The gentleman, (Mr. Woodward) objected to the proposition, on the ground that on account of its being a special election, the judges and inspectors, who served at the last October election, would be compelled to officiate there, although many of them might have removed.

Now, he (Mr. Cox) conceived that this objection was entitled to no weight, inasmuch as the law has provided for the filling of all vacancies of this sort. He believed that there was a provision in the act of assem· bly, relative to the filling of all vacancies on the morning of the election. If any officer or officers were absent, the voters could immediately select individuals to officiate in their stead. In his opinion, there could be no difficulty on that account, and consequently, the objection fell to the ground.

The gentleman from Luzerne, had also made another objection, and he (Mr. C.) must confess that he was astonished to hear a gentleman so well versed in political matters, and so zealous a politician as he was, commit so gross a mistake.

He had remarked that at the time when the delegates to this convention were elected, forty thousand voters did not go to the polls, who had attended them at the governor's election. The gentleman, however, should recollect that, although forty thousand did not give their votes for or against the calling of a convention, yet they did cast their votes on the other questions submitted to them at the same time. He thought the gentleman rather unfortunate in offering this objection. Yes, so little was the interest and anxiety felt by the people in regard to the calling of a convention, that forty thousand voters did not vote at all!

It occurred to him (Mr. C.) that exactly the same state of things might again happen, if the amendments were to be submitted on the second Tuesday of October, as the attention of the people would be directed to other objects. On that day, a new governor was to be elected, or the present executive magistrate be re-elected, and from the present aspect of things, the contest was likely to be a very warm one. Besides, there were likewise members of congress, members of the legislature, and other offi. cers to be elected, at the same time; consequently, the political parties, on both sides, would use every exertion, and employ every means to accomplish their purposes. There had always been a great deal of warmth and party feeling displayed at a governor's election, and as in all probability there would be again at the next, he would ask if, under these cir cumstances, it would not be highly probable that the people would not come forward and give their votes coolly, calmly and dispassionately, for or against the amendments? He would ask if there was not danger to be apprehended that what had happened in relation to the calling of the convention, might not again happen? He confessed that he thought there was. Indeed, it would not surprise him in the least to hear that thirty or forty thousand of those who voted at the governor's election, should not vote for or against the amendments. He felt assured that this consequence would follow, because the election of a governor would be regarded as of more consequence. He thought, too, that we had a right to infer such would be the result, on account of the little interest manifested by the people of the commonwealth in the labour of this convention. Notwithstan ding the frequent notices given by the press of the proceedings of this body, but little attention was paid to them by the people, certainly not near so much as to those of the legislature.

Among the objections-and an important one it was-which he enter tained against submitting the amendments in October, was this: that if the contest for governor should be a close one, the supporters of the several candidates, seeing that their favorite was going to succeed, might be governed by selfish motives, and consequently, vote against the amend ments, in order that their party might have the disposition of the offices. He regarded this, then, as a strong and insuperable objection to the amendment of the gentleman from Lancaster. The office holders, as a matter of course, would vote against the amendments. Each political party would be anxious to get hold of some of the loaves and fishes, and thus the office hunters would assuredly vote against the amendments, because it would be to their interest to do so. In his opinion, the most appropriate time to submit the amendments would be in June, before the election for governor came on, when they would be decided without reference to other questions.

Objection had been raised against a special election, on the ground that the attendance of voters would not be so great as at the general election. Well, he thought that was a matter which depended upon whether or not the people felt any interest or anxiety concerning the proposed amendments, If they did, then he apprehended that they would turn out whether the election was general or special. He entertained no doubt that a very large majority of the people had thought on the subject and regarded the proceedings of the convention with much interest. Having a regard for the interests and welfare of the commonwealth, they would, as a matter of course, give their votes either for or against the amendments. He could not persuade himself that our honest and patriotic yeomanry, mechanics, merchants, and others of our fellow citizens, would evince so much apathy and disregard in reference to the proposed changes in the constitution of the state of Pennsylvania, as not to express their opinions respecting them through the agency of the ballot box, because they were not submitted to them on the day of the general election. No, he enter tained a better, a higher opinion of the people than that. He believed that they would turn out and vote according to the honest conviction of their consciences. True, it might be, that men who felt no interest would not vote-men who had bets on the result-such as bar-room politicians and others of like character, who might, perhaps, obtain little offices or something equally valuable to them, by not doing so. But, he had no doubt, whatever, that the really good and valuable citizens of the commonwealth would give their votes coolly, calmly and deliberately upon the amendments, if submitted to them in June next. They would vote uninfluenced by party considerations, and exercise their judgments freely and without bias. Not regarding whether the amendments were popular or unpopular, they would give their votes with reference alone to their being good or bad.

The impression upon his mind, was, that a more cool and dispassionate decision could be had on the amendments, if submitted in June instead of 'ctober-at a special instead of the general election, when those opposed to the amendments, will be busily engaged in urging the claims of their several candidates. And, double the chance would be presented of defeating the amendments in October than in June. The justices of the peace, of which there are three or four thousand, if against the amend

ments, would turn out and ask-"who do you want for governor? who for the legislature ?" &c., and would be very ready to give tickets. But, if they should be in favor of the amendments, they would laughingly say -"there has been voting enough already, and perhaps the constitution is good enough." And, thus a man might be induced to vote on all the other questions, but not the amendments.

He (Mr. Cox) would conclude by saying that he should prefer either June or November to October, as the most eligible time to submit the amendments proposed by this convention to the constitution of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

The question was called for by Mr. M'CAHEN and twenty-nine others rising in their places.

And on the question,

Shall the question be now put ?

The yeas and nays were required by Mr. FORWARD and Mr. CHABERS, and are as follow, viz:

YEAS Messrs. Banks, Barclay, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Lancaster, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Cleavenger, Crain, Crawford, Crum, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Dickerson, Dillinger, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Harris, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, High, Hyde, Keim, Kennedy, Krebs, Long, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, Merkel, Miller, Myers, Nevin, Overfield, Payne, Purviance, Read, Riter, Ritter, Rogers, Royer, Saeger. Scheetz, Sellers, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia. Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Taggart, Todd, Weaver, Weidman, White, Woodward -72.

NAYS-Messrs. Agnew, Baldwin, Barndollar, Barnitz, Carey, Chambers, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Chauncey, Cline, Coates, Cochran, Cope, Cox, Cunningham, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dunlop, Farrelly, Forward, Hays, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, Hopkinson, Ingersoll, Jenks, Konigmacher, Maclay, M'Dowell, M'sherry. Meredith, Merrill, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northamption, Reigart, Russell, Scott, Serrill, Sturdevant, Thomas, Young, Sergeant, President-45.

So the question was determined in the affirmative.

And on the question,

Will the convention agree so to amend the amendment, viz:

By striking therefrom the words "second Tuesday of October," and inserting in lieu thereof, the words "first Tuesday of November?”

The yeas and nays were required by Mr. CURLL, and Mr. SHELLITO, and are as follow, viz:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Barnitz, Carey, Chambers, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Chauncey, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Coates, Cope, Cox, Crum, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Farrelly, Hays, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hopkinson, Jenks, Maclay, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill, Merkel, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Saeger, Scott, Serrill, Snively, Thomas, Todd, Weidman, Sergeant, President-38.

NAYS-Messrs. Banks, Barclay, Barndollar, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Lancaster, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Cline, Cochran, Crain, Crawford, Cummin, Cunningham, Curll, Darrah, Dickerson, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnel, Doran, Dunlop, Earle, Fleming, Forward, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Harris, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Hyde, Ingerso. Keim, Kennedy, Konigmacher, Krebs, Long, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Caken,

M'Dowell, Miller, Myers, Nevin, Overfield, Payne, Purvia ce, Reigart, Read, Riter, Ritter, Rogers, Royer, Russell, Scheetz, Sellers, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Weaver, White, Woodward, Young-82.

So the question was determined in the negative.

The question next recurring was on the amendment of Mr. WOODWARD. Mr. FORWARD, of Allegheny, remarked that he should vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Philadelphia, (Mr. Scott) and also that of the gentleman from Luzerne, (Mr. Woodward) because he should not like the victorious party, at the general election, to vote upon the amendments whilst under the heat and influence of political party feeling. Many reasons presented themselves to his mind why the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne ought not to be adopted. He would much deplore the idea that the adoption or rejection of the amendments were to depend on political scramble for the offices of the state.

Is it proper that amidst that scramble, the people should be called upon to give their attention to these amendments, and to decide upon their adoption or rejection in a scene of animosity and party heat, and where local and party influence could be brought to bear upon their judgment?

I am (said Mr. F) also opposed to this day for the reason which has been dwelt upon, for another purpose by the gentleman from Luzerne, (Mr. Woodward) and others who have spoken in this debate; namely, that this question of the adoption or rejection of the amendmants should be regarded as a secondary question--that you must blend it with all those political and local questions which belong to the October elections, or, that if you do not so, the people will not turn out to give their votes--thus showing that the question of amendments is regarded by the gentlemen themselves as a subordinate matter that will be merged in the October elections; and thus all those local and factitious influences which can be brought to bear in October, must influeuce the fate which awaits these amendments-this new form of government-this solemn question which touches the permanent interest of every man, woman and child in this commonwealth.

If it is true, that the people will come to the polls for the purpose of contesting the election of members of assembly, members of congress and county commissioners, but that they will stay away from an election on the amendments to the constitutton, it furnishes evidence that the fate of those amendments is to be decided by extraneous influences which ought not to bear upon them.

Sir, it is a solemn affair to change the organic law of the land, and I desire that the action of the people in every thing that relates to such a change should be influenced by those considerations which do enter, and must enter into our elections in October. For my own part, 1 do not believe that the people will act triflingly in this matter-that they will stay at home when these questions are propounded for their final action.

Whether the amendments which we have made are, or are not, ultimately to become a part of our form of government, I say, I do not believe that the people will stay at home on so solemn an occasion. I think it is paying but a poor compliment to the intelligence and patriotism of the people of this commonwealth, to assume or suppose that they will not attend to this matter.

Is it not better that these amendments should be considered alone?that the action of the people should be had upon them uninfluenced by those other factitious considerations pressed upon them by political par tizans, and which may be adverse to their best interests? Will not the people understand these questions, if they should be put to them in the month of June? I say they will--and I would even fix an earlier day—say, in the month of May.

Wilthey not, I again ask, understand the subject by that time? And why not? All these amendinents have been before them, and gentlemen will recollect that we have been told again and again in the course of the deliberations of this body, that the public mind had already been settled down upon them—and that the people had sent us here only that we might register their will, so fully and decidedly had that will been made known. So far as concerns all the questions which have been before this conventi in relation to executive patronage, I have no doubt that the people will be as ready to act upon them in three days as they would be in so many years. As to other matters they may, to be sure, require a little more consideration; but even they might as well be considered and acted upon by the month of June as deferred until the second Tuesday of October. a season of leisure; the labors of the summer are not upon the people. They will then act dispassionately with a single view to the questions before them, and not with a view to other questions, taking the foreground, and claiming the most prominent place in their attention.

June is

The newspapers will be alive to the subject; and who doubts that the few amendments which we have made to the constitution-few in number and small in space-will be known to the people through the papers, and that the people will be prepared in the spring to act more dispassionately and with a more single mind, than at the election of October? Look at the influences which are brought to bear upon that election! Before that time, it will in all probability be seen who is likely to be the most successful candidate for the governor's chair, upon which side victory in clines. I say, it will be pretty well understood: and, mark me, the party that is to succeed will not have a special affection for these amendments, whilst the party that is to fail will become the champion of them-both being influenced by considerations which ought not to weigh a feather in the final disposition of the amendments. The strongest party, whichever that may be, is under great temptation to throw down your amendments into the arena of political strife-the very last arena into which they ought to be thrown.

Now. if you fix a day in June, as is proposed by the report of the majority of the committee, the election will take place before the strength of either party is inade known-before the country is agitated from one end to the other--before streams of libel shall begin to flow and accrimonious feelings shall begin to sway the minds of the voters. You have all opportunity for a fair and dispassionate vote. But if you defer the settlement of the question until the second Tuesday of October, neither party will be satisfied-the people themselves will not be satisfied.

These, Mr. President, are the reasons which weigh with me, and which present themselves so strong to my mind as to induce me to vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne. I can not givo