was submitted to us, we have not only disregarded the well-known wishes of the people for the reduction of the House, but refused to allow them to decide between the town and district system. . . .

The Committee . . . have told us that their main desire, in putting the amendments together in this shape, was to preserve the symmetry and harmony of the instrument, and the beauty and orderly arrangement of the pamphlet to be published. I am afraid that gentlemen deceive themselves as to the real cause which has induced them to adopt this course. I am bound to believe that the gentlemen are sincere in their professions, and honestly believe that they are governed by the causes which they assign. But if they will look at the matter a little more disinterestedly, they will perceive how very difficult it will be to make outsiders believe it, and to prevent them from judging that, in order to carry some favorite but objectionable scheme, all the popular measures have been connected with it, to induce the people to vote for it, and thus to give it the force of a popular adoption, when it may be that a majority of them are opposed to it. They may possibly adopt the language of one of the Committee, on another occasion, and say: "The lion's skin is not big enough not half big enough, to conceal that other animal, which I will not name. His ears are in full view." 99 1

Late in the evening of August 1 an address to the people, which Boutwell had somehow found time to draft during the day, was adopted, as well as resolves prescribing a form of ballot, etc., for the popular referendum; a committee was appointed to meet in December and count the votes; and at one in the morning, following a brief valedictory by President Banks, the Convention adjourned without day.

The Constitution of 1853 and the seven other constitutional propositions were voted upon at the regular State election on November 11, 1853. They were the subject of the liveliest constitutional canvass ever held in the history of Massachusetts. Most of the leading members of the Convention made public speeches that were widely circulated in newspapers and pamphlets, and the press devoted considerable space to the controversy. The entire weight of the Whig party was thrown against the Constitution, and they were reinforced by some notable defections from the ranks of the Free-Soilers and Democrats, notably Ex-Governor Morton, John G. Palfrey, and Charles Francis Adams, first of that name. Hillard continued his opposition under the guise of "Silas Standfast" in the Boston Atlas;

1 Debates, III, 703-704.

George Ticknor Curtis, as "Phocion," devoted his literary ability to the same end in the columns of the Advertiser. On the other side, Dana, Boutwell, Hallett, and Wilson defended their work.

Everything was rejected. The vote on Proposition No. 1, the Constitution of 1853, was 63,222 to 68,150. All the other propositions except No. 3 secured a slightly higher affirmative vote, but the result was the same. No. 6, on sectarian schools, was lost by only 401' votes. Various interpretations are given by contemporaries. Some assert that the system of representation was the principal factor; others, the alteration of judicial tenure. It is also pertinent to indicate that the vote closely followed party lines, that the power of the Coalition was waning, that the national administration ordered Democrats to break off their unholy alliance with Free-Soil "abolitionists," and that the Whig party won the State election on the same date. "Warrington" (William S. Robinson) states in his "Pen-Portraits" that Abbott Lawrence employed forty-one orators to perambulate the State in the interest of rejection, but humorously gives twenty-two other reasons for the result. Boutwell, Butler, and Dana ascribe the defeat to the "Irish vote," though not for the same reason. The Boston Pilot did oppose the new Constitution vigorously, giving much the same reasons as the Whig press, but an analysis of the Boston vote shows that the wards where most of the Irish-born population then lived did not poll so heavy a negative vote as the fashionable residential districts. The resentment of all city dwellers at the unjust scheme of town representation was undoubtedly a leading cause. Analysis of the vote on Proposition No. 1 by counties shows that every tide-water county was opposed, and every inland county but Hampshire in favor. It was country against city, the old order against the new, and the new won by preserving the old Constitution.

5. PERIOD 1854-1915.

If inclined to be sarcastic one might say that the Convention of 1853 labored seventy-two days, and brought forth — three fat volumes of debates. Yet in spite of the immediate rejection of all its proposed changes, the more worthy and popular ones

have since become incorporated in the Constitution by single amendments, and as an educational force in constitutional matters the Convention justified its existence.

The Whig Legislatures of 1853 and 1854 did the Convention the compliment of adopting several of its propositions in five amendments, which were accepted by the people by a large majority at a special election on May 23, 1855. Article XIV adopted the plurality principle for all elections. Article XV shifted the State election a week ahead, to the national date. Article XVI provided for popular election of eight Councillors in single districts of equal population, and for a speedier organization of the administration at the opening of the political year, a reform that had been urged in the Convention but not adopted. Article XVII lengthened the ballot with four minor executive officers. Article XVIII was the Convention's Proposition No. 6, forbidding the appropriation of taxes for private or sectarian schools. Article XIX permitted the Legislature to provide by law for the popular election of county officials; and the Convention's suggestion of a three-year term is now the rule.

The three amendments ratified on May 1, 1857, belong to the same group. Article XX prescribed a literary qualification for the franchise. Article XXI was one of the greatest constitutional reforms ever adopted in this State. It solved the vexatious question of representation by providing for a House of 240 members, apportioned decenially according to the number of legal voters, in representative districts electing not more than three members each. It also increased the quorum to 100 members, which in 1891 was still further increased to a majority for each branch. Article XXII extended the district system to the Senate.

Other proposed reforms in the Constitution of 1853, such as the secret ballot and registration of voters, were adopted by legislative enactment.

This group of eight amendments is what Massachusetts chose from the wave of democratic constitutional reform that swept through the United States during the middle of the nineteenth century. Popular election of minor officials and equality in representation were typical manifestations of this movement.

But many things that crept into the constitutions of her sister States Massachusetts did not need or care to adopt. Among these may be mentioned abolition of judicial tenure during good behavior, and those numerous limitations on the power of legislatures that spin out other constitutions to interminable length. The Commonwealth has been reluctant to introduce reforms through the fundamental law that may equally well be secured through the statutory law. Her constitutional development has been conservative, in the best sense of that word.

Fifteen constitutional amendments were adopted in the half century between 1859 and 1909. Some removed disqualifications for the franchise, in favor of Civil War veterans and others; several cleared up doubtful or disputed points in the Constitution as to the filling of vacancies, place of voting, etc.; a few were minor reforms; none were fundamental. Article XXXIX permits excess condemnation of land in connection with the laying out, widening, or relocating of highways. Article XL disfranchises persons guilty of corrupt practices in elections. The use of the taxing power for the encouragement of the afforestation of wild lands is authorized by Article XLI, while the Legislature is empowered by Article XLII to refer any of its acts or resolves to a popular vote. Article XLIII makes it possible for the Commonwealth to take and hold land for the purpose of relieving congestion of population. The last amendment, Article XLIV, adopted in 1915, radically modified the tax system of the State by authorizing the substitution of an income tax for the general property tax which had heretofore been the chief reliance for revenue.

Number of delegates,
Quorum,

No rule.

James Bowdoin.
Samuel Barrett.
March to June, 1780.

1 Vote on Proposition No. 8, the highest total on any accepted.

100.

2 Vote on Proposition No. 1, the new Constitution.