Class. Book FACTS /^QsS^ ■Pr INVOLVED IN THE ) RHODE ISLAND CONTROVERSY SOME VIEWS UPON THE RIGHTS OF BOTH PARTIES. I^^^B^ BOSTON: PUBLISHED BY B. B. MUSSEY, No. 29 CORNHILL. 1842. A FACTS INVOLVED IN THE i J"^ RHODE ISLAND CONTROVERSY SOME VIEWS UPON THE IGHTS OF BOTH PARTIES. BOSTON: PUBLISHED BY B. B. MUSSEY, No. 29 CORNHILL. 1842. Bos. Pub.Lit> ; Printed by S. N. Dickinson, 1 [ Si Washington-st. Boston, J IIHODE ISLAND CONTROVEESY. Rhode Island is the theatre of a great and angry contro- versy ; a controversy involving issues of a wider magnitude than have before agitated the Confederation since the organ- ization of the government. It is a collision not of men but of principles, and as such, has drawn the attention and ex- cited the interest of the great body of the American people. Were it a merely local quarrel, it would be left to the deci- sion of the parties m.ore immediately interested ; but those who deem it such know but little of the merits of the con- test. The issue is, whether all power is embodied primarily in the people, or in the instruments of their creation ; whether man, of himself, has the inherent and inalienable right to participate in the government because he is a man, or be- cause of collateral circumstances ; whether the governed can ' alter and amend ' the government, or whether the govern- ment may, at its own option, be despotic in its power and perpetual in its existence ; in a word, whether the rallying shout of our fathers — " The voice of the people is the voice of God" — is wild and visionary fanaticism or sober truth. The whole superstructure of this great Union is based upon the recognition of the supremacy of the people ; take that away, and it must crumble to dust, and disappear " like the baseless fabric of a vision." Are not, then, the whole peo- ple interested, deeply and personally, in the result of this controversy, and ought the popular sympathy, we ask, to be circumscribed by the metes and bounds of the State of Rhode Island ? The two immediate parties to the controversy embrace almost the entire adult male population of the State. One party claims, that the Charter given to the colonies of Rhode Island by Charles Second, and the laws and usages that have grown from it during the last two centuries, possess paramount authority ; and the other, that all power vests primarily in the people. The one claims that there can be no binding law enacted unless it emanates from the Charter government ; the other, that the people are sovereign, and therefore competent to amend, alter, or abolish the forms of government that they or their ancestors have established. Under the Charter is ranged the great body of those who administer the government it establishes, and opposed to them are all those whom the Charter and the laws under it disfranchise. The former is the more wealthy class, and the latter the more numerous, but both arc powerful from their numbers, their talents, and their character. The latter demand, and have demanded for nearly half a century, par- ticipation in the government, free suffrage and equal repre- sentation. The former have fixed the standard of qualifica- tion to citizenship at one hundred and thirty-four dollars in real estate, while the representation remains the same as provided for in the Charter. Within the past two years, the immediate measures have been taken which have placed the two parties in their pres- ent hostile attitude. More than a year since, the Charter party made the pre- liminary arrangements for the call of a Convention of dele- gates, to be elected /rom and by the qualified freeholders, for the framing of a Constitution. Soon after the Suffrage party called a Convention of delegates to be elected //'o>« and by the whole inale adult people for the same purpose. Both bodies met, and each proceeded to frame a Constitu- tion ; — the Suffrage Convention on the basis of free suffrage and equal representation, and the Charter Convention upon that of suffrage and representation founded on property. That of the former was submitted to the people before the latter body had finished its labors ; and the strong support afforded, if not clear adoption of that Constitution, induced the Charter Convention to extend the right of suffi-age nearly as claimed, still leaving the representation unequal. Their Constitution was rejected by a decided popular vote, and that of the Suffrage Convention was declared by its framers and adherents to have been adopted by a majority of the people, and to be the law of the State ; and under it a new government was formed. There are now, therefore, existing in the State two distinct powers. Both have appealed for aid to the General Gov- ernment, and should more serious troubles ensue, that aid will be rendered to one of the parties. When that event takes place, if ever, we cannot doubt on which side the popular sympathy will tend. Whatever may be said by hackneyed politicians of the degeneracy of the masses, there yet burns in the public mind the inextinguishable love of liberty. Let but an unholy hand touch the great princi- ple, and, as in olden times, the beacon fires will blaze upon every hill top, and a million breasts surround it as a bul- wark. The principal facts on which the controversy is based, we will now give as succinctly as possible. The first settlements in the State were commenced in 1636, by Roger Williams and others, and were soon after called the Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. 1* Other settlements, not long after, were made within the territory of the State, by several companies under different grants. Providence Plantations, Warwick, and the island of Rhode Island, each had their separate government. The inconvenience of this was early felt, and voluntary associa- tions under the government were several times entered into, and as often dissolved. In 1643, '4, Sir Henry Vane, who was one of the Com- missioners of Plantations, with the Earl of Warwick, gi-anted the first charter to the State, by authority of Parliament. By this charter, the inhabitants of the towns of Providence, Portsmouth, and Newport, were incorporated by the name of " The IncorporatiOxN of Providex\ce Plantations, in the Narragansett Bay, in New England," with power to rule themselves and such others as should thereafter inhabit within any part of the tract of land mentioned therein, by such a form of civil government as by voluntary consent of all, or the greater part of them, they should find most suitable to their estate and condition. These powers had brought one restriction, which was, that " said laws, constitutions, and punishments, should be conformable to the laws of Eng- land, so far as the nature and constitution of the place would admit." The union under this charter was in a few years broken ; but in August, 1654, a meeting of commissioners from all the towns was holden at Warwick, when articles of reiinion were agreed upon, and the government under the charter, as at first, reorganized. The restoration of Charles IL, in 1660, caused the inhab- itants of this colony to fear, that the rights which they had obtained from Parliament, when at war with the father, would not be respected by the son. They had reason also to ex- pect, that the same exertions which had been made by their neighbors to produce the recall of their charter, would now be repeated, and with more success. They, therefore, adopted measures to procure the favor of their new king, and a confirmation of their privileges. A new commission was issued to Mr. John Clark, who was then in England, appointing him their agent for the preservation of their char- tered rights and liberties. Three from each town were appointed to draw up an humble petition to His Majesty, to correspond with their agent, and to do what seemed to them best to accomplish their wishes in this respect. The new king was disposed to forget past animosities, and unite in himself the affection of all parties. A new charter was granted on the 8th of July, 1663, and was received in November, 1663, by the court of commissioners at Newport. This charter was almost in word and letter as solicited by their agents. Its provisions, so far as they in the least bear on the ques- tion now at issue, we shall here copy at length, and omit only those which have no relevancy to the controversy. CHARTER. The charter, after the manner of those days, is very ver- bose. After naming the considerations which moved His Majesty to grant it, one of which was that the colonists had brought under subjection to the government the Indians, who, as the Charter reads, " we are informed are the most potent princes and people of all that country," it provides, First " That our Royal will and pleasure is, that no person within the said Colony, at any time hereafter, shall be anywise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question, for any differences in opinion in matters of religion, and do not actually disturb the civil peace of our said Colony ; but that all and every person and persons may, from time to time, and at all times hereafter, freely 8 and fully have and enjoy his and their own judgments and consciences in matters of religious concernments, throughout the tract of land hereafter mentioned, they behaving them- selves peaceably and quietly, and not using this liberty to licentiousness and profaneness, nor to the civil injury or s outward disturbance of others ; any law, statute or clause, therein contained, or to be contained, usage or custom of this realm to the contrary hereof, in anywise notwith- standing." Second. That the petitioners "and all such others as now are, or hereafter shall be, admitted and made free of the Company and Society of our Colony of Providence Plantations^ in the Narragansett Bay, in New England, shall be from time to time, and forever hereafter, a body corporate and politic^ in fact and name, by the name of The Governor and Company of the English Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, in New England in America." It provides " That for the better ordering and managing of the affairs and business of the said Company and their successors, there shall be one Governor, one Deputy-Gov- ernor, and ten assistants, to be, from time to time " chosen out of the Freemen of the Company, and that until such choice could be made, these officers were to be appointed by the Crown. " And that forever hereafter, twice in every year, (that is to say,) on every first Wednesday in the month of May, and on every last Wednesday in October, or oftener, in case it shall be requisite, the assistants, and such of the freemen of the said Company, not exceeding six persons for Neivport, four persons for each of the respective towns of Providence, Portsmouth and Warwick, and tivo persons for each other place, town, or dtp, who shall be from time to time, there- unto elected or deputed by the major part of the freemen of the respective towns or places for which they shall be so elected or deputed, shall have a general meeting or assembly, then and there to consult, advise and determine, in and about the affairs and business of the said Company and Plantations." " And also to regulate and order the way and manner of all elections to offices and places of trust, and to prescribe, limit and distinguish the numbers and bounds of all places, towns or cities within the limits and bounds herein after mentioned, and not herein particularly named, who have or shall have, the power of electing and sending of freemen to the said General Assembly." And " That yearly, once in the year forever hereafter, namely, the aforesaid Wednesday in May, and at the town of Newport^ or elsewhere, if urgent occasion do require, the Governor, Deputy-Governor, and Assistants of the said Company, and other officers of the said Company, or such of them as the General Assembly shall think fit, shall be, in the said General Court or Assembly to be held from that day or time newly chosen for the year ensuing, by such greater part of the said company, for the time being, as shall be then and there present." " And further. Our will and pleasure is, that in all matters of public controversy, which may fall out between our Colony of Providence Plantations and the rest of our Colonies in New England, it shall, and may be lawful to and for the Governor and Company of the said Colony of Providence Plantations, to make their appeals therein to us, OUR HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS, foT Tcdress lYi suck cttses withiii this, our realm of Eng-landJ'^ It will be seen from the foregoing general view of the Charter, that it provides for a government consisting of a Governor, Deputy Governor, and ten Assistants, to be chosen yearly by the freemen ; also certain Representatives, not 10 exceeding six for Newport, four each for Providence, War- wick and Portsmouth, and two for each other town or city, to be chosen by the majority of freemen in the several towns ; that the Governor, Deputy Governor, Assistants, and Representatives, were constituted by the terms of the Char- ter, one body, denominated the General Assembly, and that there was granted entire religious freedom and unlimited right of suffrage ; that to the General Assembly was dele- gated the power to admit as freemen, and consequently to the right of suffrage, as many persons as and whom they saw fit, without requiring any qualification whatever, and to order the manner and way of electing all public offi- cers ; and that all questions between this and the other colonies were to be submitted to King Charles or his suc- cessors. Under this Charter the government has nominally con- tinued and acted. And it is among the remarkable facts in the great history of revolutions, that though this gallant little State fought with unsurpassed courage the mercenaries of England, and saw the other colonies scout their worthless charter parchments, Rhode Island adhered, with the utmost tenacity, to its royal Constitution, and preserved it with the care and veneration shown to the crown jewels of the Czar. THE CHARTER ASSEMBLY. We proceed to give a synopsis of those acts of the Gen- eral Assembly, which constitute a material part of the data upon w^hich the controversy is based. By an act of the General Assembly in May, 1664, voting by proxy was authorized, and a plurality of votes rendered sufficient for an election. In 1666, an act was passed delegating to the towns the power to admit freemen. 11 In 1724, an act passed the General Assembly, requiring electors to have a freehold estate of £100, or 40 shillings rent, and at the same time the eldest son of a freeman was declared to be a freeman of right, without qualification. Up to this time no property qualification had been required io constitute a freeman. Rhode Island was principally en- gaged in agriculture, and it is therefore reasonable to sup- pose that very few were by this law excluded from the polls. In 1730, this property qualification was raised from £100 to d£200, or that the freehold should bear a yearly rent of £10. In 1742, it was further enacted by the General Assembly, that no person should be admitted to vote but those only who at the time of voting were freemen and possessed of land as provided in the act of 1730. Did this exclude the eldest son ? In 1746, the requisite qualification was raised to £400 or an annual rent of £20. In 1762, it was reduced to the possession of a freehold of the value of £40, or one hundred and thirty-four dollars, or a yearly rent of forty shillings, or seven dollars ; and that act has been continued to the present day. While no one could become an elector without first hav- ing a freehold of the value of $134, and proving previous residence of six months in the town where he wished to vote, yet this did not give him a right to claim the privilege of a freeman. He must be chosen a freeman in open town meeting, or he had no right as an elector. The prop- erty only placed him in such condition that the freemen of the town might grant him the boon of a free citizen, but they were not bound to do it. In 1796, the Assistants were created a distinct legislative branch, and have so continued to the present day. In the lapse of time the political representation became very unequal. The representation of the several towns was 12 fixed by the Charter, and no provision made for a new apportionment. POPULAR MOVEMENTS, &c. The Charter, at the time of its adoption, was a good one, and far in advance of the age. It provided for entire reli- gious liberty, fixed no limit to the right of suffrage, and vested the whole governing power in a Governor and Gen- eral Assembly, chosen annually by the people. The charter, when granted, as adapted to the then population, who were with but few exceptions landholders, might almost have been said to be faultless. But, when we look at the charter as adapted to the people of Rhode Island in 1840, its character is entirely changed. Instead of being in advance of the age, it is behind it. In- stead of being one of the best governments in the colonies, it has become the worst. Instead of being a government of the people, as understood in her sister States, as it really was when granted, it has become a government of a mere fraction of the people. In 1840, when there was a free white male population in the State of over twenty-five thousand six hundred, but little more than eight thousand six hundred, or less than one third of them, were voters ; so that less than one third of the free white adult population of the State, governed the other two thirds. But while the Charter, by a change of the habits and oc- cupation of the people, has been thus working injustice to the non-freeholders, it has also gradually been equally work- ing injustice among the freeholders. The Charter, at the time it was granted, in apportioning the representatives, assigned six to Newport, four each to Providence, Warwick, and Portsmouth, and two to each 13 other town. The charter made no provision for any new apportionment of representatives, and thus it has continued ever since. In the mean time Providence has risen to a city, and other towns, which then had scarcely an existence, and were entitled to but two representatives, have outstripped New- port, and the other then chief towns. The apportionment, when made, was a fair one ; noiv nothing could be more une- qual. The census of 1840 gave a population for the whole Stale of 108,837 souls. There were cast for electors in November of the same year, 8,622 votes, and at the same time the State was entitled to seventy-two representatives. Of these repre- sentatives, thirty-eiglit, or more than a majority, were chosen from towns possessing a population of only 29,036 inhabi- tants, and which cast the same year only 2,846 electoral votes. The remaining thirty-four members were chosen from towns possessing a population of 79,801 inhabitants, and which cast 5,776 electoral votes. One freeholder in Barrington, under the Charter, had as much weight in the government as twenty-one freeholders in Providence, nine in Cumberland, or eighteen in Smithfield. So one freeholder in Newport was equal to four in the former or three in the latter place. It will be seen from the above, that while about 8,600, or not far from one third only of the adult male population, had the right of suffrage, and nominally governed the State, that 2,846, or less than one eighth of that number, chose the majority of the popular branch of the Assembly, and really held the balance of power. This state of unequal suffrage and representation early en- listed attention. Near the close of the last century a movement was made to form a new Constitution, but it was ineffectual. In 1811 a bill to extend suffrage to all citizens who paid 2 14 taxes and performed military duty was passed in the Sen- ate, but was lost in the House of Representatives. In 1819, and the three following years, the subject of a State Constitution was agitated, but without success. In 1824, a convention of the freemen was called by the General Assembly to form a Constitution. This convention proposed to the freemen a Constitution redressing in part the inequalities of the representation ; but a resolution to extend the right of suffrage to others beside landholders, re- ceived but three votes in the convention. This Constitution, which did not provide for an extension of the right of suf- frage, was rejected by a large majority. In 1829, further efforts were made for an extension of the right of suffrage. Numerous petitions were addressed to the General Assembly, praying for that object. These petitions were referred to a committee, and reported upon. This re- port is unparalleled in modern legislation. It is a most in- sulting reply to a respectful petition, strongly intimating that the owners of landed estates are the only sound part of the community, and that the petitioners not only have leave to withdraw their petition from the House, but themselves from the State, if they choose. In 1832, another attempt to extend the right of suffrage failed. It now becomes necessary to give an account of more strenuous efforts to equalize the representation and extend the right of suffrage, and which have caused the recent out- break, which has so much agitated the community. In 1834, many individuals in the State associated them- selves together for the express purpose of obtaining by political action an extension of the right of suffrage. By invitations from the towns of Cumberland and Smithfield, delegates from a number of large towns assembled at Provi- dence to consult upon the best course to be pursued for the 15 establishment of a written State Constitution, that should properly define and fix the powers of the different depart- ments of government, and the rights of the citizens. This convention assembled at Providence on the 22nd day of February, and again on the 12th day of March, 1834. At the first meeting of the Convention a committee were appointed to prepare an address to the people of the State, and at the second meeting the address was read and adopted. This movement may perhaps be properly named as the date of the formation of the Free Suffrage party. The General Assembly, soon after, called a convention of freemen for the purpose of framing a new Constitution. This convention dissolved without proposing any thing material. A proposition in the convention to extend the right of suffrage was supported by only seven votes. From this time until 1840 no movements of much impor- tance connected with this subject were made. In that year a Suffrage Association was formed, with auxiliaries in the several towns in the State, and was composed mostly of mechanics without distinction of party. Up to the year 1841, every effort to extend the right of suffrage had been unavailing. At the January session of the General Assembly in 1841, the Association presented a petition for the redress of their grievances. The petition was not acted upon. At the same session a petition from the town of Smithfield for an equalization of representation was presented, and resulted in the call of a convention of the freeholders to form a consti- tution. As this convention was called on account of a petition for an equalization of the representation of the State, and not on a petition for an extension of suffrage, nothing was expected by the association favorable to their prayer. The Suffrage Association proceeded to call a Mass Con- 16 vention. It was held at Providence on the 17th of April, 1841. Another was called, and held at Newport on the 5th day of May following. At that meeting a State Com- mittee was chosen, and directed to call a convention of delegates, to draft a Constitution at as early a day as possi- ble. An adjourned meeting of this convention was held on the 5th of July at Providence, when the instructions before given to the State Committee were reiterated, and the com- mittee were directed to call a convention of the people on the basis of the resolutions passed at Newport. The Committee, pursuing the instructions given them by llie Mass Conventions held at Newport and Providence, held a meeting at Providence on the 20th of July, and in conformity with a resolution adopted at Newport, which prescribes tlie call of a Convention of the people at large, to be represented in proportion to population, passed unani- mously the following resolutions : Voted, That we proceed to issue a call for the election of Delegates to take place on the last Saturday in August, (the 28th day,) to attend a convention to be holden at the State House in Providence on the first Monday in October, (the 4th day,) for framing a Constitution to be laid before the people for their adoption. Voted, That every American male citizen, twenty-one years of age and upwards, who has resided in this State one year preceding the election of delegates, shall vote for Delegates to the Convention called by the State Committee, to be held at the State House in Providence, on the first Monday in October next. Voted, That every meeting holden for the election of Del- egates to the State Convention shall be organized by the election of a Chairman and Secretary, whose certificate shall be the authority requu'ed of the Delegates. Voted, That each town of one thousand inhabitants, or 17 less, shall be entitled to one Delegate, and, for every addi- tional thousand, one Delegate shall be appointed, and the City of Providence shall elect three Delegates from each ward in the city. Voted, That the Chairman and Secretary be directed to cause one thousand hand-bills to be printed and distributed through the State, containing the call for a Convention of Delegates. Voted, That the proceedings of this meeting be signed by the Chairman and Secretary, and published. On motion. Voted, That this meeting stand adjourned to meet at this place on the first day of September, at 11 o'clock, A. M. At the January session of the General Assembly, in 1841, a resolution had been passed, authorizing the freemen to elect Delegates to a State Convention to be held on the first Monday in November, to frame a Constitution for the State. In the choice of Delegates to this Convention none but those already freemen had a voice. At the June session of the General Assembly, in 1841, a motion was submitted, providing for a new apportionment of representation and an extension of the right of suffrage to all white male citizens, twenty-one or more years of age, who paid a tax on real or personal property, in choosing Delegates to frame a Constitution. This proposition re- ceived but ten votes. The General Assembly called a Convention of Delegates to frame a Constitution, to be held on the first Monday in November, which was one month later than the Convention called for the same purpose by the committee appointed by the mass meeting. The Delegates to the People's, or Suffrage Convention, to be held on the first Monday in October, were duly chosen by the several towns. The meetings for the choicfe were 2# 18 organized in the same manner as town meetings usually have been in Rhode Island, by the election of a Moderator and other officers. The Convention met at Providence at the time and place appointed, was duly organized, and drafted a Constitution. The Convention then adjourned to the third Tuesday in November, and in the mean time the draft of the Constitution was printed and circulated among the people. On the first Monday in November the Convention of Delegates chosen by the freeholders, raet and proceeded to draft a Constitution. On the question of the extension of the right of suffi-age, the Convention Voted^ to exclude the eldest son of freemen, and to admit such white male adult citizens as possessed taxable property to the amount of five hundred dollars. The Convention then adjourned to meet again on the fifteenth day of the following February. The Suffrage Convention met on the 16th day of Novem- ber according to adjournment, and on the ISth of the same month ADOPTED a Constitution to be submitted to the people for their approval on the 27th day of December and the five following days. T^HE PEOPLE'S CONSTITUTION. The Constitution, thus framed by this Convention, and afterwards submitted to the people, after setting forth the usual bill of rights, provides for a distribution of the powers of government into three departments — the Legislative, the Executive, and Judicial. The Executive consists of a Governor and Lieutenant Governor, to be chosen annually. The Governor is to have the appointing of such civil officers as the choice of is not otherwise proved for; he is to be Commander-in-Chief of the militia ; to have the pardoning power, and the power 19 under certain restrictions of convening and proroguing the Greneral Assembly ; and also to have a negative upon the acts of the Legislature. The Legislative power is vested in two distinct Houses, the one called the Senate and the other the House of Rep- resentatives, and both called the General Assembly. The concurrent vote of the two Houses, and the assent of the Governor, is required to pass a law : but the subsequent passage of any bill by a majority of both Houses, that has been vetoed, is to give it the authority of law\ There are to be, in each year, two sessions of the Gen- eral Assembly, alternately, at Newport and Providence. The Representatives are to be chosen according to a cer- tain apportionment, allowing to Newport 5, Warwick 4, Smithfield 5, Cumberland, North Providence and Scituate 3^ Portsmouth, Westerly, New Shoreham, North Kingstown, South Kingstown, East Greenwich, Gloucester, West Green- wich, Coventry, Exeter, Bristol, Tiverton, Little Compton, Warren, Richmond, Cranston, Charlestown, Hopkinton, John- ston, Foster, Burrillville, Jamestown, Middletown and Bar- rington, one each, and all the other towns in the State, two each. The State is to be divided into twelve senatorial districts, and each is entitled to one senator. The first, second, and third Representative districts in Providence to constitute the first senatorial district ; the fourth, fifth and sixth, the second district ; the town of Smith- field the third ; the towns of Cumberland and North Provi- dence, the fourth ; Scituate, Gloucester, Burrillville, the fifth ; Warwick and Cranston, the sLxth ; East and West Green- wich, Coventry, and Foster, the seventh ; Newport, James- town and New Shoreham, the eighth ; Portsmouth, Middle- town, Tiverton, and Little Compton, the ninth ; North King- stown and South Kingstown, the tenth ; Westerly, Charles- 20 town, Exeter, Richmond and Hopkinton, the eleventh ; and Bristol, Warren and Barrington, the twelfth. The Lieutenant Governor is President of the Senate. The power of impeachment is granted to the House, and to the Senate to try the same. The right of suffrage is extended to all white male citi- zens of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, who have resided in the State one year, and in the town six months previous to the election, except paupers, lunatics, &c., with the restriction that none but freeholders or other qualified voters, who are taxed for property to the amount of $150, shall vote in town-meeting upon the assessment of taxes or upon the expenditure of the same. A strict registration of votes, throughout the State, is pro- vided for. The Judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court and such other inferior courts as the Legislature may establish. The Judges of the Supreme Court are to be chosen by the two Houses in joint committee, and shall hold their offices until removed by the vote of the two Houses in concurrence. The Justices of the inferior courts are to be elected in joint committee of the two Houses annually. Justices of the Peace are to be elected annually by the electors of the several towns, and the Sheriff by those of the several counties. The Constitution, of which the foregoing summary con- tains the leading and important provisions, was submitted to the people for their approval at the time appointed, as before stated. The polls were opened on those days in every town in the State. All challenges of votes were received and entertained. The moderators were not under oath. The name of each voter was strictly required to be endorsed 21 on his vote, as provided in the Constitution. Those who voted by proxy had their signatures witnessed by one who had previously voted. In addition to this, the name of every man who voted was registered, and a copy of the register was duly certified with the votes. All the votes in their respective envelopes were reserved for future reference. These votes were dulv returned to the people's conven- tion, and were examined and counted by a large committee of that body. The committee reported, "that as nearly as could be ascertained, the number of males in the State over the age of twenty-one years, who could be voters under the people's constitution, was 23,142 ; that 11,572 were a majority of that number, and that the people's constitution was approved by 1-3,944, being a plurality of 4,756, and a majority of 2,372 votes." The constitution, therefore, was by the Convention declared to be adopted. The report of the Counting Committee was transmitted to the General Assem]>ly at the January session, 1842, and a motion was made in that body for a committee to examine the return, which was negatived by a large majority. The history of this controversy is now brought down to the adoption by the people of the Suffrage party's constitu- tion on the first day of January, 1842. The question of the right of the people to frame and adopt a constitution in such manner, and also the very important fact whether it was really adopted by a majority of those persons in whom this constitution invested the right of suffrage, will be considered hereafter. It is pur- posed here to give only a plain record of the facts, or w^hat appear to be the facts, in the order of time in which they occurred. The various arguments used by the two parties are left for the conclusion. Immediately after the people had adopted the Suffrage Constitution, the General Assembly convened and held its January session, at which a bill was introduced to extend the right of suffrage, but was not carried. The convention of Landholders assembled again on the 14th of February, and adopted a constitution, the pertinent parts of which will be found to be embraced in the following synopsis. THE LANDHOLDERS' CONSTITUTION Provided for a distribution of the powers of government into three branches, the Legislative, the Judicial, and the Executive. The former Statute regulating the right of suffrage, and granting the electoral franchise to freeholders possessing a landed estate valued at $134, was embodied in this consti- tution. The franchise was further enlarged by providing that all white native American citizens (twenty-one years of age) who had resided in the State two years, and in the town six months, (excepting paupers, &c.,) should be entitled to vote in the choice of State and National officers. None but freeholders, and other qualified voters who paid a tax on property of the value of $150, could vote in the assessment of taxes, or the expenditure of the same. It provided, that naturalized citizens, to obtain the right of suffrage, should possess the freehold qualification, and also have resided in the State three years after naturalization, and in the town or city where they claimed to vote, the previous six months. It also provided for the registration of voters, for the ex- emption of electors from arrest on election days, and granted to the General Assembly the power to admit to the right of suffrage other native citizens of the United States, not before provided for. This latter provision is supposed to refer to 23 the extension of the right of suffrage to the colored popula- tion, should public sentiment demand it. The legislative powers of the Government were to be vested in a Senate and House of Representatives. Each to have a negative upon the other. Both were to be called the General Assembly, and to have two sessions, one in May, the other in October. The House of Representatives was to consist of members chosen by the several towns, as follows : each town having 4,000, and less than 6,500 inhabitants, three representatives ; each town having 6,500, and less than 10,000 inhabitants, four representatives ; and every 4,000 above the latter number to be entitled to one representative ; no town, however, to have more than eight. The Senate was to consist of nineteen members, to be chosen annually, by districts. The State was to be divided into sixteen Senatorial districts, and apportioned in the fol- lowing manner : Newport, two ; Portsmouth, Middletown, Tiverton, Little Compton, New Shoreham, and Jamestown, two ; Providence, two ; Smithfield, one ; Cumberland and North Providence, one ; Scituate, Cranston, and Johnston, one ; South Kingstown, one ; Westerly and Charlestown, one ; Hopkinton and Richmond, one ; North Kingstown and Exeter, one ; Bristol, one ; Warren and Barrington, one ; East and West Greenwich, one ; Coventry, one ; Warwick, one. The chief Executive power was to be vested in a Gov- ernor, chosen annually by the people. He was to be com- mander in chief of the military forces ; to have the power to grant reprieves to the end of the next session of the General Assembly ; was to preside in the Senate, and was entided to vote there in case of equal division, and not otherwise He could fill vacancies in office which might happen during the recess of the General Assembly, and convene and ad- journ the two Houses in certain cases. He could have no negative upon the acts of the other branches. 24 It provided for the election, by the people, of a Secretary of State, Attorney-General, and General Treasurer, and also Justices of the Peace. The other officers were to be chosen in grand committee of the two Houses, as provided by the Charter of 1663. The Judicial power was to be vested in a Supreme Court, and such inferior courts, as the Assembly might establish. The Justices of the Supreme Court were to hold their offices until declared vacant by a resolution of the two Houses. The tenor of office, and the manner of appointment of the justices of the inferior courts, do not seem to be provided for. The General Assembly were to be empowered to propose amendments to the Constitution, which amendments were to be read at the several town meetings. If the next Gen- eral Assembly concurred in proposing the same amend- ments, they were then to be submitted to the people, and if approved by them, to be a part of the Constitution. This Constitution was subniiitted to the people on the 21st, 22d and 23d days of March, and rejected. The votes being 8,013 for, and 8,689 against it. The General Assembly met again in March, after the re- jection of the Constitution submitted by them to the people. At this session a bill was brought forward to extend the right of suffi-age for general and state officers, as provided in the PeopWs Constitution, and another to submit the question to those wdio were qualified to vote under the People's Constitution. Both were promptly rejected. At this ses- sion the General Assembly declared all elections, except such as are authorized by the Charter Government, illegal and void, and every officer of such meeting guilty of a mis- demeanor, and liable to punishment by fine not exceeding ^1,000, nor less than ^500, and imprisonment for six months. 25 That every person who knowingly suffered his name to be used as a candidate for any office under the People's Constitution, should pay a fine of $1,000, or be imprisoned for one year. That every person who should attempt to exercise any authority under the People's Constitution, would be guilty of high treason, and should be punished by imprisonment for life. At the April term of the General Assembly, a proposition was submitted for another Convention of delegates to be chosen by a constituency not much extended beyond the present freemen. This also was voted down. On the 18th day of April, the time appointed by the Constitution, the people cast their ballots, in the manner prescribed, and elected Thomas W. Dorr, of Providence, Governor ; Amasa Eddy, of Gloucester, Lieutenant-Gover- nor ; William H. Smith, of Providence, Secretary of State ; Jonah Titus, of Scituate, Attorney General ; Joseph Jos- lin, of Newport, Treasurer ; and the members of the Gen- eral Assembly. The popular vote was very small, (being 6,417,) many having stayed from the polls on account of the Act of the Charter Assembly, commonly called the " Alge- rine Act," which threatened imprisonment and a heavy fine for any attempt to carry out the provisions of the new Constitution. On the same account it w^as with some diffi- culty that candidates could be obtained who would consent to stand. On the first Tuesday of May, the new government met at Providence, and were escorted by a procession of about four thousand people to a building in Eddy-street, where they duly organized. A guard had been placed at the State House by the Charter Authorities, and it was deemed expedient to allow them to retain possession without moles- tation. 3 26 The Assembly organized by the election of Welcome B. Sayles, Esq., as Speaker of the House of Representatives, who took the usual oath and administered it to the other members. John S. Harris and Levi Salisbury were elected Clerks of the House. The votes for Governor were counted, and Thomas W. Dorr was pronounced elected ; and he then took the oath of office, and delivered his inaugural address in person. He went into a full discussion of the question at issue between the parties, and reasoned with great calmness, clearness and force. The General Assembly, during its session, passed resolves that "his Excellency, the Governor, be authorized to take such measures as he shall deem necessary to protect and preserve the public property of the State ; " that " he be authorized to recall any arms or cannon that have been loaned by the General Assembly to any of the Independent Chartered Companies of the State ; " " that Perez Simmons and Nathaniel Mowry be a committee to demand and receive the records, books and papers appertaining to the office of Secretary of State, from Henry Bowen, late Sec- retary of State, and transfer the same to his successor, Wil- liam H. Smith ; " and that " the Governor be authorized to appoint suitable persons. Commissioners on behalf of this State, to proceed to Washington to make known to the President of the United States that the people of this State have adopted a written Constitution and elected officers and peaceably organized the government under that Constitu- tion, and that said Government is now in full operation." The Assembly also repealed the Algerine law. At the session of the Charter Assembly held early in May, a resolution was introduced to extend the right of suffiage, which was not acted upon. The State was now in some sense like the old feudal 27 countries. It had imperium in imperio — a government within a government. Two distinct sets of officers claimed the supreme authority, and, so far as they were able, at- tempted to exercise it. The one had the majority in the State, and the popular sympathy out of it ; the other had the arms and ammunition, the records, the public seals, the purse, and what was above all, the countenance, as will appear, of the General Government. In reply to a communication from Gov. King, written in the early part of the year. President Tyler says : " It will be my duty to respect the requisitions of that Government which has been recognized as the existing government of the State in all time past, until I shall be advised in a regu- lar manner that it has been altered and abolished." In consequence of this letter, and by authority of the People's Assembly, Gov. Dorr appointed two Commission- ers and accompanied them to Washington, where they laid before the President a statement of facts. Gov. King also sent a communication to the President, stating that there existed in Rhode Island " certain lawless assemblages of a portion of the people for the purpose of subverting the laws and overthrowing the existing govern- ment," and demanding of the national Executive " forthwith to interpose the power and authority of the United States to suppress such insurrectionary and lawless assemblages, and to support the existing government and laws, and protect the State from domestic violence." To this Mr. Tyler replied, under date of May 7th, that from information he had received, he was led to believe that " the lawless assemblages to which reference is made have already dis- persed, and that the danger of domestic violence is hourly diminishing, if it has not wholly disappeared ; but," he pro- ceeds to say, " I have to assure your Excellency, that if resistance is made to the execution of the laws of Rhode 28 Island, by such force as the civil posse shall be unable to overcome, it will be the duty of this Government to enforce the constitutional guaranty." " And if an exigency of law- less violence shall actually arise, the Executive Government of the United States will stand ready to succor the authori- ties of the State in their efforts to maintain a due respect for the laws." The answer to Gov. Dorr may be readily inferred. The people had nothing to hope from that quarter. In the month of March, Chief Justice Durfee delivered a charge to the Grand Jury, upon the subject of the move- ments of the Free Suffrage party, committing himself fully to the Charter party, although those arrested under that charge would be tried, and the constitutional question raised before him. This, in connection with the proclamations and energy of Gov. King, caused the arrest, during the absence of Gov. Dorr, of a large number of those who had partici- pated in the new government. Among them were Benja- min Arnold, Jr., member of the General Assembly, Wel- come B. Sayles, Speaker of the House, Joseph Joslin, and Hezekiah Willard. That these arrests were not merely nominal will appear from the fact, that Mr. Arnold, one of the most respectable citizens of Providence, was confined in a cell used for con- demned felons, being about six feet by eight, and cold, damp and dark, and having the usual iron doors and bars, stone walls and vermin ; the latter of which always having pos- session of such places by an indefeasible right of inheri- tance. On the 15th day of May, Gov. Dorr arrived at Provi- dence, and was received by a very large assemblage of the people and the military, and was escorted to the residence of Burrington Anthony, Esq. He had previously issued a Proclamation stating that so soon as a soldier of the United 29 States shall be set in motion by whatever direction, to act against the people of the State in aid of the Charter gov- ernment, he should call for that aid, to oppose all such force, as he was fully " authorized to say would be immediately and most cheerfully tendered ; " and that " no further arrests under the law of pains and penalties would be permitted." The Governor, upon the dismissal of his escort, ordered the military to hold themselves in readiness for instant ser- vice, and directed his officers to attend him at Mr. An- thony's, his head-quarters. Cannon were planted so as to protect the house from any invading force. On Tuesday evening a force of from eight hundred to one thousand, under command of Gov. Dorr, proceeded to the arsenal to demand possession, which was refused. The Governor then ordered his artillery to fire, but it was found upon application of the match that the powder, by the thoughtfulness or treachery of some of his friends, had been wet. The troops therefore returned to head-quarters. On the next morning, six companies marched, under com- mand of Col. Biodget, to Gov. Dorr's head-quarters. While they were on the way, the Governor, by the advice of his friends, and their assurances that arrangements were in prog- ress that would, in their opinion, terminate favorably, and having also the strongest ocular evidence that the people were not ready or willing to sustain him in his military movements, left the State. A small remnant were dissatis- fied, and encamped on the hill ; but in the course of the ensuing day, after seeing the impossibility of successful defence, withdrew. Gov. King shortly after issued a Proclamation, ofTering a reward of a thousand dollars for the capture and delivery of Gov. Dorr to the Charter authorities. The reward has not yet been claimed. 3* 30 CONCLUSION. We have thus presented all the facts necessary to a right understanding of the controversy, and we now ask the can- did attention of the public to a few thoughts, growing out of these facts. It appears that there are some seventeen thousand white male adults in the State who have no voice in the adminis- tration of the Government. This body constitutes a ma- jority of the people. They are taxed and compelled to perform military duty, yet have no more power than the Russian serfs. They are serfs ; and while the Autocrat is adopting measures for raising the slaves of his empire to a level with humanity, the Charter autocrats are tightening the chains and refusing to " let the oppressed go free." Their RIGHT to a written Constitution, embracing free suffrage and equal represctitation, will not, we apprehend, be ques- tioned by the people of any other State in the Union ; for such questioning would repudiate the principles and efforts of our forefathers, and cover their sons with infamy. Many of the land-holders themselves admit this. Indeed what could be a stronger acknowledgment than the actual grant- ing of this right in the Constitution proposed by them for the adoption of the people? Time does not sanctify injus- tice ; and though Oppression be hoary-headed, its age gives it no " divine right." " All men are born free and equal ; " so says the Declaration of Independence, and so says intui- tion. Thomas Jefferson when he wrote that sentiment gave birth to no new idea. He but took the thought^ which finds a home in every man's heart, and gave it ivords. The poorest come into the world with their limbs as free as those of the wealthiest. They are born neither with crowns on their heads or manacles on their bodies ; and if adventitious cir- 31 cumstances degrade them below the intention of their Maker, they have the right to seek immediate restoration to their natural position. The colonies at the period of the Revolu- tion acted upon this principle. His Majesty, King George, disregarded their petitions for redress, under the laws of England ; and they threw off King George and the laws of England together. But if the people of Rhode Island are entitled to the rights for which we contend, hoiv long- ought they to lu ait for them ? For ever ? They have, as the facts we have pre- sented abundantly show, petitioned for almost half a cen- tury. One entire generation has gone into the grave, and how much better situated are the people ? They have been, year after year, seduced into quiet by delusive promises, thrown out to them like the tub to the whale ; and every promise has terminated in some fresh and more cruel infrac- tion of their rights. " A whole generation," says Gov. Dorr in his inaugural, " has thus passed away, in fruitless efforts to obtain as a grant from the chartered authorities, those rights which are every where else, throughout the length and breadth of this great Republic, regarded as the birthright of the people. The legislature had been repeatedly approached in terms of respectful petition, and the applicants had been driven away as intruders upon the vested rights of the ruling political class." The General Assembly has always had the power to grant free suffrage, and to some degree equal repre- sentation, under the Charter, but have always refused to exercise it. They were determined that the soil rather than the soul should be » the test of merit." They have denied and spurned the truth of the idea so beautifully expressed by the poet : " Men, high-minded men ; Men, who their duties know, But know their rights, and knowing, dare maintain, Prevent the long-aimed blow, And crush the tyrant while they rend the chain ; These constitute a State." 32 And we would here, en passant, commend this quotation to the especial thought of one of the Justices of the U. S. Court in Rhode Island who cited it, with the remark that " wealth does not constitute a State," in an eloquent Cen- tennial Address, delivered in 1836, but who is now by his judicial authority consigning to fetters those who deny the supremacy of the money-box over men and mind. We repeat the question, emphatically, how long the wronged are bound to wait before they are righUd ? And whether the lapse of sixty years of vassalage, with no vision of light breaking from the dark cloud that hangs like a pall over the future, is not sufficient to render patience no longer a virtue ? The people of Rhode Island should have their just rights NOW ; — they should have had them in 1776, when the soil had not yet dried up the baptismal ofl'ering of the freemen's blood. If, then, the people of Rhode Island have the riglit to a written Constitution, and have the right now, have they adopted the proper 'means to obtain their object? They called a Convention, and the Constitution proposed by that body received the sanction of a large majority of the white adult male citizens, over twenty-one years of age. Not even the Charter party dispute this. Now there is one fact here worthy of remembrance, and that is, that if the people, in their primary capacity, have not the power to form a Consti- tution, then there is no power in the State that has. The General Assembly have no such authority. Where is the passage in the Charter, under which they act, that per- mits them to adopt a new constitution, or propose one to the people ? The utmost they can do is to request the people to hold a convention, and adopt a Constitution. This is very far from having the sanction of law ; and this is all they ever have done, or dared to do, when the Landholders' Conven- tions have been called. Now, if the people have the right, 33 by request, to form a ConstitiUion, have they not a right without a request ? Is it not a virtual acknowledgment, that all power centres, de facto, in the people ? An able address before us, places the matter in the following strong light : " The opponents of the People's Constitution are in this difficulty. They say, that the people have no right of them- selves to make a Constitution ; that the General Assembly have no right to make a Constitution ; and that the freehold- ers and freemen have no right to make a Constitution, unless called and authorized thereto by the General Assembly, which has no power ! The people have rightfully determined that the power is in them, and have exercised it." If it be not in them, it exists nowhere. The argument, that no convention of the people can be valid, unless called by the existing authorities, is absurd. Carry out the idea, and let us see where it will bring us. The Constitution of the United States was the voluntary, unauthorized act of the States, and was not made by virtue of any call or power from the then existing General Govern- ment ; therefore it was, is, and ever must be, invalid. In fact, all the movements made in this country, from the incipient step down to the adoption of that great document, were with- out authority from the existing government. At any rate, we never heai'd that George III. called the conventions under which the people acted ; but have a strong impression that he opposed them much in the style of the Charter party, and argued that it was rank rebellion, " unless called by the ex- isting authorities^ Those who use the argument cannot dodge the conclusion, however unwelcome it may be. Rhode Island herself, in a convention called by the people in their sovereignty, and against the will of " the existing authority," cut asunder her allegiance to England. The doctrine of the supremacy of the " existing authority " over the clearly-expressed voice of the majority, is one 34 of the first political maxims in the text-book of Euro- pean despotism, but it sounds strangely in the ear of repub- licanism. Napoleon taught it, when at his climax, with his foot on the necks of the people ; so did Robespierre, while the guillotine was at its bloody work ; so did Charles the Tenth, when he muzzled the press ; and so did Nicholas, when his cannon thundered at the gates of Warsaw. But we trust this union has not yet become so servile as to tolerate it, even though it be urged by the " existing authorities " of Rhode Island. We maintain, that the only supreme power is the people ; and that this power towers above all charters, constitutions, or antiquated parchments, whether they be signed by the crowned or the uncrowned. The people have the full right, at any time, and at all times, in their primary capacity, to " alter, amend, or abolish " the forms of government under which they live. The Declaration of Independence, which we suppose not even the Charter party are yet prepared to pronounce a *' mere rhetorical ilonrish," says that govern- ments derive " their just powers from the consent of the gov- erned.''^ Mark! not from a privileged class, not from the landholders, not from the wealthy minority, but from the gov- enied. At the Rhode Island Convention of freemen in 1790, a Declaration of Rights was adopted, which says, " That there are certain natural rights, of which men, when they form a social compact, cannot deprive or divest their posterity ; among which are the enjoyment of life and liberty;" and it goes on to say that "all power is naturally vested in, and consequently derived from the people ^^^ and that " the power of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." This Declaration has been buried for fifty years in the' archives of the State. We advise the Charter Party to take it from its sepulchre, brush away the cobwebs that have gathered over it, breathe into it once more the breath of life, and give it again to the people. Washington, in his Farewell Address, says that "the basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and aUer their constitutions of government." Madison, in advocating the adoption of the Constitution says, that " it is essential that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable portion or a favored class.^^ Hamilton, whom no one will charge with ultra republi- canism, says that " the fabric of American Empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the consent of the people. The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure original fountain of all legitimate authority." Fed. No. 22. Justice Wilson says, " Of the right of a majority of the whole people to change their government, at avill, there is no doubt." The same Justice, in his eloquent Lectures on Law, (Vol. I. p. 17,) says "that the supreme or sovereign power of the society resides in the citizens at large ; and that, therefore, they always retain the right of abolishing, altering or amending their Constitution, at whatever time and in whatever manner they shall deem expedient." Justice Patterson, of the Supreme Court of the United States, says that " a Constitution is the form of government delineated by the mighty hand of the people ; " that it is " paramount to the will of the legislature," and is liable " to be revoked or altered by those who made it." Justice Iredell, of the Supreme Court of the United States, speaking of the power of the people says : " Those in power are their servants and agents. And the people, without their consent, may remodel the government, when- ever they think proper, not merely because it is oppressively 36 exercised, but because they think another form is more con- ducive to their ivelfare." This is the precise situation of Rhode Island. The people, without the consent of those in power, remodelled the government, " because they thought another form more conducive to their welfare." Marshall, that great and sound Jurist, who " though dead yet speaketh," in giving an opinion of the Supreme Court says : " That the people have an original right to establish for their future government, such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduce to their own happiness, is the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected." Justice Story, whose authority we apprehend none will dispute, says in his Commentaries on the Constitution : " The Declaration puts the doctrine on the true ground — that governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed. (Vol. I. p. 300.) The same Justice says, that the Constitution of the State " is unalterable, unless by the consent of a majority of the people, or at least by the qualified voters of the State, in the manner prescribed by the Constitution, or otherwise provided by the majority." (Vol. I. p. 305.) We might offer a multitude of other authorities upon this point, but these must suffice. Jefferson, Jay, Raavle, and a host of others utter the same sentiments. Congress has directly settled this question, if question it can be called, by its action relative to Michigan, in 1836. The people held, by their own power, and without any law to that effect, a Convention, and accepted a fundamental condition of their admission into the Union. This was pro- nounced, by its opponents, a tumultuary assemblage, a riotous, unlawful mob ; and it was gravely urged that a law should be passed making such unauthorized Conventions penal. But Congress took a different view of the matter. 37 They admitted the right of the people so to assemble, pro- nounced the Convention valid, and Michigan became one of the States of the Union.* The only question that remains is, whether the proceed- ings of the Free Suffrage Convention were equitable, and whether an indisputable majority of the citizens voted for the Constitution. Let us look at the facts. There were three immense mass meetings held at differ- ent parts of the State. At the second one, a large Commit- tee was appointed to call a Convention. In that call the Committee apportioned the State fairly, and each was repre- sented according to its population. To prove this, we refer to the facts already stated. The Convention adopted a Constitution, and submitted it to the white male adult citi- zens, who had resided in the State one year, and in the town where they were to vote six months. Moderators and Clerks were properly elected. The Moderators were not sworn, because it was not ordered by the Convention, and because it has never been the custom in the State. All the votes were carefully preserved in envelopes, and certified to by the proper officers. Each vote had the voter's name attached. There were some proxy votes, but these were comparatively few, and would not, if thrown out of the estimate, change the result materially. At the next Convention the Committee appointed to count the votes reported that, as nearly as could be ascer- tained, the number of white male adult citizens in the State, * This is the precise situation of the people of Rhode Island, with the exception that the Michigan Convention was called with less regard to legal forms, and the returns made with less accuracy and certainty. And here we would suggest that one mode of settling this question beyond dispute is, at the next election, to send Representatives to Congress, under the new Consti- tution. The Charter party will do the same. And Congress will decide which are entitled to seats. 4 excepting paupers, those under guardianship, convicts, &c., was 23,142, of whom a majority is 11,572, and that the People's Constitution received 13,944 votes, being a plu- rality of 4,747. But even if all this was illegal, the Consti- tution was adopted by the landholders themselves. The fol- lowing figures show this. At the time of the Presidential election, in 1840, the entire strength of the freemen was brought out ; for, since the Revolution, no effort at all com- parable with that fierce contest was ever made by any party. On that occasion there were 8,622 votes thrown. Now, the returns show that the number of votes cast for the People's Constitution by the landholders, was 4,927, being a majority of 616, taking the vote of 1840 as the basis. Thus it appears that the People's Constitution not only received the popular vote, but the vote of the majority of the freemen themselves. But if the returns were inaccurate, the Convention took no pains to conceal that inaccuracy. On the contrary, the Counting Committee, by their orders, transmitted the report to the General Assembly at the January Session in 1842, and a motion was made to inquire into the returns, but was negatived by a large majority. They had the full opportunity to show that the Constitution was not adopted by the majority, and thus put the matter at rest. But they well knew that those returns ivere accurate, and they wisely refused to sharpen the axe provided for their own necks. It is said that the Constitution proposed by the landhold- ers, subsequent to the passage of the People's Constitution, embraced the points at issue, and that, had the people adopted it, they would have obtained all they asked ; and that their rejection of it manifests their insincerity. "We by no means regard it in that light. A Constitution had already been adopted, legally, and by a large majority. Why should they adopt another? They considered the 39 present one valid, and the law of the land, and did not deem it necessary to abolish it in four weeks, at the request of the minority. But the landholder's Constitution did 7iot grant all they asked. The people saw the hook through the bait. It did not give a jury trial to citizens who might be claimed to be removed from the State to be held to labor. It did not protect witnesses from religious tests. It did not destroy the freehold qualification or the peculiar privilege of the eldest son. It did not confer free suffrage, but allowed freeholders to vote in the State after a residence of one year, and non- freeholders after a residence of two years. It did not place naturalized citizens on a level with the soil-born, but required of them three years' residence, in addition to the five required by the laws of the United States, and that they should own real estate in the town where they might vote. It did not provide for the vote by ballot, but referred the subject to the General Assembly. It did not limit the Jurisdiction of the General Assembly in Judicial matters, but gave them the unlimited power that they possessed under the Charter. It did not exempt from a poll tax those who actually per- form military service, or duty in the fire department. It did not provide that Acts of Incorporation should be amendable or repealable. It did not give the veto or pardoning power to the Execu- tive. It did not , in case of failure in the election of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, refer the election to the people, but to the Grand Committee. It did not provide that " no member of the General Assembly shall be eligible to any civil office, under the 40 authority of the State, during the time for which he shall have been elected." But while the above omissions and provisions presented grounds of serious objection, the apportionment of represen- tation, both in the House and Senate, was so glaringly unequal and anti-republican, as to condemn it at once. The Free Suffrage party, by consenting to it, would have aban- doned in fact all they w^ere contending for. They demanded that their right to free suffrage should be conceded, and the landholders' Convention sought to concede the principle but to hold on to the power. They sought to treat them as chil- dren, and to throw them free suffrage as a toy to play with, but the substantial benefits of the franchise they were deter- mined to withhold. After all, it was to be the land that was to govern and not man. The Free Suffrage party were solemnly bound to reject that constitution, and they would have been false to themselves and to their principles had they done otherwise. We appeal to the facts. Rhode Island contained a population at the last census of 108,837 souls, and 25,674 of those were free white adult citizens. This constitution provided for a Senate consisting of nine- teen members apportioned arbitrarily among the several towns, with hardly the semblance of a regard to population. For instance, Smithfield, with a population of 9,534, was to have one Senator, while Newport, with only 8,333 inhabitants, was to have two ; and so on, in all cases giving a decided preponderance to the agricultural towns. By this appor- tionment, ten, or a majority of those Senators were to be chosen by 35,593, or less than one-third of the population, and the remaining population, viz. 73,244, were to elect only nine. But its present was nothing in comparison with its prospective inequality. The latter portion of the population were embraced in the most gi'owing towns, and ere long the representation in the Senate would have become as 41 objectionable as under the Charter. No provision was made for a new apportionment of Senators for all coming time, and this landed majority in the Senate could always prevent the passage of any act of amendment to the constitution. While, therefore, the Senate had, as provided, a concurrent vote with the House, it would always have the power to defeat the will of the people, and thus render their free suffrage a mere nullity. The apportionment of Representa- tives was still worse, less than one third of the people choos- ing a decided majority of the nominally popular branch. The Suffrage Party were not struggling for an abstract principle, but a valuable right, which they could use and enjoy ; and therefore they rallied against the unsubstantial concession of their opponents and happily defeated it. Had this constitution been fixed upon them, they would have been more free in name but scarcely more so in fact than when w^holly disfranchised; and what would have been worse, their fate would have been sealed. No amendments, loosening the bonds, would they or their children have seen, without passing through just such a scene as the present. They were right in adhering to the proverb, that " What- ever is worth doing at all is worth doing well," and refusing to accept of the shadow for the substance. The preceding data and the arguments deduced from them, lead us to the irresistible conclusion, that the Govern- ment now in operation under the People's Constitution, is the only legal authority of the State of Rhode Island, and should, by all good citizens, be obeyed as such. Those who do not, may very properly be regarded as disturbers of the public peace, and enemies to law and order. The fact that the minority have the temporary ascendency will never legalize what is, in itself, wrong. Of the measures taken by Gov. Dorr to maintain the supremacy of the people, and preserve their Constitution 42 inviolate, we have nothing to say. How far it may be expe- dient for him to proceed, every man must judge for himself. It may not be improper, however, for us to remind the reader that when he took the solemn oath of office, he pledged himself by that oath, " So help him God," to sus- tain the important rights committed to his trust, and to see the laws faithfully executed, and that for this purpose he was appointed the Commander-in-Chief. But we apprehend no disastrous results from the military operations of either party. In this country, public opinion is the stern and just arbiter in the seat of justice. Who can resist its decision ? They might as well attempt to stay the avalanche as it thunders down the mountain side, or hold back the swelling waters of the Atlantic. How long, think you, the minority of Rhode Island can breast the storm of popular indignation and contempt that is gathering around thenij like the four winds of heaven lashed into wrath, from fifteen millions of people ? The great principle over which they are riding rough shod, all " booted and spurred," was purchased by a seven year's war, by immense treasure, and by the blood and lives of thousands of the best and noblest the world ever saw. That principle is the basis of all free government, and the people of the Union will see it sacredly preserved. Let those beware who, to gratify ambition or self-will, shall rudely trample it down ; and let them remember, too, that the PEOPLE MUST ULTIMATELY TRIUMPH. The firc of free- dom, though it may be lost to human vision, will still burn undyingly. It may smoulder in the ashes of oppression, but cannot be extinguished. The Past, with its fearful memories, belongs to tyranny, " baptized legitimate by the grace of God ; " but the Future, with its full harvest of bless- ings, belongs to the People. 43 COMPARATIVE TABULAR STATEMENT OF VOTES. Providence, N. Providence, Smithfield, Cumberland, Scituate, . Cranston, . Johnston, . Gloucester, Foster, . . Burrillville, Newport, . Portsmouth, Middletown, Tiverton, . . Little Compton, New Shoreham, Jamestown, . S. Kingstown, Westerly, . N. Kingstown, Exeter, . . . Charlestown, . Hopkinton, . Richmond, . . Warwick, Coventry, . . E. Greenmch, W. Greenwich, Bristol, . . Warren, . . Barrington, . 1058 . 220 382 . 293 208 . 159 139 . 138 125 . 237 317 . 67 #12 . 100 18 . 117 30 . 135 107 . 81 53 .=^50 80 . 45 308 . 156 52 . 9 160 . 103 c o r^ . 319 105 249 185 121 110 86 212 70 167 102 63 2 44 4 27 9 91 76 110 11 24 89 #40 168 130 37 17 65 34 17 £0 c, o ^ 2 396 78 266 189 116 98 94 120 60 96 122 29 3 20 20 00 8 55 65 90 7 29 87 45 107 90 33 4 46 19 00 863 111 204 147 196 119 110 62 186 71 380 109 78 175 91 80 36 224 106 135 119 55 101 70 207 197 112 114 229 184 45 § = o . O S c S' 3553 708 1338 892 524 400 347 401 238 280 1207 127 25 274 43| 124 66 275 251 251 134 100 160 132 895 008 137 48 366 210 53 2154 402 664 504 220 250 215 250# 50 150# 327 89 00 115 00 89 37 146 00 417 21 69 17 140 42 40 4927 2684 2392 4916 13966 6417 * No return — Number estimated. I No meetings. I No return.