cers, as already adopted, goes to the extent of making every officer of the township a constitutional officer; it even goes so far as to include the path-master in each road district. Now, sir, I believe that, without being egotistical, I may claim that I voted on this question understandingly. I think I spoke against making all these officers constitutional officers. I had no objection to designating in the Constitution some of the leading officers, such as are always required in every township organization; but I was not in favor of going into details to such an extent. I am one of the few who voted against that article on its final passage. I am in favor of reconsidering our action in adopting, yesterday, the substitute of the gentleman from Lapeer; but, for one, I feel just as ready to enter upon its consideration to-day, as at any other time. Mr. PARSONS. I call for the previous question.. The previous question was not sustained, there being ayes 33, noes 36. Mr. ALEXANDER. While there is so much visible anxiety on the part of members of the Convention to bring this matter to a termination, I should not feel at liberty to make any lengthy remarks, even were I able to do so. I wish simply to say that I am willing to vote for a reconsideration of this subject, provided a sufficient time be allowed to consider the propriety of our action of yesterday. If I can be assured that this time will be allowed, so that we may deliberate properly, I desire to vote, and that immediately, for the motion to reconsider. Mr. GIDDINGS. In order to set at rest if possible the doubts of a number of gentlemen who have spoken, I will state, as I have stated before, that if this motion to reconsider be agreed to, it is my purpose to move a postponement of the subject until the 16th of next month, and to make it a special order for that time. wish to be held responsible for the rea- been made by the committee on ar- to. Mr. GIDDINGS. I now move that the further consideration of this subject be postponed unfil the 16th day of July, and be made a special order for that day. The motion was agreed to. PAY OF ABSENT MEMBERS. Mr. MORTON. I do not understand the necessity of hasty action on these. articles. I think it would be well that they should lie on the table, so that members may have time to examine them. In regard to some of the articles which have been acted upon, many members desire a reconsideration of certain subjects, believing that material changes should be made. For inMr. WHITE. I offer the following stance, if the article on State officers resolution: should be retained in its present form, some change will be necessary in the article on counties, and also that on townships, in order that our action on these several subjects may be consistent. I renew the motion that this article be laid on the table. Resolved, That hereafter no member of this without leave, or upon leave upon his own or Convention when absent, or while absent official business, shall be entitled to his per diem pay from the State; nor shall any member be entitled to such pay when absent for any cause except sickness of himself or his family. Mr. MCCLELLAND. I hope the gentleman will withdraw that motion, Mr. BARBER. I move that this resolution be laid on the table. Mr. WHITE. On that motion I call so that we may consider now the for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken, and the motion to lay the resolution on the table was agreed to, there being yeas 51, nays 16, as follows: amendments made by the committee on arrangement and phraseology. They are very few and can be disposed of in a short time. After these have been acted upon, the article can then be laid on the table. Mr. MORTON. If that is the object, I withdraw my motion. YEAS-Messrs. Aldrich, Andrus, Barber, NAYS-Messrs. Alexander, Blackman, Case, FINANCE AND TAXATION. nance and Taxation. Mr. CONGER. Mr. President, our As the next business in order, the rules require that a motion to recon- Convention proceeded to the third sider shall be made within a certain reading of articles, the article under specified time. Now, it is undoubtedly consideration being that entitled "Fitrue that a great many gentlemen of the Convention would like to have this Mr. PRINGLE. This article is matter reconsidered that they may re- somewhat closely connected with some flect upon it more it more thoroughly. I can other articles of the Constitution upon see no earthly objection to a reconsider- which we have not yet fully acted and ation. Let the motion be adopted are not yet prepared to act. With the now so that it may not be precluded view of having all these subjects finalby our rules, and then we can dispose ly acted upon together, I move that of the question hereafter. this article be laid on the table. Mr. HENDERSON. Although I Mr. MCCLELLAND. I would sugmade a motion for postponement some gest to the gentleman making this motime ago which, however, was not en- tion, that we should at this time at tertained-I am not responsible for least go into a consideration of those the pending motion, and I would not corrections of the article which have The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that under the practice which has been adopted there is no necessity for a motion to concur in the amendments made by this committee. They are concurred in as a matter of course unless there be objection, and the article is ordered to a third reading. Mr. BILLS. Under the ruling of the Chair, I withdraw the motion. The PRESIDENT. If there are any objections to the amendments made by the committee on arrangement and phraseology, the article can be recommitted to the committee, with instructions to make the corrections indicated. Mr. MUSSEY. Do I understand the Chair to state that the amendments made by the committee on arrangement and phraseology are included in brackets. The PRESIDENT. That is the understanding of the Chair. Mr. LEACH. Then I would like to make an inquiry as to section 14. observe that that is included in brackets, yet I apprehend it is not an amendment made by the committee on arrangement and phraseology. II desire to say that with this article as jection to any of the amendments or it now appears, I am perfectly satisfied corrections made by the committee on with the exception of section 14. If arrangement and phraseology; but the Convention is to take the course there are reasons why I prefer that no indicated in the substitute of the gen- final action should be taken on this Mr. NINDE. We understood that tleman from Lapeer, (Mr. LAMB,) question at the present time. I therethe Secretary was to have the article which has been made a special order fore move that the article be laid on printed in the journal so that the for the 16th of July, I shall most cer- the table. amendments made by the Convention | tainly desire that section 14 of this arafter the report of the committee of ticle shall be amended. If we strike the whole, should appear in italics, and out the designation of State officers I the amendments made by the commit- do not wish to fix in the Constitution tee on arrangement and phraseology a State board of equalization. It occurs. should appear in brackets. to me that this change would be a proper subject for consideration along with the question of retaining the designation of State officers; hence, I should like to have a postponement of the consideration of this article. Mr. NORRIS. The whole of section 14 is printed in brackets, yet that section as it stands was, I think, a substitute adopted by the Convention. Mr. BLACKMAN. Section 14 was re-written by the committee on arrangement and phraseology, in order to avoid incongruity in the several parts as they stood. It will be found by comparison of the section as amended by the committee of the whole and the section as now printed in brackets, that the words are almost identically the same, but there has been a change by transposition. Mr. LEACH. On what page of the journal is the section printed as reported from committee of the whole? Mr. BLACKMAN. Of course the committee on arrangement and pharseology could make no changes in the substance or meaning of the article. Mr. HENDERSON. I understand that. I was simply speaking with reference to the propriety of the postponement of this subject. The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the adoption of the article. If any member desires, it will be read section by section, so that the corrections made by the committee on arrangement and phraseology may be noted. Mr. THOMPSON. May I inquire of the Chair when this article, if now laid an the table, will come up for consideration. The PRESIDENT. It may be taken from the table at any time by a motion to that effect. Mr. PRINGLE. A few moments ago I withdrew a motion to lay the article on the table, at the request of the gentleman from Wayne, (Mr. McCLELLAND,) who suggested that the verbal amendments of the committee on arrangement and phraseology might be acted upon at this time. I now suggest to the gentleman from Grand Traverse whether those amendments do not seem satisfactory, and whether they may not properly be acted on now, nothing being put beyond the power of the Convention; and then let the article be laid on the table. Mr. LEACH. I withdraw the motion. I would simply say that the amendments having been read through, no member appeared to object to them, Mr. PRINGLE. I call for the read- and the President had stated that no ing of the amendments. action of the Convention was necessary for the adoption of the amendments. Mr. PRINGLE. If that be the view of the matter Mr. BLACKMAN. I am not able to state that; but the amendments made in committee of the whole were so placed that the several parts of the sentences were very incongruously put together. The committee transposed several parts of the section so that those clauses having more direct relation to each other should go together. I think that this is the whole effect of the The second amendment is in the change made by that committee. It same section, by inserting the words has been stated that the amendments" of such State debt," in place of the made in committee of the whole are word, "thereof." The PRESIDENT. The first amendment made by the committee on arrangement and phraseology, is in section three, by inserting the words "sinking fund." year." printed in italics, and those made by The third amendment is to insert in The fourth amendment is to insert : Mr. MCCLELLAND. Allow me to Mr. DANIELLS. I ask the Secremake one suggestions I propose that tary to read section fourteen as agreed we take up this article section by sec- upon by the Convention, so that we tion for the purpose of considering the may observe the changes made by the amendments made by the committee on committee on arrangement and phra arrangement and phraseology, and seology. whenever any member chooses to call for the reading of the original as it went to the committee, then let it be read, so that it may be compared with the section as amended. In this way we may have a perfect understanding of the matter. Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. President, The Secretary read as follows: "The Legislature shall provide for an equalization by a State board, to consist of a member from each senatorial district, to be year 1871, and every fifth year thereafter, of elected as shall be prescribed by law, in the assessments on all taxable property, except that paying specific taxes." Mr. LEACH. : Mr. LEACH. I do not see any ob The PRESIDENT. That is the practice heretofore adopted by the Convention. Unless there be some objection made to amendments of this character, they are considered as concurred in, as a matter of course. Mr. LEACH. I now renew the mo· tion that the article be laid on the table. The motion was agreed to. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED IN CRIMINAL The pending section was the following: the accused shall have the right to a speedy SECTION 8. In every criminal prosecution and public trial by an impartial jury, to be informed of the nature of the accusation, to be confronted with witnesses against him, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Mr. D. GOODWIN. I move to amend this section by striking out the words, "of the nature," so that the section will read: "In every criminal prosecution the accused shall have the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, to be informed of the accusation," etc. into court and prosecute or defend that a party may appear both in pertheir own suits, in their own proper son and by an attorney, would, I think, persons without employing attorneys. be a provision of no practical value, Mr. GIDDINGS. I shall Mr. BILLS. It seems to me that while it would lead to a great deal of against this amendment for the reason there is really no reason why we inconvenience and confusion. Mr. FERRIS. In answer to the that I think " the nature of the accusa- should change our rule in this matter. vote stance and details of it. The amendment was agreed to, there being on a division, ayes 35, noes 16. RIGHTS OF SUITORS. The next section was read as follows: SECTION 9. Any suitor in any court in this State, shall have the right to prosecute or de tion," is a much more comprehensive Without this section it would doubt- suggestion of my friend from Wayne, and better phrase than the accusa-less be competent for the Legislature (Mr. LOTHROP,) I will state that I have tion." To simply state an accusation to provide that just such privileges submitted my motion more for the is one thing; but to state the "nature should be extended to every citizen. purpose of calling the attention of of an accusation," is to give the sub- But the Convention will bear in mind members to the character of this secthat we are in this article asserting tion than for anything else. While I am on the floor, I wish to those principles which properly belong under the title "Bill of Rights." It say in reply to the suggestion of my seems to me proper that under this friend from Jackson, (Mr. PRINGLE,) title we should declare in as simple that the difficulty to which he referred and concise language as possible that in England, was in the employment of every man shall enjoy the privilege counsel to defend criminals. This secspecified in the section. I trust that tion, however, speaks merely of attorit will not be the decision of the Con- neys, meaning, I understand, those provention to strike out this section. fessional gentlemen specially desigMr. WILLARD. As I understand nated by that name. If my friend from this section, the alternative is that a Calhoun, will reflect a moment, he will, man shall prosecute or defend his suit, I think, see that there can be no advaneither in person or by attorney. I tage whatever gained by allowing a should like to have the sense of the party the privilege of appearing in perThe attorConvention upon the propriety of son, and also by attorney. allowing a person who prosecutes or ney work, is the office work of the lawdefends a suit to appear both in his yer-the paper work. Now, suppose own person and by attorney. I am that my friend from Calhoun should not sufficiently acquainted with the institute a suit against me, and I should practice of courts to judge fully in re- put in an appearance, giving him notice gard to the propriety of this propo- in something like this form: "Sir, take sition; but I offer the following amend-notice that I appear to defend this suit ment: fend his suit, either in his own proper person, or by an attorney of his choice. Mr. FERRIS. I move to strike out this section, as being a mere matter of legislation. The Legislature has and will have full power in regard to this subject. In line three, strike out the word "either," and at the end of the section, the words, "or both in his own person and by attorney," so that the section will read as follows: Mr. PRINGLE. This is one of those sections which I hope will not be stricken out. It is one of the boasts of our reformed practice in the courts that the rights of individuals may not be trampled upon; that they may have an opportunity to defend themselves when charged with crime; that they may have facilities for going into court and obtaining justice or protecting themselves against injustice. Yet there are men now living who can remember the day when in the courts of England counsel were not allowed to speak in defense of the prisoner when accused of certain crimes. Now, I suppose that this section was inserted in our present Mr. LOTHROP. I hope that there Constitution, as it is found generally may be no question in regard to the in the Constitutions of other States, as adoption of this section; and I was a safeguard against any deprivation of going to ask my friend from Kent, (Mr. the rights of individuals in this respect. FERRIS,) to withdraw his motion to Mr. FERRIS. I would call the strike out. I do not regard the provisattention of my friend from Jackson, ion as of any practical value, but (Mr. PRINGLE,) to the phraseology of some other persons so regard it. It is the section "defend his suit." The a section standing in the present Consection is so drawn that it applies to stitution. I think it may just as well civil proceedings. That is the reason be retained. why I desire to strike it out. "Any suitor in any court in this State shall have the right to prosecute or defend his suit in his own proper person, or by an attorney of his choice, or both in his own person and by attorney." As to the amendment just suggested Mr. PRINGLE. The same question by the gentleman from Calhoun, (Mr. does not arise with regard to civil as WILLARD,) I would say that his proposiwith regard to criminal proceedings; tion would scarcely work in practice. yet I think it not unreasonable for us In the prosecution or defense of a suit, to provide just what this section pro-there must appear on the record the poses in reference to civil proceedings. name of some person who is to receive In some sense, perhaps, it may be ap- papers, upon whom services are to be plicable to criminal proceedings as made, etc. This may be either the well as civil. While I do not know party himself or any one whom he sethat anybody proposes to deny the lects to stand in his place. It is the right guaranteed by the section, yet I think it a right which a good many people hold dear (though it may be merely theoretical) that they may go 5 in person, and at the same time have employed Mr. A. as my attorney to defend me." Suppose the attorney should also serve his notice in this form: "Sir, take notice that I am employed to defend this case." If both those appearances were recognized, the gentleman would have to serve papers on both of us; for the rule is imperative that all papers in a case must be served on the attorney who appears, or if a party appears in person must be served upon him. And thus a double trouble would be rendered necessary, and considerable inconvenience would result, without, so far as I can see, any practical advantage. I suppose the point desired is that on trial of a cause a party and his counsel may both be heard before the jury. Now I call the attention of the gentleman from Wayne, (Mr. LOTHROP,) to the phraseology of the section, allowing a party to appear "in his own proper person or by an attorney." It strikes me that this provision is so utterly valueless in a bill of rights that we had better not encumber the Constitution with it. Mr. LOTHROP. I think myself that the provision is utterly valueless; but a great many persons seem to suppose that it is of some value, and hence right of a party, at any time, to discharge as it can do no harm, I see no reason his attorney, and appear in person, if why it should not be retained. Let he wants to do so, or to substitute an- those who think it valuable find value other attorney; but for us to provide in it if they can. Mr. WILLARD. I am not at all that as a substitute for my amend- identical in language with the provision tenacious in regard to the amendment ment. of the Constitution of the United States, which I have offered. I simply wished Mr. LOTHROP. I desire to call that no person shall be subject for to call the attention of the committee the attention of the learned attorney the same offense, to be twice put in to the phraseology of the section and general, (Mr STOUGHTON,) to the diffi- jeopardy of life or limb." But there to a query which arose in my own culties which are sought to be avoided is a very material distinction which has mind in regard to this point. As the by the language as used in this section, been stated by the gentleman from committee appears to be satisfied with being the same language as that em- Wayne, Mr. (LOTHROP.) Under the the section as it now stands, I withdraw ployed in our present Constitution. provision of our present Constitution, my amendment. The language which he now proposes which it is proposed to retain in this is the same as that which was used section, a person, having been arrested originally in our Constitution, being charged with crime and being disborrowed from the old law-books. charged on a preliminary examination, Under that provision there were a can be again arrested, tried, and if The next section was read, as fol- great many decisions by which a per- guilty, convicted of the crime. Such a son was discharged on technical ques- proceeding would be forbidden under tions without an acquittal acquittal upon the language proposed by the gentleThe provision in our man from St. Joseph, that the person present Constitution has, I think, shall not be twice put in jeopardy for worked well. It seems to me proper the same offense. I think that the that we should require an acquittal adoption of the latter provision would upon the merits to exempt a man from be a most disastrous one with regard a second trial, instead of declaring to the interests of the people of the that he shall not be twice put in jeop- State. The motion of Mr. FERRIS was not agreed to. lows: SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. and possessions of every person shall be the merits. secure from unreasonable searches and seiz Mr. P. D. WARNER. I wish to inquire of the gentleman from Wayne, (Mr. LOTHROP,) whether by the adop tion of the language proposed, a new trial can be had, as is frequently the attention to it than otherwise. As, Mr. DANIELLS. I move to amend this section by striking out the closing words "supported by oath or affirma- ardy for the same offense; for under Mr. BLACKMAN. I desire to say tion.” the latter provision, if a man were that the amendment I suggested was Mr. Chairman, I offer this amend-discharged in the first instance upon offered without my having taken any ment, not in obedience to my own con- some technical grounds, he could not time to reflect upon it. On casting my victions, but because we have heard it be again tried for the same offense. I eye upon the line the amendment sugfrequently asserted in this Convention simply wish to call the attentio of the gested itself to my mind; but I prothat we have too many oaths-that gentleman to this point, that he may posed it more for the purpose of calling oaths are of no account. I have heard decide for himself whether it is really very many honorable members of this desirable to go back to the old system. Convention declare that they are opposed to giving in assessments under oath-that oaths have no binding effect on a community. I do not agree Mr. MUSSEY. Mr. Chairman, I in this opinion, but I wish to test should be glad if, when gentlemen prowhether the Convention is willing to be pose to change language which has consistent on this subject. Mr. LOTHROP. A new trial can been adopted in our present ConstituMr. FERRIS. I suggest to the gen-be had after conviction, unless the tion, they would state some good reatleman from Clinton (Mr. DANIELLS) amendment of my friend from Van son for the change. I am not aware that, to be consistent with himself and Buren, (Mr. BLACKMAN,) should prevail. of any evil that we have experienced carry out his own idea, he should pro- If that proposition should be adopted, under the provision of our present pose that we invent in this case a then, if, after a person had been con- Constitution on this subject. special swearing officer to administer victed, his counsel should be astute change is considered by any gentleman these oaths. enough to get the case carried up on desirable, I would like to understand The motion of Mr. DANIELLS was not error to the Supreme Court, and the de- the reasons for it. agreed to. cision of the court below should be reversed, the person could not again be tried. case now? RIGHTS OF PERSONS ACCUSED OF CRIME. Mr. BLACKMAN. Vol 1—Ño. 77. རྣ་ If a The question being taken on the TREASON AGAINST THE STATE. consist only in levying war against it or in Mr. T. G. SMITH. I move to amend "Treason against the State shall consist in levying war," etc. Mr. P. D. WARNER. I suggest to those members of the Convention who are so afraid of embracing legislation ' ! lows: SECTION 13. Excessive bail shall not be re quired, excessive fines shall not be imposed, detained. No amendments were offered. in the Constitution, that here is a chance circumstantial evidence. I could never stitution; and it may in practice have to exercise their skill by striking out see the reason for requiring that the had an operation which was not inthis entire section, and leaving it to the charge of treason shall be proved by tended. By all our previous provisLegislature to say what shall consti- the testimony of two witnesses to the ions of law, in actions for breach of tute treason and to prescribe the pen- same overt act. I merely make this marriage promise, a person might be alty for it. suggestion to call attention to the ques-held to bail and imprisoned. The option. eration of this section soon destroyed that remedy. The action for breach The next section was read as fol- of marriage promise is in its nature an action of tort, though in the form of an action of contract. The consequence of the construction which has been given to the present section is, that no person committing this offense; and under some circumstances, it is one of the grossest offenses that can be committed against society (and, I might add, against the best part of society)--no offender, however aggravated may be the circumstances of the offense, can be arrested and imprisoned, or held to bail. I simply call the attention of the comMr. THOMPSON. Imove to amend mittee to this point, so that, if it is by striking out in the third line the deemed proper, a change of the lanword "to," and inserting in lieu thereof the words "shall he;" so that the guage may be adopted. As I myself am past all danger in this direction, the matter, and submit no motion in regard to it. [Laughter.] Mr. LOTHROP. I hope that neither the motion of the gentleman from Genesee, (Mr. T. G. SMITH,) nor the suggestion of the gentleman from Oakland, (Mr. P. D. WARNER,) will prevail. I think it well that treason should be defined in the Constitution. If gentlemen will carry their memories back little they will see why such a provision as this was inserted. Even so obdurate an old tory as Dr. Johnson, expressed his delight that the doctrine of constructive treason had been abro-lows: gated. The old common law doctrine in regard to treason and constructive treason, prevailing in more unfortunate times, brought a great many heads to the block that ought not to have gone there. I think that this provision in our Constitution is very proper. It has been found to work well in our RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS. The `next section was read as fol SECTION 14. No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. I history, and is comprehensive enough clause will read: "nor shall he be de-am not at all concerned in reference to prived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." Mr. VAN RIPER. I would suggest it would be sufficient to strike out the word "to." to meet the necessities of the case. He who takes up arms against the State or who voluntarily gives its enemies aid and comfort, commits the great crime of treason against that State. We do not wish, as I trust and believe, to recognize any other political offense. At any rate I do not. Mr. LOVELL. I ask for a division of the question on this amendment. Mr. THOMPSON. Striking out the Mr. T. G. SMITH. As I understand word "to," might be sufficient. Still the effect of my amendment, it would, be better if we insert the words "shall it appears to me that the language will if it were adopted, leave this section still declaring what shall constitute treason; and from that declaration, I suppose, it would follow that no other offense would be treason. Without the use of the word "only," the section will still define what constitutes trea son, and it would be restricted to those cases only which are specified. he." Mr. NORRIS. I suggest whether it would not be better to insert "shall he or she." [Laughter.] . Mr. THOMPSON. I modify my amendment so as simply to strike out the word "to.” The motion was not agreed to. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. RAFTER. I move that the comMr. CHAPIN. I hope that this sec-mittee rise, report progress, and ask tion will be left intact, inasmuch as we leave to sit again. have very high and distinguished authority for the declaration that "treason should be made odious," and I think that one means of doing so is to incorporate in the Constitution of the State a definition of the crime. [Laughter.] The amendment of Mr. T. G. SMITH was not agreed to. RIGHTS OF DEBTORS. The next section was read as follows: SECTION 15. No person shall be imprisoned for debt arising out of, or founded on a contract, express or implied, except in case of fraud or breach of trust, or of moneys collected by public officers, or in any professional employment. No person shall be im prisoned for a militia fine in time of peace. Mr. CHAPIN. I move to amend by striking out the word "a," before the word "contract," in the first line Mr. VAN RIPER. I may state that this question came up before the committee that reported this article, and we were undecided as to what course had better be pursued. We finally concluded that we would leave the question open until the section should whole, when it might be amended as come before the committee of the the committee should see fit. Mr. FERRIS. I move to amend by inserting, in the third line of the section, after the words "professional employment," the words "or breach of marriage promise." Mr. BILLS. I suggest that if these words be inserted, they should come in after the word "trust," in the second line. Perhaps the mover may see the propriety of this change. Mr. FERRIS. I modify my amendment in the manner suggested by the gentleman from Lenawee, (Mr. BILLS.) Mr. NORRIS. I would suggest that "breach of marriage promise," is hardly correct phraseology, and that it would be better to say "breach of promise to marry." Mr. FERRIS. The second sentence of this section provides that "no person shall be convicted of treason unless upon the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act." It is a question of this section. with me whether we ought in the The amendment was agreed to. Constitution to make such a distinction Mr. LOTHROP. I wish to call the between the crime of treason and other attention of the committee to one point Mr. BLACKMAN. Gentlemen of classes of crimes. With regard to the in connection with this section. Mem- the committee will, I think, perceive crime of murder, for instance, a con- bers of the committee are doubtless the propriety of the suggestion made viction may take place upon the testi-aware that this is a section which was by the gentleman from Washtenaw, mony of a single witness and upon first introduced into our present Con-1 (Mr. NORRIS,) to change the phraseol |