Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1881-03-02
Icontinued from first page.l

VI cTmOnl, lN0t INo tttefN' " N'N't'
by the State Legislatures, as these two
would represent the independent SOW.
ereignty of the State, while the other
electors would represent population in
proportion to numbers, or In other
words, the popular principle. (lba,
page 329)
Mr.. CASTOR, OF North Carolina, was
inclined to favor the latter proposition,
but would support the original resolu.
ton. After referring to the fact that
the Legislatures of New York, Penn
sylvania, North Carolina, Massachu-
sets and Virginia had each sanctioned
and recommended the adoption of the
PickenS amendment, he argued that it
affects the power of the States only by
narrowing their discretion as to the
mode Of appointing electors. 1t does
not deprive them Of any beneficial
power "or Of any power available to
them by way Of securing an equilibrium
against Federal authority. The fact
is, it only takes away from them a
matter of detail and regulation, oner-
Gus in itself, furnishing the materials
for factious intrigue and mancuyer,
and productive of no advantage to the
States. III the pro
posed amendment should communicate
some additional power to the smaller
States, il would be but to restore the
ratio fixed by the original compact" ="
(IJid., page 333-36)
Mr.. Benjamin Huger, OF South Car
olina, argued that both the federal and
popular principles are preserved intact
by the Pickens amendment. [IJid.,
page 1927
1t involved immediate agency OF the
people IN choosing the President, and
yet left the power of the States unim-
paired. Each State would have two
additional electors for the two Sena.
tors. Continuing, he said
One great aud important object would be OBJ
tanned. Al danger from geographical divisions
and jealousies on the approach Of an election
would be done away. Not only all the diferen
plica,ed interests scattered throughout the vast
extent Of the whole United States would have a
full and efficient voice in the election Of tho Execu-
tive. The East, the West, the North, and the
South would each have its proportonate influence
10 the election and no one or two geographical
portions or divisions Of the Union, by eombina
tou, intrigue, or otherwise, would be enabled 10
oyerwhelm the others. The Chief Magistrate
would consequently be, as was intended, euphati-
cally the choice Of the whole people and Of all the
different Interests throughout the Union, elected
by the people in conformity to the ratio establish ed
upon the Federal and popular principles ingraited
on the Constitution.-Annals, Fourteenth Con-
gress, second session, pages 3I5, Si6.
The Pickens amendment was adopt.
cd in Committee of the Whole Decem.
Der 90, lsl6-yeas ST. nays 81. Re
ported to the House and laid on the
table. (IJid., pages 355, 1861
On the 2lst of January, 1917, Mr.
Pickens submitted resolutions Of the
South Carolina Legislature urging The
adoption Of his amendment. (Ibid,
page 69l)
Mahlon Dickerson, Senator from
New Jersey, in obedience to instruc
tions from the Legislature of tha
State, submitted proposed amend
ment, December 20, 1877, similar L
the Pickens amendment, except tha
tipO electors should be appointed by
each State in such manner as The
Legislature might direct. ANNALS, Fiji
teenth Congress, first session, pages
65-l36)
Referred to committee OF five, (Ibid,
page G7.
Called up February II, and elabor
ately discussed by Senator Dickerson
who said
will venture to predict that whenever the dis
solution Of our present form Of Government shal
take place 1t will he in consequences VI failure u
come at just expression Of the pubie will in th'
choice Of President-lbid, page l7g.
He argued that il Is "An insimsdble eonstruc
ton Of section I Of article of the Constitution
that the Legislatures Of the States shall direct hot
they henssiros shall appoint electors = that ifsuel
ptaotieeis "an infringement Of the Constitution
Of which It will hardly be denied there is we'll
founded doubt, then It is highly eIpsditnt tina
the constitutional remedy Of amendment be ar
piled"
lie insisted that il bad been the ain
in some of the large States "to secur,
the dominant party an undue influence
by suppressing the voice of the minor
ity. This system OF defeating every
purpose of a fair election has becom,
an art and a science, and is known by
the technical term of gorrymandering.
(lbld,, page 1917
Mr., DiCkerson then reverted to tn
action Of the Legislature Of Pennsyl
vania in 1901, and that Of New Jerse,
in 1908, to show how uncertain the ex
lsting system in its operation and how
liable to abuse.
Continuing, he said
The probable result OF the votes Of all the dii
tricts, where numerous, would be as fair an eN
preston Of the public will as can be possibly oh
taibed unless we resort to a general vote Of Il
people at large.-Ibid ,pagelsl.
Perhaps the larger States will feel a reluctant
10 adopt measure which will in some degree cu
tail their power Of forming combinations wit
each other, aud thus controlling their sister State
but the very disposition thus to combine and col
troll Is dangerous and tyrannical principle an
" attempted would lead to counter combination
on the part Of the middle sine and smaller State
Their combinations an! their collision
are about equally to be dreaded. The
is great simplicity in the pl'n Of single districts
they are but little subject to confusion and mi
stakes, and a. they are to be modelled but once
ten years there will be but little difficulty in the
arrangement, The present amendu.en
II adopted, introduces no new principle into Il
Constitution, Il does not abridre n
last rights ofany State, but adds to the seeuril
Of twill suppress those exten 81,
anddapgsrous intrigues which agitAte the uniC
at the approach Of every presideatill eee tion.
Annals, Fifteenth Congress, first session, page 5
Nathaniel Macon, of North Carolin
March 9,lsls, argued in support of II
Dickerson resolution. (Ibid., page 1877
The amendment was read a thir
time and negatived-yeas 20, nays la
two.thirds not voting therefor Ibid
page 242.)
Its passage recommended by th
Legislature Of North Carolina. (iJid
page ll4)
Senator Dokerson at the next Sc
sion instructions having been receive
from New York and New Hamshii
favoring its passage) again introduce
his amendment, December 2, lSl
ANNALS, Fifteenth Congress, socon
session, page 33.)
Connecticut recommends ITS passag
(ibid., page i2,)
Mr.. Dickerson, January 10, 1s1
again advocated his amendment in
speech of great length, in which |
said
This plan Of dividing the States into d.tric
Is no new experiment It is no innovation Wha
ever upon the Constitution Il Is only eAlculau
to render permanent and uniform a regulate
which has prevailed In nearly all the States, at
which ought to have prevailed In sll and won
have prevailed In all but for the dsorganili
spirit Of party. Whatever mode may be adopts
Il Is universally allow cd that It ought To be VI
form throughout the United states.--Ibid., pa
l3q.