Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-03-06
LOuisiana's Experiment.
NouisYllle Courier-Jonrnnll


The people Of Louisiana have decided To
FISK the experiment Of a constitutional
| convention, and that body is now I'm ses-
sion. It's main object is not In doubt. 1t
Is intended TO put the control OF the State
securely in the hands Of the white people
by means Of an educational qualification
TOT voters. No doubt is entertained that
THIS object will be accomplished.
mere are other matters, however, con-
corning which there has evidently been
some trepidation. A constitutional CON
vention, in the light of experience, is an
uncertain and sometimes q dangerous
BODY. 1t Is not possible TO foresee what
II Is going TO do. The Louisiana conven-
| uon VIII shape the organic law of the
| state for considerable time to come, as
| there is no intention TO submit its action
| 70 the approval Of the voters. Whatever
the convention does, therefore, is without
| appeal, unless the courts should interfere
ana their right to do so would probably
! be contested.
In the call for this convention there has
| been an attempt 10 limit its powers. 1t is
forbidden to legallize lotteries, to increase
| the bonded Indebtedness of the State, and
one or two other things. 1t is not there
| fore, what may properly be called a
| sovereignty convention. At the same time
| II IS invested with the power of changing
| the organic law as il pleases, of enfran-
chislng or DISTINGUISHING such portions of
the population as 1t may deem proper; in
short Of doing anything that is not pro-
hbited by the act under which il was
called or the Constitution and laws of the
United States.
Whether a legislative act calling a con-
sutuuonal convention can limit its power
Is question upon which differences OF
opinion have long existed. 1t usually re-
quires a legislative act to call it, but
whence does il derive it's powers? A
legislature cannot make a new constitu-
ton. IL cannot authorize one Of its COM
mlttees TO revise the Constitution. 1t IS
argued, therefore, that it cannot confer
upon constitutional convention the now
er TO make a constitution under legisla-
1--WE instructions. That would make il q
sort of larger legislative committee or
commission. The Legislature calls under
the mandate Of the people embodied I'm a
former constitution. But the Legislature
does not elect the delegates. They are
elected by the people. They are supposed
20 represent the people, and not the Legs-
lature. The latter cannot delegate power
which it does not possess. Can IN. there
fore, limit the power TO make a new Con-
sututlon which the people have conhded
TO the constitutional convention? If il
can, II certainly participates, in a GER
tam degree, In the work of making a
constitution. Ii provides that certain
thlngs shall remain in the Constitution
III might, If 1t possesses this power, pro-
vide that only one section OF the Consti-
tuition should be changed, or, If others
were changed that they must be changed
In a certain way. Thus by the act the
Legislature might virtually make the
constitution itself end leave the conyer-
tion hardly anything TO do but to ratify
the work OF the Legislature
On the other hand, IL Is said that the
Legislature also represents the people:
that the will OF the people is as much
expressed IN the terms Of the call as ia
the call itself; that the delegates to the
constitutional convention are selected to
DO the things specified in the call issued
Dy the representatives of the people, and
that they are elected by the people with
that understanding. When Delegates are
elected to do certain things. il cannot
be justly claimed, ii is urged, that the
mere name Of the body In which they sit
can invest them with authority 10 DO
other things. The people are notified
that they are choosing a sovereign ana
irresponsible body, with certain excep-
lions, but they are presumed TO intend
the exceptions as fully as they intend
to confer complete power in other re-
spects
1t may be, OF course, that the Louis
lana convention will not attempt to do
But IL will decide for itself what is pro-
hiblted. and as its work is not TO be
submitted 10 the people there will be no !
remedy, unless in an appeal to the SUI |
preme Court. Ii has been found that |
courts are cautious about disturbing the
work of a constitutional convention |
though cases Of that sort have occurred |
IL is apparent, therefore, that there is |
some risk involved in the Louisiana ex- |
pertinent. The wisdom and conserya- |
tism OF the delegates, If they are found |
to possess these qualifications, may pre- |
vent any harm.