The Portage County Democrat. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1860-02-22
Extracts from columb,, I.,,.,.

The Sandusky Registers letter, speaking
OF the indefni,e postponement of Mr.. Harri
sons military invasion bilP in the Senate.
says:
So the famous and never-:o-be-forgotteu
Observation-Disclosures bill was consigned
to its grave beyond resurrection. 1t il due TO
Messrs. Parish, Garfield and Monroe to saw
that. in addition to the eloquent and cenclu
sive arguments OF the two last named individ
uals against the measure, one and all of them
sternly opposed the bill from its introduction.
and proclaimed and carried out their determ
ination to vote against every propositions to
amend, and to resist it root and branch To
them and to the other Senators whose vorss
defeated the bill their constituents owe debt
of thanks and rememberanee, that the stat
utes of Ohio. by their unfinching opposition.
are not encountered by an act which would
have humbled our proud State at tbs feet
OF the peculiar Institution of the South.
The correspondent of the Cincinnati Enqui
rer. writing about the resolution before the
House in favor of an adjourned session, says /:
Mr.. Stedman. Republican member from
Portage county moved to amend so as to
adjourn sine die on the second Monday of
March.
Mr.. Flagg desired the Legislature to go to
YORK and do up the necessary business of leg
islation. and then determine the question of an
adjourned session afterward.
MIR. Stedman said that he desired bis motion
to prevail The people of Ohio have three
times. within the last ten years, decided in
favor of biennial sessions 1st When the
Constitution was adopted I'd. When the
TaOiolofnro nf 1875 cuhna;ftad fA;. ,,o,1:a-
to the people, they agein decided overwbelm
ingly against annual sessions. 3D. The Leg
islature of 1858. fearing that the people did
not understand what they had done before,
again submitted an amendment to the Consti
tuiicR, for adoption or rejection, providing
for annual sessions, which they again refused
to adopt He submitted, whether an ad
journed session was not clearly in violation of
the letter as well as the spirit of the Consti-
tuition. He said the people desired fair
trial of biennial sessions and he wanted this
Legislature to let taem have a fair trial.
The appropriation could be made for two
years. and if an extraordinary emergency
should arise, the Governor has the power to
call the General Assembly together. He was
asked what became of the peoples money du
ring the winter that there was no session of
the Legislature. He would answer that he
could not tell hut the Committee of the Leg
islature of 1856 examined and reported that
the Treasury was all right. He desired to
know whether a Legislature in 1855 would
have been more likely to discover the defal.
cation Of the State Treasurers than the sue.
ceeding Legislature was 7 -
Mr.. Herrick, Republican, was in favor of
an adjourned session, and desired that the
Legislature Should not shrink from the re-
fv Of hol1 ha urQa ho
Governor, be would allow Gabriel TO blow his
trumpet, before he would call them together
under the circumstances.
Mr.. Devore made some very sensible re,
marks against adjourned sessions.
Mr.. Woods claimed that it was the duty of
the next General Assembly to district the
State, as it would be in session nine months
before the first election, under the new appor
tionment. He wanted to know whether the
Republicans expected the Democrats to carry
the next Legislature If the Republicans
carry it, they can district the State then as
they would at an adjourned session. If the
Democrats carry it, they will he said, repeal
any spportionment law that this Legislature
may pass for he insisted that tn at work be-
longs to the next Legislature.
Mr. Baldwin concurred with Mr.. Woods in
all he had said An adjourned session was
in violation of the spirit Of the Constitution !;
and he believed that to the next Legislature
belongs the duty of districting the State. If
it was necessary for this Legislature to hold
another session, the Governor might call them
together.
Mr. Harlan, Republican, also concurred
with Mr.. Woods.
Mr.. Hughes called upon the Republicans to
vote with him, against an adjourned session,
as they had done two years ago, when the re.
sponsibility was with the Democrats
Mr.. Stedman's motion prevailed. by de
cisive vote; and the resolution, as amended
was then adopted by large majority. 1t
provides fer sine die adjournment on the
second Monday of March. The Democrats
all voted for il but four