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

(ContjRued from 7uesdays HERALD)
Mr.. Upper of Montgomery favored the
reconsideration. Having rejected the
third article, leaving it difficult to fill va
cancies, we should not make it possible to
have large town unrepresented for two
years.
Mr.. Walton said he desired to repel
the charge of unfairness as made against
him. He had designed to be fair to every
member of this convention, and he be-
lieved that the decision of the committee
was not reached fairly on this question,
in that some voted in the affirmative with
Misunderstanding of the question.
Mr.. Hyde of Castleton reiterated his
former remarks, and claimed that no one
had voted under Misrepresentation. The
matter had been distinctly stated by the
chair and the vote correctly announced.
Mr.. Slade said the question was stated
by the chair, and every members name
called by the Secretary and responded to,
and read for the information of the mem
bers. We had in that decision a full,
fair and explicit expression of the opinions
of the delegates of this convention. There
is no necessity to consider that decision,
for the arguments have been exhausted
on both sides, and no new ones will be
presented.
Mr.. Powers of Morristown, said we
should act deliberately on this matter,
and we had no occasion to make accusa-
tions of unfairness, as the amendment had
been adopted by deliberate call of the
roll of the House, every member voting as
he wished to. Now, if any member has
ACT voted, let him now have the opportu-
nifty to cast his vote but no one had asked
for that privilege, and until some one of
them does ask for it, let the deliberate de-
cision of this convention sta nd, as it does,
in favor of the proposed change. We
have said in an emphatic manner, that
the people want this amendment-onceI
by the Council of Censors, and now again
in convention assembled. Why now re-
consider this vote, unless to allow the
lobby, that was so speedily organized here
last evening, an opportunity to work upon
some one of the weak-kneed members of
this convention, and if possible, induce
them to change their votes We want q
little backbone to-day to stand up against
the efforts of this lobby to break down the
will of the people as expressed yesterday.
No one has asked the privilege of chang
ing his vote on this question, and until
they do, let the deliberate verdict of this
convention stand as it is. The arguments
have all been exhausted on the subject
and so far as his constituents are con-
cerned, there was universal demand for
any change that will relieve the taxes of
an overburdened people, and he but ex-
pressed the will of the people of his vicin-
ity when he voted for this amendment.
He referred to other arguments that had
been urged for reconsideration and
Thought them not psHtiaono' Inc people
are demanding the most rigid economy,
and we have thus far gratified that de-
maud, but if this vote is to be reconsid-
cred, we must necessarily prolong the ses-
sion of this convention. Unless some
more forcible argument can be urged than
has yet been advanced, he hoped this vote
would not be reconsidered, but that we
shall allow it to stand.
Mr.. Field-The robust tones of certain
members had thrown him into a perspir-
alton. He admired this ore rOtundO. III
he had been in the place OF the member
from Morristowu, he would not have
arraigned members for proposing toI
change their vote. 1t came with ill-favor
from man who voted in the council of
censors for an amendment, and them come
here as delegate and voted exactly the
other way. Reconsideration was sim
They ask for reasons for reconsideration.
One has been stated. The rejection of the
third amendment by which vacancies can
be supplied. That il reason enough
Another, and stronger one, was
suggested by gentleman on my
left, who said that though he had
voted with the majority, he doubted the
expediency of adopting so important a
change by 80 bare majority. He repre-
sented other delegates in this expression
Why not extend to such the propriety of
reconsidering their action In the con-
vention of 1886, the amendment creating
senate occupied "A week, and the final
vote was taken on Saturday evening 1t
was reeonsidered, and a day spent in the
debate on the motion to reconsider. Ii
they could take time SO could we. He
hoped the discussion would continue.
For one he wanted to hear more frequent
ly from the delegate from Middlebury.
Mr.. Sawyer of Hydepark said that the
objection to the passage of this amend
ment, made by Mr.. Upper of Montgom-
cry, is, that we have rejected the third
article of amendment, and shall be left
without any remedy in case of vacancies.
He said it was very well known that b
third amendment was rejected because the
monstrated that it was not necessary
there being now sufficient power existing
under the constitution to fill the vacancies
referred to. He thought there could be
no change Of the verdict already given,
unless by some undue influences that we
have seen brought to bear upon this con-
vention since this motion to reconsider had
been thrust upon us.
Mr.. Hubbard of Rochester took occasion
to reply to the sallies of wit thrust at him
yesterday by the gentleman from Brattle-
boro, and briefly opposed the motion to
reconsider. ......r
Mr.. Smith of Tunbridge was sorry to-
find the gentleman from Rochester on the
wrong side, as he believed, on this ques-
ton, for he had always been taught toI
take his seat as near to the clergymen and
as far from the lawyers as possible. He
thought but few members knew what
was the actual voice of the people on this
question as other amendments were more
prominently before the people than this
one. He believed that the safest way was
to let the Constitution stand as it is
Mr.. Olmstead of Dorset thought the
argument of the gentlemen who opposed
reconsideration were not very consistent
If the members were as incorruptible as
they were described to be by the delegate
from Montpelier then the bugbear of
LOBBY held up by the gentleman from
Hyde Park did not amount to much. If
the gentleman had permitted the vote to
be reconsidered without debate, they
would nave saved some of the peoples
money they professed to be SO careful Of
Further remarks Were made by Mr.
Fletcher of Cavendish, Mr. Olmsteaa of
Dorset, Mr.. Benton of Maidstone. mr.
Kent of Sandgate.
Mr.. Phelps of Burlington said he had
voted for this amendment, because he be-
lieved it was right, and would be accepta-
bic to the people, but he had not endea.
vored to induence any other votes on the