Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1856-01-25
MASSACHUSETTS LEGIsLAruRE.


SENATE Comn,ittees.-Th President an
nouneed the following committees on portions
| of the Governors Address
On Rights and Liberties of the People (the
PERSONAL Liberty Bill)-Messrs. George w.
Warren of Suffolk, and Mills Of Berkshire.
On Constitutional Amendments Messrs
Carey Of Essex, Kenrick of Barnstable and
Munroe of Suffolk.
The report of the Commissioners on the en-
largemeni Of the State House, was referred to
| g joint special committee, consisting on the
part OF the Senate, Of Messrs. Bates of Ply
mouth, and Taft of Worcester.
The bill in addition, Sc, to establish Po-
lice Court in Chicopee, was passed to be en-
| crossed.
he bill in addition to an act concerning
| the duties and rights of jurors, was taken up
| tor consideration, The question was stated
to be on Mr.. Raymonds amendment, to re-
| peal unqualiiedly the act of 1855.
Mr.. G.. w. Warren of Suffolk, said he
thought the act of last year was a dangerous
innovation on the good old customs Of Massa-
chusetts. lie would not be satisfied with
simple repeal Of the act of last year, but
| thought the rights of jurors should be defined.
| With a-slight amendment he would be salts
he'd with the bill as reported, and support it
| heartily.
| Mr.. Brainard of franklin, regretted that
the bill of 1866 was passed. The law before
was well understood and settled, but now at
the best there will be confusion and misun-
derstanding. He urged that jurors not having
made the laws study, are not qualified to
decide upon them, and ought not to be en-
trusted with the power.
Mr.. Baker of Middlesex, the President, Mr.
Lee of Worcester, in the Chair explained
the tenor of his remarks, yesterday. lie at
tempted then TO steer clear Of the question of
constitutionality believing that under the
act OF 1850. no juror is authorized to judge Of
the constitutionality of the law
Mr.. Raymond of Middlesex, urged that al
though jurors might possibly be capable of
judging of laws, yet they were not proper au.
! thorities.
Mr.. Bull of Middlesex, voted for the law
| last year, but did not understand that it en-
| powers Jurors to decide upon questions of
constitutionality. There would never have
been any difficulty had not this matter been
complicated with the prohibitory liquor law
and the personal liberty bill. He would OPP
| pose the repeal of this act, and he thought he
would oppose its notification because the
law simply restoredan old right
Mr.. Lee of Worcester, addressed The Sem
ate, advocating the repeal of the act of last
year. The power of deciding questions of
constitutionality would be safer with the
! Courts, because Judges are more intelligent
than jurors, and have direct responsibility
for the exercise of their power He objected
to the bill as reported, and preferred to repeal
| the bill at once, so that we may stand precise
| ly where we stood before. Let us seize this
legal bison BY the horns boldly.
MIR. Pierce of Norfolk, preferred the repeal
to the deelamatory act In any course there
was danger. He was willing to seize the BIZ
son by the horns, but feared he would be hard
to hold. The repeal Of the law would not
stop agitation or settle the matter in any de-
| gree. The mistake of 1866 was in attempt
ing to chrystalize a rather underlined but gen.
orally conceded principle. The repeal of the
act Of 1866 would not put the matter back
| where it was; if it would, he would gladly
vote for the repeal,
Some lawyers and perhaps some judges look
upon the jury box as nuisance; and he
was not prepared to say it was not anuisance
Who has made it 500 Let Jurors be treated
with respect, and clothed with responsibility,
and they will become worthy of it. AS a
choice of evils it may be advisable to repeal
the law.
DEMONSTRATIONS Presented and Referred.
OF the inhabitants of Millbury, for remuner-
atioR~for expense INCURRED in behalf Of Alex
andeF BcBeth.
The order submitted by Mr.. Deyereux Of
Salem, as to the retrenchment CT the govern
mental expenses was taken up
Mr.. Charles Hale of Boston. took the floor.
| and said that what he had to do was to give
! a very plain talk on very dull subject, He
was very glad that the matter had come before
the House. There has been great uncertainty
about the subject. From His Exeellency who
did not know whether his predecessor left him
| q deficit or a surplus, down to an officer of
this House, who ordered books when he
thought there was ar ordor fol them, when
there was no order-from top to bottom
there has been great uncertainty about the
facts, and because it was necessary to
have the facts, had endeaYored to lay before
| the House the actual facts.
| What are the facts? The Legislature of
| 1854 SO administered the affairs that there was
surplus Of $4,000, and the Legislature of
1866 SO administered affairs that though they
raised tax of $l50,000 they left deficit of
| 100000. The chief duty of each Legsla.
ture is to take cRre that the income of each
| year shall meet theexpense; and 1t is because
| the Segislature of 1856 did not take that care
that he held it up to reproach. The increase
IN expenses has been enormous. Last year
the increase Of expense over that of 1854, was
$4,000; and that, although the whole ex-
| pense Of 1854 wac less than million Of dol
lars.
After having gone over the ground taken
by the gentleman from Salem, and replied in
very clear manner to the defence made by
| him for the additional expense of last wear,
MIR. Hale said that, after all, his complaint
was not that great expense had been incurred,
| provided there was necessity for the ex-
! pense, and there was way to meet Them
| The Auditor has shown that $4,000 must
be raised to meet the expenses of the present
| year. The dominant party will be obliged to
bend their energy to meet this.
In connection with the part of the address
OF Mr.. H., in which he referred to the story
OF Mary Williams and her child he took oc-
caslon to say that the law respecting the re-
turn Of paupers to the place whence they
came, is liable to great abuse by giving great
power to justices of the Peace, from whose
decision there is no appeal. AS to that wom-
an and her child, he would say, that any man,
IN office or out of Office who shall aid or as
slst in the abduction of that child, born in
Massachusetts, and equally entitled to the
blessings Of the government with any other
child, will have an opportunity to explain lis
action, as matter Of solemn argument, be-
tore the highest tribunal in the land. The as
sertion of Mr.. Hale, thus put, excited sup
pressed applause.
After further remarks from Messrs. Pike,
Deyereux, and Hale, the order was laid on
the table, and the House adjourned.
WEEKLY BANK STATEMENT Average con-
dition Of the 80 banks III Boston for the week