circumstances required and justified such apro-
ceeding. And that the Legislature, should be
empowered, at all times, to call a Convention of
the people without any respect to periodical limi-
tations of ten years or any other number of
years
Now, that seemed to him, (Mr. B.,) all that
any reasonable man could desire, but to force it
down us, and to make it a constitutional provi-
sion that there should be a Convention every ten
years, or that the sense of the people should be
taken every ten years on that subject, whether
they desired it or not, was a little too strong for
him, and he believed for all portions of the State,
except Baltimore city.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city, said some gen-
tlemen were loo apt to get up and address the
Convention without really understanding the sub-
ject underdiscussion. Now the gentleman [Mr,
Bowie,] undertook to tell us what? That he had
prejudged the question without having himself
understood it. There might be but three radical
members, including himself, (Mr. B ,) to vote
for this proposition. If he had the reputation of
being designated in this Convention as a radical,
or a red republican, because he would confide in
the people, having every reliance in their judg-
ment and integrity, then he was willing to be so
regarded, if that was to be considered as red repub-
licanism. The gentleman [Mr. Bowie,] was wil-
ling to take an antagonistic position, and he was
welcome to do so. He [Mr. B.,] did nut mean
to say that his proposition was right, as to the
details; but if wrong in any particular, it could
beamended. What, he asked, were the princi-
ples of this proposition? Not that the people
Should be compelled to call a Convention, but
that they should periodically express their wish
for or against a Convention. What objection
could there be to the people of Maryland casting
their votes at the ballot box, in a regular elec-
tion, for or against aconvention? Was there
any man opposed to that? Now, the gentleman
desired the matter lo be referred to the Legisla-
ture. He desired that the proposition submitted
by Mr. SOLLERS, the chairman of this committee,
should be adopted by the Convention, and that
the Legislature should call a Convention for that
purpose. How many years of anxiety had passed
before we could procure a Legislative act to
bring together a Convention to form a Constitu-
tion ? He was himself of the opinion, and he
had already expressed it, that a Legislative act
was necesssry, in the future, to procure legal
proof of the will of the people who had in them-
selves full and sovereign power to alter, change,
or abolish the existing government. Hence he
would like to see such a provision incorporated
in this Constitution, to secure a legal mode of
revolutionising or changing the government
whenever the people chose. He cared not how
long the article should be to carry out this pro-
vision. He desired to see this high privilege ac-
corded to the people of Maryland, to be exercised
every ten years, or whenever they might think
proper. They were the proper judges, and let
them decide the question at the ballot box. He
46 |
did not desire to force it upon the people against
the will of the majority. If the votes cast should
be against a Convention—if it was not considered
necessary by them, then the Governor should
simply make proclamation to that effect. But if
in favor of a Convention, then the Governor was
enjoined by the Constitution to call a special
election, and notify the people to vote for Dele-
gales, with the representation of each city and
county in the Legislature, according to whatever
system of representation might then exist, and
tills he [Mr. Brent,] adopted, because he pre-
sumed no more popular basis could be got for the
Convention, and the Governor is then to fix a
day for the Convention to assemble. And finally,
the article provides that the Convention should
not sit longer than a certain time—six months.
Now the difference between his proposition and
the one before the Convention, proposed by the
majority of the committee, was this, that his
[Mr. Brent's,] protects and guarantees, indepen-
dent of Legislative action, to the people of Mary-
land. this great right, while the other plan leaves
this right dependant on the action of a . Legisla-
ture, which he [Mr. Brent] was unwilling to
trust. He thought the adoption of his [Mr. B's,]
proposition would do much lo reconcile the peo-
ple to the new Constitution, which came from
this body. This would be a great answer to all
objections, as the people had a right to say
whether, in ten years hence, they would decide
to alter the basis of representation, or change the
Constitution in other respects, and this great po-
pular right must be protected and placed out of
the reach of an anti-reform majority in the Le-
gislature.
Mr. SOLLERS said, after reciting the terms of
the substitute offered by the gentleman from
Baltimore, (Mr. Brent.) for the report of the
committee on the further amendments and revi-
sions of the Constitution, that the only distinc-
tion between it and the one offered by the gentle-
man from Allegany, (Mr. Fitzpatrick,) was in
employing a different agent to effect the same
object. Now, it was provided in the report which
he had made on the subject of future amendments
to the Constitution, that any part of it might be
altered, changed or abolished by the Legislature;
provided, bills were published three months be-
fore a new election, and they be confirmed by
the next General Assembly after a new election
of delegates; or, after a Convention had been
called for that purpose, three months previous
notice having been given before a new election,
and that act on to be confirmed by the next Le-
gislature. Now, he would ask his friend from
Baltimore city, whether he did not believe that
at the very next session of the Legislature it
would not be deemed necessary by it that some
other changes and alterations should be made in
the Constitution ? They might be changes imma-
terial in their character that would be suggested,
and not such as to require a Convention for that
purpose. The gentleman, (Mr. Brent,) had ask-
ed what objection there could be to his plan.
He, (Mr. S.,) thought there were several; but
he put his own chiefly on the ground of conveni- |
