Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1861-03-22
HOUSE oF.REPREsENTAriYEs.

FRIDAY, Mareh ~
Prayer by Rev. Mr. Clapp.
Mr. SNYDER, from the select committee to
whom was referred H. B. 405-Relative to the
jurisdiction of the Probate Court In certain
countes-reported the same back with sundry
amendments, which was agreed to; when the bill
was set for third reading on Tuesday next.
A communication was received from the Su-
perintendent of the Asylum for Idiots, furnish
ing statistics Of the Institutions; which was re-
ferred to the Committee on Reform Schools and
Asylum for Idiots.
| A report WAS received from the Treasurer Of
State giving statement of the, expenditures of
last year, under the head Of Canal Fund, which
was laid on the table to be printed. szra,
A report was received from the Secretary of
State in relation to the Debates of the Consti-,
tutional Convention, which was referred to the
Committee on Finance. .eT1EH'
The following Senate Bills were read the
first time:
$. B: 273-For the settlement of the claim of
John w, AllenA ulIntdt GA0a d. al
i s. B 274-Relating to the trans cribing OF
the Marriage Record Of Perry county.
A The Houss agreed to the Senate amendments
Ito II. B. 324-Concerning the Office of City
Auditor of Cleveland-yeas 69, nays6,
f. Is. B. 269-Supplementary to the General
Tax Law of 1853, vas read the first time.
r. Mr.. HITCHCOCK remarked that as the bu-
siness and domestic duties of many members
require that they should visit their. homes
at least once before the final adjournment, and
in order that the attendance, for the remaining
part Of the session, should be as full as possible
he. therefore, offered the following:
Mr.. HITCHCOCK offered a resolution pro-
viding for an adjournment from Friday evening,
March %, till Tuesday morning, April Cd.
4 Mr.. STEERS moved to amend by making il
4 q sine die adjournment at that time, which was
decided out of order.
cg Mr.. BROWNE, of Miami, moved to amend
80 as to adjourn this evening till Tuesday morn
ling next.
NJ. BROWNIES amendment was disagreed
lto-yeas 80, naye g.. .ri,,,r -,.fays 1rt-
Mr.. SCOTT, of Warren, moved to lay the res
olution on the table, which motion was mega
ltived
1oilThe vote was then called on the resolution
which resulted-yeas 63, nays 81.
Mr.. WRIGHT, of Hamilton, offered reso-
luton for sine die adjournment on the 18th o.
April, which wasreferred toI,he couanittee Of
Al Mr.. HERRICK moved that the vote whereby
!, the House concurred in the Senate Joint Reso-
luton 57-concerning National Constitutions
I Convention-be reconsidered.A
ooMr. STEDMAN advocated the reconsidera-
ton.
Mr.. 8. deprecated any change in the ,Copsti-
i tuition, under which this nation has grown into
/ greatness and prosperity, unequalled in the
I progress of nations.
/ The resolution had been put through under
the previous question, allowing no opportunity
4 to discuss II, and he was now compelled to avai
himself Of this motion to enter his solemn pro
y test against any change in the fundamental Law
Of the land, which was theiwork Of our fathers
Q and handed down to their posterity as sacred
boon that 1t is our duty to receive and preserve
21 Mr.. ANDREWS replied that the resolutions
had been before the Legislature almost the
Il whole of the present session; and, therefore
there could be no necessity for reconsidering
them now.
Mr.. SCOTT, of Warren, required to the mo
tion he made on Wednesday evening, offering a
preamble, TO the Resolutions He desired the
resolutions to be reconsidered, that the preamble
coeld be prefxed now. or, at least, the expression
Of the opinion Of the House upon the preamble
self. rg~GgTg z005 EFkIg
Mr. DICKEY objected to the reconsideration
and remarked that Resolutions looking to co
ercion had been passed at what he regarded az
an informal meeting of the House, and be
thought tbe decided expression in favor of these
Iiatory, ought now TO stand.
Mr. FLAGG opposed the,reconsider ,be.
cause the House had acted deliberately when il
passed the resolutions; and II would doubtless
repeat its former action now.
sIaiMr. KRUM advocated the recousidera ton,
aud opposed the resolution, In written argu
ment Of some length, contendlng that there was
! no need of any change in the Constitution.
IgelMr. JONAS said that these resolutions show
cd that we are coming together like nation OF
brothers, proposing to come together from all
parts. of the nation. as they should do. Unlike
the nations of old, we are progressive people;
and 1t is necessary for US that we should at times
revise our forms Of government. This has been
the case frequently in the history Of the world
The Constitution itself provides for it's amend.
raent, and there is propriety in our calling a
Convention to meet the necessities of our finite
condition.
no Mr.! VoRIS demanded the previous question,
which was sustained-yeas 81 nsys4
lteThe question turning on the motion to recon
| slider, it was disagreed to-yeas 80, nays SO,