Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-01-18

people, and preferred those 'by authorit
of the people" He preferred this to tn
amendment of the gentlemen fror
Weakley, (Mr. Garner because tina: ger
tleman's amendment contains the title Q
the act of the Legislature
MIR. Thompson, of Davidson, accepte
the modification.
Mr.. Heiskill-Would the demand O
the previous question be in orderY
MIR. Jones, of Lincoln--It would.
Mr.. NichOlson-Thed difficulty with gen
tlemen is in retaining the title of the act
1t seems to me that with the phraseology
now accepted, we might very well let tn
title stand and then go on and state tina
the Legislature did, in accordance will
the viii of the people, provide for tn,
calling of this Convention. That is il
accordance with the facts. We cannot say
thatitwas in accordance with the expressed
will be the people, but we may say that il
was in accordance with their instructions
Ifwed do that cannot see why the gentlemen
from Weakley should insist upon striking
out the title to the act which only goes to
show the fact. Especially as the first sec.
ton of the Bill does away entirely with any
improper inference from the title.
MIR. Jones, of Lincoln, thought that Il
the gentlemen would look at the next
clause, on the second page of the report,
that would cover the whole ground;
but if the gentlemen don't like the
word authorized" they can use some
| other.
Mr.. Heiskell agreed fully with the gentle
| man from Weakley, and thought that there
was no necessity of retaining the title of the
| act; if there be anything in it to which the
| Convention objects, there was no difficulty
| in finding the act Its substance was suf-
| fciently described. He was unwilling that
any word should appear In this preamble,
historical or otherwise, which recognizes
in the Legislature the power to confer upon
| the people the right to provide the mode
| in which Convention shall be called
He did not think that the gentleman from
Weakley intended to say that it was not
proper for the Legislature to provide a
mode in which the people should signify
their will. He thought the views of the
gentleman from Weakley, and the gentle
man from Knox, are the same. What we
wish is that we shall not recognize in the
Legislature the power to authorize the
people to call a convention. want to say
that the Legislature provided that mode.
l want to say they have done that. The
gentleman from Weakley presents the ques-
ton precisely as it should be presented, as it
seems to me, and desire that it should
prevail.
Mr.. Gardner-I rise for the purpose of
accepting the amendment to my PROPOSE
ton suggested by the gentleman from
orI tbo g.. n.
wilson. Then it will read to this effect:
The Legislature did, by authority of the
people, provide for the calling of a Con-
VentiOn, and would further remark that 1
would be willing also to retain the title of
the act. would strike out in the
twentieth line the words authorize the eo-
pie of the State to call a Convention,
and insert these words, ''Did by the au-
thority of the people provide for the calling
Of Convention to meet at Nashville.
Mr.. Stephens showed an inconsistency in
this. One part reading that by authority
of the people the Legislature has called the
Convention; and another part that the
Legislature give back to the people power
to call the Convention. Now, we can ac-
complish all we want by striking out the
whole and saying that the Legislature by
passing the actof 1869, and the people did
provide, etc.
The sense is certainly very indistinct;
and the only meaning that can be given to
the language of the amendment is that the
Legislature supposed that the people de-
sired that Convention should be called
therefore think we had better adhere to the
amendment of the gentleman from Weak
ley as first offered.
hall he, 4 tod fha
amendment of the gentleman from Weak
ley it was very different from what it IS
now; and 1 shall insist upon my
original amendment. 1 object to
anything which, by any implication,
can be made to mean that the Legis-
lature has the power to authorize a con
vention. / consider the Legislature a very
proper organ through which the people
should speak when they will have a con-
vention. My amendment leaves it to the
people. It gives the title to the act and
then goes on to say that the Legislature did
recommend the people to call a Conven-
ton, and that they did in December vote
to call a Convention to meet on a certain
day in January. But it does not concede
to the Legislature the authority or power to
call the Convention.
ance Of the notifications of his PROPOSE
ton.
Mr.. Campbell then accepted Mr.. Gard
der's proposition in view Of his own.
Mr.. Warner did not attach so much i'm
portance to the preamble to the Constitu-
ton. The Constitution itself is the organic
law. The preamble is not a part of the
Constitution. 1t is merely the key by which
IL
not grant orrecognize any power, but mere
ly sets ont facts In an historical manner.
The reading shows that it does not give any
power. If then, this preamble be best the
mere key to unlock the meaning of the Con-
stitution, l do not see why we should be
so particular about it. If then, it imparts
no power, and creates no organic body,
then, of course, these words avail
nothing and l care nothing about
them, except their historical show
ing, and does not even this show that all
power is inherent in the people?
Mr. Thompson, of Davidson, conceded
the general truth of what was said by the
gentleman from Marshall, but the preamble
does recognize authority, as in the first
and third paragraphs, andhe absolutely de-
MED that the Legislature could give any
authority to the people. The third paragraph
recognized that it can and did confer pow
er upon the people. I prefer, therefore,
that we should say that this Convention did
not meet as being authorized by the Legis-
lature; and therefore ] think we should
leave out the title.
Mr.. Thompson's amendment was re-
jected and the question required upon tie
amendment of Mr.. Gardner
Mr.. Brown, of Davidson, proposed to
amend the amendment of Mr.. Gardner by
striking out after the word did in the 10Th
line these words authorize the people of
the State to Gala Convention" and insert
ing these words provide for the call of a
Convention by the people" The materia
difference between this and the amend
ment of the gentleman is, that it saves the
title of the act am a whole believer that
this power is inaienablyin the people, and
a preamble as long as from here to Jerusa-
lem could not take it away.
The amendment was adopted upon
division. Affirmative 80, negative 30.
Then the proposition as amended was
adopted without division.
Mr.. Garner proposed change in the
twenty-first line by striking out the words
''to elect and insert ''for the election of
delegates" in lieu.
Mr.. Stephens moved to strike out the
title of the act in the third paragraph.
Mr.. Baxter--If we refer to the act in any
way it is well enough to do so by the title
which the Legislature has given to it.
The amendment was rejected.
The question now required upon the
adoption of Mr.. GibsOns amendment. Mr..
Gibson withdrew it.
Mr. NinboISOn-- If caap,c 70 ma that fhis