Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1823-12-23

PVPu'df citStiuns, Ut tue ueNDefdtiOuS ~
caucus, the same spirit may here make the
holdest inroads and command its object, by II
fearlessness Of responsibility. Some of the
dangers of such AN election are thus forcibly
ladverted To in the able commentary of Juds.
fucker:
| "lhere Is no room for a campus ninrtius or
a POliSh diet on the one hand, nor for the iir-
trigues OF the sacred college or Venitian sen
ate on the other; unless when it unfortunate
iy happens that two persons having ma jority
OF the whole number of the electors in their ia
YOUR, have likewise an equal number Of votes !;
ar ichere, By any other means, the election may
devolve Oh the House uf Representatives.
Then indeed intrigue and cabal may have
their full scope; then may the existence OF the
Union be put in extreme hazard: then might
a bold and desperate purity having the command
Of an armed force, aud of all the resources of
| the government, attempt To establish them
selves permanently IN power without the flu
ture aid of forms or the cUntruul of elections.
Upon what principle, we may ask, is it that
state influence is ia this case permitted To Ope-
rate Ia an inverse proportion To the ratio of
population, and thus predomnate over it ?
Ii IS perhaps susceptible OF proof, that IT the
arts ot corruption should ever be practised
| with success ia the election of president, it
| will ARISE from this circumstance; the votes of
d few individuals in this Instance more than
counterbalancing four times their number"
| III THIS disparity was source of SD great
| apprehension when the Union was composed
of but thirteen states, In which with few ex-
ceplious there was no great relative dispropor-
! ton, aud just emerging from common and
Curious struggle for If-government-hOw
| much moe serious must IL be, when the num-
her Is increased In twenty -four, and presenting
IA ma jorty of small states? We do not urge
Esf &c..
provision, thoush we hazard nothing in say
ing that if such state of things could have
been foreseen, the constitution never would
have possessed so dangerous feature but
we insist upon il as an additional reason, why
| the primary mode Of election should be promo
Ted by all legitimate means. The first source
Of danger, of bringing the election to the
| House of Representatives, as adverted To in
the foregoing extract, has been prevented by
a subsequent amendment of the constitution {;
but the augmented number of small states for
bids similar remedy against the other
which, therefore, can only be prevented by
concert among the people, attained by their
o'cn means and IN their O,On trdy.
We have said that the mode Of election by
the people has been well provided, but that
the measures by which this mode is TO be Sc
cured against the effects of disorder could
not be-, and must therefore be a matter of re-
sulation among The people themselves. Any
means which shall be approved by their wis
dom, cannot he opposed, but 10y those who
would delude them any means which shall
be sanctioned by their experience should be
cherished and adhered TO, till they produce
evil, not merely, till they incur the resentment
of the ambitious
Do not all The efforts, which are now max
ing 10 prevent nomination in the usual way
and To render ii caucus odlous, tend to defeat
this mode of election by the people? IL il
not for this purpose that the old Glamour 4
ga:ust the system has been revived, and that il
has been represented in the most hideous
J form Ii has been denounced as the means
of cheating the people of their rights--as a
system of dIctation by self-organized irrespon-
sibic persons-an attempt, by men constitu-
tloDally disqualified for electors, to- usurp
power, To controul the election and make the
president But is not all this blind denuncia-
lion? Does any man, in his senses, believe,
that The caucus system is to be put aside to
promote an election by the people? Can il
be supposed, if all the candidates who
are at present urging their pretensions, and
others who may yet appear, persist in their
purpose, without some concert ar mutual I'M
: derstanding, that any of them can be elect
ed by the people? Why then all this cla-
mour, but To prevent the people from electing
OF Representatives; where a scene of tumult
Is to prevail which the people cannot compose,
and where some individual may be elected
against the sense of large ma ority of the
nation?
Let us proceed to consider this system OF
caucus nomination, which is of sudden so
much reviled, aud the grounds upon which il
is denounced.
The people of the United States have not
only the right To elect the President, but, con
, sultiug their own interests, the peace and
harmony and union of the government, il is
their duty to do so. But without some mean:
of concert, and Of reconcng conflicting OPT
Mons, there is imminent danger that this right
will he defeated.-Is it not right and proper
D that they should adopt some such means p
In adopting the means, is it not right and pro
per that they should determineho and in
what manner they will produce this concert
: Where is the provision in the constitution, OF
in the propriety of things, that deprives the
! people of this right May they not if they
please aud without yielding any portion oI
l their power or importance, .appuint delegates
? in all parts of the Union, 10 meet al Washing
, ton or elsewhere TO devise the terms of this
concert aud dominate a candidate for their
, support and in choosing these delegates, may
Z they not select their members in Congress to
perform this service and would not conve-
2 nlence well as higher considerations re-
commend their selection? But If this mode
of sending delegates, from all parts Of this ex-
tended Empire upon this special errand, be in
expRdient, and troublesome, if not impractica-
BILE, may the people not approve the mode Ivy
which their members in Congress shall con
yene in their individual capacities and make
a nomination subject To their revision Ii is