Boon's Lick times. [volume] (Fayette, Mo.) 1840-1848, 1842-12-17


, tions reported by the majority. They do
not deem it necessary 70 enter at present
into any IabOred exposition Of the reasons
which have forced this conclusion upon
them. and will content themselves with a
brief examination Of the section Of The
federal constitution from which II Is alleged
Congress derives the power To enact the
law in question The language Of the con
sitution is, The times, places. and manner
of holding the elections for Senators and
representatives shall be prescribed in each
state by the Legislature thereof, but the
! Congress may at any time, by law, make
or alter such regulations, except as to the
place of choosing Senators" The graft of
power to the federal government, is IN the
most clear and explicit terms, But it is
argued that this power was intended by
The trainers of the constitution to be eXer-
cised only in the event that the states failed
to exercise the power granted to them, or
exercised it in such a manner as to defeat
: the objects and purposes of the con:titu-
ton
The language of the Constitution, how
ever, clearly negatives the argument, "hut
the Congress may at H'y time m"Eeor utter
such regui"tiOnS.' Congress may alter
what regulations! Most clearly those pre-
scribed bv the States! Then Congress
man at any time atttrHe reguI0tiOnS Of the
States Congress could not alter the regu-
lations of the States unless such tegUI0tiOnS
, existed; and if such regulations existed.
, there could hardly be u future ofrepytSea-
tation. But ifthis power was only intended
to be exercised 10y Congress in the event,
! of one or two supposed contingencies, why
r was it not SD expressed! The trainers Of
f the Constitution were careful to express
| one Limitation upon the power OF Congress,
= certainly not more important than the two
/ supposed, and can il be believed that they
$ would not have expressed the latter had
they been intended!
Y In reading this section Of the Constitu-
!; ton. omit the words make or" and we
r have the times. places and manner of hold
J. ing elections for Senators and Representa-
Il tives shall be prescribed in each State. by
O tue Legislature thereof, out the Congress:
IS may at any time utter such reguiatlons.
re And is it possible for language more une
A, quivocaIly to confer power Coagre'
,e man TT any time alter such regulati0ns, is th
=. language of the Constitution. But this, !
al is argued, means thai Congress may not
4. any time alter such regu!atons and that
IS on the contrary, Congress can only eXer
J. else such power in the event OF one o
two supposed contingencies, neither o
J. which is SO much as mentioned in the Con
! stitution. The argument may be ingenu
!. Gus, but is not, it is believed, based upor
: anv legitimate rule OF construction. \
# license of construction so unlimited would
IS in the opinion Of the Undersigned, lead &c
At the most fearful consequences.
,e But the language OF the law of Congres
rs is characterized as the language Of III
Is saDerior to the inferior" TIE Representa-
rs TRES IN Congress stall be elccied By districts
If And this is the objectionable language
10 Now, what says the Constitution! In
70 times, places and manner for hViinG. ee"
tons for Senators and Representatives il
Dr each State SHIT br prescribed by the Leg
r. isature thereof" Is this Inc language q
m the superior to tie mfcriOr' Then is IT.
n. language of the law in question thc lar
a. guage of the Superior 10 ne interior. an
No ecunCeryO; and is the pnraseoIo.y Of th
re- former less Objectionable than That q ~
latter!
II is also argued, that in those cases !
=; which il was designated by the trainers ,
- the federal Constitution that Congre'
~, should act upon the subject of elections,
~ was also the duty of that body to empIO
&c federal officers as its agents" The arg,
y. menI is, that Congress has been guilty
a gross assumption OF State rights bv Il
= fprbearance to exercise to the full eXtel
ne its constitutional power. In this view
mt the subject, the assumption of power b
~ the Federal Government consists IN conf,
ea inc too much to the legislation of the State
al Ii is not here Contended that Congress II
al transcribed its constitutional powers b
PIT declaring that the States shall be disricle
r. but that they have contiicI tnc o,Uca
trust of distrlCttHg to the legislatures ,neu
as selves. Its. IN the opinion OF the mlno
ee ity, hardly presumabie, that the good pc
pie Of this State would more readily ha'
acquiesced in the enactment by Congre
CT of law which might perchance hay
placed this trust in the hands OF per>oI
M who entertained political opinions dIsslm
he lar To those of the dominant party here.
tie But Congress mdy at any tin'c mdhe
res alter such regulations. The underslgn'
les submit that IN their opinion, the action
lily Congress in the premises, extends only
he alter the existing regulations of the State
an mo