Lower Sandusky freeman. (Lower Sandusky [i.e. Fremont, Ohio]) 1849-1849, 1849-04-07
Constitntion on no ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.

Constitution or no OCOnstitutiOn.-again
We had not supposed that the short article which
appeared in the Freeman week or two since, on
this question, would have called out so lengthy a
reply from our friend of the Denercrat Our allu-
ding to the subectat ALL at that time, was to cor
rect wrong impression conveyed in previous
article of that paper to its readers-ts assertion
that the Whig party were opposed to submitting
the question of new Constitution to the people
We showed that the Wing party were in favor Of
and would support the measure, after the settle
ment of certain difficulties which had arisen dur
ing the last session of the Legislature.
These difficulties were the indecent and unlaw-
full manner in which the Locofoco members of the
Legislature took possession of the State House. the
unprecedented course they took in holding per-
petual session both day and night for over three
weeks, and the admission of Pugh and Pierce to
seats in the House. are of the questions which
ought to have been recommitted to the people, if
there is no other way getting at them before re-
vision of the constitution takes place. These out
RACES if not actual violation of the constitution,
show most unwarrantable disregard and contempt
for the rights and expressed will of the people.
But the greatest consideration which induced
the Wings in the Legislature to vote against the
measure when it first came before them, was the
fact that there were too Loeofoco apportionment
bills under consideration, which, had they passed.
would have given their party large majority in
both branches, and disfranchised large majority
of the people of the State. Had either of those
bills passed, land the question of constitution
been submitted to the people) delegates to attend
the convention would had to have been chosen from
the new Representative districts, which would pro-
badly have given the Locofocos large majority in
the convention, which would have been most disas-
ous to the interests of the people of the State and
would have subverted the very measures for which
it was called
This last and most important objection was re-
moved by the failure of these bills in the Senate
and the Wings, impressed with the necessity of &
revision of our State constitution, were induced tc
overlook other objections, and introduced resolu
ton in the Senate to permit the people to vote fo
against the measure, which passed by nearly
unanimous majority. Therefore we claim that the
Democrats charge that the Wings were opposed t.
having the people vote on this question is unjust
not in accordance with the facts, and ought to b.
retracted We do not charge the Democrat witt
any sinister motives in leading his readers into al
error, no doubt the charge was honestly made, h
seen it in the Statesman and supposed it must b.
so.
The Democrats pleasantries about our article ar
perhaps all well enough, and we have no reply t.
make, but we must confess our inability to see tn
inconsistencies he does; our language would not ap
per quite ridiculous if it had of been quoted cor
rectly, but democratic p editors have way c
misrepresenting their opponents, not Intentionally
f for it has become second nature to them-the
. can't help 1t.