Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1861-02-20
sua n others Of Hancock county, ioFsbe sam,

object SlA ~ III t3
By Me-. HERRIcK. from George Willard apd
"A others OF Lorain county, for relief IRON tdx
Go on B,ndso Stocks traasfsesed 10 the state
By Mr. HAMILTON From ] B Roberts
and ftty seven others Of Logan county, for y
reduction of The salaries of County tficers.
By Mr.. KRU M--From citizens Of Ausuuburg, /
Asbtabula county, for reliet ito K.osas.i wi II
BY Mr.. COX-From David Mcfarland and |
III others Of Richland County fora more s.fin- |
By Mr. wooD-From John Broadbeck and
"a o.hers Of Otowa, for amendment OF the law
regulating mutual insurance companies.
BY Mr.. JONES, OF Htmtlton-From Aaron
Brown apd 45 others of Hamilton county, for a
tax for agricultural improvements.
The following protest was presented by M.
CONVERSE, and entered upon the journal
The updersigped members Of the House Of
Representatives respectfully but earnestly pro-
test against the passage of Senate b II No ga;
To authorize the Guaranty Of United States
Bonds.
Article eight, section three, of the Conatitu.
/ ton ofthe State Of Ohio provides that "no debt
tOha,eusr shall hereafter be createdb by oron be-
half OF the State, except the debts particularly
enumerated and specified in the first and second
sections OF the same article. Creating debt
for the purpose OF sustaining the credit Of the
United States Is not one OF the exec ptions speci
hsd, and is therefore prohibited BY The third
section.
:. Tue language In these sections OF the Con
stitution OF our State 10 plain and easily un.
derstood; and besides, has already received Ju
dicial construction by the highest tribunal in
the Stats--the Supreme Court OF Ohio In the
case Of the StAtev. Medbery, ct al, Ohio State
| holl
that the State 10 Inhibited, by the third section,
from contracting any debt whatever, except
those specifically provided for In the fret and
second .sections.h lsa contingent debt, no
debt whatever? The mere statement Of the
question really answers IL. "This sweeping
inhibition does not deal with any particular
class Of debts, nor tcih the consideration OF debts,
tukeiher hty arise from seypices, borrowed noaer
or other tcise, nor simply pitk he yascaia. class
of dtbis mentioned ia ihe first and secoud sections
Of this article but prohibits aayi debt whatevsr,
nhether direct or contingent
Il The first and second sections allow the crea-
ton of certain, both direct and contingent debts,
and the third prohibits inthe strongest possible
language any other than those specified, thus
showing, by the context, that rtbe trainers OF
the Constitution intended to Include contingent
. debts as we'll as direct within the Inhibition.
|
, No. 224 create contingent debit The bill re-
qures the Commissioners of the sinking fund
under the great seal Of this State, to guarantee
! the payment of the principal and interest o
, bonds OF the United States to the amount ol
2,007 ,060 81. Does the Endorsement of nego
/ table bonds create o contingent debit The
: mere statement Of this proposition, like the
former one, really answers it. Guaranteeing
Z the United States bonds 10 in no sense pay
ment of what we owe the United States. II ID
nowhere claimed to be In the bill or preamble
neither Is IL creating q debt for the purpose of
, paying prior Indebtedness. For in that case
, "the money, arising from the contracting o
! such debts shall be applied to the purpose foi
} which 1t was raised, or to repay such debts
and to no other purpose whatever" which is moi
provided for or contemplated in the bill or pre-
amble. z" tiG - Rniiaui ol 7N2d552N ~
The bill itself is not sufficiently guarded. Il
opens the door for the most moDstrous frauds
upon the State OF Ohio The marner 10 whict
Senate Bill No. 224 passed the House, under
the gag Of the previous question, thus cutting
Of debate and amend mepts, which the majority
on this floor knew we're prepared to be offered u
the bill, can only be accounted for on the grount
that the majority were unwilling to make a. rec
!, ord on the proposed amendments. We think
in all the history of Legislation in America, n,
, instance can be found where a bill OF 80 mucl
Importance has been passed without the mples
opportunity for both amendment and debate
The object oil the bill Is To sustain the autho
rity and credit Of the United States, when a
the same time Ohio needs assistance to sustain
z her own credit. Ohio 10 nov under protest 70
the non-pay ment of SO QUO 900 of her own in
debtedness, aud without enormous sacrifice
she cannot within the next year pay such in
..
II The people OF Ohio are already overburtheneI
With taxation, aud her fnances in a. much mOr,
embarrassed condition than those Of the Genet
al Government.
The Undersigned most earnestly protes
against the passage of Senate bill No. 224, O,
un sise, inexpediens, aud a aigrent violation o
he Constitution OF our Site, 81, H.. ~
A. B.ooRNT, "a e9nsr- JAMES GlMeLE. ,ss2i1s1
g. W SHAW, l1Igq ~ J05aN. RxLL0Ws,l IA q
A. p.J. sNYDRB, en- M1P.sKINNERe ia.r
!, ESQ. D. O NV BRsB, GEORGE MCCONNELL, IL
WILLIAM PAKRf nesl W.U. MO RR,l ,lsi Is u
JAS. NJ. sT0Uw Z 80 i1a q. HUGHES, ,'..a ir s-af,
JOHN WE STCO rT ,ossef1' N. A DEvoRR, st, .r
II Jas. WHIrE, aH. 11DENNIs O0LE, lai. I.l
e. OHAsE, JOHN .. MYERS, -rs
. J. @. Nc5L H00LER, J0sEPH JuNAS, .
B. W. CARLISLE, q WILLIAM JBSSUP, ~
/, o. POWERS, HHNRY /. DtOKEY. o
n. B $3.50 amend an act regulating dc
scents ana the distribution Of personal estates
pd5scu luafCu AfI 1SOo-Who Iehu u 6ecO0u um
and referred TO the committee on the Judiciary
H. B. 272-To amend section one oi an ao
entitled can act providing for the confinement O
liprisoners, urSer the laws of the United States
10 the Ja,ls OF this State, and to repeal certai
acts therein mentioned, passed March 26, 1856
:. was read third time and made the order O
the day for Wednesday next.
H. D. 282I By Mr. HERR lCK-Requirirl
county auditors 70 make returns to the Audito
: of State of the amount OF fees receivedby ooun
" auditors--was read third timeiGQ STf'
II Mr.. HERRICK spoke In favor of, the bill, Il
order to have some definite basis Tor future leg
islation, with respect TO the fees o our couot
I officers. That now the law was interprere
I. livery differently, ior the reports Of county Off
GERS showed that counties otSthe SINE size va
ried more than one hundred per cent Ia th
amount paid to the same officers That th
State has over five hundred county officer.
that probably receive over three.quarters OF
million Of dollars, and the people have rigb
to know what their respective county ,oficeFs' d
\ receive. q That he State needs itas matter Q
statistical information, which IL the most cofrec
: basis to correct abuses, orsto shape future leg
, islation. siaai w-7y
II That We know what all our State and othe
: Eoficers receive, and there Is no reason why W
, Pshould not know what our county officers re-
ceive. 10
i Mr.. BALDWIN advocated, the bill, = an,
moved to emend it by making the penalty, 70
omiltiDg to make return, 800 instead Of $50
Il Which was agreed to.
nha han