Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-04-20

|
| preparation"
The first statement OF the call which
to Mr.. Lassiter's mind. instances incon-
siderate preparation. ana the inaccuracy
| of which he would have us TO believe mas
caused him much perturbation Of spirit
is that In which IL is asserted that Wash
ington Randolph. Mason, ana Blair cast
Virginia's vote against the election OF
senator's by the State legislatures. HAY
| ing through his own historical researches.
| or those of others. made the remarkable
| discovery that this statement was not
only unsupported by recognized author
ity, but was even opposed to the estab-
! lishcd fact. he pours out las dlsappoiht-
ment I'm these words
Judge therefore OF my disquiet. upon
| consideration OF communication 10 tne
| Democrats OF Virginia. the general pro-
poSal of which met with my warm appfo-
! val. 10 be unable to find that any OF the
| illustrious characters called in our behalf
| had embraced our side Of this contention;
| but so far as they seem 10 be recorded
at all. had spoken and voted on the
| contrary side"
No doubt Mr.. Lassiter was really dis
turbed when he made. or supposed he had
| made. so painful "A discovery; but IL is
a fact nevertheless. that there was no
real occasion for his disquiotude. ana
| that the anxiety which he suffered was
| solely attributable to his own 'inconsid-
! crate preparation" the signers OF the
call having no reason to reproach them
/
! ton Of the proceedings of the Federal
| Convention. as taken by James Madison.
| will amply verify 1t IS true that on
June eth Mr. Dickinson of Delaware. and
not Of Pennsylvania. as Mr.. Lassiter er-
roneOusly says moved in Committee Cf
the Whole that the members of the Sc
c0nd branch Uhe Senate) fought" to be
chosen by the individual legislatures, and
that every vote recorded. including that
OF Virginia. was an affirmative vote; but
had Mr.. Lassiter not been content 10
abandon his Investigations mt this point.
he might have been spared the 'disquiet'
which he then and there experienced.
Had he turned but n few more of the
pages Of the Madison Papers. from which
he claims 20 quote. he would have been
relieved TO find that. after the Commit
tee OF the Whole had made its report 20
the convention itself. a vote was had
upon the section relating TO the election
of senators. This vote was taken Oh the
18th day Of June. the question as stated,
being, TO agree that the members of the
second branch be chosen by individual
legislatures and upon this. the final ana
only vote taken IN the convention itself.
the States Of Pennsylvania and Virginia
were recorded I'm the negative.
The paging Of the various editions ard
reprints Of the Madison papers is SO diff
fefcnt that a reference 20 page 239 Of my
copy of the Journal Of Constitutional Con-
venti0n may not assist MIR. Lassiter but
u he will read the proceedings Of June
10Th IN his or any other edition OF the
Madison papers ! think he will be fully
persuaded thai the statement OF this
vote as IT appears in the call, is abso-
iutely and literally correct
Mr.. l.assiter has also fallen into error
III saying that the motion OF Mr.. Wilson. |
Of PENNSYLVANIA. made in the Committee
Of the Whole. for referring the election
to the people was defeated Pennsylvania !
alone voting aye" II will be apparent to
the most casual reader, upon an eXaml-
nation OF the text Of the proceedings or
journal. that no vote was had upon this |
proposition. The question was for post
poning NJ" Dickinson's motion referring
the appointment Of the Senate TO the |
state legislatures. I'm order 10 consider !
Mr. Wilson's FOR referring IL to the peo- !
pie Mr.. Wilson desired that his propO- |
Sition should be first voted upon. but his |
motion TO that effect received but one !
vote. that Of his own State. journal |
Constitutional Convention. page 1907 Mr.. !
Dickinson's suggestion having been ac- |
cepted by the committee without q dis !
senting vote. there was no occasion for |
vote upon Mr. Wilson's suggestion to |
elect senator's by the people. and as a |
matter of fact there was none.
Mr.. Lassiter further challenges the |
statement in the call that Mr. Madison |
favored the election Of senator's by the |
people, Notwithstanding that the Ian |
euage OF that great and far-seelng states
man, quoted I'm the call would seem TO be |
! cannot find a word or a line i'm the |
journal kept by Madison 10 support Mr. |
lsasslters assertion that "AIr Wilson of |
Pennsylvanla. proposed that senators !
should be elected by the people, and Mr. !
Madison. of Virginia. antagonized this !
idea Mr.. Wilson. I'm committee Of the /
whole. suggested the mode of choosing |
the Senate Of New York" and Mr.. Madi. /
son antagoniZed that idea. journal Con- |
sutuuOndl convention. page 50
But. IN order 10 place Mr. NfadiSOn'S .
position upon this question beyond all |
controversy. and TO establish for all time |
TO come that he was opposed 10 the cleo
ton OF senator's by the people Mr.. I.assi- |
ter quotes the following passage from No
l.NII. of the Federaiist. the authorship |
Of which he attributes TO Mr.. Madison:
1t is equally unnecessary 20 dilate on
the appointment of senators by the State
legislatures. Among the various modes
which might have been devised for CON
shutting this branch Of the government
that which has been proposed by the con-
VentiOn is probably the most congenia,
with rhe public opinion. IL l. recon-
mended by the double advantage Of favor
ing q select appointment and Of giving to
the state governments such an agency |
in the formation Of the Federal Govern
ment as must secure the authority Of
the former. and may form a convenient
link between the two systems"
The only comment ! make upon this IS
that No. L\lI Of the Federalist was not
fore this paragraph could not have been
written by him. Mr.. Alexander Hamil-
ton. the great FedeIalist. who openly
avOwed in the convention that he did not
favor a republican form Of government |
was the author Of No. LNIl. The Fcde-
ralist and other Constitutional Papers.
Volume l.. page 339. This book was pub
lished as late as 1894 and Is a reprint OF /
Warmers edition Of the Fedcialist of 1918. |
There are other Inaccuracies and mislead- !
ing statements i'm Mr.. Iassitcr's letter. !
but i shall pass them by unnOuced They
doubtless will cause him no disquietude,
and / have already written enough TO
show that as critic be IS not q great
success.
Although I have shown conclusiyoly
that the vote OF Virginia in the Federal
Convention was against the method now
in vogue for clecung senator's and there
by convicted Mr. Lassiter OF the charge
OF "incOnsideratc PREPARATION which ne
so lightly and inconsideratcly brought /
against the signers of the call Tor the
May Convention. let il be distinctly UNI
derstOod that the advocates OF the popu-
lar election of senators do not base their
arguments upon the fact, pcrsuative as
ii may be, that the Virginia deputies,
with George Washington at their head.
voted against the election of senator's by
the legislatures.
We place this great reform. In the Ian
guage OF Senator Turpie, mainly upon
the ground that the people were not only
originally declared by our revolutionary
fathers to be capable of self-government.
but that they have proved themselves IN
the history of the country for more than
a hundred years to be worthy of that
(SigneO CLAGGETT b. JONES.
Secretary, &c.
PLANT CHANGES HANDS.