Which amendment process was favored after the 1798 convention?

The favored amendment process after the 1798 convention was the proposal by the legislature followed by public ratification. This method is significant because it emphasizes a balance between legislative authority and the democratic power of the electorate. By having the legislature propose amendments, it leverages the existing governmental framework to discuss and draft changes. Public ratification ensures that the citizens have the ultimate say on whether those proposed amendments should be adopted, reflecting the principles of popular sovereignty and democratic engagement.

This approach bolsters the integrity of the amendment process, as it necessitates both legislative consensus and public approval, thereby fostering a more deliberate and representative system for making constitutional changes. The dual requirement prevents hasty amendments and encourages thorough consideration of any proposed changes to the state constitution.

In contrast, options like direct voter amendments could lead to potential instability and populism, while amendments by executive order would concentrate too much power in the hands of the executive branch. Judicial approval, while important in interpreting laws, does not serve as a process for amending the constitution itself. Thus, the preference for a legislative proposal followed by public ratification effectively balances these aspects, reinforcing both legislative order and democratic participation.