Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-08-16
ruE AppoRTIONMENT.

THE APPoRTIONMENT
1t is significant of the prevailing sentiment ana lee-
:ns in regard to the mandatory clause OF 'ie
m nj b that no State that has yet acted on The sub
;ec, with single exception, has needed The single dis
trc, reqIiston.
Neu HAMPSHIRE, in an early stage Of the question,
led off in distinct legislative expression against the
right of Congress thus to dictate TO the States the ooe
and manner Of electng the Representatives to which
they are entitled under the new ratio. Louisiana ac'
uay held her election without reference either TO the
ratio or the single district clause Missouri owing II
s said to the fact that the State Constitution makes no
provision for calling Extra Sessions OF the Legislature,
hus already held her Congressional Election, and with
ont regard TO the mantamus has chosen members by
general ticket. In Georgm, no measures have been
and none will be taken by the Legislature 10 comply
with the law of Congress, ard both parties have take
measures elect members by general ticket AS Tor
PENNSYLVANIA, the only State where an attempt mas
been made to carry the law, speculaons are rife as
to the probable Of the Executive in whose hands
the bill passed at the late session OF the Legislature
now rests, for approval rejection Up 10 the time OF
adjournment, no communication had been received
from him oil the subject This, though not fatal, 1t
seems 10 the bill! nor necessarily preventing lis becom-
,nr a law if sent the next Legislature with his ap-
prevail nevertheless regarded by the local press, un.
der the adverse expressions from various quarters OF
the State and the obnoxious character OF the bill itself
TO the Democracy, as but the prelude TO veto The
keystone at Harrisburg, says that if the wishes OF the
Democracy of the Stale are consulted the bill will
yer become law, 1t being universally regarded by
them only in direct conflict with the law Of Con-
gress ITSELF but glaringy unjust to the political MAORI.
y of the State Indeed scarcely less could have been
peced, under the circumsances-the bill being the
result of compromise between two houses of opposite
politics. and the subject of long and violent alteration
in its progress.
Thus much for the States that have already acted
with reference to the Appointment, or the next Con-
sress What will-wha ought to be the course OF the
statea hich re VI n g q
which no doubt will engage its due share of attention
in the several Stale Legislatures prior TO any action
under the law in question. In Ohio, where the Legs.
ature has just assembled in special Session, we per-
ceye the question met at the outset by the Demo.
cratic members The constitutional right of Congress
TO dictate to the States how they shall proceed to elect
members, independently of and prior to any action by
the States themselves, eloqneny and unnnswcra-
bly, repudlacd i'll the Senate. The result in that body
was the adoption Of concurrent resolution, appointing
Joint committee of the two Houses, to report bill
apportonng the representation of the State in Con-
gress by Districts In the House, however, even this
equvocal acquescence in the law Of Congress was re-
sisted by the Democrats, and the words "by districts,
struck out.
These indications show the strong and natural jea
ousy which the Democracy have always exhibited, Of
every movement that looks towards encroachment on
the part of the Federal Government on the reserved
rights of the States. 1t feeling that cannot be too
sedulousy cherished and acted on. We trust and be-
eve The Legislature oil thS state, Wnc Is soon 10 as
sembe, before taking any action on the subject, will
give this question Of the right TO dictate the one
hand and the duty Of submission and acquiescence on
The other the consideration which its grave importance
calls for at their hands. We confess that, upon a
first and hasty glance at this subject, we did not
ii in all its important bearings. Indeed, until we read
the clear and convincing argument OF MIR. Wright
in the Senate of the U S., not aware of half
the length and breadth Of the question.
We merely glance at one or two of its strong points:
! l. That the Constitution makes it the duty Of the
State Legislatures to prescribe in he first instance, the
time, places and Of holding elections for sena
tors and representatives
.. That Congress, by the Constitution is only per-
,niucd in its discretion, 10 make alter sucu REGrLA
rIoSs.
| 3. That this the cotemporaneous construction
put upon the particular clause question, by seven Of
"the old thirteen" S aes when they gave their assent
10 the nsrument-to w.t. that it did not grant the pow
.r to Congress 10 interfere with the manner nc, OF
choosing representatives,, nc, unless the Legislatures
Of the States should neglect refuse, or be unable
themselves to make laws regulations for that purpose
and Mcn until The STATE Legislatures should hare
oeted, or had had an opportunity IN act.
a. That if it be conceded that Congress may proceed
under the clause in question: irrespective OF the action
or action of the State Legislatures, it must, if it
unde takes make such regulations that the people can
90 on under them, and elect representatives. without
the aid of any State laws-that Congress has not the
right 10 command the State Legislatures to pass any
law whatever much less TO dictate the form OF the laws
w5ich they shall pass.
These are of the positions enforced and Illus
traed by MIR. Wright, with his usual strength and