Delaware inquirer. (Wilmington, Del.) 1859-18??, 1859-12-17


heading Of Constitution Makers" what pur
ported to be an editorial, which was evident
instigated by the life tenure Judiciary of thi
State, ii not actually written by one of them
In it they are pleased to say, that "Thcre ar
a few Old John Browns in the State of Del
aware, who seem to be never happy us whel
they are in a state OF political agitation Ant
after stating that they are forming themselve
into " Committees and Reform associations, I,
work journey-work on the present Constitu
ton Of the State" they then go on to say that
"although the whole Constitution is TO b,
ovcrhauled and repaired by them (meaning tn,
said :" Old John Brown's') after the most APP
proved method of political tinkering, yet The
bulk of labor is intended to be expended upon
our present Judiciary system. If the thing works
well, and the object can be accomplished, tn,
State will be presented with an eiechre Judici-
arg, after the best and most corrupt New York
and Baltimore style. II would bea novel sight
to see our excellent-our very excellent and
Observation-Disclosures of the several Courts of this
State ousted, to give place TO the representa-
tives of bummers, thieves and corrupt pOliti-
clans"
Thus ii would seem, that in their estimation,
all those who are seeking and desiring TO have
| the present Constitution of the State amended,
are "0ld John Browns" Consequently, the
three or four thousand citizens who petitioned
| the Legislature to amend the Constitution so as
to abolish life tenures in Office, are like sold
John Brown" guilty of treason; and, Of course,
subject to the tender mercies Of these very life
tenure Judges for as there is no other Court
In. hofnr hos, ha nd
and tried. And it has been often decided even
in England "that an attempt TO subvert the
fundamental laws of the kingdom was high
treason Mt common law"
The same principle holds good in this coun-
try.
But the question may be raised whether
those citizens, who by petition, the proper ex-
ercise of their rights of suffrage, or by any other
legal and constitutional means, endenvOr to
have the Constitution amended, or those who
having obtained power in derogation of the
rights of the people, and prostitute the high
trust which they thus hold, to the subversion
of those great fundamental principles or laws
Which lay at the very foundation of all our in
situations, the question may be, which of these
are guilty of high treason against Caser? And
to this there will be q preliminary question
Who is the true C@ser? In England, the King
is the Ceser. In this country however, ever
since the :" days which tried mems souls" it
has been pretty well settled that the people are,
or ought to be, the great Ceser. But tie stick
lers for life tenures in office contend that the
people are nothing but "bummers thieves, and
corrupt politicians" and that the Judiciary are
the true Ceser Ii they have the settling of
the question, we have no doubt that it would
be so determined, and all the "Old John
Browns" in the State, to the number of many
unta tnir lnnls mt fnr tl,a mt
fortunately they will not be permitted to de-
eide these questions The forum will be chang
ed. We are warranted in saying this, because
there are "0ld John Browns" enough in this
State, las the Judges and their few toadies de-
nominate the Reformers) to amend the Consti-
tuition; and, also, because there is n provision
in the Constitution which expressly declares
that ''the Governor and all other civil officers
under this State shall be liable to impeachment
for treason, bribery, or any high crime or mis-
demennOr in Office And that instrument re-
quires that such impeachments shall be tried,
not by the Courts, but by the Legislature.
Again: In the above extract taken from their
prOnunciamento they, in denouncing and ridi-
cuing an elective Judiciary say, @ 1t would
be novel sight to see our exccllent-our very
excellent-Judgcs of the several Courts of this
State ousted, to give place to the representa-
tives of bummers, thieves, and corrupt poiti- |
cians.n
BY this it is plainly maintained that the peo-
pie of this State and country, who alone elect, |
are "bummers, thieves, and corrupt polti- |
cians;" and that the gentlemen in the several
Legislatures in this State, who voted for the |
bill to amend the Constitution, so as to abolish |
life tenures in office, are not only Old John |
Browns" but the representatives of hum
mcrs, thieves, and corrupt politicians That |
all may know who those representatives, |
were, we here give mn accurate list from the |
Journals. Those who voted for that bill at |
the January Session 1855 were, in the Senate, |
Archibald Armstrong, and Sewell O. Biggs of |
New Castle county, Daniel Currey, Moses lIar-
rington, of Kent Elihu J. Puscy and John A.
Hazard, of Sussex--6 in all, in the affirmative;
in the negative, none. Senate journal p. la. |
In the House, same session, the following gen-
tlemen voted tor it, viz: Jonathan Groves, |
John j. Henry, David Mckee and Jas V. Moore, |
of New Castle county John W. Cullen, Thos |
Draper, John W. Smith, and John Woodall, of |
Kent Woolsey Burton, Asbury G. Pepper, Bur
ton u. Prettyman, and John S. NAPLES, of Sus-
sex-whole number in the affirmative I2, and
8 in the negative. One absentee, who at the
next session voted for the bill So the bill
failed in the House that session, the Constitu-
ton requiring for such bill majority of two
thirds. House Journal p 5s4.
In Senate, January session, 1857, II received
the votes of Abraham Boys, Sewell @. Biggs,
and Archibald Armstrong, OF New Castle Mo-
SEES Harrington, William Collins, and Thomas
J. Moore, of Kent; John A. Hazard Manlove
H. Carlisle, and Thomas A. Jones, of Sussex.
Affirmative, 9-negative, nome Senate jour-
nal, p. so h 1873.
In the House, same session, the following
gentlemen voted for the bill, viz William O.
Lodge, Edward Sheppard, Francis d. Dunlap,
liarland Cloud, Charles Gooding, Thomas j.
Eoard, and Bayard Deakyne, of New Castles
VIM. Meredith, James Williams, Joseph Moore
WIN. A. Atkinson, and Bethuel Watson, of
Kent; James Ponder, Thomas j. Cannon, Ebe
Walter, Thomas J. Phillips Paynter Frame,
and John Marshall, of Sussex. Affirmative, ls
negative, 2. House journal, p. 275. So the
bill passed the Legislature this session, but was
vetoed by Gov. Causey.
A new bill was introduced at the last ses-
sion, (ls59) and received, in the Senate, the
votes of Abraham Boys, Charles T. Polk, and
David W. Gemmill, of New Castles Wilson L.
cannon, and Thomas J. Moore, of Kent; DR..
John Martin, of Sussex. Affirmative, G-nega-
i've, 3. Senate journal, p. 1877.
In the House, same session, il received the
totes of Thomas W. Belvillc, Franklin Q. Finn,
lewis Thompson, Charles II. Oldham, Jona-
han L. Ellison, John NJ. Naudain, and George I
". Churchman, of New Castle being in the !
filrmatiye-negatiye, none. Jonathan Brown,
saac Short Caleb S. Pennewill, W. +. Jack
on, John Harrington, VIM. Slaughter, and C.
J. watson, of Kent; being in the affirmative I
negative, none. Benz. White, Thomas A. II
ones VIM. II. Moore Bushrod L. May, Alfred o
icllvaine, and John W. Walker of Sussex; be- e
ng in the affirmative; negative, /. The vote q