The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1882-08-29

spOnsiOie OmceS and the people h1d the SatSfac-
ton of seeing those who hal swim lied them out
of the dearest rights Of feemen installed as their
rulers without their cnDsent"-[From Speech
OF Charles E. Dyke delivered in the Leon county
Reform Club, at Tallahassee, September 10Th,
1875 Printed by request of the Club and
scattered broadcast throughout the State rs q
campaign document
That was a very good speech, and the
author of it believes now as he be-
lieved when it was made that the Con-
stitution of 1868, which was voted for by
the editor of the Economist, was counted
in "just as Reed was counted in by
ballot-box stufing; but that belief did
not prevent the instrument from being
declared and accepted as the supreme
law of the land, not only by its oppo-
nents and advocates, but by Congress and
all the States of the Union. No one that
we ever heard Of has refused to accept Office
under it, no matter what may have been his
belief as to its adoption originally. 1t is
recognised as the Constitution. The ed
itor of the Economist would not have de-
clined Office nnder it. In fact he has, like
all of us, acknowledged it as of binding
authority and sworn to support, protect
"and defend the Constitution and govern
ment of the State against all enemies,
foreign and domestic, and bear true
faith, loyalty and allegiance to the same,
"any ordinance or resolution of any State
Convention or Legislature to the con-
"trary notwithstanding. So help him
God" So you sec that the FLoRIDIAN's
belief as expressed in the speech quoted
did not deter Judge Hilton from accept
ing the Constitution and swearing to sup
port it. That makes twice he has taken
the thing to his bosom-once when he
voted for it and again when he took an
oath to defend and protect it
Now, we suppose that in quoting from
the speech mentioned the purpose was to
create the impression that the person who
made it is inconsistent now in not favor
ing the calling of a Convention "by a
short cut" to make "New Constitu-
ton" But this is quite another question.
The present Constitution, as We have seen,
is the recognized supreme law-recog-
nized as such as we'll by those who voted
against it as by those who believe it was
fraudulently adopted-and it prescribes
the steps to be taken and the forms to be
pursued in calling a Convention. The
FLoRIDIAN is in favor of following these
forms and warns the Democracy that
there is danger in going outside of them.
A Convention called in pursuance of law
will be regular and legal, but Conven-
ton called contrary to and in violation of
the plain provisions of law will be irreg-
ular and illegal and be liable to the
charge of being revolutionary, and this
no one can gainsay. 1t is idle to tell US
that the people reserve the right to alter
their Constitution at pleasure. This is a
fundamental principle underlying all
State governments, but the people them
selves prescribe the manner in which this
fright" shall be exercised. They tie
up their own hands," says Cooley, an ad-
mitted authority on all such questions !:
"By the Constitution which they estab-
"lish, they not only tie up the hands of
"their official agencies, but their own
"hands as well and neither the officers
"Of the State, nor the whole people as an
aggregate body, are at liberty to take
"action in opposition to this fundamental
claw" 1t is only sin the absence of any
provision for amendment or revision con-
tanned in the Constitution ITSELF" SAYS
this same authority, that the Legislature
"wOuld be authorized to speak for the
"People on this subject and to point out
Ga mode for the expression of their will :"
But the Constitution does contain pro-
visions for amendment or revision and
it would seem to follow that if these pro-
visions arr disregarded and treated as of
no binding force and Convention is
called in defiance of them, the movement
cannot escape the charge of illegality and
will be defeated, in our judgment, and
carry down with it the party championing
it az well AS postpone amendments which
all agree are desirable to be made. " Shall
we say it ?"-the advocates for following
the law are better friends of amending
the Constitution than those who urge a
disregard of the law and the calling of
Convention in defiance thereto.
A Constitutional Convention is now in
sight. The Legislature of 1881 passed
a preparatory resolution. as the Constitu-
ton prescribes. This resolution will be
passed by the Legislature to assemble in
January next and the whole question will
go before the people at the election in
1884. II the people consent, then the
Legislature to meet in January, 1885, will
call the Convention and it will assemble
inside of six months thereafter. All this
will be regular and legal and nobody can
oppose it on the ground of being revolu
tionary. Which course is the wisest-to
follow the law in this matter or 90 con-
trary to itP
Every Law-abiding citizen of Florida