|
since the period assigned bjr the gentleman, (Mr.
Ewastman.) Many years rolled on and many
Changes in parties occurred before ever a whis-
per was heard that a Convention could be called
by a single act of the Legislature, and indeed be-
fore a Convention, called in any way, was heard
of. As to the right of the people to administer,
reform or alter their Constitution whenever they
may think proper, he never doubted or denied
it. - No man in this age and country does or can
doubt or deny it. He asked if that was not
genuine democratic doctrine. But how was it to
b* done? When en this point they compared
notes, it would be found he was a better demo-
crat than the gentleman was. I, (said Mr. C. ,)
give more power to the people and say they can
prescribe — the "how" they can "bind them-
selves." while he says they have no power to do
so. The gentleman admits the. language of his
proposition is cloudy, and he says let those that
come after us find out for themselves its true
construction. No, sir, let us make ourselves
clearly understood — Jet every thing be plain, not
a puzzle to those who are to come after us. The
.Constitution is not for lawyers and the courts
only, but for all classes and descriptions of oiti-
zena.
The 1st article in the bill of rights is in these
word3,"all government originates from the people,
is founded in compact, and instituted solely for the
good of the whole." What meant these words,
''founded in compact?" Were they senseless?
No— but full of meaning. Government was a
compact and for the whole. Yet, says the gen-
tleman, a part may, at their will and pleasure,
violate its most solemn engagements. True it
is, there is no judicial tribune before which a
breach may be prosecuted, but the moral and
political obligation to observe its terms is none
the less for that.
Mr. PRESSTMAN wished to hear the reasons on
which this view was founded. The gentleman
from Kent admitted the right of the people to
make the compact. Had they not then an equal
right to change the compact?
Mr. CHAMBERS replied, he had said so in "totti-
dem verbis," and he now repeated it. (Here,
with a pause after every word, he said in a very
slow and deliberate manner. ) I admit the right
of the sovereign people to change the Constitu-
tion whenever they think proper to do so. Was
that emphatic enough ? Bat yet they must do it
legally.
When they have themselves declared the
mode and manner, and the only mode and man-
ner, they must pursue it. , Here they divided.
The gentleman says they may do it in despite of
the compact without Constitution or law, against
Constitution and law. Well, be should not argue
against this doctrine. He would, as soon enter
into an elaborate logical argument with the most
nervous, timid child, to persuade it to be alarmed
when suddenly brought into the immediate pre-
sence of a hideous monster, as be would to per-
suade the people that they ought to dread this
political monster; and he was free to say that ef
all the horrible monsters that ever presented
|
themselves to his political vision, the most horri-
ble was a mob, and as he had: before said, such
a doctrine, if sanctioned, would ultimately lead
to that— the exercise ef this lawless power by a
mob.
He had been asked, Why not provide for a Con-
vention?
He would say it was not only proper, but it was
our duty to do this. We represent the people-^
we are forming the compact. Now is the lime
to do it, and if noone else does, (Mr. C ) said, he
pledged himself to offer a provision regulating
the mode of calling a Convention. This mode
of proceeding had lately become quite fash-
ionable, and if the good people of Maryland
chose to follow it, they must be indulged. Only
let every thing be done "decently and in order.?'
Let it be done according to the form of law.
Have a Convention once a year, if it be deemed
proper — name a commission to call it at plea-
sure — give to the City Council of Baltimore, if
it must be so, the power to convene a Conven-
tion; but let it be done "according to the Con-
stitutionand Laws of the land." Never sanction
the idea that an irresponsible self-created t$6dy
of men, excited by the fiercest passions, wound-
ed by defeat and disappointment, embittered by
party collisions and animosities, and enflamed by
selfish unprincipled demagogues to a state of
madness as well as folly — never tolerate the idea
that such an assemblage, itself the sole judge of
its o«n numbers, of its own powers, its own
mode of proceeding, without any rule to guide or
any authority to restrain its action, but its own
unbridled will — is the power competent to rule —
to put down an existing government and found a
new one. He described the proposition, with
its "Gorgon head" as an alarming heresy which
should be abjured by every wise and prudent
man.
Mr. JOHNSON said, he was in favor of both
these propositions, and that if he were in his seat
when the question was taken, he should vote for
both with infinite pleasure. The first [continued
Mr. J.] is a self-evident proposition. I cannot
see that it requires a moment's discussion. In
the nineteenth century, with thirty republican
constitutions before our eyes in which it finds a
place, it is an axiom — and it is two late for me,
at least, to discuss it. The history of our own
country and of France, demonstrates that oppres-
sion, intolerable oppression, may be thrown off
by the people whenever they choose to rise up
in their majesty and assert their rights. It is a
power which cannot be taken away from the
people, and of which they cannot eve* divest
themselves And if this Convention should form
.a Constitution, one of the provisions of which
should declare it to be unalterable for ever — and
if that Constitution, thus stamped with a per-
petual existence, should be ratified by a unani-
mous vote of the people of the. State of Mary-
land, U would be an absurdity so gross, that in
fifty jean hence or less, when jts- provisions
might have ceased to be applicable to another,
and a different condition of things, the people
would cast it indignantly aside, and substitute for
|
