Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1851-03-03
Corporations and the PeopIe.

49,
have voted down every proposition confer
ing upon the Legislature the power to re-
peal laws granting special privileges, will
not deny the right of the Convention or of
the Legislature to interfere with, amend,
revoke, or repeal any law in regard to the
tenure of the property of individuals. 1t
matters nothing though through the liberal
inducements which the law may hold out
men may be induced to become citizens
and property holders in the State, yet it is
regarded as just and proper to entrust the
Legislature with full and unrestricted pow
er to alter, amend, or repeal any such law,
but when the question comes up to confer
the right to repeal laws granting special
privileges which are denied to the many
and are found to be injurious to the public
interest and oppressive to the people, these
sticklers for the sanctity of corporate pow
ers declare that they are beyond the con-
troll Of the legislature and of the people.
Can any one doubt, while this doctrine pre-
walls, that Ohio is cursed with privileged
order.
Mr.. Reemelin, the faithful servant of the
people, made an able speech in the Conven-
vsntion, while the proposition of Mr.. Law
renee, to amend the bill of rights, so as to
confer the right of repeal, was under con-
sideration. He exhibited in clear light
the difference between the rights which the
corporation lords would confer upon the
people and those which they would reserve
to themselves. We copy the following par
agraphs from the speech:
desire now to make another point, to
which | call the special attention OF the
gentleman from Franklin, (Mr. SWAMI
| ask him as a legal man whose opinion is
certainly entitled to great weight, whether
almost all our rights, as men, as citizens,
as husbands, and fathers, or as holders of
property are not to some extent, at the
mercy OF this convention, and the people
who shall act hereafter upon our labors.
ask him whether this convention and the
people after it, may not change the princi-
pie Of inheritance that now prevails in the
state Of Ohio,as to persons now or here.
after in being, and that my children now
born might be stript Of the righ: of inner.
itance which they have right to expect
under our laws | ask him whether the
dover Of my wife, TO property which
now hold, might not be taken away by the
action of this convention and the people
afterwards, and whether all my rights as
property holder-(the right of properly
being legal and not na.ural could lot be,
nay, may not be affected by the action Of
this Cow ention. l ask him to say far-
ther-he with myself having voted TO vest
unqualified legislative power in the Gene.
raj Assembly-w whether all these rights and
all these interests are not at stake; and
whether they are not all entrusted to the
discretion oftheGeIeralAssembly? There
is no doubt of that. But to make myself
still better understood, | ask him il such a
law as now exists in the state of Missouri,
and such as prevails in my native country,
which gives to the wife one half oflhe prop.
erty acquired during marriage, might not,
| yea, whether it is not very likely that it
will pass the General Assembly? .
And If the gentleman from Franklin still
fails to understand mel will put case still
nearer home to him. | understand he has
in his drawer proposition, which he will
offer as soon as he can get an opportunity,
to wit: That the right now enjoyed by
property holders, to lease their property
for SO years, and then renewable forever,
shall be restricted to 81 years, and thatthe
devise of property shall in no case be per.
mitted to extend further than to persons in
being, and the immediate descendants OF
persons in being. Now, sir, am prop
erty holder, to small extent, in the city OF
Cincinnati. When purchased that prop
erty, the right to lease it to an unlimited
extent existed, and my right to devise it
extended one generation further than what
is now proposed by the gentleman from
Franklin. These rights, by me- now en-
joyed by every property holder in Ohio
rights which give to real estate peculiar
value in the eyes of men, and which have
constituted in many cases the principle in
ducements to purchase, are at once attack
ed by this proposition. None deny the
right of this Convention, or of the General
Assembly, to pass law Of that kind, and
|, for one, mot only admit the right, will
join my friend in his endeavor to secure its
adoption. But am not now talking of
what should be done, but Of whot might
be done; the point that desire to make
being simply this: that this Convention, and
the government existing under the Const.
| tuition we shall frame, hold at discretion
many of the rights of property, the rights
Of our wives and children, ,and not even ex-
cluding some of our personal rights, and
that the action of government may affect
existing relations Of society-righ,s which,
to some extent, have already accrued; and
| ask, since all these interests are by con.
sent left 10 the General Assembly, whether
we may not trust little to the discretion
of that body, to the same extent-no more
and no less-the interests and rights of those
bastard children oflegislalion, whose spe-
cial priyilepes and immunities and whose