568 THE CHANCELLOE'S CASE.—1 BLAND.

It seems, that the formation of the government of our country,
like that of England, has not been so much the result of pro-
found political research as of happy coincidences: if much is to
be attributed to patriotism, to virtue, and to wisdom, still more
must be conceded to fortune, and a favorable concurrence of cir-
cumstances. The English American colonists claimed the benefit
of the whole of the English Code of laws; and especially those
parts intended for the preservation of the rights and liberties of
the citizen; and they adopted, in substance, the English system of
government. In this general translation and adoption, some parts
of the Code were improved, others neglected; and portions of the
system of government were better here; others not so good as in
England. The representation of the people, in the popular branch
of the Colonial Legislatures, was everywhere more equal and
better than that of * the people of England in the House of
607 Commons of their Parliament.(c)

sion, that those who have been most anxious to destroy the Constitution of
Virginia, and to substitute in its place this thing, will not be more dissatis-
fied now with the result of our labors, than this new Constitution will very
shortly be opposed by all the people of the State. Sir, I see no wisdom in
making this provision for future changes. You must give Governments
time to operate on the people, and give the people time to become gradually
assimilated to their institutions. Almost any thing is better than this state
of perpetual uncertainty. A people may have the best form of Government
that the wit of man ever devised; and yet, from its uncertainty alone, may,
in effect, live under the worst Government in the world. I will do nothing
to provide for a change. I will not agree to any rule of future apportion-
ment, or to any provision for future changes called amendments to the Con-
stitution. They who love change—-who delight in public confusion—who
wish to feed the cauldron and make it bubble—may vote if they please for
future changes. But by what spell—by what formula are you going to bind
the people to all future time? Quis custodiet custodes ? The days of Lycur-
gus are gone by, when he could swear the people not to alter the Constitu-
tion until he should return animo non revertendi. I have no favor for this
Constitution. I shall vote againet its adoption, and I shall advise all the
people of my district to set their faces—aye—and their shoulders against it.
But if we are to have it—let us not have it with its death warrant in its very
face: with the fades hypoeratica—the sardonic grin of death upon its counte-
nance."

The question on the proposition to insert a clause providing for future
amendments was then immediately taken and decided in the negative, ayes,
twenty-five, noes, sixty-eight.—[Debates Virg. Con. of 1829, page 789.)

(c) "The whole fabric of English liberty rose step by step, through much
toil, and many sacrifices; each generation adding some new security to the
work, and trusting that posterity would perfect the labor as well as enjoy
the reward. A time perhaps was even then foreseen, in the visions of gene-
rous hope, by the brave knights of Parliament, and by the sober sages of
justice, when the proudest ministers of the Crown should recoil from those
barriers, which were then pushed aside with impunity."—2 Hal. Mid. Ages,
179, Phil.. edit.