The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-04-07
THE UNION WASHINGTON WEDNESDAY MORNING APRIL 1852

Dy wnich representation IS 10 DC CALCULATED anu heh
Gays; &eA
Until that inst ration has been made the States
shall be entiued," &c.
Now, sir, the argument founded upon that Is clearly
this That representation shall be given according TO the
atonalways after AN enumeration has been made
The constitution Itself gives representation by estimate
that Is absolutely necessary because its language 49, tha
until the enumeration shall be directly made repre- ena-
lion shall be gyen by estimate Now. sir, II you argue
under that provision far authorizing representation
by estimation Is concerned upon The admission oil nc
State. IL would absolutely forbid IT, The rule is repre-
senalion according TO population, ascetained By ac-
tua census or enumeration" But until there has been
iaken--untl the first census-the State shall
be entitled sc. How, sir. they 10 be entitled after
wardsf According 10 enumeration beyond all dispute
and therefore il ollows-foowing out that literal in
depreciation OF the constltutionthat when State
Is admitted in respect which there is enumeration
the State would be entitled 10 but one member Tor, II
you refer to thai provision the constitution, that repre-
sen,aon could only be given coDeclstay by estimation
until the first enumeration was made and II you have
The enumeration according TO the express provision o.
the constitution that representation shall be distributed
according TO the results oil that enumeration, then each
new State would be absolutely entitled TO but mem
Der ~ The House OF representatives; at all events,
would follow that new States coming IN could have bu
one member
Now sir, in four different instances of admission Of
new States into the Union, they have had two members
upon the estimate OF their population at the time of ad
mission That Settles il anyt thing can settle IT. the In
depreciation oil Congress upon The subject, and that brings
us 10 this conclusion that although the rule given by
the constitution 60 by the observation-disclosures thu
rule given by the constitution that without enumera
ton, State be entitled TO only member. because
\ y merely general rule IN extraordinary cases n
alton BY estimates Well sir, my friend from Louisiana
Mr. DowNs says that speak oil this because ther,
has been enumeration. Sir, has there been an emu
meration! Has there been such enumeration il
California there has been his State, my State
or in any other State in this Union Doubtless in eacl
State errors have been committed, and there will be
continuation of lhem because it is manifest that nc
absolute precise accuracy be attained
This particular But has there been in California any
thing that deserves the OF an enumeration Does
furnish us with approximation Is there reason
able probability that what is called an enumeration o
inhabitants Will apply 10 the as taken in the new
State OF California; Sir, these questions must all b.
answered in the negative. Then we must either regu
late the OF California, contrary the xet
and most evident probabilities OF the case upon delec
tive and dscredlled enumeration, or we must do justice
TO her by estimating what her population was IN 1850,
best may And, according TO all reasonable and JUST
fable estimates California had population large enough
10 amply enute her 10 two representatives. do not
however, pretend to put it on the precise fraction.
| satisfied that California had population larg,
enough 10 enie her to two representatives ii there has
been an actual enumeration. And, under these circum
stances, what 10 do | am unwilling TO do injus
ce 10 her; and, at the time, do not want TO d.
any ejusce 10 South Carolina, by deprivng her of
member 10 which she is entitled under the act OF 1850
In order do justice 10 California well cal
while acting under the peculiar circumstances unde
which placed. what better do than, during
The present decennla period 10 add one member to the
fornia her two members without interfering with the
portionment OF the other States
Now, my friend from Louisiana [Mr. DowNsl says
that his State within thousand, something like
that, of having large fraction South Carolina and
should have precisely the feeling ii Louisiana had
the larger fraction II is not because would be willing
10 do injustice to Louisiana than TO South Carolina
but South Caoina-is actually entitled under the law
1850, TO its additional member OF the arges
fraction. Why sir. should take that right from her
IL is night under that la van unquesiionabe and cea
right. Ii her fraction exceeded that OF Louisiana by
under the law, gives her right TO the additional mem
Der; and upon what principle, wonld ask, should we
take il away from her! Then II seems 10 that The
only alternative left add member the House
OF Representatives, and give 1t TO California. These
views strike being just aud right, and honorable
have interest IN this question Ii does not
my State; neither increases dlmnisbes her powers
Of representation. She has fraction aud il she loses
a member by the census, she must submit 10 the loss
But South Carolina holds necessarily by the provis
OF the act of 1850, and in justice she ought TO be
titled TO that member think, as said before, that ID,
sentiments expressed by the senator IRON Missouri Mr.
GEYERl correct; and II is attended with
difficulties and embarTassmens, think the plan which
he proposed is The best thing that we can do.
Mr. UNDERWOOD. AN not exactly prepared tc
vote this evening" and had rather that the would
lie until tomorrow and, in order TO have lime Il
consider the matter, that the Senate adjourn
The motion was agreed TO.
And the Senate adjourned