Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1874-08-13

iect 1t, handed him the form OF closing
in the present Constitution that he
might copy it. The committee on en-
rollment and revision approved of that
form, and directed it to be followed.
1t was at the very last working hour
of the session. The Constitution itself
had been adopted after eight months
deliberation and discussion. This was
as a mere matter of form.
The sheets were being enrolled for pre-
and as they were being CO.
pied by the hired clerk they were sent
into the Convention from our commit
tee room to be read to them that they
might see that no mistakes were made.
Our committee sat there and compared
the body of it, and saw it was correct
even to the dotting of the is and the
crossing of the It's. But when it came
to the winding up, the sheet contain
ing the formal closing, we perhaps did
not compare, and so the omission, if
really made, was not observed by US.
L wrote the other day, as soon as l
heard this objection was made, to the
delegate from Harrison county, who is
a United Presbyterian minister, and
who understood was also convert
against the Constitution because of this
omission, and gave him a statement of
what the facts were. Now that is a
plain statement of what it was, and
how it occurred. 1 also stated to him
that if the attention of the Convention
had been called to the omission of the
clerk, was satisfied that of the one
hundred and five members of that body
at least one hundred and four of them
would have Immediately voted to cor
rect the omission. Besides, the very
words, Sin the year 1874 are full recog-
milton of the Christian Era. Now, hereis
a man that undertakes to set himself up
to think for and instruct the people not
only upon religious but upon secular
matters, who believes this Constitution
contains a great many good things, adj
mitting in this letter that this may
have been mere accidental omission
but fears it was done on purpose, anC
therefore ne wants you to vote down
the whole great and good work, and
go back to our twenty-five year ole
Constitution, which, as have claimed
we have so far Outgrown. Why, gen
tlemen, when read that, felt mort
than at any time, when rejecting
about this matter, the necessity thai
we must think Tor ourselves. Wher
men who are regarded as prOminen
men, and who occupy the positions o
leaders and teachers of the people, vii
make such objections as this, and g
back on their speeches and convictions
what is to become of us, if we do no
sit down, drop our work, even, for ;
time, and do our owl thinking?
Well, gentlemen, belive that is ;
tolerably fair pattern of the objections
that are made.
POSITION OF SOME OF THE mo LICENSE
MEN.
What is said here on the subject 0
the license and anti-license clause P
What is the argument that is made Oh
that subject? the members of the Con
vention were moral cowards,' becaus
they did not venture TO fasten on tn
I Constitution absolute prohibition ant
now, lest the people might possibly, il
i their power, vote in license, let us g
to work and demOlish the whole struc
ture. | believe that is fair statemen
of the argument. Let us analyze tina
argument, moment. They wer
moral towards because they did not ven
ture to fasten prohibition on the Con
stitution. The meaning of that is the.
: were afraid that if they fastened tha
!, i,l, the people would beat the Who'll
thing and yet in the esame breath the
say, we are afraid the people will bea
the no-license clause, and therefore lt
, us tear everything down. | am yer
happy to-day that that is not true of a
those who advocate the nO-llcens
, clause. 1 happen to known PERSONAL
that it is not true of one of them. An
, 1 see an address published in this sam
!, paper showing that it is not true {
! those selected to take charge of ths
question in this county as an eXecutiv
committee. While they have publish
5 ed their address in opposition
3 license, they express their opinion
: favor of the adoption of the COnstitl
3 ton, and say that is the most effectiV
= vote and it is no time to take counsel
: our fears. Well, gentlemen, | leay
: you to judge where the moral cowardi,
D comes in. 1t seems to me to be em
Y nently fair and proper if this is to col
D tinue to be, as it is now and has been fl
e nearly century-a Republican gOverI
0 ment-we should let the people deciC
j how they want these things done.
!. had no suspicion until heard this a
t gument and the source from which
!. came, as to what the result on tn
:, license question would be. l have n
much doubt now.
: THE HOUSE OF DISCIPLINE.
There is another objection made
u and | am not going to take time to (
l. over them here. There is a provisil
,. in this Constitution that one of the +
8 formatory and punitive institutions
'r the State shall be house of disciplin
i and the opponents of the Constitute
, -lcOmmenced estimating the expense
g that at a million dollars, and ha'
II understood they have got it up now
le a hundred or two million. In one
e our county papers appeared last WEI
), an argument from Lewis ID. Campbe
al who was one of the members of Il
Convention, against the adoption of t
Constitution. He was one of the ty
y members that refused to sign it. o
D. of the provisions to which he refers
a. this one for a house of discipline. T
l lsays, that the Legislature could provi
e. for it just as well as the people conld
y adopting the Constitution. Well,
~ tno urol plece tnoy ouCceSuou Dy d We
D. small majority III getting that clau
lg into the Constitution. voted agair
it it myself, but it was finally adopt
m with the understanding that all th
D. would be necessary would be to fen
" off part of the penitentiary groun
ct and put in the younger conyictS so th
to they would not mix up with the old
a l suppose that would cost $500 or $40
m That is all there is of that. But wha
call special attention to is, that Il
same Campbell was the author of ii
p amendment; and there were over 4
w pages OF the first volume of the debat
v and twenty-three days of time occupi
ly in discussing that question, chiefly
he Mr.. Campbell and its other advocate
It's A great many of US protested against
nb n, trying to stop them and trying to ge
he rule to limit debate. 1t locks a lit
u remarkable to see him opposing t
of Constitution now and giving this as o
he reason. He adds many other reaso
why he opposes it; but there is one