Boon's Lick times. [volume] (Fayette, Mo.) 1840-1848, 1842-06-25
FINAL PASSAGE OF THE APPORTION.
- MENT BILL IN THE SENATE,

Tallmadge moved to reconsider that mo-
ton; and this having been done-26 yeas
to Is nays-Mr. White moved to reconsid-
er the vote by which Mr.. Benton's amend
ment was concurred in. That amendment
was, to add proviso, "that each district
shall contain, as near as may be, an equal
number of inhabitants to be represented"
His reason for this motion was, 10 leave
this section Just as it came from the House.
Messrs. Benton and Tappan spoke against
the motion, and in favor of the proviso.
The speeches of these Senators abounded
in abuse of, and reflections, on the Wings.
Mr.. Tallmadge replied, and then debate
of five hours duration took place, in which
Messrs. Buchanan, Talmadge, Walker,
Allen, Simmons, Woodbury., Archer, Con-
rad, Rives, Bagby, White, Wright, Bayard,
and Sewer, participated. There were some
passes between Mr.. Allen of Ohio, and
Mr.. Archer of Virginia, the former Sena-
tor having, in manner and language, threat
ened the action of Senators upon the other
side.
Mr.. Archer warned the Senator to be
careful how he INDUCED in these threats.
The Senate was not the place for them
Mr.. Allen said threats upon the other side
would have no effect upon him. They
were contemplate.
Mr.. Archer asked the Senator from
Ohio if he meant to apply this epithet in
any sense to him.
Mr.. Allen dsclaimed, and order was re-
stored.
The motion to reconsider was sustained,
yeas 35, nays 2O--and then other amend
ments were proposed, all of which were
) rejected. Finally, the question was taken
on the passage of the Bill, and it was passed
and sent to the House, by the following
vote:
YEAs-Messrs Archer, Barrow, Bates, Bay.
Huntington, Kerr, Mangum, Merrick, Miller,
Morehead Phelps, Preston, Simmons Smith Of
Indiana, Sprague, Sturgeon, Tallnadge, White,
Woodbridge-25.
NAYs-Messrs. Allen, Bagby, Benton, Der.
rien, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Fulton King Linn,
McRoberts Rives, Smith Of Connecticut, Tap.
pan, Walker, Wilcox, Williams, Woodbury.,
Wright, Young-19.
The only change in the Bill is in the ra-
ito, and in allowing an additional member
to States having fraction of more than
one-half of the ratio. The section in re-
laton to the District System is precisely
as it came from the House; there being.
we suppose. on the part of the Senate,
some apprehension that other amendments
might be engrafted upon it in the House
and delay and uncertainty be the conse-
itself, and ought to have been retained; for,
as it is, corrupt Legislature may so cut
up and divide State into Districts as to
set all equality in representation at def
ance. The only protection now is in the
watchful care of the many aspirants to
seats in Congress, to see that the districts
= are made as nearly equal as possible.
| Be this as it may, the question may be
regarded as settled, that all future elections
: in the States must be by Districts; and it
becomes important to know what course
the Governor of Missouri will adopt, in re-
gard to the August election. Provision
has been made by statute, for an election
of members of the 2Sth Congress by Gen.
eral Ticket, but that was done before the
adoption of the law of Congress providing
for an election by Districts, and is, of
, course, a nullity. AT the late Loco Foco
Convention the question was started, and
, smothered; but it was evident that it had
many friends, as, being a really democratic
measure, it must have; and the indication
I Of an intention to nullify the law will not
II receive much favor even in that quarter
1t was argued, also, we have understood,
that the Governor had been elected to per-
y form certain duties, and it would be en-
croaching on his prerogative, and calling in
Il question his sound judgment, to instruct
r him in this matter. Gov. Reynolds is
e left, then, to use his own discretion in re-
J. gard to the call of an Extra Session of the
:, Legislature, to provide for this contingent
cy, and we believe he will consult the pub
k lie voice by doing SO. The repeal of the
:, aw under which the election is now pro-
e posed to be held, will work serious injury
4 to nobody, except the candidates in nomi-
y nation; and even here it may be suggested
9 it will afford an opportunity to do Justice
1t to portion of the State which is likely to
d be unrepresented because of the change in
D. the ratio of representation. The election
70 can as well be held next Fall, or in August
lS43, as in the approaching August, and
Is certainly nothing can be gained by running
S. counter to law of Congress, and endan.
r ger our right to a representation in that
10 body for months at least, if not altogether
!, by insisting on an election under the pre-.
u sent law.
D. But, if the Governor should be disinclin
E. ed to take this course, we would call his at
he tention to the argument addressed in the
,fI Senate, and which stands upon ground
n which is irrefutable. 1t was commended
'" that Missouri and all other States with ex