A DELEGATE-There is no quorum voting. Not a sufficient number seconding the call, the ayes and noes were not ordered. Frank, Fullerton, Garvin, Gerry, Goodrich, Grant, Įvious question, and it was declared carried on a The question was then put on ordering the previous question, and it was declared carried, on a division, by a vote of 63 to 27. The question was then put on the proposition of Mr. Hale, and it was declared lost. Mr. HALE-I call for the ayes and noes. A sufficient number seconding the call, the ayes and noes were ordered. The SECRETARY proceeded to call the roll on the amendment of Mr. Hale, and it was declared lost by the following vote: 1 Ayes-Messrs. Bickford, E. P. Brooks, Chesebro, Comstock, Conger, Curtis, Duganue, T. W. Dwight. Ely, Evarts, Gould, Greeley, Hale, Hand, Harris, Houston, Hutchins, Krum, Lapham, A Lawrence, Ludington, Opdyke, C. E. Parker, Prosser, Rathbun, L. W. Russell, Seaver, Silvester, Smith, Van Cott―30. Mr. HALE-I move to amend this section by striking out in the second line the words "and district attorneys." My object in proposing this amendment is to raise the question simply and distinctly, whether the office of district attorney shall or shall not continue to be elective. It is evident that gentlemen upon this floor who are opposed to the election of district attorney are not agreed as to what method of appointing shall be adopted. Mr. ALVORD-I am compelled, Mr. President, to rise to a point of order. If I recollect aright, the previous question was only to apply to sections, not to the whole article. The previous Noes-Messrs. A. F. Allen, Alvord, Anquestion having been ordered, I thinkdrews, Archer, Baker, Ballard, Barker, BarThe PRESIDENT-The gentleman is mistakennard, Beadle, Beals, Beckwith, Bell, Bergen, E. The previous question not only applies to sections, Brooks, J. Brooks, E. A. Brown, Burrill, Carpenbut to parts of sections, and all other questions that may be raised. ter, Champlain, Cochran, Cook, Corning, C. C. Mr. LARREMORE-I desire to offer an amend Mr. HALE-If we determine that the district attorney shall not be elected by the people of the county, the matter of appointment may very well be left open until we come to the consideration of some other report. I have only one word to say upon this general question as to the election or appointment of district attorneys, in addition to what I have already said in the Committee of the Whole, and that is to answer an objection which was made upon the alleged ground that the district attorney was a representative officer. The committee who made this report based their re-ment. commendation that he should be appointed in The SECRETARY read the amendment as folpart upon the ground that he was not a repre-lows: sentative officer. Gentlemen upon this floor have After the word including," in first line, stated that this was not so; that a district attor-insert the words "the register of the city and ney was a representative officer. In one sense I county of New York and the register of deeds in admit that he is, but whom does he represent? all counties where such registers are now or may Does the district attorney represent the people of be authorized by law." the county of Albany, or the people of the Mr. LARREMORE-I offer this merely to corcity aud county of New York? By no rect the phraseology of the section as amended. means. He represents the people of the I have submitted it to the gentleman who proposed State of New York; and if the argument that he is a representative officer is worth anything, it shows only that he should be elected by the people of the whole State, and not by the people of a particular locality where a particular sentiment may prevail, which is in opposition to the will of the people of the State. Therefore I say that, so far as there is anything in that argument, it is an argument against the election of this State officer, the person who represents the people of the State, by the people of a particular section or locality. Upon this amendment I ask that the ayes and noes may be taken. the original amendment on the subject [Mr. Seaver], and he agrees to it. I think it important, as it will remove any doubt that may arise under the section. The question was put on the amendment of Mr. Larremore, and it was declared carried. Mr. BALLARD-Mr. President, I move to strike from the fifth and sixth lines of the first section the words "and be ineligible for the next three years after the termination of their offices." I desire to say that, in my judgment, there is no longer any reason why a sheriff should not be eligible for re-election, provided the people of his county see fit to elect him. The time has been, when imprisonment for debt prevailed, that reaThe question was then put on ordering the pre-Isons existed why a sheriff should not be re-elected. Mr. BARKER-I move the previous question on the pending amendment. There is no reason, in my judgment, now why a sheriff should be ineligible for re-election more than a district attorney or county judge should be ineligible. I hope the amendment will be adopted by this Convention, and on that question I ask the ayes and noes. A sufficient number seconding the call, the ayes and noes were ordered. The question was then put on the amendment of Mr. Ballard, and it was declared lost by the following vote: me as a very extraordinary proposition that this office shall be dropped entirely. We need a coroner. A suggestion has just been made by the question put to the gentleman from Albany [Mr. Harris], as to how we are to proceed against a sheriff for malfeasance, for trespass, for anything in which he is liable. The common law has prescribed, and it has been the usage of this State, and I do not know how extensively elsewhere. that the process in all such cases shall be issued to the coroner. He is an officer for the purpose of executing such process upon the sheriff. And then, again, in all our large counties, and especially in all counties where there is a large city, the office of corouer is a very important one in refer We see the fact in the Ayes-Messrs. Alvord, Archer, Baker, Ballard, Beals, E. Brooks, Carpenter, Cochran, Farnum, Fullerton, Goodrich, Grant, Hatch, Hitchcock, Landon, Merrill, Morris, S. Townsend-21. Noes-Messrs. A. F. Allen, Andrews, Barker, [ence to criminal matters. Barnard, Barto, Beadle, Beckwith, Bell, Bergen, daily publications throughout the year in the city Bickford, E. P. Brooks, J. Brooks, E. A. Brown, of New York, and it is so in all large counties. Burrill, Champlain, Chesebro, Church, Colahan, His duties are of a very high and responsible Comstock, Conger, Cooke, Corning, Curtis, Daly, character. He has to ascertain the causes of Duganne, C. C. Dwight, T. W. Dwight, Ely, Ev- death, and whether crime has been committed in arts, Field, Folger, Fowler, Gerry, Gould, Graves, such cases. I cannot believe that this Convention Greeley, Hadley, Hale, Hand, Hardenburgh, Har-is prepared, on a mere suggestion of this kind, to ris, Hitchman, Houston, Hutchins, Kernan, Kin-abrogate this office because, in same portions of ney, Krum, Lapham, Larremore, A. Lawrence, A. the State, it is unnecessary. It does no harm R. Lawrence, Lee, Lowrey, Ludington, Mattice, where there is but very little to do, for where McDonald, Merwin, Monell, More, Nelson, Op- there is but very little to do his charges against dyke, Paige, A. J. Parker, President, Prosser, the county must be very small. Rathbun, Reynolds, Robertson, Rogers, Root, Mr. RATHBUN-Will the previous question Rumsey, A. D. Russell, L. W. Russell, Schell, carry us to the adoption of the section if it is Schoonmaker, Schumaker, Seaver, Seymour, Sil-moved upon the whole matter? vester, Sheldon, Sherman, Smith, Spencer, Tappen, Van Cott, Veeder, Wakeman, Wales, Wickham, Young-90. Mr. BICKFORD-I move to strike out from the second line the word "coroners." The object of the amendment is that the office of coroner shall no longer be a constitutional office, but an office under the control of the Legislature. In the county in which I reside and almost all the counties of the State, the office of coroner has become a useless office. It is not needed at all. It is simply an absurdity to elect in each of the counties of Jefferson and Lewis four coroners. An act was passed last winter or the winter before, conferring the powers of coroners upon justices of the peace. The Committee on Towns and Counties in considering the question of abolishing the office, conceded that in almost every county of the State it ought to be abolished, but in such counties as Kings and Albany, etc., it was deemed important to continue it. Now if this amendment is adopted, it will be continued where it is necessary, and where it has become wholly useless it may be discontinued. Mr. HARRIS-I shall vote for this amendment. The office of coroner, I know, is of no great account. It is a very venerable office in its name but it has become useless. Not one in ten of the coroners of the State have anything to do at all, and so far as my observation, extends, it is only used to make changes in political conventions. Mr. BECKWITH-In what manner will you arrest a sheriff, if the office of coroner is abolished? Mr. HARRIS-If the Legislature cannot find a way we will amend the Constitution. Mr. SEYMOUR-I do not know what may be the sentiments of this Convention, but it strikes The PRESIDENT-It will. Mr. RATHBUN--Then I move the previous question. The question was put upon ordering the previous question, and it was declared carried. The question then recurred and was put upon the first section as amended, and it was declared carried. The SECRETARY proceeded to read the second section, as follows: SEC. 2. All county officers whose election or appointment is not provided for by this Constitution, shall be elected by the electors of the respective counties, or appointed by the board of supervisors, or other county authorities, as the Legislature shall direct. All town officers whose election or appointment is not provided for by this Constitution, shall be elected by the electors of such town, or of some division thereof, or appointed by such authorities thereof as the Legislature shall designate for that purpose. Mr. VEEDER-I move the following amendment. It is nothing more than adding the last paragraph of the section of the present Constitution. The SECRETARY proceeded to read the amendment as follows: "All other officers whose election or appointment is not provided for by this Constitution, and all officers whose offices may hereafter be created by law shall be elected by the people, or appointed as the Legislature may direct." Mr. VEEDER-It seems to me that this provision should be continued in the Constitution we propose to submit to the people. In my opinion this is a proper place to incorporate it, and I hope it will be adopted. Mr. EVARTS-Mr. President, I rise not to without it, and may provide for the appointment of Noes-Messrs. A. F. Allen, Alvord, Andrews all city and village officers, for these classes of Archer, Ballard, Barker, Beadle, Beals, Beckofficers are left out of the section as it now stands. with, Bell, Bickford, E. P. Brooks, E. A. Brown, However, it would perhaps avoid misunderstand- Carpenter, Cooke, Curtis, Duganne, C. C. Dwight, ing if this amendment now being considered were T. W. Dwight, Ely, Evarts, Field, Folger, Fowler, withdrawn for the present, and were it not that Frank, Fullerton,__Goodrich, Gould, Grant, the previous question has been sprung upon us, I Graves, Greeley, Hadley, Hale, Hand, Harris, should now withdraw the proposition. For these reasons I desire to be excused from voting. The question was then put upon excusing Mr. Veeder, and it was declared carried, upon a division, by a vote of 44 to 40. The SECRETARY completed the call of the roll, and the amendment of Mr. Veeder was declared carried, by the following vote: Hitchcock, Houston, Hutchins, Kinney, Krum, The question was then put on the adoption of the second section as amended, and it was declared adopted. Mr. KRUM-I move to reconsider the vote on the first section. Objection being made, the motion was laid over under the rule. Ayes-Messrs. A. F. Allen, Alvord, Andrews, Archer, Ballard, Barker, Beadle, Beals, Beckwith, Bell, Bickford, E. P. Brooks, E. A. Brown, Carpenter, Curtis, Duganne, C. C. Dwight, T. W. Dwight, Ely, Evarts, Field, Folger, Fowler, Frank, Fullerton, Goodrich, Gould, Grant, Graves, Greeley, Hadley, Hale, Hand, Hitchcock, Houston, Hutch ins, Kinney, Krum, Landon, Lapham, A. Law-vote, by which the second section was adopted. rence, Lee, Ludington, McDonald, Merrill, Merwin, Opdyke, C. E. Parker, President, Prosser, Rathbun, Reynolds, Root, Rumsey, L. W. Russell, Seaver, Silvester, Sheldon, Sherman, Spencer, Van Cott, Wakeman-62. Mr. GERRY-I move a reconsideration of the Objection being made, the motion was laid over under the rule. Mr. KRUM-My motion was to reconsider the vote by which the previous question was ordered on the first section. Noes-Messrs. Baker, Barnard, Barto, Bergen, The PRESIDENT-The motion cannot be enE. Brooks, J. Brooks, Burrill, Champlain, Chese-tertained at the present time, objection being bro, Church, Cochran, Comstock, Conger, Cooke, made. Corning, Daly, Garvin, Gerry, Hardenburgh, Har- The SECRETARY proceeded to read the third ris, Hatch, Hitchman,. Kernan, Larremore, A. R. section of the article, as reported by the CommitLawrence, Lowrey, Mattice, Monell, More, Mor-tee of the Whole, as follows: ris, Nelson, Paige, A. J. Parker, Robertson, Rogers, A. D. Russell, Schell, Schoonmaker, Schumaker, Seymour, Tappen, S. Townsend, Wales, Wickham, Young-45. Mr. KERNAN-I move to reconsider the vote just taken. SEC. 3. The Legislature shall, at the first session thereof after the adoption of this Constitution, and from time to time thereafter, by general laws, applicable to all the counties of the State in which boards of supervisors shall exist, confer upon the boards of supervisors of the several counties of the State such additional powers of local legislation and administration as may be deemed expedient; and during the continuance of laws conferring powers upon said boards, the powers therein conferred shall be exclusively exofercised by said boards of supervisors. Objection being made, the motion to reconsider was laid over, under the rule. Mr. HITCHMAN-I move to amend the section as it now stands so as to strike out all after the word "people." The question was put on the amendment Mr. Hitchman and it was declared lost. Mr. HITCHMAN-I call for the ayes and noes. A sufficient number seconding the call the ayes and noes were ordered. Mr. RATHBUN-Is it in order to move the previous question on the second section? The PRESIDENT—It is. Mr. RATHBUN-I move the previous question on the section. The question was put on ordering the previous qnestion, and it was declared carried, The SECRETARY then proceeded to call the roll on the amendment of Mr. Hitchman, and it was declared lost, by the following vote: Ayes-Messrs. Baker, Barnard, Barto, Bergen, E. Brooks, J. Brooks, Burrill, Champlain, Chesebro, Church, Cochran, Comstock, Conger, Corning, Daly, Garvin, Gerry, Hardenburgh, Hatch, Ilitchman, Kernan Larremore, A. R. Lawrence, Lowrey, Mattice, Monell, More, Morris, Nelson, Paige, A. J. Parker, Robertson, Rogers, A. D. Russell, Schell, Schumaker, Seymour, Tappen, S. Townsend, Veeder, Wickham, Young-42. Mr. SHERMAN-I offer an amendment as a substitute to the third section. The SECRETARY proceeded to read the amendment as follows: SEC. 3. There shall be in each of the counties of this State (except New York). a board of supervisors, elected in such manner and for such period and composed of such numbers as is or may be provided by law, and they shall, in addition to the powers which they now possess or which inay be hereafter given to them by the Legislature, and subject to legislative modification, have exclusive jurisdiction over the following specified subjects, and where the jurisdiction shall be exercised by legislative authority, it shall be exclusive, until the authority shall be withdrawn; but such jurisdiction shall not be exercised in any case without the assent of a majority of all the members elected to such board, to be determined by yeas and nays, which shall be entered on the journal. 1. The location, erection, purchase and reparation of bridges (except over navigable streams), ture to create commissions. They are unlimited litigation. The litigation arose from a passionate consume any of the time of the Convention, but dissatisfaction with the legislation which that to express my hearty concurrence in the motion of the gentleman from Kings [Mr. Veeder ]. I observed the omission of this clause of the present Constitution in the report of the committee, and certainly it is desirable that a provision for future offices should be included in the Constitution we frame to save questions that may be raised. Mr. PAIGE-If this last clause of the second section is adopted, the result will be that officers that ought to be elected by the people will be directed by the Legislature to be appointed, and for that reason I oppose the proposition of the gentleman from Kings [Mr. Veeder]. clause permitted. I will agree with him, however, if he says that it was by reason of that clause, that this litigation came to a profitable result. For it was upon this clause that the court of appeals placed the right of the Legislature to establish the different commissions as they now exist in the city of New York, and without that clause, it may be, that those commissions would fall, having nothing to support them. It is for that reason that I approved the amendment of the gentlemau from Kings [Mr. Veeder] and on that amendment I move the previous question. The question was put on ordering the previous question and it was declared carried. Mr. BURRILL-I call for the ayes and noes. A sufficient number seconding the call, the ayes and noes were ordered. The SECRETARY then proceeded to call the The name of Mr. Veeder was called. Mr. BURRILL-I hope the amendment of the gentleman from Kings [Mr. Veeder] will not prevail. I supposed that that clause had been omitted purposely It was the existence of this clause in the second section which gave rise to so much litigation in regard to the power of the Legis-roll on the amendment offered by Mr. Veeder. lature; and while it was conceded that the election or appointment of officers which might strictly Mr. VEEDER-I desire to be excused from be called county officers, was, by the first clause, voting. [Laughter.] I make this application beof that section, directly given to the people or the cause I have not been allowed an opportunity of local authorities of the county: and while in the expressing my object in submitting this amend. second clause of that section all officers who may ment, and that I may now say a word as to my strictly be termed county. town and village intentions. I offered this amendment, believing officers, were to be elected by the people of the then as I do now, that it is a material and proper cities, towns and villages, or to be appointed by one. That it is absolutely necessary to provide the authorities of that locality; it was under the for the election or appointment of a certain class last clause of this section that it was claimed of new officers that it may become necessary from that the Legislature had a right to make a dif- time to time to create. There are many officers ferent division of the State than counties, towns, now appointed by direction of the Legislature, cities and villages; that there was nothing in the other than county, city and town officers, the manConstitution which prohibited the dividing of the ner of whose selection cannot be questioned. I do State into new divisions or making new districts, not agree with several gentlemen in reference to the and that when these new districts were created, legitimate effect of this provision. I do not wish the officers placed over these districts were neither any one to understand me as at all favoring the county, town, city or village officers, and there- system of governing our cities by commissions, or fore all those officers could be elected or appointed the acts of past Legislatures, which have forced as the Legislature might direct. It was claimed upon our cities large, useless and expensive comthat by the mere addition of some other territory missions. My position in opposition to commisto a county, the Legislature might direct that sions ought to be fully understood. I have herethese new district officers should be elected or tofore upon this floor, while a member of the Legappointed as the Legislature might direct, and islature, expressed my views upon that subject, they claimed under that this class of officers and I will not repeat them now. Though the should be appointed by the Legislature or by Legislature, in violation of the spirit and object of such authorities as the Legislature might confer the provision now under consideration, have crethe power upon. It is this clause which has ated commissions in districts and district officers, created all the litigation which arose in regard to yet I think there is a necessity for this provision. creating the metropolitan district, consisting of Because the Legislature has violated the fair New York, Kings, and of the adjacent counties of construction of this provision, is it our duty Westchester, Richmond, and I think one other. to abandon it? I never, with all due reIt was under that clause that the Legislature spect to the decisions of the court of appeals, claimed the power to create metropolitan districts. believed any authority was by this provision It was under that clause that they have created given or intended to be given to the Legislature the capital police districts, uniting Albany and to create commissions, taking from our cities the Rensselaer counties; and the frontier police dis- control of their local and legitimate affairs. I intrict, by uniting portions of Niagara county to tend, however, in order to obviate this misconBuffalo and the adjacent towns. I hope struction, in order to prohibit absolutely the therefore, the amendment of the gentle- Legislature from 'creating commissions to affect man from Kings [Mr. Veeder], will not be adopt- municipalities and their government, to offer a proed. If it shall be, it will bo the inserting into vision, when we come to consider the report of this Constitution a clause which will cause a the Committee on Cities, which will accomplish great deal of difficulty, and in regard to which great difficulty has already arisen. Mr. FOLGER-I do not agree with the gentleman from New York that this clause has caused that object. Without this amendment, as the section now stands, there is no possible restriction against creating commissions. This amendment will confer no additional power upon the Legisla in cases where the general laws of the State [portant question for the Convention to determine shall be insufficient to accomplish the object; but is, whether the powers granted absolutely are where such bridges shall be between adjoining safe to be intrusted to the boards of supervisors. counties, the concurrent action of all the boards of supervisors of such counties shall be necessary. 2. The location, purchase, erection and care of buildings, and the purchase of real estate for town and county purposes. This question does not arise in regard to the other powers, for they are in the control of the Legislature, which may modify them at will, or wholly withdraw them. A brief reference to the enumeration of the powers exclusively given, will 3. The erections of portions of public high-enable gentlemen to judge of their propriety. The ways into separate road districts for the purpose of improvement, beyond what may be authorized by general State laws. 4. The use and working, as public highways, of turnpike, plank and macadamized roads, after they shall have been lawfully abandoned. first relates to bridges. Boards of supervisors already possess, large powers in reference to this subject, but not all that is desirable. They may borrow money to a limited amount to repair and construct bridges; but when bridges costing beyond this limit are swept away by fire or flood, the Legislature is the only remedy. The action of this body, in nineteen-twentieths of such cases, is based upon the recommendation of boards of supervisors. Why may not they be safely trusted 6. The legalization of the informal acts of town with the full control of the subject? The second meetings in reference to the raising of moneys specification relates to county buildings. I do not authorized to be raised by law, and the legaliza-know but the supervisors have already all the tion of the irregular acts of town officers, on the authority on this subject that this proposes recommendation of the county court. 5. The working and improvement of public highways, laid out in pursuance of the general laws of the State, in cases where such laws may be insufficient to accomplish the object. 7. The fixing of the salaries of county officers, and the number, grades and pay of clerks and subordinate employees in county offices whose compensation may be a county charge. 8. The borrowing of money for town and county purposes, in anticipation of taxation authorized by law. to give them. In this case, the only effect will be to make the jurisdiction exclusive. I think no one will question the safety of this. The third specification relates to the working of abandoned chartered roads, for which no provision, that I know of now, exists in general laws. It does not propose to allow a general change in the highway system of the Mr. SHERMAN-The amendment I offer varies State, but simply to enable the inhabitants of a from the printed form on the files in two respects, neighborhood or town, or number of towns, to which I will state. I have inserted the provision put in proper condition for use a road given up by contained in the amendment of the gentleman from the corporators. To do this may require a greater Orleans [Mr. Church], which makes the jurisdic-amount of labor than the general laws permit; tion conferred on boards of supervisors by the yet, as the law now stands, the only recourse is to Legislature exclusive while it lasts. The other the Legislature. What information, or what variation is in the striking out of the provision capacity, can a Legislature possibly have for the draining of swamp lands, which, I think, over a local. board, to judge of the may be accomplished by a general law. It is un- propriety of such a measure? The fourth necessary that I should say anything of the evil specification relates to separate road districts; which results from flooding the Legislature with for example, where the people of a village, formbills of a strictly local character. All admit and ing a particular road district of a town, wish to all wish to correct it. Can it be done? This is gravel the street, or make sidewalks, and for this practically the question we have been considering purpose need to lay out an additional amount of for the last three days. The Committee on Town highway labor, or purchase, perhaps, a gravel and County Officers, after a patient and searching bed. Is the overshadowing wisdom of the Legis examination of the case, presented a scheme that lature necessary to pronounce judgment on such a promised results in this direction; but the Con- measure before it shall be permitted? The fifth vention, doubting its practicability, has seen fit to specification is of a similar character to the two set it aside, and has thus far failed to supply a preceding ones. The inhabitants of a town or proper substitute. Feeling that the struggle neighborhood may wish to put more work on a ought not to be abandoned without one more effort, particular road than the general law now I have offered the proposition now before the Con- permits. Why should they be required to vention. It is simple, and will be easily under-come to the Legislature for a thing that stood by all who have had practical experience in could be SO much better determined by the details of town and county affairs. It seeks the local authority? The sixth specification to combine the merits of the several plans pro- relates to the confirmation of informal acts of posed by the gentleman from Onondaga [Mr. towns and town officers in matters controlled by Andrews], the gentleman from Orleans [Mr. statute. For illustration, a town votes at a special Church], and the report of the committee, though town meeting to raise certain money to rebuild its it does not accomplish all the objects sought by town-hall. There has been an informality in the the latter. It gives to boards of supervisors cer- notice of the meeting, and the bonds of the town tain distinct, sharply defined, exclusive powers, are, in consequence, illegal. Is not the board confirms those they already possess by legislative of supervisors-the power which must eventu enactment, and authorizes their further extension ally direct the raising of the money - the proper -the powers derived from the Legislature to be authority to provide the remedy by legalizing the subject, always, to legislative revision. The im- informality? A town officer, through acci |