Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-01-20
SENATE OF NEW YORK,
JANUARY 8, 1924.

MIR. Bovine, from The select COMMITTEES, to
whom was referred the preamble and resou-
tons of the General Assembly oflhe state of
Tennessee, reprohating the practice of mem
beers of the Congress of thu: United States,
meeting in caucus aud nominating persons TO
be vot-d for as President and Vice President
of the u. States, and transmitted 10 the two
houses, by his excelency the Governor re-
ported as follows, to wit
That they have attentively examined the
preamble and resolutions submitted to their
consideration but as they are constrained on
deliberate reflection, {" dissent from the
principles maintained, and the opinions ex-
pressed therein, they have thought il due 10
the subject aud 10 the respectable state of
Tennessee, to explain at large the reasons Of
that dissent.
In discharSing this task, it has been mpss-
s,.his &. as...d he s4.s..ssa af same Topics
which are not frequently presented for le-
gislative consideration. The nature of the
subject, and the schema manner la which il
has been taken up by our sister state, renders
this not only Il matter oinecessty, but of duty.
The committee do not deem il Necessary, To
enter into an Elaborate discussion of the con-
stitutional right ofthe representatives and SEN
ators in congress, in their character as ciii-
zens, tn recommend 10 the people, fit persons
tn he supported candidates for the Off
ces of president and vice president of the u.
States tor whatever may he said as Ia the
expectancy ot this practice, considered either
on general principles, or with reference To any
particular state of things, there is not in the
opinion of your committee, any plausible
ground for d.nouncIng it as repugnant 10 the
spirit of the constitution. After a deliberate
examinations OF the arguments adduced by the
general assembly of the state of Tennessee,
hn a.
constitutional provision, which renders il i'm
proper for the members of congress To ex-
press their opinions on this, or any other ques-
ton ot interest 10 their constituents.
The constitution of the United States, in
the 0plnlnn ut the committee, WAS not intend
ed Ia regulate, and does nut attempt Ia con-
trout them, in the exercise oftheir civil or po-
litical rights.
But it is commended in the documents before
us. that the practice in question, is inconsist-
ent with the spirit uf that article, which de
clares that "no senator or representative or per-
son holding any otiicr of trust or profit, under
the United States, shall be appointed on eiec-
tor" But the argument, in the opinion OF
your committee, goes very far beyond the
gust construction of the article, or the inten
lion Gifts trainers. The members of congress
cannot be chosen AS electors, but by the con-
stituti"n, they have right 10 vote, and do
vote Tor the electors themselves, or for the
members of the legislatures of their respect
rye states, by~whom the electors are appoint
ed In the exercise Of this right they are
governed by the opinions and preferences they
have formed, and they bring them To bear
directly on the decision of the question. How
then can the expression of the same opinions
and preferences, in a mannrr less solemn and
Tess direct, be repnsndnt Ia the spirit of the
constitution?
Again, The article includes not only the SEN
ators and representatives in congress-, but all
persons holding offices If profit or trust under
the United States. Iflile argument be Just,
II must equally apply 10 all the officers con-
necfed with the various departments of the
general government, who are To he found in
great numbers, IN every quarter of the union.
10 prohibit the members of congress, and
a'i other persons i'll any manner connected
win the government, from assembling tugeth.
er, IN Their private capacity, and consulting ON
question ofsO much interest tn the nation,
would be to stlip them of rights common to
every ether indi'idu Such never could have
Oprh me intentiOn of the constitution.
IL IS also supposed tn be against the spirit
OF the constitution, inasmuch as members
oi congress may become the final electors, and,
therefore, ought not To prelude the case, by
We
particular candidates." and because it " vio-
Iates The equality intended to he secured, by
ule constitution the United States, 10 the
weaker states" Notwithstanding the opinion
VI the general assembly of the state of Ten
Dsssee, 1t appears to the committee, this part
81 me argument is equally faIIaciuus. The
,He'noeFs OF congress are not SO far pledged,
ny mere Recommendation, as To be compe-
eo III aH hazards 10 support the individual TO
whose nomination they consented, for the
Pr"prirty OF his support in the last resort,
must depend on then existing considerations
"'PuOhc good, 10 which tn representative
cannot be supposed to be inscnsibe, without.
aI tne same TINE, surprising that he approach
sS the hnal election, with "A settled determi
patIOn 10 disregard them. Aud IL that he the
sase, the danger is the same, whether he has
or has not, assisted in the nomination of a
Candidate or, If there be any difference. il is
much greater in the latter ease, than in the
lor'ner of the cases stated. Nor is it certain.
'h't Tie candidate supported by the repre-
9ehlalIve ~ CAUCUS, will be one of those pre-
senlen To the house Of Representatives, and
nc y not the whole argument falls lo the
ground. Besides, this idea is founded on the
oplnl"n, that If the election should ultimately
uev0lve on the h1nse of representatives, the
'oembers Vt that body should come To- il as
20 new question:, t0hoiy uncomB,ited, and
without even the least preference To indIyi-
ouals. This in The opinion Of the committee
- S"pP0sing what, in free government and
'" case So prominent, car never occur, and
'Nen u II could, would be- in no way desira
We. The dangers Of ~ election by the house
"' representatives., are already sufficiently ~
'"'ni"s, 5utin snch state Of things, it is easy