecting the ballot. That it has been desecrated--that it has been abused to such an extent that the representative body is no longer an epitome of the body represented, cannot be doubted. The right of suffrage has been struck at. We are in danger of having our republican institutions undermined, unless we do something to prevent the frauds that have been perpetrated upon the ballot.

The objections, Mr. Chairman, to this section may be summed up in a few words : First, that it destroys the secrecy of the ballot, and next that it is a combrous restriction upon the exercise of the right of suffrage.

These are the sum and sub

stance of the whole of the objections which have been raised by the opponents of the section under consideration. The gentleman from Indiana, (Mr. Harry White,) at the very commencement of this debate, worked himself into such a state of excitement that he invoked the aid of ten earthquakes to shake earth and sea, in order to prevent the consummation of such iniquity.

Mr. HARRY WHITE. Mr. Chairman: I do not desire to be misapprehended. I will state to the gentleman that I only invoked the aid of one earthquake.

Mr. M'ALLISTER. He invoked the aid of one earthquake then. He called for a commotion of the earth, sea and air in order to prevent, what? To prevent an inroad upon the secrecy of the ballot. Now what is this great secrecy for which he invokes the aid of supernatural power? It has been well denominated by the gentleman on my left a myth. In practice it amounts to nothing. In the borough in which I reside there are six election districts-two township districts and four borough districts. Regularly, at every important election, the result is announced by the men who stand at the windows, in advance of the counting of the ballots. The result so announced is often wonderfully accurate. How every man votes is known to every other man; and these results we have, annually and statedly, at every important election; and yet it is said the ballot is secret. It is not secret in practice. But if it were this section does not take away what secrecy that the ballot has. The endorse

ment of the name of the voter upon the ballot by himself does not expose the way in which he votes. The endorsement of his name by another elector, if he cannot write, does not necessarily destroy the secrecy of the ballot. The majority of the electors receive their tickets from other persons; and if they cannot read they must get some one to read for them. The secrecy of the ballot is therefore taken away by that very act; and it is no more taken away by getting another person to endorse the name upon the ballot. Then when a man comes to the window with the ballot endorsed, is there any violation of secrecy? This section leaves to the Legislature to prescribe upon what part of the ticket the endorsement shall be made, how it shall be made, and in what manner the ticket shall be prepared. These are all matters of legislative action. Laws can be enacted in minutiæ by the Legislature, and this duty should be left to it. The endorsement may be upon the outside, with the name of the office to be filled, if the Legislature so direct; and most probably the Legisla ture will direct that the endorsement shall be so made that it will not expose the person for whom the elector votes. If this be done the required endorsement will not destroy the secrecy of the ballot, but it will aid in unearthing the frauds which strike at the root of this great right of suffrage. Until there is an investiga. tion before the proper tribunal the name of the person for whom the elector votes will not be divulged; but when such investigation takes place it is necessary that ît should be divulged. Without such development being made there can be no exposure--no detection. All of these sections are designed to afford evidence of how the elector casts his vote in order to detect the fraud. That knowledge is essential to a conviction, and there can be no conviction of any criminal offender against the election laws unless we obtain witnesses to the frauds; and in the designated endorsement is afforded just such evidence. Has it been shown, or is it even pretended to have been shown, that this endorsement upon the ballot will not furnish the evidence upon which those who depredate upon the right of suffrage can be arrested and convicted?

Three or four principal modes in which frauds upon the ballot are usually committed. It has been shown that repeaters come in different dress to the same poll, or go from poll to poll repeating their

vote. Why is this done? Because there is no mode of identifying the person who casts the vote and connecting him with the vote in the ballot-box. Will not this afford that evidence? Will you not have the handwriting of the repeater, or the handwriting of another, to testify as to the identity of the person? Surely you will.

Then, again, the ballot has been taken from the hand of the voter, and by skillful manipulation another has been substituted for it, and dropped into the ballot-box. Will not that be detected when the box is opened, and the witness and voter is called? Surely it will. And, again, the ballot-boxes, with their entire contents, are changed. This fraud will also be detected, and the guilty perpetrators punished. Then, Mr. Chairman, the means are sufficient to correct the evils. The enormity of the evils is admitted, and the means of their correction are found in this very provision. Gentlemen are mistaken if they suppose that this great wrong upon the ballot is to be prevented without some trouble. It may be a little cumbrous, it may be somewhat difficult, for a man to write his name, or to get another to write it, but what is that trouble compared with the great end to be accomplished--the preservation of the ballot?

It is said that these frauds relate only to cities. They have been shown, however, to exist in the country as well. But if this were not so, if these frauds did not now exist elsewhere than in the cities, what assurance have we that they will not be carried into the country before another year? They spread, and spread rapidly; but suppose, for the sake of the argument, that they are now, and will continue to be, confined to the cities. Is not every voter in the country interested

in the result of the election of the chief

magistrate and other executive officers, including the State Treasurer ? Is not every voter deeply interested in our judiciary, which is elected upon the general ticket? Are we to entrust those who do not receive a majority of rightful ballots with the administration of our laws? Surely not. We are then all interested, and should be willing to subject ourselves to some inconvenience.

The gentleman from Allegheny, (Mr. J. W. F. White,) whom I do not now see in his seat, argued learnedly against this section. I am ready to confess, Mr. Chairman, that if I had framed a Constitution at home, instead of coming to this Conven