not upon the tax roll, and never will amendment of Mr. VAN RIPER, and it against popular rights, and it will be The amendment of Mr. CONGER was agreed to, upon a division; ayes 36, noes 32. The question again recurred upon the amendment of Mr. VAN RIPER, as amended. I would like some such provision as that which I understand is now in force in the State of Indiana, requiring the assent of the tax payers to such a measure. I would not like to have it provided for in the Constitution, that that assent shall be shown by a vote of the electors; but to require the assent of persons whose names appear upon the last assessment roll. I would vote for a provision of that kind, but I do not If we adopt this first clause of the want to provide that this assent shall amendment of the gentleman from be shown by a vote of the electors. It Cass we will be precluded in the Legisappears to me that we would be tying lature from submitting the question to ourselves up by adopting the provision Mr. CROSWELL. I call for a di- the tax payers alone; we will be comhere proposed; we would necessarily vision of the question, and ask that pelled to submit it to all the electors of be compelled to submit the question the vote be taken upon the first clause the locality. At least that will be the to all holders of tax paying property, of the amendment. fair inference. There may be a better although some of them may never pay The CHAIRMAN. A division hav-way devised than to submit such a a tax. ing been demanded, the vote will be question to the electors, such a way as is first taken upon adding to section practiced in Indiana. In either case, I twenty-seven the following: hope this amendment will not be adopted; I am opposed to inserting in the Constitution anything in regard to it. There will be no danger in leaving Mr. CONGER. I understand that the question to the Legislature. If we have had a distinct vote on the any community desires a law authorlast division of the amendment, on the izing in their case the question to be motion of the gentleman from Cass, submitted to the tax payers alone, the (Mr. ALDRICH,) to strike it out, and the Legislature can pass a law to that committee refused to do so. I do not effect, if such a provision as this is not see how the amendment can be divided, incorporated in the Constitution. In as it will be, in effect, requiring the some places they might desire it, in same question to be taken over again. others they might not. My own Mr. BLACKMAN. I think when opinion is that the Legislature should The question was taken upon the that motion was made to strike out the be left free to make such provisions in amendment of Mr. ALDRICH to the latter part of this amendment, it con- that regard as might be deemed best. amendment of Mr. VAN RIPER; and tained a different proposition from that I do not think their is any use in buildupon a division, ayes 28, noes not now in it; it has been amended since ing up a man of straw here, and then counted, it was not agreed to. knocking it down by means of a Constitutional provision. I hope that no portion of this amendment will be adopted. Mr. FERRIS. I want to say one word more in addition to what I said this forenoon. I think it would be a pretty sight for this Convention, sitting here in Michigan, sitting here in part for the purpose of giving the elective franchise to a class that have for two hundred years been excluded from it, to say that we cannot trust our poor white men in the decision of the question, whether we shall improve our localities by bringing railroads into them. If that is the opinion of gentlemen, let them say so, and we will go to the people on the issue.. The question then recurred upon the amendment of Mr. VAN RIPER, as follows: "The question of such aid shall be submittedto a vote of the city or township to be affected thereby; and no person shall be entitled to a vote at any submission of such question, unless he shall be the owner of property liable to taxation." "The question of such aid shall be submitted to a vote of the townsbip or city to be affected thereby." then. The CHAIRMAN. The last portion of the amendment has been twice amended since the motion to strike out was decided. Mr. CONGER. I do not see that it has been amended so as to materially alter its sense. [Laughter.] Mr. CROSWELL. I am glad that we are at last to understand this question more clearly than we have done. The entire discussion from the beginThe CHAIRMAN. The Chair will ning has been based upon the suppoMr. ALEXANDER. I move to rule that the amendment is suscepti-sition of a submission of the question amend the amendment by adding the ble of division, and the first question to the people that has been the founwords, "within such township or city;" will be upon adding to section twenty-dation of the whole argument. We so that it will read, "unless he shall be seven the first clause of the amend-have been told here by gentlemen on the owner of property liable to taxation ment. the one side, that it is a principle of within such township or city." I think Mr. LUCE. I had not intended to our government, and fair, and right, the gentlemen of this committee will say a word upon this question; but that a majority should rule; that by readily see the propriety of my amend- supposing that this amendment might the expressed will of superior numbers, ment. A person may be the owner of be adopted, I rise merely to state an a community should be authorized to property subject to taxation outside of objection to it. While I would be in aid such railroad enterprizes as they the township or city in which the vote favor, if a member of the Legislature, may deem beneficial to the general inis being taken, and yet under the of adopting a provision in the law terest. On the other hand, it has been amendment, as it now stands, he will similar to that proposed by the junior argued that it was wrong and unjust be entitled to vote, if he resides within gentleman from Cass, (Mr. VAN RIPER,) by a vote of a bare majority to approthe city or township where the vote is I am opposed to putting it into the priate the property of the minority for taken. Constitution. If we adopt his amend- such a purpose. Now, to our astonment, it will be regarded by many ishment, we are met by the statement people of this State as a direct blow that the question should not be sub The question was taken upon the amendment of Mr. ALEXANDER, to the 3 门 GER,) this morning, he contended that under the provisions of this section as it stands, there must be a submission of the question to a vote of the people. I thought at the time the section could not bear such a construction. He insisted that the Legislature had not and could not authorize the issuing of municipal bonds for any purpose without a vote of the electors. It had fallen in my way to know that the gentleman was mistaken. I knew that the Legislature had frequently authorized common councils of cities, and township boards of townships, to issue the bonds of municipalities without such a vote. mitted at all to a vote of the people. round it with every safe-guard essential (Mr. BILLS,) suggests, to a vote of the The tables have been turned, things to secure a full and fair expression tax-payers; but I do say certainly to a have changed, and now forsooth this from those who must bear the load of vote of the people. aid is not to be made dependant upon taxation. In my judgment, one of If the whole matter is left with the the popular will. I am glad, as I have these safe-guards is a vote of the people. Legislature, I apprehend that provis already remarked that we are to un- If I could have my own way, I would ion will not always be made for taking derstand distinctly what this proposi- require something more than a mere the sense of the people in the manner tion means. majority vote. I would not suffer a suggested by the honorable gentleman At any In the argument of the honorable few artful, active men to saddle an in- from Branch, (Mr. LUCE.) gentleman from St. Clair, (Mr. CON- debtedness of thousands of dollars rate, we shall not have a uniform mode upon an unwilling community. I fear prescribed for the whole State. In some this will too often be the result even with localities the expression would be obthe adoption of the pending amend-tained in one way, while in others a ment. The gentleman from Kalama- different method would obtain. But I zoo (Mr. GIDDINGS) told us here to-day have serious objections to the mode that in his town, after much excitement, suggested by my friend from Branch. less than a majority of the electors He would have the Legislature provoted upon the township or the village, vide for obtaining and filing the assent I do not know which, an indebtedness of a majority of the tax-paying elecof one hundred thousand dollars, to tors of the municipality in favor of the aid in the construction of a railroad. proposed aid. If he will investigate a There will be sufficient opportunity for case decided in the State of New York designing men to influence the public against the village of Rome or the city mind with hopes and expectations that of Rochester-on reflection I am inwill never be realized, to tire out the clined to think it was against the town patience of the cautious and cool, and of Genoa-he will find that in that plunge the community into schemes of case, it was held that a statutory I well remember that at the last ses- this sort, without the removal of this provision, such as he suggests, must sion of of the Legislature I introduced a restraint. be strictly pursued. The act of the bill which passed that body authorizing Now, I say let us stick to our text. Legislature required that the officers the trustees of the public schools of the I know how this subject has been issuing the bonds, should first procure city of Adrian to issue the bonds of treated in the Legislature. I have and file the written assent of two-thirds that district for the sum of forty thous-lived long enough to be satisfied that of the tax-payers of the town. I think and dollars. That bill became a law it will not be likely to be hedged about the court decided that the holder of without any provision in it for taking with too many restrictions there. In the sense of the people of the district their zeal, representatives will insist upon the question. Its provisions, in that their constituents are a unit upon my judgment, were wise and good. the question, and they will successfully They were understood beforehand, and importune the Legislature to grant the I believe, were in accordance with the desired aid without the circumlocution wishes of the people. But I refer to of a vote. Unforeseen objections will this case, as I might refer to many appear to every proposed restriction. others, to show that bills have fre- I well remember that my excellent quently passed the Legislature, author- friend from Allegan, (Mr. WILLIAMS,) izing the authorities of cities and townships to issue bonds at their own discretion, without any clause requiring a vote of the people. I say that under this section as it now stands the whole power is in the Legislature. It may exclude the people of a township or city from any vote or voice in the determination of the question of rendering aid. Now, I submit that extraordinary taxation like this, that is to be felt to the very quick by those who are to bear the burden, should in all cases be first submitted to those interested for their approval. I have great confidence in the Legislature, but I do not believe in permitting it to impose taxation of this kind without an expression of the opinion of the people upon whom the tax is to be imposed. If we are to have this provision in our Constitution, let us place the power in the hands of the people, clearly defined, secure against the interference of outside influence or intrigue. Let us surVol. 2-No. 22. the bonds was bound to prove affirmatively that the assent of two-thirds of the tax-payers had been obtained and filed, as required by law, and that the affidavit of the officers issuing the bonds was not evidence of the fact. That particular provision produced long and tedious litigation-the validity of the bonds was attacked; they were held, if I remember correctly, invalid, and the general effect was to depreciate such bonds, capital fearing to invest in them, lest all the preliminary requirements of the statute had not been complied with. Mr. WILLIAMS. Was not the question in the case of Freeman Clark vs. the city of Rochester, the submission to the vote of the electors before the enactment of the Legislature would become a law? The question I think was whether the law should be submitted to the people before it could take effect. at the commencement of the last ses- I hope that a plain, distinct provision will be inserted in the Constitution, requiring the Legislature in every instance, to submit the question of the proposed aid to a vote of the people to be affected thereby. I will not say, as my honorable friend from Lenawee, one to which I refer. In the decision to which I have alluded, I think the contest hinged upon the question whether the officers of the town had complied with the provisions of a law requiring the assent of two-thirds of the tax payers before the bonds issued, and if I am not greatly mistaken the bonds failed upon that account. Now, I would not, by the action of The argument of the gentleman Legislature cannot be trusted with anythe Legislature or otherwise, encum- would lead us to the conclusion that it thing that may arise hereafter, and ber the issuing of these bonds by any is the duty of this Convention to so that we must tie up their hands, and proceedings of this character. I fear frame this provision that no earthly fence them in on the right hand and it would only have the effect to injure damage could possibly be done under on the left, in the rear and in front. the sale of the bonds. I would simply any circumstances whatever. He In my judgment that will not be in have a vote of the people upon the wishes us to throw around this subject accordance with the wishes of the peoquestion. I would provide that the all the safeguards that it is possible for ple of this State. faith of a community should not be the Legislature to throw around it. It has been from this very thing that pledged, that no bonds should be is- Now, I do not understand that we are the greatest difficulties have arisen sued, nor security given in aid of rail- here for the purpose of making laws under the present Constitution, so far roads, without having in the first place for the government of this State. I do as difficulties have arisen under it herethe assent, approval, and ratification not understand that we are here for tofore. At every step which the Legof a full, fair, and clear majority of the the purpose of doing the work of islature have attempted to take, they electors of the township or city-and a Legislature, as and a Legislature, as some gentlemen have met the Constitution. It has been there I would leave the matter. seem to imagine is the case. I under- in their way; it has stood in the way of stand that we are here for the purpose progress, in the way of the onward of framing a Constitution. Nor do I march of the people, and the advancebelieve that when this Convention shall ment of their interests. Let us not adjourn, all the wisdom of this State adopt the errors of the Convention of will disappear. I think we may rea- 1850. sonably expect that the Legislatures who are to convene in the future will have sufficient intelligence to perform properly the business which will come before them, the business which properly belongs to Legislatures. Mr. WILLIAMS. I move the following as a substitute for the amendment of the gentleman from Cass, (Mr. VAN RIPER): "No city or township shall be authorized to grant such aid, without first obtaining the assent of a majority of the citizens of such township or city, whose names shall appear on the last preceding assessment roll thereof." Mr. INGALLS. As this section now stands, there might be counties in the Upper Peninsula that this amendment would not reach. I would ask the gentleman to include the word "county" in his amendment. permit me to ask him one question? Mr. BILLS. Will the gentleman Mr. PARSONS. With the greatest pleasure. Mr. BILLS. Is not the whole of. this section twenty-seven designed as a restriction upon the Legislature? But the gentleman seems to think that it is necessary for this Convention Mr. PARSONS. Most certainly it to provide absolutely in this Constiution is. There is no question but what the Mr. GIDDINGS. One single sugthat this subject shall be submitted to Legislature, independent of this secgestion in reply to the gentleman from the vote of the electors of the munici- tion, would have the power to authorize Lenawee, (Mr. CROSWELL.) I have pality interested in it. Now, it is pos- counties, cities and townships to grant simply to say that the proposition he sible that the Legislature may possess this aid to railroads. That is as plain has advocated, to require a vote of the as much wisdom as this Convention. as the sun at noon-day. And yet honelectors of the municipality, and the I trust there will be more Legislatures orable gentlemen in this Convention approval of a majority of all the elec- than one to convene before this Con- have assumed that there was a question tors in a locality, before such aid can stitution, if adopted, shall be amended about it. And, as I understand it, one be granted, will in my judgment be or replaced by another. Some changes of the great objects of this section altogether impracticable. The truth may be necessary and proper to be is to do away with the least question is that very seldom do a majority of made; some better course may be de- that could possibly arise in regard to the people come out to vote on either vised. It is possible that the course it, so there shall be in the future side, or both sides. It is almost im- pointed out by the amendment of the none of these questions raised by the possible to get a majority of the elec- honorable gentleman from Allegan executive, or members of the Legislators of a town to come out to vote on (Mr. WILLIAMS) may be better than to ture, or by anybody else; so that all a question of this kind. I have known have this matter referred to the vote of scarcely an instance where that has oc- the electors, or to the vote of the taxcurred. I know that in my own town, payers. I for one am not in favor of upon the question of raising $100,000, tying up and manacling the hands and we did not have out one-half of the feet of the Legislatures, who are to voters of the town. convene in this State in the future. may understand that the Legislature have this right. And this restriction of ten per cent. is proposed, so that this right should not be exercised beyond what is just and reasonable and Mr. PARSONS. The honorable genThe honorable gentleman from Len- But honorable gentlemen propose to tleman from Lenawee, (Mr. CROSWELL,) awee, (Mr. CROSWELL,) is now, and has go further than this restriction. They with a great deal of feeling and been for several years past, an honor- propose to point out the only way eloquence, informs us that he sees in able member of the Senate of this which the Legislature shall adopt in this committee a disposition to do State, and I trust that when he goes submitting this question to be voted something which he conceives to be into the Senate again, as I have no on, before the bonds are to be issued. wrong, unjust, and improper to be doubt he will, he will be as competent Now, if that is necessary, then it is done. With a great deal of eloquence to legislate there as he is to discharge equally necessary that we should go he describes and portrays the evil that his duties in this Convention. I trust further, and declare that these bonds will result from such action. He it will not be considered necessary for should not be issued until the road that were he in the Legislature he should this Convention to make all the laws bed is prepared for the rails. And be in favor not only of requiring this which will be necessary for the govern- perhaps that may not be far enough to matter to be submitted to a vote of the ment of this great commonwealth, but suit some members of this Convention. electors, but of requiring it to be that we shall leave something to be They may desire to go still another approved by more than a majority of done by future Legislatures. We step, and say that the bonds shall not the electors. Perhaps he would be in should not assume that this Con- be issued until the iron is laid down favor of requiring an affimative vote vention possesses all the wisdom upon the track. says of two-thirds of the electors before the that there is in this State. We Now, I would leave all these quesshould not take the ground that the tions to the Legislature; I would trust bonds shall be issued. * this matter to their wisdom, their in- farce; outsiders might control the his farm may die, or sell his farm; but tegrity, and their honesty and sagacity. matter, and not those who would be he must give his assent to placing the I have just as much confidence in the affected by the tax to be thus imposed. mortgage upon it. And upon the Legislature as I have in this Conven- I propose in my substitute that the same principle I would in this case tion, and therefore I hope this Conven- question shall be submitted to those require the assent of the majority of tion will not be disposed to tie up the whose names shall appear upon the those to be affected by this matter. hands of the Legislature, to cripple last preceding assessment roll; not to Mr. STOUGHTON. If it be the their power, and by our action here the electors only, but to the citizens of object of the enemies of the proposiassume that the legislators who are the municipality, male and female, tion allowing municipal aid to be voted to convene in this State in the future white and black, whose names are on by municipalities to railroads, to so will be entirely unfit and unqualified the assessment roll. My proposition hamper and tie up the Legislature and to decide so grave a question as this. meets every objection that has been those municipalities that no such aid Mr. WILLIAMS. I apprehend there urged against property qualification. can possibly be granted, it seems to need be little or no difficulty between It is true there are some objectionable me they have resorted to means very the gentleman from Lenawee, (Mr. features; but I apprehend we could likely to accomplish their purpose. If CROSWELL,) and myself, in regard to introduce no clause without some ob- we are to have these various entangleour former action upon this matter, in jectionable features. ments in the Constitution, it is very the Legislature of this State. I am doubtful whether a law could ever be aware that during the railroad discuspassed by the Legislature on this subsion last winter, the question was agitaject which could ever be carried out. ted somewhat, in reference to the power of the Legislature to impose restrictions upon the persons who were to vote upon the question of granting aid to railroads. At one time it was a question of some doubt whether the Legislature had the right to impose such restrictions, and I so stated; but it was only a doubt. Now, in reference to the case referred to by my friend from Lenawee, (Mr. CROSWELL,) I am perfectly confident that he is mistaken in the gist and The proposition of the gentleman drift of the case. The case of Freeman from Allegan, (Mr. WILLIAMS,) requires. Clarke vs. the city of Rochester, in 24 the assent of a majority of the tax-payBarbour, is the only one in the New ers, in the first place, before this aid York Reports, to which my attention can be given to a railroad, by any muhas been called, where the question of nicipality. How will you do that? assent has arisen at all. Freeman The validity of the bonds would deClarke having purchased some of those pend, in the first place, upon the quesbonds, and having brought his action tion whether a majority of the tax-payI am not at all desirous that the new against the city of Rochester, and the ers were in favor of their being issued. Constitution should embody anything city refusing to pay the money It seems to me that the principle of his which may lead to doubt upon that upon them, the question was raised proposition is impracticable. I think point. I am perfectly willing to meet whether the city was liable, the law the principle of making the property that question fairly and openly here in having been submitted to the vote of of an individual the index of his right this Convention. I am anxious to the electors of the city before it went to vote is all wrong. It is contrary to have a clause adopted here that will into effect. It was claimed that no the genius of our free institutions; it for all time hereafter relieve this ques-law could be submitted in that way; is anti-republican. If we place such a tion of any doubt. And, therefore, I that it must be a law as soon as passed provision in this Constitution, there proposed the substitute which I sent by the Legislature, and that the elec- will certainly be one black spot upon up to the Chair. I believe I may say tors of a township or city could not it. I think we should never adopt it. that that substitute embodies in it, at make it a law, because they had no right Just see where the principle will lead least in the ideas if not in the language, to make a law. The court decided that us. If the principle be true, then in the very amendment proposed by the the bonds were good, and the city had all our primary elections, where the honorable gentleman from Lenawee, to pay them for $300,000. I think that question of taxation comes up, you (Mr. CROSWELL,) to a bill in the Senate is the case to which the gentleman re- should allow none but tax-payers to during the last session. I do not de- ferred; I know of no other case of the vote, and you should carry the princisire to say in this Constitution that the kind. We may undoubtedly conceive ple still further, and say that a man Legislature shall be confined to any that if there be a provision of the Con- shall vote according to the amount of particular method of obtaining the as-stitution, or a law, which required the property he owns; that a man who sent of the majority of the citizens of assent of a majority of the citizens, owns one thousand dollars' worth of a township or city to be affected by is- either by an election, or in any other property shall be entitled to one vote, suing bonds for this purpose. I desire manner, if that assent be not obtained, while the man who owns one hundred simply to require that before the bonds the same would be illegal and void. thousand dollars' worth of property are issued the assent of the citizens of That question is hardly worthy an ar- shall be entitled to one hundred votes. the municipality shall be obtained. gument in this Convention. I think the people of the State of Michigan will never endorse any such principle as that. I would go further than that; I Now, I am desirous of having here would not merely require the assent a property qualification in reference to of the electors; I would put it upon this vote, while I would put no such I think the people of each municithe broad ground that every man in a restriction upon the right of the elec- pality should be allowed to say by their municipality who pays a tax therein, tive franchise. But when it is pro- votes whether they are in favor of whose name shall appear on the last posed to impose an obligation on granting this aid or not. I suppose preceding assessment roll, shall have property, I would have the owner of the Legislature would provide in any the opportunity to give, in such man- that property allowed the privilege of case that that should be done. It is ner as shall be prescribed by law, his saying whether that obligation shall barely possible that a case may arise assent to the issuing of such bonds. be placed upon it or not. It has been where every man in the community I would put in that clause requiring contended that under such a rule the would petition the Legislature to allow this question to be submitted to the person who may vote for the obligation the officers of the municipality to issue property-holders of the township or being imposed, may not be the person the bonds; and in that case there would city for many reasons. The vote with- who will have to pay the debt. But be no impropriety in allowing the out that qualification might be a mere the person who places a mortgage on bonds to be so issued. And there may be cases where it would be proper to submit the question to the vote of those alone who are directly interested in the tax. If the section is left as reported by the committee on the legislative department, the Legislature will be left free to adopt such a course as to them may seem best. This question is not entirely an open question. It has been settled, at least by a decision of the Court of Appeals of the State of New York, where it was held that such a vote was lawful. My understanding of that case is different from the understanding of the gentleman from Lenawee, (Mr. CROSWELL.) I have the report of the case now before me. By a provision of the Legislature of the State of New York, the common council of the village of Rome were authorieed to issue bonds to aid in the construction of a certain railroad. The law contained this further provision: ་ after the word "thereby," the words, or any other portion of the people, I have one word to say in reply to the “The board of trustees shall have no power to make such subscription as is authorized in the first section of this act, nor to raise bonds or create any liability under this act, until it has been previously approved by two-thirds of all electors who shall have paid a tax on personal or real estate in said village, whose names shall appear regularly in the last village assessment roll for the next year preceding the one in which the vote is taken." The question raised was whether that tax was a legal one; and the Court of Appeals in passing upon it, use this language: matter." "The law by its terms was to take effect immediately, but by the eighth section, the trustees of the village were not to have power to act under its provisions in subscribing and issuing bonds, until the law had been ap proved by two-thirds of the electors who had been tax-payers in the preceding year. By the ninth section they were to vote "for railroad stock," or "against railroad stock;" and by the tenth section if the requisite apthat it was the unanimous wish of the proval were had, the trustees were directed people of Adrian that the authorizato subscribe for stock and issue bonds. tion of the Legislature should be given. case is, therefore, in substance, only a sub-section. mission to a vote of the parties interested, of I believe this section, designed as it for the issue of, those bonds, without the question whether or not they chose that the municipal corporation should subscribe to is to restrict the Legislature to a cer- referring the question to the people at the railroad. In other words, the Legisla- tain amount, not conferring by any all, might have well taken upon himself ture did not compel the village to subscribe, means any authority upon the Legis- the responsibility of his own acts, from but, creating by law the necessary machinery, left it to the tax-payers to determine that lature for I have no question of the the regard which his fellow members authority of the Legislature to pass had for his own veracity and truthfulNow, if we leave this section just as laws to grant any amount of aid that ness, when he asserted that such was it was reported by the committee on the people may desire to grant as a the desire of his constituents. There the legislative department, the Legis- restrictive clause holding the Legisla- may be other such cases as that. We lature might in all proper cases sub-türe to a certain amount, and holding cannot tell but what the Legislature mit the question to the tax-payers in the people of the State, city, or town- may be the best judges of the manThe wishes of of the townships or cities. But I ship to an authorization before that aid ner of submission. think it would be entirely wrong to can be granted, I think this section is the people themselves may possibly place a provision in the Constitution all that is necessary. If I thought any direct it. requiring this question, in all cases, to other course would be better, I would be submitted to the tax-payers, and to not make any opposition. none others. That provision is unnec- This has been an open question, a essary. The Legislature have the loose question. But from the decisions power now. It seems to me that we of the highest court in the State of should leave a little power in the hands New York, I think gentlemen can have of that body. no doubt but that it is perfectly legal Mr. FARMER. I move to amend and proper to submit this question to the amendment of the gentleman from the people, and require the assent of Cass, (Mr. VAN RIPER,) by inserting the property holders, the tax-payers, any f If the proposition now pending is adopted, the Legislature will have but one course left open to them. Suppose the proposition of the gentleman from Allegan, (Mr. WILLIAMS,) should be adopted, that there should be required a majority of the persons bearing names that appear upon the last assessment roll. I submit that in many places one-third or one-half of the names on |