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

| we nave NOT yet IeCeiVeu any uUSWe1 IIulH
Carolina but are sorry TO see, The gathering signs
in the Charleston Mercury not quite auspicous
as they were few weeks past 1t now appealing
10 the smaller States 10 combine 1t charges upon The
opponents of The South Carolina mode of representa-
ton and of voting IN the Convention, that "They
intend TO get power the mssr instrucs 10 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
der them equal! Nor will they act upon the prnci.
pie Of the popular will, by direct appeal the pso-
pie. Their statesmen aud aspiring politicians choose
to have the whole numerical power Of their respective
States consolidated to support their pre!enons 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 predomnance, and
engrossment of the hi CHEST Offices in Government-the
smaller States combine State 'Indepe ndencs and
sovereignty is peculiarly their protection and power
Let them stand by their reserved rights. When the
Constitution has taken nothing from ihem The larger
States have right TO require any surrender; and 10
propose 10 them 10 give up the contingent advantage
of an equality in the House Of Representatives with
the larger States, in the election fails in the Elec
tora College, and to GO into voluntary Convention
neither TO act the principle of State sovereignty,
THE will of the people, is like the dctation OF
proud and mperous masters than the friendly counsel
of equals Their position is safe when
resting 'ihe foundation upon which the existence
and ascendency of the great and popular Democratic
principles
We regret 10 hear this language thrown into the dis
cusson. /. sounds too much like the appeal of John
G. Adams in the Senate of the U. S about 1902 3,
when he called on the "Champions of the small
States 10 forth in opposition 10 the amendment
of the Constitution changing the mode of elscling
President and Vice President 1t is little in unison
with the principles of John Taylor of Caroline, whom
he brought forward his proposition TO amend the Con
stitution, relation 10 the election OF these officers
u fharf ha rIactN
Mercury has put forth this appeal in the spri. Of
uncompr omisng hostility to the proposition Of Virg
MIA and to the practice Of previous Conventions; bot
this we be permitted 10 say, with all possible
ankness and respect that if the argument should be
exhausted 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 harmonic with
South Carolina. They have given some evidence
Of this spirit in yielding TO other States their pre-
ferences for an early day. But are we to yield
every thing Our Convention declared in March
last (and have yet reasons 10 believe that
the Democracy of Virginia dssents from these decla.
rations) "Each State must be left free, and will be
Free 10 pursue its favorts plans and 10 adopt !s own
course Of intermediate action" "For ourselves, too,
we claim the right to decide whether electoral voice
shall be given separately per capita, or announced ae
gregately by delegation. To 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
"Pennsy lvanian" and the "Hartford Times:
From the Psansylraniqn)
THE NATIONAL Conference.-The seems to be agreed
upon in all quarters that the Democratic National
Convention, TO nominate candidates for the Pres-
dency and Vice Presidency, shall be held in May,
344. II also seems to be as generally agreed upon
that each State shall elect or appoint lis Delegates
IN accordance with its previous usages, as shall
he most agreeable 10 It's Democratic citizens
The Virginia Convention concluded to send hive dele
gates from each Congressional District; all the other
States that have acted the subject, have We believe,
decided to send the number of delegates that each
State 10 entitled 10 in the electoral colleges. This last
appears to US be the true number. The only point
now at issue any here, SO far as we can learn, is
the mode of voting in the Convention. Some desire
it 10 be "per CAPITA, that is, each Delegate voting
as his name 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 the candidates, and then giving many votes
for the person thus agreed the number OF eec-
torai votes the State is eHtitled TO.
We have always advocated that plan Of selecting or
nominating candidates which Appropriated nearest TO
the mode OF dieting them afterwards The first OF
the above plans, the per capita one, is nearest 10
the theory of present electoral system, and
fully in accordance with the constitutional require
ments while the latter, 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 GJSten, until every Stale
IN the Union has adopted the general election PLAN
the result has been, that each Stale now gives Ills
entire electoral vote 10 one or the other candidates.
II would appear therefore, that each State - eI
DC ced to give undivided vote to the candidate no
minated il should be allowed TO have an undivided
vote in the Convention that selects the candidate
This we are inclined 10 think, has been the practice IN
all prevous National Conventions.
fl we are right in this opinion, former usage ought
not to be laid aside without good reason, and there are
the stronger grounds for adheng TO the usage, when
it is in accordance with the pre- vailing operation Of
constitutional and legal enactmen,s. We do not know
that ii is of any great importance, which mode OF the
two shall succeed as it il not likely that it could IN
any event change the result
Certainly it is not of sufficient consequence TO pro.
duee any dscord, nor do we apprehend that It will
Everywhere, the very best feelings are manlfesung
the mselyes and there OF the shadow OF doubt en-
tertaned of the perfect harmony Of the Convention,
and acquescence 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.
(Frcm The Hartford Tinesl
! Each State must OF course, adopt such mode as 1t
deems proper in appointing lts delegation. lhere IS
something peculiar relation to The election laws oil
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 year-n others for several years.
and 40 we might enumerats features connected with
one State that not connected with anolher III IS
the that each State should pursue s own course
in selecting Delegates 10 the National Conyenion and
We do not see how il possibly be ether"ise The
time and place of holding the Convention, is evidently
settled and of the Delegates in various States are
already chosen Others will be selected sonn and IN n
very short time the entire representation, VIII hold helr