12 



authorized those conventions to act on matters in the nature of 

 amendments to the state Constitution, The Convention of 1788 



fixed the capital of the State and the Convention of 1789 granted 



7 

 Fayetteville a member in the House of Commons, There was no di- 

 rect vote of the people on whether either of these conventions 

 should be held, nor was their work submitted to the people for 

 approval. 

 Convention of 183$ » 



The (jeneral Assembly of 183)4-35, in calling for a vote of 

 the people on vrhether a convention should be held to propose amend- 

 ments to the state Constitution, introduced two significant practices 

 in North Carolina: first, that the question of whether a convention 

 should be held should be determined in a popular referendumj and 

 second, that the amendments agreed upon by a convention should be 

 submitted to the people for ratification before becoming effective. 

 These practices have generally been followed with regard to all 

 subsequent conventions the call for which has been initiated by 

 the General Assembly, although until I876 there was no constitu- 

 tional requirement that the question of convention or no convention 

 be submitted to the people and the Constitution has never required 

 popular ratification of the work of a convention. The acts which 

 authorized a vote on the calling of the Convention of 1835 provided 



%ouse Journal— 1787 , 6 Dec, 1787, 20 State Records 197 

 (authorizing the Convention of 1788 to fix the seat of government) ; 

 House Journal— 1788 , 19 Nov. 1788, 21 State Records 68 (authorizing 

 the Convention of 1789 to grant Fayetteville a borough member in 

 the House of Commons), 



^ Papers of the Convention of 1788 , p, 90, MS in State Department 

 of Archives and History, Raleigh, 



"^Journal of the Convention of N,C,, 1789 , 21 Nov. 1789, 

 22 State Records 5Q-5IT 



^Laws l83"ij^35, C. 1, 



