Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

sion of the election law was in force. Although the question of taxation has been the most vital question before the state for the last half-century, the interests affected and the party managers were careful to see that the voters had no chance to vote on a taxation amendment while this election law was in force. In March, 1908, the General Assembly passed a resolution for submitting to the electors a taxation amendment, but eighteen days thereafter it was careful to repeal the law which provided for party indorsement and thereby made certain the defeat of the amendment. Several amendments have been voted on since the repeal of that law but none has been adopted.

The latter part of the fourth period of the state's constitutional history was marked by growing dissatisfaction with the judicial system whose great weakness lay in the provision for a District Court, so constituted and so administered as to hold the respect of no one, and to be only a halting place for cases on their way from the Common Pleas Court to the Supreme Court. Its decisions satisfied no one and as a consequence practically all cases appealed from the Court of Common Pleas were carried up to the Supreme Court, and its docket became so clogged that justice was long.deferred. Another great source of dissatisfaction which resulted in the decision to hold the constitutional convention of 1873-1874 was the growing suspicion that railroad and other corporate influences were exercising too great a power over official conduct and especially over the conduct of state legislators and municipal officials.

After many months of discussion a Constitution was framed and submitted to the electors, who by a vote of more than two to one rejected it. It seemed to contain

nearly all the features which were demanded by the people, but it contained a great many comparatively unimportant changes, some of which displeased one or another small group of voters, the total of which was large. The convention itself was in session so long that people grew suspicious. The Constitution contained many things that were thought to be proper matters for legislation. Then, too, the question of licensing the liquor traffic was submitted as a separate proposition and became the leading issue. Although the license proposition received less than a majority, it received seventy thousand more votes than the Constitution itself. The injection of the liquor question served to confuse the issue and many persons voted against the Constitution because they preferred to have it rejected rather than adopted with a license clause. Some of those, who favored license, had the absurd idea that they could get license without the Constitution and voted against it. Many of the important questions at issue were never seriously considered by the voters.

The fifth period in Ohio's constitutional history, extending from 1874 to the present time, has been characterized to a degree by a long line of attempts to adopt as amendments the most important features of the rejected Constitution of 1874. By means of an amendment, a supreme court commission was provided in 1875. After unsuccessful attempts in 1877 and 1879 to change the judicial system, such an amendment was adopted in 1883. In 1885 two more amendments were added, one changing the fall election from October to November and the other giving the General Assembly the power to change the time of election and the term of township officers. Among the amendments not already men

tioned, was one providing for the governor's veto and another allowing at least one representative from each county; both were adopted in 1903. There was also one providing for biennial state elections, adopted in 1905.

A majority voted in favor of a constitutional convention, when it was submitted in November, 1910. There are probably but two of the former leading questions likely to demand much consideration. They are the taxation question and the liquor question. The other questions, that seem most likely to be issues, are ones relating to the more modern forms of democratic control. Ohio started out with a suspicion against all departments of government except the legislative; one hundred and nine years of experience with legislatures has served to surround that branch with as much suspicion as there was at any time against the executive. On the other hand there seems a distinct tendency to place more power in the hands of the executive and make him directly responsible to the people. The judicial branch of government, whose functions were little understood in 1802, has, during the greater part of the last half century, been the really potent department of government and has been generally held in high respect. There is much reason to believe, however, that recent years have brought about as much suspicion against this department of government as has usually attached to the legislative department.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS

At the time of the formation of the State of Ohio the purpose and meaning of a written Constitution as it existed in the mind of the most advanced thinkers was very different from the one prevalent at the present day.

Universal suffrage was not at that time accepted as a safe policy even in a free government. That the form and control of government ought to reflect to a degree the popular mind was quite generally accepted. To the political thinker of that day, representative government did not necessarily mean that the person represented should select the representative. The notion of representation then prevalent was the one quite commonly held even to-day in most European countries: that is, that representatives should represent interests rather than people. With that as the dominant idea it is not surprising that the decision not to submit the Constitution of 1802 to popular vote met with little protest. Nor was that method unusual.

Immediately after the Declaration of Independence several of the states set about the formation and adoption of Constitutions. Within a short time all the states, except two, had done this. The two exceptions were Connecticut and Rhode Island, whose charters were so liberal that they served well as Constitutions for many years after these colonies became states. In framing and adopting Constitutions, four different methods were used: first, the Constitutions were framed and adopted by legislative bodies on their own initiative, without express authority and without submission to the electors; second, they were framed by legislative bodies under express authority from the electors, and without submission to the electors; third, they were framed by legislative bodies under express authority, and afterward submitted to the electors; fourth, they were framed by conventions chosen for that purpose, and then submitted to the electors. But when action was taken by legislative bodies without submission to the

electors, either with or without authority, it was the custom to defer final action until copies of the proposed Constitution had been made accessible to the electors. Final action was then dependant on popular approval or disapproval. In making the first Constitutions, adoptions without approval by vote of the electors occurred in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, New Jersey, Vermont, and Georgia. In more recent years practically all these states, as well as the newer states, have adopted the plan of submitting their proposed Constitutions to the electors; but Virginia framed and adopted a new Constitution without submission to the electors even so late as 1902.

The first Ohio constitutional convention met in Chillicothe, November 1, 1802, and organized in a very simple way, with a president, secretary, and assistant secretary. They left no records of debates. The journal of the convention gives the proceedings day by day, and the vote by yeas and nays on mooted questions. The convention, consisting of thirty-five delegates, was in actual session twenty-five days, and adjourned November 29, 1802. The total cost of the convention was $4,556.75.

When the convention met it went to work promptly and within four days had adopted standing rules and orders, and appointed the principal committees. Party lines were not distinctly drawn, yet it was apparent by the votes on leading questions that those adhering to the Federalist doctrines of Governor St. Clair were few in number. Many discussions in the convention arose over the effort to determine the status of the negro; and the various motions, resolutions, and votes indicate that the

« AnteriorContinuar »