The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1857-05-27
For the spirit
Constitutional Amendments.

Mr.. EDITOR go Frequent changes oil
the fundamental law of q State are dan
gerous. In thus obtaining relief from
supposed grievances, we too often bring
upon ourselves evils of the most serious
character. This is well illustrated by our
own Constitutional changes. The organic
law Of 1902 contained no clause prohibit
ing State or County from engaging in
works of internal improvement or con-
tracing debts to any amount; and, con-
sequently our debt became 30 enormous
that the public credit is now only pre-
served by an unsparing exercise Of the
taxing power.
In 1851 the New Constitution was rat
lied by the people; the "plunder system, .
it is said, was thereby destroyed; provision
was made that the aggregate amount oi
our debts shall never exceed three quar-
tiers of million dollars; and it was pro-
vided that the credit Of the State should
not be extended in aid Of associations OF
corporations, that no debt should ever be
contracted for purposes Of internal Inn
provement, that the State should never
become joint owner or stockholder in
any company or association, that the State
should never assume county and township
debts, or the debts Of any corporation,
and that counties, townships, &c. should
never be authorised to become stockhold.
ers or subscribers to any association ol
corporation.
1t is certainly true, that long before
the New Constitution was framed, public
sentiment was awakened to the evils thus
provided against; and the proposition fol
the construction of the Walhonding I'm.
provement would have received little favos
from the General Assembly of 1850, If i,
had been then first presented. NevertAs.
less, no one doubts, that when the people
determined to have q New Constitution
those provisions were properly inserted
and exhibit, upon the part Of cur Consti-
tuticnal trainers jealous care Of csl
interest and prosperity. But the new in
strument, though in many respects superior
to the old one, il BY no means perfect; end
while those salutary principles become
part Of the organic law, serious evils. fore
seen BY few, crept into the new system
Ons of these evils Is the new judiciar,
system. Many believed that the old on,
was more cumherous, inefRcient and ex
pensiye than any other IN this country
and spprehend there Is little danger 0
returning to It; yet the system now h
operation h no Improvement; II is mani
festiy inferior. True, under that systen
Judges were elected BY the General As
sembly instead Of the psople, and thu
Was wrong in principle. True, under tha
system we had Associate Judges -alway
men of respectability, and frequently Q
strong sense and much intellieencs-ye
without that knowledge of the law 90 essen
tial to a Judge. Bnt the Judges Of tn
Common Pleas werc not also Judges Q
the District Court, (then called Suprem
Court and wers not subjected to the i'm
putstion, so ceaselessly applied to Judge
of the present day, Of log rolling IN tn
Superior Court to obtain decision h
accordance With the ruling court below
an imputation, Of course, resting on slight
if indeed any foundation IN fact, yet no,
well calculated to bring court into DID
repute! Indeed, Il must be confessed, tia
all expectation to the contrary. the de
fcisions of the present District Court com
mand less respect than Nas entertains
Ifor those which cmanated from tie sam
L
|body under the old system, though th
|court was then held by two Judges instea
of four as now constituted.
i It might be further urged, though tn
proposed change deas not reach tbs
|clause, that FIVE Judges in the Suprem
Court at Columbus, instead OF the fou
WHO sat there under the Constitution {
'Ilso2, is no improvement. A decisfo
pronounced by one of the Judges of ths
court, and concurred in by two of b
brethren, but from which the other sw
Judges dissent, must generally be receive
with grave doubts as to its soundness; an
lyet, during the last Ave years, that cou'
has been precisely thus divided upon man
Questions.
But the great objection to the presel
Judiciary system is that no sufficient tin
lis allowed for the District court. Unlil
3 most other States. we allow appeals fro
. the Common Pleas of mere questions