The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1854-12-20

cation 81 All aIuuhus fuI aouAA ~
aaurs. M the desire &C all Who heard /,
ain. and the duty which drvslses up 4
IN him to throw all the light he cSa |
upon this Interesting and impsit ant
asiter shall sysil any thing. doubtless
Ibis speech will be pablislltd IN sxfrn-
30. ] prupase 10 give ysn new only
fhs points which he madesshilst pass
ing
His argument in favor Of The method
a. smending..Ihr Constitution by Con-
sentipn rather than bs the Legislature.
was much the same Nth that which he
used in the county ean,,ss last sun
mer. sn pleased AMI prpsd 10 sec
the great interest which this portion 81
his reInarkslrlieitsd. DemocFsiic Ss,
nsters listened atieniively. while the
Governor. 10 strain worthy OF him
self and The cause which he VAS main
tanning. lifted this grave subject abo,e
the INST and the contamination Of par
" jeslousirs. and placed il in that lul-
" positi0nl which, until the lasl six
wears. il had always occupied in North
carolina. lie carefully ayoillel in
ir.slucing any topic that might array
Wings aud Democrats. and spoke like
nne Who hssslearned-- wisdom in ..ihe
school Of the patriots sho framed our
constitution ol 1885. and rho had been
taught there. that the making or the
amending Of constitution Was not TO
be decided by motives connected with
the ascendaney Of this party or that
party. the elevation Of this maj or that
man; but such as concern the harmo-
ny Of large State with diversified in
tcrcsts. and the welfare pf not only The
present generation. but Of posterity.
] wondered TO see how completely the
Governor succeeded in separating this
question from party heats, such as we
have bren accustomed 60 connect it
with. All was COOL and serene. vet inn
pressive and convincing. As you no
doubt have not forgotten the general
scope Of GOV. Grallam's arguments up
on the subject above indiraisd. and as
no duubt they are fresh in the memo
fies Of most 81 your readers. | will moi
repeat them.
Ills remarks upon the question 81
the constitutionaiity of the mode ol
calling a t'on,ention whilh he propo-
SEES, were in substance. | believe. these:
The LIST ssctipn oi article 4 Of our
amended Constitution. j. a prohibition
upon the Legislature alone. n csnnnt
call a Convention except under the
forms there specified. The cords Of
that section do not apply 10 a call Of I
Convention by the people; and that
the words convey just what the trainers
Of the constitution intended. is clear
from The language used by Judge Gas
ton in the Convention, to the elect
that. in drawing up or in approving the
inhibition contained ia that article, he
was acting under fear which he felt,
NOT of the peopl. but Of the creatures
u the people. In other words, that he
did not desire to have the Constitution
Al the mere beck Of a majority Of the
Legislature, al the same time that he
entertained no apprehension Of one
called by msjorit, Of the people. In
the course Of these remarks the Guver.
nor alluded Ia some interesting histo-
rical f,cts. which had never. cnniess
stuck me with the force which they
did when mentioned By him in this CON
neciion. One of these was. that the
4 Federal Constitution prevails in North
| Carolina by the say-sn Of aCon,entior
which WAS called bs u majority only d
the Legislature. aud whose decisions
were never ratified BY popular vote
never having been submitted to the
people. 1t was against such acts d
the Legislature that our amended On
stitutiop intended To guard.
| Gov. Graham admitted that the PEG
pie cannot call convention TO aIte
the Constitution, unless the exstin,
State Government gives IFS consent Il
such call; that is, they cannot with
out revolution. But he insisted, tina
whenever the people call convention
by the assent Of the existing Govern
ment, such a call is NOT uncolstitution
| al, because not forbidden by the con
! ,t,tution; and is mt revolutionary, be
cause the assent Of the existing Gov
eminent Of the State thereto has beef
signifed. la the assent of the I,sgis
laiure. as proposed in the bill, he argu
ed, and so far as could see he arguet
well, that this case differed FROM Oh,
|, case Of GOV. Dorr of Rhode Island
When that rebellion came up for dis
cussion bcfnre the Supreme Court q
the United States, Mr.. Webster. wh,
represented the anti-Dorr party, all
mittcd that If Dorr had obtained III,
assent Of the existing government of hi
State befure calling his convention, hi
L. liz.