The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-04-16
RHODE ISLAND.

III
is now daily putting forth upon the subject of
| the unhappy differences in that State-dife-
rences in every point of view, to be deplored
| by the advocates of both parties, would not have
surprised us much in that press some years ago.
But its position, and, of late, its tone and con-
not of neutrality by any means, but rather of
armed observation than of active and vehe-
ment hostility. Its recent editorials, though
somewhat labored and pedantic, and almost al
| ways full of the grossest sophistry and injus-
tce, have been written in calm spirit, and with
deliberate purpose. Its deep and deadly perso-
nal malignity has never dscomposed its tenn
per-its revenge is bitter but cold.
| How, then, can that journal reconcile it to
| any sense of what it owes to its own political
| professions, to pursue in cold blood, such a
course, in matter so delicate and so perilous 2
How can the exclusive champion of democracy,
abet proceedings of which the immediate eff
feet is, to discredt all popular government, and
| the not very remote tendency is, to overthrow it
utterly2 How does a patriot, thanking his
God every day from the house tops, that he is
not like the publicans and sinners, that are ready
to sell their country for gold, how does such a
patriot find decent apology, 10 his conscience.
for striving to reduce that country to level
with South America, to explode in it every YES
tige or notion Of law, or constitutional liberty,
and to substitute for the order, the peace, the
fraternal moderation and forbearance, that have
hitherto distinguished and blessed her-the
reign of wild anarchy and revolutionary vio-
ence, without end, check, or mitigation
Surely nobody pretends in this country to de-
ny the right of the People, where evils are no
longer sufferabe, to alter or abolish their forms
of government. II is hardly necessary at this
time of day to republish in a newspaper the
Declaration of independence, which every body
knows by heart. But do the writer's of the
Globe mean to say, that mere provisional
revolutionary government" as the French Con-
vention called it. is the only form of poity for a
free people? Will they affirm, that whenever
"a few restless spirits meet in public places,
and proclaim that they will hold elections,
in order to a Convention for changing the
existing Constitution, in whole or in part, they
can bind by their edict, all who do or do not
think proper to take part in the adoption of
them2 They say the majority must govern well,
but what is the majority? They answer, the
mere numerical majority of men above twenty
one years of age But, why not OF all men ca
pable of bearing arms why not include all
youths beyond the age of puberty why not
wonen-at any rate all not sub potestate viri,
if that is legitimate exclusion? If you fall
back upon natural rights, where are you to stop?
How can you prove you have majority even
of those past the age you arbitrarily pitch upon
BY what law were their qualifications fixed
ny what Judges were they examined who GER
ti6es to their capacity? Are madmen, felons,
paupers, to be admitted? What residence gives
stranger right to vote? May the absent
and the sick exercise the privilege? Are not
places and times of election to be chosen with a
view to general convenience? Will majority
of one or two votes in some hundred thousands
thus gathered in tumult, suffice Why not
These and hundred other similar questions
must be satisfactorily answered, before you can
predicate of any popular vote, that it is the voice
of the majority, or prove that majority, how
ever informally ascertained, is to be the supreme
law.
For this reason it is that, by nothing less So
lemn than a fundamental article in every Con-
stitution, are the qualification Of electors settled,
and express provision is tactly made for the
time, place, and manner, of holding elections.
Under regularly constituted government the
off ho inrifu IL fhnc Dn6
1t is settled by a presumption, where proof can
not be had The law which requires every cit
zen having the right, to vote on such day, al
such place, in such manner, declares the ma
ority of those who do thus vote to be the majo-
rity Of the whole. They may very possibly be,
in fact, minority, many having refused to vote,
but that makes no difference The silent are
presumed to acquiesce in the voice Of those who
speak, and he that will not exercise his priyi-
leges has nobody but himself to blame, if his
neighbors give him the law. He has had fair
notice and has not chosen to profit by it.
Now, it is plain that no such presumption can
exist, except under regular government, and
by virtue of some precept of the constituted
authorities, calling upon the People to go to the
polls, which precept the People are bound, or,
what is the same thing, have solemnly agreed
to obey. BY what color Of right, can private
individual like ourselves, exact of US, that we
should at his mere will and pleasure give our
voice on the most important matters, or be
taken to have submitted to has decision in re-
gard to them? With what sort of accuracy
could the public will be gathered under such
circumstances And if IA bare majority of ever
so few votes, imagined to exist from such an
imperfect showing, is to change constitutions at