The Evansville journal. (Evansville, Ind.) 1834-184?, 1844-02-15

that which has ever prevailed, and which
conforms the dictates of common sense, is.
that where State votes as a State, by ma
lonty of its delegates, the votes count one,
be they few or many, or the State large or
small. On the contrary, where the votes of
all the Delegates are counted, they vote in
dividually and independently, each for him
self counting one. And it is to be noted
that wherever this latter mode of voting ex-
lists among confederated States, it is in all
cases founded on compact, to which the con-
sent of each State is required In the alb
sence of compact, the invariable mode of
voting, in such States, is, in all cases, by the
majority, their votes counting one. The
course which Virginia has resolved to take,
is in violation of this plain and fundamen-
tai rule, and if should become settled prac-
tice, would be destructive of the foundation
on which the whole structure of the State
Right doctrine is reared.
hold, in the next place, to be an indispen-
sable principle, that the Convention should
be SO constituted, as to give to each State, in
| the nomination of candidate, the same rela-
tive weight, which the Constitution secures
to it in the election of the President, making
due allowance for It's relative party strength.
| By the election, mean the whole-the
eventual choice whenit goes into the House
of Representatives, as we'll as the primary
vote in the electoral college. The one is
as much part ofthe election as the other.
The two make the whole. The adoption
of the one, in the Convention, which framed
the Constitution, depended on the adoption
of the other. Neither could possibly be
adopted alone. The two were the result Of
compromise between the larger and smallel
States, after long and doubtful struggle
which threatened the loss of the Constitu
ton itself. The object of giving 10 the
smaller States an equality with the larger il
the eventual choice by The House, was IL
counierpoiSe the preponderance of the large
in the electoral college. Without this, tht
smaller would have voted against the whole
provision, aud IFS rejection would have beer
. the consequence. Even as it stands, Della
ware voted against it. In confirmation Q
what state, refer to Mr.. Madison's repor
of the proceedings of the Convention.
I Having stated what mean By the cleo
ton, it win require but few words TO ex
Y plain my reasons for the principles have lai
down. They are few and simple, and res
/ on the ground, that the nomination is in re
q ality the election, if concuued in as far a
! the party is concerned. 1t is so intended t
). be. The leading reason assigned for maxim
n it, is to prevent division of the party, an
: thereby prevent the election from going int
A the House, where the smaller States woul
have the advantage intended to be secure
o.. 4I,,,,, h., .bo Constitution, hv ha; mr. Mo- q
: on an equality with the larger.
d Such being the intended object and e
,fl feet, now submit to every candid mine
/ whether the Convention ought not TO
: constituted, as to compensate IN the nom
8. election, which the smaller States surrendt
n by going into a Convention. Would it NJ
r be unfair-a palpable want of good faith an
lsubversive of the compromise of the Coz
) stitufion TO withhold il? Or, if demanded
), would it be short of an insult to refuse it,
o Can it be thought that the smaller States al
d so debased and absorbed in the party polite
/ of the day. as 10 permit themselves to
c thus indirectly stripped of right, whiC
Is their high minded and patriotic ancesto
IL held so dear, as even to prefer the loss
the Constitution itself, rather than surrend
Sc it.
to lobject, then, TO the proposed Conventle
in this connection, because it makes nocor
IN pensauon to the smaller states for the ST.
" render of this unquestionabIe and importa
OF constitutional right. Instead of that lis a
rs vocates peremptorily and Indignantly refu
Id any, and treat with scorn every attempt
Id secure it. Some have even gone SO far,
Sc TO deny, that the eventual choice of Il
be House constitutes any portion ofthe electio
lat and to manifest open hostility against t
for provision of the Constitution, which contai
is 1t.
ia. If there was no other objection, the o.
be under consideration would be insuperat
ce with me. differ utterly from the advocat
w. of the proposed convention, in reference
this provision. | regard it as one ofthe Fl
IN, Importance, not because desire the ele
or ton TO go into the House, but because
Re- Iieve ii 10 be an indispensable means, in t
yil hands of the smaller States, of preservi
lot their Just and constitutional weight IN t
en- Presidential election, and through that,
M the Executive Department and the Cover
as ment itself, which believe TO be assent
ict to the preservation of our sublime Fede
is System. Iregard the adjustment ofthe re
ties tive weight of the States in the Governm'
ew TO be the fundamental compromise of
BE- Constitution, and that on which our VIII
he political system depends. It's adjustm'
will constituted the great difficulty in forming
rse Constitution The principle on which
not was finally effected was, that, while due c.
nc. cesson should be made to population,
will provision should be also made, in some To-
ist, 10 preserve the original equa lily OF the Sta
be IN every department OF the government