Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-02-21

svstems every State votes as unit ID the choice OF
President, and it is evidently just rule 10 aPPortoh
the weight Of the parties in selecting candidate so Us
10 preserve the force which they will have IN elect
| ;ng the President Several attempts have been mace
n alter The Constitution of the United States SO as 70
brirG about this exnguishment OF State systems anu
.he amaon of the State sovereigntes into one
mass for the purpose of elscting President BY UNI
form districts; but il has always failed. The States
determined TO maintain their right OF separate acton'
and acl as States in The election Of President nose
which at time had, by their own laws, divided thetf
mower and weakened their relative strength by ADOPT
nq the district system, have, one by one, adopted Inc
general ticket So stem, until South Carolina excepted,
all the States elect by that mode, and South Carolina
elects by her Legislature, without consulting The Popu
lar voice at all The appointment OF district delegates
10 National Convention, for the nomination oil can
date who is 10 be voted for by States their separate
canaci,y has evidently the effect of breaking do"n the
sepaate weigh: of the States which they have SO often
refused 10 yield in the constitutional way, and pract-
cay set up constituency for the Presidency unknown
10 Inc Constitution.
New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio may, by decided
maortes Of their Democratic voters, prefer one can.
;dae for the Presidency, WHILE by merging all their
STRENGTH in district SYSTEM with those ofother States,
their votes mas be made, by the aid of combined mi
norites 10 be cast against their VIII, and hey De oouno
"a rive their s5 votes to candidate who in conven.
ion nc the representatives Of States selected as they
are 10 vote would not be entitled TO them Putng ~
York and Vermont together, the union OF he majority
in Vermont with the minority in New York; might give
the Interference TO candidate who, u the votes were
Given by the States only they must vote at last IN
The election would only receive SIX out OF fortyt"o-
Il is moi in the spirit Of the Constitution, nor accoru.
ing to the prevailing ideas among State Rights men,
that such effects should be brought about by an ANAL
Gama,icn Of the people OF the United STATES mo one
national mass. -
II surprises u.s. that the doctrine of the abolition OF
State power election Of President and the adoP-
ton of rules so papaby Irrational republican,, should
I have proceeded from MIR. Rhe once the most ultra
uphoder OF State sovereignty in South Carolina. He
tells u.s. that the federal feature does not direct The
general rule. 1t is only the exception" He denies
that The States, majorliy OF the party IN Stale
are to rule in the convention He says the President
is "the representative of every man in the Union, and
he insists that the "popular Will ought TO govern
\ without regard 10 States.
! The doctrine is broadly stated in lis extreme charac
ter 1t is that the election Of President the people
OF the H. 5 form national mass in which the States
are unknown.
! Is il so? And ought i, to be SO; We content our
selves with quoting an account shortly which ought,
to have, and probably will have, :lgh authority with
the party with which Mr.. Rhelt has acted and IS OF
great weight with the Democracy every where. IL is
part of the speech of The Hon john c. Calhoun in the
Senate of the s. on the 9th of May, 1884, the pro-
test of Gen. Jackson In that protest Gen Jackson
had spoken of himself representing the people OF the
U. S. directly, than the Senator'S in Congress
This, MIR. Calhoun UNDERSTOOD as declaring that the
|
the aggregate and TO this doctrine, attributed TO Ge
neral Jackson he entered vehement denial in the fol-
lowing terms, which may be contrasted with the ultra
ism Of the national doctrine expounded by Dir.
| Rhelt:
alt is impossible FOR the most careless observer 10
read this paper without being struck with the extreme
solic'ude which the President evinces TO place hm
self in position between the Senate and the people.
| He tells again and again, with the greatest empha.
ss that he is the immediate representative OF the Anne
rcan people He the immediate representative Of the
American people! thought the President protested
TO be State Rights man, placed at the head OF the
State Rights party that he believed that the people
Of these States were united in constitutional COM
pact, forming distinct and sovereign communities;
and that no such community or people, as the Amer-
people, taken in the aggregate, existed had sup.
posed that he the President o! the U s, the only
title by which he is legally aud constltutonay known
and the American people are not epresented IN SIN.
ge department Of the Government; no. not even IN the
other House. which represents the people o! the seve-
raj States, distinct from the people IN the aggregate
solemnly determined at the very commence ment
OF the Government, under the immediate authority OF
Washington himself Such, had supposed, the
established political creed of the party at the head OF
which he protested be, and yet he claims to be not
only the representative, but the immediate representa-
tive of the American people. What effrontery! What
bodness of assertion! The immediate representatives
Why, he received vote from the American peo
Pile He elected by electors, elected either by the
people 0f the SatPS or by lHef OF
course is at least far removed from the people as
the members of this body, who are elected by lessla-
lures chosen by the people; and who, The truth must
be told, fully and perfectly represent the people
of these States than the electoral colleges, since the
Introduction of National Conventions composed of
office holders and asprants, under whose auspices the
presidential candidate of the dominant party select
ed and who instead of the real of the people, utter
that of mercenary corps, with interests directly hostile
10 theirs. M Caihomn's Speech, published IN Niles
Register, rol 46, page 2l5.
MIR. Calhoun's theory here, is entirely adverse to
that advanced by Mr. Rhet and the very plan upon
which the latter insists that a National Convention
ought TO be organized, is that IN winch Mr. Calhoun
found the greatest repugnance to the States Rights
principle The theory imputed TO Gen. Jackson did
not 90 to the extent which is here assumed; for, the
term "people Of the United States, is in the States
Rights language construed 10 mean, the people OF the
Suites united, but hls. Rhetts whole argument is
based upon the absolute duty of extingushng all Sc.
parate State will, and creating an aggregate American
people. We 20 with Mr.. Cahouns theory, that the
constitutional doctrine makes the people Of the States,
the constituents CT the President, and with the Geor
gian, which quote, for the party in each State to
express its principles and preferences as "unit
We take more interest in explaining opinions on
this point because that great stress is laid in
several quarters, upon the indispensable necessity OF
making The Democratic Convention "Natonal' in IFS
features, instead of preserving the State Rights dis.
linclons. IL il be insisted upon, the consequences
VIII ue unlaForaOle, LOT There WIZ Uei
difference of doctrine and of action, and possibly
serious conflict 1t is above all things proper, that
such distinctions should unnecessarily be produced
end pretensons set up by any portion OF the party
to establish niable rule, based upon novel prnci-
ples which must be accepted by all the rest under peril
of threatened dsaiecon. The right Of consultation,
and an equal right 10 investigate principles, must be
conceded 10 all portions ofhe Democratic family or It's
union is al end There difficulties enough before
US, without having such controversy unnecessarily
brought upon US.
There is already sufficient commoton within the
Democratic party, on the subject Of the Presidential
nomination for 1874. On the single point, that the
differences with regard to men, TO be referred to
National Convention, all are agreed But this agree
ment goes but little way towards removing difficult
tes-and securing unanmity of action. Acquies
ceuce in the decision Of tie Convention-and
hearty support by all portions of the parry TO the
nomination, The main objects desired If these
be not attained, the Convention will have met not
merely in vain, bn for evil 1t will have turned ea
lousies into confirmed dIstrnsts, and rivalries into
enmi,ies. To break off from its authority, and peril
The hoDen OF the countrv bv an onen breach the