Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1825-05-10

J Witnesses, II tnere were any, Here all
the proofs were concentrated. Mr.. Kre-
mer was stimulated by every motive
watch could impel 10 action, by consis-
tency of character; by duty 10 his con-
T., slituents--to his country; by that OF re-
deemiDg his solemn pledge; by anxious
wish for the success oil his favorite,
whose interests could not Tail to be adj
vanced by supporting his atrocious
charges. But Mr.. Kremer had now the
benefit OF the advice of his friends. He
had no proofs, for the plalnest OF all rea
sons, because there was no truth in his
charges. They saw tina, to attempt to
establish them, and to fall as he failed
IN the attempt, might lead to an exposure
OF the conspiracy, OF which he was the
organ. They advised therefore that he
should make retreat, and their adroi,-
ness suggested that, in an objection to
that jurisdiction OF the House, which had
been admitted, and IN the popular to-
pics OF the freedom OF the press, his du.
ty to his constituents. and the inequality
in the condition of the speaker of the
House and a member on the floor, plau
sible means might be found TO deceive
The ignorant, and conceal bis disgrace,
A labored communication was accord
ingly prepared by them, in Mr.. Kre-
mer's name, and transmitted TO the COM
mittee, founded upon these suggestions.
Thus the valiant champion, who had
boldly stepped forward, and Promised,
as Representative OF the people, to
"cry aloud and spare not" forgot all
his gra,uilons gaIlan,ry and boosted pa
trlolsm, and sunk at once into profound
silence.
With these remarks, l will for the present,
leave him, and proceed to assign the reasons to
you, to whom alone admit my self to be official
ly responsible, for the vote which gave on the
Presidential election. The first inquiry which
II beloved me to make was, as to the influence
winch ought to be exerted on my Judgment
by the relative state ofthe electoral votes which
the three returned candidates brought into the
House, from the colleges. General Jackson
obtained 90, MIR. Adams 81, and Mr.. Crawford
Al. Ought the fact OF plurality being given
to one OF the candidates to have any, and what
weight? Ii the constitution had intended that
At should have been decisive, the constitution
would have made it decisive, and mterdicted
the exercise ofany discretion on the part of the
House of Representatives. The constitution
has not SO ordained, bat on the contrary it has
provided, that GO from the persons having the
highest numbers, not exceeding three, on the
list OF those voted for as President, the House
of Representatives shall choose Immediately, by
ballot, President" Thus, discretion is ne
cessarily invested in the House for choice I'M
Plies examination, comparison, Judgment
l1n t,lrt atn hat, Dff
SONS was highest returned, not being, by the
constitution of the country, conclusive upon the
Judgment OF the House, ii still remains to deter.
nine " hat is the true degree of weight belong.
ing to =! Ii has been contended that IL should
operate ii not as an instruction, at least in the
nature of one, and that in this form it should
! control the Judgment of the House. But this
is the same argument of conclusiveness which
the constitution does not enjoin, thrown into a
different and more imposing shape. Let me
| aDaiyZe it.-Ihere are certain States, the ag-
gregatc Of whose electoral votes conferred up
on the highest returned candidate, indicates
their wish that he should be the President
Their votes amount in number to 80, out OF the
POI electoral votes OF the whole Union. These
go do not, and cannot, of themselves, make the
President. If the fact OF particular states 81
wing SO votes, can, according to any received
gardcd in that light, to whom are those nstruc-
IONS to be considered Addressed According
to that doctrine, the people, who appoint, have
the right to direct by their Instructions, i'll Ger.
tain cases, the course of the representative
whom they may appoint.
The States therefore, who gave those SO
votes may, in some sense, be understood there
by to have Instructed their representatives in
the House to vote for the person on whom they
were bestowed, in the choice OF a President.
But most clearly the representatives coming
from other states, which gave no part of those
| SO votes, cannot be considered as having been
under any obligation TO surrender their jAogT
ments to those of the states which gave the SO
votes. To contend thar they are under such
an obligation, would be- to maintain that the
people Of one state have the right to instruc,
1 the representatives from another state. II
would be to MAINTAIN still more absurd propo-
sltion, that in case where the representatives
from state did not hold themselves instructed
and bound by the will Of that state, as indicated
in its electoral college, the representatives
from another state were, nevertheless, instruct
ed and boundby that alien will. Thus, the en-
tire vote of North Carolina, and large maj oii-
ty of that of Mar, land, in their respective cleo
toral colleges, were given TO one of the three
returned candidates. for whom the delegation
from neither of those states voted. And yet he
argument combatted requires that the delega-
ton from Kentucky, who 90 not represent the
people OF N orth Carolina nor Maryland, should
be instructed by, and give an effect to, the in
dictated will of the people of those two states,
when their own delegation aid no attention TO
it. Doubtless, those delegations felt them
selves authorized to look into the actual COM
nos1tlon Of and all other circumstances con-