Year: 1859

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTs.-Th
question has been frequently discussed
in times past, how far the Legislature in
conjunction with the people, can go in
efecting constitutional amendments. -
By some it is eontended the powers of
the Legislature are unlimited in the
matter or making propositions to amend,
to be acted upon by the people. Others
believe that radical changes belong only
to the people in constitutional conven-
ton assembled, and that such was the
design of the gette,s up of our present
constitution. This point is immaterial
to the matter we have in hand. 1t seems
to us there is more important question
to be solved, and that is tie one we some
weeks ago propounded tothat paragon of
ability, the Sacramento Union, to an
swer; but which, owing probably to a
wonderful :enacity of that paper to its
own opinions notwithstanding their ab-
surdity, yet remains unnoticed. We
again PROFOUND the query to men of
good sense throughout the State outside
of the Union office, especially those
Douglas men and Republicans who have
heretofore taken decided position
against the partial or imperfect submiss-
ion of constitutions to the people,
whether in case of many radical or ex
tensive changes in our constitution be-
ing agreed upon by the Legislature for
after submission to the people, if it is
constitutional and proper that the chan
ges should all be submitted in a lump
requiring but one form of ballot with a
single yes or no upon it, or whether the
people may justly claim the right to pass
upon each section or distinct proposition
separately. We incline to the latter
ideas and cannot see how the Union with
any consistency can differ with US.


A portion of the people want the con-
stitution to stand as it is. Another por-
ton desire the judiciary remodeIed but
nothing else. Others desire to see 9TH
er articles remodeled. All these " ish
to be accommodated at the ballot box.
They want to express their wants there
They ought to have that privilege
What is the consequence The consti-
tuition as a whole must be harmonious.
The people will vote for one section or
proposition and reject another. The
Legislature presents a well adjusted
fabric. The people are sometimes
swayed by caprice. They are not vers-
ed in constitutional law. They vote for
this provision and not another. A ma
jority decides that this section proposed
by the Legislature shall be adopted and
an other not. The result is a constitu-
ton inharmonious, contradictory-an
unintelligible mass of nonsense. We
do not want to run any such risks
Constitutional amendments have to be
published. 1t costs but little more to
publish the whole than a part The ex-
pense of a convention is but little more
than would be spent by Legislature in
effecting constitutional changes and the
dangers far lie SIS imminent. The best
lawyers in the State who would not con-
sent to hold scat in the Legislature
would regard it as an honor to represent
the people in a constitutional ronven-
ion. They wonld be elected by TIE
people with reference to a high purpose
and might be expected to be above that
party dictation which corrupt and de-
grades Legislature. They could be
trusted by the people more implicitly
their production looked upon with less
suspicion, their motives be urquestioned
Besides, the people prefer new suit to
one patched at the seat, the knees and
the elbows.