many members of this Convention have fallen
upon this branch of the report of the Com
mittee on the Declaration of Rights; that is
that in the report as printed there is no pro
vision covering the ground my amendment
proposes to cover. But if lam to understand
that provision is to be considered as already
embraced in the report of the committee
will withdraw my amendment.
The PRESIDENT. That provision is in the
original report, it is omitted in this only by
error of the printer.
Mr. BRISCOE, My object is reached by this
44th article, and I therefore withdraw my
amendment in order to prevent any difficulty
Mr. PUGH. I was about lo say mat rather
than support this amendment—
The PRESIDENT. There is no amendment
pending.
Mr. CLARKE. Simply as a matter of his-
tory, and to put those, who in the last Legis-
lature voted against this Convention bill, in
their true position, I will state that I was one
who had the privilege of voting against that
bill, and also of discussing its provisions
As I understand it, the ground taken then
against the bill was not that the Legislature
had not power to call this Convention, In
the argument and upon the vote which I
gave upon the question, I conceded the power
of the Legislature to call this Convention;
and I stated that if the Legislature would
pass a constitutional bill to take the sense of
the people upon the call of a Convention, it
would receive my vote for that purpose. The
ground taken, however, was this: that al-
though the Legislature bad the power, it
must carry it out in the manner prescribed
by the Constitution. That Constitution pre-
scribes, in the first place, that the question
should be taken first as to whether the people
would have a Convention. Until the people
had decided that question, there was no
power on the part of the Legislature to call a
Convention; that the election of members to
the Convention must be subsequent to the
people voting that they wanted a Conven-
tion; and the power existed in the Legisla-
ture to provide for the assembling of a Con-
vention only after the people by their votes
had declared that there should be a Conven-
tion. But no gentleman acting with those
with whom I acted, denied the cower of the
Legislature to provide for the assembling of
a Convention. And we said we would sup-
port a bill, provided it did not contain that
unconstitutionality and several others, which
were in the bill which was passed.
I would say further, without entering at
length into the argument upon the proposition
announced in this first article, that if
the gentleman from Howard (Mr. Sands) is
correct, then the doctrine is just this. We
are assembled in Convention here to frame
the organic law of the State. According to
the doctrine of the gentleman, if the people |
are not satisfied with what we may do here,
- all they need do is to assemble in their pri-
mary meetings, elect other delegates, have a
Convention here in Annapolis, or in Balti-
more city, or wherever else they choose to
assemble, form a Constitution, and according
to the theory of the gentleman from How-
ard, that would have just as much the sanc-
tion of law as the Constitution we may
frame here. Now if that be the doctrine,
then I would say that there were only 30,009
voters in this State who voted in favor of
this Convention, while the whole vote of the
State is something like 90,000. We wanted
a provision in the bill requiring a majority
of the 90,000 In favor of the Convention be-
fore it should assemble. It is to be presumed
that the balance of the voters, 60,000, or gay
50,000, are opposed to the assembling of this
Convent-on. Now if the majority of the
people of this State have the right to frame
such a Constitution as they think proper and
when they think proper, all that is necessary
to be done is to have a Convention assemble
representing those 50.000 voters, and accord-
ing to the gentleman from Howard it would
have just as much authority as this Conven-
tion. I am merely calling the attention of
members to this matter—those who are an-
nouncing their wild theories here, which
will catch the ear of the populace who like
something radical, such as this ''power of
the people"—in order that they may stop
and reflect a moment and see where they are
going; see if they are not carrying out an
idea involving the power of those who were
silent at the polls to exert their will with just
as much authority as those here.
Mr. PUGH. I thought the President in-
formed me just now that there was nothing
before the Convention.
The PRESIDENT. There is no amendment
pending; this first article is before the House
tor consideration.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I desire to move
an amendment to this first article, it now
reads;
"That all government of right originates
from the people, is founded in compact only,
and instituted solely for the good of the
whole; and they have at all limes the un-
alienable right to alter, reform or abolish
their form of government in such manner as
they may deem expedient."
1 propose to add the following :
" But this right ought only to be exercised
in the mode previously agreed upon and pre-
scribed by the people, whenever the mode of
alteration or amendment of their form of
government has been agreed upon and pre-
' scribed by the people in their written Consti-
tution,"
Now, sir, I am a strict constructionism
and a conservative man to an extent that 1
suppose I shall not find many upon this floor
to go beyond me. I hold the abstract prin- |
