Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1843-09-05

of the two principles. An attempt to make
the election conform TO one principle or the
other by adopting it in nominating candi-
dates, Is, therefore, utterly subversivc of the
principles and compromises of the Constitu-
ton, and of dangerous tendency.
But why do not the advocates Of the ma
jority principle carry it out ? South Carroll
ma Convention chose two Delegates to the
National Convention, and recommended the
rest to be chosen by Congressional Districts.
Those two. standing in the place of Senators
have nothing to do with the popular or ma
them Why choose nine delegates to the
Convention, when that principle would cnti-
tie her TO but Scven? Why not reduce Rhode
Island to two delegates instead of four, and
Delaware and Arkansas to one each, instead
of three The majority principle would re-
quirc it.
That is not all. Is the majority referred
to, majority of the entire population. men.
women and children, blacl, and white Are
women, children and Slaves to be consulted
as to whom they prefer for President We
presume not. The majority meant, mus De
a majority of the voters. Now, some States
gain Representatives in Congress, and consc-
qucnty Electors of President and Vice Pre-
sidcnt, by counting five slaves as equal to
three voters. b. the majority principle,
these should be struck off. Nor Is this all.
The right of suffrage IS very different in diff
fcrcnt States. Taking the same numbers OF
white people in Pennsylvania and Virginia,
the number of voters among them in the for
mcr, is believed to be more than twice as
l. Al Al.
pie, all voters should have eguai power,
whereas the Virginia voter has twice rs much
as the Pcnnsy lvania voter. If South Carroll
m would adopt the pure majority principle,
let her strike off her two delegates she has
elected in place of her Senatorial Electors.
one or two more which she gets by her slave
representation, and one or two more, to re-
ducc her voters to level in power with those
of Pennsylvania, New York. Ohio, Ken
lucky AMI many other States, and then may she
staud ready, IN all fuin'css, to 60 into Con
vcntion with her sister States upon that prin
ciplc
What is the effect of her plan a proposed
THIS. and nothing more or less IL reta'n. m
the nomination and eicch1n, all hc adyantn-
,rhich the Conytituti ., gi,cs HER, anil require
,Nr3r York, Pennsylvania. ant othc States
sin.i,,,,!h sit,tqte.!!. IA surcadr all The aican-
tagcs ne Constitution eices - w. nc
two Electors and the slave vote are hcld .;
virtue Of the compromise of the Constitution
and so is the power of other States to con
Ccntratc their votes in the choice OF Prc>i-
dent. She proposes TO retain in the nomlna-
ton her two extra Delegates and slave repro
scntation. and at the same time claims from
them a surrender of the power of conccntra
ton. And this. q most paLpabie departure. from
the o,4joriiy principle, She cndcavors to main
tain by N, appeal 10 hat ycry prnciple!
State Equality.
Another leading argument in favor of tho
South Carolina plan is, in substance, that, by
going into Convention and thus conccntrat
ing the votes of the party upon Il sin Gle can
didatc. the small States lose the chance they
have of giving an equal vote with the large
States in the election of a President Y tho
House of Representatives, and that for TIN:
sacrifice they ought to be compensated by
advantages in the nominating Convention.
Surely. those who press this argument
have not we'll considered the differences which
it necessarily authorizes.
|. 1t is totally inconsistent with the major
ity principle which is so jealousy pressed bl
the same politicians. In one breath they tel
US the Delegates ought to be elected by dis
tricts more truly to arrive at the will OF the
popular majority in the next they give a
a reason for pressing the same plan, that II L
a concession to the small States in dcrogt
ton of the popular principle ! 30 little, at
/ ter all. do they regard the majority principle
that they are content TO abandon 1t alto
/ gcthcr, and give the States an equal vote IL
/ the Convention. "Confcnt'' was the wOr,
used by the South Carolina Convention, ant
.contclf Is the word adopted by those whC
advocate their plan. They prefer, however
an Intermediate course. but still in subycr,io'
of the majority principle, and securing ad
vantagcs to the small States beyond those sc
cured to them by the Constitution.
,. An argument like this, implies IN over
SIGHT of the great object which the Democrat
t. p,,r.y have in view. 1t has reference sole
" 10 local .,.:ror or indivi9,,al preference. am
not to any question Of practical administra
ton. No 10 secure any principle or Promot
any n,casurc. but TO obtain a local or lndlvI
dual advantage in the election is the sole basi
on which it rests. The Convention. we trust
is not TO waste its energies in struggles OF TIN
sort, cndangcrng, for local and personal Oh
iccts the great measures which it is called t
secure.
5. This argument is inconsistent with on
of the principal objects in holding Nation
al Convention. That object is to prevent tn
election from devoiving upon the House c
Representatives. where it has never enterc
without poisoning the fountains of both pa
N. e +.