The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1873-11-17
THE PENNSYLVANIA CONSTlTut-
TIONAL QUESTION.

In Il country like ours, the people are
and must be sovereign. They are final ar
bitcrs of all questions of political or gov
ernmental policy. Through their repre-
sentativcs, they make and unmakc law.
This principle was recognized in the Decla-
ration of Independence, in the declaration
that governments derive ''their just powers
from the consent of the governed and
that 'it is the right of the people to alter
1.-THE government. SO, also, the con-
stitu,ion commences with these words 1--WE
" the People of the United States do
" ordain and establish this constitution"
SO self evident is the proposition that a
government of the people" can only de-
rive its powers from the people that tits an
axiom that can hardly be proved. A con-
stittion cannot be adopted except by the
people Sometimes, as has been the case. in
Vermont, they delegate their power to their
representatives, chosen for that express pur-
pose while in other states, representatives,
similarly chosen, frame an organic law and
the people approve or disapprove. 1t would
seem impossible to question this power of
the people, but ii is questioned in Pcnnsyl-
vana. In 1871, the Legislature of that
state submitted to the people the question
of calling a convention to revise, amend or
alter the constitution. The people, in their
sovereign capacity, ordered convention
called, and the next legislature made provi-
sion for the election of delegates The
vote Of the people was for convention
with unlimited powers indeed, there was
no necessity for restriction, because their
work must be submitted to the people be-
fore it became operative. As the people
were sovereign, so.theirdclegates they elect
ed, represented the sovereignty of the pco-
pie; they were, for the time being, the
sovereign people Of Pennsylvania they
could do all that the people could, subject
to their final revision their powers could
not be limited save by the peoplc-as has
been decided by the highest court in New
York such convention, to use the Ian
guage Of the New York court, sis a move
" a change in whole or in part, of the cx-
sting form of government" ''it is above
and beyond the constitution Their
work, being completed, must be submitted
to the people for ratification or rejection.
As representatives of the people of the
state, the convention must decide when,
how and in what form II shall Ln octn1
upon by the people. The legislature of
Pennsylvania, however, attempted TO dis
regard these principles, by directing what
the convention should revise and ,;hat il
should not revise. The servant places him
self above the master. The creature of the
sovereign dictates TO the sovereign. Can
anything be more absurd ? There is some
thing more absurd, An attempt is being
made to override the ordinance of the con-
vention-thc expressed will of the sover-
eign people - providing the manner in
which the new constitution shall be acted
upon by the people. We do not believe
that there is any danger that anyone will
be found bold enough to resist the will of
the sovereign people as declared by their
chosen representatives. The very attempt,
however, shows how little the fundamental
principles of free government are under
stood by politicians No power under
heaven, save an armed revolution, can re-
sist the will of the people, and woe be to
those who undertake it.