Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1823-11-28


IL is. in other words, that il affords the onl,
means, under present circumstances by which
The viii OF the people can be asccrtained and
accomplished. The opposers of a Caucus,
on the contrary, taking the ground Of the Ten
nsssec resolutions, would So act. that the cleo
ton shall take such course as 10 give 10
single individual The same weight in the eec-
ton a. Is given To million of freem.n We
do not say that this is their intention, but such
would be the eiltc of their success Startling
as this general position may appear, ii is never
theless, susceptible Of demonstration, thus /: If
there he no previous Nomination, there will
he no Election by The People; this will not he
denied by the opponents ola nomination. In
that event, th- Election de, olives on the House
OF Representatives, voting by States, each
State giving one vote (; and the choice is made
from the three persons among the Candidates
who shall have received the highest number of
votes. Some ofthe States are represented in
that body by a single member each, only In
the election by the House of Representatives
therefore, single person, expressing his indi-
,ldnal sentiment, gives vote equivalent, in its
effect, TO the votes of all the people of any
state in the Union, by the other mode of cleo
tinn. The Representative from Missouri, for
example, in an election by the House of Repre-
seniaiives, would WELD more tremendous
| "
erted by all the people of the State of New
York or Of the State of Pennsylvania This
IS what we deprecate; and this is what Mr..
Grundy would prefer to resorting TO custom,
oi which he has heretofore entertained good
opinion, and given TO the world practical proofs
! oft.
We might here set the argument in favor of
a Congressional nomination, which comes up-
on our minds, in the view we have Just taken
oft, with irresistible force. But we have not
seen the worst fiji. That candidate, out of
the three highest, who has received the lowest
number of votes of the three may, and i'm all
probability would, be elected, in AN election
by the House OF Representatives, and the
will and wishes Of the People be set entirely
nj defiance. Candidate No. l, for example,
might receiee from the electors 100 votes =
Candidate No. might receive 80, and Cam
dIlate No. 8. might receive 80 electoral votes
Here would be distinct expression of the
will of the People, in favor of No |, aud a.
ganst the other two, but particularly against
NJ. 5. Ii would he an even chance, never
theiess, that, inan election by the House of
| Representatives, the choice would fall on No.
8. Would ,ihie he desirable TO Mr.. Grundy or
to the State of Tennessee?
lf on the other hand a nomination be made
previous 10 the Election, Candidate will be-
by minority of those in whom they have a
Just confidence. Another candidate will doubt
he presented in opposition TO the regularly
nominated candidate. The people will then
decide, between two, which they prefer. The
choice will be iheirs and il is thus only, I'M
| der the circumstances which now exist, that
the right of the People 20 chuse their Rulers
can be preserved 10 them
J The resolutions may, perhaps, intend to
refer to the power which the large States have
IN Il Caucus, by ,he predominance of numbers,
over the smaller ones. To this none can OBJ
Iecf but those who maintain that inequality in
the rights the People is desirable, or that il
is the soil and not the population of the coun
try that is to he consulted in the Election of a
President. For ourselves, we say, that thirty
1--we thousand men in New York or North
carolina, or Ohio, are entitled lay reason, and
! according 10 The whole spirit OF our govern
meni, TO the same weight in the Union as thlr-
ty-fve thousand in Mississippi, Delaware, or
Rhode Island, and that each Representative
on The floor OF COngress is, and ought 10 be- of
equal weight with every other. In Meeting
o Members of Congress, besides, the small
States will still have an advantage over the lar
! ger for the two Senators of each of the small
states will count forvotes Just the same as the
Senators from the greatest States in the I'm
ION hich is again in full accOrdanc swith the
spirit of the Constitution.
| But, the most curious argument advanced
against Caucus nomination, in the resolutions
is, that 1T lessons the Independence ofthe Ex-
ecutive. We did not expect TO hear from the
Democratic State of Tennessee an objection
OF this sort. We thought the people of that
State were of opinion that the Executive of
the U. States was too independent, too pow
eriul, rather than otherwise. But how will il
4 -
Over the present Executive il can have no
possible influence. With regard to the Pre-
sident that TO bP, it certainly cannot he sup
posed that he would owe less obligation TO
those who should actually elect him in their
Official capacity, whose single votes may make
him President than To those who, as pri, ate
IndIviduals, recommend him TO the People as
a candidate for their suffrages. 1t is clear,
therefore, that IN that view, an election by the
House of Representatives is to be deprecated,
and nomination, as the means ofavoding il.
gains instead of losing strength by the argu-
ment.
To The People themselves" however, Mr..
Gruudy and the Legislature of Tennessee will
leave the election OF President. Good We
are with them, and have already shewn that
1t can be left to them in no other manner than
by taking course directly opposite 10 that
which The Legislature recommends. But how
does this declaration Of The Legislature CON
slst with the conduct Of the Legislature Of the
same State at the last session? They will now
leave the Election to the People themselves"
But what have they already done They
have endeavored 10 take it from the People
Of their own State, by passing formal act, 10
both Houses, declaring that one Of the Can
didates, who was named, ought to be the Pre-
sident of the United States, and that all the
rood PpOuIp nf