" 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 times the un-
alienable right to alter, reform or abolish
their form of government in such manner
(not 'as they may deem expedient,' but) as
may be provided by this Constitution."
That leaves the full and plenary right of
the people unimpaired in that respect, and
simply points out a peaceful mode, regulated
by law, by which they shall act and when
they shall act. Is not that a safer course
than to leave the matter as it now stands in
this first article, which would seem to au-
thorize any demagogue to start up with a
proposition to reform the Constitution? As
I said before, such a course would be attended
with great danger to the peace of the com-
munity. The only effect of the amendment
which I have the honor to submit is simply
to point out a peaceful, quiet mode, regulated
by law, by which this alteration shall be made.
Now, it may be said, if this amendment
should be adopted, it would conflict with the
44th article of the report as made to this
Convention. That article reads thus :
"That this Constitution shall not be al-
tered, changed or abolished, except in the
manner therein prescribed and directed.''
When that 44th article is taken up it will
be time enough to modify it; and I think it
will be right so to modify that article as to
make it conform to the provision I propose to
insert. It is not that the Constitution shall
not be altered, or changed, or modified, ex-
cept in a certain way, because that would
negative the idea that the people have the
right to change or alter their form of govern-
ment. They have that right undoubtedly;
but it is the right of revolution; and no man
denies that right. It is the right of revolu
tion, and is nothing short of revolution
whenever a re-form of the Government is at
tempted in any other way than in the mode
pointed out by law, and regulated by law
And my purpose is solely to bring to the con
sideration of the Convention the simple ques
tion of the expediency of pointing out in this
Constitution the mode by which it shall be
altered, and not leave it to the wild vagary
of any demagogue who may choose to assert
that the time has come for altering it. And
the words "as they may deem expedient,'
now found in the article as it stands, would
it seems to me, justify. any. assembling of the
people anywhere for the purpose of changing
the Constitution. It is for that purpose alone
that I have offered this amendment, and
hope it will be adopted,
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's, Will
now be in order to offer an amendment to
the pending amendment?
The PRESIDENT, it is not now in order
there being already an amendment to a
amendment pending. |
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. Would it
be in order to move to strike out a portion
of the original article?
The PRESIDENT. Not until the pending
amendments are disposer of.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. The ob-
ject which I proposed to accomplish was to
have all the first article stricken out after the
word "whole," in the third line of there-
port. If that were done, it would then leave
this first article to conform to the first article
of the Declaration of Rights in the old Con-
stitution of our State, and would then read
thus:
"That all government of right originates
from the people, is founded in compact only,
and is instituted solely for the good of the
whole,"
That would conform precisely to the pro-
visions in the old Constitution which was es-
tablished in 1776, It is an enunciation of a
principle well established, and it would then
contain sufficient for all purposes in support
of that principle. Now I do not agree with
my friends that this is the plaice to authorize
amendments to be made to the Constitution,
or to point out any mode in which the Con-
stitution which we may frame here may hereafter
beamended, I think the 44th article
of the Declaration of Bights, as reported by
the committee, accomplishes all 'halt is de-
sirable. That article provides—
"That this Constitution shall not be al-
tered, changed or abolished, except in the
manner therein prescribed and directed."
That would be sufficient in the Declaration
of Rights; and in some other portion of the
Constitution that declaration could be car-
ried out by setting forth the peculiar mode
and manner in which the people might
change their organic law hereafter, should
they feel so disposed.
Now I do not agree with some of the gen-
tlemen who have addressed this Convention,
in their conclusion that the Convention held
in 1850 was in itself revolutionary. I will
- state to those gentlemen that they will find
in no part of the Constitution of 1776 any
article or section prohibiting the people from
calling together, at their will, a Convention
for the purpose of reframing or reconstruct-
ing their organic law. By reference to that
Constitution, it will be found that it simply
pointed out the mode in which lire Constitu-
tion could be changed by the General Assem
bly of the State of Maryland; but not one
word prohibiting the action of the people in
that respect, I now refer to the 59th article
of the old Constitution, which leads:
"That this form of government, and the
Declaration of Rights, and no part thereof
shall be altered, changed or abolished, un
less a bill so to alter, change or abolish the
same, shall pass the General Assembly and
be published at least three months before a
new election, and shall be confirmed by the |
