|
Jyfr. JENIFEJL I think that as this is a mere
isolated proposition, as to which, I believe, there
will be great unanimity in the Convention, it will
be well that we should act upon it at once, and
•how to the State and to the world, that this pro-
position has met with but one response in this
body.
Mr. BOWIE. Let us take the vote.
Mr. SPENCER. I move that by unanimous con-
sent, the orders of the day be postponed, for the
purpose of considering the report of the gentle-
men from Charles, (Mr. Jenifer.)
The motion was agreed to.
The question then recurred on the adoption of
the amended report of Mr. Jenifer.
And, without debate, motion or question, the
report was adopted unanimously.
The PMSIDENT directed that fact to be enter-
ed upon the journal.
The Convention then proceeded to tbe orders
of the day.
THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
The Convention resumed the consideration of
the report of the Committee on the Declaration of
Rights of the State of Maryland.
And the state of the question was this :
Article 1st being under consideration yester-
day, in the following words :
"That all government of right originates for
the people, is founded in compact only, and in-
stituted solely for the good of the whole."
Mr. PRESSTMAN had moved to amend the said
article, by adding at the end thereof the follow-
ing:
"And they have at all times the inalienable
right to alter, reform, or abolisn their form of
Government, in such manner as they may think
expedient."
And Mr. HICKS had moved to a'mend the said
amendment, by adding at the end thereof the
following:
"And that any portion of tbe people of this
State shall have the right to secede and unite
themselves and the territory occupied by them
to such adjoining State as they shall elect."
And the pending question was on the amend-
ment of Mr. HICKS.
Mr. J. U. DENNIS was entitled to the floor.
He said, that whenever there was a controversy
between parties, tbe specific matter in dispute
should first be well ascertained and understood,
and tbe points of difference fairly and plainly
laid down, so that there might be no misappre-
hension in regard to them. He read tbe propo-
sition of Mr. PMHTHIX, and said he, (Mr. D.)
understood that gentleman as saying that a ma-
jority had at all times the power under all Gov-
ernments without any law or sanction in the Con-
stitution — without and beyond the Constitution —
if they saw fit, to alter, and change their form of
Government. I understood this (continued Mr.
D.) to be the sentiment expressed by the gentle-
man from Baltimore city, and also by the gentle-
man from Frederick, {Mr. Johnson,) not no«r in
his seat. Am I right? . , j ,
|
Mr. PRESSTMAN. I prefer that the amend-
ment I have offered should speak for itself, be-
cause I might interrupt the gentleman longer
than either of us should desire, by undertaking
to explain it. But I do mean to say, that the
people have the right to say in what mode their
Constitution shall be changed. I have never said
that they should not determine that matter in a
legal mode, or in such a manner as might be
consistent with the bill of rights. The difficulty
lies in this — what the legal mode is.
Mr. DENNIS continued. The gentleman said
" the people. " If, by that term he meant that the
entire people of the State had the right to change
their government in a manner, and according to
the provisions to which they themselves had as-
sented, then there was no dispute between them.
But if the gentleman meant to say that the major-
ity of any community had the right, in opposition
to the provisions of the Constitution, to assemble
and make a Constitution in any way they might
see fit, then he, (Mr. D.,) took issue with him.
The first question which presented itself was,
What is a government 7 He defined his under-
standing of the term. It was a compact. And
what was essentially necessary to a compact?
Must there not be contracting parties ? Then the
proposition of the gentleman from Baltimore
city was, that one party to a contract, simply be-
cause it found itself in a numerical majority,
might annul the contract, substitute another, and
thus enforce a new government upon the ether
party. If one party was at liberty to annul the
provisions of this compact, it ceased to be of any
binding force. And, he would ask, what right
had a majority to say to the minority, you shall
be bound by whatsoever terms we may impose.
He illustrated this case, and said, some propo-
sitions were so plain that it was only necessary
to state them, in order to show their absurdity.
This he apprehended to be one of them. In a
few years the city of Baltimore would possess a
numerical majority of the whole State.
He had been told once, in reference to this Con-
vention, that unless the principles which it might
engraft upon the Constitution, should* meet the
concurrence of the inhabitants of Baltimore, they
would make a new Constitution, and that, with a
numerical majority in the State, they would en-
force that Constitution upon the whole State.
And such was the conclusion to which the gentle-
man's argument must inevitably carry us. He
could foresee no other result.
The gentleman had referred to the bills of rights
in the various States. In all of them the same
abstract principles were found. Yet he, (Mr.
O.,) would venture to assert that in no instance,
excepting one, had the doctrine been carried out
to the extent to which the gentleman asserted it.
That one exception was the State of Rhode Is-
land, under the lead of Governor Dorr — and he
had been sent to the Penitentiary. Mr. D. read
the provisions in the Constitutions of different
States of the Union, to sustain his position. The
assertion of these abstract principles was never
wtended to confer on a mere majority, the power
of making a Constitution and enforcing it over a
whole State, It was a doctrine unknown- and
|
