New-York daily tribune., 1844-02-10


u The following account Of the d;s.,,
we mentioned yesterday in the House of D
sentatives, by our reporter, should have cos
hand yesterday morning. The question w.,
claims TO their seats of Members elected h. = :
erl Ticket.
,, "A,HiSGr0s "Wednesday. P,5,
Mr.. Elmer concluded his remarks, cons;s+
principally of an argument against the cons.:.
tlonalty of she Single District Law. He Oassa asN
that this is not lac, but merely coDst;,n.sea sea
rule operating not directly upon the peo0I.'S'
upon the Legislatures OF the States. Se' .
He referred TO the colemporancous co,s..
of this clause of the Consti;uton-ser,o,sn, 1ss'
ratiyng Conventions objectng to the coDS co, 81 3
of this power upon Congress. ''''ils'
Mr.. BELsER loco made sens;b,. u,.
speech in support of the law and acs;,.. "~;
right of these members to their seats S1ls. TS ..
requiring elections by single districts had i' "a ~
passed after due deliberation and accord;nr, ~. 0
forms of the Constitution; and the oues,ion - q
no longer one of eypcdiency but of re<;s.soss w
the law Of the land. After showing bv rsiass.
to the clause Of the Constitution above
and to that providing for the elections Of s' Psss
sentatives every two years, that the power II
quirc elections by single districts was nv ~ y
delegated to Congress By the ConstitutdrOY rY's :
laid down the principle that not only in po,r ,-
by every principle of ustice and equity the S,,,s
were bound to aid Congress in the execut;on NO :,
this as we'll as all delegated pewers to the So
port of which he brought cogent and conyipc;s5.
reasons.
The cotemporaneous construction, instead ;,
proving the unconstitutionality of the law urors,
directly the contrary 1t was true that seven Il +
the States had invcighcd against the invesue,,
of Congress with this power, yet they had conn
into the compact recognising it, as was pmve3
by resolutions of the Legisl aturcs of South Can
lima, drought forward and their object pov,
fully advocated in the first Congress bv "
Burke of S c. of Mass, of n. c., &c.
He glanced at the eSPediencyof tie law; 81,
gesting that were it now to be declared unco;
stitutional by the House, the large majority oftS,
States which, in obedience to it, had distrct.S
themselves, and particularly the large States. New
York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, sc. could easily -
peal these laws, elect by general ticket, and ,bn
entirely overshadow and annihlate the intucpe.
of the small States-urging that on account Il
the uniformity which it secured, it was decided
for the interest of all the States to maintain ,5s
law, sc.
He asked gentlemen who subscribed to the d..
trines of the recent address of Dir. Calhoun hov
they could reconcile them with dsobedience b
this law He had no doubt but Mr. c. hmsl.
would not hesitate to declare that it ought be h
obcyed. A jealous scrutiny and regard to d,
rights Of the States had been observed in the pa.
sage of the law it was the sacred and bindin,
law Of the land and he urged gentlemen, fre.
ING themselves from Ill party prejudccs, regar.
less of the fact that Wing Congress had pasgl
it, to aid in maintaining it inviolate. He did not
say the delinquent States could be compeeda
comply with the law but until they did they
had no rlghtto appear by their Representatives N
this Hall, sc. &c.
The debate was farther continued till ad
ournment at late hour by Messrs W. Brow,
of Tenn. and CoLLAstER Of Vt. in defence of tn
law, and by Messrs. DILLNcHAM of Vt. an
WOODWARD of S. C. against it.
In SENATE, Mr. HANNEGAN presented resoIl
tons of the Ia. Legislature in favor Of the con.
tinuaton of the Cumberland Road.
Resolutions were adopted-of Mr.. BARROW
directing an inquiry as to the cxpedency OF re.
pealing the law allowing to the Collectors of Gus.
toms three months to furnish their bonds.
Mr.. WOODBURY. continued the Tariff discussion
in opposition to the present law, condemnlng ii as
more Objectionable in many of its features than
the odious' Tariff Of '28, &c. sc. WhOr
concluding, he yielded to an adjournment
ARGUS.