Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1817-03-14

as not oeion.lng 10 1t: or IT II thought
proper. IN that character, To usurp the
power, IN the same character twas bound
finally TO act, and decide rpon it: and
that, too, undera double responsibility
LIST. The high responsibility for the usur-
paiion-2d. The increased responsibility
I'D consequence Of such usurpation, of
Judging rightly upon every possible bear
ing of the usiirpcd power.
That flie powerproposed TO be assumed
by the General Assembly, was an usurp-
ed power, will appearamost self-evidcnt
proposition, upon Il correct consideration
OF the grounds upon which its advocates
place it themselves. They admit the ac-
tual power 20 call Convention. is para
mount to tilelegiSlaiive power, and resides
only iii the people; but they contend,
thar the General assembly have The right
toad the people in carving into effect
Their VIII for calling a Convention and
to that end, they infer the rightto call on
the people 20 express that will. Now, il
is almost seieeviden;, that this is begin
ming at the wrong end. The Inference is
quite the reverse result from the premi
ses-The people. in whom the mower is
admitted to reside, should perform the
tirstact. The first act, is the declaration
VI ti'H ONt VIII II u tlltN Vit SUCH tie
c'araiion, that the right of fhe Legislature
to interfere ~ ANY way or for any object
Is pretended 10 accrue The pconle. al
though both coaxed and provoked TO do
so, have made 10 such declaration. The
ground. then, upon which the right is at
tempted to be placed, is altogether unsub-
stantial, and of course, the power prc-
tended 10 be derived from il must he mere
usurpation. .iit be pretended, that the
people have no mode of declaring their
own will without the interference of tile
legislature, the fact is peremptorilv de-
med. The papers before the Legislature
demonstrate the error of the suggestion.
Some few individuals from nineteen coun-
ties, have, III the common and ordinary
mode, bv memorials, actually declared
their will, being impelled 10 il, both bv
cOaXinG and proyocatinn What would
have prevented the whole people Of Virgil
MA from declaring the same will, i'm the
same mode, bnt the want of such will
Surely for the want Of memorials, nor
want acknowledge of the mode of procee-
ding; Tor they were most oiiiciously fur
nsleti with memorials inahundance. with
on; giving them the trouble of preparing
them for their own objects and their
ears were stunned with earnest soicita-
tons to sigu them. But the people very
wisely treated these wild effcrts ofiheir
ineretrcious frendswith The silence tlev
deserved. Instead, therefore, of an afiir-
NATIVE declaration of such will from the
people, there is The strongest negative de-
claration againstii.
II IS said, that the proposed measure is
mere imitation 10 the people To express
their own will; and imposes on them no
obligation. This would be. itself, strong
evidence of asurpation. The business OF
legislation is 10 urescriberules of conduct
| to be observed by fhe people, which no
cessariiy implies the obligation 10 obedi-
ence on the part of the people, and are,
ofcourse, compulsory rules. Upon what
ground, then, is lleright ofinviiation loun-
ded An invitation, too, of the most ex-
traordlnary character: an invitation 10
the people TO exert their own reserved
rights, from the exercise ofwlich the le-
glslaturc Is ex' ludrd bv their own Con-
stitution. Ifthsright OF invitation should
not be paipable act ofusurpation, TO say
tie least OF II, II IS an act Of extreme Off
cousnf S., and could only be justified bv
a necessity too obvious for denial by
any ; but whlchis, by none, even preten-
ded.
The attempt TO Justify Ibis usurpation,
by recurrence TO certain general exprcssi-
ons The Constitution, Is still more re-
markable and extraordinary. The one
is, tiiatthe legislature shall be a complete
legislature, and possess complete Iegisa-
tive powers. What is the naturainterpre-
taiion OF this grant of power? Certainly
that fine legislative power although COM
plete for all legislative objects, shall be
limited 10 legislative objects only. What
is the Interpretation of the friends of this
usurpatlon, upon the reserved rights of
the people? That because thew are a
complete legislature, with powers limited
merely 20 legislative objects; therefore.
they may extend their powers beyond the
sphere of legislation, ami seize ,iDon the
reserved rights of the people and TINS
compel thepeople TO at i'm their high So
vereign character, whether with or against
their own Widths. too, under the extra
ordinary pretext ofenlarging the rights d
liberties of the people.
The next general expression seized on
IS the recommendation contained in the
Constitution 10 have frequent recurrence
to fundamental principles. II would be
difficult to determine what fundamental
principle is here alluded to. Is il preien-
died. by this resort, 10 be a fundamental
principle, that the Legislature should at
pleasure break down all constitutional
restraints upon the legislative power, and
seize upon the rights reserved to The peo-
pie, for the express purpose Of guarding
them against all legislative interference
If that be the object, it is really an i'm
provement upon all the novel devices
yet developed in the fashionable political