Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1844-03-08
TEENS or TIE RICHMOND PALLADIUM:
Two Dolfars--in advance; and Three Doiiars
at the expiration of the year.
SPEECH OF CALEB B. SMITH, OF INDIANA,

SPEECH OF CALEB B. SMITH, OF INDIANA,
On the constitutionaiity Of the second section
Of the apportionment act passed by the TWEEN
,v-seventh Congress. Delivered in the House
of representatives of the United states.
House. OF REPRESENTATIVES,, Feb9, ISL.
Tho resolution reported BY the majority oil 'he commit
tee on Elections, receiving that the representatives. e'eete
by general tcke, States Of New Hampshire, heofg-
gin Mssis,ippi aud Missouri, legally elected, and
enoi seat, members of the House oil Representa-
-ives being under con5tlera ton
Mr. CAIrB b. SMITH of Indiana, having OBJ
famed the floor said, that after The very able
and elaborate discussion which had already been
made he did no, suppose IL would be IN his pow
er 10 presen, TO The House any new light upon
the question, or to Influence the votes at mann
hers unon lis final settlement. Regarding IT,
however, as question OF moro importance than
INV which would BIO presented TO tho House. Tor
tia action during the present session, and know
inn that those whom he had the honor TO repre-
sent felt deep interest IN It's correct settlement,
he conceived i, to be his duty TO present 10 the
House and the country his views IN regard 10 1t.
T, was to DO hoped (said Mr.. S that in the set
Element Of question involving an impor tnnt
constitutional principle, no mere party consider
atoms would DO allowed TO Influence the action
of this Uouse-ihat M desire 10 promote tho IN
.erests of party should warp tho judgment or IN
fluence the votes OF members upon this flnor.-
We should be actuated IN our course ny higher
and nobIer aims We should approach tho exam
nation Of tho question in :he spirit of candor,
and with a desire to elicit tru;h--with deter
mination 10 &C, IN tho premises. that ouv re-
corded Judgment shall meet the appreciation Of the
couatry when all party excitement in reference
10 the matter shall hive subsidized and to secure
Tho approval Of our own consciences.
This IS the first time, since tho organization OF
tho Federal Governlneni, that tho House OF Rep
resentatives has been called upon in thiS manner
10 decide upon the constI'uiInnaitv OF an act at
Congress From the decision of the House there
ia no appeal It's action is final, and canno! be
,exersei The Constitution having mlde each
branch of Congress, respectively. the exclusive
;,lco of the validity Of tho election OF its
members the question cannot he preson'od to tho
judicial tribunals of tho country, Tor their doct7-
ION II becomes us. then, 10 be The more eau
,iols aud circunspect IN our deilberation7, AND
tho moro careful Of tho precedent we may cs'ab
Ian H.forc We assume tho respons bhty Of de-
GLAZING an act Of Congress unconstitutional aud
yo;d !, should DO made clear and paipable that
she Constitution has been violated. Should the
,ues.ion 10 ono Of doubt, It IS our duty to regard
tho law as binding, md 10 conform OR action 70
ia provisions Wlthon, further preliminary re-
,natks | will proceed TO the eX animation OF inc
ones,ion now before tho House.
The last Congress Incorporated IN tho act 10
epoor,ton REPRESENTATIVES among tho SEVERN
States provision that tho Representatives, rom
each Stats sh Dud be elected ny districts, out one
member being elected from any ono dstilc'.-
An the States have complied with the reqllsitIons
of ,hs ,c, Of Congress- and elected their Repre-
sapta,iyes in conformity with It's provisions, OK
c.pt tho Statos of New Hampshire. Georgia
Mississippi and Missouri. These States have
elected their Representatives, bv general ticket.
in direct violation Of the law. The House Is now
caIiea ypon 10 determine whether the Represent
,a,ves thus elected IN violation oil the law are
entitled Ia sents upon this uoor.
If the act Of Congress requiring the Repre-
sertatiyes 20 be elected by districts Is conSttu'
,ionai II is clear they have no right 10 be admit
ted az members and they can only retain their
eeats upon the superstition that the law IS IN Vio-
Iation of the Constitution. dccisIon OF me
ns,itu,ion,l question is then unavoidable, as up
a lie discrimination rests their right. Much has
been said during the discussion OF the relative
advan,,pes Of the district and general ticket syS
TENS of elec,ng Representatives,, and also OF me
pronrietv of Congress attempting TO control the
action of the States upon this SUBJECT Ihis ar
gpmon, has certainly no relevancy TO the SUBJECT
now under discussion. When tho bill contain
no this provision was before Congress, the eNpe>
diencv Of the measure was legitimate SUBJECT OF
argument. But having become aw. the guess
ton of its expediencv Is at an eno' IL Is no"
recorded upon our statute book ms law OF the
land. and, as a Iaw-abdng people. we are bound
n vield inn,ici, obedience to its bahests, unless
i, i clearly in violation Of the Constitution
The second section % the anporhonment act
of the last Congress. the consuu'1onahty OF
which is denied. Is "a follows
"1n3 be II further enacted, Tint in each case
whore State is entitled to more than one Reps
rssenta,;ve the number 10 which each State
shall he entitled under the apporionmens shall
be elected by districts. composed OF contiguous
territory. equal IN number 10 the number OF Rep
rsseniatives which said State hall be- entitled,
no one disric. electing more than one Represen
iaive.
Had Congress the right to make this regula-
ton in regard to the manner Of elec''ng Repre-
sentaiiyes? Thn, clause IN the Constitution IN
der which the power Is claimed IS found N the
tth section of the IL, article. and reads IN these
words "the time. places. and manner OF holding
Hat hall