Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-03-09

ceiye that il is embraced in the manner oil holding
elections. The manner Of holding an election is one
tlug-c persons 10 be elected, their qualiicatohs'
or number apparently different things The man
ncr OF holding election might he the same III '!'
choice of one twenty persons. Each voter, ;" "a,
as The powe. of Congress Is concerned, has {" eqna'
rl.h 10 participate The choice "f The whole nai''
members in his State And he does M! 81 F1Fl'
pate the authority which directs otherwise IS not
found in the Federal Constitution bat remains " TN
t.e State Wa have in "75a, freely and from
choice adopted the district sys,cmbut never, never
lei assist in lis arbitrary imposition upon our sister
States
Fractional representation is another provision al the
deemed by wholly unconstitutional. In The p
portionment of direct taxation, equality may be obtain
ed with arhmetical exacness, but in the apportion
Of number Of individual persons, the fractional
part OF representative cannot be attained, and such
an absurd,r could have been within the con:enl-
plaon al The trainers oi tho Constitution when a
State is allowed an additional representative on account
q. fractional excess, such State has certainty one
more member than results from the application OIL u
fixed ratio 10 all the States The States receiving ad-
dI;ional representation en- account oi fractions a'S
thereby applied 10 their aggregate OF Federal nnmtPis
a smaller and different ratio than the other States
which is unequal, unjust, and unconstitutional Ter us
failure 10 meet the description OF uniform rule IL,
therefore, thirty thousand fixed the rato ana
State with forty SIX thousand numbers should De al
lot,ed two representatives., such allotment would OK
A'Sa'sA1
literally and glarngy unconstitutional And II, IN IKE
manner the ratio should be fixed at seventy Thousand,
and State with two hundred and fifty thousand should
be allowed four members certainly, in that case is
representation would exceed one for every seventy
thousand The ratio o. such State would be one lot
every sixty two thousand five hundred
But fractional representation not only gives 10 soe
States The advantage Of an additional member IN the
House of Representatives, but consequently also All
additional elector OF President and ice PRESIDENT ana
an undue weight in the election OF those officers
Could the President have had the forhtude 10 give TO
the Constitution the shield to which his doubts entitled
it, he might have acquired some just renown tor having
followed III The footsteps of the lusrious Washington,
and would have Justly claimed and received the hppro'
baton OF the advocates Of such equality and influence
among the States the House Of Representatives and
in the election Of President and ice President, as Is
secured To each by their compact ct union. we
have alluded IL tbs subject Of fractional represen-
;aiion with 10 particular wish 10 upset tEe az
ror,lonment already mace, wi'h TIE vac" q te-aa
listing II on he bass and rnle prescribed III "e
Constitutions but because nave desired t.Al i!Ey
be noted .enembeTed condemned, and III al inr'neI
por'ion:rn!s d.iige niy osche"ed and because we
sA 10 declare our canvction that the Application OF
uniform dvsor TO the federal numbers Of the STATES ana
the rejection OF fractional excuses, IS The on!y true con
stitut3onal mode.