Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1846-03-26
DEBATE ON THE CONVENTION.
Substance ofthe remarks of Mr.. BALDJVIyy.
Of augusta, upon The Convention Bills, in
the House Of Delegates, FEB. 9Th, 1916.


Mr.SpEAKER--Ife feel i, to be due to mvselrto
explain the reasons by which have been gov
erned in the course which have pursued up-
on the question now under consideration. and
which induce me 10 vote for the bill reported
by the select committee
My having been chosen as member of tina,
committee has given occasion for an attack
upon the presiding officer of This House, and
1t is proper that should say something in his
defence. The ground of complaint against
the Speaker is that he has violated the es,ab-
lished parliamentary usage in appointing upon
the committee majority of those opposed to
the object sought TO be attained by the reso-
luton of reference.
The existence Of the parliamentary rule is
not denied but it does not seem TO me tha,
the Speaker is liable TO the charge of having
violated it, The resolution directed an uoui.
ry into the expediency of providing by law
for the call of Convention, and all thai was
required by the parliamentary rule was tha.
there should be majority of the committee
favorable TO the call of Convention. The
action oil the committee has shown that this
| was provided for oy the Speaker.
Among those favorable to the call of a con-
vention there is a difference of opinion as to
Its organization, and it is made cause of COM
plant that the control Of the committee was
not given TO the advocates of the white basis.
IL is IN reference to this question that nv an
pointmenI has given dissatisfaction. The
complaint itself seems TO me TO be unreason-
able and unnecessary and so far as nv opin-
IONS are concerned, they were entirely un-
known to the Speaker, with whom was no,
at that time personally acquainted.
Thus much have deemed it proper to saw
IN Justification of one who has not the on
portunily to defend himself; and | will pass
TO the discussion OF the subject under consid-
Grafton, with the single remark that in the Sc
lection OF the committee great care seems TO
have been taken to give to every interest in
the Safe share in its deliberations.
Before proceeding 10 The discussion of the
comparative merits of the two bills, wish to
explain briefly my position in reference to the
general subject of a convention. | have, it is
true, joined in reporting bill favorable to the
call OF convention, and intend voting for
that bill, but do not wish Ia be COMPOUNDED
with those who advocate convention as a
matter OF choice. Or the contrary, look
upon frequent alterations Of the Fundamental
law as great evil, and would submit to many
inconvenience rather than to resort to so
dangerous remedy. It's fearful thing for
any community to resolve itself into its orr
ginal elements, and to undertake the delicate
task of again uniting its dissimiIar interests
and harmonizing its conflicting passions.
The object Of every written constitution is
10 protect mlnorIties against the expressions
OF maJorIties, by imposing restraints upon the
popular will, and this constitutes their CHIEF
excellence. Majorilies, however, are always
impatient oil these restraints, and at every op-
portuniiy afforded by change in the funda-
mental law, they seek 10 lessen the number
OF these restraints, or 10 weaken their force
Thus, the experience Of the States Of this I'm
ION shows that every change in the organic
law is marked by some encroachmenl of ma
lJorities upon the rights of minorites. These
steps in the line of modern progress are call.
ed extensions Of popular privilege, but having
no fancy for such extensions, ! am, as gen.
eral rnle, opposed to conventions.
( Our presen. constitution, however, though
the work of a body of as wise and viriUous
men as ever assembled, and in the main worthy
OF It's authors, seems to me to have three de-
iecis, which must at no distap: day lead &c
lis overthrow. The first Of these is that the
oasis OF representation Is entirely arbitrary
and does not accommodate itself upon any
principle 10 the changing condition Of the
different portions of the State. This, in
State where the relative population and wealth
oil the different sections is so rapidly chang
ing, must, think, lead to convention fol
amendment
The next defect is in the basis Of individual
suffrage. When the trainers Of our constitu
ton abandoned the freehold qualification fo
voters, it seems to me they left the best ant
safest basis of suffrage, and in the effort tc
stop short Of universal suffrage, they have in
volved the whole subject in confusion.
Next to the freehold basis, the most uni