Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-06-21
NE .lproriion,aent Rtl.


! Ill has at last passed Congress, with the Senate 5
amend n'ens. It's features new, and objectionable
lst he mandalnus ms the Globe calls it, 10 compel
the states To district their territory and thus elect their
members OF Congress; not they have been permitted
To do for more than fifty years in the manner which
they deemed the most suitable and convenent.-2dly.
The representation of raclions-and 3dly. The reduc-
ton OF the number OF representatives. instead OF lis
enlargement in some proportion to the population of
the people The House of Representatives at present
consists Of 2i2 membe-s-and the next House is e.
duced by this bill to 223-tha 10 saw the population
has been increasing for the last ten years and will
crease Tor the next ten-and notwithstanding this in.
crease Tor twenty years, the number of representatives.
TO be ~ less for the next ten years than has been
for the last ten. This dspropo is as anomalous
ns IT appears 10 be Of kee ping with the character
Of our institutions Its operation upon Virginia is sui.
hcientiy rama kable Although have smaller frac
ton than any other State, under the ratio, viz two
only, yet the number of Representatives is 10 be
reduced from 81 10 Is. We lose six and, of course,
the difficulty thrown upon the Legislature of COM
pressing II districts into 10, will be seen at
There would appear 10 be some doubt whether Mr..
Tyler can sanction such bill Certainly the follow
ing article in Saturdays Globe does put very strong
case upon the occasion:
"Htadtng Captain Tyier.-We have heretofore ad-
rerted to what seemed to be the policy of The Wings
that of sending bills 10 Mr. Tyler against which he
fully committed, and lEus lay him under the necessity
OF using The veto, mourning the imputaton Of ncon
sIs,ency. We have given what seemed TO be in
stance OF this, the temporary BILL which has
gone tn The Senate and which violates the compromise,
and also the condition which the land distribution
bill passed.
ave have now 10 point TO another instance OF the
same policy: that Of the mandamus and fractional
presentation blll-sometncs called the apportionment
bill-now passed both Houses, and which has gone to
Mr.. Tyler with the clause III it for which Gen.
Washington vetoed the appoftIonment bill of 1880, and
against which Mr. Tyler voted times, OH yeus
and nays, the Senate Of the U. ) in the sessions of
1881 aud 1852. Mr.. Tyler then voted against the
fractional representation III every form in which it
could be presentrd and in such company Tazewel,
Troup, White, King, Forsyth, Nangum, &C. and
against Mr. Webster, who was then an advocate for
fractional representation. 1t then opposed on con-
sutona grounds in the Senate, and finally defeated
in that body by the Senates receding from lis amend
ment. On the qurson Of recedlng in the Senate,
moved by Judge White, The vote was 20 to 10 Mr.
Tyler being where he always had been, and where
Gen. Washington and his Cabinet were, against frac
tional representation. II has the question 10
pass upon again, coupled with another-tlat of the
mandate 10 the States to district themselves
ain our vcw however the great pont-the inter
ference of Congress with the mode If elections and
by an unconstitutional attempt To command The LegIs
atures of the Statess tie most obnoxious feature 4
tie late measure The number of Representatives was
question of expedlency, which was viewed in differ
aspects by persons the party operated upon
by various local considerations. The mandate 10 the
Slates-in some involving disfranchisement for
not performing impossbilliy, and in all the same
result, should the local Legislature refuse what Con
gress has right TO commands The most hgh-hand-
ed act of Federal oppression on record.