Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1874-11-06

- .zz.ss..zEzzszs -; -
CONVENTIONAL Fis o m
H7a&v JOS. B. BATCMELOIs.E X-
AZ ,NEY-G E.NERA OF
NarIf~SLff> "a
1t Is n keen IN fdrthne to:see
ARR 81 DIE pgnishedssup-
porters, than is the proposition to call
a Convention Of the people Of North
Carolina Tor The purpose Of amending
their Constitution. We would that
every intelligent voter in the State
could have placedin his hands apamph-
let containing the various letters that
have appeared IN the JOURNAL from dis
ttiin5gt1ished gentlemen in the State, for
Il It were doue, there would: be scarce
a dissenting Foice about the espedi-
eney of calling Convention.
The letter of MIR. BArcHE1oR, which
we publish this morning, is well
worthy of the most careful consider
alton. The fact that Mr.. BACHELOR
failed to approve the Convention Bill
of 1871, for the reason that he deemed
it unconstitutional, gives increased sig
nifcance to the warm and jealous
support he is now giving to the prop
osit;on to call Convention by two
thirds vote OF the General Assembly.
Tt is worthy Of note too, that Mr..
BATGHELoR like Mr.. MANNING, lives III
the section of the State that is as
srTaa1 to be hostile to the Convention.
-. s.. :. 49, MR.. BACHELORS LETTER.
RALEGH, N; c., Oct. q 1874.
Ncss,,s. Engeghaa.d 4, Saunders:
.GEsS,1I,IIlEz,N,EN;-Your letter asking my
opinion on the Convention question
IS, eeeiyed. -. =. ,y5.,:-st
.Althopgh compelled by. cireunstan-
ces bayond- my control, to occupy
since the war 3, private station, my
my, opinions yon questions OF pubic
Int crest haze: at all times been de-
cided, aud. at no time have hesltated
to express them when proper to do so.
Upon no question has there been a
more imperative. demand for the full
lest expression: of opinion by those
who hold dear the interests and wei
fare Of cur people, than OF that which
YOU suggest. I therefore, without
hesitation give you the conclusions to
which ] have arrived.
Your first question Is:
ssf,o. YOU think the best interests
OF tE6 people of North Caroline re-
attire tlieir Constitution. the 'ECanby
Consultation" so-called. to be mater
tally and speedily amended .
aShis I do not regard as an open
question so far as our party IS COZ.
cerned. It opposed the adoption OF
the Consultation when it was PROPOSED:
in 1853. Since that time it has lasis-
ted that it wis entirely unsuited to the
wants of the people, and experience
has proved tho correctness OF this
position. It has insisted from the
beginning. that material amendments
were Necessary; has once attempted
the call of Convention, this failing,
hos 4restored to amendment by le2ls-
lation to cure some of the evils. !
know of no member Of the Demo
cratic conservative party, who has at
any time defended the present Con
hetitntion, or said that material amend
ments were not necessary. Under
these eireur stances, to harbor doubt
that the best interests of the people OF
the Statereqnires that the present Con-
sbitntion, should be materially and
speedily amended, would be to cast
,a+, tot q Y
honesty of purpose Of the party which
have supported since it's organize
tion.s t,.s.. ...r -r-
Your second question is:
. SIT ;, iii ,yonr opinion, materia.
changes IL the Constitution ought tC
be speedily made, which mode OF max
ing 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 p
I have no hesitation in saying that
the mode of amendment by Conven.
ton 49, under existing circumstances,
not only the better of the two sugges
tons, but In nay humble Judgment,
the -olll 2. mode from which we can
hope to, obtain such @ Constitution as
our people need and deserve After
careful consideration of the present
Goustitu lion and an experience OF It's
practical working, I do not think that by
any systcnl Of Legislative patchwork
cutting Of here, splicing there, in
serting LII enc place, and striking out
| III another--it. can be changed into q
systematic and harmonious whole. -
The defects are tee numerous, too rad
| ical, too much in detail and too COM
plicated in its various provisions, to
be rernedied III this way. The wisdom
Of the best legislatures which there
is aay reason to hope will be elect
ed for many generations, viii not
be equal to, the task OF sc
grating amendments on the ex-
listing stock, as, by curing its
| defects and supplying its wants, to
render it desirable instrument. To
obtain such a fundamental law rs we
need, the Constitution. should be re-
written as 4 whole; and / do not see
how this can successfully be done,
except by Convention.
To amend by Legislative enactment,
each amendment, or each bill contain
| ing amendments, must pass two Gen
eral Assemblies. How many Of these
| amendments are necessary, and how
many bills if would take, no one has
yet taken the time and trouble to
cipher cut. In the late effort made in
this way there. were sixteen in one
bill. The. next General Assembly
dropped eight Of these, and now the
question is pending before the Su.
preme, Court whether the other eight
have. been constitutionally adopted.
My opinion, formed after investiga-
ton, is that they are not. How the
Cont will decide the question cannot
now be known. But should it decide
that the amendments were properly
adopted, still grave questions of CON
struction Will be presented, and, as to
one of these amendments, L think the
Court will be compelled, by reason OF
other provisions, to give it such con.
struction as viii defeat, in q great
measure, the purpose of its adoption.
This experience illustrates both the
difficulties above suggested; first in
procuring the adoption of proper
amendments, and second, in SO franz
ing and adding them to the existing