The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1826-04-05

the majority in the large State, though the
cheice OF but about quarter part Of the ag-
gregate population Of the two States, would
still be chosen. Why sir, that is one posi-
bic result Of the General Ticket system, as
considered between two States. But | viii
show you another result, not only equally pos
sible, but far more probable. Take the case
of Pennsylvania and New-York. Pennsylva-
mia, being unanimous, and giving twenty
eight votes to her candidate; New York, not
being quite unanimous. but giving thirty-one
votes to her favorlte candidate. There is
great contest between these rival States !;
their candidates are each aiming, and their
States for them, at the brightest, the most
glorious prize in the world, and you call in
the small, DISCONTINUED, factious minority of
New-York. Eve votes only out Of thirty-six,
and say to this minority, you shall he the UNI
pires in this great question we will leave it
to you, impartial, unprejudiced men, TO as
sign this most precious prize. Sir, to whom
will they assign it, under the influence of
those feelings, which cannot but actuste so
small minority in so great struggled Un-
questionably, to the Pennsylvania candidate,
unques;ionably against the majority in their
own State. Is this result which would tend
to harmonize our Republic? No, sir, it would
tend to civil war, as much as any ground Of
contention between two powerful aud neigh
boring States 10 this Union, on the subject OF
this election.
But have better answer to the case of
the honorable gentleman. 1t is case which,
on his principles, cannot happen. The reme-
dy he provides is predicated on the non-
existence of the disease. If his premises
are true-l will not say his conclusions do not
follow say they cannot follow. What is
his general superstition That States are not
unanimous-that States have mnorities and
ahe evil is, that those minorities should be
unrepresented. What is the gentleman's
particular case? Why that out of two States,
one is unanimous, and one is not whereas,
the first supposition is, that the States are not
unanimous. Now, il out Of two States, one
is unanimous, out Of twenty four States,
twelve will not be unanimous. The probability
is, that States will not be unanimous; the pro-
liability is. that the minority in one State will
be balanced by the minority in another; the
further probability is, that if there be an unan-
imous State in one part OF the Union, on one
side Of the question, there will be an unani-
nous State in another part of the Union, on
the other side Of the question. In contradic-
tion to these premises, the gentleman puts
case, amounting to this, that out of any two
States, one will be unanimous, and that one
win be nearly equally divided. The SUPPOSE
ton, therefore, is contrary to his own premises.
This leads me to remark, that the fair pro-
lection of the minority is in the majority Of the
other States, and it is not necessary to make
any further constitutional provision for it.
The gentleman from South-Carolina seems to
be, as was very forcibly shown by the GENTLE
man from Virginia, mir. Archery in the error
In coniounding the choice of an Executive
of6cer-who is. a Representative of no part of
the People, not even of those who choose
him-with the constitution Of a representative
body like this, for which il is necessary that
the country should be divided into the small
est practicable sections, and that each section
should naTe its representative, in order that
its local peculiarities and interests should
be attended to. But far different is the case
Of the President; he Is an executive officer
he must carry the laws into execution, equal
ly Tor all-Tros Rutulusve The is not the
President of this or that party. He cannot
say, 1t he would, this law, which bears hard
ON my friends, shall not go into execution
against them; but for those others, my oPpo-
nents, Will grind them to powder withit If
the representative Of any, he is representa-
tive Of all, and this by the necessity of his
Office; II is not matter of choice with him.
Now, ia creating this President, the Con-
estitution provides two hundred and sixtysone
moments Of power. To New-York it gives
thirty-six Of them; and how shall New York
exercise this, her share of that power? In
such way, certainly, as TO crafty the great
eat portion Of her citizens and, to obtain that
result, the question must be put to vote OF
the people, as the people Of New-York. No,
says the gentleman, if New-York happens to
be divided, as nineteen to seventeen, will
take away thirty four thirty sixlhs of her pow
er. Just in proportion as her citizens deViate
from unanimity, will mulct them in thirty
elxth of their voice in the election of the Presi-
dent, and when they are equally divided, they
shall have no power at all. The gentleman will
contend that this evil will find remedy in
other States, where a similar result will be
produced, and what New-York loses in one
way she will gain in another. That, sir, |
grant, is the practical operation have allow
ed; have urged, that on this very principle
of compensation, there is between the general
ticket and the district system, very little prac-
,tical difference. But in the one system il is a
stipulated provision, in the other, it is a prac-
teal effect. The majority, nef the minority,
are entitled to the stipulated provision, that
their will shall pervail; and It is enough to
console the minority, that, in the practical
operation, what they loose at home they gain
abroad.
To be continued