Year: 1862

The Constitutions Convention has adopt
ed Wentworths ordinance to submit to a
vote Of the people Of Chicago, at the April
election, the question Of abolishing the
Chicago Board Of Police Commissioners.


The question is to be voted On by sepa-
rate ballots at the city election on the third
Tues1zyln April next. The ballots will be
wordedasP1 For the city Of Chicago electing
lis owndhcezs," and against the city Of
Chicago electing its own officers"


In an ignorant community the form Of
taking this vote would add strength to the
proposition to abolish the Board Of Police
Commissioners. But among a peo-
pie so intelligent as that of
Chicago, this smart dodge will
fool nobody. The great original from
which this fraudulent style Of submitting q
proposition is copied, is the Lecompton
Constitution which was SO signally repu-
dated by the people Of Kansas. Last fall
q trap baited with similar cheese, was set
to allure the people into voting for bad
banking law. The form Of voting was, "For
banking law ona specie basis and against
a banking law on q specie basis" One
would suppose that the fate Of that bill
would be sufficient warning to deter others
from attempting to play similar game on
the people.


In the present case an attempt is to he
made TO abolis1, the Board Of Police Com
missioners, and it Is done under the pretext
Of comforting on the people Of Chicago
the right to elect their own officers. The
object is, to restore to the Mayor the ap-
polntment and control Of the Police. That
is tile whole Of it The people Of Chicago
have tried both plans, and there is little
doubt but they much prefer the present.
It secures better bodyo policemen at far
less cost, and removes them beyond the
arena Of partisan politics. The question
is, Shall the Police Of the city be the tools
and creatures Of the Mayor to do his dirty
work, and to persecute those whom he dis.
1ikcs2 or shall the Mayor be confined to
tic performance Of his proper functions
and the Police be restricted to the discharge
| Of their legitimate duties? This is tie
question to be determined.


But legal question arises at the tllresh
hold: Has the Convention the authority te
submit such proposition? Hasit the power
to nullify an act Of the Legis1ature:in thi:
way7 The Constitution itself will not bt


voted on till June 18th, and until then i


has no existence. The old Constitution re


mains in full force until the proposed ont


be ratified by the people. The Convention


itself has no power to make law, nor car


it repeal one already made. It is not


Legislative body. It is purely recommended


tory, and not plenary in its powers, and nj


law it may enact, is binding antiI tie cit


Gems Of tie 1ohoze State shall pass upon il


If Wcntwo1tll's ordinance had been sub


nitted to the people Of the State of nlinoi:


for ratification, as part Of the Constitu


ton, and a majority had voted for it


then it would be a part Of the organic law
| But to attempt to empower a muuicipa


corporation to nullify and repeal law en-


acted by the Legislature of the whole peo


pie, is monstrous usurpation, md i


clearly unconstitutional Suppose major


lty Of, those voting, at the April elcctio,


should Vote to abolish the Board Of Polio
| c. mmissloncrs, and the Board should re


fuse to recognize the validity Of such vote


and appeal to the Supreme Court for pro


lection, is there any lawyer that will 81,


that the Court would not Instantly set asid


such election as Illegal and void? ulega


simply because the Convention had n
power to authorize such a. vot
: before the new Constitution itse
was adopted, and no power to er
a1'le q town, precinct or city t
abolish and override an act Of til
Legislature. An act Of the Legislature ca
only be repealed by a subsequent Lcgisl:
turc OF by Convention submitting the T,
pcalcd proposition to all the electors
) the State, The Convention has made itse
ridiculous, and added another to the Ion
list Of usuTpations it has attempted to pc
petratc.