The offices, would be divided, however contemptible they might be. One candidate would say to a man who had promised to vote for another, “divide your vote-vote for me for this office, and for your friend for that". The Legislature should have the power to arrange the offices, and no individual member would have influence enough to change the law. An arrangement would be effected, by a general law, which would give a good deal of stability to the system. No Legislature could change the law, unless the change was agreed to, by the people, and no one would try to get it done, against the sense of the people. Remonstrances, and petitions, would assail him at every step. It would be better to leave it to the Legislature, and so get rid of the difficulty. If the gentleman wished to prevent incessant changes, he should leave it to the power of the Legislature. He had no mistrust of the people, but he believed the people themselves, would like best, to have a general law. They would prefer, that the Le gislature should designate what elections should be held for particular offices, than to be called out to vote in a manner which was not regulated by a general law.

Mr. DARLINGTON, of Chester, said that he could not see with the gentleman from Luzerne (Mr. WOODWARD) the propriety of making any change in the amendment of the gentleman from Montgomery, although he was in favor of giving the people all the power they could conveniently exercise. He conceived that the exercise of this power, in the manner proposed, would not be satisfactory to them. He entertained the same opinion as the gentleman from Montgomery, that the Legislature should point out the number of persons who should hold offices, how many he should hold, &c. The objection urged by the gentleman from Luzerne, did not appear to him (Mr. D.) to be sound-that the Legislature might be influenced by members from the district about which they might be legislating. Now, it did not necessarily follow, that the Legislature would act on the information of members only. They could have information brought before them by petition, and act upon the matter as they did in all cases of a like character, and with strict impartiality. He could not see any objection against giving to the Legislature the power of regulating the manner in which these offices were to be filled. The inevitable consequence of giving to the people the election of their officers, would be, that they would act without understanding each other, and would elect as many officers as there are offices, and there might probably be, as observed by the gentleman from Franklin, as many as fifteen candidates for each office. It was not likely, too, that men so competent to fill them would be elected. In order to obtain men of character, capable of transacting the duties he would be called upon to perform, the offices must be so divided, as to make them worth holding. In the county of Philadelphia, they might be better separate; but even in the larger counties some of them would not even afford a living to the officer. In the county of Chester, the prothonotary, register and recorder, could be singly filled; but the clerk of the court of Oyer and Terminer, clerk of the Orphans' court, and clerk of court of Common Pleas, could not be, for no man could make a living. An individual would not give up his business to take office, as he would not be able to maintain his family. Now, if gentlemen wished to subserve the wishes of the people, they must so regulate these offices that

Ser 2

The gentleman from Chester (Mr. DARLINGTON) has told us, that the Pople could not understand each other. Why, sir, is this business so omplex that the people cannot manage it without the aid of legislative machinery? The gentleman has failed to point out the difficulty, and aving failed to do so, it is fair to presume that there is none. Under the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Luzerne, if the annual income of two att ched offices increased largely, the people themselves could detach them by a very simple operation or if the annual income of a single olice decreased considerably, they might, by the same simple operation, attach it to another, and thus regulate the matter as they, from time to time, think proper: but as the matter at present stands, they must petition the Legislature, from time to time, to effect these objects. For these reasons, as well as others that might be given, I shall vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne.

Mr. FORWARD, of Allegheny, said, that he rose to ask a question, and make a remark or two. There were five offices in a county to be filled, besides the Clerk of the Court of Oyer and Terminer, which was too small to be held separate. While the amendment of the gentleman from Montgomery would leave to the Legislature the regulation of the number of offices that might be held by one individual, the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne provides, that an individual might hold two or more offices at the same time. [Mr. WOODWARD (in an under tone,) tht is the election of those officers once in three years.] Yes, that is it. Well, here was a difficulty. At the first election, they were given to five different incumbents, and at the expiration of a year. one of those incumbents died. A new election took place, and the officer elected had held it three years under the Constitution, and at the end of that time, there would be four offices vacant, and the fifth would be disposed of. Before this election, another office became vacant; the late incumbent having held it three years. So that, at length, by death, resignation, or removal, three years, only one office was filled. Now, what, he would ask, was to be done? An election could not take place, for the office was filled.And, thus, there was an end of the whole theory of the gentleman from Luzerne. He (Mr. F.) objected to the principle also, and contended that it was necessary that something like a general rule should be established by the Legislature. The Legislature may be just as well informed with respect to the qualifications of the different candidates, and the distribution of these offices. The amount of business in each county could be known, and a decision could be made accordingly. It would be necessary to look to what was done the previous year, as to the number of suits that were brought the indictments framed, and cases in the Orphans' Court. It was easy enough to obtain all this information. So, in relation to the Recorder's Court, and Register's office.

It was expedient that some general rule should be established, and it was as easy to regulate the matter by the Legislature, as by the people. The Legislature could inform themselves as easily as the people of the county could, as to the number of suits in the different courts, and the amount of business to be done by each officer. They could then graduate the labor to the business in each office. The Legislature would not be so apt as the people to act on shear local and party grounds. The regulation, too, would stand on permanent principles, and not be left to the shuffling and

man from Luzerne, seemed to think that the Legislature might exercise 8 discretionary power to the prejudice of the people, and in opposition to their interest, and therefore he would not trust them with this regulation. He (Mr. DARLINGTON) entertained no such distrust of that body. He believed, that the gentleman on a former occasion, was among those of his political friends, who went in favor of vesting the Legislature with discretionary power in regard to the creation of offices. [Here Mr. WOODWARD signified his dissent.] The gentleman shakes his head. He (Mr. D.) was certainly under that impression. However, be that as it may, he could not agree with the gentleman, for he had no doubt the Legislature would act with a due regard to the wishes of the people. He was, therefore in favor of retaining the clause as it is.

Mr. REIGART, of Lancaster, said Mr. Chairman: It seems to be conceded by all, that we will take from the Governor the appointment of the county officers, and give it to the people, to whom it legitimately belongs. But the question arises, how are we to give it? As I at present view this matter, if we give the power to the people, let them have it, not in part or parcels, but wholly and entirely; they are perfectly competent to elect their officers, and they are just as competent to say how those offices shall be filled, and by whom; whether some of these offices shall be attached to each other and filled by the same persons, or whether they shall be detached from each other and filled by different persons. The amendment proposed by the gentleman from Luzerne (Mr. WOODWARD) leaves it to the people, while the other proposes to leave it to the Legislature, to say how these offices shall be filled, what offices shall be attached to each other, and what offices shall be kept separate and how they shall be filled. As it seems to me, sir, the objections to leaving this matter to the Legislature are numerous. In all local matters, the member or members from the particular district will be alone consulted, and they will arrange this matter as may best suit their own individual views; so that in the end, one, or two, or five men, will arrange for the people what they can do for themselves. Besides, there are many and great objections to leave any thing to the Legislature, as to carrying out this favorite constitutional measure, which the people think they can do better themselves, and which they can do better themselves. What, sir, will be the practical operation of this measure? It is well known that the people of the different counties in the State once in every year, at least, send delegates, for political purposes, to a county convention, one or two for each township. These gentlemen, selected for their intelligence or some other good quality, are most generally public men, who have the means of knowing the annual value of every county office, the amount of the annual income, &c. If gentlemen concede this, and it has not been denied, will they say that the people are not as good judges of their own interest as the Legislature are? But the gentleman from Franklin (Mr. DUNLOP) has told us, that it would beget confusion among the candidates for the different offices-that a man may refuse to vote for a particular candidate for register, when he would be willing to support him for recorder. For myself, sir, I cannot perceive the force of this argument, as the same confusion must also arise should the details already mentioned be left to the Legislature. This confusion might arise among volunteer candidates, but not among regularly nomina

The gentleman from Chester (Mr. DARLINGTON) has told us, that the people could not understand each other. Why, sir, is this business so complex that the people cannot manage it without the aid of legislative machinery? The gentleman has failed to point out the difficulty, and having failed to do so, it is fair to presume that there is none. Under the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Luzerne, if the annual income of two att ched offices increased largely, the people themselves could detach them by a very simple operation or if the annual income of a single office decreased considerably, they might, by the same simple operation, attach it to another, and thus regulate the matter as they, from time to time, think proper: but as the matter at present stands, they must petition the Legislature, from time to time, to effect these objects. For these reasons, as well as others that might be given, I shall vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne.

Mr. FORWARD, of Allegheny, said, that he rose to ask a question, and make a remark or two. There were five offices in a county to be filled, besides the Clerk of the Court of Oyer and Terminer, which was too small to be held separate. While the amendment of the gentleman from Montgomery would leave to the Legislature the regulation of the number of offices that might be held by one individual, the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne provides, that an individual might hold two or more offices at the same time. [Mr. WOODWARD (in an under tone,) that is the election of those officers once in three years.] Yes, that is it. Well, here was a difficulty. At the first election, they were given to five different incumbents, and at the expiration of a year. one of those incumbents died. A new election took place, and the officer elected had held it three years under the Constitution, and at the end of that time, there would be four offices vacant, and the fifth would be disposed of. Before this election, another office became vacant; the late incumbent having held it three years. So that, at length, by death, resignation, or removal, at the end of three years, only one office was filled. Now, what, he would ask, was to be done? An election could not take place, for the office was filled.And, thus, there was an end of the whole theory of the gentleman from Luzerne. He (Mr. F.) objected to the principle also, and contended that it was necessary that something like a general rule should be established by the Legislature. The Legislature may be just as well informed with. respect to the qualifications of the different candidates, and the distribution of these offices. The amount of business in each county could be known, and a decision could be made accordingly. It would be necessary to look to what was done the previous year, as to the number of suits that were brought the indictments framed, and cases in the Orphans' Court. It was easy enough to obtain all this information. So, in relation to the Recorder's Court, and Register's office.

It was expedient that some general rule should be established, and it was as easy to regulate the matter by the Legislature, as by the people. The Legislature could inform themselves as easily as the people of the county could, as to the number of suits in the different courts, and the amount of business to be done by each officer. They could then graduate the labor to the business in each office. The Legislature would not be so apt as the people to act on shear local and party grounds. The regulation, too, would stand on permanent principles, and not be left to the shuffling and