Exch.

akes state 11. butary 3-4-1932

APPENDIX TO HOUSE JOURNAL.

REPORT

OF A

Minority of Select Committee on the subject of calling a Conven tion to frame a new Constitution.

IN HOUSE-March 14, 1849.

Mr. PENNINGTON, from the Select Committee to which was referred so much of the Governor's Message as relates to a call of a Convention to frame a new Constitution, submitted the following

REPORT:

The subject is one of great importance to the people of Ohio. The question has been agitated in the legislature for some years, and so far as our information extends, has thus far principally engaged the attention of politicians. We are not aware that a single expression of public sentiment has ever found its way by petition to this Hall, demanding action upon this subject. Instead of this silence on the part of the people, being indicative of their approyal of the measure, it is most significant of their disapprobation. Look at the great questions of the age, moral and political reform, that interest and agitate the country; you find the people assembling in their primary meetings, mass conventions, and in a bold and fearless manner, giving free utterance to their thoughts in the way of speeches, resolutions, addresses, petitions, &c. Is it to be presumed that the intelligent people of Ohio, would not be awakened to this movement if a real necessity for it existed? To come to such a conclusion, would be to deny to them, the merit of that proud position which they occupy in the moral, social and intellectual world, and which fits them for the enjoyment and preservation of their rights and liberties.

It is not a party question, and has therefore never influenced the election of members to the legislature, one way or the other. So far as we are advised, it has never been made a question in a single county in the State. We know

1-APP. H. J.

that politicians have been for years urging the passage of a bill submitting the question to a vote of the people; but politicians are not always the true index of public sentiment; they as often misrepresent as represent the people's will. Guided and controlled by selfish motives, their principles controlled by self interest, it would be a dangerous experiment to leave the destinies of a free people in their keeping.

The Constitution of the State of Ohio was adopted in Convention on the 29th day of November, A. D. 1802. It is the work and finish of the early and patriotic pioneers of the great west, in the cause of republican liberty. It will be found, by reference to many of its provisions, to be an act copy from the Federal Constitution; of that constitution that issued from the hands of the disinterested patriots of the revolution, that has stood the shock of party conflict for more than half a century, and remains unchanged and unshaken, amidst all the exciting questions of progress, as a durable monument of the wisdom that framed, and the sound republican opinions of those who adopted it.

In the progress of time, some evils even in that venerable instrument are made manifest. Yet what American citizen, who is honest in his attachments to the free institutions of our land, would be willing to run the hazard of undertaking in these times of angry party feeling, and party dishonesty, to abandon the Constitution of the United States with the hope of making a better one-one that would more effectually secure the happiness of the people, the union and prosperity of the American States; to try such an experiment would be to cut ourselves loose from the sheet anchor of hope in the preservation and longer continuance of the American Union.

We are not opposed to change, we are in favor of progress; but we are in favor of that change and that progress, which, in its results is most likely to secure the blessings of liberty, and establish equal and exact justice among all men.

If we were made sensible that the present Constitution would likely be made better-that the public voice demanded an alteration, we would be the last to interpose an objection. It is said in the Declaration of Independence, that: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights: among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed-that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of

the people to alter and abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

These are principles which lay at the foundation of all free government; when they shall cease to be obeyed and respected, liberty will have fled from among men. The framers of our constitution have looked to the security of these great objects, in the provisions which they have engrafted upon it.

The Constitution of our State was laid upon the deep, broad foundation of human liberty. Under its benign influence and sound conservative principles, we have grown prosperous, happy and great-what liberty that the citizen is entitled to, that it does in the least abridge? What right of property or of person that it does not extend the most ample protection? There is not a Constitution to be found within the whole broad limits of the American Union, that does more perfectly secure and protect the great ends set forth in the Declaration of Independence, for which "governments are instituted among men." The experience of fortysix years, has doubtless detected evils in some of its provisions; it would be strange if it were not so. Because there are some evils in the form of the existing government, does by no means justify a change. It is the work of man, and is, therefore, necessarily imperfect. If Constitutions are to be. changed because some men, or set of men, are not justly dealt with in their own opinion in all things, continual revolution and change would be the sad result. Is it expected that a Convention can assemble to frame a new Constitution, that will in its deliberations and conclusions meet the expectations of all classes of men? Such an idea is preposterous in the extreme. We have much better reason to conclude that if a new Constitution was framed by any Convention likely to assemble for that purpose, instead of producing satisfaction and calming the agitation, it would only become more universal and deep rooted-it would not be long before a deep, strong cry would come up from every quarter of the State for another change. The lessons of history inform us that frequent changes in the Constitution or policy of governments, is baneful to the welfare of the people and the success of republican liberty.

The main and principal reason urged for a new Constitution is, that the administration of public justice demands a change in our judicial system. We readily admit that, as present constituted, the people are subject to some evils and

delays in litigation-that a change is not only desirable but necessary. It will, we trust, be admitted, that if the legislature has power to correct these evils, that the argument so far as this objection to the present Constitution goes, is disposed of. The provisions of the Constitution that bear upon this question, are found in the third article. The 1st section declares "the judicial power of this State, both as to matters of law and equity, shall be vested in a Supreme Court, in Courts of Common Pleas for each County, in Justices of the Peace, and in such other Courts as the legislature may, from time to time establish." Four Judges constitute the Supreme Court. By the second section of the Constitution, the State may be "divided into two circuits, within which any two of the Judges may hold a Court." If the burthens of the Supreme Court are so great, that the time allotted for their sitting in each county is too limited to enable them to give proper investigation to the cases, what objection in pursuance of the Constitution, to dividing the State into two districts, and let the court be sitting in each circuit at the same time. This would give more time, especially to those counties where the business is so extensive as to demand it. Courts of Chancery and Courts of law, in this State, are separate and distinct systems, and have separate and distinct jurisdictions, yet are administered by the same Judges. It has always appeared to us that there never was any real necessity for these distinctions; that there should be but one form of administering justice in all cases; that there should be, so to speak, but one court, and that court should have jurisdiction of every case, and in every shape in which it could be presented. But as the two systems are distinct in our State, there is an impropriety in having them both administered by the same Judges. Let the Legislature therefore organize a Chancery Court, by dividing the State into as many circuits as is required, and elect Judges or Chancellors accordingly-giving to the Court such original and appellate jurisdiction as may be deemed necessary to secure the ends of justice. This done, (no one denies but that the legislature have full power) and the great burthens now complained of, as resting upon the shoulders of the Judges of the Supreme Court would be removed. It is said that it is great folly, and some say ludicrous, to require the Court to meet in each county of the State once a year. We look upon this requirement in the Constititution as one of the wise things provided for by its framers; it not only renders the administration of justice more speedy, but more economical. It is a matter of great consequence to the litigant, who has had the expense of one