The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1862-05-31

taking from the legislature all control
over the subject, is an important and good
ooe.
| The abolition of the two mill tax is a
provision Of great Importance. indeed,
no one reason contributed more to the
call of the convention than the necessity
for this It is true, our last republican
legislature had in effect done the job; but
their action was clearly unconstitutional,
and might have led to disastrous conse'
quences.
The provisions which prohibits cites,
towns and counties from running into
debt by !oaning their credit to paper rail-
roads and other corporations is au excel
lent one.
| About the change in the judiciary sys-
! tenn we are not SO clear, and indeed are
not lawyer enough to form a hasty judg-
ment The reduction of the number of
judicial circuits strikes us favorably; but
the giving Of jurisdiction to the county
courts to an indefinite amount, and in
criminal cases under the grade of felony,
without the Intervention of grand jury,
strikes us as tending, at least, to promote
litigation and encourage petty prosecutions
The evil will be greater for several years
to come, in view of the fact that all the
present county judges are retained in
office, many of whom are not lawyers and
never were elected in reference to such
new functions.
And as this article is gotten up not in
spirit of partison advocacy, nor of captious
opposition to, the new constitution, but to
weigh its provisions honestly and imparti-
ally, as they strike our individual appre-
hension, we may as we'll name some
other provisions that strike us unfavorably.
We do not like the provision that allows
the legislature to fix the amount of all the
salaries, state officers, judicial, &c, and
especially do we dislike that provision
which enables them to sit as long as they
please and fix their own pay 1t is true
all their usual perquisites" are said to be
cut off-gold pens, pen knives, dc, but
" stationery is allowed them, and We
should like to know what that can't be
made to include. We can imagine no
graver error, under our free institutions,
or one that has led to greater abuses than
this, to put men into office and leave the
compensation for their services at their
own discretion. What led to the restrict
ion on the legislature in this particular in
our present constitution? Before its adop-
ton, it is we'll known, our legislatures of
ten remained in session three and four
months, and sometimes voted themselves
as high as five dollars day. We don't
like this part Of the new constitution.
Equally distasteful to us is the provision
to defray the expenses of the courts, by
laying tax on the suits brought before
them 1t has been the boast of our free
institutions that in this country justice is
free and its administration prompt, and
efficient. The rule that n Door man, before
he can claim justice of his neighbor, must
advance half his claim in the shape Of
docket fee, is one that can hardly be sus-
tanned Oh sound PRINCIPLES.
There is also, in the advocacy of the
adoption of the new constitution, a good
deal of clap-trap argument used on the
assumption that the state expenses are to
be greatly reduced by it. We can see no
solid footing to base such an anticipation :
upon. The whole business will be in the
hands Of the legislature. and it is next to
absurd to look for rigid economy from
that quarter
In reference to the local argument so
freely used to prejudice the people of
Ottawa against the IS constitution, be-
cause IL cuts down our Supreme Court TO
next to nothing, we attach no Importance
to it We rather prefer the certainty of
retaining the court with a Smaller terri
tory, which the adoption of the new con-
s;itution Will assure u, to the uncertainty,
in case ct its rejection, of retaining the
court with its present territory. 1t has
been a constant struggle, ever since the
court was located here, to keep the legis-
lature from removing it to Chicago. 1t
will be relief to have the struggle ended
by giving up part Of the court
But we must close In what we have |
written, our object, as the reader has !
doubtless perceive, has not been either to
advocate or oppose the new constitution,
but to throw out some ideas that should |
be taken into account by every voter in
making up his mind on the question.
Our own conclusion in the premises is of |
little Importance; yet we are free to say
that we think the new constitution is an |
upon the old, but that the
is much less than it might
havc-is SO little indeed, that we are far
from being nervously anxious whether it
is adopted or rejected, and shall quarrel
with nobody for voting for or against it.