Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1844-02-01

saa y sk1S',RaS.s,, AAH-Ass l.s 80
$50 EsE 80 s.
RICHMOND, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY /.
MR. CALHoUN's ADDRESS
We received by Yesterday mornings mall in the
uCharles,on Mercury OF the 29.h January, the long
looked for Letter of Mr.. Calhoun, and hasten TO lay
before our Readers 1t is in time for our Democratic
State Convention of this morning-though we could
have wished that it could have reached US al an ear
lier day-and given 10 all our readers better opportu
nitv Of weighing lis positions
We have unfortunately received it too late, to give
the deliberate consideration to which II il entitled
We should have been much better satisfied indeed il
had reached us at an earef aay That we might moi
have been under the necessity of laying these hasy re.
arks upon it, on the morning OF the meeting of our
State Convention. BUTT IL due to the subject to state
most frankly views of the positions which be takes
We will attempt 10 discharge this duty in manner
we hone, not at all calculated to give offence
We havs but one copy Of the address in possession
and that copy must hasten to put IN the hands Of
compositors. We have been only able to give hur-
RED glance its contents-and our remarks must,
therefore, be necessarily brief, and not well
dered nor as we'll expressed the importance of such
paper from such man deserves and requires We
hone at least that they will be calm, moderate and re-
speotful in their character
The most important fact which this letter reveals
is that Mr.. Calhoun will not ''permit his name to 90
befare the proposed Convention" at Baltimore He
assigns the reasons for this great ength-and
The main position is that the Convention is not roperly
constituted and the argument is LIST, that in Y and
some other States, their delegates have been appointed
by Conventions, and not by the peope-and 2ndy that
they should have been elected in districts, for the pur
nose OF securing TO the smaller States, the benefit Of
The com promises OF the Constitution-the District yo
ting in The large States, pensatng the small States
(as is ulleged for what they lose i their resduary
right of equality of voting the House of Representa-
tises A few words to each
Howe yer desirable 1t might ha been that the dele
gates should have been appointed by the people, yet
there is nothing IN the Constitution 10 forbid each
State from voting IN tint, in any other way she may
please to select On the contrary, the analogy of The
Constitution obviously permits it. 1t permits each
State 10 choose her electors her Legislature d.
reefs and in all Tie States the general ticket mode 10
now adopted, except in S. G, whose Legislature
reserves TO tself the power Of choosing all the electors
without any participation the part of the people If
each State, therefore, select her electors in her
own way it would appear to be perfectly confOrmable
to the spirit OF the Constitution, for each State to ap
point her delegates 10 the Convention in the way she
preers She stands as sovereign State in this respect
az we'll as in the selection Of her electors
Nj e. specifies only New York by name, as one Of
the States which have elected the Delegates by Con-
vention We beg leave to add Georgia another; who
was the frs, to elect in the same way-and all her De-
legates were originally instructed TO vote for Mr. Cal
houn, though the late Convention has relieved them
from that obligation. The election by conventions too
is no usage. On the contrary many of the States
are only following the precedent of preceding con-
ventions Whatever, too, Mr.. G. may say of the want
of any precedent ain cur political history voting b.
majority and counting per capita we would remind
him of the which adopted at two of the
Con We ntions Of Ba,more-where in the Virginia Sub
Committee, for example, her 30 county Delegates
adopted that very mode, TO cast her whole Electoral
vote for individual
But Mr.. Cs great argument s, that il strikes at the
COMPROMISES Of the CJnstitution-and impairs the
rights of The small States lie contends that the best
wav to prevent this injury elect The DELIBERATE.
10 Baltimore by Districts. We beg leave in the fret
place tn remark, that the majority of the States have
already elected will elect their Delegates by Con-
ventons and not by Districts Most Of the small States
have taken the course and seem not TO have
t,cipaled in his suspicious and fears. Arkansas Lou.
isiana, Alabama, Mississippi Michigan, Rhode Island
&c have elected their delegates by Convention. MIS-
souri, will certainly follow their example New York
Tennessee, Ohio, Kentucky, Georgia, have adopted
the same There is NO question, that Pennsyl
vania will do the same. Wire nia the only very large
State which has thrown the selection the hands Of
the people of her Congressional Districts And shall
one single State tell the Others that unless they come
into her way, she will dscaim theirs But in the sc
cond place has not each State 4 right to Judge for
herself; Mr. Calhoun says no. and declares that il is
perfectly novel doctrine that any State has such
right, 10 act as she pleases,) when she comes to
act III concert with Others IN reference to what con
Germs the whole" We shall not stop TO enquire, whe.
Their South Carolina did not clam this right virtue
Of her sovereign character, when she nullfied the
Tariff law. Neither shall stop to enquire whether
if each State has constitutional right to select her
electors in her own way, she has not similar right
nominate her delegates Nor shall stop TO enquire
whether if the small States have right TO Judge for
themselves, if they will go into the Convention
with the large States, upon such terms they the small
Staes have not almost all Of s1n consented go into
the approaching Convention, upon these terms whe-
Their their actual election by delegates in Conventions
does not express the "mutual consent" which Mr.
requires or, how it properly the form of
"dictaton.
But, is Mr. Calhoun altogether correct even in hi.
constitutional view II he IS, the previous practice OF
the States not in general unison with his opinions
Nor are the doctrines of Of the strongest fathers
of political church strictly conformsbe with them
John Taylor of Caroline of the highest authority in
these matters-not inferior to Mr.. Calhoun himself
We know, that no man " as more anxious TO take the
election of President out of the House Of Representa-
tives. For this purpose, he brought in whilst he vas
in the Senate of the U. s., in 1896 proposition to
amend the Constitution, taking the election entire "
out of The House, and in case was elected Pre-
sdent the first vote by the electoral colleges send
ing back 10 them, and combining their choice TO the
two highest candidates. He allowed no ecu yaent in
his scheme, for the loss which the small States are nj
legged to have sustained BY the loss of their remote
and resduary rights of electng in the House of
Representatives. On that occasion he eloouen,Iy
depicted the influence of "the arstocracv Of small
States" in the election But we have more memoru
BILE exposition OF his opinions, The celebrated debate
in the Senate soon after the election of Mr. Jefferson
1t is on the amendment of the Constitution To dscr
inmate in the votes between President nd Vice Pre.
dent In his speech, he deprecates all "endeavors to
excite phical eaousles, and 10 excite ga lea.
lousy of the smaller against the larger States He
there contends, that
aft is the intention of the Constitution that the popu
lar principle shall operate in the elect OF President
and Vice President 1t is also the of the Cor
slilutlon, that The popular principle, in dschargng
functions committed TO by the Constitution should
operate by majority and not by minority. That the
majority of The people should be driven by an un'ore
state of parties, to the necessity of renquishing
their WILL in the election of or the other of these
officers or that The principle of majority, in func
ton conded to tie popular wil should be deprived of
halt its rights, and be laid under necessity of volat
ing lis duty 10 preserve The other half, the in
ention of the Constitution" -
Again: 81 must suppose it TO have been the intention
OF the Constitution hst both The federal principle and
he thneo FINN