The Whig standard. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1843-1844, 1844-02-08
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

The House adjourned last evening, leaving Mr..
ELMER, of ~ J., in the midst of his speech.
This morning Mr.. c. J. ING ERSOLL desired
to make report, but Mr.. E. declined yielding the
floor, and gave notice that he should endeavor to
prevent the consideration Of any other business
until this matter Of elections was opposed Of.
Mr.. ELMER then proceeded with his argu-
ment, the substance of which was, that the law
Of the last Congress was no law, because it was
imperfect. He closed with some general refec-
tons. in the course of which he charged the
Wing party with disposition to increase the
powers of the Federal Government 1t had been
intmatcd (he assertion was made by Mr. Ken
needy, of Indiana that this question was to be de-
cided on party grounds. 1t might be 60, but he
sincerely regretted it.
Mr.. BELSER, of Ala, regarded this question
as one which addressed itself to the judgement
and conscience of every member. In his view it
was of the gravest moment, and one upon which
we should pause and consider before deciding.
He had voted against spreading the protest of the
minority on the journal, because he thought that
they were prejudging the subject, and that all
who came here with prima facie evidence of
membership had right to participate in the pre-
liminary proceedings of Congress until the va
lidity of their returns were decided upon. This
contest was between the General Government
and the States-between the constitutional pow
ers of the former and the laws of the latter. If
the power to regulate elections was not control
led by the Gen. Government the greatest confusion
would ensue. If the States could do what was
now attempted, they could do more they
could establish each its own basis of representa-
ton, and elect in one mode in this State and in
another in the next Mr.. B. quoted Madison, and
referred to a report made by Messrs. Forsyth,
Mangum, and Webster to prove the correctness
of this position. Mr.. McDuffie also, in 1917,
gave his views upon this subject, and took ground
J against the constitutional power, which he would
have got rid of by amendment of the Constitution,
but the existence eff the power he did not deny.
4 Adverting to the law passed by the last Con-
gress, tell me not, said Mr.. B., that it was passed
by Wing Congress-such an argument has no
effect upon me. will not bring party considsra-
tons to bear on such question as this. regard
the law as just as sacred as II it had been passed
by any other Congress. The States were bound
to conform to the law Of Congress- He would
not say that the General Government could force
the States to do this, but that the latter had no
right TO appear here until they did do it.
He would do nothing that would lead the Gov
eminent into anarchy, nothing that would estab-
lish precedent of this character If different
opinions were to prevail, if the law Of the last
Congress was to be pronounced unconstitutional
The effect would be that large States like New
York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio might elect by a
general ticket system, and in such form as to
ride over all the other States. The debate was