Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-08-10
WILLIAM T. AvERr, Dem.

Az. HALLAAM \ <1fAAA5
Our friends at distance should understand that
the Congressional Districts in this State, arranged
by the Wing Legislature of 1852, and under which
we still elect our members of Congress, were made
expressly for the purpose of eleeiing eight Wings
sad tics Democrats.
/. The first District was laid of, by the Wing
Legislature of 1852, to secure a certain Wing ma
jOrity, and prevent the election of ANDREW JOHN
SON to Congress The Presidential election of 1852
showed Wing majority in the counties composing
the District, of s46. The District contained a sur
plus of population of 1912: the county of SEWER
with q population of 6760, and Wing majority
Of $40, having been added to the District for the
purpose of making the Wing majority impregnsble
At the election Of 1853 there were two Wing candi
dates, and CANPBELL Dem was elected He died
soon after his election, and N. G. TAYLOR CWhig)
was elected his successor. In 1856, A. G. WATKINS,
who had been prominent Wing, wac supported by
the Democrats and, being sustained by many Wings,
who objected to KnoE-NOthingism, he was elected
by go majority over TAYLOR, the regular Know
Nothing nominee. In 1857, Col WATKINS was again
elected over TAYLOR, by l76 votes; having again
eeived the support of several hundred dine Wings
Col LAEDON c. HATNEs and T. A. r. NELSON,
ESQ, were the candidates. NELSON, having received
the votes of the former Wing supporters of WAT
KINs,s is elected by very small majority.
2. The second district was made strongly wing
the majority for sCoTr, in 1852 having been 1925.
From personal considerations, Col CHURCHwELL
(dsm.) was elected over MATEARD in 1853 but
Col SNEED *. NJ was elected in 1855, and MAY
MAID in 1867, as again in 1853.
3. The third district was laid of with a small
whig majority; but the Hon. SAMUEL A. SMITH
carried the district in 1858. 1856, and 1857. His
defeat now shows no loss of democratic strength,
Gov Harris has received in the district majOrity
not much less than eight hundred
T. The fourth district gave scOrT, in 1852, ma
jority Of S45, and elected WILLIAM CULLoM to Con-
gress in 1858. Col. SAVAGE was elected in 1856
and again in 1857, by 1908 majority. He is now
defeated by several hundred, while Gov. HARRIS
received majority Of thousand. This is q DEM
Ocratic loss, but it oecssiOned by change Of
public sentiment the questions st issue between
the parties. The democrats themselves did the
work.
8. The fifth district gave sCorT majority Of 9l5
Il has always been carried by the opponents of the
democratic patty.
6. In the sixth district the apportiOnmsnt scI
concentrated ell the Democratic votes it posi-
BILE 10 throw into it, Tls Democratic majority in i
election IN that district is more than double the aOhOl
majority By which sr Of the Opposition members ara
nOr elected Thus the majority for HARRIS in
that district is at least 4 2OO while the aggregatG
majority for NELsOS, BRABsoN, STOKES, QUARLEsi
HATToN, and ErHERIDGE is less than 1900. Tn,
arhole majority for all of the Opposition Member
elect s less than the Democratic majority in the sir
distriet! A sufficient commentary upon the appOr-
tionment under which the late election was held.
T. The seventh district elects JOHN V. WRIGHT,
with but nominal opposition. The Democratic ma
jority in this district, ALSO is more than that BY
which SIR of the Opposition Members were elected
say $500.
8. In our district, JAMES NJ. QUARLEs received
the party majority.
9. The ninth district, it is said, elects ETHER
IDuE over ATKINS. 1t was laid off as wing dis
triot; the majority for ScOTT in 1882 having been
962 ETHERIDaE was elected in the district in 1858,
aOsthou opposition the whig majority being cOnsid-
cred too heavy for any Democrat to be willing to
contest it, In 1856, ETHERIDGE was sgsia elected,
bs majority Of 55s, over I. J. FREEMAN, (dem }
In 1857, he was defeated by Gen. ATKINS, by ma
iOty of 1923; and now he is said TO have been elect
ed by some twenty votes. This review shows the
odds against which Gen ATKINS had to contend and
will lessen the surprise at the result which might
otherwise be felt
10. WILLIAM T. AVERY is reelected by an in
creased majority, notwithstanding an independent
Democrat Joined the Opposition in an effort to de-
feat him. The district was laid of with whig
jority of SIS In 1855. Gen. RIVERS (wbig)
carried it by majority of 40, over D. NJ. CuRKrN,
ESQ. Mr.. AVERY was elected in 1857 by majority
Of 299 His msjOrity is said TO be from4 to SEQ
We have made this brief review to show the inc
squAliGiss Of the sppOrticnment Of 1852. The
reader will see that, with the exception Of the
third and fourth districts, where the Democrats de.