Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1874-10-23
VIEWS OF LEADING NO R II HI
CAROLINIANS ON TIE CONFEN.
TIRN QUESTION.

TON QUESTION.
Again we have the pleasure OF lay
ing before our readers the views OF
distinguished North CaroIiniars upon
the Convention neutrality-suspicious.
whose opinions will carry weight with
them, not only in the Cape Fear sec
ton, but in the whole State. We
trust that our contemporaries who op-
pose the call of Convention will give
their readers the benefit of what these
distinguished gentlemen of the Cape
Fear have to say on the subject.
LETTER.
W1LMINGToN, n. c., Oct. %. 1874.
Messrs. EngeIhard q; Saunders:
GENTLEMEN-The undersigned haV-
ing received letters from you asking
their views upon the Convention now
under discussion, have conferred to-
gether, and concurring in their opln-
ions submit the following joint reply:
You ask us, in brief, to respond to
the following enquiries:
"1st. Do you think the best interests
of the people of North Carolina re-
.quire their Constitution, the "Canby
Constitution" so-called, to be materi-
ally and speedily amended?
ID. IF, in your opinion, material
changes in the Constitution ought to
be speedily made, which mode OF
making those changes, do you think
the best interests of the people OF
North Carolina demand should be
adopted, that by Legislative enactment
or that by Convention
Sd. The Conservatiye-Democ ratic
party having an undoubted two-thirds
vote in each House of the General AS
sembly, what do you think is the duty
of that party in reference to the call
ing of Convention by the Legisla~
ture at its approaching session for the
purpose of amending the Constitution
In reply to the first question, we
beg leave to say, that we are decidedly
of opinion that the Constitution Of the
State needs to be changed in very
many and very material respects, and
that too right speedily. Indeed, the
daily experience of six years, III our
Legislative Halls, in the Counts of
Justice and III every walk in life shows
that it is an insuperable O stacle to
good government.
This "Canby" Constitution was liter
ally conceived i'll sin and born in iniqnity
and it must ever be symbol of wrong
and oppression. We could submit to
the outrage, however, perpetrated upon
Us in it's ''adoption," so-called, if it was
not the fruitful source Of SO many evils
that time would almost fail us to refer
to them in detail This however Is
not necessary, for they are well known
of all men. Suffice it to say then,
that in almost every one OF the many
instances where the "CanDy" Constitu-
ton varies from tn old Constitution
of our fathers, the difference has been
productive of unmixed evil. In our
opinion the sooner we return to that
old Constitution the better it will be
for the people OF North Carolina,
observing of course the changes rem
dered necessary by the war and its re-
suits. And we deem it proper to say
here, in order to prevent any possible
misunderstanding that We believe no
one contemplates, as no one ought to con-
template, any change il regard to the
Homestead Exemption save such as
will enlarge and render more secure
that wise and Eenefcent provision. We
deem it proper to say also that we be-
lieve no one contemplates, as no one
ought to contemplate, any change in
the Constitution tending to impair the
| rights OF the colored people.
In reply to your second lnterogatory
we beg leave to say that we are decid-
eddy of opinion that the mode of
amending the Constitution by means
Of Convention called by a vote of
tvo-thirds of each House of the Legis-
lature is vastly preferable to that by
Legislative enactment. being the
| cheaper and more speedy, if not the
| only practicable mode OF accomplish
ing the desired changes. The Cons
| titution is sOfUll OF mischief IN so many
particulars, in what IL says aud in hat
1t does not say, that it viii be nearly if
not quite impossible to make it conform
| to our wishes and to our wants without
rewriting thewh hole instrument, and this
it VIII be inanlfeatiy lmpracticable to
| do unless it be done i'll Convention.
I The mode OF amendment by Legislative
| enactment is adequate only when one
or two specific amerdni ants are desir-
| ed, bat is unsuited to the condition in
which we find ourselves, for the rea-
son that every one Ofthe many changes,
even the minutcst and most trivial az
| teration, would have to be the subject
matter OF q separasa Bill before two
| successive Legislatures, IL we would
avoid the doubt now hanging over the
amendments recently supposed to have
been adopted. And this being SO, we
would be obliged to content ourselves
with only very few of the changes so
necessaryto be made OF the Legisletui G
would be compelled to enter upon an
endless and interminahie field OF Iecis-
laJion.
But there is another objection to the
mode Of au amendment by legislative
, enactment that IS i,Isuperable, to-Wit:
the uncertainty that tic Conservative
party viii have tbree-ffths vote III
each House of the General Assembly
III 1876. Unless that party shall have
such vote IN each House in the Leg
is ature in 1876, it viii be utterly
! poweriess to amend the Constitution.
/ When, II the history of the state, has
any party held one Legislature by q
tWG-thirds vote, and lis successor by a
three-hfths vote? 1t Is surely neither
wise nor prudent to exchange the GER
tam present for the Uncertain future
1t Is our deliberate opinion then, that
| IA VIC OoIAoSi Nf.IINS Woulu CnnnRS
| the Constitution it must do it now or
| never.
In addition tothis, the cost of making
the changes would he greatly less by
Convention than by the Legislative
mode. The Convention consisting Of
only one House and that not larger than
the lower branch of the General Assem-
bly,, would necessarily consume much
less time in remodeling the Constitu-
ton and would do it at much less cost
| The Convention would do its work, and
well and thoroughly, at cost of less
than $50, 600 as willappearfr from simple
! calculation. By Legislative enactment
not half the work nor half SO well done
would cost more than twice that
amount at least. And there is another
serious objection to proceeding by
legislative enactment growing out of
the rules of parliamentary law that
govern all legislative bodies. AS hiss
been said, and for the reason already
assigned, every alteration in the Con-
stitution no matter how trivial, must
be the subject Of q separate bill before
two successive Legislatures. They
can not be all put in one bill, so that