Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-03-24


"ar's OF the Constitution the People regarded
~ citizens OF the Union, and empowered to exer-l
else their rights without control or check by the
State Governments in other parts they are recog-
nrzcd as citizens Of distinct State soveregnties,
and empowered to exercise their rights as mem
hers OF the Union only, through State organs.
Now it will be admitted, / presume, that NJ this
light of appointing electors is with the people, yet
II is with the People OF the States as distinct State
societies, in their highest sovereign character The
idea oil sovereignty imports necessarily will, dis
erection, judgment the essence Of sovereign pow
er Is to act, or not and to act when and how il
pieases If this be so, does not this amendment
impair this right and limit the exercise OF the
ereen power vested In the people of the States
docs It enable II 10 act how and when it pleases
Does 1t not take away all discretion, as 10 the
manner OF exercising and performing an important,
right, and force and limit it TO mode
But it was still more Objectionable in another
point Of view. 1t may defeat the right which was
attended TO be secured In giving the election to
the states, as States, 1t was to enable each to act
in her Electoral College separately and eiinitivey
Zach State was to exert that influence, which her
interests, and the majority of her People, fairly
expressed, might require. 1t not particular
districts, or portions of territory in a State, or
masses OF population, that was intended to be re-
presented, but It was the sovereignty of the State
and II that sovereignty be in the People (Which
Winning, W auuitSJ tIlcn the wishes OF MAORI
W OF the People OF the State to prevail. Now
SIR, let me suppose that nineteen twentieths of
State are in favor of A for President, and one
District, on the borders Of the State wishes 10 20
with an adjoining State for Il, do you not, by this
amendment, enable that District TO defeat the wish
IS and interests ofits own State, and to take one
from the number OF its electoral votes! Do You
not break the force of State interest and will and
especially the large States, and enable local and
partial interests to defeat the general interests of the
State: SIR, cah tell the honorable gentleman from
south Carolina, that, by his amendment, =" yir-
gina, voting by Districts, would not be Virginia
still."
But we are told, that there is great want of
uniformity in the manner of choosing Electors:
that uniformity is desirable, and that there ought
10 be some fixed rule in the Constitution Mr..
Chairman, 1t is not a rule, but right which the
Constitution meant to secure, and uniformity was
never intended. Make il uniform and YOU DESTROY
the very Object intended in leaving the State free
as to the mode of exercising this right, YOU defeat
the very object, which have already shewn. the
Convention had in view, in not originally iimit;ns
the appointment 10 the State Legislatures 1t NAV
be important, IN the opinion OF State, to change
rs mode, and to take away the power of doing So.
IS to limit what ought to be free-what the honor,
bic gentleman from South Carolina thinks an evil
consider an important benefit. Sir what i'm
portance IS it TO Virginia. that South Carolina an
points her Electors by the Legislature; or to South
Carolina, that Virginia appoints by the General
Ticket! None! But it is said, that if we do not
adop, some uniform rule, we shall be forced in,o
uniformity, and that the resct will be the same,
Inns Is not SOL Ii will not be the same thing, II all
the States were to vote by General Ticket, the re-
iative weight of each In the Electoral Colle,e
would, adInit, be preserved; bat this would no,
be the care il you District the whole Union
small Stale can be more easily united by District.
N''"'' Z" '' Soutb
INA would be enab!eu I,.uSn,,iy pv 80 Ss
Unite and to give their full number of Fleece
woes TO one man; whereas Virginia and Pe,nsrI-
Vana' and New York, from their large terri,ory
shu vast population, might be divided and brok
INTO fragments, and their weight and influence IN
the election greatly impaired. 1t would sp;, Tho
interests OF the small States admirably well 20
nave this uniformity, but not that OF N. ,,-ro
ones. ' O.
II would strip the large States of an imnor,,,,
sovereign right 1t would break into FRAGMENTS
'heir aggregated strength, and sink them into in
s'ealncanee Unless this be the object, there is no
PRACTICAL benefit, that can see, which would ba
obtained by this mighty boon, uniformity! B,,
ahotner evii has furnished topic for defamation
ana is The great desideraum with the advoeates of
ms amendment; it is that you will enable the w
OF the majority TO prevail! Although am very
sensible, Mr. Chairman, that there is NOTHING mon
Iaiiscous than TO found political calculations y,
sFithmetical principles, ye, will follow the hon
oraole gentleman from South Carolina i, ,L
comparative view of the General Ticket and nj.
Flct system, and will demonstrate, that if either
system ought TO be adopted, the General J'cte,
- decitediy preferable in ascertainns and exn,ae
ing me will ofthe majority.
II you divide State into districts, ALTHOUGH N.
msJorltIes should exceed the rninorites by n fe,y
Fotes' mere Is no transfer of those minorities IN
other districts BY the general tickle, system all
the naIOrltIes and rninoritio, og A. "
drought into one aggregated mass and sincle ma
lorlty deduced. Let us illustrate by an eSor,nIa.
~ and . are competitors for the Presidency. and
New York the State TO vote. Her dis,Yicta .,o
'h;rty-six 1t might happen that, in nineteen dis
Hlcts, n Should get a majority Of one hundred
go'es over Is: In the seventeen other districts.
Is majority in each district might be 50 LARGO as
mat, by adding together his nisorities in ,5c SO
Venteen' and his minoriics in the nneteeo. he
wound get large majority OF the vote, of tho
Whoie state, and yet A would be elected tbouob no
oniy got minority. BY the general ticket system
ms cannot happen, because the najoritfes and mi
Horlee OIL every section OF the State being brought
,ss'ner, mere Is oat one majority, composed of
all the votes of the Stale; and conscouen,Iv No 60
Can be elecred without having the public voics !,
lis favor. 'o''e !"
But the honorable gentleman from South Caro-
ma supposcs the case of two States, by the GENE
raj ticket system, TO shew the ascendsnev ~ -
hori'ies' lie supposes that Nev York has 100 600
voters and Pennsylvania 75,00O-that GO 000
voters ~ the State of New York are in favor Of
a, and forty thousand in favor of Il: and tho, d.
whole $4,000 voters in Pennsylvanis should ,,;,'
their votes to b, who had received the New Vol
minority. The result of this you'll be that A ,vho
iecsIyed only $4,000 votes, would get thiT,v"siv
electoral votes, whilst q, who received Il 'ooo
would only receive twenty-eight And WIN Ia,
me ask, should it not be so9 The 60 900 votes in