To the changes brought about by the new constitution, the people gradually adjusted themselves and it steadily grew in popular favor. It added to the strength of the democratic party, and Joseph Medill, the president of the convention, was elected governor by a substantial majority. The apportionment, as already noted, was made in the interest of that party, but it was destined soon to lose the advantage of its gerrymander. New issues, national in their scope, arose above the political horizon. The cloud, at first small and insignificant, grew as it swept on, bearing in its breast bolts of destruction for the whig party and for its opponent the scourge of defeat, humiliation and long years of exile.

The section providing for the amendment of the constitution required that proposed changes should receive a three-fifths affirmative vote of both branches of the General Assembly, before submission to the people. In order to become a part of the constitution, an amendment must receive a majority of all the votes cast at such election. Of course, it might receive a majority of all the votes cast thereon, and at the same time not receive a majority of the total votes cast at the election. The votes on the amendments submitted in 1857 will illustrate the practical working of this section of the constitution.

The vote on amendments to the constitution submitted at the October election of that year was as follows:

Proposition No. 2. Change of District courts-Yes...
Change of District courts-No.

.156,646

30,039

Majority

.126,607

Proposition No. 3.

Bank and individual taxation equal-Yes.. 160,470
Bank and individual taxation equal-No... 20,600

The election of delegates resulted in the choice of men of high average ability, a number of whom were, or afterward became prominent. Of the entire number, 105, sixty-one were lawyers, a fact that was seized upon and used with telling effect by the opponents of the constitution when it was submitted to popular vote.

The convention opened with a more intelligent discussion of the oath to be taken by the members than that noted at the outset of the convention of 1850-1851. The oath of office was administered by Chief Justice White, of the Supreme Court of the state, in the usual form, including the pledge to support the then existing constitution of Ohio.

A majority of the delegates were republicans, but the organization of the convention was effected without partisan controversy, and Morrison R. Waite, of Toledo, was elected president on the fourth ballot. Before the convention concluded its labors the president resigned to accept the position of chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The vacancy thus occasioned was filled January 28, 1874, by the election, on the fourth ballot, of Rufus King of Cincinnati.

There was some controversy over the letting of printing contracts, but it did not, as in the previous convention, turn on the politics of the printer. The policy of competitive bidding, which was openly opposed by the dominant party in the convention of 1850-1851, seems to have grown quite popular in two decades. There was no objection whatever to it, and the only controversy arose over accepting the bid of a Cleveland firm but slightly lower than that of a Columbus establishment. It was argued, and with much show of reason, that the superior convenience arising from having the work done by a local printer would more than balance the difference in price. But the convention, by a substantial majority, literally kept its faith and voted to give the contract for publishing the "Debates" to W. S. Robinson & Company of Cleveland, the lowest responsible bidder.

On May 20, the fifth day of the convention, the chair announced the following standing committees:

4. On the executive department.
5. On the judicial department.

6. On the elective franchise.

7. On education.

8. On public institutions.

9. On public debt and public works.

10. On the militia.

11. On accounts and expenditures.

12. On county and township organizations.

13. On apportionment and representation.

14. On revenue and taxation.

15. On municipal corporations.

16. On corporations other than municipal. 17. On miscellaneous subjects.

18. On amendments.

19. On the schedule.

20. On traffic in intoxicating liquors.

The "Official report of the proceedings and debates of the third constitutional convention of Ohio," published in two volumes, the second in three parts, contains a very complete and detailed record of all that was proposed and done. The volumes aggregate over 4,800 pages. One wishes that the work might have been more thoroughly indexed, for while it contains much that is now of little practical value, it also includes a great fund of able discussion of fundamental principles and problems of state government that are of current interest. To some of the more important of these, brief reference will be made on succeeding pages.

ATTITUDE OF THE PARTIES TOWARD THE CONSTITUTION OF 1851

It will thus be seen that while each proposition received a majority of the votes cast thereon, no one received a constitutional majority of all the votes cast at the election. All of these amendments were defeated by the electors who refrained from voting on them. Some of them doubtless did this purposely, but most of them were negligent and indifferent. No doubt it was the purpose of those who framed this section

to make it somewhat difficult to amend the constitution. The theory was that before a change should be made there ought to be such a popular demand for it that it would secure the support of a majority of all the votes cast at the regular election. In after years there was a growing conviction that this provision conceded too much to the ignorance and indifference of the electorate.

EARLY ATTEMPTS AT AMENDMENT

However this may be, it is certain that the practical inability to adopt amendments led the people in 1871 to vote for a convention "to revise, alter or amend" the constitution. The two decades from 1850 to 1870 had witnessed great changes in Ohio. The population had grown from 1,980,329 to 2,665,280, but in a much greater ratio had increased our corporate and industrial development. Vast aggregations of wealth had been invested in commerce and manufacturing. Railroad, telegraph and express companies were performing a great service for the people, reaping rich returns and gradually acquiring political influence of a dangerous character. Immediately after the close of the Civil war the enterprising spirit of the people turned to peaceful activities. Great manufacturing establishments sprang up and Ohio exemplified the declaration of the President of the United States that the "fires of productive industry were kindled at the funeral pyre of slavery." These changes magnified old problems of state government and brought forth new ones. Failure to adopt amendments to meet these new conditions led to the agitation for a constitutional convention, and when the question was submitted to the people in 1871 the proposition prevailed by the following vote:

Whole number of votes cast at election....

Necessary to authorize calling of convention.....229,996
For the convention....

Against the convention..

459,990

.264,970

104,231

PRELIMINARIES OF THIRD CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

It would be difficult to enumerate all the considerations that led the people to vote in favor of a convention. It was generally conceded that the judicial system again needed revision. In a public address, Gen. Thomas Ewing declared that the Supreme Court was four years in arrears with its work and that with all diligence on the part of the judges the law's delays were destined to become more vexatious and expensive. There was also a general feeling that there should be a more effective regulation of corporations. The eternal warfare between the temperance people and the liquor interests figured pretty largely in the vote for the convention. The anti-license advocates had won by a small majority when the constitution of 1851 was adopted. The friends of the license system were now eager for another test of strength and felt very sanguine that they would be able to vote their proposition into the constitution. Other questions of minor interest helped to bring about the result. Among these were the veto power of the governor, limitation of indebtedness for cities, a salary system for county officers and proportional representation on the Supreme Bench.

CHAPTER VII

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1873-1874

EQUAL SUFFRAGE

The subject of woman's suffrage, which scarcely received consideration in the constitutional convention of 1850-1851, was presented at length in the convention in session twenty-three years later. Alvin C. Voris, delegate from Summit County, appeared as leading champion of the cause. His eloquent and extended address is full of interest. Among other things he said:

"Whatever tends to elevate woman tends to better society. The practical recognition of her rights and powers, as a human being, as a citizen, tends to elevate her. The conclusion is obvious. No wise man will think of depriving society of her potentialities for its melioration.

"The exercise of the elective franchise has elevated every class of persons properly exercising it. Like wealth, power, intelligence and all the civilizing agencies, it has made society better, and the individual exercising it a more exalted being, capable of higher accomplishment. *

* *

"The necessity of reform is the conviction of the hour. The abuses of the privileges of the elector are fearfully undermining our social system. May not the self-restraint of woman be an important element in this reform? * * *

"Her truly endearing qualities are inherent in her very nature and would continue to be hers, just as man's continue to be his, though she should have a larger field of duty and privilege open to her, which will be exalted as she is exalted or lessened as she is sunk in the scale of being.

"Woman will vote. The decree has gone forth, backed by the growing reason, sense of justice and generous intelligence of the age. Many of you will live to see and bless the day that enfranchised the most lovable and virtuous half of our people."

To the speech of Mr. Voris, Thomas W. Powell, the venerable delegate from Delaware County, made a carefully prepared reply. Those interested in the study of the history of this subject will find both addresses well worth reading in full. Volney G. Dorsey, delegate from Miami County, thus summed up his argument against the proposed reform:

"Christianity, built upon the family relation, has brought woman to this elevated, this glorious position, in which she is at once a blessing to herself and to all around her. Remove her from this, and I care not what you add to her, her moral influence is gone and gone forever. The ballot can not compensate for the loss of the influence of the home; official position can never repay her for the loss of that greater kingdom which must be thrown away when the sanctity of the family relation is invaded by the duties and responsibilities of political station.'

There was much interesting discussion of the proposition to elect judges of the Supreme Court by proportional suffrage. The proposed plan permitted any elector to vote for only three of the five judges to be chosen. Gen. Thomas Ewing, who favored this, summed up the objection to the plan in his answer as follows:

"The charge against this method that it increases the power of the [political] convention in the choice of judges, has been presented in its most plausible form, as follows: "The two great parties will each nomi

nate three of the five judges of the Supreme Court. Two of each three so nominated will surely be elected, and only one of six nominees defeated. Hence either party may nominate three very bad men with a certainty of electing two.' But, I answer, the majority in a state will not lose a judgeship by bad nominations if they can help it, any more than under the present system; and a party when in the minority, will seek then as now to recover their power by good nominations. There will be exactly the same rivalry of party and effort to make good nominations and elect the nominees."

Another delegate favored the system of proportional voting because it would secure to the minority its rights. On this theme he said:

"What are these rights? First and above all others, the right of a voice in the government, not an absolutely controlling voice, but a voice that can be heard in council and that may be effective so far as the power of just opinion can become so. This is all that is asked and with nothing less should a free people be satisfied."

TAXATION

The committee on revenue and taxation made its report March 12, 1874. These were many opinions, some of them at wide variance, on Section 3 which was originally reported as follows:

"Laws shall be passed taxing by equitable and uniform rules all real and personal property, so that all property shall bear an equal share of the burdens of taxation according to its true value in money, but providing against double taxation."

In explanation of this section the chairman of the committee offered the following:

"It is evident that the clause 'equitable and uniform rule' was intended and does confer on the General Assembly a larger legislative discretion in the adjustment of the general system of taxation than it possessed when but a single rule, and that uniform and inflexible, limited its action. But the question arose in our consultation, and in my judgment is still unsettled, as to how far such legislation can co-exist with and be exercised in the faith of a subsequent clause in the same section, which requires all property on its appraised value in money to share equally the burdens of taxation. Whatever may be our difference of opinion this section clearly means, to some extent, a departure from the past policy of the state as to taxation. * * * The State of Pennsylvania in framing her constitution adopted the idea probably intended to be embraced substantially in this amendment to the section of our old constitution. It is that by implication a classification of the property of the state might be obtained.'

Another member offered a more concise and definite explanation: "I am aware that we shall be asked what is meant in this section by the adjectives ‘uniform' and 'equitable' as applied to the rules by which the real and personal property of the state is to be taxed. In ordinary use the word uniform has a more definite meaning than equitable'; but my own construction of them, as we use them in this connection, is that the equality shall apply to the proper classification of the different subjects and classes of property sought to be taxed, and the uniformity shall obtain in the equality of taxation throughout the state of all the property in the same class-variable as to class but uniform as to the rate of tax on each class. That is my definition and if it means less than that I shall oppose it."

As will be seen the contest was between those who believed in the classification of property for the purposes of taxation and their opponents who favored the iron-clad uniform rule. The section submitted was a compromise of a not very satisfactory character. It was amended until it finally took the still more unsatisfactory form:

"Laws shall be passed taxing, by uniform rate, all real and personal