from Howard (Mr. Sands) to open the debate
upon his amendment.
Mr. SANDS. The proposition contained in
my amendment is so plain that I have no de-
sire to argue it, at least until I have heard
something said in opposition to it.
Mr. CLARKE. I take the floor with great
diffidence and reluctance this morning, as I
had no idea this question would be sprung
so suddenly upon us. And even now, with
the expectation that we shall not be brought
to a vote upon it to-day, I will yield to the
chairman of the committee (Mr. Stirling) if
he desires to open the debate.
Mr. STIRLING. The gentleman is very kind,
but I have no disposition to take the floor at
this time.
The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from
Prince George's (Mr, Clarke) will proceed.
Mr. CLARKE. Mr. President: When I first
listened to the reading of the 4th article re-
ported by the majority of the Committee on
the Declaration of Rights, to be embodied in
the bill of rights, as declaratory of the pre-
rogatives of the people of this State, I de-
signed to say nothing on the momentous
questions involved, because from the circum-
stances attending its incorporation into that
report I did not believe that any good re-
sult would be accomplished by my partici-
pating in this debate. If the manner of its
incorporation into the report be any indica-
tion of the deep and permanent character of
the disease, of which the principles contained
in this article are the result; or if what
emanates from the majority of this committee
can be considered the reflection of the judg-
ment of this Convention, then this body is in
no condition to listen to discussion, or re-
ceive and weigh carefully any suggestion or
proposition which does not accord with the
principles announced in the doctrine: "That
the Constitution of the United States and the
laws made in pursuance thereof being the
supreme law of the land, every citizen of this
State owes paramount allegiance to the Con-
stitution and Government of the United
States, and is not bound by any law or ordi-
nance of this State in contravention or sub-
version thereof."
But, sir, I cannot believe, that even in the
midst of the revolution going on around us,
in the midst of the passions and excitement
of the times, a body of men representing the
people of the State in their sovereignty, and
called on to remodel their organic law, can
decline patiently to listen to a discussion and
application of principles settled and main-
tained by the fathers of the republic. In
fact, subsequent thought has led me to re-
view my original design, independent of any
NOTE.—I allude to the fact that the report was
drawn up and prepared to be submitted to the Convetion,
without the minority of the committee
having had an 'opportunity to take part in the dis
cussion or formation of it |
consideration of what effect discussion may
have upon the action of this Convention.
The bonds which, through affection and
interest, united the States composing the
Union, have been parted asunder as the storm
rudely snaps the rigging of the mast. Our po-
litical fabric is reeling and surging before the
storm of war, and amid the tierce conflicts of
battle, and unless the principles which were
designed to form the basis of the political
fabric of our government are manfully main-
tained here and everywhere else, we have every
reason to fear the destruction of our civil free-
dom and independence, and the establishment
upon their ruins of a vast military despotism,
wielded by the hand of some bold dictator,
I know not who he may be, nor do I under-
take to make a prophecy or prediction.
Every man, therefore, in public station owes
a duty to the preservation of the cause of
constitutional freedom, and in behalf of the
maintenance of the true structure of our
form of government, as established by the
Constitution. I ask a respectful hearing.
In its behalf alone do I plead.
Ever since the great victory achieved by
"Republicanism," under the leadership of
Jefferson, Madison, Clay, and others, over
"blue-light Federalism had supposed that
certain principles had become settled as axio-
matic, in regard to the structure of our govern-
ment. Among them that no one would con-
tend that the Constitution of the United
States organized a national, consolidated
government; but that, on the contrary, it
was universally conceded that the form of
government thereby created was, to a cer-
tain extent, federal, and to a certain extent
national; federal in its formation, national
in the powers conferred upon it, and the
mode in which those powers were to be exer-
cised. That certain powers were delegated
to the United States by the Constitution;
and that the powers not so delegated, and
not prohibited by it to the States, were re-
served to the States respectively, or to the
people. And that the language of the Con-
stitution—" that the enumeration in the Con-
stitution of certain rights shall not be con-
strued to deny or disparage others enter-
tained by the people;" "that the Constitu-
tion and laws of the United States which
shall be made in pursuance thereof, and
all treaties made, or which shall be made
under the authority of the United States,
shall be the supreme law of the land, and the
judges in every State shall be bound thereby,
anything in the Constitution or laws of any
State to the contrary notwithstanding"—de-
clared plainly the principle of the supremacy
of the Constitution and Government of the
United States in the exercise of the powers
conferred upon the government by the Consti-
tution, within the limits fixed by that Consti-
tion. That the clause requiring that Senators
and Representatives in Congress, and the |
