The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-04-08

!
( Mr.. johnson. Of Tenn, doubted whether
any of the amendments proposed improved
the bill. He said
The section, as now understand il in the
/ bill, gives to the State Of Minnesota one
! Representative, and il then goes on TO pro-
I vide that she shall be entitled to as many
| other Representatives s her population shall
justify. That settles the whole question:
The House of Representatives is the arbiter.
Ii is Tor that House to determine, and for
them to determine il upon such evidence as
will satisfy the House, what number of mem.
bers she is entitled to and, i, seems to me,
that section, as it now stands, will not be
improved by the amendments proposed. The
House OF Representatives must determine
the elections, returns and qualifications OF
its own members. We say, in compliance
with tie Constitution, that Minnesota shall
have one member certainly, and rs many
others as her population may entitled her TO;
and it is for the House TO determine that
question II seems TO me that the section
is better than the amendments pro
posed will make it and for that reason
shall vote 10 retain II in its present shape,
and get il through as soon as we can.
There are simply two things to
be ascertained here: first, have we evidence
that State has been formed second have
We evidence that it is republican in its char
acter! These two tn ngs being ascertained,
everything else is for the State that applies
for admission into the Union.
Mr.. Mason was in favor Of allowing the
State but one representative il a greater
number was allowed il would be disre-
gard of the Constitution and Of the rights
of ether States. lie made lengthy speech
from which We take the following:
have said in good faith that have no
desire in the world TO put straw in the
way Of the admission OF Minnesota into the
Union a. a State. am satisfied that the
objections have made, are objections found.
I'd upon constitutional faith between the
States. II it is departed from, by assigning
TO this State more than she is shown to be
entitled to under the census act aud tho rule
Of apportionment, it will be a departure
from the Constitution at the expense OF all
the other States of the Contedcracy. can,
under no circumstances, vote TO admit
State with that undue assignment 10 her Of
political power in Congress. II will be
with great regret that shall feel myself
compelled 10 vote against the admission OF
this State. because, in my judgment. il
would involve an absolute departure from
the faith, Us well Of the law, as of the Con
stitution. The effect of my amendment,
only is TO assign 10 her one member TO fix
by law the representation that she shall
have, and 10 fix II at one member, because.
as construe the law and the execution of
the law--l mean the census act--it IL shown
that she is entitled 10 but one. At least,
what practical results is attained by insist
ing upon morey We shall have another
general census within two years. Then the
political power to be assigned TO Minnesota
will be ascertained, as il will be for all the
States, by u new apportionmeni under
new census. and at least she will be entitled
TO exactly the same political weight relative
ly in the Coni,dcracy that is assigned 10 all
the other States as based on representation |
with this advantage, If it he an advantage |
that belongs 10 her position that her popu
laton Is increasing, ! understand, from the |
emigration there, every week and every
month. giving to ler in the estimate oil pop |
ulaton that has been made, advantages that !
cannot be given TO the other States, no mat |
ter what their population has been, or what |
Increase may have taken place in their pop !
ulation since 1850 and, ] doubt not, IN
great many of them there has bsen a large
increase since that time.
Mr., Crittenden supported Senator Masons
view. lie said:
from Virginia is entirely right when
he says that the apportionment OF Rep !
rcsen,atlvcs is the appor,ioument Of power, !
and II ought always, upon the principles Of
the Constitution, upon the very spirit OF the |
Constitution, TO DC strictly observed in the !
apportionment Of Representatives. A. well !
"a | recollect, it wa for some deviation in |
this particular that General Washington ex |
erclscd, for the first time in the history Of !
this Government the veto power. ! think |
we are bound 10 adhere % a strict obsrv. !
ance Of this provision oil the Constitution, |
because it Is the very spirit and life Of the
Constitution equal representation and equal |
apportionmcnt Of political power. think
the honorable senator from Virginia il en.
tirely correct, and one Representative seems
10 me TO be all that, according 10 any scsls
or any rule this new State can be entitled
10. She is not entitled 10 more by the ccn-
ss Of her population. Make all fair, hgiti
mate additions to that for portions Of the
country 10 which this enumeration wa not
EXTENDED, and still, il understand the case,
she il no, entitled, she has not the number
oecessary, to give her two Representatives.
Mr. Polk Of Missouri, con,eDded that the
STATE was entitled to three representatives.
lie said
Senators have said that they are vii
ling to deal literally with this new State.
Certainly new State "a entitled 70 hbernl
dealing; but d. not claim that. y say thai
what il askei for by thDse who claim three
u.a,ut,-r. far tHis -ta,e ~ sufsnrfsd m.