23 



and before they took the oath of office, a question was raised, 



10 



"whether the Legislature had a right to impose the oath prescribed," 



After some desultory comments by others, Mr. Justice William Gas- 

 ton, a delegate, made answer in a speech which settled the issue, 

 and which still constitutes the clearest exposition upon the sub- 

 ject in its North Carolina context: 



"Tlie State Legislature had indeed no authority to impose 

 an oath upon the members of the Convention, but the 

 People had ratified the Act of the Legislature, by 

 choosing Delegates under it. According to the theory 

 of our Government, all political pov/er was derived from 

 the People, and vrhen they choose to make a grant of power, 

 they might make a plenary or a restricted grant, might 

 give it all or in part. The Legislature by the Act 

 proposed to the People a Convention, with the powers, 

 restrictions and limitations set forth in the Act, It 

 was, as it came from the Legislature, no more than a 

 proposition or recommendation. It must originate some- 

 where, and with no body could it have originated with so 

 must propriety as in that which represented the people 

 for legislative purposes. The proposition having been 

 sanctioned, it became an act of the people j but it has 

 been sanctioned precisely as it was proposed. Such a 

 Convention as it proposed in the Act of Assembly, and no 



•'-'^ Joumal of the Convention Called by the Freemen of North 

 CarolinaT". . 1635 , U^ U June 1035 (Raleigh; J, Gales & Son, ^1836) . 



