Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1852-03-19

with a fine impression of the abilities and
knowledge of the gentleman who delivered If.
We congratulate the Virginia Historical Socie
ty upon the handsome style in which it was re-
presented before the public on the 18th Janua-
ry, 1852, and the seat Of learning, which is now
plucking the ripe fruits of Mr.. Washngton's
| cultivated understanding
Without committing manifest iniustice. we
cannot, in the circumscribed space of daily
newspaper, pretend to do more than to state the
subject OF this Discourse, the general train of
Its reflections and single out, perhaps one or
| more OF Its points for particular observation
ms done, we Will have to turn the reader over
| to Mr. Washington himself. The subject which
the speaker selected for development was s.the
Virginia Bill of Rights and Constitution of
| 1776." The Constitution of 1776 abeing the
first written social compact reduced to practice
| forms an in the government of nations
| By which must be understood form of govern
ment set forth in full dimensions perfect in a ts
parts, and springing from the sovereign power.
Subject to that limited Specification alone is the
enunciation of Mr. Washington historically cor
| rect. The English people claim that they have
| written Constitution anterior in its existence
even to the colonial charters, under which the
old States of this Union first emerged into poll
tical existence. And it is certainly true that
where Limitations upon the powers of the var-
GUS departments of the government, and even of
| the government itself exist, and are evidenced
| by solemn instruments of writing, which may
be and are referred to as the bulwarks of popular
| liberty, that the people who live under such
| form of government may, in the highest and best
sense, be said to have written Constitution
Inc truth OF History requires us to remind Mr..
Washlngton's read ers. that as we derive all the
| valuable principles in our Constitution from
| the parental source of England SO we derive
| from her the valuable policy of committing to
writing the limitations intended to be imposed
upon tue action of the government, and tho Sc
curities for the liberties ofthe people and of indi
viduals Allthatthe constitution of 1776 contains,
in this respect, which the Constitution of the
mother country did not at that time contain, was
a more formal development of the powers of the
/ government and a more careful and particular
| deineation of its several parts.
One of the principal objects that Mr.. Wash
ington avows, is to overthrow the common be-
llsfthat the English people derive the free prn-
ciples of their government from their Saxon
ancestors. and to substitute for it the be-
lief that English liberty has "a high and noble
pedigree aud is in truth, inheritance, trans
mltted to this Democratic age and country from
the bosom Of an exclusive uristocracy.'' This
rather unusual proposition is established, in the
gentleman's opinion, by attributing magma char
TIA, which he seems to think, constitutes the sum
and substanceo OF English ibe ty, to the action of
the English barons. And Indeed, in respect TO tho
| constitution of 1876, MIR. Washington enter
| tains a somewhat curious idea, for he thinks
the only principle, - after passing over
the ''mere machinery of government " which
1t contains, is the provision and protec-
ton which it makes for the individual rig hts of
the governed. Now, here we take issue with
MIR. Washington. We think the s.great char
! terri f,,1
| the part of the crown, but even if every one
We're TO be observed in their utmost strictness,
| tho chief good Of the En- slish constitution has
| not been yet obtained. And SO we are willing
to admit, in their greatest latitude, the value of
the boundaries drawn round the rights of indi-
vidual citizens by the Bill of Rights and Con-
stitution ot'76, but we cannot concede t3at such
acknowledgements constitute the only or the
best principle of these organic declarations
we consider that the principle Of popular rep
feSentdtIon planted in remote ages in the Englisl
constitution and t,ansplnnted into our own, as
worth the contents of all the charters that have
ever been wfung from reluctant oppressors.--
This principle which, in its natural and steady
developments has overshadowed TIE aristocratc
| and kingly features of the British government,
has indeedproved the buIwalk offreedom against
| the tyranny Of kings. We say that we consider
the right OF popular representation the mother
| OF Eng lish ard American fieedom-and who
doubts it? Peruse the history of the English
Constitution through its stormy existence, and
we will discover that it is against this celestial
/ shield that all the blows of tyranny have been
aimed. What was the dark policy of the
House of Stuart! To undermine and abolish
the concessions of Magua Charta? Oh! no.
| What Shatford and Charles aimed at was to
destroy this feature of popular power, and car
ry on the Government without the interposi-
ton of Parliament But the principle Of popular
representation in one ofthe estates ofthe realm,
which we fairly hail as the genius of English
freedom, was destined to an immortal existence,
and set at naught the ambuscades and the
open assaults of all its enemies. Now to this
enquiry we direct Mr.. Washingtons attention
from what source was this principle of repre-
sentation, as applied to the common people, de-
rived! Was that of Norman and aristocratic orr
gin! Or was it not in all probability vestige
OF Saxon freedom that had fingered in the
minds of the people after their subjugation and
which, so soon as they had recovered suffi-
cient portion off power, they hastened to engraft
upon the constitution of the country? In its
humble beginning the House of Commons con
stltuted no permanent part of the government,
but was popular delegation sent up to give the
sanction ofther constituents to the imposition
and collection of taxes. 1t is plainly popular in
its origin, and did not constitute feature of
Norman polity. But we have not time to pros !
ecute this subject further.
There is however, one other point to which !
we beg to refer, on account of the slight and
casual attention it has received at Mr.. Wash
ington's hands. Upon pages 80, 81, he disc s.
ses the effect which the feudal system exerted
upon personal independence and finds in that
beneficial result an ample remuneration for the /
odious features which it certainly contained-
In this connexion the talented gentleman adds. |
sand let me say, in passing, that it was princi- !
pally by means Of tn It ascendancy and prepon-
derance which the Feuda system gave to coun-
try over city life, that it was enabled to effect
this end.
During, the dark ages also, -population was
everywhere collected together in cities, or large
muses.. for the purpose of protection ard securi-