New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1852-09-21

and find the people doing away with ali rastric.
tions in most Of those Constitutions made mans
years ago. A delegate who has addressed the
+ Convention on this topic expressed his surprise
and regret ct seeing all Of the restrictions iIcor-
i'9rhaed IN cur Constitution Of 1916 falling awav
strotand him For his Mr. B 81 part, he had
! experienced no such sensation. he felt when
he saw these restrictions taken away, that we
were doing just what the people had sent us here
to DO. Let Us go on, let US abolish wherever we
see tne attempt to restrict, and if it shall be
necessary for that purpose, let us blot out the
oid constitution altogether. and get new one
| hf:. CAsTEIIAN0s was surprised at the seem
ing alarm entertained by delegates at anything
IN tfe shape Of a restriction. But for prudent
restrictions, he did not see how we could polti-
cally exist. Society was restriction. The
banding together of people for any legitimate
purpose, was restriction. He called attention
to one. remark made by the gentlemen from
West Baton Rouge, viz: that tie peopls should
always be heard. He responded to this senti-
ment. But if the gentleman carries it the
| Whole length, he must advocate the abolition of
the veto power, for the people speak through
their representatives. What is the Senate but
restriction on the House! And what is the
veto but restriction on both Houses, These
are restrictions, and perhaps even the dgleoa fa
| from West Baton Rouge will admit that if thew
are evils, they are necessary evils.
But he would refer to Art. 10 of the Cousti
| tation, winch says: ss In all elections by the
| people, every free white male who has been two
years citizen Of the United States. who has
attained the age Of q years and resided in the
olate TWO consecutive years next preceding the
election, and the last thereof in the narisb in
which he offers to vote, shall have the right Of
voting"
He understood it to be the almost unanimous
wish OF this Convention to make the oualifca
t tons OF an eiector, two years residence in the
state and six months in the parish. If this
should be the decision of this Convention. anv
citizen who may come to this State and remain
In 1t two years, although he might have had no
opportunity and had not been able to learn its
wants, might be raised to the office of Governor
Now, he would ask if any citizen, within the
short space of two years-he cared not what
his capacity or ability might be-he would ask
Il such person, being elevated to the office of
Governor, could reasonably be expected to have
information enough to give sound reasons for
his veto of any bill that might be passed by the
Legislature for the benefit of any portion Of the
State! Or if he would be likely to even under
stand the subject: Ii, in that short time he
could become thoroughly one Of as? No! He
would say decidedly no. And, with these views,
would vote for giving the Governor time to pro-
perry tix his residence among us. He could not
sympathize with those who would lop off the
veto power-lop off every ualifoation-destroy
every thing and leave nothing in its stead
Mr.. CONRAD said: In this discussion, we
have been enveloped in fog of words. The cry
OF restriction and all that sort of thing has SO
counfounded us that we have some difficulty in
viewing properly the very simple question be-
fore US 1t has been proved by the gentleman
from New Orleans, Mr.. Jennings, and trust
Mr. Jennings is satisfied that that old
togy, Mr.. Roselius, proved successfully that
Constitution making is nothing after all but a
process OF imposing restrictions. This word
"restricton has been one of mighty meaning
within this hall for the two days past. Why,
SIR, people are laughing at us outside. Wehave
lost our charts. When | came here expected
to form very inconsiaerable portion Of a prac
tleai body. When came here thought it was
to unite in giving rational expression to public
opinion. L find that / came here with a sense
OF duty different from that entertained by some
delegates. came here not to pull down the
Constitution Of 1915, for | knew it contained
many excellent provisions. | knew il also con.
tanned many Of the provisions in the Constitution
OF lel2 am not afraid of progress, but was
| glad that there was much of the Constitution
| OF 1872 contained in the Constitution of lS45
The people said that the Constitution of 1915
was too radical for their use-too ultra in its
character This complaint was general one.
Now, I'm coming to inquire how the word
= restriction" has assumed so much Importance
Id speaking of that Constitution.
me Constitution Of 1912 was copied from the
Constitution of the United States and the Con
sttution of the State Of Kentucky. In the
Constitution OF lS45 the people thought they saw
a Wild spirit of radicalism and innovation upon
the system of American liberty. We have been
sent here to avoid extremes And | would en-
quire, in what did the radicalism of the Consti-
tuition of 1916 consist shall look TO certain
articles in that Constitution which were deemed
ultra restrictive. 1t will be seen that the party
crying out against all restrictions were those
who made them. Look. for instance, at the re-
strletlon against corporations. 1t has been said |
shat 'he ne restriction policy was then carried too
lar: Where was the restricting power' The
OF delegates in the Convention of 1S45
were democrats. They thought the wings were
too fond OF corporations, and that was the cause
OF their carrying out their restrictions on COR
porations. Then they thought the wings favored
banks, and because they thought the wings
wanted banks, they placed such restrictions on
them. But the people have thought that many
OF these restrictions were too ultra, and have
sent us here to remove them
Among the ultrasms charged by the people
upon the Constitution of 1S45 were the restric
tions upon banks and corporations The ultra
sms OF this Convention are in removing restric-
lions sanctioned by experience. | think that
the people Will not approve of the ultra spirit
this Convention The Constitution
of le45 certainly went far enough for the bows.
1t is my sincere belief that the people will not
sanction cur inroads upon the safe path of expert
ence. Why, sir, what have we done? We have
marched into the Senate chamber, taken away
all qualifications from the Senator, and left no
Inference between the two Houses of the Leg
and now, we have come to the Gov
ernor, and propose to strip him Of all qualitica-
tlons In the name of God, was there not
enough of that in the Constitution of 1916?
Mr. HEBRON said that he was not at all aston
ished at his colleague being in favor of restric-
ton. He could easily account for that but he
could not SO easily understand his colleague
when he spoke so favorably of the Constitution
of 1915, and said that the Constitution of 1912
was q capital one. Did his colleague mean
what he said What! With the property quali-
ication and the judicial tenure for life, and
,ther odious features, did his colleague really
hink that the Constitution of 1912 was a capi-
al one' Does he think it was equal even to the
Constitution of 1852 The Constitution of le45
vas radical and progressive to a great extent,
'ut the obje tion to it was that it did not 90 far
nough. There were restrictions which the
constitution Of 1S45 failed to take away. but
which ought to have been taken away, He
ould easily conceive why his colleague desired
hose restrictions to remain. but he did not think
hat he settled the blame of their being in that
constitution on the right shoulders. He be-
ieyed that the wings of NewOrleans could en-
lghten his colleague as to the manufacture of
he planks in the Constitution of 1945. His COL
eapue CHARGED the restrictions u, +bo co,,l:.