Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1817-01-28

said. that you svore only 10 observe il i'm
your legislative acts, as u legislator of the
neople; and that when YOU trans2ress
your powers, when YOU perform an act
which is not whhin the sphere of your
legislative duties, you act only as indivi-
duais, and are moi bound BY Your oaths.
Bat this is an idle sophism YOU can
not separate your acts as individuals and
as legislators. admit indeed, (said Mr..
~ that the oath binds us to The Consti-
tuition no longer than ii exists but it
| surely interdicts It's from any act which
| is.calculatcd 'o destroy that instrument.
have shown YOU then, that you have
no power which Is not expressly granted,
or inferred from some general or special
power hay e shown you, that the aatho-
| rlty which is now claimed Was not given,
and cannot be given-l have shown YOU,
| that the same authority is equally granted
10 the other branches OF the government
and that YOU are bound by your oaihs, 10
support this Constitution.
Mr.. Smyth rose toSay that the gentle
man must he mistaken: he himself had
not taken that oath.
believe, Sir, (sid Mr.. T.) | am cor
rect-but whether he has taken the oath
or not, it is the same thing. You were
sent here 10 support, not to destroy the
Constitution, under which you are legis-
latiug
He said he would notice some Of the
| arguments which had been urged in favor
OF The opinions he WAS opposing.-lt has
been said, that this Constitution requires
reform; that there Is no body who can
DO ii but the Legislature, and therefore
we must Interfere that because no other
! department ofthe government possesses
the right TO meddle with il, therefore we
possess the right Mr. I. said he heard
every day every part of this argument
repeated. The Constitution is defective,
and requires reform! Who SAYS so T?
The Legislature, who owe their existence
10 this Constitution, who live and breathe,
and have their being from it are they
qualified 70 repudiate ii? Sir, is it com
petent for the Judiciary to annihilate a
law, which they may deem defective! to
enter into Il resolution 10 call upon the
people TO reform it , Your business is io
obey this Constitution; not TO lcyislate
over II, bat underlt .-Bui, suppose it was
defective; suppose that no body else is
competent 10 reform ii, does il therefore
follow, that ii falls TO you TO do ii You
are not the rcssduary legatces of all the
power which is not granted TO the other
branches of the guvernment.-Andw what
Sir, is this argument al last, but that of tv-
ranny, necessity, state necessity -? As a
great evil exists, and no one else can re-
dress it, therefore it is contended that we
| must do It. Tyrants have always used
this argument and the people have al
ways suffered by il. Stript OF lis false
co!ourlng, the argument is this that
what the good of the people requires, we
must perform. Suppose we should
choose 10 say, Sir. that the good of the
- - .
period of our servlce.-lf we can trans
cend 1t for one day, why not Tor longer
lime? Why not vote ourselves perma-
nent and leave our seats To our heirs,
with such salaries as we choose 10 as
sumo 1.-The argument of necessity is the
tyrant's plea; but that necessity cannot
be plead, where Legislative powers are fair
| iy defined.
But il is said, the federal constitution
furnishes precedent for the powerwhich
is claimed. One or two satisfactory an
swers have already been furnished by the
gentleman from Brooke (Sir. Doddridge, J
and the gentleman from Berkeley, (Nlr.
Coiston)--he would venture 10 mention
another. You Aad the power to send de
legatcs to Philadelphia Won had the pow
or TO call convention OF the people OF
| Virginia TO consider the constitution
confederation was compact of STATES, &,
| that the Legislature OF Virginia was woad
lac the State OF Virginia You were par
lies 10 that compact. If then you had
| tie power 70 send delegates TO form the
| act Of confederation, YOU had the same
! right TO send delegates To change it. You
| hat power TO appoint rs many or as few
| delegates rs YOU pleascd-they were 0niv
| ambassadors 10 see whether the federal
! compact had been properly executed.
| But this federal convention did actually
| form d new constitution, and recon-
| m ended 1T TO the States 10 call convent
| ons 10 consider it. You might have d.
| doptcd the new constitution at once-ii
| was only the substitute for the old one
| but for these two reasons because the
sages who formed ii had recommended
| il 10 be laid before the conventions OF
| the States for ratification and because
| the words Of lhe constitution weth.
| psopie' showed that it was to be ratified
| by their consent.
But il is said, said AIr T. that The legis
| laiure OF New York havccxercised the pow
er now claimed at urhands lie knew
| not what their constitution said upon tai.
sghject; hut!le true question vas, doc.
| the constitution Of Virginia aufhoriz,
this powsry-And after all, tic constitu
| ion Of Ncw-Y0rk furnishes 10 prece
dent for us. II we judge the tree from
lis fruit, ii is indeed q most uniucky pre-
cedeut. The New York convention hav,
admitted an unlimited suffrage. Yo,
have seen 500 black men turn the scai
OF election i'll tie city OF New-Y DIRK, tn,