ier was lukewarm on the subject but open to conviction. While admitting that many people were in favor of calling a convention, they stated their own position by saying that, "At present we are easy on the subject-We wait for reasons. Among the other papers which favored a convention were the Lafayette Courier, the Vincennes Gazette and the Goshen Democrat, which latter paper had "on all occasions, urged its propriety."'5 Among the papers which were rather equivocal but favorably inclined toward a convention, were the St. Joseph Register and the Ft. Wayne Times. Of the public meetings called to consider and act upon this question, the proceedings of only two have been preserved in the contemporary journals. On March 14, 1846, a meeting was held at Marr's school house, in Marion county, which went on record in favor of a convention and proposed a series of amendments which ought to be incorporated in the new constitution. Some time during the month of May, the people of Washington county assembled and approved of the act of the General Assembly for 1845-6 in calling a convention to amend the Constitution. They believed that "an experience of thirty years, and the radical improvement made in the science of government during that time, as well as the great changes that have occurred since the adoption of the present constitution, in the population, the agricultural, commercial, manufacturing, and mechanical interests of the people, render such a call highly proper and desirable.'' The amendments proposed by individual citizens, journals and public meetings were as follows: (1) Biennial sessions of the General Assembly, which the Goshen Democrat estimated would save $25,000 annually. Biennial or triennial sessions.10 (3) Triennial session." (4) Abolition of the associate judgeships to reduce court expenses.12 (5) Appointment of associate judges and justices of the peace." (6) Remodeling of the judiciary and adequate compensation for judges. (7) The abolition of the existing probate system and the creation of probate circuits with. 13 5. 6. Sentinel, March 19, 1846. Statement of Democrat, cited in Sentinel of July 25, 1846. 7. Ibid., May 28, 1846. 8. Recommended by meeting held at Marr's school house on March 14. Sentinel, March 19, 1846. 9. 10. Cited in Sentinel, July 25, 1846. Recommended by the Vincennes Gazette. Cited in Sentinel of May 14, 1846, in a quotation from the St. Joseph Register. 11. Jefferson, Jr., in Madison Courier of February 21, 1846. 12. 13. Marr's school house meeting and Vincennes Gazette. competent officers elected by the pec local legislation to the county author or special legislation.16 (10) Pro from granting divorces and thus tes tem cial power." (11) Fixing the men and the Senate at 25.17 (12) Fixing pe of the General Assembly.18 (13) Reg 25 years of age and senators 30. 14 6 weeks and the compensation of the gubernatorial term at 4 or 5 years a ineligible to succeed himself.20 (16 at 4 years and the representative ter 1 that all fines shall be applied to the .. instead of county seminaries.21 24 Assembly from creating any State d invasion without submitting the q Prohibiting the creation of a State dev annual interest and the payment of :(20) Prohibiting the renewal or cre ing purposes, after the expiration of (21) In all charters granted, require liability clause. (22) Abolition of pay all the tax instead of heads. and State officers by the people. system of free common schools. suffrage to white males, 21 years of ag who were actual residents. (26. trades and professions and of all g imprisonment for debt in all form. property which should be exempt fthe passage of all relief laws. (28 absolute control of their own proper of holding general elections from Presidential years when the election. date. August was the busiest month in the year for farmers and this worked a hardship on that class of voters.24 (30) To place costitutional restraints upon the growth of monied monopolies.25 The results of the campaign in favor of a constitutional convention were measurably successful. The election of that year was held August 3. Returns were received from 76 counties. 59,591 votes were cast on the subject of calling a constitutional convention. Of this number 32,468 electors voted in favor of a convention and 27,123 were opposed. The total vote cast for Governor at the same election was 126,449, and the total number of polls according to the official enumeration was 126,969. It will be observed that the total vote cast on the subject of calling a constitutional convention was less than half of the total electorate of the State, and the majority in favor of a convention was only 5,345. The Constitution provided that "if there should be a majority of all the votes given at such election in favor of a convention" the General Assembly was required to provide for the election of delegates to a convention. As soon as the results of the election were known, an animated controversy arose as to the power of the legislature to provide for the call of a convention. The three questions which were most hotly contested were the legal or constitutional power of the General Assembly to submit the call for a constitutional convention at any other time than the year on which the 12-year period expired; what "majority" was required to call a convention; and had the General Assembly the "right to prevent the convention by refusing to pass the necessary laws." The Indiana Sentinel, one of the leading advocates of a convention, discussed these questions editorially on August 29, with great skill and assurance. They assured their readers that they were "sustained by able lawyers whom we have consulted on the subject." Article 8, they contended, "does not confer, enlarge, or restrict any right of the people to assemble in convention, by delegates, for the purpose of altering or amending the form of government. It is merely directory, as a mode of proceeding, and a matter of convenience. In this contention the were ably sustained by the Brookville Democrat who subscribed to the doctrine that the 12-year section contains an obligation, declaring what shall be done; but at the same time it does not prohibit the holding of elections oftener than once in twelve years for the same purpose." In defense of this position they quote Article 24. 25. St. Joseph Register, and Ft. Wayne Times, cited in Sentinel, May 14, 1846⚫ I Section 2, to the effect that the people "have, at all times, an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter or reform their government in such manner as they may think proper. 9126 When the proposed measures were under consideration in the General Assembly, Senator Read27 maintained that the people had an undoubted right to amend their Constitution at any time; Senator Stewart favored a convention, but he maintained that the General Assembly had no constitutional authority to call a convention at any time except the 12-year periods, but he maintained that the people were not similarly bound and could call a convention at any time, although he does not indicate the manner or the agency by which the convention was to be summoned.28 The most elaborate arguments were advanced by the contestants in the House. These arguments were sustained by an imposing array of citations. Mr. Secrist29 held that the 12-year clause, if strictly construed, was a nullity, and he advanced the argument formerly set forth by the Brookville Democrat that "the people, by no constitutional provision, could take from themselves, or restrain, or limit, their right to alter or amend their Constitution." However, he was opposed to calling a convention at that time as the excitement which had been aroused would result in the rejection of the constitution when drafted and the needless expense involved would injure the prospects of future amendments. Mr. Yaryan adhered tenaciously to the 12-year provision and considered the whole proceeding illegal. Mr. Porter thought the 12-year provision was not binding, but for expediency's sake he thought it ought to be complied with.30 The Weekly State Journal of December 30th, speaking of the bill which was then pending in the Senate, observed that a “diversity of opinion exists as to the propriety of its becoming a law," and contended that the 12-year period should be strictly observed. "It is contended that, inasmuch as the above article does not, in so many words, interdict any other mode, the legislature may, at any time, direct a poll to be opened This, they held to be "a forced inference, and not warranted by a fair construction of that instrument." The Brookville Democrat charged the Whig editors generally with standing by the strict construction of the 12-year provision, but in his remarks in the Senate, 26. 27. 28. Quoted in Sentinel, September 19, 1846. A Democrat. Stewart differed from his political friends on this question. 29. Secrist, a Democrat, differed from his political friends. 30. 31. Julian held to the 12-year section; Dunham thought it was not binding. date. August was the busiest month in the year for farmers and this worked a hardship on that class of voters.24 (30) To place costitutional restraints upon the growth of monied monopolies. 25 The results of the campaign in favor of a constitutional convention were measurably successful. The election of that year was held August 3. Returns were received from 76 counties. 59,591 votes were cast on the subject of calling a constitutional convention. Of this number 32,468 electors voted in favor of a convention and 27,123 were opposed. The total vote cast for Governor at the same election was 126,449, and the total number of polls according to the official enumeration was 126,969. It will be observed that the total vote cast on the subject of calling a constitutional convention was less than half of the total electorate of the State, and the majority in favor of a convention was only 5,345. The Constitution provided that "if there should be a majority of all the votes given at such election in favor of a convention' the General Assembly was required to provide for the election of delegates to a convention. As soon as the results of the election were known, an animated controversy arose as to the power of the legislature to provide for the call of a convention. The three questions which were most hotly contested were the legal or constitutional power of the General Assembly to submit the call for a constitutional convention at any other time than the year on which the 12-year period expired; what "majority" was required to call a convention; and had the General Assembly the "right to prevent the convention by refusing to pass the necessary laws." The Indiana Sentinel, one of the leading advocates of a convention, discussed these questions editorially on August 29, with great skill and assurance. They assured their readers that they were "sustained by able lawyers whom we have consulted on the subject." Article 8, they contended, "does not confer, enlarge, or restrict any right of the people to assemble in convention, by delegates, for the purpose of altering or amending the form of government. It is merely directory, as a mode of proceeding, and a matter of convenience." In this contention the were ably sustained by the Brookville Democrat who subscribed to the doctrine that the 12-year section contains an obligation, declaring what shall be done; but at the same time it does not prohibit the holding of elections oftener than once in twelve years for the same purpose." In defense of this position they quote Article 24. 25. St. Joseph Register, and Ft. Wayne Times, cited in Sentinel, May 14, 1846* |