The daily Green Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1861-1865, 1862-10-23
The Council of Censors

Some members Of the Council of Censors as
appeared iro y the discussion yesterday, doubt
the wisdom of proposing, at this tine, an Y
amendments to the constitution. We were
glad to see this.-The constitution authorizes
the Council to call constitutional convention,
when there shall appear to be an g ABSOLUTE
necessity" to amend the organic law. The
trainers of this law, evidently, had the right
views respecting constitute While it won Id
have been an unwise presumption in them to
have left no provision by which their work coul
be amended, they intended to avoid the equally
dangerous error of leaving their work at the
mercy of every tinker who might desire to Law
his hand upon it. When an absolute necessi
fy should arise for revising the constitution, the
door was to be opened but until then it was to
remain closed.
1t is apparent that constitutions should be
stable. They are designed as muniments to wall
about and protect the liberties and rights of the
citizen. They are framed to restrain Lagigla-
lures, executives and people from any departure
IRON the great and fundamental principles of
right and government. They are the higher
law to which the more temporary enactments
OF the General Assembly, dealing in detail
with the affairs of common lite, are to be sub
ordinated, and by which they are to be limited.
And as such they should not be dealt with as We
would deal with a revision of the Statutes, or
an act OF the Leg islaure. 1t is said that it is
better Tor the public that our laws should be
certain and stable than that they should be
right, and this is undoubtedly true, SO far as
the ordinary business of life is concerned. Of
how much more Importance is it that the Con-
stltuticn, the ultimate standard to which all |
Legislation must be conformed, should be GER
tam and stable? This is the general argument
against amending the Constitution, drawn from
the nature OF organic laws, and from the limit
atoms IN cur own Constitution, which we are
glad to know the Council are considering and
will have presented to them much more forcibIy
than We can do.
But there are other reasons why the Council
should not call Constitutional Convention. 1t
is true, as stated by Mr.. Edwards, that the
people are not demanding any changes in the
Constitution. They are, as whole, satisfied
with it as it is. 1t has worked WELL and is as
good as, if rot better than, Constitutions will
average. Under it the State has cni1yed as
mach freedom and happiness as have fallen to the
lot Of any people, Not half the Counties in the
State We're represented in the Convention which
Iut the Council in nomination. and half who
were present, went to AID in putting in nom.
nation Council who would let the Constltu
tion alone. The vote for the Council was very
light, many towns not casting single ballot
Since the Council were elected, there has been {
no symptom that the people expected or desired
any amendments to the Constitution Then
why make any! Why incur the expense of a
Convention, when the State is already getting
60 heavily in debt from the frightful disburse-
ments Of the war! Why not let the Constitu-
ton, under which we have lived 50 comfortably,
remain as tis at least till more peaceful times,
when We shal have more leisure, disposition,
and possibly means for discussing amendments?