Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1847-04-16
WHOLE NO. 80.

llglblc one. But aliens do not. All the
States were on or near the seaboard they
had all enough land 10 spare, and held out
different, but about equal, advantages 10 i'm.
migrants. All were anxious 10 gel such. and
regarded the arrival Of foreigners, BRINGING
with them as they did, always labor, and of.
ten capital, as a real blessing, (witness the
debates Of that day.: so much Of a gain thai
they would gladly have paid. and would have
been considered by their sister States. as
bound and able to pay full tax for them, in.
stead Of being let of with three-ffihs. The
provision becomes, therefore, on Mr.. Spoon.
er's hypothesis, absurd and hence the inter
pretation is not 10 be admitted. Or as the
States expected about equal increase from
this quarter, il would BE- imperative and void
which again renders the construction lie.
galIy inadmissible.
But the consideration that conclusively
shows Mr.. Spooner's hypothesis 10 be unite.
nable Is the construction put upon this clause
by the Constitution itself. The latter part
of the clause fires the first aPpOrfiOnmem q
representatives. We can examine that scale
and test the whole matter, seeing which i'm
depreciation COMFORTS with the numbers there
set down.
Referring IN that. the reader will find that
New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Is
land, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey,
and Pennsylvania, then considered as free
States, were allowed, by the Constitution IL
SeG, thiriy-fve Representatives. Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, North and South Caro-
lima, and Georgia, the slave States were al
10 we'd thirty Representatives. Now we have
no exact census TO refer to: there was none.
The data probably used TO estimate these
numbers were the same with those BY which
the old Congress apportioned taxes under the
Resolve above cited. (See Journal of Con-
gress, Sept. 81, 1855, and ~elsewhere.) As
the above numbers conform to the ratio there
used, which was conJsSsedy calculated on the
basis of reckoning hree1jfhs Of the siares, it
proves that the same rule tcds foiiored here,
and SO settles the question.
If Mr.. Spooner dislikes this method of
proof we can give him a different one. Let
us refer TO the nearest official census, that of
1870, taken only three years after. The
above named free States had then l,96S, 455
inhabitants. The slave States had 1903. Si5
free inhabitants, and 657 ,527 slaves. If the
reader will 90 over the calculation he will
find that on the basis of reckoning three
flths of the slaves, the numbers (35 and 38)
given 10 each grand division are as exact as
could possibly be. On Mr.. Spooner's plan,
being equal in absolute numbers 1865 Ass
to 8 5l,372,) they should have been equa,
also in the number Of their Representatives
Again; take separate States, where to be
sure there would be more chance of error
than in a general survey. Still, making due
allowances for such mistakes, unavoidable
before any general census had ever been
made, we find evidence of the same rule be-
ing observed. Select the old and best known
States, about which there would De least pro-
I,L,I;.,- -. fn,l,, &C., ,.-. r. 3d.
Compare Pennsylvania (l3i,O 900 inhabit-
ants) with Massachusetts, then including
Maine, Ala 200. About equal in population,
they have, as we should anticipate, an equal
number Of Representatives, eighi assigned 10
each. Compare Virginia, then including
Kentucky, S2l 900, with North Carolina.
then including Tennessee, 42s 900, the first
nearly double the last, and their Representa-
tives preserving the same ratio, 10 to S.
Now compare a free and a slave State Penn
sylvania, (431.0OO,) with North Carolina,
(42S, 600 about equal in population, the first
is allowed eighi and the latter only fire Rep
resenialives. How is this TO be explained
on the "alien" hypothesis1 Again, COM
pare Pennsylvania, (43l, 900 with Virginia,
(s2l ,00O) the last nearly double of the first,
but not as was the case in comparing her
with North Carolina, allowed double the
number Of Representatives; no, she has only
ten to Pennsylvania eight. How is this 10
be explained on the alien hypothesis
If we allow Mr.. Spooner to include three.
ffths Of the Indians among 4" other PERSONS
5 their numbers are not sufficient to explain
e this difficulty. Their whole number in al
the thirteen States was supposed 10 he onl,
: SO, 1000. (See Jefferson's Notes. Holme
Annals. n. Am. Rev.)
And at the time this first appointment wa
made there were, according TO Mr.. Spooner'
1t own admission, Up. Sc, 100. &c. absolute
% ly no aliens at all to be counted in any way
Ie as he says the Constitution made citizens
3. all persons then residing in the country
|. This makes these differences of number
a. still more inexplicable on his plan.
e. But now glance along the census and OF
le serve how many of the swelling numbers
at the Old Dominion are marked "%ShaOeS," an
then reckon only three.ffths of those-an
IF the whole riddle is solved. So too OF Mort
Carolina.
We have made the above calculations o
IS the official census of 1890. But if we recu
z to the estimates which might have been, ant
} probably were, in the hands of the Conven
! ton the result is the same. For instance
o Massachusetts, by her private census Of 1891
7 contained $3.50 inhabitants. Virgini;
e never had a census, but by Jcfferson's calcu
q lation from accurate data, made in 1882, she
had at that time 567.5l4 inhabitants, viz -
296.s52 free, and 270,762 slaves. (Noies
p. I26, &c.) Now according to these mum
bers, on Mr.. Spooner's plan, if Massachur
setts had eight Representatives, Virginia
7 should have had thirteen. On our plan sht
should have had, as she did, just ten.
! Mr.. Spooner's hypothesis, then, if admit
5 ted, proves that the Constitution did not un
derstand itself. He does not deny that tn
words are capable of bearing the common Pre-
: slavery construction; they are then, as he dc
$ mands, words should be to make a wicke
2 Law valid, ~"pknGry." Taking the abcv
: considerations into view, they are seen to b