tem of government. He did not mean to be understood
as saying that all who had been, or were
called reformers, were demagogues or agitators,
far from it. He was well aware that many of
our ablest and most judicious statesmen had long
contended for essential changes in the Constitu-
tion of the State, and he was himself one of those
who believed material and important improvements
might, and should be made. He was
therefore, on this, the only proper course, a re-
former himself, and could not with any propriety
cast censure upon the whole body of reformers.
Though he had not seen the necessity for this
Convention though he had not fully acquiesced,
after the law authorising it had been pasted by
the Legislature, he was now convinced of the
propriety of engrafting upon the new Constitu-
tion an express provision for calling such assem-
blies hereafter, whenever the deliberate judgment
of the citizens of the State may call for them.
In this he was most happy to find there was a
general concurrence of opinion in the Convention.
All seemed to agree that such a provision was
necessary to secure the future quiet of the State.
All appeared to aim at the same desirable end;
but there were some diversities of opinion as to
the means of obtaining that end. For his part,
he was decidedly in favor of the plan proposed
by the honorable chairman of the committee, (Mr.
Sollers,) which left with the Legislature the power
to make such amendments (by the acts of two
successive Legislatures,) from time to time in the
Costitution, as the public convenience and interests
might require, and also gave them, in express
terms, the power to provide for the convocation
of future Conventions, whenever the general
public judgment should call for them. The es-
sential difference between which and the proposi-
tion of the honorable gentleman from Allegany,
(Mr. Fitzpatrick,) was that the latter gave no
power to any body, not even to the people themselves,
to make any change or amendment whatever, in
the Constitution you are about to submit for
periods of ten years, and at those periods only,
through the cumbrous and expensive machinery
of a Convention! Between these two modes he
could not, for a moment, hesitate; and he felt
persuaded, if gentlemen would lay aside that
warmth and vehemance for a few moments, which
had been excited by discussion, and calmly
compare the two modes, and deliberately
judge of the probable, not to say the inevitable
operation of each, they would by a very large
majority decide in favor of the proposition of the
honorable chairman, (Mr. Sollers.) Gentlemen
should remember that it was not improbable that
much of the relutance many of them felt to con-
fiding this subject to the Legislature hereafter as
proposed, might be attributable to a bias of the
mind consequent upon former discussion about
the propriety of calling a Convention by an act
of the Legislature, when there was no provision
in the Constitution giving them such a power;
and all attempts to have an act passed for such a
purpose was therefore resisted, upon the ground
that no power existed for such a purpose, but on
the contrary amendments were to be made to |
that Constitution by express provision, in the
mode prescribed by it, and in no other
As for these reasons, and upon these grounds,
the call of a Convention by act of the Legislature
was long and vehemently resisted under the old
Constitution. It is not likely that minds which
were heated in that contest, may, without taking
time to appreciate the important difference of an
express grant of power and injunction of duty
upon the Legislature in the new Constitution—
apprehend a recurrence of the same contest, and
he therefore was reluctant to trust the power to
the Legislature—a moments reflection will, I
I think, dispel all such apprehensions, and gen-
tlemen will see that all the grounds upon which
resistance to such assemblies was formerly based
are intirely removed, by the proposition of my
friend from Calvert (Mr. Sollers,) and no oppo-
sition can hereafter be made to the call of a Con-
vention by act of the Legislature, if this provision
be adopted, but on the grounds of its inexpediency
and the indisposition of the people—legiti-
mate and proper grounds always and fair subjects
of inquiry. To this old prejudice or bias in
men's minds alone, can I attribute the cause of
argument in which some gentleman have indulg-
ed, in which they have seemed to regard the
amendment of the gentleman from Allegany as
the only proposition making provision for future
Conventions, and that the report of the committee
as prohibiting or preventing them. Whereas
the fart is, that by the plan of the committee, the
control of the whole subject is left constantly
with the people of the State through their Legis-
lature, and by the other all control is absolutely
taken from the people, except simply the right
to say by their votes, once in every ten years,
whether they will have another Convention or
not—the effect of which is to be, should they by
their votes in June next adopt this Constitution,
to fasten it upon them with all its imperfections
for an infinite period—for after the experiment
of this Convention, my word for it, the people
will bear a great many inconveniencies long and
patiently, rather than resort to another. On this.
and upon several other occasions during the sittings
of the Convention, there has been manifested
a strange want of confidence in the future le-
gislatures of the State, and a disposition to fix
every thing now by unalterable rule, leaving no-
thing to the wisdom, discretion, patriotism or
virtue of those who are to come after us. For
my part, highly as I respect the members of this
Convention, I am not one of those who think all
the wisdom and virtue of the State, past, present
and future, is concentrated here. I think there
are as many wise and good men in Maryland out
of this Convention as there are in it, and I believe
the legislatures that are to come after us will be
as capable of judging of the true interests and
best means of promoting the happiness and pros-
perity of the people of the State as we are; and
more so, because they will have the lights of
further experience and knowledge of the times
and circumstances for and under which they are
to act, which we cannot have.
Why distrust future Legislatures so much? |
