amongst his constituents? He (Mr. Price) might be taking a very impolitic ground to assume this position; but he felt assured it was to the interest of this country, at the present period, to gather all the means within her reach for revenue. It has been remarked that this is a rich country; that the people are able to pay $300,000 without resorting to a system of this kind for support; but he could tell the gentleman when they fixed a heavy tax upon the people they would find greater difficulty in collecting it than they imagined. He believed there was no people in the world who could bear taxation with more difficulty at this time than the people of California. The present state of the country forbids the collection of taxes. The people are a moving, floating population. You see them, but you cannot find them. Three hundred thousand dollars a year would be a very considerable sum in our treasury. He desired to send the Constitution to the people of this country in its most simple form; he wished it to go forth unembarrassed by onerous restrictions. Let the people judge for themselves, and pass such laws as circumstances may require.

Mr. HALLECK agreed with the gentleman from San Francisco, (Mr. Price,) as to the propriety of permitting the people to legislate for themselves; but at the same time the object of this Convention is to limit the powers of the Legislature; and it appeared to him that this very clause fixes a very important limit upon those powers. We may be a gambling community, but let us not in this Constitution create a gambling State. If money is necessary for the support of the State government, let us not raise it by means which even the gentleman himself, (Mr. Price) admits to be immoral. In nearly all the new Constitutions you will find this clause. It was not contained in the old Constitutions, but in most cases where they have been amended it has been introduced. In the old Constitution of New York, to which reference has been made in the course of debate, no prohibition was inserted. Many gentlemen present would remember the famous case of Yates and McIntyre, which involved not only individuals of the State in ruin, but was the occasion of serious embarrassment to the State government itself. The result so clearly established the evils of the lottery system, that the Convention of New York, in 1846, inserted a clause in the very first article of the new Constitution, (see Sec. 10.) prohibiting lotteries and the sale of lottery tickets. It appeared to him (Mr. Halleck) that this prohibition was one of the best that could be inserted in the article limiting the powers of the Legislature.

Mr. MOORE said he had received no instructions from his constituents directing him to prescribe the particular amusements at which they should pass their time; when they should go to bed, or when they should get up. He came here to lay down the broad and general principles of religious freedom.

Mr. DIMMICK agreed with the gentleman, (Mr. Moore,) that this Convention met here for the purpose of making a Constitution on the broad principles of religious freedom, but he had yet to learn that the exclusion of a clause which pro hibits gambling is religious freedom. It might be contended that gambling is religious freedom, inasmuch as it takes the largest possible liberties known in any community where religion exists; but it would require a very free interpretation of the gentleman's remarks to bring the practice of gambling within the ordinary bounds of religion. He trusted it would be a long time before he became a moral man, entitled to membership in any church, by reason of his proficiency in the art of gambling. It was a new theory of morals, which he thought should be omitted in this Constitution. The gentleman from San Francisco, (Mr. Price,) proclaimed this a gambling community. He (Mr. Dimmick) was not ready to accept the remark as applicable to his constituents. He trusted such a thing could not be said of all the districts of California, though it might be appropriate as applied to the district which the gentleman represented, and perhaps some other districts. It might possibly be expedient to license gambling in certain parts of the country, but not lotteries. Other modes, such as have always been customary in the country, might be sanctioned. But, for his own part, he preferred that gambling of

every description should be prohibited. Whatever might have been usual in other Constitutions, it was time for this Convention to present to the people of California a Constitution which would prohibit any injurious or immoral practice. Gentle men assert that we are not here to make laws. He would ask are we not here to make a Constitution-the strongest law known under our system of government. That Constitution only requires the sanction of the people to become the funda mental law of the country. Other laws, passed by the Legislature, will be subservient to it. He trusted the new State, which was to occupy so prominent a position in this confederacy, would not, for her own credit, adopt an immoral system of taxation as a source of revenue. The best policy for governments, as well as individuals, is a strict adherence to legitimate and honorable means of support. Whatever temporary benefit may be derived from a contrary policy, the evils of a departure from this great principle are certain to be felt sooner or later. In the case of governments, the inevitable consequences are, an extravagant and reckless system of legislation; an undue spirit of speculation, and a general derange. ment of the permanent interests of the State. With individuals, it encourages habits of idleness, and a distaste for those industrial pursuits best calulated to promote the weath and prosperity of the mass. The question of revenue is of very trifling importance, compared with the deep and lasting injury which institu tions of this kind must inflict upon the community. The lottery system is the same as all other gambling-a system of cheatery. The chances are against the purchaser of the ticket-otherwise the institution could not be sustained. All the revenue is obtained from these chances, which are against the buyer. Shall this State, which is to introduce our great republican principles of government to the nations of the Pacific, derive its means of support from the ruin of individuals? Shall the State of California give its sanction to an institution which can only be sustained by producing degradation, poverty, and crime? He trusted not. He sincerely hoped this prohibition would be incorporated in the Constitution. He appealed to the good judgment of this House, forever to prohibit the Legislature from adopting a measure so injurious in its tendency; so degrading to the honor of a republican State; so destructive of the best interests of the people, both in their social and political relations; and so universally condemned at this period by the deliberate judgment of the American people.

The question was then taken on the 27th Section as reported by the Committee, and it was adopted.

The 28th and 29th Sections were then passed without debate, as follows:

28. The enumeration of the inhabitants of this State shall be taken under the direction of the Legislature in the years one thousand eight hundred and fifty two, and one thousand eight hundred and fifty five, and at the end of every ten years thereafter; and these enumerations, together with the census that may be taken under the direction of the Congress of the United States in the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty, and every subsequent ten years, shall serve as the basis of representation in both Houses of the Legislature.

29. The number of Senators and members of Assembly at the first session holden after the enumerations herein provided are made, be fixed by the Legislature, and apportioned among the several counties and districts to be established by law, according to the number of white inhabitants. The number of members of Assembly shall not be less than twenty-four nor more than thirty-six, until the number of inhabitants in this State shall amount to one hundred thousand; and after that period at such ratio that the whole number of members of Assembly shall never be less than thirty nor more than eighty.

The 30th Section reported, being under consideration, as follows:

30. When a Congressional, Senatorial, or Assembly district shall be composed of two or more counties, it shall not be separated by any county belonging to another district; and no county shall be divided in forming a Congressional, Senatorial, or Assembly district.

Mr. I RICE inquired of the Chairman of the Committee, (Mr. Norton) where this section came from.

Mr. NORTON said it came from the Select Committee on the Constitution.

Mr. PRICE inquired if the Chairman of the Committee assumed to himself, as Chairman, the authorship? He would like to know whether the section could be found in any of the Constitutions, and if so, in what Constitution?

Mr. HALLECK stated that it was from the Constitution of Iowa.

Mr. PRICE could not see the use of encumbering the Constitution of California with sections of this kind. If there was no Legislature ever going to be formed, it might be very well to provide for the districting of the counties; but what this House had to do with it, he could not perceive. He moved, therefore, to strike

the section out.

Mr. SEMPLE called the gentleman's attention to a system known as gerrymander. He was in favor of the ing in the States, and explained the effects of that system. section; he considered it a necessary provision in the Constitution to provide against political frauds of this kind, and if there never had been such a provision reported before, he thought the Committee would deserve credit for originating so excellent a provision.

The question was then taken, and the section was adopted.

On motion, the Committee rose, reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.

On motion, the House adjourned to 10 o'clock, A. M., to-morrow.

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1849.

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment.

Prayer by Rev. Senor Antonio Ramirez.

Journal of yesterday read and approved.

Mr. BOTTS, from the Select Committee to whom was submitted the subject of the proper mode of paying the expenses of the Convention, and the proper per diem, or other allowance, of its officers, made a report in writing, accompanied by certain correspondence which had taken place between the Committee and Brevet Brigadier General Riley, Governor of California, in which General Riley stated that he would pay, so far as the means in his possession would permit, the necessary expenses of the Convention; and submitting a communication address. ed by him to General Persifer Smith, containing a statement of the manner in which this fund was collected; together with a minority report from the same committee; which were ordered to lie on the table for further consideration.

Mr. ORD moved that forty-three copies of the report, not including the corres pondence, be prepared for the use of the Convention. The motion was decided in the negative.

On motion of Mr. SHERWOOD, it was ordered that twenty copies of the report, without the correspondence, be prepared for the use of the Convention.

A motion to prepare copies of the correspondence for the use of the Convention. was decided in the negative.

Mr. GWIN moved to reconsider the vote by which twenty copies of the report, without the correspondence, had been ordered to be furnished. The motion was decided in the negative.

On motion, the Convention adjourned to 3 o'clock, P. M. to-morrow.

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1849.

The journal of yesterday was read and approved.

Mr. GWIN moved to take up the report of the Committee of the Whole on the bill of rights, with a view to action on the amendments.

At the suggestion of Mr. SHANNON, Mr. GWIN withdrew his motion.

Mr. CARILLO rose to address the Convention, and the Interpreter and Interpre ter's Clerk being absent, Mr. Foster, a member from Los Angelos, was requested to interpret the remarks of Mr. C.

Mr. CARILLO complained of incompetency and disrespectful language on the part of the Interpreter's Clerk-whereupon

Mr. Borts moved the following:

Resolved, That on the complaint of Mr. Carillo, a member of this House, of indignity offered to him, in his seat, by the Interpreter's Clerk, the said Clerk be removed.

The resolution was adopted.

On motion of Mr. HOPPE, Judge White was requested to act, temporarily, as Assistant Interpreter to the Convention.

On motion of Mr. SHANNON, the report of the Finance Commitee was taken up, viz:

Report of the minority of the Committee of five on the payment of the expenses of the Convention, and the per diem or other allowance of its officers:

The Committee, to whom was referred the subject of the proper mode to be adopted to pay the expenses of the Convention, and who were directed to report the proper per diem or other allowance of its officers, have had the same under consideration and beg leave to report :

That the officers of this Convention are entitled to a per diem allowance, as follows:

Secretary, $28 00; Assistant Secretary, $23 00; Sergeant-at-Arms, $22 00; Copying Clerks, $18 00; Doorkeeper, $12 00; Page, $1 00; Reporter, $50 00; Chaplain, $16 00; Interpreter, $24 00; Interpreter's Clerk, $21 00.

And the Committee further report that, in the opinion of your Committee, the most feasible and proper mode of paying the expenses of the Convention is in the schedule to provide that the first Legislature that meets under this Constitution shall make early provision for it.

Mr. HALLECK moved that the report be recommitted, with instructions to report the daily pay of the Secretary and Translator at $16, and of the other officers of the Convention in proportion.

Mr. BOTTS was opposed to the resolution. He thought it would only produce delay. He could not, for his own part, come to a correct conclusion as to what ought to be the per diem allowance of these officers, until he knew the source from whence their pay was to come, and the time at which it was to be paid. He thought it exceedingly important that that part of the report should be taken up first. The purpose of the minority report was to decide this question at once, so that there would be some ground to proceed upon in fixing the compensation of the officers. It was unnecessary to require the Committee to report again. The two reports fixed the same rate of pay; they were exactly similar in that respect. They arrived at this conclusion in the following manner. the amount which he thought proper. The aggregate salary for each officer was Each member put down written down, and divided by five-the number of members composing the Committee. The amount thus arrived at was adopted. He did not believe that when it was taken into consideration the manner in which labor is paid for in California, though the amount seemed very large, that it would be found extravagant, or at all out of proportion. He had enquired among merchants who employ clerks in San Francisco, and he found that this Convention was giving, at the rates fixed in the report, little more to a temporary Secretary or clerk, who was employed only for a few weeks, than was paid in San Francisco to clerks who were employed by the year. The Committee were of opinion that the State was entitled to be served with as good talent as any merchant. It was in consideration of these facts that the Committee went so far beyond the proposition of the gentleman from Monterey, (Mr. Halleck.) In justice to these gentlemen he thought the people of California should be required to pay them as liberally as they would be paid by private individuals. The Convention had no right to draw upon the patriotism of its offi. cers; gentlemen might draw upon their own patriotism if they wished, and make their pay as low as they pleased; they could readily afford to do that when they had all the honor; but the case was different with the clerks, who had none of the honor and most of the labor.

Mr. JONES could not see what vast difference the lower estimate of the gentleman from Monterey, (Mr. Halleck) would make. It would not amount to more than a hundred dollars a day at the most. Moreover, he thought this body should

remember that these gentlemen are not residents of Monterey. They have sacri. ficed their prospects elsewhere, and lost time in coming here, and it would be but simple justice to pay them liberally.

Mr. SNYDER addressed the Committee as follows:

There are many matters touched upon in that and the accompanying correspondence, which deeply interest us; and particularly that portion which relates to the collection of customs in this country, and the manner in which the money so collected has been appropriated.

I ask the indulgence of this Convention to make a few remarks, which, I think, will not be inappropriate at this time, relative to the financial affairs of this country, and the treatment received from the Government of the United States.

The question of the expenses of this Convention, referred to in the report of the Committee, very naturally suggests that it is high time the Government of the United States should awaken to a sense of its duty towards the distant Territory of California.

There was a time, Mr. President, when emigration to this country was encouraged by a certain power, if not directly, indirectly.

I speak, sir, from personal knowledge in regard to this matter, for I was influenced by a gentleAye, sir, he is now in this very house. You well man in this country to come to California. know, sir, we were here but little over one short year before it was understood that despatches had arBe that as may, he returned after accomrived for Capt. Fremont, then on his way to Oregon. plishing half his journey, and in a very short time the American flag was seen floating within the I will not say, Mr. President, nor need I dwell upon the fact how the walls of this town. Government of the United States rewarded that young man-how he was placed between the jealous fire of older and more subtle officers.

I will only here assert that the action of the Home Government was, in his case, and in that of the country which he aided to annex to our confederation, in every respect consistent. They condemned the devoted soldier, and they no less showed their disregard of the rights of Americans, by a total refusal to provide means to pay the expenses incurred in bringing this territory into the line of our government limits.

Sir, California has been abused by the General Government. The citizens who cast themselves on the hostile shores of the Pacific, have been abused; and chief among them is that young man, who, perilling all for his country, stood shoulder to shoulder with the daring few who crossed the rocky ridges between this and the old States, to add another bright star to our already glorious Confederation.

How appropriate are the words of Byron to this case!

"He who ascends the mountain tops shall find
The loftiest peaks most wrapt in clouds and snow;
He who surpasses or subdues mankind,

Must look down upon the hate of those below;
Though high above the sun of glory glow,

And far beneath the earth and ocean spread,

Round him are icy rocks, and loudly blow,
Contending tempests on his naked head,

And thus reward the toils which to these summits led."

It is true, sir, that the great Government of the United States, of which we claim to be a part, should be rebuked by California! Not only the emigrants to their country, but the foreign residents and native Californians, have suffered from the negligence of the home Government. I do not make these remarks because I now love my country and her institutions less, but because I love And I glory in the privilege which althat freedom of speech guarantied by our forefathers more. lows the poorest man in our Republic to condemn his rulers when they act unjustly, as they have done toward California.

Judging from its acts, it would indeed seem, sir, that Congress believed the assertion of the representative from the little State of Delaware, that there "were not five men in this territory capable of forming a Government for it," and, of course, that there was, in his opinion, as few capable of judging how far their rights were outraged by neglect. This, sir, is the voice from little Delaware, uttered in that august assembly to which we, the forty members of this Convention, are about to submit a petition for admittance into the Union. We hope that the distinguished mouthpiece of little Delaware did not entirely exhaust the wisdom of his State or its representative, by this sage remark. However insulting it may be to this great territory and its inhabitants, we can have no quarrel with the little State of Delaware, for we have here a country which could put both the little State and its wisdom in its pocket, and forget in its vastness that such small things were there.

Now then, Mr. President, I will come to the matter which is more immediately connected with what I most wish to say.