The Hawk-eye and Iowa patriot. (Burlington, Iowa) 1839-1843, 1840-02-20

ceeded the receipts in sum not far short
Of 8 10000. To remedy an evil, attribu-.
ted principally to the operation of the law
for the punishment Of crimes, which, BY
subiecting the petty thief to Imprisonment
in the Peniten,iary, for a short period,
filled it with convicts who seldom could
be usefully OF proftably employed, and
actually threatened the State with bank
rnptcy, it was proposed,so to modify the
criminal code as to punish the latter class
Of offenders in more summary and less
expensive mode. With a view, to this
object, the Hon. Thomas aMoRRls--who
has since acquired some notoriety7 as "a
member of The u. S. Senate, D. but who
then, represented the county Of Cler-
mont in the General ,Assembly-intro-
duced into the House.. a few days. af-
ter the commencement of the session, a
resolution providing for the appointment
of select committee 10 inquire into the
expectancy Of remodeling the Judiciary
system Of the State; which was laid on
the table FOR consideration. AS the mat
tiers contemplated by the resolution en-
braced a very wide range, IL was fully
discussed in committee of the whole, on
the 9Th of December; and being ultimate
ElyIagreed to; Mr.. Morris was placed at the
head of the proposed committee, which
consisted Of the FIVE intelligent members,
among whom was Mr. HAMMOND, the pre-
sent able Editor of the Cincinnati Ga
zete. but then a representative from the
county of Belmont. a I'm ss29bhs
|. On the 2Olh of the. same month: Mr..
Morris. from the. above committee, report
ed the bill already referred 10, as supple
mentary to a law then in force entitled
san act for. the punishment Of certain Of
lenses therein specified" which was read
the first time. This bill was taken up
for consideration in committee of the
whole on the 9Th Of January, 1921; when,
after long and animated discussion,
whichwas continued on the 18th, 10th,
Goth, and 22d, in the course of which the
|hill underwent s,mdry amendments in its
details, and was once recommi,,ed /, it was
at length reported to The House. a mo-
ton was then made. to amend the first
section, which, as. originally introduced,
provided for the punishment of petty lar
ceny by a fine not to exceed 500, and
Imprisonment i'll the county jail not ex
ceeding six months, by striking out the i'm
prisonment clause, and substituting whip
ping; which was agreed to by a small ma
jority. Snndry attempts were then sue
|cessively made to amend the same sec
ton Gin various ways, all Of which were
defeated. At length, the writer of this
arlicle-who had the honor of being one
of the representatives from the. county of
Ross, and was then, as he sllbis, decided
ly opposed to the infection Of stripes on
the back of an American citizen, for any
cause whatever7ofered an entirely new
section, substituting, fine, or imprisonment
at the discretion of the Court, lin lieu of
whipping. which was agreed to after a
short debate 39, noes: %. The
bill was then ordered to be eligl tossed for
a third 'reading-ayes 81, noes 81. On
the 23d, it was accordingly read third
time; when, on motion, it was recommit-
ted to second committee, witch report
ed it back on the same day with sundry
amendments, all CT which were agreed to,
and verallylortIeredito be engrossed.-
On the Oath. the bill as amended was a.
gain read the thir. time, and passed-ayes
AZ, noes. 2l.-On the Both, the Senate
resolved itself into committee of,sthe
whole on this bill; which, after having
been amended by striking out the section
quoted in the article from the Register,
was finally ordered to go to third reading
On the 3lst, it was accordingly read the
third time and passed-an Intellectual at.
tempt having been previously made to af-
fix the punishment of whipping to the Of
Tense of petty larceny. &c. q II s2'',S
Ery of the progress fof the bill in question
through both branches of the Ohio Legis-
lature. 1t does not appear from the doc
llments In Our possession whetherthe Sec
ton noticed in the commensurate of this
article was originally incorporated into
the bill, or whether il, was introduced by
way of amendment in the course, of the
discussion which took place before its
passage, through The House--no direct
vote having been taken thereon in, any
stage Of the proceedings, in this body
Our better impression, however, is de-
'cidedly in favor Of the latter suppositiop.
1t was our lot, during the whole Of the
session, to be the roommate Of Mr. Nor.
RIs.f Although not a member either Of
the standing committee on the Judiciary,
or ofllle special committee raised in pur-
suance oflheresolution introducedby this
gentleman OH the nhs of December, yet,
at his urgent solicitation we regularly
assisted him iii drawing up and prepar-
ing for the action of the House the va
rlous criminal bills which il became his
duty to report, including that {s'supple.
m lq 70 The act for The punishment, OF
certain 7ofienses therein specifed; > and to
the best Of our recollection, the 10th sec
llon dld On, not originally constitute part Of
It. On the contrary, We, believe that it
was brought in BY the selec, committee
to which the bill was recoInmit,ed, az