|
THE BILL OF RIGHTS. '
The Convention resumed the consideration of
the order of Jfce day, being the report submitted
by Mr. DORSET, on the 11th instant, as chairman
of 1h,e committee on the declaration of rights.
The question -pending before the Convention,
was on the amendment offered by Mr. CHAMBERS
of Kent, on the 29th instant, to the amendment
offered by Mr. PRESSTMAN, on the 28th instant.
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, was entitled to the
floor.
Mr. C. said that, in order to enable the gentle-
man from Baltimore city, (Mr. Gwinn,) whose
argument had been broken off by the near ap-
proach ofthe hour of adjournment, to conclude
his remarks, be, (Mr. C.) would waive his right
to the floor.
Mr. OWINN thereupon took the floor.
Mr. GWINN said he would take advantage of
the kindness of the gentleman from Kent, to con-
clude the remarks, which, in consequence of his
state of health and the weariness of the House,
induced him to omit pressing on the Convention
at its last sitting. He would promise to repay
that kindness, by occupying no more time than
was necessary, to express his views on the sub-
ject under discussion. The amendment of his
colleague was, to insert in the bill of rights, a
declaration of the inalienable right of the people
to change, alter or abrogate their form of govern-
ment. The gentleman from Kent, (Mr. Cham-
bers,) had moved to amend the proposition, by
adding the words " according to the law or Con-
stitution of the State." This amendment was
directly in contradiction of the original propo-
sition. If the right was inalienable in the peo-
ple, it could not be definitively surrendered to a
body which was not the people, and which, as it
was part of the government, might be interested
in resisting that power of reformation which it
was the object of the article to recognise. The
proposition involved no danger. The right must
be exercised with moderation, and within the
limits of that " moral competence," which re-
strains every legislative body.
The article, as proposed by his colleague, did
not assert a revolutionary principle. That prin-
ciple exists in all governments, without provision
made for its exercise. The object of the amend-
ment was not to assert a nglit or revolution, but
to compel the recognition by the existing govern-
ment, of the source of power, in the State, and
to constrain it by moral force to accommo-
, date itselt to their varying wants and situation.
Where this is done, revolutions, even if they oc-
cur, are comparatively harmless. There is no
hotter instance than that of England in 1688, as
contrasted with the result of the less flexible sys-
tem of France, which was upturned in the last
century.
There was no reason to object to the majority
principle which the article recognised. The peace
and happiness of the greater number are interest-
ed in a stable government. They are sureties for
its existence. Much more evil is to be appre-
hended from the obstinacy with which minorities
adhere to power. The whole proceeding under
|
our Convention bill, recognises the majority prin-
ciple. The Constitution which we make, may
be carried here by a majority of counties, if the
majority of a delegation were entitled to cast the
vote of a county, voted against by a majority of
the counties, and yet be ratified by the popular
vote of the city of Baltimore and the larger
counties. The Convention are but agents in the
business — after they have concluded their work.
it is submitted to the people, and, by force of
their majority vote, becomes a supreme ordi-
nance.
Illustrations drawn from English constitutional
law were not applicable. The arguments of Fox,
Grey, Krskine and Sheridan in the movements in
the Hritish Parliament, on the subject of reform,
in the year 1797, went on the ground of conveni-
ence and not of right. The Constitution of the
State did not recognize the principle of popular
rule, and Mr. Pitt was able to resist all claim
which was put on this ground. So too, in 1688,
when the Parliament met to remedy the state of
things ensuing on the flight of James I., it was
seriously embarrassed. " The King can do no
wrong,1' and, "the King never dies," were max-
ims, which utterly contradicted all notion of right
to fill the throne, or to consider it vacated. It
was compelled to adopt an extraordinary and ut-
terly inconsistent resolution, to arrive at any re-
sult. After examining, critically, this resolution,
he showed that no such difficulty could occur
under the doctrine of a majority. It arose out of
their artificial system. But there was an intrin-
sic right in the doctrine of a majority power.
Those who had the most numerous interest in life
snd liberty were certainly entitled to prescribe
the laws by which they should be governed. It
was the rule of every deliberative body— it should
be the rule of that supreme Parliament of which
all, who have an interest ia the State, are mem-
bers.
He stated that seventeen or eighteen States
had adopted the principle of the amendment of
his colleague, without the modification of the
gentleman from Kent; and these were not new
States, animated by a desire to overleap the an-
cient land-marks, in their eagerness after novel-
ty. Among them were old, discreet and orderly,
and what were esteemed conservative, States.
They had adopted the principle, and no danger
or inconvenience had resulted. Yet the cry had
been raised that its introduction here was warrant
for a revolution. In conclusion, he was in favor of
the proposition, for two reasons : first, because
the right to alter, amend or abolish the Govern-
ment is in the majority of the people, and it is
proper that it should be specifically recognized in
the organic law; and secondly, that it is a right that
cannot be absolutely surrendered, and it is use-
less to adopt a form of words which would imply
such a surrender. The amendment of the gentle-
man from Cecil, (Mr. MCKANE,) because a mode
should be prescribed for ascertaining, from time
to time, whether the people desired a change or
not. For whenever, this was ascertained, it-was
the duty of a popular government to lend all its
energy to promote this end.
|
