DOCSLIB.ORG

Fourth Ohio Constitutional Convention

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fourth Ohio Constitutional Convention 01310 LBCIST-ATIVE IIISTORY. 409 FOURTH OHIO CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. The work of the Fourth Ohio Constitutional Convention, which con- vened in 1912, was a part of the legislation of the period which this volume is intended to represent in history, and it was thought proper to include within these pages a comprehensive review of the great work performed by that august body; therefore, the letter which follows was sent to a number of members, with the result which is shown in the sev- eral contributions received. The conlbi~led arguments contained in the pages which follow will furnish to posterity a complete understanding of what the different elements in the Convention endeavored to accomplish for the people. I am addressing you upon a subject of great importance to the libraries of Ohio, and I sincerely trust that you will give the matter serious consideration, and, if possible, comply with my request. The 80th General Assembly of Ohio authorized the publication of a com- plete history of legislation of Ohio for the years 1909-1913, inclusive, in connec- tion with a history of the State Administration for the years 1909-1912. I was duly appointed by the Lieutenant Governor of the State, as well as by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, "Legislative Historian," to prepare the first volume of this work, and it is expected that the said history will be continued in the future. A number of gentlemen who were prominent in the late Constitutional Convention have suggested that it would be a very proper thing to include in the aforesaid history, a careful review of the work of the Fourth Ohio Constitutional Convention. I have concluded that the very best review that could be given of the Con- vention would be a symposium of views by various gentlemen who were nlenl- bers of the Convention, in the form of a'contribution from the several gentle- men who will be invited, yourself being among the number. Of course it is accorded to each gentleman to express himself fully and fairly, according to his best judgment, as to the work of the Convention, and this without fear of criticism. This proposed volume of political and legislative history is being prepared ,entirely without prejudice with regard to any man's politics, and it is hoped that the work, when completed, will prove to be of great value as a book of reference, especially to students in the colleges and high schools of Ohio. Hoping to hear favorably from you, sir, I have the honor to subscribe myself, Sincerely and faithfully yours, JAIIESR. MERCER, Legis1ottz;e Historicln. 410 01310 I.EGISI.ATIVE IIISTORY OIIIO T.EGISI.ATI\'E HISTORY. HON. HERBERT SEELY BIGELOW, and that the successf~~lamendme~lts were atloptetl I)y vote of a 111 L)elryate frorlr Horrrilto~l Coz~ntj'nlrd Prcsidcllt of tlze Collveiltiot~. The ballot used for the election of delegates was a non-partisa~ . separate ballot. It received, ho\ve\-er, as nluch attention, more, L homas Jefferso~lsaid : "As new discoveries are than non-partisan and separate I~allotsfor judges and members matle, new truths tlisclosetl. antl manners and opi~~ions scl~ool board usually receive. As for the vote cast in adopt changed with the change of circumstances, institutions amentlments, that was quite as large as could have been expecte ruust also advance ant1 lieep pace with the times." special election. There seems to Ile 110 basis for the assumpti The people of Ohio hat! lived for sixty years the voters who attended this special election were not fairly rep untler a Constitution which was framed when steam tive of those who remained at !lome. locomoti\!es were a greater curiosity than are flying Echoes of the opposition to the \vork of the Con\-ention 1- machines at the present time. 111 1SSO a Constitu- died away. There is, of course, grumbling among men who tional Co~lventionwas electetl to revise the doc~rment, profession of party politics. The cities which have thus far avail( I~utthe worli of this Con\:ention was rejected by the selves of the home rule power 1ial.e illvariably atlopted a non- l~eol~le.I11 1 !) 1 1 another Conventio~~was chosen, ballot for municipal elections. 'The door is open now.to municipa \\.hicIi asseml~letl at Columl)us as Ohio's Fourth Constitutional Con- ship of public utilities. The constitutio~lalbars are down and \-ention. pie of Ohio cities are free to go I~rowsingill these pastures \. New discoveries hat1 I~eenmatle. New truths liatl I1ee11 disclosetl. they lilte. Naturally this does not te~~dto sanctify the menlor Manners antl opinions had greatly cha~~getlsi~~ce the Constitution of Co11ve11tio11 for those whose political views are colored by their ( 185 1 was adol~tet!. The Conve~~tionset about tile task of ~~rovitlingnew interest in pul~licutility securities. 1)olitical institutions, bettcr suitetl to the neetls of tlie new genel-atio~~. The atloption of the i~litiati\.eand referendum in the for111 It was a great good fortune that the Legislature in l)ro\:idi~~gfor tlie it took was most strenuously resisted. This was regarded as election of these delegates had 1)rescl-il~etla non-l~artisan1)allot. and that drastic departure fl-0111 the \\!ays of the fathers. It is too soc the tlelegates who were chosen without respect to party lines, tlitl their work in the Convention unco~~trolletl11y consitleratio~~of party ~)olitics. wl~etherthis change is going to vindicate the criticism of its el. justify the expectations of its friends. The Convention took the \\ihile the!-e was no divisio~~in the Co~~ventionaccortli~~g to political par- that direct legislation through tl~einitiative antl referentlu~ucou ties, there were, of course, two groups in the Conventio~~.Tl~ese groups expected to produce the best results unless there were pro\ were tlescril~etlI,y 1Macauley. who ol,ser\;etl that "The n~intlsof all mall- liintl are so constitutetl as to fall ill two roughly equal groups-those means wherel~ythe voters coultl secure in convenient form a tc who cling to the past, distrusting change: and those who i~istinctivel~ measures to.l,e sul~mittetlto ],o!~u!ar \.ate with arguments for an It is to 11e regretted that the present Ohio Ixgislature was re challeiige l~recedent." There was also the irrepressible conflict over tlie carry out this provisio~lof the Constitution, apl~arentlyon tlie tl liquor question. the publicity pamphlet which the Convention pro\.ided for i~ligl ''he great issues of the Co~~vel~tiol~which sl~arplydisti~~guished these to exploit tlangerous tloctrines of gover11111ent. It is also to be two groups of the so-called conservatives and progressi\.es. were taxation, that owing, possibly, to some practical defect in the act pro\-idir reform of the jutliciary, home rule for cities, ant1 the initiati\-e and publicity pamphlet, the people of Ohio were compelled to vot referendum. A dispassionate review of tlie worli of the Convention first two referendum measures without the information at 11a ~iiust.I thinli. lead to tlie conclusion tliat this wotli was faithfully and the Constitution intentled they should have. conscientiously done, and while it displeasetl sollie people \vho are called IYhile there has been this failure on the part of some to reactionaries and tlisappoi~ltetl others who are calletl I-adicals, it reasoll- tlie spirit of the initiative and referendum position of the COIIS ably satisfied those who I~elievetliat ortlerly progress is the nisest COIF should also be said that ill several decisions in\:olving the pr sel-vatism. the initiative antl I-eferendum the Ohio courts have eshibi Those tlisapproving of the worli of the Convention have tlwelt mucli reassuring attitude. They have shown an unmistakal~le tlisl upon the fact that the delegates were electetl I)y a minority of the voters colistrue and enforce these provisions in the spirit in n~hicli OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. framed. The friends of direct legislation could not express too strongly submit forty-two, of which thirty-four ~vereratified by the electors the satisfaction they must feel over the fact that the courts should have the polls. How well did the Convention succeed in carrying out the fo at the outset insisted upon the integrity of the new plan. going objects? The first Constitution of Ohio was written by the friends of Thomas 1. It adopted and the electorate ratified the amendment to Arti Jefferson. The present fundame~ltallaw of the State, like the first, was I1 of the Constitutioll engrafting upon it the Initiative and Referendu largely shaped by Inen who acted upon JefTerson's advice when he said: The arguments against it are all based upon specific example in otl "Do not be frightened into the surrender of true principles by the alarm States on the ground that it is intended to overthrow representative gc of the timid or the croalcillgs of wealth against the ascendency of the ernment. I am satisfied the provision as adopted here is not subject people." that objection. The work of the Convention is still ~ulderfire. But the delegates Section 3, Article I, of the Constitution incorporated in both Con5 were inen to who111 a great opl>ortunity came. They met that oppor- tutions of the State ill force since 1802, authorized the people to petiti tunity with a high purpose. and to instruct their representatives, but authorized no remedy for fail^ lV11atever the dispassionate verdict of his tor)^ may be, the nlembers to obey such instructions. This provision siinply furnishes the remet will always be able to loolc baclc to their ser~icein Ohio's Fourth Consti- It is wise and it is conservative.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Color Line in Ohio Public Schools, 1829-1890
    THE COLOR LINE IN OHIO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 1829-1890 DISSERTATION Presented In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By LEONARD ERNEST ERICKSON, B. A., M. A, ****** The Ohio State University I359 Approved Adviser College of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is not the work of the author alone, of course, but represents the contributions of many persons. While it is impossible perhaps to mention every­ one who has helped, certain officials and other persons are especially prominent in my memory for their encouragement and assistance during the course of my research. I would like to express my appreciation for the aid I have received from the clerks of the school boards at Columbus, Dayton, Toledo, and Warren, and from the Superintendent of Schools at Athens. In a similar manner I am indebted for the courtesies extended to me by the librarians at the Western Reserve Historical Society, the Ohio State Library, the Ohio Supreme Court Library, Wilberforce University, and Drake University. I am especially grateful to certain librarians for the patience and literally hours of service, even beyond the high level customary in that profession. They are Mr. Russell Dozer of the Ohio State University; Mrs. Alice P. Hook of the Historical and Philosophical Society; and Mrs. Elizabeth R. Martin, Miss Prances Goudy, Mrs, Marion Bates, and Mr. George Kirk of the Ohio Historical Society. ii Ill Much of the time for the research Involved In this study was made possible by a very generous fellowship granted for the year 1956 -1 9 5 7, for which I am Indebted to the Graduate School of the Ohio State University.
    [Show full text]
  • Conflict of Laws
    Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 6 Issue 3 Article 9 1955 Conflict of Laws Fletcher R. Andrews Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Fletcher R. Andrews, Conflict of Laws, 6 W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 227 (1955) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev/vol6/iss3/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Law Review by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 19551 SURVEY OF OHIO LAW- 1954 An action shall be deemed to be commenced within the meaning of sections 2305.03 to 2305.22, inclusive ... as to each defendant, at the date of the summons which is served on him or on a co-defendant who is ...united in interest with him," would help them out of the dilemma. The court pointed out, however, that no heir at law was united in interest with executrix or the legatee,60 and that none of the three originally named heirs at law had ever been served at all, so that there was no need to determine whether service on one of them would have satisfied the statute as to the other two or as to those not even named. Furthermore, the statute only applies to defendants, and its plain provisions cannot be avoided by making defendants into plaintiffs, after the limitation had expired.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio Rules of Evidence
    OHIO RULES OF EVIDENCE Article I GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 101 Scope of rules: applicability; privileges; exceptions 102 Purpose and construction; supplementary principles 103 Rulings on evidence 104 Preliminary questions 105 Limited admissibility 106 Remainder of or related writings or recorded statements Article II JUDICIAL NOTICE 201 Judicial notice of adjudicative facts Article III PRESUMPTIONS 301 Presumptions in general in civil actions and proceedings 302 [Reserved] Article IV RELEVANCY AND ITS LIMITS 401 Definition of “relevant evidence” 402 Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible 403 Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or undue delay 404 Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct; exceptions; other crimes 405 Methods of proving character 406 Habit; routine practice 407 Subsequent remedial measures 408 Compromise and offers to compromise 409 Payment of medical and similar expenses 410 Inadmissibility of pleas, offers of pleas, and related statements 411 Liability insurance Article V PRIVILEGES 501 General rule Article VI WITNESS 601 General rule of competency 602 Lack of personal knowledge 603 Oath or affirmation Rule 604 Interpreters 605 Competency of judge as witness 606 Competency of juror as witness 607 Impeachment 608 Evidence of character and conduct of witness 609 Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime 610 Religious beliefs or opinions 611 Mode and order of interrogation and presentation 612 Writing used to refresh memory 613 Impeachment by self-contradiction
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court W Cover
    No. 13-1314 In The Supreme Court Of The United States ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE, APPELLANT, v. ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA AMICUS BRIEF OF THE STATES OF WASHINGTON, CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, HAWAII, IDAHO, MASSACHUSETTS, MISSISSIPPI, NEW MEXICO, NEW YORK, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA, AND VIRGINIA IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS ROBERT W. FERGUSON Attorney General NOAH G. PURCELL Solicitor General REBECCA RIPOLI GLASGOW Deputy Solicitor General Counsel of Record JAY D. GECK Deputy Solicitor General 1125 Washington Street SE Olympia, WA 98504-0100 360-664-3027 [email protected] i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ................................ 2 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................... 4 ARGUMENT ............................................................... 5 A. The States, As Sovereigns, Are Entitled To Structure Their Lawmaking Processes As They See Fit .................................. 5 B. The Elections Clause Does Not Disturb The States’ Sovereign Authority To Allocate Lawmaking Power To Entities Other Than The Legislature .............................. 8 C. The Arizona Legislature’s Argument Threatens States’ Diverse Redistricting Systems, Which Often And For Good Reason Place Significant Power Outside The Legislature ................................................ 10 1. Some States Give Their Courts Authority To Redistrict
    [Show full text]
  • Blaine's Name in Vain: State Constitutions, School Choice, and Charitable Choice
    Denver Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 Article 4 December 2020 Blaine's Name in Vain: State Constitutions, School Choice, and Charitable Choice Jill Goldenziel Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Jill Goldenziel, Blaine's Name in Vain: State Constitutions, School Choice, and Charitable Choice, 83 Denv. U. L. Rev. 57 (2005). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. BLAINE'S NAME IN VAIN?: STATE CONSTITUTIONS, SCHOOL CHOICE, AND CHARITABLE CHOICE JILL GOLDENZIELf ABSTRACT This article explores the growing controversy over "no-funding pro- visions, " state constitutionalprovisions that restrict statefunding of reli- gious institutions. These provisions, allegedly rooted in anti-Catholic bigotry, may threaten state implementation of school choice programs and faith-based initiatives involving public funding of religious social service organizations. This article argues that these no-funding provi- sions, which are commonly termed "Blaine Amendments," "Little Blaines," or "Baby Blaines," are often unrelated to the failed federal Blaine Amendment, and do not always share the federal amendment's infamous anti-Catholic history. In the first study of its type, this article surveys the language and history of constitutionalprovisions prohibiting funding of religious institutions in allfifty states, and details the constitu- tional history andjudicial interpretationof these provisions in eight rep- resentative states: Ohio, Wisconsin, Arizona, Florida, Colorado, Michi- gan, Vermont, and Maine. This article concludes that the fates of school vouchers andfaith-based initiatives will not rest on the so-called "Blaine Amendments," but on the ideological and jurisprudentialtendencies of state judiciaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Elections in Ohio
    Chapter 8 Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Elections in Ohio Major and Minor Parties in Ohio Ohio has a very rich history of strong political parties. The Ohio Democratic Party is older than the Republican Party, having its origins in the foundingdistribute period of the state. Initially, a party known as the Federalists served as the main rival to the Dem- ocratic Party (or the Democratic or Jeffersonian Republicans,or as they were sometimes know). As the Federalist Party faded, the Whig Party emerged as the opponent of the Democrats.1 The Whigs were strong in the “Western Reserve” part of the state, which is the northeast corner of Ohio. The Whig Party held to strong abolitionist views and so served as the natural core for the emergence of Republican Party in Ohio in the 1850s. post, Beyond the Democrats and the Republicans, minor political parties have struggled to gain ballot access and sustain their legal status in Ohio. In the 2012 general election, no minor parties received even 1 percent of the vote, although the Libertarian Party presidential candidate came close, receiving .89 percent of the popular vote. Among thecopy, other minor parties, the Socialist Party presidential can- didate received .05 percent of the vote, while the Constitution Party received .15 percent and the Green Party received .33 percent. Even thoughnot third parties do not currently have much hope for winning the plurality of the vote necessary to actually be awarded an office in Ohio, they can affect a close election by siphoning off votes that might otherwise go to one of the majorDo party candidates.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 the Constitutional Framework of Ohio State Government
    Chapter 1 The Constitutional Framework of Ohio State Government Image courtesy of the Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board Advisory and Review Square Capitol the of courtesy Image Statehouse Map Room What is a Constitution? A constitution is the fundamental law of a state or nation. It is a written document agreed to by the people and thus derives its authority from those it governs. A constitution establishes the nature and character of the state or national government. It organizes government into various branches, prescribes their powers, and specifies the extent to which these powers may be exercised. The Ohio Constitution is the fundamental law of Ohio and is subject only to the restrictions of the United States Constitution, acts of Congress, and international treaties to which the United States is a party. It may be changed only by voter approval of proposed amendments. Like the United States Constitution, the Ohio Constitution organizes government into three separate branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. Each branch is independent of the other two and has defined powers and responsibilities. All laws enacted by the legislative branch must comply with the Constitution’s provisions; those that do not are unenforceable. LSC A Guidebook for Ohio Legislators Page | 1 Chapter 1: The Constitutional Framework of the Ohio State Government Ohio’s first constitution was approved by Congress in 1802 as a first step to Ohio’s admission to the Union as a state. Ohio’s second constitution, the Constitution of 1851, as subsequently amended, is today’s fundamental law of Ohio. A constitution is the fundamental law of a state or nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio's State Test High School American Government
    OHIO’S STATE TEST HIGH SCHOOL AMERICAN GOVERNMENT TEACHER’S GUIDE REVISED WITH UPDATED TEST ITEM SPECS AND SAMPLE TEST ITEMS - AUGUST 2018 COLUMBUS CITY SCHOOLS SOCIAL STUDIES DEPARTMENT www.ccsoh.us/socialstudies Ohio’s State Test: High School American Government Teacher’s Guide 1 Test Specifications: American Government Introduction The American Government Test Specifications provide an overview of the structure and content of the test. This overview includes a description of the test design as well as information on the types of items that will appear on the test. A test blueprint is included that identifies the range and distribution of items and points, grouped into various categories. The specifications also provide specific guidelines for the development of all items used for the American Government test. This document is intended to be a resource not only for item writers and test designers, but for Ohio educators and other stakeholders who are interested in a deeper understanding of the test. General Description of the American Government Test In 2010 Ohio adopted new rigorous academic content standards for American Government. A model curriculum based on these new standards was adopted in 2011. An achievement assessment that aligns to the new standards and model curriculum is mandated by Ohio Revised Code 3301.079. The assessment will be administered as a two-part test, in a computer-delivered format, to measure progress toward the standards and to provide information to teachers and administrators. Test Design The structure of the American Government Test will consist of two parts that will be given near the end of the year.
    [Show full text]
  • OCT 24 2066 MARCIA J Nl^Rqgft C Sllpreme T;(;T^Id? ^F TABLE of CONTENTS
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO MELISSA ARBINO, Case No. 2006-1212 Petitioner, -vs- JOHNSON & JOHNSON, et al., Respondents. AMICUS BRIEF OF THE OHIO CHAPTER OF THE AMERCIAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATES IN SUPPORT OF CERTIFIED QUESTION NO. 1 Bemard K. Bauer, Esq. (0016290) Julie A. Callsen, Esq. (0062287) (COUNSEL OF RECORD) (COUNSEL OF RECORD) BERNARD K. BAUER CO., L.P.A. Benjamin C. Sasse, Esq. (0072856) 410 W. Sandusky Street TUCKER, ELLIS & WEST P.O. Box 932 1150 Huntington Building, 925 Eudid Avenue Findlay, OH 45839 Cleveland, OH 44115-1475 Telephone: (419) 423-2673 Telephone: (216) 696-3536 FAX: (419) 423-2127 FAX: (216) 592-5009 E-mail: bauertrial@turbosurf net COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENTS, COUNSEL FOR AMICUS CURIAE, JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & OHIO CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN JOHNSON PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATES AND DEVELOPMENT, LLC AND ORTHO- McNEIL PHARMACEUTICAL, INC. Janet G. Abaray, Esq. (0002943) (COUNSEL OF RECORD) Stephen P. Carney, Esq. (0063460) Melanie S Bailey, Esq. (0075821) (COUNSEL OF RECORD) Calvin 8, Tregre, Esq. (0073454) Douglas R. Cole, Esq. (0070665) BURG, SIMPSON, ELDREDGE, HERSH Holly J. Hunt, Esq. (0075069) & JARDINE, P.C. Sharon A. Jennings, Esq. (0055501) 312 Walnut Street, Suite 2090 James M. Petro, Esq. (0022096) Cincinnati, OH 45202 Frank M. Strigad, Esq. (0078377) Telephone: (513) 852-5600 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FAX: (513) 852-5611 30 East Broad Street, 17th Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Robert S. Peck, Esq. Telephone: (614) 466-2872 Stephen B. Pershing, Esq. FAX: (614) 728-7592 CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION 1050 315'Street, NW COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT, Washington, DC 20007-4499 STATE OF OHIO Telephone: (202) 944-2874 FAX: (202) 965-0920 ^^[^ciu/ COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER, MELISSA ABARINO OCT 24 2066 MARCIA J Nl^rqGFt C SllPREME t;(;t^id? ^F TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Statement of the Facts ..................................
    [Show full text]
  • Records and Sources of Ohio Law from 1787-1850 William H
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Cleveland-Marshall College of Law Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Cleveland State Law Review Law Journals 1968 Records and Sources of Ohio Law from 1787-1850 William H. Vodrey Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Legal Writing and Research Commons How does access to this work benefit oy u? Let us know! Recommended Citation William H. Vodrey, Records and Sources of Ohio Law from 1787-1850, 17 Clev.-Marshall L. Rev. 583 (1968) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 583 Records and Sources of Ohio Law From 1787-1850 William H. Vodrey* TABLE OF CONTENTS (Sequence) Preface ------------------------------------------------------ 584 Records and Sources I. Basic Documents A. Northwest Territory --- --------------- 585 B. Ohio Constitutional Convention ------------------------- 585 II. Laws of Ohio A. Miscellaneous Compilations ---------------------------- 586 B. Indexes ---------------------------------------------- 588 III. Reports of Ohio Cases A. Senate ------------------------------------------------ 589 B. Supreme Court --------------------------------------- 590 C. Common Pleas Courts --------------------------------- 592 D. Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Government in Ohio Before 1912 HARVEY WALKER*
    OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL Volume 9 1948 Number 1 Municipal Government in Ohio Before 1912 HARVEY WALKER* While the Constitutional Convention was laboring behind closed doors in the summer heat of 1787 in Philadelphia, little bands of pioneers from Massachusetts -and Connecticut were cross- Ing the Alleghenies to Sumrills Ferry, Pennsylvania. There, during the fall and winter of 1787-88, they built boats to carry them to the Ohio, and down that mighty stream to the mouth of the Mus- kingum, where they arrived on April 7, 1788 to establish the first town in the Northwest Territory, Marietta.' Arthur St. Clanr, the first governor- of the Northwest Territory, arrived on July 9 to make it the seat of government in the Territory A few months later, in the fall of 1788, another town was settled, opposite the mouth of the Licking River, on the north bank of the Ohio. This settlemnt was more advantageously located than the first and Governor St. Clair moved the territorial offices there from Marietta in the fall of 1789 and christened the town Cincin- nati after the noted post-war Revolutionary society Other early settlements, prior to statehood, in 1802, were: Gallipolis (1790), Manchester (1791), Chillicothe (1796), Dayton (1796), Franklinton (1797), Cleveland (1796), Youngstown (1798), Warren (1799) and Ravenna (1799) From 1788 to 1799 the government of the Territory was vested in a governor, a secretary, and three judges. This group was given legislative authority until such time as the population of the terri- tory should be sufficient to warrant the election of a legislative assembly To this group, then, was given authority to establish units of local government.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Executive Veto in the Ohio Constitution* Alonzo H
    The Ohio State University LAW JOURNAL VOLUME 2 MARCI, 1936 NUMBER 2 HISTORY OF THE EXECUTIVE VETO IN THE OHIO CONSTITUTION* ALONZO H. TuTTLEt The convention which met in 1787 to draft a federal con- stitution never seriously questioned the wisdom of providing for an executive veto and this in spite of the fact that only four of the states had at that time any such provision in their con- stitutions. Only two members, Franklin and Gorham seemed to have spoken against any veto power whatever, while a few, Wilson, Reed, Hamilton and Gouveneur Morris argued for an absolute veto power. The real difference of opinion, however, was between those who favored a qualified veto power in the President alone and those who favored joining with the Presi- dent a suitable number of the judiciary in the exercise of this power: Realizing that a veto power would be given, Wilson and Madison, probably the two ablest members of the conven- tion, led the fight for the joining of the judiciary and the execu- tive. Not satisfied with the indecisive vote of four states to three against their proposal, they brought the matter up again and again, and even after the matter had seemingly been settled for good, late in the proceedings of the convention Madison * The legal aspects of the "Executive Veto" will be treated in an article by Professor Tuttle to appear in a succeeding number of the OHiO STATE UNrVERSITY LAw JOURNAL. t Professor of Law, Ohio State University. 99 100 LAW JOURNAL - MARCH, 1936 proposed that all laws of Congress should be submitted to the President and the Supreme Court separately.
    [Show full text]