Chicago Daily Tribune Newspaper, February 14, 1873, Page 3

G S —— i ] i 4 THE CHICAGO DAILY ''RIBUNE: FRIDAY, FE BRUARY 14, 1873 a9 o HORACE GREELEY'S WILL. The Westchester Surroga.ta Pro- nounces Mr, Gresley to Have Been Insane, The Will of 1872 Thrown Cut, and the TWill -of 1871 A%mitted to Probate. Proponent’s connsel signified his allow the will of 1871 to be edmitted to probate. To this course no objéction seemed to be mads, gn’t:‘ counsel fof contestanta appears, therefore, the part of ' the coniestants, codnsel for pro- g:::;:ltmrl for the infant announced their with- from tha contest, pursuant to the re- quest of those whom they ropresented, and willingness to Ve s thatno further testimony was neddssary on his side, and the mattor was in this omewhs{ anomalous condition, and withont ag:nment by the learned counsel, left to the to determine. In evéry case o testator is d to Lo gend. To this presumption is presume: usually stpersdded the tostimony of subscribing witnesses, generall, that they consider and disp non-experts, to the effect ¢ ered the testator to be of sound oging mind and memory. Here the sub- : . ; i ecribing witneases testified to a compliancs with From the New York Herald, Feb. 11 the usual formalities by a peanP whom Ffiey The long-contested Groeloy will case has at Jast been disposed of in whst may be cailed. an unexpected, if not & very summary, fashion. Sur- - yogate Coffin, of Westchester Ccunty. yesterday, $n the Court Eouse at White Plains, gave his written report to the reporters to be copied, and §tis given below verbatim. It reads very like a0 easay on the law of SuYrogate, and the Surro- geto takes it upon himself to pronounce Horace Greeley to have been insane and totally nnfit to makea will. The will of 1871 is admitted to mfle, and gives €10,000 to the Children's Aid iety, £2,000 to & lady in Mr. Greeley's family, anda farm in Pennsylvania to William - Barnes Greeler, a brother of deceased, besides some miscellaneons legaties. The rest of the proper- 1yis divided equally betwoen Ids and Gabrielle Greeley. The vanity of human greatness and publicity could have no better proof than the fact that there was not s single soul in the Court, yesterday, to hozr the opinion of the Sar- considered - OF S0UND AND DISPOSING MIND and memory, Thereupon, and without any re- gard to any facts and circumstances occurring at any other time or placo than the eccneof the execution, the proponent was held to have made out Krima Jfacie case, and the burden of own upon the cortestants to estab- ro0f Was if thoy could, that some or more of ish tho fact, these formalities had nof, been_complied with, or that the testator was incapable of makinga will by reason of unsoundness of mind. TL\? sought to assail its validity on the latter groun It is perhaps unnecessary to detail with any de- f‘[efl of minuteness the testimony which the con- 5 . stants adduced with A VIEW TO ESTABLISIING INSANTTY. Suffice it to say that tho intimato nssociates of tho decedent observed, at loest as early as the 1st of November, 1872, snd_conversation, mind which gave fhem much concern; that this condition continued down to the 9th day of No- 872, in_ his acts, appearanco, indications of aberration of rogats read excepting the two reporters and the | yember, the day of the date of the will in con- Gonaty Clerk, and 5o the roading was dispensed - WesteresTER CoUNTT—BURBOGATE'S CovRT.— | - In the matter of proving the last will and testa~ ment of Horacs Greeley, deceased. Robert 8. Hert for Ids L. Greeley, Emgonent of the will of Nov. 9,1878. George P. Nelson and Joseph H. Choate as counsel for gnardian ad lif. of Ga- troversy, on which day his condnct and language were of 80 marked and unusual a character as to eave no doubt of his insanity. The painful his- tory from this period down to about the 20th of November, when he was removed by his friends to the private asylum of Dr., Chosate, near Plesantville, is furnished by the testimony, and there it ceases. From that date to a few hours brislie 3. Greeley, infant heir-at-law and rext Emfi‘mfl!y to his death, on the 29th of Novem- of kin. Isainh J. Williams for contostant and ont of the will of Jan. 9, 1872. On the alleged will of 1872 being presented for ‘probate, Mcssrs. Samuel Sinclair, Charles Storrs, snd Richerd H. Manning, being the executors - pamed in an earlier alleged will of the decedent, bearing_ date Jan. 9, 1371, appeared and pro- ynmm;l? the latter will, and claumed that the will of WAB VOID FOB LACK OF TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY. The cases thus became consolidated, and the ‘question to be determined was, which was the lsst will and testament. The proponent of the {ast will and testament of 1872 caused the sub- ‘ecribing witneeses to that will to be examined et oste prima facie case for its estab- lishment. The contestants then proceeded with evidzos tending to show thet the decedent was | C not, at the time of its execation, 1 < CAPABLE OF MAKING A WILY, reason of unsoundnesa of mind. ‘At an early siage in the progress of the case, sud after releases had boen executed by all of the legatees 'and dovisees named in the will of , eave tho childron of the deceased and the Children's - Aid Bociety, and after Miss Greeley l;n&rexgcntad and d:hvexodq:flol 1::;’ sounger sister s conveyance of one e of all the property claimed to bave been isposed of by the will of 1872, the counsel of Greeley and thome of hor sister objected “hat the contestants of the latter will had no Tonger any statute in Conrt and no right to con- tost the same. I thiok, they wers - yromg. Our statutes (3, E. §.,. 5th Ed.), 1646, provides that the executor, dévise ar legates er, we have no direct evidence as to his bodily or mental condition. Upon this evidence, in connection with the peculiar provisions of the will in the light of the fact as alleged, that Gabriello was, if snything, his favorite, and the contrast between it and other msade by him, and the farther fact that in it he pominates no executor, when in 1871.he had urged upon his frie) renson why he should make a will that he conld thos appoint his own exccutor, would seem to be the grounds mpon which the contestant’s counsel relies wills therefore nd A. J. Johnson as the chief AS ESTABLISHING TESTAMENTARY INCAPA and so far as overcoming the festimony of the | subscribing witness as to again Probandi ugen the cast the onus yponent. In this I am in- ed to _elieve he ia right. To say the most of t, the evidence of tho subscribing witness is very meagro and ansatifadtory, when wo con- eidar the precedont facte. Hore was s who had manifested such palpable indications of unsettled reason 2s to cause his most cherished and intimate friends the liveliest anxiety, who waa, by their advice and under their direction, erson DOUBTLESS, REMOVED TO THE PRIVATE ASYLUM of & eminent phyeician, who made the. fhoat- ment of tho dissases of {ho brain & specialty, and who remained ander his treatment ntil the ESURSLEGE TRLo factum o o, and, indeed, durin Lat day, no word veas uitersd by = other than tho monysillsblos “No" in response 0 questions put o him, Sirat askod iF the pager waslis last will and testamont, e, it ‘would seem, -with his oyes tho dying man ell,” ¢Vog," and en named in any last will, or any person in. the { closed, =said ‘“No,” and on the guestion estate, may have the will proved.. Any interest, | being repeated in a Marr:&:d (gix;m he e ‘however slight and queer it seems, the bare pos- zibility of an interest is, sufficient to entitle the | I an Execntors, 284 ; Dayton's Surrogate, 158 and opened his_eyos_slightly, ooked at it, and maid *Yee.” When aske y Mr. Stuart if ho wonld have him, who was party 0se a test -, (Willi b; e DL, (e | s of hiamaist infimsta fosads, o5 be of oo 159) The executors named In the will of 1871 * BAVE CLEARLY BY STATUTE AN EXPRESS BIGHT 10 hivo thet will proved if they can cstablish the fact that it is the laat will, and they may right~ fally contend againt the validity of any alleged | Witnessit? " and the response was fully c 1 23 ity e e vort Doy of the hands theso circumstances may be consistent with the soundness of a mind—therefore sane. ;:;xuinly‘ it strikea me, are not inconsistent wi L3 once clearly established. The onus was upon the proponent to remove any doubts upon the subject, were it practicable to do so. “¥ubhéquent will ssan obstacle’ in thio way of ‘eetablishing the will under which thoy claim. Thelr interest in this xegord, is vory apparent *forif they can succeed_in establishing this will “Ibs title to the moveablo goods of the testator, _though in ever so many different and_distinci places, rcsts in him in possession, and did indeed 60 rcst presently npon the testators denth. . on Executors, 551.) The probate for letters testamentary is merely operative as the suthenticated ~evidence, and_mot at all as the foundation of the executor's title, for he derives &l his interest from the will itself,snd the property ot the decesed in him from the moment of tho 18, cit- i et wil, then o il world bo elashare. us the proponent and contestants are tryin, their alloged ritles, Bosides, 5 - THE CHILDREN'S AID BOCIETY in the” will of 1871, had not relessed or abandoned its Jegaey, and iad a right to expoct the executors to look after its interests.: At the dlose of the contest, and before exhausting the <evidencoon the part:of the contestants for al- Inged reasons, immaterial to the decision of the 7z, e comnsel {or proponsnt stated that undor -instructions from his client and aanc- hmsd'b{hh further effort to es- « fablish' the will ‘of 1872 was abandoned—that -they withdrew from the controversy: and he “intmated 2 willingness that the will of 1871 “thould be admitted to probate. The counsel for -fll&ufimflmfi il i a:w d.iuenc;mm this stion. - Thereupon_the executors pro- duepd” the usual formal proof of the execuginn the will of 1871'and applied for letters testa- :Tentary thereon. It seemed to be comsidered 2om of the conasel that thus the wil of “relating to it - had :this’ Conrt. But this, I apprehend, conld not _be-done in - this or any case. The statute says : er_gister, an “ YHAT EVERY SURROGATE SHALL CAREFULLY S R 5 10 mde of the due service of the pcg;h%n the Eu.xE Togete ehall cause the witnesses to be examined befors him, Al guch proofs and examinations ikl) be reduced to writing.—(Ib. 148, § 56.) 5 testimony, taken by sny Surrogate in rela- R toLhasmof of any will shall be reduced to ‘Wiiting;-and shell be entered by him in & proper be provided and preserved as s part of the books of his office.—(Ib. 167, § 75.) The -Burogate shall enter in his minutes the decision ¥hich he may.make concerning the sufficiency of -Ibs.proot or validity of any will which msy be -affered for Jrobste, and, if he find against it, Jnll-giate the ground Spn which the decision s made, Ze—(I0. 160, §65,) Tho Surrogate of tach county shall provide -and keep & book in c be- entered all minutes of proceed- hi" a.—(Th. 965, § 13, ,fl. 1) +1¥ill be seen that the Jangnage of these Nisions is imperative, and that the .JURROGATE HAS NO DISCRETION ON THE SUBJECT. 7oDbe testimony and proceedings cannot, there- ore, be withdrasn, but must remain, as part of &Bmogdnnd files of his office, and & decree shzade. "It would, however, be competent for _Mlparties, being adults, in such s case, ateny - Mg of the proceedings, to enter into a stipula- gb;n, 1o be entered on the minutes, to suthorize o Court to make & decree in pursuance of the hm of the stipulation. But here this difficulty regard toany such adjustment is encoun- g s 2 pro- PR i S ES a tint ellor ordered the testimony of an in- 4ken in the case under the objection of his furdian ad lifem to_be stricken out.) Perhaps furthest the Courts have gone in sanction- .act of the guardian ad hitem in declining HF| E £ of Levy-v. Levy, 3 Mad. Rep., 2 case- d.u‘ndyu—um n.lilnp lication here.h All | 3 cases, ag well as lementary works on % subject, indicate R, . - THE TENDER SOLICITUDE hich all the Courts guard and protect the of those whom the law considers as in- 18 of managing theirown affairs. The con- Ioxfhg such it may be considered, of the counsel oy 1, FTOPOREDt Epeaking for both children to A xogde will of 1671 to be admitted o probate be tantamount to an sdmission that the 4 R‘:fifitedm 1872 and propounded as the last 3 gppd testament of the decedent, purporting to s :h Irger interest in his entate to bis Chiliren ® will of 1871, is not in fact the laat mnl © e, 2i8ht -to bo refused probate. Thus 1 u:pmt:mh!e, 28 I have endeavored , to FFEE 2 £ B | E, F E"&"fi;lhq infant, it would seem to remain my %ihwnm_dex, however reluctantly, the case Sony 2 2erits, " and to decide upon ‘the’ testi- I g IN 80 PAR AS THE WILL OF 1872 ® omcemed, In the midat of the evidence on i) Et With respect to per lueid intervals, it is sufficient if the evidence duced in support of the will shall establish that the party that there Garrett Biblical their grand concerts on the evenin, prox. Professor Butterfield has ] o o3¢ In relation to th infant’s Iights) i £he | Ronoeha train on the Milwaukeo Division of the 5Bt | Gricago & Northwestern Railrond yesterday. have had no doubt of McNulty's guit. witneases, he said “No,” at which Mr. § was 80 evidently astonished that he repeated the question by asking: ' WILL YOU HAVE ME, JOHN B. STUART, again *‘ No." alight importance to the incident mfimg with_3Mr. Reld, while all of The; continned unsoundness, where it has' been 0 sbove scone, as- the evidence shows, oc- curred about an hour before the dissolution of :tie‘ decedent. There is no evidence as to where will was written, or a8 to the attendant cir- cumstances, or 08 to where it was found, or that the decedent had any agency whateyer in its production for formal execution, and I am not permitted ST the evidence of Dr. Choate, pert, under whose care and patient was for nine ‘days immediately his death, and who was in the house at the time of the so-called execution of the alleged will. TO HAVE THE DENEFIT OF the professional ex- in whose house the rior to Under the facts of the case, had the parties all been of age, the intendment would in consequence have been. strongly sgaizet the pro- ponent._On the other hand, infant party, principles of la¥ caunot be relaxed, nor unwarranted made in her favor. In these respects the law knows no distinction of sex or age. Soundness and perfectness of mind are held in law to be ABSOLUTELY REQUISITE IN THE MAXING OF WILLS, the health of the body merely not being regard- ed. If general insanity be prov to continue until & recovery be party alleging & Tostoration to sanity must prove ecause there is an. inferences from evidence be it ia presumed own ; and the allegation. (Grobell vs. Barr, 5 Barr, 441). raons of unsound mind Lavidg afflicted had intermissions, and 'WAS AN INTERMIBSION AT THE TIME of the act ; but the order of the proof and pre- sumption is thereby inverted, for whero insanity is established, then the party who wonld take advantage of the act, 2n reason, must_prove such sct %e;:e. ity of the decedent established, and no gufficient proof that at the time of the factum there was an interval of resson. Applying the above prin- ciples to this state of facts, it follows that the during an _interval of 40 have been s0 (Cartwright vs. Cartwright, 1 Phellim, 90 Tn thus instanco we have the general insan- 1 of 1872 must be refused probate. The will of 1871 having been daly proven, must therofore be sdmitted as the last wil Horace Greeley. will and testament of e EVANSTON MATTERS. The Hon. William. Parsons, M. P., of Great Britain, will lecture in Lyons Hall, under the auspices of the Fioneer Firs Company, on Batur- day ¢ Kichael Angelo” has been pronounced by those who heard it as the finest lecture of the season, and selfish considerations ongl;z to bring & crowded house to bear him on son.” evening. The lecture of Mr. Parsons on rgeStephen- Mrs. Livermore will inform the poopls of Ev- anston _and vicinity, who will take " trouble to'go to the Methodist knows about ‘‘Our Girls.” The Ladies’ College chuarch this evening, what she iciates the affair. 0 mianionnrf meeting at the chapel of the nstitute, last evening, was well an infant jsa y to these proceed- an i hg e ardian E‘l attended.-_Dr. M. C. Briggs made a very fervent E‘&m&fi:xmy axdian ad hlem or |- oross, Ho was followad By Androw J. Booth favarmbly the interosts of e prtant Cahis sy | W. K. Beans, and E. McClish, all of whom seemed to have the missionary spirit. Tellestablished role.—(uames v. J Pai 3 185 Buckles = v. James, Paige, | "'y, “onthly sociable of the Presbyterian sny. Siaphemson o %o 398 - Btephen- | Gurch will be hold this evening in the church u&xm v. Mooro, 4 Handford, ch. 87, the x‘:&?n. Strangers aro _especially invited to at~ The Mendelssohn Club are to give another of of the 4th e matter in accident occurred to the incoming bout midway between Winnetks and Evanston the wheels of the locomotive tender gmd apart 80 that they would not fit the gauge The expresa from Milwaukee came to the rescne, and brought both trains into_the city, reaching here about two hours behind time. the track. DR. WILMOT AND McNULTY. CrrLLICOTRE, TIL, Feb, 11, 1673, To the Editor of The Chicago Tribune: Sm: Ay attention has beon called 0 a para- graph in your paper of Saturdsy, the 8th inst., which i3 wholly untrue, and does me injustice. | The statement referred to is the following : Dr. Wilmot had an interview with AcNulty at half [ & ol withdraw the proceed- | pagt 10 o'cl 2 was told that he had sworn falsely K g to the will of 1872, and D et f¥itiaot dendod it and was called 8 Al impossible to accept or consider any such ., -He was spparently_ satisfied with that remark, that may hiave boen mude by or ga bo- | ad, MeNuity refasiag to forgive bim, o left Now, Mr. Editor, there is not a word of truth in that statement, 56 I was not in Pooria on the day of execution, and have not seen MeNaulty since the day of his trial. gy, "hch €ball Do admitted and which re- e * %kfi' doing 80, this embarrassing fact is | Please make the correction in your next issue Ly ed at he outsct,—that the testimony | and oblige, Ycars, A. Wirxor. £ide is incompléte and fragmentary P. S.—Since the post mortem and inquest, X WiLyor. MIRORITY REPRESENTATION. Address of the Hon., Joseph De- dill at Springfield; 0l Wednesdsy evoning, the Hon. Joseph Medill delivered an address on the subject of Minority Representation, in the Hall of the House of Representatives at Springfield, theaddress being, in part, & reply to the late speech of Senator Canfield in support of his proposed amdéndmerit to the Constitution striking out the minority representation clause. Mr. Medill, after having been introduced to the large sudicnce of members and citizens by the Hon. 8. M. Cullom, Speaker of the House, as the parson wha know more of the subject in question than nny other man in Ilinois, zddress- ed them as follows : e The public pross has notified the people that & movemont has beon inaugurated in the Scnate to abolish Jthe constitutional provision seearing proportional represcntation to the people. IT BHOULD NOT START IN TIE SENATE. ‘Why hes this movement its inception 1n_the Senate? That bodyis clected npon the single district plan,in which the plurality rales. If Sen- ators are satigfied with the systom under which they aro elected, why are ‘they not content therewith? It is bardly respectful .to the Houmse for the Senate to take the initiative in this matter, to meddlo with the composition of the other branch, and to attempt to break up its constituencies. The membera of the House have a right to feel that itis a ratuitous interferenco, for o movement of this d shonld commenco in tho Honse itself, whose members are manifestly the best judges of the workings of the new system, THE FOUSE HAS THE LARGEST CONSTITUENCY. The members of the House hold their scats by tho votes of 407,582 constituents. The -mem- berd of the Senate hold their seats by the votes of only 247,578 constituents. There are only 19,000 voters who exercised the franchise at the 1a8t election, unropresentod in the House by members of their own free choice, whereasthera are184,733voters unrepresented on the floor of tho Senate. The Honse, therofore, has 160,000 more constituenta behind them than the Senate. In three Senatorial Districts the members were elect- od only by pluralitios, & majority of the people having voted sagainst them. ~ Which, then, is i 1most democratic body, that which wopresents & part, or that which represents the whole? And would it be in the direction of democracy or re- ublican government to reduce the House to the limited represcotation of tho Senate? Do Sena- tors_ask for this change upon the ground that the House is an inferior body in political, moral, mental, educational, or legal qualifications? Do they ask it upon tho ground that the previons Houso consisted of & superior body of men to the present one, and in such marked degres as to require a constitutional amend- ment? Are the Senators, as a body, so vastly superior to those of the House in all qualifica- tions that make up & good legislator that it is dangerous longer to slect members of the latter upon the totality g!tem of representation? The members of the House would, perhaps, resent an impatation of this kind if avowed on the floor of the Senate, They would be hardly likely to confees to this disgraceful inferiority of ability, honesty, and fidelity to duty, and’ it wonld be difficult for the Benate to prove it. ‘The propoeition in the Senate is equivalent to an attempt to exclude from goats in the House of Representatives 51 members, who were sent there by the votes of 180,000 citizens, and dis- tribute them among 240,000 voters who have sent 102 members to the House. The majority party on tho floor of the House have ono repre- Bontative for every 2,400 votes that they cast, while the minority have only one representative for every 8,400 votes. they cast. & proposi- tion, then, 18 to take from those constituencies consisting of 8,400 the privilege of electing a represontative, and give it to_those constitu- encies of only 2,400 persons, and who are repro- sented now, which would be an outrage upon . free i(:vammsm and equal rights in every as- pect in which it can be viewed. WHO ASES ITS REPEAL ? Have the masses of the people petitioned the General Assembly or either branch for a return to the old system of diamuchning!ma ‘minority of the voters ? How many thousands of petitions Bave beon sent to the Senate, demanding the abolition of the free vote and proportional representation? I bave heard oF: Hone: The press has_reported none. No member of either House has stated that his constituents have asked for thischange. Was a return to the old system an issuse of the late political cam- aign ? Was a majority of either branch of the egislature elocted npon that issue? What - County or District Conventions;resolved in favor of areturn to that abandoned system? Didthe State Conventions of either of tho great par- ties? Did the primary caucuses 7 Have the . people, in any capacity, asked forit? No; no such demand has been made. THE COUBT HOUSE POLITICIANS. This movement in the Senate to change the organic law has bean initiated by a member of one branch, nninstructed, nunadvised, and unre- quested by {ho people.. Provisions of Conatitu- tions should not be changed for light reasons, nor unless there is a demand from the peopls themselves. 1\{1:5& is nl‘:r t.bgg!l:lot:fi?om :Vf'h this ¢€§- iracy sgainst popi iy 0 are the :.’;:euy :airil! A{‘L):utisflbd with the free vote and totality representation? Trace back the movement to its cause, to the sprins of action that roduces _ it, D¢ it will be found to have its source among the class known as County Court House politicians, and not among the masses of tho people. This clsss of men are jealous of every system which reduces their political influ- enco over the poople. They desire and seek absolute contrnlfn monos;)ly of power, and are bitterly opposed to any division of that power witn their political opponents. GIVE IT A FAIB TRIAT. The new eystem sbould have s fair trial. No man is qualitied to pronounce it a failure until after that fair trial. “Let it stand, eay ten years; elect five successive Houses under it, ln&; if at the end of that time it does not work well, if it is demonstrated to be a failure, or in- ferior to the old method, then it will be time enough fo submit an amendment for its abolition to the popular vote. This un- seemly haste to abolish-proportional reprosonta~ tion proves that its onemies fear it may becomo, by trial snd experience, too_popular for_over- throw, and lead to it extension to other depart- ments of Government. Thenew Constitution of Tllinois is of world-wide ronown. It is held up by thinkers of other States as the model Consti- tation for imitation and ad%ytinn ; and in man; of the chief States of the Union Constitution Conventions are beiug called, incited thereto by a demandon the part of the people of these Shte!wldofin system of Btate Government similar inall its essential featares to that of Illi- nois, which the i feature of the such wide attention, among reflecting and intel- ligent men, a8 the—to the politicians—darin, innovation of the free vote and . proportion: representation. To abolish it without trial would cause deep Tegret, sorrow, and indigna- tion smong all ‘}urogreamva minds, not un]g throughout the Union, but the world, and woul inflict & lasting stigma on the name and fame of Ilinois, for intelligonce, progression, and Imowledge of the science of free government. Lot us provo all things, ;and hold fast to that which is good. A LITTLE HISTORY. Back towards the Colonial period a heavy property qualification was imposed on suffrage, comparatively few of the people were al- Jowed to vote. The same objections to an ex- tension of the franchise were then urged that are now offered against the froe vote. Property _qualifications were gradually removed, first in one State, and then in anotler, but each effort toenlarge the suffrage and make it free was bitterly resisted and opposed by the ruling 50 much clique”_aroznd every Court’ House in the United Btates. Formerly in thia country members of Congress wers electod in each State on a genaral ticket. A majorityof a few hundred would elect the entire delegation of 5 Btate. Ten, fifteen, or twenty mombers would thus hulqnc.‘h_eir _mts‘ l: an inconsider- able majority. e voice of the minority wag completely stifled and practically disfranchised in the halls of Congress. This Eystera of in- Jjustice continued for some time, sup) rted by the Court Houso politicians by precisely the lina of argument now used sgainsi the representa- tion of minorities in Illinois. After a time, gome of the State Legislatures divided their States into single districts, for the purpose of iving the minority of the poople & voice in the f‘uu of Congress; but so pereistent were the local politicians sgainst the single - district system, that it became necessary. for. Con- s to interposa_ to force all the tates to break up their territory -into ‘eingle districts. This was done for &h;‘ purpose of iving the minority party in & some_repre~ Sntation 1o spots T Poreit happened 10° be -the localmajority. Thus was partial minorityrepre- sentation established, but it waa only represen- tation of minority parties, and not 'minority masses. THEORY OF OUR GOVERNMUNT. The theory of our Government is that of & Representative Republic. The fountsin of power, or absolute sovercignty, is veated in the citizen, in the voters, esch bsing equal to zay other, and each having an inherent and political zight of legialation, in his primary eapaoity. In s porfect Hepubi¢, {hd lectors wonld meet in a primary capacity, or what may be called s town meoting,” to chact, change, and amend laws, declare war or poace, or imposge, abolish, or reduce taxes, Bat in our country, covering ¥o vast an area, and embracin, such a 1‘“‘?’}“ o of Pf""‘e’uflifx’ system of rimary legislation is not practicable, "It world impracticable for the b:sl & million voters of .Illinois to come to the Stats Capitol in Spring- field, aud epend titonihs evers year in the busi- ness of legislation, thongh they have a perfect right to do so, if such be their will and desire, This physical dificulty is abolished by the sys- tem of selecting a limited numbor of agents to st for them in & legilative capacity. But suppose that all tho peoplo came together in person, would not the minority have a right to speak, vote, and protest, on every proposition ? Certainly. The minority wonld e reproscnted in propria personez. To oxclude them would be 2n'act of high-handed tyranny, that would most assuredly lead at onco fo com- motion and civil war. But if the mority have a democratic and perfect right to act in persoi in the primary assembly, in the enactment and emondment of all laws, have they not also an equelly good and perfect right to elect agents to represext them in tho law-making nssembly of deputies? It the majority have an undanisble right to send deputies, why have not the minor- ity an equal right in _proportion to their -strength? ~ On what _principles of equality and domocracy can they be .denied thatright? The majority cannot dispute their right £0 take pact in tho primary assembly ; how then can they dispute, or. refuse admission to thoir agents, {0 moet with the agents of the ma- jority? Ihave yetto helr:logiicnl answer to this point. It certainly is not to be found in Mr. eld’'s apo ech in the Senate. WIAT THE MAJORITY NOW GETS, Our schemo of proportionsl representation gives the majority Barty 67 per cent of. tho rop- rasentation in the House, and to the minority party only 83 per cent. The latter repre- gents 40 per cent of the whole vote, and the former only 60 per cent. Hence the majority has more than its equal rights now, and consequently has nothing of which it can justly complain, Experienco in this and other States covering a Beries of years, shows that all tho candidates in Legislative ane Congressional Districts roceiving the highest vote, gato betweon 52 and 60 per centof tho whole vote cast, and the minority candidates aggregate from 40 to 48 per cont of the votos cast, It is eaid, the majority should rule. That is true; but the minority should have an equal voice, man for man, and any block of voters, of 8ay, three thousand, should have a seat in the Asaembly, as well as lngeulhur block of voters of threo thonsand, that being about an averago constitnency on a basis of s Houss of 153 votes. DID THE MAJORITY FORMERLY RULE ? But does the majority rule under the old sys- tom? Tasyuo. It isa systemin which ho mmontg les the majority, because a plurality elocts the members, and _that plorality may not be equal even to one;third of the votes in the Btate. But even if it should be moro than half, yot on the floor of the House thus elected a majority controls all legislation, which is minor- ity rule. For example, the majority of tho votes on the floor of the Senate were electod by 130,000 votes. The remaining members wero elected by 8y 117,000, but thero were 185,000 votes cast for candidates not elected. Thus we have the :fliin-esunhfives of 140,000 voters dictating their t0 800,000 men ; 130 votes, ontho old system, thus control and overrule the will and wishes of 300 voters. Is thata system to be called majority represontation ? I claim thatits proper name ia’ pluralily monopoly and minority rule! A tyrannyis the dictation of one class to the oth- ers, Wherein, then, does this differ from a tyr- ;nqy, l?n v:lhzfil the mingréty d.i(;t‘:fie! to the ma- ori yranny, carried out fully, is slave in hich the rights of the ‘minorily aro over: ridden and crushed. _Proportional representation takes away no rights from the majority to which they are enti- tled. ~They still have complete control of legis- Iation, but their legialation is tempered by the arguments, protests, ressons, and smendments offered by the minority. Hence the laws passed under these circumstances are more acceptable to the whole people, more cheerfully obeyed, upbeldhknd defended than when imposed arbi- trarily by one portion upon the others, who were Voiceless in their formation. Itis in the Legialative Department.of Gov- ernment that the minority should be repro- sented. The making of law for the observance of all, should be partaken of by the whole peo- ple, but the' prevailing voice, -or_majority, is Tesponsible for its_execation. Therefors, in 2n executive or administrative office, created to carry into force and effect the lawas made by the General Assembly, those officers ehould re sent the wishes and will of the majority. broad and fandamental distinction between Iaw- making and- Isw-executing muat not be lost sight of, overlooked, or disregarded.- Our con- stitutional provision applies only to law-maki The majority party, or class of people, i have the absolute control over the Executive .officers. : LEGISLATION NOT DONE AT THE POLLS. But it 18 argued that Tegislative questions are settled at the polls and not in tha‘LAlll of rep- resentation. is mot true as a fact, except as to some vague propositions, some general outlines of legislation. The thousand details and particulars of bills must be considered and digested by the legislative body. Multitudes of measures are introduced into legislation that cannot be considered in detail at fhe hustings, but must bo entrusted to the agents selected b; tho pao&le to carry out their wishes, and witl whom they can communicate {rom dsy to day during the sessions of the Legislature. In logialation, a rule always prevails in _the formation of. Committees, to give the minority a Voice. If this rule is fonnded upon justice and right, why should not the same princirle apply in the selection of the representative? If only tho reprosentatives of tho majority or plurality should have seats in the House, and the vast bodies of minority be disfranchised and voice- logs, then, to carry ont that principle, the Com- mittees should be ‘composed exclustvely of men of one class of views, and the representatives on the floor of the other class of views should have no voice in those sub-bodies selected for the framing and preparing of legislation. SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES DO XOT REPRESENT ALL. But it is said that the members elected by the successful party or faction represent the wholo eople. By legal fiction or assumption, they o, but, as s matter of fact and truth, they do not. The legislator I voto against, and try to dofeat, cannot be said, truthfuily, to represent my wishes, interests, or opinions. (0 may differ from me in political views and 1dess of Government; in sympathies -and in interests. He may bo under the pay, control, or infiuence of corporations, riugs, or classes. He may want to impose mortgages, dobts, taxos andagresments upon my %puiy,lguinul which T protest.§l may believe 0 be a-weak, ignorant or venal man. He may be my personal enomy, and that of my frionds. . No social sympathy may exist between us. My candidate may ngree with me in all the matters of legislation, in social, political, and religious sympathies. ;Forty-nine per cent of the voters may think as I do, and ardently desire to defeat the candidate upheld by 51 per cent, and elect tho other. Now, if we are restricled to the absolute necessity of se- lecting one or the other of two, I admit that the candidate receiving the majority of votesis en- titled to theseat. Bat if we can practically obviste this difiiculty by enabling both those classes to bo fepresented, most assuredly it is more eatis- factory and more democratic to doso. It is mockery to say that the man I opposcd and tried to defeat, or who is thrust on me, represents me in any just sense, in enacting my wishes into laws, whon it is notorious that he does not, but goes exactly contrary to mywishes and interests, and was electod for the purpose of thwarting and defeating them, and, ' perhaps, of injuring m interests or business by his hostile vote an action in the Legislative body. El MINORITIES SELECT THE BEST MES. But it is said that the syatem of proportional Tepresentation weakens the responsibility that should exist betwecn the Ropresentative and the constituent. This not true, but if true in any degree, it is equally applicable to the old sys- tem. - innfld?!h’iflymgieummp has s, de- cided preponderance of party swrength,the caucus makes the choice of Be‘r‘eaanmh'nc. The mi- nority goes to the polls, -utterly hopeless of electing its candidates, and zoes through what practically is merely an idie form. But in dis- tricts where the people are pretty nearly evenly divided in sentimont upon State, general, or lo- cal guestions, thore it a struggle for sucesss un- der both systoms. Under the old system, it is a struggle to-obtain all the - Representatives; under the new, it is only a struggle to obtain,a majority of the representatives. - Consequentfy, tho responsibility is as great -in the oue casa'ias in the other, -with this additional advantage . jn behalf of the new over the-old, that the weaker constituencies :are enabled to select the meni of their choice certainly as fres from dictation.of caucus a8 the majority in districts where it has ‘a decided preponderance. ~And they -ore - more apt to select able, pare, and qualified legis- lators, because they arc the weaker party, ‘hav- ing -8 pride n being -strongly and ably repre- scnted, to makemp in brains what they lack in numbers. By experience, it will be found that members elécted by minority constituencies “ho pleases s reg: vill be superior as a whole to thdsé &lécted by the majority constituencies, in districts where partics are very unequally divided in their rela- tive strenzth. _ TRE UNREPRESENTED VOTERS. Theta were 185,000 votes cast for candidates for the Sensto at thé late election in valn. This vast body of men faled to elect & gifigle repre- sentative; and for what reason? Simply be: caugo Sbgy wero infer?eerscd throughout the State, and happoned to be in the local minority in each district. Now if these 185,000 voters had lived one portion of tho Stato by themselves, they could have elected enators and 66 members of the House. Why should their richta of représentation bs destrosed and annulled, sim- ply because they live thirdugliont theState rather than in a certain portion of the Stéic? Isthe democratic right of representation foundod upon geographical locality? Is it right thata man shonld be represented if he lives in one part of tha State, snd not represented if ho lives in the other? s itright .that heshonld Lavo more legislative influence by livitig n oue section than byliving in another? If thosa 165,(00 voters had lived in twenty-six districte of the State they wonld have constituted a majority in each, and elected iwonty-six_Scnators and soventy- eight membora of "tho Houso on the old plan, zlvmg thort ths control of both bodies of the eneral Assembly, cnd efiabling them to make | laws and dictate to the whole State: This is one of tho possibilities of fthe old system, which; by the application of the new; is removed. For, under the'new, men aro aqualt Iy and fairly represented wherever thoy may live, aud it .ia not necossary that they "shall be huddled toge!her in solid masses to have repre- sentation, but wherover they exceed one-quar- ter, and are less than one-halt of tho pooploof any vicinity, they can. obtain one-thid F the representatives, to which thoy are rightfully and equally entitled under any system of Domocrat- ic free Government. POSSIBILITIES OF THE OLD GOVERNMENT. To test the old system s little further, sup- pose that the peopls should divide into three great parties with strength es follows: Re- publican, 150,000 ; Democratic, 145,000 ; Liber- ol party, ' 155000; nd that this strength should be distribated proportionately throughout tho State, The result would be, that the “ Liberals” would elect 51 Senators, and 153 mombers of tho House, swoeping eve: district, carrying every member, and utterly dis: frmc\uaing, in the halls of the General Assem- Vly, the old parties, representing noarly 300,000 votes. This is one of the chances of the system of monopoly plusalits, 40 ardently upheld by its admirors. ~ Whereas, under tho proportional plan, this new party would control a ittle more than a third of each house and cach of the other arties would have the remaining two-thirds ivided betwoon them in proportion to their strength. Is this not the most oqui- table and democratic method of electiog under tho supposed case? Again, suppose that this new party only lived in but had a_majority in twenty-six Sonatorial Districts. They would elect twenty-six Senators and seventy-eight members of the House, notwithstanding they number less than one-quarter of the whole vote cast in the Stato. Eighty thousand voterswonld thas eloct twenty-six Sonators and seventy-eight members, while 370,000 Republican and Demo- cratic voters would ‘elect but twenty-five Sena~ tors and seventy-five members of the House. Thus, by only s plurality in one-half of the State, they would absolutely con the logis tion of the whole State. This isanother of the Zomtieu of the grab-all system of representa- on. g COUNTY REPRESENTATION IMPOSSIBLE. But Mr. Canfield asks for county representa- tion, and says that it brings the people more neatly home to the sourco of responsibiliy. The county syatem _is not practicable in single dis~ tricts, 38 ho asks for, on account of the enor- mous disparity in the populstion of counties. AMany of the counties of the State contain a 7ar smaller population than a single ward of the City of Chicago. Bome of them do not contain enough to constitute one-third of a constituency of a member of the Frenant House of Repre- sentatives. Others of them, as Cook, contain twenty-one full constituencies. If, then, wo were to give every county a repre- sentative, and ~ every other county ropre- sontation in proportion to its numbers, it would require a House of over 500 members, and, in the supposed case, thore would still bs great inequalities between counties, on account of unreprosented fractions, necessitating the adoption of a floater system, which, at best, is & make-shift to avoid the evil. d then see how the county system would work in the County of Cook. The provailing plurality, electing on a geaeral ticket, would send a solid delegation of soven Senators and twenty-one members of the House, though that plurality might not repre- went much more than 35 per cent of the votes of the people, and, if the peopls break into four parties, it might not represent much more than & quarter of the whole. This would be a ma- jority representation with a vengeance, And 1s it eafe for the remainder of the State. Wonld it promote healthy'legislation, to have one enormous county coming down every vear, in golid phalanx, represonting s special in- torest, elected and pledged to carry out that intorest, constituting a balance of power be- tween the other parties and factions of the House, and, in effect, dictating the legislation of the whole State? Cook Connty.does not ask for 80 extraordinary an advantage oyer the rural districts, and it is certainly not their interest to insist that she ahall have and exercise it. WHAT EACH COUNTY CAN DO NOW. Every county entitled to a separata Repre- eentativo under the old system, can obtain one now. If the district numbers three counties, as a great many of themn do, each county can havoe a Representative, if the people want it. there are personal reasons thot overcome the geographical ones, it is the busi- ness of constituencics to determine it for them- gelves. In s large number of other cases, two counties constitute a district, in each of which the majority party can have its representative, and the minority one can be taken alternately. In a number of other still larger counties they are entitled to three representatives. The stronger party can have two the weaker one. 1f there are three parties, each can have one; whereas, under the system proposed by Mr. Can~ field, tho stronger of the three factions would have them all, which would be minority rule and majority subjection. The great County of Cook, electing one-seventh of the legislative body, i8 broken up into such districts that mere party majorities or nscendancy are neutralized to the extent *hat they should be, and on all political questions, the county will exorcise fn tho Lalla of legislafion only just such & de- gree of power and influence 2s those parties ehould exercise. 8o that, from overy point of view. it is better, safer, more equal, more rightful, and mora democratic that the whole people ehonld be rep- resented by & general and uniform_system of proportional representation, than by the other system of grab-all, that leads to s0 many abnses, and so many dangerous contingencies of minor- ity rule. The new system always secures ms- jority rule; the old may, or may not. The new system alweys places on the floor of the Honse s, body of lafii;hmm with the whole mzss of the cople bebind them. The other eystem, at 8t, only places upon the floor & body of mem- bers representing a mere majority of the voters, leaving enormous masses unrepresents A WEAE OBJECTION, It was said that the now method of Vofing gave trouble tothe officers of election, au caused some dalay in computing the votes, and some additional expensein sdding them’ up; but this objection is of trifling consequence at best, and had better not bé brought forward by the Senator from Kane, as it_casts reflections upon the intelligence of the officers of elsction o that connty, for it cortainly cannot require any very great degree of oducation or mathe- ‘matical knowledge to know how to add up a'col- umn of votes, consisting of one. £wo, one and & half, or three, . Our system of free achools must have accomplished very little for the State if they have not produced & body of scholarahip and schiool masters equal o problem of so simple description. Perhaps the Senator only reflects his own mathematical deficiences, and mistake them for those of his constituents. THE RIGIITS OF THE VOTE. A _oterisa sovercign or inherent integer in the " law-making power of the Stats, and bas his rights as & voter, 88 well asa law-maker; the constitutional provision in queation de- rives no man of any privilege which ho had nn- er the old Constitution as to how he shall cast s vote for Representative. Mr. Canfleld is not obliged to camulate- his voto now; he 1 at per- fect liberty to give each of the three candidates in his district one vote, or he may scratch off ona name and vote for o, or erase two and vote for one, or he may reject them all from his ballot. He had these privileges under the old Constitu- tion ; he has them intact under the new. But the new Constitution has' removed ceriain arbi- trary and wrongfol limitations imposed on the rights of ‘the independent voter, and has eplarged his .freedom of action at the polls. He is now at liberty to cast his vote to sunit himself. He may distribute 1t among all _the candidates, or concentrato it on one, or di- vide it oqually among two, or give two parts of it to one aud the remainder to another, or he may distribute it ashe had a right to do under the old Constitution. He is now fres to vote as ards the distribution of his suf- frage. Hence it is called the *frco vote,” as contradistinguished from tho old arbitrary ro- stricted voto. What right hos the sgent or rep- rr<entative to restrict and_hamper the soverdign Yoter n the use of his su¥rago? Is the servant grester thian Lis master? Shall the cley dictato to the potter ? I cast my vote to eunit myself, as a sovereign voter; you csst your vote to sumit yourself.. It 18 now = your political privilcge, a8 it was maturally your right to do. You distribute your suffrageto suit voursclf. Whatright have T to interfore with the distribation of your suffrage ? It is enough for me, being only your equal, to mind my own business, and it is énough for you, being only my equal, to manage your own vote, and let me manage thine, If tho voter has rct a right to Qispose of bhis voto a3 he pleases, then tha right to vote is a force, and frce government by the people & myth, and the sooner we got to_fands- montal principles sud re-establish the right of the voer to Luve tho benefit, privilege, and un- hampsred right to exercise his functions.in the choico of & representative to make laws for him, the léattér it will bo for the sukte of free govern- ment. PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMEN: 'The proposed amendment to the existing Con- stitntion brs a double purposs, both in violation of tho true principles of republicanism and self- governitant: _First, it would deprive the minor- 1ty, and often thé msjority, of a represcutative voice in the making of l&ws which they are ex- pected to obey, mc‘}; in the impoaition of taxes ‘which they must pay. Becond, it would deprive tha yoters of the right to decide how they may confer thelr suifrages in selecting agenis to repreaent ther in framing laws and imposing taxes: . This schemd ebows distrust in the in- telligénoe of the le, in their capacity for self-government, in their ability toselact sgents to make laws. Ihavé mone: No trme demo- crat has any such distrust. The people muat be entrusted with this function, or the system of free government must be confessed to bo a fail- ure, sud given up. 2 If the voters of Tllinois found the exercise of the fres vote, soctred to them in the new Con- stitution, dangerous to popiler liberty and indi- vidual safoty or hgpinela, they would quickly, with one voice, demand ita abrogation. Thoy would be pouring in_letters, telegrams, and pe- titions by thousands; they would be holding mass-meetings and conventions, and passing | votes of inatruction and resolutions, all over the Rtate: But a3 nothing of the kind has becn done, 88 no movement of the sort has been in- sugurated, inz single precinct of onr broad Stato, it shows that the people are not alsrmed, not discontented, not afraid to oxercise their en- | larged rights of votiog and fopresentation ; that they are not opposed to the system of _totality representation and the freo ballot, and that it is only the professional politicians’ who rulo &t | the county seats, and “run” the politicsof their respective counties and enjoy the oftices, who are distarbed in spirit and apprehensivo of svil consoquences. They love that political machine bert whichfkeeps the people in leading- | trings, which séaures thie rule of king caucus, axd which deprives their political opponents of | all participation it the Government, and in the | framing of laws which all must obey, and in the | imposition of taxes to which all must contribute, They prefer that system which gives the offices to the brawling partisan, and they believe in the | doctrine of “to the victors belong the spoile.” | If they would restrict this doctrine to executive oftices, there would be little issue with them, Lut when they attempt to dsprive the voter of a voice in the making of the laws, it becomes Berious matter, as it isin direct conflict with the very genius of freedom and representative govern- | mont. It is very instructive to hear those Coun- ty Court House politicians descant on the free- dom of the people, and unctiously tell them that they are the fountans of power and honor, and that every man ia free, equal, and independent, and at the same time endeavor to tie up their bands with withes, as the Philistines did Samson, and to deprive them of their rightfal Yoice in the creation of laws. In m jndflent, the peo- ple will be slow to respond to_this demand to tear from the Constitution of Ilinois its bright- est jewel and most progressive principlo in the gcience of government. JOHN BRIGHT'S POSITION. Mr. Canfield %uolud at some length from John Bright's speech in_opposition to minority repre- eentation in the British Parliament. But it is necessary to give the reason for this opposition in order to understand it properly. It wasonly Droposed in the way of an amendmentto the original Reform bill, and_applied to a Tew great cities which were entitled each to three or four members of Pailisment. It appeared that those cities were, with one exception, ¢ Liberal” in politics, and, moreover, the system proposed was not the cumulative but the restrictive vote ; that is to say, that no elector should vote for more than two of the three or four members. John Dright did oppose that lim- ited npfi!icntian of the principle to & few cities. He took the ground that the object was to rob the Liberal party of ten or fiftecn mem- bers of Parliament, without compensation from the Tory constituencies. He said thatit was the l!mite% and not the free ballot, and that the voter could not camulate on any one of the can- didates, but was restricted to voting for two. Hence his serious and persistent opposition to it, for it was a fraud on the Libarals of Eng- Isnd. He insisted upon extending it to Lhe counties, and said he would be willing to accept it for Liberal constituencies, and for Tory con- atitnencies as well. But that the Lords wonld not permit. Mr. John Stuart Mill took tho ground that it was well to lose twelve or fifteen Liberal members by tho adoption of the Eystem applying _only as above stated, for the sake of securing & recognition of the principle of fotality repre- sentation, or the representation of minorities, he ng;rding it as sn entering wedge which, when driven home, would eventually apply to the whole Kingdom. Afr. }ill, at the same time as_energetically and strongly s Mr. Bright, pointed at the injuatice of this limited applica- tion of the principle. 3Ir. Canfield forgot to state those things in his speech, so that I now 2dd them by way of & rider to his remarks. PALLACY OF BESUBMISAION. 1t is alleged that proportional representation, ar the free ballot, was adopted by the people in ignomcb of its meaning and scope; that less than balf the voters went to the polls to ratify the new Constitution, and therefore this propo- sition should be resubmitted to tho people. Now the truth is, that they adopted it ith thei eyes open, and with a correct understanding of its purport and object. The subject had been discussed for three years by the leading press of the Btate; it was firet introduced into Congress in 1867, in a powerful report in it favor mado tothe Senate by Senators. Backalow, Wade, and five others. Ithas been discussed ever since in Congress. It was advocated by the leading papers of this State in 1868 and 1869, and ever since. It was advocated before the Convention of 1869 was elocted, 8s one of the princi- ples that should be incorporated into the now Constitution. and it was advocated and op- posed, argued pro and con. bgtween the time of the election of the Del%fi;tcs ‘and their meeting in Springfeld. It was discussed more or lesa throughout the seven or eight months that that body was in seasion, and when the Constitution was submitted to the people for ratificaticn, this proposition was separately submittod. It was actively and vigorously discussed throughout the State by ali the press and all the people who had any opinions to offer. It was voted upon, fairly, understandingly, and intelligently, and adoptod by & majority of nearly 30,000. Looking at the result in the various connties of the State, it is clear that if a full vote had been cast on tho question of ratification, the new system of pro- ortional representation would bave received ,000 instead of 30,000 majority. If there is any good reason for resubmitting this proposi- tion, there are equally g reasons for resubmitting the entire instrument. The ruleis, that those who donot attend elec- tions snd vote on_questiops, acquiesco in -the wishes of those whodo.. If aman or a princi- pleis not elected_bocause everybody does not oto, then the obligation of that rule would cause 18 to spend the larger ion of our time going to the ballot-box. e Judges of the upreme Court, holding the highest department in the Btate Government, are elected at a special election, at & period of the year when no other political considerations are before the people, and but a comparatively small number of vote3 are cast. Why not raise objection that because they were elected bya msjorityof the whola people, therefore their seatashould be contested, andthe mattor reeubmitted toanothervote. Thae absurdity of the proposition is so apparenton its faco, that every other argument on the subject is unneceseary. Bat if, after giving the new srstem a fall and fair tho people dislike it, they will manifest their "dislike, and thea the question can be resnbmitted to themon its naked merits. In conclusion, let us take no backward step in this great reform in the science of government. Let us not retrograde in the destruction of ignorance and monopoly. Let Ilinois continue to bear aloft in ad- vance of the column, electoral and representa- tive reform. It would be_ an indellible stain on her high reputation " for intelligente, Jprosress, and ideas, to return to the system which eho has 80 happily discarded. It would be a cowardly surrender of the rights of the masses to intrigu- ing politicians nnd partisan hacks, which the poople of Illinois must never permit. This sye- tem will prove by its works, and by its actual fruition,” that it is founded upon Tight, and upoh the true principles of government. It will force itself into the Con- stitution of every State in the Union, and eventnally into the Constitution of the Foderal Union; and the time will come, and mot fer dis- tant st that, whon all legielators will ba elocted upon the principle of proportional representa- tion by the freo ballot, and then men will won- der that for 50 many years they groped in dark- ness and permitted” the nrbitrary eystem of ‘monopoly rule of pluralities sg long to prevail, solong to intlict an injury dpon the body poli- tic, and 8o long to diafranchise vast mas3ea of {free citizens. SPECEAL NOTICES. New Life for the Languid. Porfect health is voucksafod to for. Probsbly niaety ‘poople oat of every hundred who call themsclvos healthy Bavo their “turns” of languor, exhaustion, depreesion of spirits, and bodils palz. At theso times a wineglasstal of Hostatter's Stamach Bitters 1s as rofreshing as **tho shadow of & rock inawewryland.” It invigarates and Tests the syatem and choers the mind. Tho effoct of the Bittersin cases of rervous debility, produced elther by undas physical excrtion, over:study, iatense Anxioty, ar any other cause, 1s wonderfally reviving and tuvigomating Yo fach, this heslthful vegetablo restorativo possessos medicinal propestios which eatitle it to the rauk of an article of primo necessity, and it should be kepton hand in every dwlling, and promptly taken as a remedy for all the minor atlments as well as for more serious complatnta. GAUT“IH LEA & PERRINS UN ' WORCESTERSHIRE SAUCE. uyors are csationed to atold the namerons Couater- gsred for sale b - Boy foltsand JOHN AMUSEMENTS. MoVICKER'S THEATRE, MAX MARETZEK. .DIRECTOR. Grand Itallan Opera! THIS EVENING, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 14, FAREWELL NIGHT, LE WNWOZZE DI FIGARO. (Marriage of Fizaro). 8 PRIMA DONNAS IN THE CAST. LUCCA, ¥ KELLOGG, 3 RIAMI,_ RONCOXI, AR AN UL, SCHORIELD. TO.ORROW-SATURDAY—GRAND FAREWELL MATINEF, (By Spacial Request), DMIGINON-. This Opers ereated a perfect farows on fts first repro- sentation here last Monday. PAULINE LUCCA (nor last appearsnce). CLARA LOUISE KELLOGS (herlnst appearance] BANZ, VIZZANI, JAMET, LYALL, DUBREUL. &c. Monday Next—EDWIN BOOTH as BRUTUS. Reserved Seats now for sal3. STAR LECTURE COURSE. THEQ. THOMASY UNBIVALLED ORCHESTRA SIXTY PERFORMERS, AS3ISTED BY SS ANNA MEMLIG, the Brilliant Planiet, and GEO. L. 0SGOOD, the Favarite Amosican Tenor, LEVIELLL, ' LYALL. Grand Concerts and 1 Grand Matinge, AMIOHIGAN.AV, BAPTIST CHUROE, Moadsy a3d IOk BARK *HONGHEGATIONAL CHURCH, . 18 and 19, s Catieraoon, Feb. 19, hasah. o Sest. Goaotts. om oach Side of tho rivor aroin the far Siac oo Thootherstramot. ) o e keta fc Concart for sale. v Halsigh and Magiscm bta. and 495 Madison 8t For v on, $1.00: Reserved Seats, 3. sshoar. AGARPENTER & SHELDOYN, Mansgers. MYERS' OPERA HOUSE, Monroost., between Doarborn and State-ats. Arlington, Cotton & Kemhles Biinsirels. AN ENTIRE NEW AND VARIED PROGRAMME. MACKIN and WILSOR in their Artistic So0gs and Dancss. QUARTETTE—Kayne, Tyrroll, Surridgo, and Laag. THE ACTOR’S STUDIO, GLYCERINEOIL. THE BLACHK STALUB. Every ovening and Saturday Matinee. ACADEMY OF MUSIC. THIS (FRIDAY) EVENING, BENEFIT OF MISS CARLOTTA LE CLERCO, GRAND DOUBLE BiLL: Tho last and greatest London Sensatfon. PYGMALION AND GALATEA, With Tom Taslor's vxquisito Comedy, A SHEEP IN WOLF'S CLOTHING. HOOLEY’S OPERA HOURE. THE HOME OF COMEDY! IMMENSE DOUBLE BILL! 3r. JOHN DILLON ia two great charscters. Fride. | and Satarday, Feb. 14and 15, and =t the Saturday Matinecy PAUL PRT. Joha Dillon | Phabe.... Miss Emma Clins ‘the Dilloa Specialt; cts, entitlod @’CALLAGHAN ; Or, The Art of Mesmerlsn. Monday, Feb. 17~SERJIOUS FAMILY, aud BARNEY HE BAROX GLOBE THEATRE, Ti WED: 'URDAY AFTE! NS, tl highly-interestiug Society Drama, In 3acts, entiticd JED; or, The Lost Will. Tho Charming Vocalist, Misa LULU CULLUSL: th Artisiic” Ethiopian Comodian, JIMMY DALTON: FREESAN SISTERS, and the Comeds Company, Ia & ow aad cholco programmo. < The STAR AND CRESCE! CLURB will have & St. Valontino's Parcy o3 FRIDAY EV V. 19, 1533, 2t Szow's Hall, cor. b e A NOBLE CHARITY. OMAHA LOTTERY! TO ERECT THE NEBRASKA STATE ORPHAN ASYLUL. To be Druwn in Public, March 31, 1873. Tickets S1 Ench or Six for 85. Tickata sent by Exprees C. O. D., if dezired. 1 Cash Prizo.... 75,00] 1 Cash Priza........825,00 1 Cash Prizo.. “ 1500 (1 Cash P 10,00 1 Cash Prizo.. . 5,000] I Cash T B X ] e, For balance of Prizes send for Circular. This Legal Enterprisa s talorsod br His Excellency. Gorernor W. H. James. sad the bost busiases men of tha e. Tho limited namber of Tickets oa haad will be farnish- od those who spoly firat. AGENTS WANTED, For full particulars address TT) nager, Omaka, DISSOLUTION NGTICES. DISSOLUTION. To ALL Waos IT Max CONCERX Allen C, Sellock and Goorge S. Chil. ‘partners under the &: & Company, “bave thi fleck will contizu ‘est Alzdison-at., : firp oL 0y O lleck & Chicago, Feb. 3, 193 GEO. 8. CHILSON. DISSOLUTION. The copartnership heretofors exlsting under the firm name of Eddy & Jami=son ia this day dissolved by matual conscnt, J. Jamison retiriog. Tho busincss will be car— ried on by A. D. Bddy, who will recalve all dues for the Iate firm 80d setels all indobtedness, A. D. EDDY, Chicago, Feb. 1, 1973, J. JAMIESON. MISCELLANEOUS. 3 o o SISCELLANEOUS: The Hechanics' and Traders’ Exchange. The olection of oficers takas place at the Excbang 133 LaSalle-sl., on Saturday, b, 15, at 10 o'cloc] All thoso wishing & vofce in the management for the en- :mm ::\fl :nult- be oo hand and sign applicstion for naw 'MEDICAL CARDS. > DR. C.BIGELOW CONFIDENTIAL PHYSICIAN, Statest., Chica; Teis wolt known by all roaders of tho O. Blgelow is tho oldest ostablished ph: Sctonto nd sxperionco hare miads Dr. 5. Sowned SPECTALIST. of the xge. honored by the pross. esteomed of the bighest medical attainments by all tha ediea fnsiitatas of {he day, havin dovotod T il alt saces ot CUROMG ANDSPECTAR h£5 K ascs o D AT TATION FRER, SEPARATE Pa : ity L COMIRR AR08 $o-0. BIGELOW, No- 461 Statess " " Mamps, to NO CURE! Dr. Kea,n’ NO PAY!! 360 South Clark-st., Chicago, May be confidentially consalf o s the o: cian in A T Dr. E. A. Bassett, - Z9State-st., Chilcago, & graduate of the Untsersil Philadelphis, ia sdmiftad By ths proic: " public to bo ihe most thorouzhi aaccessful physleiau in the trea his specialty—Xervons, Ch Thor living at & disiznca oo modical treatiso, ~ Coasuliatlon rov, a1 the'dlsvasea ut Special Disczscr. by latter. Sond for i [