The Dorr Letters Project

Editorial People's Constitution:
Electronic Transcription

Introduction

This document, written by Thomas Dorr in the middle of June 1842 while he was in New York City making preparations for his return to Rhode Island, outlines what happened on the night of May 17-18, along with presenting Dorr's unwavering belief that the People's Government could still be put into operation. Dorr obviously intended for the document to be printed in a newspaper in Providence; however, it was most likely intercepted by Law and Order officials because it was never published.

Letter


The People's Constitution


For some time past, in the expectation of when ‸ a collision of arms [...]
between the opposing parties in
this State, and amidst the preparations for active service,
a most important and a vital question has been lost sight of –
What has become of the People’s Constitution? The attempt
has been urged by its opponents to convince the friends of
Equal Rights that, because the arsenal was not captured
on the 18th of May, and on the same day Gov. Dorr deemed
it inexpedient to maintain a contest with 50 men against
500, therefore the People’s Constitution has come to an [...] end,
and all the past proceedings of the People have been erased,
and are of no effect. That such an attempt should have
been made, and should be still continued, un in the confidence
inspired by a temporary triumph success, is not surprising. But no
man, in the exercise of his deliberate judgment, ought to be deceived
by it. If the Constitution was rightfully established and put in opera-
tion, by the election of a government under it, it has at this mo-
ment precisely the same validity that it ever had; and the
rights defined & acquired under it ansubsist unaffected by any
occurrence within the last four weeks. Suppose that, by a hostile
invasion, the Legislature of Massachusetts New York, or of any other State, should
be taken into captivity, and a large number of citizens should be put
to the sword, what would be thought of an inference that
any individual should pretend to draw from such an event –
that the Constitution of New York had ceased to exist? Every
man would reply, that it was a [...] and ‸ an illogical &
lame conclusion from around the premises; because the
Constitution wasis rightfully established, and contained‸s no stip-
ulation or condition, that it shall be deemed and taken to be
nullified and abrogated by the happening of any such contin-
gency. So, if the People’s Constitution in Rhode Island have
been rightfully adopted, and put in operation, by the election &
action of its Legislative, or other departments, it is still a valid,
subsisting instrument, and has not been disposed of by the fate of arms,
by the resignation of men officers, or by any other‸another any other event which
has transpired. The work of forming and adopting this
Constitution was a gradual one. What was thus done


cannot be easily undone. We all recollect the anxiety which
attended the election of the first Legislature, and the ho‸lding of their
first session. And why? Because the success of these measures
was to give an actual existence to the Constitution. The People
did successfully elect their officers under this Constitution. These
officers did assemble ‸ and organize themselves in the forms presented by the Constitution; and
the Constitution was put in operation. How, and to what extent
this operation has been impeded, delayed, or suspended by any
subsequent acts is another question, which, decide it as you
may, does not affect the existence of the Constitution, any more
than the non-execution of a law, in any instance, affects the its
existence, when duly enacted. Some of the members of the People’s
Legislature have resigned their places. True – but the places can
be filled in the manner prescribed by the Constitution. The ‸ Chief Exec-
utive Magistrate under the Constitution is not now in the State. But
he has a right to be here. He is not expatriated. He has not compro-
mised his rights as an officer of the People, nor their rights as electors;
and ‸ he is the last man living to meditate or perform such an act.
Suppose such an attempt had been made, or should be made,
who gave the Legislature, or any magistrate, the authority to “com-
promise” the Constitution? The Constitution gives no such power.
The whole People, who made adopted the Constitution, have
given no such power. In fact the Constitution now belongs
to the Citizens of the State. Every man has a right to claim and
insist upon the provisions which it establishes. It is his Consti-
tution. A majority of the whole People was necessary to give it
an existence. It is now the property of the individual members of the
State, until dispensed with by the whole People. [...]If these positions
be true, and they cannot be successfully controverted, how is the
great question of Right involved in the controversy to be met
with an assertion of the power of the Charter Party? Have we
no Constitution, because some of our citizens have been rudely
seized and thrust into a dungeon; – because a law of pains
and penalties has been enacted by another body of men, claiming
to be the Legislature of the State; – because $1000 have been offered
for the arrest of Gov. Dorr in Connecticut, against the permission of
its Chief Magistrate; – because suffrage men are thrown out
of tenements, out of employment; – because it is difficult

for a friend of the People’s Constitution to insure his house,
or to obtain a discount at bank; – because his house is
liable to be entered without a warrant in search for arms; –
because he is liable to be stopped in the streets by an armed
patrol, and insulted & roughly treated; – because, in a
word, the supporters of Republican Institutions in Rhode Island
are placed on the footing of servile insurrectionists, or Polish
rebels - ? - Let the common sense of every Republican in our
State and county respond to this question. If the rights acquired
under a Republican Constitution can thus be taken away, it is
time that some new definition of popular rights be forthwith devised,
andthat all our declarations of rights be given to the winds,
and that we return to that “good old English monarchy,”
for which one of the members of the present Charter Legislature has
recently expressed so decided a preference.


A large military parade is contemplated by the
Charter men on the 4th of July, to celebrate, as we ought to believe ‸ may be supposed,
the principles of American Independence. But let us imagine
for a moment, that their attention should be directed to the
“Foundry” Legislature, whose adjourned session takes place on
that day. Suppose them to surround the building & transfix the
members on their glittering steel steel. The People and their
Constitution may still survive the shock. A regular election
of members will again take place in April; and what is
more important, two members of Congress will there be chosen.
These members will, without doubt, in the body which we may
expect to see returned by the popular vote of the country, be recog-
nized and admitted to their seats, and our Constitution will be
thus admitted to have a valid existence by a branch of the National
Legislature. Of the result of the coming Congressional elections
our opponents are opponents well aware, from indications every
where not to be mistaken. Hence the great anxiety to make People
believe that their Constitution expired at the arsenal.


If the Charter Assembly should grant an extendsion
ofsuffrage on the same basis as that contained in the
People’s Constitution, they would, so far, harmonize with the
People, by removing any objection on their partrecognizing
their Constitution in part; but without giving it any ad-


ditional validity.


To “peace-men” to “force men” and to all
other friends of Equal Rights we say ‸ keepthen – Hold on to your
Constitution.

Questions

In what ways does Dorr attempt to justify his actions?

What does Dorr mean by the use of terms "peace men" and "force men"?