Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1817-12-18

lie services had rendered themselves incompe-
tent 10 self maintenance. 1t cannot be reason
ably supposed, that the wisdom of the conveu-
ton could ever haye been SO prosttuted 10
indtvidual regard, rs 20 haze laviShed the pub
lie treasure in rcWartiine NioSe whose own pc.
euniarN advancement was tie basis OF their
patriotism no Sucii intention can De Justly
presumed TO have occupied any portion Of
iheir :,5ar,s, nor is il to BE presumed that they
we're 80 short sighted. and sisOrant OF human
nature rs to have prolsered To the labOrer ms
hire before he had earned II. Thus much
then for the second objection and it, hostility
To- The law OF ihe laHd.
We come nov 10 consider thc third obecti-
on, which j. shortly this: That the session ga
the legislature which authorlkcd ihe charter
ot the james river COMPANY, hath clearly eA-
cceded It's cons itu ,iULal power, by pleising
in perpetunm the pmllic faith rs the safe
gnatd ana protection ct p" exclusive -priviic-
yes, which act 10 Il manifest SMbyerS,on OF ;nat
we!lcsta5hshed and imputtaut principle of
municipal law, which declares, that Legislative
acts Which derogate from The power of SUbSc-
quent legislatures. are uinO binding force
Tins principle IS applicable TO ctr purpose for
two reasons: list. Because tlie legislature of
this commonwealth hove made a pledge OF
public faith, for the security ola privilege
which we have heretofore shewI 10 be uncon
stiiniionai ID. because thar pledce did most
clearly ContiaNene the authority OF a body
whose functions were equivalent and dcuti-
cal with those OF the precedent legislature
II L. 50 obvious that th,s act IS in direct and
down, that presume ii needs no, The aid OF
words TO demonstrate II more iOrcihiy j
shall, therefore, iii discussing ITS merits iurlh-
er, content myself with lew observations up
ON It's important utility, and the intent OF
those by whom it was originally promulged,
~ giving II the force of law. II was IN its
original institution so ordained and establish
ed as 10 require the supreme power OF state
10 alteC or abolish II (aS we learn from Il history
Of this subject, upon the truth OF which we
place the most observation-disclosures from this too
we may conclude that il was dee med a principle
OF vital Importance TO the public veal, and The
reason IS PLAN, Tor that when clothed with due
authority, il presented AN nsupera ble obstruc.
ton 30 the eEcroachmentS of powers, OF an
equal or inferior degree, aud thereby prev ent-
ed Tie abuse oflegiSlative functions, winch III
me course of SO many ages must lave become
NIGHTLY corrupted.
But II this restraint was removed, ii may be
easily perceived that there would be nothing
LETT 10 check the sway of the most arbitrary
power, fer il would then be within the sconc
OF the precedentlegislati authority, Ia give
perpetual law TO all which might succeed il.
I It's origin Ill this government may De deduced
from that of Great Britain where for ages
past Il has been the theme Of constant eulOgi-
um TO some OF the most learned and popular
writers on Jurisprudence, that have ever hon
orCd any age or nation. Ii il is thus cherished
as an object OF veneratiOn to nation of peo-
pie who are, as we suppose, exposed to all the
gratnes of unreStrained tyranny, and robbed
Of AtureS dearest rights by the riaOr of civil
law-how much more does il deserve the un-
!ei2neu devoJ-Oi of nation, which from free
dom OF lis municipal institutions, TO ms an
- pla'ibHS uiium' III the political horizon of
the world! How does IL become this govern
nlent TO lend its constant support, when il
processes TO all mankind its ability to secure
tlie ends at civil compact, by making The least
o"croachmenis upon the SAed and unalt0rable
laws OF nature and OF natures God. Il would
be utterly useless for me 10 trespass longer on
your time and patience, by detailing at length
all the arguments which might be offered 10
cOrroDorate those already advanced. / will
therefore hasten to my conclusion by propo-
sing case which may serve 10 illustrate the
more torclbly what we have said in regard to
the subject heretofore. Suppose (as is evil
dtnt,J that upon an INVASION OF this common
wealth, II becomes necessary 10 raise an army
to repei that Invasion the necessary and iuse-
peraDie consequence of this raising, is, that
there mast be some appropriation made for
the support OF this army but the legislature
recognizing the existence eff that principle,
winch IL IteVcr existed, we have shewn 20 have
been long since exploded, make pledge OF
pubic faith, and iOT the sake OF gratifying the
amDltlon OF oSicers, or TO answer other ends
which II is not necessary 10 point out atpTe-
sent. guarantee the maintenance of this army
10 The great diSparagcment of the community,
long AFTER the emergency which called il into
action shall have ceased. Here il is evident
that the public interest is the wanton urey
OF military rapacity and before the existence
OF such uSTrpa tiOp, the constitution musi ne
ccsSarily nave been set at nought. But can we
believe that tile present legislature c0uld be
composed of men who world calmly behold
the scene OF rapine and plumber would any
man dare to insult the feelings Of VirgiEians
by SupPoSIng them Sucs servIe demagogues,
as for Il moment to dORbt of their natural and
constitutional authority TO resist such usurpa-
lion Surely not. How then is il that III q
case governed by the same principle, we see
them calmly ana quietly submitting to an en-
CrOachmcnt, which Is the tiist step towards
II q ali IN
1 admit that this ~ all extreme case. 1 believe
II - case OF whose actual existence al ii fu-
tuTe day there is not at this Time any general
apprehension. | admit further that there is
not the slightest analogy between The motives
Of this aud those which induced the pledge
formerly alluded TO, on the one hand il IS
usurpatlon and tyranny in its most fragrant
form, whilst OF the other is only usuTpation
founded upon misunderstanding of establish
ed principles. Although [ have thus openly
admitted the difference of motives, / would by
no means have you to understand that my
ideas OF tie general principle are not essent-
ally the same on the contrary, from The view
which nave taken of the subject, il would
appear TO be undenabe and irrefntdble
conclusion such, therefore, is the light in
which have considered this objection.
A few remarks now, HpOn the fourth and last
objection, will bring me To a final conclusion.
The injury which the James river company
and consequently the public, would sustain BY
the competition OF similar institution, is
made the subject matter Of the itiI aud ast
objection, not less frivolous than those which
IN the order Of these remarks have preceded
IT. III will be seen at once, that the validity OF
this depends entirely upon the consistency of
those before mentioned, this being only AN
excrescence sprung from those which are by
them deemed more substantial, but which IS in
fact contaminated with tie same palpable abb
surdlties which cause the whole structure Of
lheir ingenuity to totter OF its basis. / has
been rudeiy, bet most clearly demonstrated,
tsat tie principles Of these objections are