Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1870-06-16

He was not 90 fearful Of the effect Of
. tinkering with our laws at
some gentlemen appeared to be. He
wished there was more of it,
until our laws should become per-
eliminating from our statute books
all laws which are defective. Some laws
have been passed which are defective, but
the succeeding legislature speedily
amends or repeats the act. He cited in
stances where the frequency of our ses-
sions had worked benefcially for the Pc
cuniary interests of the people
of the State One article of the
bill of rights Of the State enjoins fire.
quent recurrence to fundamental princi-
Piles, and we cannot better do SO than by
frequent elections and frequent return to
the people of powers by them delegated to
their representatives. Some very odious
laws had been stricken from our statute
books only by this odious system Of
sstinkering" We have been making pro-
gress, and such progress demands change
in our laws-a continual "tinkering" to
adopt them to the advanced state of our
civilization. He said the Supreme Court
were inclined to keep ahead of the legis-
lature in the enactment of laws, or rather
repealed laws, for reasons good and suf-
ficient to themselves, about as fast as
the legislature could enact them !;
and the frequency of the exigen-
cies which require annual sessions,
he believed would continue that system.
He said it would be more likely to result
in two sessions in each year, instead of
one session in two years. AS to the sta
tistics, presented by the gentleman from
M.lI1ahrrxr tn indahfnaca of tho
State, to pay that indebtedness we had
only to put the hand in one pocket and
take out the money and put it into the
other pocket. We have immense wealth
in the State, and we are prosperous
people, and do not require to be penurious
in these matters. He referred to the
gentleman from Rochester, who is an or
thodox clergyman, that he better go home
to his constituents and say to them that
he has learned from the gentleman from
Middlebury that half the number of
sessions of the legislature, will save
to the people half their money; and
to Gerry out this economy, he better go
over to the people of Stockbridge and say
to them that it was not necessary for
them TO have preaching every Sabbath,
but it weuld be cheaper and better
for them to have preaching on alter
nate Sabbaths, and that he could sup
ply them, his people in Rochester
being satisfied with the other alternate
Sabbath. He thought, seriously, that we
should not-change the officers so frequent
ly, but we should retain the right and
the privilege of holding our officers strict
ly to their accountability to the people,
and that this accountability should re-
turn at least as often as once every year.
Every citizen of the State has the right
to cast his ballot for such officers as he
preferred, on the first Tuesday of each
September, and he protested against the
innovations that are being made upon the
usages and customs of our fathers. Again
we cannot 80 we'll equalize our taxes, and
provide for their collection, if we resort
to an equalization of the grand list only
once in two years instead of every year.
He protested against any change in the
time-honored customs of the State under
which we have 80 long lived and prospered.
Mr. Benton of Maidstone referred to
the nct that the proprietors OF railroads
or foundries had man or men daily in
spect the workings of the establishment,
and used it as an illustration of the neces-
sity of frequent meetings of the legisla-
ture.
Mr.. Fletcher of Cavendish had not been
at all influenced by the arguments of the
opponents of the article. Mr.. Dillingham;
was not as successful in throwing a mist
around this body as around jury. We
should not dare to meet our Woodworking
constituents if we reject this amendment.
Mr.. Ferris of Swanton said it had been
stated that large majority of the people
are expecting US to pass this amendment,
and it has been denied by The opponents.
All v~o do 10 10 coy yes on no TO this
and he believed that the
people are looking to us to say eyes"
He was in favor of gratifying the will of
the people, instead of allowing the pre-
dictions of some, that they would be
cheated out of it, to prove true. Let US
try the experiment, and if at the end of
seven or ten years it does not work well
we can return to the present system.
Mr.. Horribin of Bennington said that
he knew that the people of Bennington
were in favor of this amendment, and he
should favor it, as being demanded by the
people. He was in favor of economy in |
all things, and for the sake of economy |
he should speak for the people and vote
for the amendment.
Mr.. Smith said he represented the |
farmers, and they sent him here to OPP
pose this amendment. Nothing will be
saved for material improvements by bien-
NAL sessions He attacked Mr.. Horribin's |
encomiums of Bennington and claimed |
Tunbridge was a much more respectable |
town.
Mr.. Benton of Maidstone again opposed |
the amendment.
Mr.. Carpenter of Readsboro, thought |
that by this change we do not abridge the
rights of the people. Ii it is so the con-
verse of the proposition would be true, |
and by two sessions each year we should |
double the rights of the people; and by
sessions they would be still fur
Their increased. The fact is it does not
abridge any of the rights of the people,
but only provides for a new method of
exercising those rights. He thought that
a sort of special pleading. The
argument as to economy he thought one
of great Importance to the people, and he
had no doubt that the change would re-
suit in great saving of expense to the
people of the State. The rights of the
people being the same, and the matter of
being of so great Importance to
the peoplS, ne thought We Gould not re-
fuse the voice of the people, and make
the proposed change, and thereby give
more stability to our laws.
Mr.. Drake of Royalton, said he was
some troubled on this subject. He sup
posed that most of the delegates here had
their minds made up on these amendments
before they came here, or were instruct
ed. Now he had no instructions, and
hardly knew what were the wishes of his
And even now, after so
many lengthy arguments on both sides, he
hardly knew how to vote. He could see
4 great deal of sophistry, on both sides, in
The argument. He thought the voice of
the people would favor economy, and he
lid not believe that biennial sessions
would reduce the expenses one-half, but
ne thought they must be less than at
present. He did not understand, with
;he gentleman from Montpelier, that the
lights of the people are to be abridged by
his change. He knew there would not
De so many chances for thepeople to come