Connecticut western news., 1879-09-03
CANAAN, CONN. WEDNESDAY,, SEPT. B, 1878
Biennial Sessions.


 We simply desire that the people shall hear both sides of the question and then judge for themselves. As Mir. Graves is one of the strongest and ablest advocates of biennial ses- . sions and is well known to our readers, we . Thought they would perhaps like to see what he has to say in his own vigorous style We shall probably. publish something on the other side of the question before the October election |: Editors of tbe Fa1maer Tn a former con- i. .munication to your journal stated that the pending proposed amendment to our constitu- tion de biennial sessions of the Legislature was inaugurated by the House of Represent . atives of 1878 in pursuance of the recommen- -datons of a commission appointed under a resolution of the General Assembly of 1877, composed of leading and prominent gentle men of both parties, which commission made it's report to the General Assembly of 1878 At the time of writing that communication, did not have before me copy of that report or of the signatures to'the same, and there fore had to rely upon my memory in giving the general features of it.
 The report of that commission, so far as it touches upon the matter of biennial sessions, is as follows:
 GAS measure of good state policy and wise economy, we recommend the submission to the people of a proposed Amendment to the Constitution providing for biennial sessions of the General Assembly, the members to be elected for two years, and to hold only one session, the compensation for the two years not to exceed $500 Such an amendment can be so drafted that after the session of Janu- ary, 1879, there will be no session until Jan uary, 1881. If the proposition is approved hv tbo 1oxr Eo, the people will be saved the annoyance and expense of an election in the odd years, and the saving in legislative. expenses public printing, and general raids on the treasury will not be less than $150, ,000 in every other year
 s1n addition to this we may properly consd- CT that the total expenses to the public throughout the State is not less than $l0O, 900 for the elections in the odd years, and this sum would be saved for other purposes
 Several States larger than Connecticut find that with biennial sessions of their legisla- lures, the public suffer no inconvenience, and they have provided for them in their Consti- tutions- Among these States we mention Ar kansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Geor- gia Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Penn sylvania, Tennessee, Texas Vermont, Vir- ginia and West Virginia.
 All of which is respectfully submitted.
 |. S. FOSTER, Chairman.
 JOSEPH R. HAwLEY
 MARSHALL JEWELL.
 NATHANIEL WHEELER
 HENRY M CLEVELAND.
 ALBERT N. BALDWIN.
 Hartford, January 9th, 1878"
 It will be seen, therefore, that this Con- mlsslon was composed of representative men from the Republican and Democratic parties, the Chairman having been honored as Presi- dent pro tenn of the United States Senate and in various other positions beyond that of any son'of our State now living, two members for mer Governors of our State and honored in many other official trusts, one of them an ex- state Senator and an ex-member of the House, and the others having seats in the House of Representatives and filled various offices of public responsibility.
 Commission composed of such men, after one years deliberatIon, made the report to the General Assembly, touching the question of reform and retrenchment in public expenses Of our State, as quoted herein. Now the measure of biennial sessions was inaugurated in pursuance of that report, by the House of Representatives of 1878, and passed by that body sosthout e dissenting 00te, and came be- fore the General Assembly of 1879, in con- formity to the provisions of the Constitution, and received the sanction of e0ery Deai20crat- Sc naesaber is both branches of th0t AssenaIly and alsoof every Republican member, except Senator Hills of Hartford. But my present attention is directed more particularly to the Democratic Party, of which I am proud to be recognized, and by which I have been many tmeshenored by a seat in the Legislature,
 The Commission report that saving in pubic expenses not Jess thGn $15O,OOO will bergained every odd year to the treasury of the State, besides a saving to the people of not less than $100,000 in the expenses of conducting the elections of the odd years. This statement was made after careful con- sderation, and from my own investigations given to this matter, long before this con- mission had an existence, can verify it's cor rectness, and in 8 speech of mine made in the House in 1876. gave the figures conclusive ly showing that such results would follow the adoption of biennial sessions of our Legisla- ture.
 I have said in this article that my attention was directed to the Democratic Party, and the reason for that is, that have noticed that the Democratic press with a few excep- tons have taken ground in opposition to the 1 adoption of this proposed amendment.
 Some upon mere party grounds some up- | on the alleged reason that it would be con | trary to the principles of democracy to curtail l the people in their privilege of choosing a l Legislature every year, and some upon al- | legged reasons of public policy. In view of l the position of the Democratic press I am led | to ask, if it has not always been cardinal l principle with the Democratic party in it's leg l islation, national or State, to have regard to l public economy in the expenditure of the l moneys of the people? Was not RetrencH- | n367st and Reform emblazoned on our ban | ners in the Presidential campaign of 1876? Did we not succeed under our professions in I that campaign, in carrying the popular vote l of the country (to say nothing more? Were ! these nsers pfessi0fsS, made to deceive the l people and gam their sufrages by fraudulent l pRetenses z.-. been SO long in power, 1t had become corrupt, 1 Gnd UGs eztrG0GgGnt 61a pubic expenditures. | Did we mean it2
 If the public expenses of the State can be l lessened every other other year $15O, GOO, and el0O, 900 saved that is now expended in con- ducting annual elections, by the adoption of the biennial sessions amendment, is it in con- sonance with the time-honored professions of the Democratic Party, for the members of that party to vote down such measure?
 have personal interest in this matter, for if live to east my vote I shall vote in fa- vor of the amendment. Am to be read out Ok ku6 party AOT SO uo4uSsi anu clA ULleIS WHO are of the same mind Is all this to be done because the chairman of our State Committee resides in Hartford, and has taken it upon himself to issue what he is pleased to call 'sAn appendix" to our accustomed "Year Book, ," taking grounds against it .? Has there oesH meeting of the members of our State Committee to consider this question from party standpoint Has there been any Democratic convention, ,tate, county, Senatorial, or even town that { las resolved against the measure Not one; TOT has there been any assembling of the !