Referred to the committee on representa-
tion.
The PRESIDENT also laid before the Convention
a communication from E. Root, Esq., State Su-
perintendent of Public Instruction of the State of
Wisconsin, covering the reports of the State, of
the Board of Regents of the State University.
Which was read, and
Referred to the committee on Education.
On motion of Mr. STEWART, of Baltimore city,
the Convention proceeded to the consideration of
the unfinished business of yesterday.
THE DECLARATION OF RIGHTS.
The Convention resumed the consideration of
the order of the day, being the report submitted
by Mr. DORSEY, on the 11th ult., as chairman of
the committee on the declaration of rights.
The state of the question was as follows;
The first article of the report being under con-
sideration in the words following:
"That all government of right originates from
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 words:
"And they have at all times the inalienable
right to alter, reform, or abolish, their form of
government, in such manner as they may think
expedient."
And Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, had moved to
amend said amendment by adding, at the end
thereof, the following words :
"According to the mode authorized by the
Constitution or laws of the land."
And the question was on the amendment to the
amendment.
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, who was entitled to
the floor from yesterday, resumed and concluded
his remarks.
Mr. CHAMBERS alluding to his remarks of yes-
terday in relation to the question of "compact,"
said there were other authorities which would
sustain him, but he had thought it sufficient to
show the error of his friend from Cecil, in sup-
posing Justice Story to deny this doctrine. He
thought it quite as much an error to ascribe the
origin of this notion of "compact" to the advo-
cates of the Divine right of kings, and not less an
error to suppose that Justice Story had so assert-
ed. The doctrine of the Divine right of the
king to govern, is as opposite to that of compact
or agreement of the people as to the terms of
government, as darkness is to light.
The Divine right to rule necessarily leaves noth-
ing to the people but the Divine obligation to be
ruled. The decrees of the Deity cannot be con-
troled by the agreements of men. His friend,
(Mr. Donaldson,) had fully shown that the doc-
trine was introduced by Locke, Sidney and oth-
ers, who were the patriots of their day and an-
tagonists to the Divine right of kings—and so
said Justice Story, p. 293, sec. 325. And in
p. 313, sec. 343, he concludes, after examining
the debates in Parliament on the abdication of
23

James the Second, by saying," it is apparent from
the whole reasoning of the parties, that they were
not considering how far the original institution
of government was founded in compact," &c.
He would now proceed to examine the other
proposition which he regarded as of the very
greatest importance to the very existence of gov-
ernment—the binding obligation on all—the whole
community of the Constitution or organic law,
until altered by a Constitutional or legal mode.
He did not profess to give the authority of
Conventions or Legislatures, in which this sub-
ject had been directly discussed. It was the
duty of his antagonists on this occasion to .pro-
duce some authority for their new doctrine
which was at war with long settled opinion, and
doubtless, if authority existed, it could not have
escaped the extensive information and industri-
ous research of the several gentlemen who have
urged it. The gentleman from Baltimore coun-
ty, (Mr. Buchanan,) supposes he has the author-
ity of Mr. Burke. It was not the celebrated and
justly celebrated orator and patriot, Edmund
Burke—but a name-sake. He had not been suf-
ficiently attentive to the political operations of
the last few years, to know much of such mat-
ters, and he confessed he had not heard of this re-
port until it was now produced by the gentleman,
nor did he know where Mr. Burke came from.
[SEVERAL VOICES. " From. New Hamp-
shire."]
Well, it seems Mr. Burke is, at least, of im-
portance enough to have it known what State he
represents. Most certainly he had evinced a
commendable share of industry in the collection
of writings, on the question of the rights of the
people. But did not his friend perceive that each
of these writers expressed the very doctrine
which our bill of rights announces—which every
Constitution in this broad land declares, which
he had repeatedly said, none but a madman
would deny—that is, that the people are the
source of all power, and have the right to alter
and change their form of government? This on-
ly left us where we were; they do not say the
people, or a portion calling itself a majority,
may do this without law—against law. Mr.
Burke, indeed, does say, he thinks his is the true
interpretation, and the authority of this opinion
is against us. On looking over the journal,
it will be seen that he came to the conclusion
that the Dorr revolution or rebellion, was strict-
ly justified, and that the general government
should not have interposed to restrain, or the
courts to punish it, and on the same day on which
his report was presented, it was postponed to
the next session of Congress, and he was not
aware it had ever been heard of since.
Neither the President with his Cabinet, or the
courts of Rhode Island, or the Supreme Court, so
thought.
Mr. BUCHANAN remarked, he had not relied
on the authority of Mr. Burke, but on the boohs
lie had cited from his report, and which were not
in the library.
Mr. McLANE, asked leave to make an expla-
nation. He had not intended to evince any indis-