The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-05-31

free from all charge, first to publish the entire ro'oft
in their daily paper secondly, to furnish proof up
thereof to any other paper in the District Of Soss
ba and, thirdly, to furnish two copies OF The ~ oa
for the use of each member OF the Senate ny ni"'
O'Clock the ensuing morning
Resolved That seat the moor OF the Ssnhh
shall be assigned to the Reporter actually on duty y
the President of the Senate.
The resolution was read and ordered TO Sc
cond reading.
The Senate then resumed the consideration
OF the Apportionment bill
Mr.. YOUNG moved to reconsider the vote os
which the proposition to insert 74,399 IN Tue Di'
as the ratio Of representation was rejected Dol
the motion did not prevail-yeas 20, nays 70.
Mr.. BARROW moved to fill the blank WAN
1889
Mr. WALKER suggested TO the Senator to mo-
dify the amendment, by placing the ratio at
7O,755
After some remarks by Messrs KING, walls
Err, McRoBERTs, PORTER CALHOUN, BAens'
ALLEN WOODBURY., BARROW, and HESDEssos,
Mr. BARROW so modified his amendment as
to reduce the ratio to 7O680. and he remarked
that, if it should be rejected. he would vote
against every proposition until they came down
to the ratio agreed upon by the House.
Mr. CRITrENDEN submitted few remarks ~
favor of large representation OF the people,
and argued that numbers alone had not merely
a political, but great moral power
Mr.. PRESTON maintained contrary opinion
Mr. KALAMAZOO said that, al the commenes-
ment of the debate he voted for the highest "a
ito, and all the arguments which he had s'ncf
heard had tended to confirm the views which hs
then entertained He expressed himself IN Va
vor of the amendment proposed by Mr. Barrow,
Mr.. WRIoHr still adhered to his preference
for small ratio.
Mr.. KING would prefer the ratio OF 6s,ooo OF
$4,000 to that now proposed, because II ne
7O,6sO should be adopted, some Of the small
States would materially suffer with regard 10
| fractions.
| Mr.. YOUNG said that unless they adopted
some ratio 10 correspond with the fractional re-
presentation agreed upon by the Senate, MUS
tce would lie done to Alabama and Tennessee.
The question was then taken on the amend
ment of Barrow, to insert 7O,6SO as the rallo
|
frmative-Yeas %, nays IS, as follows:
YEAs-Messrs. Archer Bagby, Barrow, Bayard
Berren, Buchanan, Calhoun. Clayton, Conrad, Crasts
| Cuthbert, Evans, Fulton, Graham, Henderson, Linn,
McRoberis, Mangum, Msrrick, Porter, Preston Rises
SEWER Sturgeon, Tallmadge, Walker White, and
Winms-20.
NAYS-Messrs. Allen Bates, Benton, Choa,e,
Crit,enden, Huntington, Kerr, King, MoreheSd,
Simmons Smith, of CT, Smith, Of la, Sprague, Tap
pan Wilcox, Woodbury., Wright and Young-l-
| So the amendment was agreed to.
The question was stated on agreeing to tie
amendment of the Committee on the Judiciary
to the second section, viz: to strike out the
words in italics:
Sec Q. And be itfurtter enacted That, in every
case where State Is entitled to more than one Re.
preventative, the number to which each State shsi'
be entitled under the apportionment, shall be elected
by districts composed Of contiguous territory, equsl
in number the number Of Representatives to which
said State may be entitled-nO one district eectin2
more than one Representative and The election in sur
State shall, under the Laos thereof be made by district
such districts shall be composed Of contiguous teriicr
and each shall contain representative population equal q
the number wlc by the eristirg ratio shall be rsquiyea
for member, nearly may be and no one dtsysf
shall elect more than one member.
Mr.. ALLEN moved to strike out the entire
section.
Mr.. HUNTINGTON said that as this was a ques-
ton which would, in his judgment, give rise 20
debate he would move that the bill be laid upon
the table, with view of going into an Execu
tive session
The motion prevailed, the Senate went into
an Executive session, and subsequently ad-
jouIned