American watchman and Delaware advertiser. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1822-1828, 1824-05-04
THE CAUCUS QUESTION.
WAsHINGTos CITY, March 4, 1924.

"a
Of respectable free holders and citizens of the coun
ty of King and Queen, approving of the course
which have pursued in relation 10 the caucu:
which has recently held at the seat Of the genera
government, has been duly received. Permit me
through you, TO express TO them the sincere gratiH
cation feel at this testimony of their appreciation
To representative who properly estimates III.
virtue and int lgence oil the people, and the hiet
and sacred character of his trust, nothing can b,
more grateful than the spontaneous expression O
their esteem and conhdence-nothing more calcu
lated to encourage and sustain him in the discharge
OF his duties, and TO excite in him an honorable am
bition to merit the continuance of their favor BY
Increased perseverance and zeal in their service
No representative has more sensibly experienced
this truth than myself for none is more indebted tc
the kind and sustaining appreciation of his constitu
ents. The renewed instance OF this appreciation
afforded by the address of the freeholders and citi
gems OF King and Queen, will always be reccollect
ed by me with feelings of gratitude and pride.
Calm and deliberate reflection the subject q
q congressional caucus for the purpose OF nomina
Ting President, has convinced me that it has none
OF thu advantages inrInscally relatively which
have been ascribed to it.--A caucus Of member.
OF Congress 10 nominate President, is meeting
OF nubc men, not to express the opinion OF the
people but to direct and control IT, by virtue OF the
influence and weight at their official character. II
is idle and dIsnPenuous 10 pretend that it is meet
inl Of individuals, and not OF members. II an equal
number OF the most res peciable individuals from ey-
cry state in the Union happened to be in Washing.
ton when congressional caucus was held, we should
perceive that they would not be permitted assist
IN II nor would an independent caucus held by
themselves carry with II the least authority whate
yer It's therefore, TO all ntents * purposes, caucus
Of members Of Congress, acting in their official char
ac'er; and as such is liable to serious and insu-
Perabie objections Il is usurpation Of the rights
OF the people, and an attempt to substitute nOmina
ftoR tor election II tends deprive the state 90
vernments Of their control in the election Of Pres
iden; and to give the election to few individuals
who are thus placed under the strongest temptation
to promote their own interests at The expense Of the
public good.
One Of the principal pretexts for it u.s. that il is
intended to keep the election out OF the House Of
Representatives; but several conditions are neces
sary 10 enable caucus to have this effect 1t must
consist Of sufficient number OF members who
must agree to surrender their preferences and unite
on one candidate, however unfit many OF them may
deem him-and that candidate must be nominated
by majority sufficiently numerous and respectable
TO give to their recommendation the force Of an edc
with the people. One OF these conditions is derog
ato'y to the constituent members, and the other
to the people. But, it a caucus could have the
eject 70 keep the election out of the House of
Representatives, the remedy is really worse than
the disease. 1t is admitted that both the caucus and
the election by the House are evils but con,in-
gent evil, which may seldom happen is attempted
to be avoided by substituting one that is TO become
regu ar, periodical and that is to be dreaded -
There can be no doubt that the members, acting in
the House on their official responsibility would be
less exposed to the influence ofintrigue than acting
in caucus, without responsibility. But 1t is said +" in
the house the little state of Delaware will have as
much consequence as the great state OF Virginia.
- NOW. strange as II may seem, the very persons
who use this argument tell us that on the present
occasion, the little state Of Delaware is going to
vote precisely as the great state of Virginia will !;
50 that whatever force this argument might have,
10 favor OF caucusses generally, it is deprived Of all
weight as 1t respects the expectancy of the late eau
Gus Butlt 1t is right to caucus against the constitu
viewto defeat of provisions because
IT'S thought to operate unequaIly, why not caucus q.
ga'nst 1t to defeat anyiother provision which we may
osapproVe on the same grounds lift is right to eau.
Gus against the equality OF the small states in reIa.
ton to the election Of President in the House. WHY
not caucus against their equality in the structure Of
me oenate which is not occasional as the former
b1t permanent! Even if all the members of Con.
gress mad attended caucus, as before suggested
tnere Could nave been no nomination by a majority
OF any one candidate; and nomination bv mere
plurality, would not have the least weight upon the
people The principle OF the Presidential election
Is majority not plurality. So lar from any nom
nation BY mere plurality having tendency to
keep the election out Of the House. il would be re-
EaTded by the people, effort of a minority to
dictate 10 them and would stimulate the m to great
CT exertions 10 resist and defeat their purpose thu.
promoting division and dscord, instead Of harmony.
as mas been pretended. But say the advocates of a
caucus, why do you disapprove? Why will you
not unl'e and vote for one candidate, surrenderine
your preludces and pre[errences-mraninv M
oouo1' why DO you NOT vote for 0ur candidate This
70 De sure, would be very eectua way of settling
AL dlihculty' and doubtless TO them at least yery
satisfactory one; but this inquiry brings up The