The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1851-03-26


yances then complained of were eonsi
dered to hare been settled. No new
element Of disquiet. either Of sectional
interest or Of popular privilege. seem
ed to be contemplated for the next hall
century. Read the debates Of the con.
vention, and you will see that II was
with these cheering hopes that the
members Of that body terminated their
labors. How. then, are We to under.
stand that provision Of the constitution
providing for amendments hy the Le-
gislaturef Why. that it was intend
ed to provide for those immaterial
changes of the mere machinery of the
government, without interfering with
any great principle on which 1t was
based. Ii was after this provision had
been agreed on lin committee Of the
whole, if recollect aright) that the
able and lamented Meares moved the
additional provision which was also
adopted, providing that no convention
should be called, except by vote of
two-thirds Of all the members of both
Houses. What are we to understand
by this-but that he who moved it, and
the convention that adopted it, foresaw
that at some future time an attempt
might be made, not merely TO improve
the machinery Of the government, but
to change its organic principles, which
could only be done properly by the peo-
pie in convention. through vote of a
bare majority Of the two Houses? Lit
tie did that convention suppose that in
fifteen years their foresight and wisdom
would be brought to the test Of trial.
Am not. therefore, warranted in
saying that this attempt to change one
Of the great fundamental principles Of
the constitution by legislative action,
is not only contrary to the spirit and
purpose Of the provision Of the conven
tion of '35, in regard to amending the
constitution-but that it is also repug-
nant to the very theory Of the govern
ment itself? The very first great car
dinal maxim of free and representative
government laid down in the /" decla-
ration Of rights" which is declared to
be a part Of the constitution, is this,
" that all political power is vested in
and derived from the people only"
Here is great question Of political
power affecting for all time those from
whom we derive our brief tenure Of au-
thority, with which we cannot rightful-
ly interfere, except by making provi-
sion to consult those whose servants we
are, with which we were not sent here
to interfere, and with which we dare
not interfere, unless we assume to our
selves prerogative which the people
have reserved to themselves. This as
suming to know what are the peoples
rights better than they do themselves,
although resting on an affectation Of
great love for the people, is anti-repub-'
hcan and contrary to the doctrine of
constitutional freedom. This doling
out favors to the people by piece-meaI,
is constituting ourselves their masters
instead of their servants. The gentle
man from Burke (Mr. Avery) said that
it was evident the convention of '35
intended that all specific amendments,
not involving an entire overthrow Of
the organic law, should be by legisIa-
tive enactment. The proposed change
does involve radical alteration of the
organic law in one particular. What
is more important, what more safely
guarded, what more intimately inter-
woven with the framework of civil IL
berty than the question of suffrage !
And the change contemplated proposes
an entire abandonment Of system that
has been commensurate with our histo-
ry as people, under which the glori-
Gus deeds of our revolutionary history
were achieved, under which the peo-
pie have lived contented and happy,
which was never heard of in the cata-
logue of complaints to redress which
the convention of '35 was called. Or
did the gentleman from Burke mean
that the provision in the constitution
for calling convention was not de-
signed for an amendment Of the consti-
tuition, but for the framing Of an entire
new one to suit new system Of GO
vernment upon an entire overthrow Of
the present republican formi Ii so,
moments reflection will teach the gen
tleman the absurdity Of his position.
Such an oUerthro,o as he speaks Of could
be nothing but revolutionary, which
disregards constitutions as we'll as or
dinary laws. An amendment of a con-
stitution presupposes that the great
principles which constitute its organic
existence are to remain unchanged.
]" An entire overthrow of the organic
law" for which the gentleman from
Burke thinks the provision for calling
convention was designed, would in
volve an overthrow of that very provi-
sion as we'll as all others, and would
throw us back upon the original ele-
ments of social organization; and be-
ing revolutionary in its nature, would
not be likely to regard the barriers
against the popular will, by requiring