Wilmington journal., 1871-08-04
From the Boston Post.
North Carolina

From the Boston Post.
FOrth Carolina.
The people of North Carolina are 10 de-
eide, by popular vote at the approaching
election, whether a Convention shalI be
called to revise the organic law of the
State. The existing Constitution war
adopted three or four years ago, having
been one of the first fruits of the Upas tree
of reconstruction. It was the work of un-
pr tctised and ignorant hands. as we'll as
of greedy and designing politicians. and
wa conceived and consummated almost
exclusively ia the interests of RadicsIism.
for the benefit of which, in fact, recon
struction itself was designed. IL is foil OF
defects-some of which we have already
pointed out-defects which substantially
destroy the general Liberties and abridgt
the rights of the citizen, as they hav.
heretofore been understood and for a CEN
tury or more enjoyed in that State. The
Democrats have wisely improved the frs
favoring cccasionof restoring the principles
thus overthrown by a revision of the fun
damental law, through the ordinary mode
OF Constitutional Convention. The chief
defect of the Constitution is one which
may be said to be unconstitutional in itself
and therefore suicidal, and in the nature
OF the case imperative. 1t touches the life
of the organic law, is fatally partial in its
purpose aud effects, and is subversive OF
the foundation principles of republican
| ism, because it poses q restraint upon
the popular will which is utterly at vari-
ance with republican liberty, and deprives
the people of their power of sovereignty
and OF their right under the forms and
processes OF law to change the organic law
at their pleasure. It is this that no part
of the Constitution thall be altered unless
a bill for that purpose shall have ps ssrd
the Legislature by three-fifths majority,
and shall have been published six months
previous to a new election of members,
and shall have passed also the succeeding
Legislature by @ two-thirds majority, and
| finally have been submitted to the people
and adopted by a ma jority of those voting.
The Radicals, fer whose advantage this
| Limitation was devised, maintain its invio
liability. Their life es party in q measure
depends upon it, and they cling to it with
all the tenacity of dying grasp. They
contend that the Democratic movement
for Convention is illegal and revolution
ary. and even threaten to call in the aid of
the General Government. if necessary, to
interfere with its final consummation.-
They argue, indeed, and in this are sup
ported by Rep1blican presses throughout
the cDuniry, that the people have estop-
ped themselves, by ratifying the Constitu-
ton, from the right of calling a Conven-
tion except through the primary action of
the Genera Assembly, as the Constitution
! provIdes-as If 1t were possible for the As
sembly, or the Constitution, or the people
themselves, by any act or vote whatever,
to impose such limitation upon popular
sovereignty. Our own State Constitution
provides that amendments may be made
by two successive Legislatures, by O vote
of majority OF Senators and two-thirds
OF the Representatives, if finally approved
by the people. This provision was not
very readily adopted in the Convention
which revised the Constitution in 1920,
and was approved only by small majority
of the popular vote. The amendment
was introduced by Mr.. Webster, and by
him explained to be in ntended to avoid the
| necessity of calling q Convention except
when real evil existed. He distinctly de-
CARED that he knew no principle that could
prevent a majority Of the people, even q
bare ma jority, from altering the Oonstitu-
ticn. The action of the Legislature in
submitting amendments was not the exer-
else of a legislative power, but simply the
power OF making propositions TO the peo-
ple
The question in North Carolina is, sim
ply. whether the people have not the re-
served sovereign right, anything in the
present organic law to the contrary, to re-
sort to .he fundamental action of o Oonsti-
tutional Convention, for the purpose of
ascertainiug and giving effect to the popu-
lar will whether the limitation upon the
supreme will of the people contained in
the present Constitution is of any binding
| effect whether, in a word, the people OF
a State, by ratifying and self i'm posing
such restriction, can estop themselves
from the exercise, under due forms of law,
and not in a revolutionary manner, of their
inaliensble powers of sovereignty. Ifthey
shall call Convention and adopt a con-
sti ution. and the people shall approve it,
'Eere is no reason to believe there will be
rebellion or usurpation other IL an such ss
may arise from Radical sistance and
tae interference of the National Gov