Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1868-02-28
Ohio Legislature.
Thursday, Feb. 2z, 1858.
SENATE.
MORNING SESSION.

called the Senate to order at ten o'clock.
Prayer by Rev. w. M. Ferguson.
THE HOUSE ROAD BILL.
The question pending when the Senate
took recess last evening. was on the ap-
peal of Mr.. Keifer, from the decision of the |
President pro tenn. in ruling, as out of orr
der. the motion of Mr.. Kramer, to amend |
the House Road bill by limiting the duty
of working two days on the roads, or pay
ing three dollars Communication therefor, to |
white male citizens. The formal question |
this morning being, "Shall the decision OF
the chair be sustained as the Judgment of
the Senate ?" the Senate agreed that the
point of order should be withdrawn and re-
served for the decision of the President of
the Senate.
The question being on Mr.. Kraner's
amendments
Mr.. DANGLER offered a substitute
therefor, exempting from work on the
roads such colored persons as are excluded
from voting. 81 sq
Messrs. MAY and DowDNEY opposed
the sales.--future.
Mr.. DANGEER defended his substitute.
3 MIR. EVERETT was opposed to the
amendment OF the gentleman from Hardin,
Mr.. Kramer.
Mr., GODFREY would vote against both
the amendment of Mr.. Kramer and the sub
stitute OF Mr.. Dangler.
Mr.. COREY was opposed to any poll tax,
on principle, and to compelling any man to
work on the roads who is denied the right
OF suffrage. He explained his position by
saying he should vote tor the substitute OF
Mr.. Dangler, but against the amendment
of Mr.. Kramer, as the latter made dlstinc-
tion on account of color, to which ne was
opposed.
Mr.. CONANT believed that black men
had the same right to vote as white men;
but he was opposed to both the amendment
and the substitute.
Mr.. JONES was opposed to making the
distinction recognized by the amendment
and substitute. 5s
Mr.. MAY said the people of Ohio had
decided at the last State election, by ma
jority of fifty thousand, that black men,
though Obliged to work on the roads and
he subject to the same liabilities, as to tax
alton, &C., to which they had been liable
for more than half q century past, should
not enjoy the right of suffrage.
Mr.. LAWRENCE said the Republicans
had charged the Democrats with being in
favor of compelling the blacks to work on.
the roads and bearing the other burdens of
Government, while denying them the right
to vote. Mr.. L. was disposed to meet them
at least half way, and while he would deny
the blacks the right OF suffrage, he would
release them from working on the roads.
The white men of the country should con-
troll its Government and were able to do
the work required on the highways with :
out the aid of the blacks.
Mr.. .STAMBAUGH was opposed to vast
ing time in debating amendments to the
bill. He was opposed to negro voting and
negro equality; and to the amendment and
substitute. t...o- :
Mr.. BROOKS saw no objection to the
requirement of work on the roads on ac-
count of its being poll tax. 1t was sim
oon q m q
jury, &c. He should vote against the
amendment because he was in favor of the
colored men sharing in the benefits, and in
the burdens of government.
Mr.. DANGLER was opposed to the
amendment as offered by Mr.. Kramer. 1t
would be but few years till all men in
Ohio without distinction OF color, would
have the right of suffrage. 1t was for
that reason he had offered his substitute.
Mr.. YEOMAN was opposed to both the
amendment and the substitute, because he
was opposed to making any such distinc
tion between white and black citizens, as
was proposed.
Mr.. GRISWOLD would not vote for any
law that would make any distinction on
account of color between men in regard to
bearing the burdens or enjoying the privi-
leges of government.
Mr.. TORRENCE should vote for the
amendment with the view of breaking
down the whole section requiring work on
the roads, to which he was opposed.
Mr.. .STAMBAUGH would never vote for
any law that would attempt to eliminate
the discrimination between white and
black men, which the God of Nature had
made. Hit.
Mr.. KRAMER had not proposed his
amendment becauses he thought it right,
but to show the majority in the Senate the
inconsistency of obliging colored men to
xxynr m hi nt txxyou Nc a nd mn I'M
the right to vote.
Mr.. GOLDEN was opposed to offering
amendments and making speeches merely
to delay vote on the passage of the
bill ,8
Mr.. BIGGS should vote for the amend
ment in order to make the section requir-
ing two days. work on the roads as unpop-
ular as possible.
The question was taken on Mr.. Dangler's
substitute, and 1t was not agreed to.
The vote was then taken on Mr.. Kraner's
amendment with the following result:
YEAS Messrs. Biggs, Burrows, Camp
bell, Carter, Dickey, Hall, Jamison. Kei-
fer, Kenney, Lawrence, Potts. Rex, Scrib-
ner. Terrence, Winner-15.
NAYs.-Messrs. Berry, Brooks. Conant,
Corey, Dangler, Dowdney, Emmitt, Evans,
Everett, Godfrey, Golden, Griswold, Kess
Ter, Kramer. Linn, May, Simmons, Stam-
baugb, Woodwork, Yeoman-20.
So the amendment was not agreed to.
Mr.. LAWRENCE moved to amend so as
TO direct the supervisors to warn persons
to work on the roads in ther respective dis
tricts between the first day of April and
the first day of September or the first day
of November annually, as the trustees of
the township may direct, which was agreed
tn.
Mr.. WINNER moved that the further
consideration OF the bill be postponed till
the third Wednesday in January, 1869.
The motion was advocated by Messrs
Winner. Dangler, Keller, Kramer, Corey,
Hall and Griswold, and opposed by Messrs.
Stambaugh, Kenney and Berry.
On motion of Mr.. STAMBAUGH, the
Senate took recess.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
THE ROAD BILL.
The question being on Mr.. Winners mo-
ton to postpone the further consideration
of the Road bill to the third Wednesday
Mr.. REX said the passage of the bill was
demanded by the people. The question
ought not to assume political cast The
objection to the present law was that it took
from the people the election of their road
supervisors. The demand was that there
should be change to the former law.
Mr.. STAMBAUGH said that fairness
and political honesty demanded the pas
sage of this bill. The masses of the people
of Ohio called for the repeal of the present
obnoxious road law. Mr.. s., so long as he
retained seat on this floor, would respect
the will of the people.
There was disposition on the part of
some Senators to force upon the people q
law, which they had tried for year and
found obnoxious. Mr.. s. trusted that no
Senator would fail to do his duty to his
constituents, and vote against the postpone
ment of this bill.
Mr.. EMMITT stood here to represent his
constituents. He had seen no petition or
letter from them asking for the repeal of
the present road law. None of his con-
stituents, that he knew of, asked for the