Baltimore daily commercial. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1865-1867, 1866-05-26
OUR REPRESENTATIVE BASIS-MIJST
WE REDUCE IT OR ALLOW THE NE
GROES TO VOTE.


on the present basis of representation she en-
joys much larger share Of political power
than justly belongs to her. To prove and il
lustrate this, the Tribune has gone into some
figuring, which it seems to think conclusive.
1t selects four States, two where slavery
lately existed-Maryland and Louisiana, and
two of the free States-Maine and New Jersey,
each of them having the same representation
In the Electoral College, and assuming as a
postulate that the voting population of State
is the true standard or criterion Of its proper
political power, proceeds to show by reference
to the four States above named, how unequally
that power is at present distributed. Thus,
there being according to the election of 1860,
in Maryland 92,462 voters, and in Louisiana
only 50,5l0, it argues that '|if Louisiana has
cher right share of political power, then there
care Al, 952 cipher ballots in Maryland alonel''
Pursuing the same line of argument, and
showing that the aggregate number of voters
in Maine and New Jersey being 219,O43, and
in Maryland and Louisiana being but 142, 972,
and these four States having each the same
representation in the national councils, it de-
clares that the injustice of such a distribution
OF power is so apparent, or to use its own
words-''the argument we present is so clear
sand compact, that we lose patience with those
"who pretend to question it." That argu-
ment is thus summed up: SIN other words,
'142,9 72 voters in Maryland and Louisiana
Isora nc infuaotio1 90 90 oto ,o+orc - M,;,o
sand New Jersey, and have precisely the same
'voice in the Electoral College. We can
"easily figure out 1901 cipher votes in this
calculation, who have no more power at our
"ballot box than so many Hindoos-who are
"nullifed by a monstrous slave oppression
(which belongs to the past, with all its sins
"and short comings, and should be swept
"away"
We have not unfrequently heard the same
argument, in substance, suggested by others,
and the same conclusions reached, that these
inequalities, apparent on a comparison of the
number of voters with the number of Repro
sentatives in the several States, prove gross
injustice towards some of them, and that such
injustice is the result of the "slave oppres-
sion," or, at least, of the non-voting negro
population; but even at the risk of overstrain-
ing the patience of those who thus argue, we
will venture to question tn cir logic. If it be
sound, then this apparent inequality and in
justice will be found to exist only where you
compare the voting power and the represen-
tative power of the free States with the similar
powers enjoyed by the States where slavery
lately existed; and therefore to refute it, it
will be only necessary to show that the same
and even greater inequality will be found to
exist, not only as between States where slavery
was never tolerated, but whose free negro
population is so small as to exert no influence
whatever in the comparison.
Let US, therefore, following the example of
the Tribune, and using the same kind of
"compaettt1p qrgumqept,4 is GerfafISrf So lfom
the faint of slavery and the presence of a negro
population.
lake, for example, the State of Rhode
Island, whose voting population in 1860 mum
bered 1881, and the State of Minnesota,
whose voters at the same election numbered
34,799. Each of these States has four Repre-
sentatives in the Electoral College, and apply
ing the Iribunes argument-if Minnesota
''has her ri 5ht share of political power then
there are ,S4S "cipher ballots in the little
State of Rhode Island alone.
Take another instance. The State of Yer
mont and the State of California are each
represented by five members in the Electoral
College, and turning to the number of voters
IN each of these States in 1860, represented by
these Electors, we find that while in Califor-
MIA there were 1850 voters, in Vermont
there were only 1884! Here again, to use
the 1rlb~ne'S argument, if California has her
proper share of political power, there are in
Vermont alone 1896 "disfranchised voters;
and by the same arithmetical calculation 60, 795
voters In Vermont and Rhode Island care as
influential and have precisely the same voice
In the Electoral College, as 153, 639 voters in
the States of California and Minnesota, an in
equality far exceeding that to which the Tri
6nnc refers in the comparison it institutes, be-
tween the two free and the two slave States,
of whose voting population it has given us an
exhibit.
The Tribune, as well as all those who con-
tend that the negro should be allowed to vote
or otherwise that his, race should be excluded
from the basis OF representation, assume mani
testify that a reform to that effect in our Con-
stltutlon would remedy the evils referred to
but is this so? Would not the inequality above
mentioned between California and Vermont
and between Minnesota and Rhode Island still
continue, notwithstanding such modification?
That inequality has no connection with slavery
or the negro, but is the result of the relative
of the female sex in the East
ern as compared with the Western States; and
whilst great solicitude is manifested in behalf
of that negro population in Maryland, who are
designated as ''nondescripts in Maryland law
and with no NOR rights at the polls than so
many horses and cows" we do not remember
ever to have heard any regrets expressed that
he female sex in Vermont and Rhode Island
S excluded from the ballot box, when to adj
nit them to that privilege or otherwise exclude
hem from the Representative basis, is the only
method, by which the inequalities we have re-
erred to can be avoided
The truth is that this whole outcry over the
INJUSTICE of including in our representative
basis a race or class who are not permitted
% participate in the selection of their renro.
is little better than affectation
This question, like all other political rights |
md powers, was settled by our fathers with
Washington at their head, when they framed |
ur federal Constitution. The wisdom of that /
has never until the present been seri.
usly called in question. They declared that |
representation and taxation should always be |
pportioned on the same basis; that basis was |
he whole number of free persons, and three
fths of all others-there being now no others,
he whole number of our inhabitants, white or
lack, male or female are under the Constitu-
ion to be reckoned up whenever we would as
ertain what national taxes our State is to pay,
r what number of Representatives she is to
lect. The makers of that Constitution never
ndertook to say what race should vote or
hat sex should vote-they left that expressly
} the discretion of each State; but they did
~ that all free persons, white or black, male
r female should be represented, and that the
aO1n 1z@ al /