Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1863-10-21

amendments were made to the present Constitution
of the United States? and then answers I" by no
means They were appended really and truly as
amendments, not dispacing the position and num-
bers and the entire phraseOlogy OF all the original
in the Constitution. This is indeed true bu. it by
No means follows that the other course is unconsti-
tutional The amendments to which he alludes
made no extensive change in the powers of the gov
eminent. In fact most of themare merely declara-
tory, and being proposed by Congress it was most
convenient to present them in that FORM, 81.
But suppose that in pursuance Of the provisions
of the fifth article of the Constitution Congress
were upo, the applications of Legislatures of two
for the purpose of proposing amendments to the
Constitution, and such Convention should after
agreeing to the amendments desirable, proceed to
revise, reunite and consolidate the whole, and that
it should in that form be ratified by Conventions
in threefourth of the States, would it be an entire-
ly new system which could not be put in operation
without the secession of the States from the present
Union and the total dissolution of the existing gov
ernment? The argument of Marion goes this length,
or fails entirely: Arguments that prove too
much prove nothing at ALL" and tried by this stand
ard, think have shown that the arguments of
Marion are complete fallacy. l not only assert
that the foregoing hypothesis would be clearly
legal and constitutional but 60 further and say that
if such Convention should make any changes or a.
teratIns not entirely subversive of republican prin
cples it would still be perfectly legal and consti-
tutional proceeding, and if ratified by three fourhs
of the States would become the fundamental law
without any secession or dissolution Of the existing
government. I admit that the Convention of 1857
made'a great and "radical change" in the system,
but still not total change, and therefore did not
transcend their powers. But even admitting (Which
do noD that the old Constitution was entirely ig-
nored, and an entirely new one proposed, it Still
does not follow that there any secession in 1889.
The new Constitution superseded, or was substitu.
ted for, the old one without suspending the func-
tons Of the national government for single hour.
The first President, Senators and Representatives
under the new Constitution were elected IN pursu-
apce of laws enacted under the old. 1t would GER
ainly have been somewhat singular proceeding, for
the Congress of Confederation which was already
dissolved, to have enacted laws for the election of
the chief officers to administer the government Of
new Union which was not yet in existence, but into
which the constituent members of the dissolved
Confederacy contemplated entering at some future
day.
But Marion supposes that he has completely de-
molished me by an argument drawn from the by
pothesis of the firm which he introduces. He says
johnson, Williams and Harris entered into mer
camille copartnership, prescribing certain restric-
tons on each of the MEMBERS which are found to
be quite Objectionable in practice. They consult
together with the view of amending the old articles
but cannot agree. johnson and Williams tEen
laying aside farther considerations of the old ar
ticles propose set of entirely new articles differ
ing radically from the old ones and among other
things, confering powers on Williams (whom it is
proposed to make general agent under. certain re.
s;rictions for the concern in such phraseology as
induces Harris TO fear that future trouble might
arise from misconstruction by Williams Of that
phraseoogy in his ov, favor.
The result is that the old articles are not amend
ed Harris will not subscribe the new ones, and
johnson and Williams (although they had original
ly agreed to remain partners of Harrss for life, and
rot alter nor change the old articles unless all three
shoHM ccncur) set themselves up in separate cor
Germ under the new articles, and Harris continues
in the old business BY himself" And then asks:
"Will Davidson assert that johnson and Williams
are the old cancern and that they did not 20 out Of
it?" answer no bot | rW assert that there is
no analogy between the real and the hypothetical
case. johnson, Williams Harris and ten others,
enter into mercantile firm under the style Of John
son, Williams, Harris Il Co. In their atcles of
partnership they agree to deal exclusively grocer
les and on the credit system. After several years,
proposition is made to alter the articles so to
limit the trade in groceries to great extent, and
embrace dry goods, and at the same time abandon
the credit, and adopt the cash system. johnson,
Williams Harris and eight others agree to this
change, two dissent from it. Nevertheless the
change is made, and johnson, Williams Harris and
eight others continue business under tee old style
The other two for time have nothing to do with
the business of the firm yet do not carry on the old
business themselves but attend to their own pri.
yate affairs. The business, however, is not closed
up. There is no distribution of the debts or dlVs'
ion Of the credi.a Will Marion say that johnson,
Williams Harris & Co., are new firm; that they
withdrew from the old one? After sometime, as was
ioreseen and contemplated by the other eleven the
two dissenting members again take their places IN
the firm. Will Marion assert that this firm consist.
ing Of ,be same Identical members with great and
material though not total change in their articles
is not the same old firm He is reduced to the re-
cessity Of doing this or Of admitting that that the
Union Of 1870 was the Union of l7s2.
But Marion lays great stress on the inseruoh OF
Article VII providing that: The ratihcatons OF
the conventions Of nine States shall be sunc'ent 1or
the establishment of this Constitution betgeen the
States so ratifyinp the same" But that difficulty
was seen and not evadcd by me in my first commu-
nication In that communication say: "Ihe on
" particular then in whiclrthere was the slightest
departure from the provisions OF the Constitution
was in its being put into operation when It had been
ratified by only evcn of the States instead Of by all
of them The other two States, however, soon rat
flied it. and thus remcded that defect; and there
is lit,s doubt that TIC result foreseen and con-
templatcd by the National Convention. And it is
believed that that enlightened body of statesmen
foresaw that il tho government was put in operation
under tho amended Constitution upon its adoption
by nine States it would ensure its speedy adoption
by tho other four, and thus by temporary depart
ure from tho Constitution ultimately secure its en-
tire rulGllment"
So much for the question Of the secession of the
eleven States in 1889. DAVIDSON.
ro DIX CONCLUDED IN OUR NExT
Nopru CAnoLiNA CHRISTIAN oNFERENCE.-This
body mot at Graham N. G., on Wednesday last and