Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-12-24


the majority being so equivocal in some
of them as TO MAKE entire changes in
their delegation. 1t is presumablc, that
by the district plan there might be dis
| tricts, having decided majorities, differ
ing from the prevailing sentiment Of the
| State. And why should not these be
heard in their due proportions? Differ
| ence OF opinion is TO crime. 1t arises
| mostly from difference OF interest and OF
associations. If there be district in
! Connecticut, having majority OF what
is called republican opinions or dis
| trict in Georgia, Of opposite sentiment,
| should like, III either case, TO see such
! districts represented here. Though their
| might be 10 great difference in tie gene
| raj momentum on either side, by this
| change, it would afford most happy con
| sequences. Disappointment, in any mea-
sure, IS then reconclied 10y the reflection
| that there was fair trial Kindred sym
l,athies would he happily blended between
distant climates, and geogc2p hical diviSi-
ons avoided. The contrary is the conse-
quence, in any larger mode of division,
and especially in general vote of States.
disappointment is then sharpened by con-
sidering that fair trial was not had that
the sentiments of the minor divisions OF
the States were not heard Aiiipaihies
whole states aud regions, being united
II opposition to each other, respective
ly.
Of all species of division, noac is so
truly TO be deprecated, as that of Il geo
graphical character And that the mode
OF general vote tends that way, is clear,
and that III filling the electoral colleges,
as well as this House For, the very APP
pearance of this united opposition in col
leges within whole states and regions, TO
other sections, equally united and this
frequently occurring. WI! naturally lead
to the same kind OF local feeling. And as
certainly, too, in tederatiye system,
where each state is left free TO regulate its
weight in the balance, does ittend toward
the rhode or entire suffrage; and our ex-
perence proves it. The evil, then, is
national one, and growing one. Its
only cure is by Il constitutional provisi-
on.
Ii is said, that by adopting this amend
rnent IN the case OF electors, the fedora
tive principle in that particular viii be dc
creased. What is that federative princi-
plcl 1t consists mostly in the two extra
electors being allowed 10 the States with
out respect 10 their relative sizes this
vas CONCESSION TO the small Siates--
= mi this y still retained h+l tho a,nArA
tribution or number of electors. The
right of the states, indeed, to regulate the
mode ofappoint ment being of federative
character, may be an object with some.
But, when the state IS so united in senti-
ment, as TO present an individual fr0at, il
may still do s., and tiie object is still re-
tanned. When this IS not the case, the
less in any state viii depend on tie rela-
tive losses sustained by other states in
the same way, and the fraction of loss in
any case is not worth The expence of the
many evils resulting from the present un-
settled course.
MIR. p. said, lie had long been impress
ed with the necessity of The amendment,
and had for several successive sessions
presented it the favourable period, he
hoped, had now arrived it may be many
years before we experience so much in
teTnal harmony. lie had sincerely wish
ed that his views had impressed some 9th
er nembert to have offered this propositi-
on, whose influence and arguments could
have given IT force. lie still. hoped, its
own merits we're such as 10 give If favo-
rable determination.
Mr.. Root ofN. Y. said, that changes in
the constitutions of governments ought
never to be made on slight motives. Some
great evil to be avoided, or some great
good TO be attained, ought TO be the only
motive to change. Attempts to change
| q constitution, even If unsuccessful, pro-
| duced very pernicious effects they are
! calculated to strip in degree the consti-
| tuition of that re, erence and respect, to
which it ought to be entitled, and which
| the rising generation ought to be taught
| TO entertain for it. For these reasons,
| Mr.. Il. said, he never would consent TO d
| change for slight causes.
lie first proposition contained in The
| resolution before the House, was not, he
said, TO bis mind, calculated to change
| the principles of the constitution, siuceit
! proposed nothing more than modiiicati-
on OF the manner in which constitutions
al provision should be executed. That
| the people should elect their representa-
tives IN such manner as TO speak the
voice of the nation most distinctly, was
what the constitution intended To so
organise the House Of Representatives,
| that trey may truly speak the national
will, is TO law ous the STATE INTO districts
for eleciing Representatives or tie MI
norlty Of The people may elect The major
iiy 81 the Representatives. Mr.. X. was
therefore ~ favor of this part of The resO-
luton.
But the other proposition, said he, as
now rescnted to us, contempiates an in
vasiCn Of one Of the greatest fundamental
principles Of Our constitution. Ii was not
50, as the honourajlc gentleman from N.
y