Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1855-01-10
REMARKS OF MIR. FISHER,
OF ROWAN.

Mr.. SPEAKER: Until very lately, IL was oy no
means my intention to occupy the time of the Sem
ate in expressing my views upon this question and
having been prevented by special engagements from
giving much time to the consideration OF the SUD-
ject, enter upon the discussion not without hest
taon after hearing the very able efforts OF distIn-
ruished gentlemen who have preceded me, on both
sides. Nor should consider it necessary to go over
the ground already covered so fully, but for the
strong argument last made, by the honorable Sena-
tor from Chatham, which appears to me to require
some notice. l SHALL therefore, ask the indulgence
of the Senate to enable me to remark briefly upon
the main points of this question, lnasmuch as the
decision may rule important precedent hereafter.
We know, sir, that precedents OF wrong actioh
make most dangerous errors, which are operative
not only in their immediate effects, but live TO De
cited to the injury of justice and to the perverslon
of right legislation in all time to come
Since, then, this is not question OF mere present
policy but very grave enquiry touching the Con-
stitutiona powers of the legislative department we
should approach its examination with careful ana
dispassionate deliberation-when 1t is obvious that
any hasty interpretation and unwarranted construc
ton of the Constitution may hereafter be fruitful,
not only of and of danger but of no less than
an actual subverson of law in reyoution-for 1t Is
undeniable, sir that the doing that which the Con-
stituton does not authorize is act OF revolution
And as this is the first enquiry of the kind since the
adoption of the present Constitution it becomes us
to look carefully as accustomed to be said IN the
Senate of ancient State, " lest the Repuohc re-
ceve injury" The question has nothing IN ITS en-
not be so regarded except in its tendency to super
sede and override the proposed Constitutional
amendment for Free Suffrage as embraced IN the bill
before US.
We must all agree, sir, that the age is certainly
one of great progress; and taunt which we, OF the
democratic republican faith, are accustomed to
hear most frequently, is that charging us with I'M
prudent In the present instance the
gentlemen who advocate this new movement nave
out-travelled US they have taken the track and
are rapidly out-outstrippng even Young Amerca.in
the race of progress in that leading directly
andrapidy to the goal of a-democracy place 1or
which honorable gentlemen of that side have, IN
time past entertained decided horror. We, sir,
hold no such democracy but doctrines far more con-
sentative as we'll as restrictive because restricted by
the letter of the Constitution.
For what are Constitutions made but to ttnaat
power-to define the manner and mode of its exer-
else according prescribed grants of atitude-and
to restrain it's exercise within these grantsf
And here am led to remark what it is, amidst
all the changes of party contests and the huctua-
tons of political warfare that constitutes the marked
distinction between the two great political schools
of this country. l say the two-for from the foun-
dation of the Government there have existed but
two and there be, in fact but two. Differences
may arise and parties may spring up, on questions
of policy affecting local interests and OF temporary
nature Issues may be made extraneous or collat-
era but in the end after the subsistence OF the ex-
cited elements questions resolved back, the two
forces ranged in line under their respective ban
ners, and these true banners are, what sir! What
inscription do they bear? On the one you read
strict construction ON the other .un admitted con-
structiOn."
Thescafter ALL are the antagonstic doctrines which
lie at the bottom fall political action, and IN tins
question now under discussion, they not, IN a
most remarkable manner illustrated? l know, sir,
it is insisted that our Constitutions very pro-
found and very complex; requiring to bestudleG and
expounded with learned investigations; and so they
should be, let wisdom always elucidate-6ut that
fbauc he nronerlv understood other
from this dissent entirely, and hold no such be-
lief. The Constitutions under which we live Sir,
were not made, like the oracles of old, to speak
words which might be construed to mean whatever
should happen to be desirable, which were intended
TO be capable of any two-fold interpretations they
are not enigmas of erudition, comprehensive only
by the learned schoolmen of the law; but IN the
opinion of those who hold the doctrines upon which
we of this side stand these great charters of
liberty and of equal rights are plain in word-Simple
in expression-clear in Specification and were intend
ed to mean precisely what in terms they express
no less and no more Otherwise, what are the
things called Constitutions? What but common in
struments liable to be interpreted to be explained,
and sir far than this, liable to be Perrertedto
their by the learned, the astute, the inge-
NOUS? So that the great ntellects of the age be-
come the authoritative, and deemed the most in
faIlible because the most trusted and the most in
eXpounderS. To what must this in
evitaby lead? 1t must lead surely to arbitrary
absolutsm of construction the most dangerous. as
Is the most unlimited. Ii just anu True
taton should alwaysbe made then no injury would
ensuc; but if otherwise must be inevitable, then
woe to the State, and the people who have surreR
dered themselves bound. For myself, sir of
this body, deprecate most earnestly any such
render, any course OF action to nix precedent
that may lead to it.
Thus much, sir, may be said in objection to the
general tendency of this measure which proposes to
do new thing let come to the point at is
sue and enquire what it is ; and in making this in
curry must take leave to express my surprise at
the extraordinary range of this discussion. We
heard from the honorable and distinguished Sen ,tor
from Orange very serious admontions against de-
stroying the present balances Of power by aboli-
ton of the landed qualification of voters but does
be propose nothing moro dangerous? To this meas
ure of amendment there is annexed only question
of expediency; to his proposition, question of con-
We heard from the able Senator from
Guilford but little directly referring the PROPOSE
ton in the amendment before US, much however of
nature somewhat startling as he sets it forth in
respect to the inequalities and oppressive operation
of our present Constitution. We expected to hear
SIR first defence and argument in favor of the
manner Of calling Convention as proposed, not
the reasons merely why in his opinion Convention
is needed for Jam unable to see that this last has
ANYTHING to do with the question before the Senate
We heard from the learned Senator from Chatham
q more elaborate argument directly upon the ques-
tion to- which shall REFER according to my recollec-
ion of his positions, and which he endeavored to
fortify by high legal authorities these | shall not
stop either to refer to examine farther than to
say that cannot the proper application to this
,essy for adducing any from abroad to settle for US
question to determine which have abundant
authority in the Constitution of State and in the
debates of our Convention.