leave it to the legislature. And, he doubted not, but that the offices would be as well filled as by the governor. It had been contended, however, that great inconvenience would be experienced by the governor and senate, from having to act upon so many appointments.

The delegate from the city of Philadelphia, and others, had said there was danger of the legislature usurping too much authority in the matter, if left to them-that they might create offices, for the purpose of filling them themselves. What, he inquired, had been our experience on the subject? The experience of all time past, had shown that there was no danger in conferring this power on the governor. He conceived there was no foundation for any alarm, lest the legislature should usurp the power of filling the offices. Even if the amendment should be adopted, the legislature would confer the power on the governor. How did it happen? It had been the natural course of things, and would always be so. When a new

governor came into power, it generally happened that there was a majority of his own party in the legislature. And, he would ask, if it was to be expected that the party coming into power, would not avail themselves of all the power and patronage they could? Surely they would. They grasped at all the power which was left by those who preceded them, because they had held the power over the offices which migh have been created by them. The legislature having given the new governor the power, he returns it to the party, and appoints from those of his own party. Experience had proved that, for a number of years past, the various governors of Pennsylvania, have had more power than was ever contemplated by the constitution of 1790, when it went into operation. Many offices had since been created, which were not then in existence, nor thought of by the convention who framed the constitution of 1790.

As, for instance, the canal commissioners, the auctioneers, and many others. There was nothing in the constitution, to be sure, to prohibit the legislature from creating these offices. No one could doubt, but that the legislature had been continually running into the error, of conferring more and more power on the executive; and most probably, they would do so in time to come.

The delegate from Beaver, had referred to one objection, as he conceived it to be, in reference to the amendment, which was: That if the legislature should create new offices, and rise without putting officers into them, there would be no officers to fill them.

He, Mr. C., would ask if it was to be supposed that the legislature would create offices and not fill them, or devise means by which they should be filled? Such an idea was out of the question. It would occur to their minds, at once, knowing the governor possessed the power to fill the offices, that it was their duty to do so. He trusted that the gentleman would not let the amendment be an obstacle in his way. It coincided with his (Mr. C's.) view of the subject.

Mr. DICKEY, of Beaver, asked for the yeas and nays.

The question being then taken on agreeing to the amendment, it was decided in the negative-yeas 49, nays 68.

YEAS-Messrs. Baldwin, Barndollar, Barnitz, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Carey, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clark, of Dauphin, Cline, Coates, Cope, Cox, Crum, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Dunlop, Farrelly, Harris, Hays, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, Hopkin

son, Jenks, Kerr, Konigmacher, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill, Merkel, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Royer, Russell, Scott, Serrill, Sill, Snively Thomas, Todd, Weidman, Young, Chambers, President pro tem-49.

NAYS-Messrs. Agnew, Banks, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clarke, of Beaver, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Cochran, Craig, Crain, Crawford, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Earle, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, High, Houpt, Hyde, Ingersoll, Keim, Kennedy, Krebs, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, Miller, Nevin, Overfield, Payne, Reigart, Read, Riter, Ritter, Rogers, Saeger, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Weaver, White, Woodward-68.

66

Mr. BELL, of Chester, moved to amend the section, as amended, by striking out the words, of courts of record, unless otherwise provided for in this constitution," and inserting "whose appointment is not herein otherwise provided for, as well as all officers created by law, when by such law, the mode of appointment is not otherwise prescribed."

The CHAIR (Mr. Chambers) said, it was not in order to strike out what had been adopted in convention.

Mr. READ, of Susquehanna, expressed his hope that the gentleman (Mr. Bell) would withdraw his amendment, inasmuch as a committee had been appointed to see that the amendments were put in as symmetrical a form as possible. The amendment seemed to be founded on the discovery, made by the delegate from Beaver, that an office might be created, and the legislature adjourn without first taking care that it was filled. Now, he (Mr. R.) would regard such an event as unlikely, as that a man would build a house, and forget to put doors and windows to it.

The CHAIR repeated the decision he had just made.

Mr. STERIGERE, of Montgomery, said, that the provision adopted yesterday, provided only for vacancies in judicial offices. But, we had said that a great many offices should be filled by officers chosen by the people, or appointed by the governor and senate; and, as many of them might become vacant by resignation, death, or otherwise, it was only proper that they should be filled temporarily, so as to keep the wheels of government running until such time as they could be filled by an election, or an appointment of the governor, by and with the consent of the senate. He considered the language of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Chester, (Mr. Bell) imperfect in many particulars. One defect in it, he would mention, and that was, it provided for vacancies in judicial offices only, and no others. If any delegate coincided in opinion with him (Mr. S.) it would be as well to move a reconsideration of the amendment

Mr. BANKS, of Mifflin, asked if the gentleman from Montgomery was in order?

The CHAIR again pronounced his decision, in regard to the motion not being in order.

Mr. BELL then said he would withdraw his motion to amend.

And, the convention, on motion of Mr. MARTIN, of Philadelphia county, Adjourned till half past three o'clock.

TUESDAY AFTERNOON, JANUARY 16, 1838.

The convention having assembled at the usual hour, and there being no quorum present;

A motion was made by Mr. SMYTH, of Centre,

That there be a call of the convention.

Which motion was agreed to.

The secretary thereupon proceeded to call the names of the members; and a quorum having, in the mean time, been ascertained to be present,

On motion of Mr. MANN, of Montgomery, further proceedings on the call were suspended.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

The convention resumed the second reading of the report of the committee, to whom was referred the second article of the constitution, as amended by the committee of the whole.

The pending question being on the motion of Mr. BELL,

To amend the said section as amended, by striking therefrom. in the fourth and fifth lines, the words "of courts of record, unless otherwise provid for in this constitution," and inserting in lieu thereof the following, viz: "whose appointment is not herein otherwise provided for, as well as all officers created by law, when by such law the mode of appointment is not otherwise prescribed."

Mr. BELL said, that before the question was taken on his amendment, he desired to say a very few words by way of explanation.

This is not intended, said Mr. B., as the gentleman from Susquehanna (Mr. Read) supposes, to supply a casus omissus, in relation to the power of appointment.

I will call the attention of the convention to the history of the amendment, when under consideration in committee of the whole at Harrisburg. It had been discussed for several days. Those who were in favor of reform, began to entertain serious apprehensions, that they would gain nothing in the shape of an amendment to this part of the constitution of 1790, and that the people of Pennsylvania, who had called so loud and long for the curtailment of the patronage of the executive, would be left just where they were, with all the power and patronage of that office, untouched.

With a view to stand against such a state of things, the gentleman from Susquehanna, (Mr. Read) acting from a feeling of despair, as to any reform amendments being made, introduced the amendmnent, providing that the governor "shall appoint a secretary of the commonwealth during

pleasure, and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the senate, appoint all judicial officers of courts of record, unless otherwise provided for in this constitution," and which amendment was adopted in committee of the whole.

In introducing the amendment which I have had the honor to offer, it is no part of my purpose to introduce any new principle, but simply to preserve the symmetry and the harmony of the instrument.

It will be in the recollection of the members of this body, that some difficulty arose as to what article the restriction on the appointing power should be placed in; some gentlemen insisting that the sixth article was the place, in which this matter ought to be regulated. So far as concerns the manner in which particular officers should be appointed, this view probably is correct-but the object of the section before us, has not reference to particular officers, but is intended to regulate and restrain the exercise of this power of appointment, in relation to the governor of the

state.

The language is :

"He shall appoint a secretary of the commonwealth during pleasure, and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the senate, appoint all judicial officers of courts of record, unless otherwise provided for in this constitution. He shall have power to fill all vacancies that may happen in such judicial offices during the recess of the senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session." And, then the section stops, so far as the governor is concerned. Now, my object is to go a step further, and to insert, as part of this article, that which at present belongs to the sixth article of the constitution; that is to say, in addition to the power conferred upon the governor by the section before us, to appoint all judicial officers, whose appointment is not herein otherwise provided for.

I propose to invest him with the power, which must be vested somewhere or other, to appoint in the same manner, "all officers created by law, when by such law the mode of appointment is not otherwise prescribed."

My object is, to take that provision out of the sixth article, to which it does not belong, and to transfer it to that part of the constitution which treats of executive patronage. Why should we not do so? We are endeavoring to prescribe, with as much accuracy as possible, the extent of the power which the executive shall possess, in regard to this particular subject.

In laying down this limit, we have said that he shall have power to appoint all judicial officers, whose appointments are not otherwise provided for; and all that I propose, is to go one step further, and to say that, under the circumstances, he shall appoint all officers created by law, and the mode of whose appointment is not prescribed by law. And I ask gentlemen to say whether, upon reflection, this section is not the most proper place in which to insert such a provision?

These are the reasons which have induced me to lay my amendment before the convention, and I have entered thus much into detail, because

am desirous that they should be properly understood. It will be seen, however, that there is another feature in the amendment I have offered, which differs in some degree from the report of the committee of the whole.

By the report of the committee of the whole, the governor is only to appoint all judicial officers of courts of record, whose appointments may not be otherwise provided for in the constitution. By the amendment I have offered, he is to appoint all judicial officers, unless provided for by this constitution or by law. For the future, the justices of the peace, are to be elected by the people.

The only judicial officers whom the governor can appoint, will be officers of courts of record. It is not necessary, therefore, to insert these words, because all judicial officers of the courts of Pennsylvania, are officers of courts of record.

And the question on the said amendment was then taken.

And on the question,

Will the convention agree to the amendment to the section as amended?

The yeas and nays were required by Mr. DARLINGTON and Mr. REIGART, and are as follows, viz:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Baldwin, Barndollar, Barnitz, Bell, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Carey, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clarke, of Dauphin, Cleavinger, Cline, Coates, Cope, Crain, Crum, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Farrelly, Hays, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, Hopkinson, Jenks, Kerr, Konigmacher, Lyons, Maclay, M’Sherry, Merrill, Miller, Montgomery, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Purviance, Ritter, Russell, Scott, Serrill, Snively, Sterigere, Thomas, Todd, Weidman, White, Chambers, President pro. tem,-51.

NAYS-Messrs. Banks, Barclay, Bedford, Bigelow, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clark, of Beaver, Clarke, of Indiana, Cochran, Cox, Craig, Crawford, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Harris, Hastings, Hayhurst, High, Houpt, Hyde, Kennedy, Krebs, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, Merkel, Overfield, Payne, Reigart, Read, Riter, Saeger, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Schellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Stickel, Taggart, Weaver, Woodward-58. So the amendment was rejected.

66

A motion was made by Mr. COCHRAN,

To amend the said section as amended, by inserting after the word 'appoint," in the third line, the words "an auditor general, a surveyor general, a secretary of the land office, and ;" and by striking from the fourth and fifth lines, the words "unless otherwise provided for in the constitution."

Mr. C. in explanation of his views in offering this amendment, said that he was one among the number of the members of that body, who had received the instructions of his constituents, to vote in favor of a restriction of executive patronage.

But, said Mr. C., I do not wish to run into extremes. It certainly seems to me right, that those who are in daily communication with the