born and raised in one—the Empire state. Although the people of Rhode Island and Delaware may be very good people, yet I rejoice to know that I was not born in either. I do not like little states; they may have votes in the senate, but they have no political influence. Mr. Seward, black republican as he is, when he speaks in the name of the great state of New York, speaks with an authority and a weight that a Webster could not command speaking from Rhode Island.' Another discussion pertained to the introduction of a clause prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors, a proposal which was finally rejected. Perhaps the longest discussion arose upon a clause rendering the stockholders of a corporation liable for its debts and obligations. It drifted into a consideration of the subject of corporations in general. The opinions expressed ranged all the way from a desire to protect the farmer against "smart gentlemen representing to them glittering schemes" to "that broader question, whether the resources of the country shall be developed or not, whether we shall have the means and facilities for creating a market here, at home, for our surplus products, and whether the capital that shall come into the country shall receive such protection as will cause it to be productive."
In most particulars the constitution resembled, both in form and substance, those of other states of the Union. There were some distinguishing features, however. The question of slavery had been decided in the negative by vote of the people, and a clause excluding slavery introduced. There was a feeling, quite common throughout the west, against free negroes, and clauses were introduced to keep them out, by a denial of the right of suffrage, of holding real estate, and the maintenance of any suit in the courts. A somewhat similar policy was pursued toward the Chinese. The assembly was given the
