Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1813-12-23
FOR THE VIRGINIA ARGUS.


on the existing Ac, of Assembly, arranging
the state into districts for the election of
Members OF Congress, very important
question was raised and discussed relative to-
the right of the legislature to restrict the
residence of each representative to the dis
trict for which he shall be elected. The
bill Gt is understood) was carried through
the house OF Delegates originally with such
restriction; but the Senate passed a vote
for striking the restricting clause from the
billas an amendment, to which the House
of Delegates finally agreed, and it passed in
to an act without the restriction. In support
ofthe amendment it was commended that the
legislature had not a right to confine the re-.
sidencc to the district for which the repre-
preventative shall be elected. The person,
who now addresses you, believes this doc
trine to be utterly erroneous and of danger
Gus tendency, and that it is much to be de-
sired that the Senate would reconsider the
subject and unite with the Delegates, befor G
another general election of members of Cen
gress shall take place in amending the act
referred to So Ear as TO restore the clause
restricting the residence of each represen-
tatlve to his respective district as contained
in the several former actsup that subject.
The expression of Il wish that such review
of the question may be taken is here parti-
,cularly directed to the members of the Sc
nate only, because it is presumed that a
majority of that body was in favor of the
doctrine, which denies TO the legislature the
right OF restricting, as they passed the a
mendment, for striking out The restricting
clause; whereas 1t Is not so presumed as to
the House of Delegates, since they had pass
ed the bill with the clause: but it has been
understood that the amendment was finally
as1 Pol ,xy tha loo
Their than incur the risque of losing the be
netit ofhaying the additional representative
to which the STATE is entitled under an act
of Congress lately passed for apporiioning
representa- ives among the several states
IT, therefore, the Members OF that branch OF
the legislature wherein the amendment was
proposed and insisted upon, will reconsider
the subject, and if such portion CT them
should discover shat the doctrine adduced
in support OF il is erroneous and dangerous,
30 as that a majority Of them should concur
In restoring to the Law its former principle,
it is confidently believed that they will renH
der very important service To their Coun
try. For it is seriously app ehended that
the doctrine is not only dangerous in its ma
ture and tending TO impair the constitutional
authority of the state legislature IN point
ofgreat and essential moment but that the
innovation it has generated, If not removed,
will at no very distant period be productive
of mischievious consequences. If the law
shall continue as it now is, no one need TO
be surprIzed If he shall see representatives,
even to the 18th Congress, returned fur dis
tricts remote from those in which they re-
side, whose political principles pre-, ent them
from being elected in their own districts,
and which principles are adverse to those of
che great body of the people of the state !;
because the districts wherein such elections
can be carried may not contain any per-
sons so important TO the opposition party
as some that may be fcusd in districts
where the majorites are not of that party.
Considering that, if any citizen believes
all innovation either in principle or in law,
subversive of right, or injurious to the inte-
rests of the Commonwealth has been intro>
duced, it is his duty to contribute what he
can, as objection t the innovation, which he
judges to be justly entitled to puDlic noticc,
the writer of this address requests the favor
of you 10 publish the subjoined communica-
ton from a memberof Congress received
several years ago, containing an argument
delivered by that member in the House Of
Representatives on question precisely ST.
milar to that aI,nded to, and iE opposition
to the doctrine herein exploded. 1t is wish
Su ftndl ~ khiliCUN bC ettINhoiJ sliiN
deliberately examined. because it is behev
ed to exhibit course OF reasoning clear and
cogent in refutaiion Of that doctrine should
the examination Of it be followed by Ie>
punciation ofthe doctrine and such modifi.
cation of the law as has been suggested, il
may be considered as an event oil real im-
portance to the principles OF the CONSTITUTE
ON and to very essential attribute Of the
state governments, for which the public may
LB.C.
WAsHIN TON CITY, Dec. goth, 1907.
Nix DEAR 49,,
/ expect you have observed in
the Intelligencer some account Of proceedings
in the House Of Representatives ON the CON
tested election OF MIR. M'Creery, returned
a member for the city Of Baltimore From
such account, as you have seen in that pa
per, you will have observed that very im>
por,ant question was discussed relative to
the right Of the states 20 FIX qualifications of
representatives. believe that AL or very
neay all the arguments against this RICH,
were published in that paper but it has
4 ILL