The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1880-02-11
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
The Report in Favor of Calling It.
To The House Of Representatives.


Three subjects of enquiry are submitted 10
the Committee, LIST, Shall Convention be
called? I'd, If called, at what time shall it
be held Sd, What will be the probable cost
of holding same
lst Shall Convention be called 1t is
unnecessary to go into q consideration of the
various objections to the Constitution, as 1t IS
generally conceded that il is radically de-
feetive The principal objections to it are,
that It SURPRISES remedial, reformatiye and
progressive legislation restricts the applica-
ton Of experience to the improvement of the
common school system, and establishes an
unwise and expensive registration scheme
The question submitted to the Committee Is,
whether it is necessary TO call Convention
10 correct these defects. There is a method
provided in the Constitution itself for revis-
ing and amending same. This method pro-
vides for submitting the proposed amendments
to the electors, through agency of the Legisla-
ture. In compliance with this provision sew
eral anne ndmehts have been already incorpo-
rated in the Constitution, to-wit: the amend
ments relating TO the Chancery system. and
TO Biennial sessions of the Legislature;
while the section relating to public adver-
Using by loyal newspapers, has been ex-
Ii the objections TO the Constitution were
limited TO a few parts, this me hod would an
swer every purpose; but, the larger portion of
them are fixed IN the general system. To
eradicate them, woul1 require revision of the
whole instrument. Therefore. the method
provided in the Constitution itselfis not suited
TO the purpose.
Scarcely a session of the Legislature has
raised since the year 1874. that an alarming
number of amendments has not been proposed
TO the Constitution. careful examination of
them will show the serious objections that
exist to the same while they prove that the
defects exist in the system. The object of leg
islation IS not alone TO suppress crime, provide
civil remedies. and make appropriations. 1t
has higher and more benefcent purpose,
which directs it TO the material development,
and internal improvement of the State These,
in fact, they contribute most to general
rosperity, and the happiness of the people
should receive all the stimulus that can be
given them. If the organic law restraints
| legislation in these respects, it but shackles
progress, and fails in the first end of all gov
ernmenIs The present organic law is open
to these objections in the highest sense; and
nothing, but Constitutional Convention can
put it in harmony with Democratic prime pie
nd the great interest of the people.
End. If Convention is called at what time
hall it be held There is a resolution submitted
| to the committee, which proposes to refer the
whole question of constitutional Convention
| to the electors, at the next election for menu
bers of the Legislature, to vote for, or against
! Convention. In the opinion of the committee
this would be unwise Ii a Convention is to
be held it ought to be done at the earliest prac-
| ticable time. Without the least difficulty an
! election tor delegates could be held on the
| third Tuesday in February next, and the Con-
vention convene on the second Tuesday IN
/ March. This would enable the Convention to
| act, and submit the new Constitution the
people, if it were deemed necessary, before the
| next general election. The committee, there
fore, recommend the passage of House Bill No.
| 80, entitled, An act authorizing a Convention
| of the people of the State to form a new Con-
| stitution, which was referred to them for
| their consideration, with amendments thereto.
In this connection the committee deem II
proper to allude to suggestion that Is made
/ by one of their members, locking to making
| the action of the Convention. called, pro-
vided for in the above entitled House Bill,
| final. without reference to the people for their
| ratification. Without adopting this sugges-
| ton, the committee have examined authorities
on the exercise of this power, with the follow
ing result, and submit the same for the
consideration of the Legislature, to-wit:
Mr.. Cooley says, see Cooleys Constitutional
Limitations, page 80, Article ", "In accord
ance with universal practice, and from the
| very necessity of the case, amendments to an
existiHg Constitution, or entire Te0slon Of a. must
| be. prepared and matured by some body of
| Representatives chosen for the purpose. But
| no body of representatives,, unless specially
clothed ruth pOcer for that purpose by the people
| arhen choosing them can rightly take dehnitlve
| action upon amendments or revlsions.
1t would seem, them that Convention could
exercise this power if, at the time of the cleo
ton of delegates, the election specially clothed
them with this power. Otherwise no such
power could be assumed.
Mr.. Jameson, in his work on Constitutional
/ Conventions, Sec. 40 ct Seq, asks this ques-
ton, and then proceeds TO discuss the same,
What disposition shall be made by the Con-
vention of the work of its hands?" The ques-
! ton involves the consideration of two courses
namely: " The Convention might finish its de-
| alterations, and without further ado, publish
| its work the supreme law of the land :" or
! 8 1t might sabmt the fruit of it to the people
| for approval or disapproval"
''Of the two courses says Mr.. Jameson
1.-THE first is wholly inadmissable in any case
whatever that atone excepted an achich 1t
should be adopted under the express au-
thority Of law.' 1t is the usual course, when
| the Legislature calls Convention, for it to
provide for the submission of its work to the
people. This right has been questioned, and
'intimations have beeu thrown out that the
Convention could disregard the requirement
of the Legislature. In the Illinois COnven-
ton of l847 and 1862, it was contended that
the Convention was for the purposes for
which 1t was assembled, sovereign, and could
disregard all the provisions of the Act, call
ing it into existence at lis pleasure Hence
concluded, that those bodies might or
might not submit the result of their labors to
the people, Notwithstanding the positive
injunctions of the Legislature, as their own
views of expediency should dictate See
Jameson, on the Constitutional Convention,
Section 4l4
The right claimed by these Conventions is
denied by Mr.. Jameson. Yet he lays down
the rule, that if the Legislature calling the
Convention, direct that their action be de-
finitive, and that ii shall not require the rati-
ication of the people, then, in such case, the
exercise OF the power Is proper. inns certain
ly is in conflict with the rule laid down by
Mr.. Cooley. For it in effect takes from the
electors the right of choice, they only having
the option of choosing delegates. Jameson,
Section 484- However, he qualities the rule
by saying mo very serious exceptions could |
be taken on principle to an act containing
such provision provided the precaut,on had
been employed to axe upon it in advance the
sense Of the people" Jameson, Sec. 494. But |
where the existing constitution of the State |
does not expressly grant to the Legislature |
the power to call a Convention then a provis- |
ion permitting the Convention to adopt, with |
out submission. is of doubtful propriety.
The majority OF the States have always con-
formed to the doctrine of submission. Yet s |
large number of the States have held to the |
opposite view, among which are New Hamp- |
shire, South Carolina, Virginia, New Jersey, |
Delaware. Pennsylva MIA, North Carolina.
Gcnrc.ia Nm. NcrL. Ma...-Ia.,d 49,. |