The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1850-01-26

~ &
Tho white Basis.
Resolutions are before the Legislature of Ala
bama for aboishing the white basis of representa-
ton, and establishing this mixed or Federal basis.
Under tie present law, the Congressional Districts
are Distracted according to ahe number of white in
habitants in the State. BY the proposed system,
three-fifths OF the slaves are to be added to the
whites, and the apportonment made upon that basis
The controversy is as old the existing apportion-
ment OF representatives. The question was dis
cussed with great deal OF feeling at the time the
present law was passed. and the decision was in
favor OF the white basis, on what we have always
considered impregnable grounds.
The argument in favor of the mixed basis proves
too much for its advocates They say that the right
Of representation in Congress being acquired for the
State by the possession of slaves, it is manfestly
unjust, as well as inconsistent, - these are the
words of the Bulletin of this city-that those por-
tons Of the State where the negroes are located
should not have the benefits Of the increased repre-
sehtation. The argument stops short of its legit-
mate conclusion. The negroes of the district do
not belong equally to all the portions or all the
people OF district. 1t is, therefore, unjust that
the benefits derived by the poss esson of the negroes
should not belong to the individuals who are the
owners. The non-save-owner or the small slave
owner, within given district, should, on this prin
ciple, have less political weight than the large
owner. Obviously then, if the right should be en-
joyed by the parties only who furnish or own the
sort of population by which the State acquires, in
her Federal relations, an augmentation of political
power, the individual not the district is the right
full claimant. The argument cannot stop short Of
the position that every save-owner ought TO exer-
else the right of suffrage, directly as the master Of
his slaves-that is, three votes, an addition to his
own, for every five slaves Amy other distribution
of power, which admits any other constituency to
share of his property rights, would be, according
to the rule considering, 60 manifestly unjust
and inconsistent"
But in truth, no such right flows at all, BY any
deduction OF reason, from the Federal rule of appor.
ionment. That is the result of a contract made by
the State with other States. The voters of the
whole State, who by It's constitution are the SOW
ereign constituency, are the quail owners of all
the political other rights which the State posses.
SEES by virtue of the Federal Compact, and are
bound by no rules except such s obtain in their
own State Constitution in the dist rbuton of politi-
cal power within the Stale. They may establish
what basis they please, but it doe not follow from
any obligation arising out of the ederal rule.
The objection that there is something in disre-
garding the mixed basis within the State, which
weakens the position of the South on the subject OF
slavery, is easily answered 7 he protection of
slave institutions is strongest when placed under
the guardianship of the whole people of the State,
jointly interested in the preservation of the poili
cal rights which it gives. By the white basis, all
the voters of State participate in the advantages
of the increased representation equally. BY the
mixed basis, that portion of State which has least
slaves loses portion off weight, while the slave
owning portion gains and this by virtue of its supe-
rior wealth. The inequality thus produced, is one
likely TO produce heartburnings, and 10 kindle eal-
ousy between the STAKEHOLDER and the non-slave.
holder, the large owner and the small. Political
inferorty imposed as penalty for poverty, is not
easily borne long and that the Federal basis i'm
poses on the class of non-slaveholders degree of
political inferority, is not only evident but unde
niable.
This mode of reasoning has nothing to do with
our relations to other States, and cannot be fairly
used as retort or reply. The proportions OF
political power belonging to each State in the Union
are matters Of compact and there is no more reason
for the non-slaveholding States to bring an arglY-
ment against slavery, because we choose to admin
lister within the State, on our own rules, the share
of power assigned us in the compact than it would
be for the large States to accuse the small ones of
want of repubieanism for adhering to their equal
representation in the Senate.
The white basis puts the three fifths representa-.
ton for slaves under State guardianship as a State
privilege, not as private right Of slave owners,
and this is neither unequal nor inconsistent"
but in our own judgment manifestly equitable and
inst. Ill