Year: 1859

able. The new Convention, in fact, stood
just where the old one did in 1916, and
since Its labor was completed, we have been
testing 1t as did the Gold citizens" the first
constitution. That We have found it defect
i've is not now denied by anybody. We
have felt it interfere with every effort TO re-
strain the infamous election frauds that have
SO long disgraced the State. We have found
1t turned into an incendiary of our free
schools, no doubt against its own intention.
We have found it thrust by a corrupt Exec
utve between the people and the securities
of the Treasury. I..


We have found it tying up legislation
like wheat in measured sacks. We have felt
it deprive us of all legislation in times CT
trouble, when one weeks session might have
averted the ruin Of hundreds of citizens
All these things have been admitted over
and over again, and all have come of that
unwise determination to make a new Con-
stitnton, instead of amending the old one; I;
OF disregarding the safety of refitting what
we all understood, for the glory of making
something that had yet to be tried. The
evils we now endure are none of them like
those that produced the Convention of 1850.





State partnership in Banking, exorbitant
veto power in the Executive, and evils like
them, were what we complained of them
This difference proves that if the Convention
had confined its labors TO the remedying of
what practice had shown to be weak or
mischievous in the old Constitution, we
should to-day have government with
whose structure and duties there would be
little or no complaint. s.


In resolving TO make new Constitution,
they opened the door for new evils, though
they excluded all the old ones successfully
enough. Now We think the time has come
to perform on the present, the operation
that should have been performed on the old
Constitution. 1t has been ia operation long
enough 10 show us where il hurts, and where
II will hurt as long as it lasts, and when
that discovery is made every year that pass
es without amendment IS so much unneceS-
sary injury. We don need new one, and
we didn't need one in 1850. We only need
to have the execrescenses and admitted
difficulties removed. F.


We should object to any effort at this day
and aftereight years experience of the pres
ent Constitution, to supplant it by another
manufactured under the pressure Of present
feelings and opinions, just as we objected
to the substitution of the present for the old
Constitution The reforms needed can be
made without the trouble of reconstruc-
ton.


The Convention of 1850 tore down the
house to cure smoking chimney, and put
in two or three new windows, and acted
unwisely, as we firmly believe, in so doing.
We do not think the experiment should be
repeated now. A Convention can easily
amend the three or four more Objectionable
points in the present Constitution in two
| weeks, and indeed q session could hardly be
protracted beyond that time, if its work is
| limited to what is necessary to be done. 1t
| is easy to settle and adopt amendments tO
work already done, but, as the Convention
found in 1850, it is weary, and not always
beneficial, labor TO do the whole work over
| There are, of course, different opinions as
to the amendments needed, some regarding
one, and others regarding another, as the
| most important. But when all sections OF
the State are assembled in Convention it will
easely be seen what ones are generally es.
teemed worth considering. And We may be
sure that after so long trial of our Consti
tuition, whatever is likely to need amend.
ment is known, and if properly cared fol
now we may avoid a more imperious call a
few years hence. The Evansville. Jourad
says that party differences do not control
mems opinions of this subject in that part OF
the State, and if this be SO we may be all
the surer that Convention can do much
good, and will Go little harm.