The Greenville journal. [volume] (Greenville, Ohio) 1850-1918, 1911-08-03

The movement for the early adnais-
zion Of Ohio into the Union had its
origin in the partisan controversy be-
tween the Federal and Anti-Federal
parties. General Arthur st. Clair,
governor Of the Northwest Territory
and friend to Washington, Adams and
Hamilton. represented the interests
of the former on the western frontier;
| Edward TIffin, Jeremiah Morrcw and
Thomas Worthington, all ardent sup
porters of Thomas jefferson, were
prominent leaders of the opposition.
In the erection of new state they
sought the overthrow of St. Clair and
the advancement of the interests Of
the Anti-Federal or Democrat. party.
Their zeal in this work was intensi-
| fed by their antipathy to the person
ality Of st. Clair, who was imperious
and unfortunate in the manner of his
| rule.
Congress passed an enabling act
providing for the erection of the new
state, which was approved April 80
1902. 1t fixed the boundaries of the
state and provided for holding the
constitutional convention. beginning
the first Monday of the following No
vember. The delegates were elected
by the people. On the organization
of the convention at Chillicothe, Ed
ward Tlffin was chosen president
The sessions continued from the first
to the twenty-ninth day of November.
After determining, with but one dis
senting vote, that it was expedient
"to form a state constitution and gov
ernment," the convention proceeded
to frame a constitution, which be-
came operative without submission to
a vote of the people The convention
of thirty-five delegates was in session
twenty-five days at an expense to the
state of $4,556.75.
The partisan contest that hastened
the admission of Ohio into the Union
| is reflected in the first constitution.
Having disposed Of St. Clair, the fol-
lowers Of Jefferson determined to
guard against the "autocracy" of any
| future governor. This office, under
the constitution had more honor and
| dignity than power" The governor
had no veto. Sovereign power was
conferred chiefly upon the legislature,
which had authority to elect judges
and repeal laws. 1t had also practi-
cally unlimited powers in the grant
ing Of charters to corporations. It is
needless to observe that in these
times there is no disposition to invest
our General Assembly with such a
measure of the sovereign power Of
the state.
In 1919, the question of holding a
constitutional convention was sub
mitted to the voters of the state, but
the proposition was defeated by a
majority of 22,328 in a total vote Of
36,302
Second Constitutional Convention.
The second constitutional conven-
ton was held in 1S50-51. The con-
stitution il framed is popularity known
l as Ju0- COHSlllullOiI VI iCJl'
Perhaps the most conspicuous and
industrious advocate of this conven-
ton to frame a new constitution was
Hon. Samuel Medary of Columbus,
Ohio. editor of the Ohio Statesman,
and one of the leading Democrats of
the state In the numerous editor
ials that he published on the subject
are set forth the grounds on which
he favored a new constitution. Among
other things he claimed:
/. That the first constitution had
been hastily and loosely drawn; that
it had never been submitted to the
people; that the state had outgrown
the usefulness and limitations of that
instrument.
2. That the judiciary system Of
the state should be thoroughly re
vised to the end that justice might
be done without vexatious delays,
| 8. That sessions of the general as
sembly should be held biennially
instead of annually.
1. That provision should be made
requiring the general assembly to re
fer every measure increasing the
state debt to vote of the people.
5. That state officers, includint
Judges, should be elected by the peo
pie.
The question of holding constitu
tional convention was submitted Il
the people at the October election il
1849 The total vote cast at thil
election was 235,370; for the conven
tion, 145 5,698; against it. 51,171 Tht
cember made provision for the con
vention, the delegates to which were
elected April 1, 1850.
AS already stated Mr.. Medary wal
the chief advocate of new constitu
ton. 1t is said that along with hi
unselfish and patriotic desire to servt
"the whole people" in this matter, b.
! cherished q personal ambition to b,
bright and shining light in this con
vention. He was therefore candidate
for delegate from Franklin county
But, alas! the perversity of "the peo
pie" Remembering that it was tn,
first day Of April they gave Mr.. Me
dary a surprise and elected over hin
Mr.. John Graham, surveyor. Me
dary was keenly disappointed.
The convention met in the capito
E at Columbus May 6, 1850. where
continued in session until July 9 O
! the same year. It adjourned and me
again in Cincinnati. Dec. 2. 1850