Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-01-27

4 Of the constitution, and it fortunately happens
e that we have on record q practical exhibition oil
their views II will be recollected thst the cues
ton here is, TO the legislative power Of super
4 inducing any qualification upon those enumerated
in the consi ution. II must be admitted, that ii
they have the power to add any disqualification,
though but for an hour, aday, or yeai, they have
eoua power TO enact IT for years, and consequent.
10 such may operate for the life of the indvidu
Al. In November 1776, committee was raised
N 10 revise the laws of this Commonwealth, con-
n listing of Messrs Jefferson. Pendleton, Wythe.
George Mason, and Thomas l.. Lee. who report.
ed number Of revised bills in June 1873. Tho
mas Lee died in the mean time, and the report
WAS made by Messrs. Jefferson, Pendle,on and
Wythe. George Mason having resigned, but not
until the plan of the work had been agreed upon,
and in q considerable degree, carried into effect
(See s. at l.. c. 8. p. 1859 These bills were never
enacted into code, but passed separately, as oc-
cssion required, and are known in legislative
history by the title of revised bills. In Oct 1885,
enc of these passed, imposing the penalty of ex-
pulsion from the house, and inegbility for three
years. upon bribery, or treating, either TO promote,
or in consequence of election. IL authority in
any case can have influence, surely this is one in
which it is entitled to peculiar weight, we have
here practical construction placed on the cons:-
tuition, by the very who wrote il, BY the
venerable Pendeton, one OF its most jealous and
enlightened supporters, and By two other most
active anu contemporary pOlltlctans. who
of all men, will be least suspected of putting on the
constitution forced construction, for the purpose
,1of extending the powers of the legislature, and
las the gentlemen FROM Norfolk is pleased TO say)
ssridging the rights of the people This single
case would seem 10 him conclusive Of the question.
But, sir, said MIR. c., will dwell no longer on
this construction of conjunctons and propositions
The gentleman is greatly mistaken in supposins
the whole argument to rest on this ground. Strike
these words from the constitution, and still, ac
cording the theory of OR government, and every
fair rule of construction applicable to the cons,
,uon, and the power of supcradding other quail
fica,ions remains unimpared to the legislature. The
United States, they presented to the world the
first instance of regular written constitutions
also present the singular fact of two constitutions
differing radically in the rules OF construction ap-
nlicable 10 each. The one operating on no pre-.
existing rights, is only grant of SO much power
is expressly or implicitly given. The other is no,
grant, but restriction of power, or intended TO
direct its exercise. For, before the adoption of
the constitutions all power, legislative. executive,
and judicial, was in the people themselves. As
they could not exercise this power otherwise
! than through their representatives, all this power
would be vested in them and but for the consiitu-
t;on would sill remain in this body. AS how
ever, the people have chosen 10 take from US
,or,ion of this power, the COW OF the former
propo -ition is true, ard all power taken from
as is still enjoyed by The legislature. With this
fundamental truth always in view, let apply
one or two plain rules OF construction, and see
whether this power Is not fanly derived from the
Icoasuton, even without deriving any aid from
,is words, or duly qualified according to iaw.''
Tie first of these rules 10. that words shall he
considered according 10 their common and natural
import, and not put negative Specification upon
Affirmative words, or the contrary. Supposing,
them the words, g or duly qualified accold ding
law" removed from the constitutions, il would
~. AZ he Inns Of Dell ol,a
sist of stwo Iepi e. atives TO he chosen from
each county, and for the District of West Angus
ia, annually, OF such men as actually reside in,
and are fleehoders of, the same."' Ii is not said,
although gentlemen wish to coastrue it, that all
ieeholders and all residents, shall be capable of
serving in the General Assembly; but by the rule
Of construction before mentioned, only requires
these qualification in persons otherwise !" duly
qualified according 10 law"
Another rule OF construction, which every
lawyer in this House will admit to be true, is,
that as the enumeration Of particulars excludes all
cases not enumerated, the exception OF particu-
lars strengthens all cases not excepted. The first
is applicable 10 the federal, the second the state
constitution. Had the constitution been entirely
silent then on the subject of the qualifications Of
members, the Assembly, so far from having no
| power would have had unlimited control over the
subject. AS but two exceptions made to this
unlimited control, it follows, that all other qualifi
some prohibitory words preventing its exercise
Now these,w ords, let gentlemen point out.
This construction Is strengthened by general
view of the constitution. Will gentlemen point
out to us where even legislative power j. granted
TO the Assembly? Shall we be told, that IL is an
inciden, to government, and arises from the very
nature of the thing? Then 1t is :re-exisling
right, not granted, but regulated in its mode OF
exercise by the constitution, and only far regu-
lated as is EXPRESSED. Shall be referred to
that clause, which says, the two Houses of As
sembly shall together be " complete legislature ?"
4 This, no doubt, intended 10 free them from
the necessary concurrence of the executive, to
which they had always heretofore been accu-tom-
ed but If it were, it might have been, intended
10 convey legislative power, IL becomes necessary
to consider what ideas the convention were likely
10 attach to those words. l, is we'll known TO
this House, that in England from whence are
derived most of our principles Of government The
universally acknowledged doctrine is, that the
legislative power is supreme. What ideas, then,
must the trainers of the constitution have bad of
a complete legislature? Certainly legislature un-
controlled in its powers; and had there been no
other clause in the constitution, the legislature
could have done any thing, and in what manner
they pleased within the scope of legislative power
But as other clauses of the constitution restrain
them, both in the use and the mode of exercising
their powers, so far and no further they re-
strained. Now, where is the CLAUSE which either
expressly or implicitly prohibits the legislature
from requiring o her qualifications of its members,
than those required in the constitution.
In the Federal Constitution, each house was
expressly declared to be judges of the quslifca
tons OF its own members, because, without grant
they would not have enjoyed the right. No such
power is granted to us; and yet we exercise the
right, and have from the foundation Of the govern
ment IF exneiiinc those who bav bean entity of