Litchfield enquirer. [volume] (Litchfield, Conn.) 1829-current, 1843-11-23
DIsTRIcTING FOR THE ELECTION OF

DISTRICTING FOR THE ELECTION OF
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS-.
Among the subjects brought before the late Wing
State Convention not the least interesting i'm
portant was that indicated at the head Of this arti
Gle. A resolution was passed unanimously, which
in the first place speaks Of the importance of uni
formity in the matter of choosing Members Of Con-
gress and in the next approves Of the act passed at
the I'd session Of the eth Congress with view to
secure that object.
The 18th section Of the list article Of the Consti-
tuition of the United States is as follows:
"S4. The times, places, and manner Of holding
elections for Senator's and Representatives shall be
prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof
but the Congress may at any time by law make or
alter such regulations except as to the places of
! choosing Senator's"
By this it will be seen that the power Of prescri
bling the manner of electng members of Congress is
conferred on the State Legislatures unless Congress
should see fit to interfere, but if it should do then
the power of that body was to be paramount and
preme. 1t is said that Congress may ALTER the
the regulations Of the States, or may MAKE regu.
latons at pleasure and without reference to the
ton Of the States ON the subject. Congress might
direct the members Of the House Of Representatives
to be elected all on one day (Which would doubt
less be great Improvement and by the general
ticket system, the district plan, or in any 9TH
er way which the wisdom of that body night de-
sire. But until recently Congress has not in fact
interfered, and the entire subject has been left with
the State legislatures. Great evils have resulted
from this source. No uniform method has prevail.
ed. In some States the general ticket system has
been adopted; in others the single district system,
or complex system where some Of the districts are
single and others double, treble, and quadru-
pie. This made the representation from the differ.
emit States exceedingly unequal How it may ope-
rate will appear from the following example Thus
suppose the country to be much divided on any
question Of national policy Gas the tariff for exam
ple,) and the majority on this question in Massa-
chusetts (entitled to ten mcmbers) is 10000, and
in Georgia, which has eight members, the majority
is 5000 in the negative. Now the first of these
States elects her members by single districts, and
the last by general ticket. 1t may happen that
Massachusetts, will elect six in the affirmative and
four in the negative; but Georgia will send her en-
tire delegation in the negative, and the vote in
Congress Of the two delegations combined will be
six in the affirmative and twelve in the negative,
and yet combination of the two States on the pop
ular vote would give 5000 majority in the alfirma-
tive. This illustration will serve to prove that if
some states be permitted to elect by general ticket
while others choose by districts, it may and often
will so happen that minority of the people will
rlllo fhn W hnl: e Al
thorough scrutiny, would appear that this has Of
ten occurred since the organization of the govern
ment under the Constitution of the United States,
and thus the interests Of the country have been sa-
crifced to on incalculable extent. This has long
been regarded as a crying evil and many Intellectual
! efforts have been made to remedy it. The Wings
at the I'd session of the late Congress took up the
subject, and on occasion Of the passage of the appor
tionment bill inserted the following section:
"S2. And be it further enacted that in every
case where State is entitled to more than one rep
resentatlve the number to which each shall be en-
titled under this apportionment shall be elected by
districts composed Of contiguous territory equal in
number to the number of representatives to which
said State may be entitlcd-no one district elect
ing more than one representative"
What could be moro equitable or Just than the
provisions Of this section, or more clearly within
the competency of Congress! The Oh ect was most
praise-worthy, and of vital importance to the
healthful working of our system. And yet strange
as it may seem, soon as the proposition sub
mitted it was most violently assailcd both in and
out Of Congress. 1t was denounced as an eneroach-
ment on the rights of the States and as an attempt
to dictate to them To such an extent has the mad.
Of faction proceeded that several of the states
to wit: New Hampshire, Georgia, Mississippi, and
Missouri have actually chosen members by general
| ticket, or in utter defiance of this law The State
legislatures have refused to constitute the districts
in conformity with the act Of Congress. On the
one members from the above States will pre-
sent themselves in the Hall Of the House of
Representatives and claim their Seats and if we do
not mistake the character of body they will be
| instantly admitted Thus will be contaminated an
other outrage the laws Of the land and the Con-
stitution Of the United States, not less fragrant than
that perpetrated in the celebrated New-Jerscy case
IAhlie attention does not seem to be awake to the
alarming fact that the House representatives. Is
about to be organized by act of rank usurpation,
which must deprive it of ever vestage Of legitimate
authority, and make it little better than MOB.
Os-Can any one tell why the name of the gentle
man in Virginia to whom Mr.. Van Buren, addressed
his letter declaring his opposition not merely to the
details but to the PRINCIPLE of the Tariff Of ls42
was H,lnprassed No doubt he ia some out and out