The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-04-09

pidbS are UfDuiaeu Tor
calling them together. IL Vermont, a convsn-
ton is to be :ummoncd BY the council of Gem
foTs, who are choten and meet every feven
years., In Kentucky, TenneGie, Ohio, De-
Law and New Hampihire, the lseiilature NUT
direci the ienie ~ the qualified sssasss, 60 BE
taken TT the time Of eleetisg their eGiilators,
and if a majority cfvotes !iou'd be in favour of
calling the convention, the legislature muit
di,et' one to be called. r. Kentucky, however.
the fenie ofthe people mutt be taken at two an
nu1l elections. TIE contributions of Delaware
and Sont. Carolina, may be amended either by
the legilla;ure or by convention.
Ii is certainly defect in the contributions of
the otbrr tates, that they contain no particular
directions tor their own amendment. In
Mafacautetts, Rhode IGand, New York, New
Jeriey, itnniylvania, Virginia and N Carolina,
no proviiion of this fort has been adopted but
the practice Gas Far as have obfcrved i) has
been couformable to the principle of the otbt,
contributions, and to the principle of republican,
government. A propoiition, for inftance, was
made IN the year 'e-, To fummon convention
in Virginia: the Legislature referred it to the
people, who had never relinquiined this attri-
butte of their fovereignty and the people de-
cided agaicif the meeting of convention. In
New-Jerlev, few years ago, there was de-
cided majority of both houfes of the Legislature
~ favour OF a convention, but they did not ven-
ture upon the meaiure (; they were determined
to wait until the votes of the people, at a gene
raj election, could be taken on the fubjeet. The
legislature were decidedly in favour of con-
vention, but the people were decidedly againit
II, and the meaiu'c was confequently rein-
qufhed.
If there is contribution which prefcribes no
particular procefS for the calling of conven-
ton, and which confers the execution of it on
no particular department, what would it prove,
bat ,hat the people did not intend to give away
this iovereign power from themfclves, to any
body whatever? What would it prove, but
that the body which attempted to exercife fuch
power, was in faa violating the fpirit of the
contribution 1t is true, that mott of thefe Fate
contributions have given the legislature the right
OF making any laws whatever, on any fnhirtf,
with the exception only of thofc enumerated in
the Bill of rights but this qualified power
docs not certainly extend to an alteration of the
confitntion. There is a material difference be-
tween making and altering law, and making
ard altering conftitutiOn; between the change
of an adfctitious, and of a fundamental law.
The hrf power is exercifrd by the Legislature
the hf is either exercifed according to fome
ipeciied provilion of the contribution, or it is
reierved to the people themfelves, in their fove-
reign capacity.
Bat if it were in the power of the legislature
10 call SOHVeHtlOU, tniS lOVerSlyn power CT
the people would be liable to incefant nfults.
The people might elect legislature merely to
revife the laws, without ever thinking of any
change in hrconittution. Yetthe eglature az
fumes to itielf the power of calling conventi-
on. II does not refer to the people the previ-
Gus quetion whether they will have conven-
ton, but merely what candidates they will
pleafe to prefer. The election comes on: the
iherifs receives the votes of every man, who
defres an amendment of the contribution. But
it is not provided that majority of the whole
number of qualified electors is nece!iary to the
determination of the election. The fmal,eA
po!Iible number will be Efficient to decide it,
and there will always be few in every county
in the fate, who are diipofed for change in
the government. What then is the confe-
Guccss An election mua- be carried and
convention will be afrmbled. The only re-
fource which the majority of the people would
have in fuch dilemma, would be to fend fnch
members to the convention, as would refolutc-
ly oppofe every innoyation. But fiIch men, if
they even competed the majority of the corven-
tion, would have the whole contribution COM
p'eaty at their feet, for let it be recolleaed
that the Legislature would have the fame right
to give them unlimited powers as TO give them
any: in fDltc of their previous contract with
their continents, fprit of reform might arife
among them: mutual alteration and mutual
iealoufg would appear; and they might not adj
jorrn, before they had changed the contribution
itfelf or at leaf had endangered the tranquility
Of the nation. Should the people however
Humber at their potts on the day of the electi.
on fhould they fnFer the friends Of innova-
ton TO elect their favourite candidates the
consequences of fnch deplorable apathy will
be fir more worthy ofregret. The convention
will be competed of members, who, to the
power of reviIing every part ofthe contribution
has combined an active fpirit ofinnovation. In
eitherof thefe cafes therefore the people have not
decided in their iovereign capacity: their con-
fituton has been altered, and majority of the
people have been oppofed TO the alteration.
May we not fill further extend the confe-
quences of fuch a doctrine! The Legislatures
may be tempted to exercife this power beyond
what the defects of the contribution will require:
Conventions may be frequently collected and
the confltution will be continually huGtuating.
Is it even too bold prediction TO fay that the
Legislatures themfelves may affune the privilege
of changing the contribution, without having
recourie to convention, fince they have the
fame constitutional power to reform as they
have to create reformers
Tree it is, that even the legislatures themfcIves
are not altogether beyond the controul of the
people, and that their official Responsibility will
generally make them extremely anxious to COL
lect the fcnfe of the people, before they give
the word for the attending Of convention.
Rut If ic couaIIv frue- hat thor. MO NJ,