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

ioa,. nerci, To sr:liiy The whimsical con-
cesiS OF lew ilicorclic politicians. Aud
| IN that rcsnrrt, il i belle, ed. the present
IS a case directly III point, although in
sui,ing, * il Is believed, an absolute
uS;irpaiioa oi powers la get at the tayo-
rae canius!ing object, which bot FOR such
'isutialon, pronid be beyond the reacl,
OF nv Legislature.
I; Is here respectfully asked, in this
wlid career iDg dcmo!ishing The Nirghian
| constitution. what is 10 become OF the
right of instruction heretofore held so
dear by the haiiorers Of The peoplei
That also must be turned upside down.
| For II is proposed, that instead Of the
/ legislators modestly waiting to receive
| the instruction OF the people To guide
| them IN the discharge of their legislative
functions according 10 The true theory OF
instructions, they should presunIptuously
undertake 10 instruct the people in the
exercise of their reserved rights. u Is
proposed 10 do more 10 make such in
siruciiGns obligatory by law--All this too
SO far from previously consulting the viii
OF the people. rs far ais that will has been
developed, II appears 10 tie directly OPP
posed totlie whole proceeding, as unlvisc.
unnecessary and intrusive. In the course
OF these General Reflections, most re-
the cham p.onsofthi usurpation, ccultluct
escape cbseNa alton. One poriouoi them
insists upon the legislative right 10 call
convention al once, without any iuiermc-
dIate consultation with the people, 10
perform the last, as well as the first act
Another portion revolts al this mons trous
| prctension; but insists, upon the leSsla-
tive right, To do the first act: not the
conclusive act. The adyoca,cs for the
! legislative right 10 perform tie inci3ient
! act, attack the priucplc of their aniago-
! niSis, with the most profound logical, and
F. conclusive arguments 10 demonstrate the
! usurpation OF the legislative pretension
/ 10 perform the conclusive act, without
once appearing 10 apprehend, tina; the
same arguments viii as clearly demon
| Strate the usurpalion Of performing the
! incipcnt act.-'io shew this. nothing is
necessary, but 10 translate the argu mcnt
/, from the one case, TO the other. The let
| gislative right to perform the last, can on
~ be lusinied, say they very properly,
| by extreme necessity; the existence Of
winch necessity, they peremptorily deny.
| IL Is then asked what will Justify the
incipient act, but The same necessity =?
Surely nothing-it is further asked, whe-
Their the right to change the government
Is Joint right, between The people, and
legislature? If so: whence is this new
definition of the right derived? Certainly
moi from the constitution. Certainly not
from the reason ami nature of things. Ii
is again asked what ere the boundary
lines between the iDclpicnt, and the con.
elusive act Where does The right OF
the legislature stop and the right OF the
people begin! 1t would seem, as fthe
principle of the division OF This right, was
prepOsierous, If not absurd Tint the
! legislature should have the right 10 begin
the people 10 conclude the work. file
legislature To enter the wedge: the people
10 cieave the iinber.-'fie truth il. the
legislature has as much right TO do both,
as either act.-And in truth, ii has no
right io do either.
fits not denied to tire legislators 10 ex-
press their oarR opinions upon tie policy
OF calling d convention in their indivi-
Qua! or legislative capacities, nor 70 back
such opinions with The best arguments
al their command, nor 10 publish them,
fit be their pleasure, to their consfitu-
ents and to the world. But the true point
of ts,rpaiion consists in this tiat in
their legislative capacity, they propose
10 judge, IN the place of the people, OF
the occaSion which would render such
expression necessary and proper They
propose TO do more; TO annex by law.
Limitations and notifications to tie opiaions
ofthe peopte when expressed. Now. the peo-
pie nave reserved 10 Themselves, as well
the right of Judging ofthe occasion, which
would render such expression of opinion
proper as of the proper opinion to be ex-
pressed, when in their judgments the occ0-
sion has occurred. They have also re-
s1ryed Tie right to express such opinion
free from all modification or restraint
whatever. When, therefore, the Legisla-
ture propose TO substitute themselves for
the people, for the purpose ofiudging in
both these respects, and by law impose
compulsory obligations on the people TO
confirm or reject their acts, it is mani
fest usurpation upon the reserved rights
OF the people; rights, too, OF the highest
sovereign character. aud which ought TO
be guarded by the people, against all le-
gislaiive encroacliment, with the most
scrupulous watchfulness.
This course of observation forces ano-
Their reflection on the mind. If these zeal
Gus advocates for constitution-mak
differ SO radically amongst themselves as
to tlie principle by which your present
constitution is to be demolished sccWndau
arteDi, it IS most earnestly and solcmmv
put TO ihc people, seriously TO consider,
and ask themselves: if they once permit
their constitution TO be demolished, what
confidence they can have in the capaci-
ties of gentlemen, who dilferso essential
~ as 10 the proper mode Of accomplish
= inc tins work of dPstruciiOn TO max r.