sentiment for and against allowing the negro political rights was pretty evenly divided. Other questions upon which there was much difference of opinion were the following: annual or biennial sessions of the legislature, the submission of the Constitution to the people (lost seven to twenty-seven), salaries for officials, poll-tax, qualifications for voters, and apportionment of senators and representatives.

The convention of 1850-1851 had one hundred and twelve different delegates, four of whom were elected to fill the places of delegates who had resigned. The convention met in Columbus, May 6, 1850, and adjourned March 10, 1851. A recess was taken from July 9 to December 2, after which the sessions were held in Cincinnati. The sessions, exclusive of the recess, covered a period of one hundred and sixty-three days. The expense of the convention was $94,441.32. The organization consisted of a president, a secretary, two assistant secretaries, a reporter, an assistant reporter, a sargeantat-arms, and a door-keeper. One of the first things the convention did was to enter into a silly discussion of the form of the oath to be administered to the members of the convention. Certain members objected to taking an oath to support the Constitution of the State of Ohio, because they said, they had come there to alter and revise the old Constitution. The oath was finally so modified as not to require the support of the Constitution of the state. When it is remembered that their work was to propose alterations and was not final, that the proposed Constitution had to be submitted to the people, that their very election as delegates and their presence in the convention was because the Constitution made provisions for such convention, the contention seems

most puerile. The form of oath finally accepted was as follows: "You solemnly swear that you will support the Constitution of the United States, and that you will honestly and faithfully to the State of Ohio discharge your duties as members of this Convention."

The election for president resulted in the choice of Colonel William Medill, the Democratic candidate, on the first ballot by a vote of sixty against thirty-eight for Joseph Vance, the Whig candidate. Peter Hitchcock and Reuben Hitchcock, each received one vote, and three votes were blank. The first yea and nay vote was on a motion to invite the clergymen of Columbus to so arrange among themselves as to have some one offer prayer each morning. Some opposition developed, but the motion was adopted by a vote of eighty-four to nineteen. As early as the fourth day of the convention a considerable degree of partizan rancor was developed over the question of selecting a printer, and the words "Democrat" and "Whig" were bandied back and forth.

In March, 1850, and before the convention met, the General Assembly had appointed Mr. J. V. Smith reporter of the convention proceedings, but there were those who questioned the right of the General Assembly to make such appointment. The result was that on the fourth day of the convention he was formally selected for the place by the delegates, themselves. It was not until eight days after the opening of the convention that standing committees were appointed. There were eighteen different committees and were as follows: on privileges and elections, nine members; on the legislative department, nine members; on the executive department, seven members; on the judicial department, thirteen members; on apportionment, twenty-one mem

bers; on elective franchise, five members; on corporations, other than corporations for banking, five members; on banking and currency, seven members; on public debts and public works, nine members; on future amendments to the Constitution, five members; on education, seven members; on militia, seven members; on finance and taxation, five members; on preamble and bill of rights, seven members; on public institutions of the state, five members; on jurisprudence, nine members; on miscellaneous subjects and propositions, seven members; on accounts, five members.

The usual form of submission of propositions for the consideration of the convention is illustrated by the first proposition submitted after the appointment of standing committees. It was the following: "Resolved, that the committee on apportionment be instructed to inquire into the expediency of providing in the Constitution of the state for allowing to each county in the state one representative." In most cases such resolutions were, on motion, referred to appropriate standing committees. Early in the convention the committees made reports in the form of definitely worded and numbered sections of the proposed new Constitution. These were then taken up, usually in order, by the convention in committee of the whole, and there discussed, amended, accepted, or rejected. When the report of the committee of the whole had reported to the convention, the report was adopted, rejected, or referred back to the standing committee with such instructions as the convention saw fit to give. The method of procedure was such that it became difficult, as the convention proceeded, for members to know in every case the status of propositions that had been submitted, and the result was much useless dis

cussion, explanation, rereading of resolutions, withdrawals of motions, substitutions, and amendments. The convention seemed to have had much difficulty in keeping before its members a definite and clear idea of what it was trying to do. It is surprising to note how much of the discussion had little or no bearing upon the question before the convention. There was also a most inexcusable waste of time resulting from the willingness of the convention to listen to spread-eagle oratory, in which catch phrases about liberty, freedom, and equality were the leading stock in trade. Toward the close of the convention the tendency of discussion took on a degree of partizan political rancor.

That a Constitution framed by such a convention should, with few changes, have satisfied the state for over sixty years argues well for the ability of the people of the state to adapt themselves to a very defective basic law. That the Constitution should have contained some blunders and defects is not surprising; but it is to be deplored that it should have provided a method of amendment that places amendment outside the power of a great popular majority, and makes change dependent upon the action of partizan leaders whose actions are so often guided by special interests.

The great discussions of the conventions related to the organization, powers, duties, and control of corporations, banks and banking, legislative apportionment, legislative sessions, veto of the governor, the judiciary, and taxation. In the second month of the session practically four days were devoted to a discussion of the question of single or double liability of stockholders; but when, a half century later, the money interests wanted to abolish the double liability clause it was, by

the assistance of state party leaders, made a part of the party ticket, and adopted so quietly that the mass of the voters had no idea what was being done. The feeling against banks was such that a free banking clause would certainly defeat the Constitution; so the Constitution provided that no such law should be effective until after a referendum. The first test of the sentiment of the people was in 1857 when a proposed banking law was overwhelmingly defeated.

The convention never appeared more helpless and incompetent than when discussing legislative apportionment. The fear of the abuse of power by the legislature permeated all discussions. At one time during the convention a proposition was introduced providing for the recall of members of the General Assembly. It will be noted that the Constitution provides for a referendum in the case of banking laws [Art. XIII, Sec. 7] and allows it in the case of laws relating to public schools [Art. II, Sec. 26], as well as in certain other cases, and that the question of the recall of unsatisfactory officials was seriously considered sixty years ago.

In the case of two of the leading questions discussed, taxation and the judicial system, the convention of 1850 showed itself hopelessly incompetent. It was the failure of the judicial system that was really responsible for the convention of 1873. This convention was essentially a lawyers' convention. Of its total membership no less than fifty-nine per cent were lawyers, as compared to forty per cent in 1850, and thirty-nine per cent for the convention of 1912.

The convention of 1873 contained a large Republican majority, but, during the long drawn-out discussion there was little evidence of party feeling. It took six ballots to select the president of the convention. In