Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-08-11

We have not yet received any answer from "South
CaroIna'-but we are sorry 10 SIZE, the gathering signs
in the Charleston Mercury are not quite as auspicious
as they were a few weeks past. 1t. is now appealing
10 the smaller States 10 combine. 1t charges upon the
opponents of The South Carolina mod. of representa-
ton and of voting IN the Convention, that "They
intend to get power, as the missr ~instructs TO get mo,
ney-'h nrs.ly if you can, but if not-get money!
II concludes its article by stating that
"The larger States will not act with their sister
States, on the principle of their sovereignty, which rem
der them equal! Nor will they act upon The prlnci.
pie Of the popular will, by a direct appeal TO the pso-
pie. Their statesmen and aspiring politicians choose
to have the whole numerical power Of their respective
States consolidated TO support their pre.entions 10 the
presidential purple. There is one way, and but one
way, of keeping them TO their just weight in the Con
federacy, and of preventing their predominance, and
engrossment of the highest Offices in Government-the
smaller States must combine. State 'Indep cndence and
sovereignty is peculiarly their protection and power.
Let them stand by their reserved rights. When the
Constitution has taken nothing from them, the larger
States have no right 10 require any surrender; and 10
propose to them 10 give up the contingent advantage
of an equality in the House of Re representatives with
the larger States, in case the election fails in the Elec-
toral College, and TO &c into 4 voluntary Convention,
neither 10 act on the principle of State sovereignty, nor
the will of the people, is more like the dictation of
proud and imperious masters, than the friendly counsel
of equals. Their position is never so safe as when
resting on she foundation upon which the existence
and ascendency of the great and popular Democratic
party is laid-ns oun dearly cherished State Rights
principiss."
We regret TO hear this language thrown into the dis
cussion. II sounds too much like the appeal of John
@. Adams in the Senate of the U. S about 1902 3,
when he called on tho "Champions of the small
States" to come forth in opposition 10 the amendment
of the Constitution, changing the mode OF elsctIng
President and Vice President. 1t is little in unison
with the principles of John Taylor of Caroline, when
ne brought forward his proposition TO amend The Con
stilution, in relation TO the election Of these officers.
We do not yet understand, whether the Charleston
Mercury has put forth this appeal, in the spirit of an
uncompromising hostility TO the proposition of vrsi
mia, and to the practice OF previous Conventions; bot
this, we must be permitted TO say, with all possible
frankness and respect, that, if the argument should he
exhausted on the part of South Carolina, or, unless
much stronger arguments be produced, than have been
already exhibited, We do not believe the Republl.
cans of Virginia will change their position. They
have every possible disposition TO harmonlze with
South Carolina. They have given some evidence
of this spirit in yielding to other States thor pre-.
ferences for an early day. Bot are we TO yield
every thing Our Convention declared in March
last, land we have yet seen no reasons to believe That
the Democracy OF Virginia dissents from these decla.
rations,O each State must be left free, and will be
free, TO pursue lis favorIts plans, and 10 adopt ls own
course of intermediate action" sFor ourselves, too,
we claim the right to decide whether our electoral voice
shall be given separately, per capita, or announced ae'
gregately by our delegation. To our sister States, we,
of course, conceds the same right"
We may publish the whole article OF the Charleston
Mercury hereafter, along with the views which we
have formed upon the subject. And in the meantime,
beg leave to submit the following remarks from the
Pennsylvania" and the "Hartford Times:
From The Pennsytranian)
THE NATIONAL CONVENTIONAL 1T seems 10 be agreed
mann in all ouartPrs that the Democratic National
Convention, TO nominate candidates for the Presi-
dency and Vice Presidency, shall be held in May,
1874. 1t also seems to be as generally agreed upon
that each Slate shall elect or appoint lis Delegates
IN accordance with its previous usages, or as shall
he mnst agreeable to It's own Democratic citizens
The Virginia Convention concluded to send five dele
gates from each Congressional District; all the other
States that have acted on The subject, have, We believe,
decided to send the same number OF delegates that each
State ls entitled 10 in The electoral colleges. This last
appears to US TO be the true number. The only point
now at issue any v here, SO far as we can learn, is
the mode of voting in the Convention. Some desire
it TO be 'per capita" that is, each Delegate voting
as his name is called, for the candidate he shall choose.
Others desire The vote to be taken by States; that IS,
The delegates from each State agreeing among them
selves on the candidates. and then giving as many votes
for the person thus agreed upon as the number OF cleo
torai votes the State is eHtitled to.
We have always advocated that plan of selecting or
nominating candidates which appropriated nearest to
lUG IbOGG VI SGtttHs hhNhh oiNA
the above plans, tho per capita one, is nearest 10
the theory of our present electoral system, and
FULLY in accordance with The constitutional require
ments while the latter, or State cote plan, Is more
consonant TO the present mode OF electng these
officers. One after another have the States yielded
up the district election cystein, until every State
IN the Union has adopted the general election plan;
the result has been, that each Stale now gives It's
entire electoral vote 10 one or the other candidates.
IL would appear, therefore, that, az each State IS eI-
pected to give an undivided vote to the candidate no
minated, It should be allowed to have an undivided
vote IN the Convention that selects the candidate
This. we are inclined to think, has been the practice in
all previous National Conventions.
Ii we are right in this opinion, former usage ought
not 10 be laid aside without good reason, and there are
the stronger grounds for adherlng TO the usage, when
it is in accordance with The pre- vaiing operation OF
constitutional and legal enactmen,s. We do not know
that i, is of any great importance, which mode OF the
two shall succeed, as II IL not likely that 1t could In
any event change the result.
Certainly it is not of sufficient consequence to pro.
duce any discord, nor do we nPPrehend that 1t will
Everywhere, the very best feelings are manlfestIng
the mselves, and there is not the shadow OF a doubt en-
tertained of the perfect harmony OF the Convention,
and ucquiescence in its decisions, whoever may be the
successful candidate. Wherever, and whenever the
right spirit prevails, and the good Of the whole is the
paramount principle of action, The same harmonious
results may always be anticipated.
From The Har.Gord Times
Each State must OF course, adopt such mode as 1t
deem proper in appointing lie delegation. There is
something peculiar in relation TO the election laws OF
each State. In South Carolina, The Electors are chosen
by the Legislature in all of the other States BY the
people; in some States the Governor and Senate are
elected for only one year-in others for several years;
and so we might enumerats features connected with
ons State, that are not connected with another. 1t 10
proper then that each State should pursue i;s own course
IN selecting Delegates 10 the National Convention; and
We do not see how it con possibly be otherwise. Tbs
time and place of holding the Convention, is evidently
settled, and some of the Delegates in various States are
already chosen. Others will be selected soon, and IN n
very short time The entire representation, will hold their
credentials. We wish then, at this time, to urge upon
all Democrats, The importance of attending fully the
primary meetings.
AN AGREEABLE EXCURSION.
IL - NI..---- a. \ karn hoan