The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-01-12
Proclamation or Submission /?

Editor of The Times:
Sir.-For some time past / have noticed
what seems 10 be a growing deterinltia.
tion on the part of the CONSTITUTIONS
Convention to proclaim the new Consa-
tuition instead Of submitting 1t 10 tne
vote of the people for their ratiaca'ioh
or rejection. / am myself Nirsiniaa
end q democrat, both by birthriSht AMI
choice, and am deeply interested IN az
that concerns the welfare of my S'at;
and country / am especially inlefsslcu
81 the new Constitution, and nave sSo'.
hopes and a strong belief that III VIII os
1; great improvement on our present o.s-
I am willing to submit to proper authoti-
Nv whether submission thereto DC p'eas-
ant or unpleasant TO my taste. bul' s'i'
am not disposed TO submit TO ih'piop7.
authority, even when it would IMPOSE
good a thing upon me, as DeileEc '4iS
new Constitution VIII be and beiaeFe
large majority OF the free and iEacpeh-
dent voters of Virginia are OF the sdn'e
mind.
In view OF this growing purpose OF ihs
par. of the Constitutional Convention ~
proclaim the new Constitution the JUS
ton very naturally arises; Has the Cow
stitunonal Convention the autnoIies ~
proclaim the new Constitution!
The fundamental principle uhaeisa iis
sself-goyernment resides IN Inc PsopiS,
We boast that ours is a government %
Tho peoule. by the people and for the
psonIe. II, a democracy the people eXer-
else tho right of self-goycrnment en-
u.assc by their own direct vote. In u
republic The people rule. not by their CT
rect vote en- masse. but by ana throusa
representatives whom they, the people'
choose for themselves. Such is our ioitii
OF government. 80
II is also a Fundamental principle OF
commemorative government that the
chosen representatives Of the people nave
no authority except such as is eXpicllg,
or by logical and necessary implication,
delegated to them by the people, anu
that such authority as is not oeiesa'eu
so such representatives by the people "a
thereby denied them and reserved es
and TO the people themselves TINS pr1n.
riple is embodied in the Constitution u
the United States (see amendments az :,
ID; ii is absolutely just, ana IS "en
known and recognized by all Statesmen
sud business men. 1t Is ceat' 'hen
that In ours, which is representative
government, our representatives have no
authority except such as has been dele
gated to them by the people. Therefore,
IL the constitutional Convention, whose
members are the representatives OF hle
people of Virginia, has the authority 10
proclaim the new Constitution. the Peo-
pie of Virginia have delegated that au-
lhority to H. If the people OF virginia
have delegated that authority to me
Constitutional Convention, the conFehloh
has that authority; if the people nave
not delegated that authority to it. theh
Ct has not that authority. DIS Is pam
and irrefutablc.
The simple question before US then Is
this; Have the people of Virginia dele
: gated to the Constitutional Convention
The authority to proclaim The new Con-
sGtution? Has such authority been oeIe-
gated by explicit statement or bE loelSat
and necessary implication?
The Democratic Convention, which Sub
mitted the question of calling Constl-
tutional Convention TO the people OF Nir
sinia, gave the most explicit ana SoieIiili
pIedGe to the people that If they the
seople should vote in favor OF Gaining
such Constitutional Convention, the ne"
constitution, when formulated, would be
submitted 10 the vote of the people of
Virginia for their ratification or rejection.
Acting under this pledge. the people OF
Virginia voted in favor of calling Con-
rtitutjonal Convention. These are plain
facts of history, and are incontroNertibie.
Such Constitutional Convention has peeh
called under this sacred pledge MADE 10
the peoItie OF Virginia, and / confidently
submit that the Democratic party in VIZ
einia and the constitutional Convention,
which is at once the representative of tho
Democratic party and CT the people Oh
Virginia, are both bound by the most
solemn and sacred pledge to submit the
new Constitution to the vote of the people
of Virginia for their ratification or rejec-
ord ny
anywhere to be found by which the peo-
ole of Virginia delegated. or even limited
ur 6cleeatinE to the Constitutional Con-
vention the authority to proclaim the new
constitution. | challenge even that au-
gust body of one hundred chosen VIZ
Cinians. the Constitutional Convection, to
show one iota of the delegation of such
authority to them or TO anybody else.
So far from delegating such authority
the people Of Virginia in the most explicit
tcrms-the solemn pledge made TO them
have reserved 10 themselves the right 10
ratify or reject the new Constitution. We
answer, therefore, in the most emphatic
terms that the people of Virginia have
not delegated to the Constitutional Con-
scntion the authority to proclaim the new
PROSTITUTION. Hence The Constitutional
Convention has not the authority 10 pro-
slaim it. There is no escape from this
conclusion, DEt IN clSnONeSty ana iiS-
tracc. ] know that members OF the Con-
etitutional Convention. who are high in
public favor, for whom / have hitherto
maintained q high regard and for whom
now ! lIaroor no III feelings, as quoted in
The public prints, have denied that the
constitutional Convention is bound by
This pledge. Then. who is bound by it?
what was 1t made for? Certainly the
Democratic party is bound by IL, and the
constitutional Convention is the represent
ta;iye of the Democratic party. That
ehich binds the principal also binds his
representative. Such a denial is the mer-
tst political jugglery. and IS a sad COM
e1entary either upon the intellect or the
honesty of those who make 1t. Any per-
ton who can satisfy his conscience with
such trickery and chicanery as this has
terious cause TO fear that honesty has
90 longer her seat in his soul. ! SIM
.ereiy hope the public prints have, as I
know they often Go, rnisquoted the mem
sers or the Constitutional Convention in
his matter Unless further confirmed we
thai hope and believe that they have.