The Placer herald., 1858-03-13

Ihus 1t appears that the only proposition made
in this law was to take the vote for and against
the calling of Conventions that was the only
election provided for. 1t makes no reference to
the vote on any other question whatever; and the
second section provides no other description of
information to be furnished to this Legislature, as
foundation to oct upon This law was acted
upon by majority of the electors who participa
ted at the polls at the last general election; and
agreeably to the requirements of the second Sec
tion of the Act, the Secretary of State has COM
municated to the Legislature the vote for and
against the call for Convention. Thus all. eve
ry requirement of the law has been fulfilled
There is a majority of l2.546 of those exercising
choice upon this particular question, in favor of
a Conventon-of those who elect to call, over
those who elect not to have Convention. Why
is it, then, that it does not result as duty upon
this Legislature "to provide by law for calling a
Convention?" Why do we hesitate to comply with
the desire of over thirty thousand freemen affirm
atively expressed, and provide an opportunity to
amend, modify, and change this instrument, uni
versally admitted TO be radically defective? All,
say the opponents of the bill, the Constitution of
the State has not been complied with Sir, an
swer. then, that the Act of 1857 was a nullity,
and have heard no one take that position direct.
This second clause of Article X created an elec-
tion-a question-upon which the people were to
decide for or against; and they were to do it at
certain time and place, namely: at the next cleo
is both time and place-at the time of the next
election, and at the same polls Says the clause:
'and if it shall appear that majority of the elec
tors voting at such election, have voted in favor
of calling a Convention" ETC.. etc. 1t will be
seen that the lst section of the Act of 1S57 fully
provides the mode of eXpression-by ballot-and
the words to be used, and the time and place of
holding this elect on; and that the ults thereof
should appear, the second section seems to have
been framed with direct view to that object
The Interpretation which give to this clause of
the Constitution must undoubtedly have been the
same as was held by the Legislature of 1857. for
the law which they enacted is fitted to it in every
provision We find that in the State of Michigan,
whose Constitution in this respect is exactly like
ours, word for word. and from which we borrowed
this tenth article of ours they held an election in
lS49 for the same purpose, and gave to this clause
meaning identical with those who agree with
myself. They counted the votes for and against
OH this one question, and no dispute that we can
hear Of arose as to the correctness of their con-
struction. Here Mr.. Anderson read from the
Constitution of Mich gan the article relating to
the amending. and calling a Convention to revise
the Constitution of that State, comparing it with
the tenth article of the Constitution of California.
and showing the two TO be alike in words and
meaning: he also showed the table of votes and
certificate Of canvassers from the statutes of the
State of Michigan for 1850. in verification of his
assertions in this respect.] But the Senator from
Alameda has cast shadow of doubt upon this ar-
thority, he thinks. In his research for author
ity. he burrowed in the rubbish Of the State libra
ry and from its mOuldly, worm eaten depths, has
fished up an almanac an old almanac, from which
he learns that in lS4S there cast in that State
at the Presidential election. 650l6 votes. thus
showing that the 33,l93 votes cast in 1919 for a
Convention must have been majority of all the
votes cast in that year But sir have shown
that those who passed ultimately upon the qucs-
tion and decided that Convention had been order
ed by the people, never. in arriving at this conclu
sion. alluded to, or took into consideration. the
Presidential vote, or the vote upon any other Of
fcer or question. They stuck to their text and
upon the number of yeas or nays upon the one
proposition of the Convention made out the
award: and if this almanac authority has any
thing to do with the mooted point here. the Sena-
tor has failed to MI Ike it appear. Now, sir, ask,
can we pretend to more knowledge Of this consti-
tutional provision than those who originally
framed it? than those from whom we borrowed it?
think not Whv, sir. another section of our
Constitution seems to settle the point, if there re-
mains yet doubt; ! allude to section twentieth
of the eleventh article: "a plurality of the vote
given at any election shall constitute choice,
where not otherwise directed in this Constitution"
BY this it appears that it must be in express terms
otherwise directed if greater than a plurality
vote is required for choice at any election; it is
not to be left to doubtful infer and find that
two-third vote of the Legislature is required by
the Constitution in one or more instances. Can
there be doubt as to what is meant by the word
"election?'' 1t seems to me that our differences
of opinion upon the main question arises, for the
most part. from different descriptions of cleo
tions spoken of in connection with this subject;
"electon for members of the Legislature ""gen-
eral election" and especial election" Noah
Webster. who is good authority as to the meaning
of words in the English language. says election
means "the act of choosing; choice; the act of
choosing one or more from Others"
At an election for members of the Legislature,
which is the one spoken of in immediate cOnnec-
tion with this subject, we select between the diff
ferent candidates presented; there is an election
upon each person. If they should be numerous
and of different and extreme shades of personal
popularity l defy any person under our secret.
ballet-boX system of voting, to determine how
many of the electors voting at the general cleo
ton at which this voting was had in 1857. to say
who or how many voted for members of the Leg
isature. At this election, in tie Seventeenth
District, there were eighteen candidates voted for,
only six of whom could be elected. The elector
may simply exercise choice upon township, or
county. or district. or State officers; he may mix
them up, or he may vote alone upon some such
question as the one now under discussion. Who
has right to know they voted for members OF
the Legislature. or for any one or more of them?
Will you take the vote as counted out on the diff
ferent candidates-the highest votes for the elect
ed and the lowest vote for the defeated-and cx-
pect to find the aggregate equal to the number of
electors voting for those officers? If so you will
often be far from correct If we are to govern the
decision of the people upon calling this Conven-
ton by comparison wi h the vote for members
of the Legislature. the law passed by the last
Legislature does not provide for it; and that OBJ
iect could not have been effected had the law max
er attempted it. Gentlemen who give this con-
struction to this clause of our Constitution make
it a nulity. But Governor johnson and the At
torney General have ascertained that the official
vote for the Lieutenant Governor, at the last
general election, was upwards of $4,000; and they
seek to make that vote the test of this question;
this is more almanac authority. Why, this second
clause saws not word about the election for
Lieutenant Governor; then it can have no bear
ing upon the question before us. What is a
general election?' Why, sir, simply time and
place. fixed by law. when and at which, for great