The Southern Literary Messenger, Vol. II., No. 10, September, 1836Various
General
The Southern Literary Messenger, Vol. II., No. 10, September, 1836
Various
American literature -- 19th century -- Periodicals
But even there the true theory prevails, and the wisdom to which the
constitution looks as governing the whole country, is that of the
electors, and not the delegates. However small, ignorant, or obscure
the place may be which sends a member, in that place the constitution
supposes the wisdom to reside which is necessary to give one vote in
Parliament, and not in the _individual_ through whom the vote is
given. If the constitution is in error, reform that, but do not usurp
powers for the representatives. Hence the fate of the eloquent Burke
before the electors of Bristol. In distributing more equally the
elective power, our ancestors evinced both their justice and their
wisdom. They saw no reason for supposing one portion of the country
possessed of much more wisdom than another, whilst all alike required
protection. The power of instructions and short terms they supposed a
sufficient check to enable the people to protect themselves. Abundant
evidence may be adduced to show that those great men were familiar
with the importance, and obligation, and frequent exercise of this
right. To prove this, we need go no farther than the Debates of the
Virginia Convention which adopted the federal constitution. That
constitution was no where more thoroughly discussed, or more warmly
opposed, or opposed by men of more ability, than in that convention.
Yet in their debates we find the right asserted both by opponents and
advocates of the constitution; the one party contending that the right
was not sufficiently secured by power to enforce its obligation—the
other that the nature of the office, and the character of the men,
would be a sufficient guarantee of their obedience. Instructions are
frequently mentioned as a regular, legitimate, unquestionable mode of
_controlling_ the will of the representative. And the idea of
disobedience is never suggested except in connection with other
possible gross moral and official misconduct. Disobedience seemed to
be considered as treachery to the constituent. As my authority is not
accessible to all of your readers, you must allow me to quote
liberally to sustain my opinions, at the hazard of encumbering your
pages.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account