Newspaper Page Text
2
l;, r as actual discovery could give it,
"as prior to the of every other
nation ; upon the entrance of the
Columbia river, an.l the name given
to it, by Captain Cray, an American
citizen ; upon the exploration of the
c amo river, over land, by Captain*
Lewis and Clarke ; upon the settle
ment of Astoria, at the mouth of the
Columbia river, under the protection
of the United Slates ; and upon the
restoration of that establishment, a>
an American possession, in lb It!, by
Great Britain.
According to the letter of Air.
Rush to \ir. Adams, the llritish
Plenipotentiaries opposed the claim
of the United States upon grounds
extremely vague, and entirely unsat
isfactory. They adverted to the
navigation of Drake anti Cook in
that direction, to trading posts said
to have been formed in several pla
ces with the consent of the Indians,
ami insisted that the: unoccupied
parts of the North West Coast were
as open as they bail ever be> n fi>r
the formation of new settlements.
The leading object of each partx
lia* been to gain tlit* sovereignty <>i
the country through which the Co
lumbia river and its tributary stream
pass. The pretensions of Great
Britain, from the feeble manner at
which her negotiators were enabled
to support them, amount, in reality,
to nothing more than the occasional
excursions of In i traders among the
Indians, and such transient fixtures
as were necessary to their comfort
for (lie moment. These cannot be
ultimately sustained against the right
of the United States, founded, as it
i-, upon the .- urv ; sos the shore,
opto a veiy high northern latitude,
bv the fust European discoverrcs ot
America ; upon the examination of
the mouth of tin C durnhia !iy Capt
Gray, and the nation,,; expedition ot
Lewis and Cl.nke, tiom the Missis
sippi River to < i • Piiciftc. Ocean. It
Great Britain had • considered As
toria, on the Colin ora, which had
been taken by her agents during the
late war, ns ;> part of tbe territory <>!
the United States, sh would hardly
have restored it in 1818, in fulfil
mi nt of the stipulation in tbe first
article of the treaty ot Ghent,
To comprelie and the subject more
fully, the reader will understand,
that, by the third article of the con
vention between tin* United States
and Great Britain, of the -Oth of « *<>
toher, 1818, the country and waters
in dispute w< re, for '.he space ot ten
years,to be free&op-. nto the vessels,
citizens, and subjects, of the two
powers. .Mr. Adams, in his instruc
tions to Mr. Rush, laid it down as a
basis of negotiation, that the applica
tion of colonial principles of exclu
sion could not ho admitted by the U.
States as lawful, upon any part ot
the Northwest (’oast of America, or
as belonging to any European na
tion. This basis is assumed upon
the fact of the independence of the
American nations, the rights of ter
ritory surviving to them, and the ne
cessity there will he for room for the
accommodation of their future popu
lation. Mr. Adams viewed it as a
necessary consequence of the exist
ing slate of things, that, henceforth,
the American continents would no
longer be subject to colonization.
He instructed .Mr. Rush to propose
to the third article of the convention
of the 20th of October, 1818 ; and.
with a view to draw a definite line
ot demarkajion for the future, to stip
ulate that no settlement should liere
aiter be made on the North-west
coast, or on ary of the islands there
to adjoining, by citizens of the Uni
ted States north of latitude 51, nor
by British subjects cither south of
51 or north of 55. Latitude 51 is the
degree at which the U. States are
willing to limit their future settle
ment, it being understood that the
Columbia river branches that far
north. As, however, Mr. Adams
observed, the boundary line already
ran in latitude 18 to the Stony Moun
tains, Mr. Rush was authorized,
should it be earnestly insisted on by
Great Britain, to consent to carry it,
m continuance, on ihe same parallel,
to the sea. Mr Rush, eventually,
submitted to the British plenipoten
tiaries a paper proposing the contin
uance of the third artie'e of the con
vention of the 20th of October,
1518, for a lurther term of ten years,
and limiting Brit: h settb meats with
in the latitudes of 51 and 55 north
The British plenipotentiaries also
submitted a paper, proposing to an
nul the stipulation of the third article
of the convention in question, and to
substitute, as a boundary line, front
the Rocky Mountains, tire 4tHh de
gree of latitude, to the point where
that parellol strikes the great iiortii
casternmost branch of the Oregon,
or Columbia river ; tlicncc, dowi
along the middle of t'ae Oregon or
Columbia,to its junction withthePaci
lic ocean; the navigation of the
whole clrannel to he perpetually free
to the citizens and subjects of both
parties; no settlements to be made
by either party within the limits as
signed to the other ; settlements al
ready formed tqf*ontir.jie to he occu
pied, at the ofhe proprie
tors, for ten years ; and. for the sam<
p> riod, citizens and subjects to pass
and repass, as her tol’orc, hr land
and water, to trade as formerly, with
out duty or impo<t, subject only t
tl*’ local regulation* which, in other
respect tlu-partic- mov find it ne- '
te-sary to enforce within their re
spective pirisdii lions.
From this exposition of the Amer
ican riiiiin and the fJritish pretension,
it will he seen that the main point ot
difference h< tween the I : iti (! States
and Great Britain, on this subject,
tliat the former arc v. filing to con
tinue the boundary line along the
49th degree of northern latitude to
the Pacific Ocean, while the latter
wishes to pursue that parallel no
farther than where it will strike the
great 'brav h of
the Oregon or Columbia, and then
to follow that river to the sea, re
taining for British subjects, in com
mon with American citizens, the free
navigation of the whole channel of
the stream At this stage"of the ne
gotiation the further prosecution ot
it appears to have been suspended.
In tlie correspondence between
Mr. Adams and Air. Rush.it is gra
tifying to perceive that the territori
al rights of the country were main
tained with a full knowledge of par
ticulars, and with great ability in
argument.
Asa proof of the advantages at
tending the Napier press lately im
ported from England for use of this
paper and the Daily Advertiser, our
edtf ion of country papers, consisting
of 1! J 2'> copies, has been struck off
without unusual exertion in an hour
and five minutes : with an ordinary
press by great exertion, the same
could not have been accomplished
in less than six hours and a half.
[.V. I’. .Inter.
FOR THE STATESMAN.
Editors.
It is an old saying that actions
speak louder than words ; And as
some of the whining sycophants of
the day, who in the year 1824, to
blast the hard earned fame of the
“Hero of Orleans” were day and
night engaged in the unholy cause
of calumny, slander, and detraction,
since it is notorious that Gen .Tack
son is “ the man of the People,” and
that Mr. Adams lias become some
what unpopular in Georgia ; have
now tho unblushing effrontery to
come out and say, that they are the
friends and supporters of the General ,
and are. basely attempting to impose
on the credulous, and less informed
part ofthe community, hv saying that
though the friends of Gen. Clark
did support a Jackson ticket, they
were privately aiding Mr. Adams, in
whose cause they arc still engaged,
though under false colours. A cs,
those same pliant tools of king cau
cus, wore then crying out that (Jen.
Jackson was a cut throat, an assas
sin, a Military chieftain, a despot, a
Tyrant, a Federalist, an enemy to
free suffrage, and opposed to the
best interest of Georgia. Witness
the hundreds of publications, that
w'ent the rounds in all the venal
presses in this and other States.
Now that the people of Gergia,
may know who they were, and yet
are, tho true friends of Gen. Jack
son, and of Mr. Adams, you wili
please publish the following extract
from the Journals of the House ol
Representatives of 1024.
“ Friday, Dec. 3d. 1821.
Mr. Fort ol Baldwin laid on the
table a resolution relative to the en
suing presidential election.
Monday, Dec. 13.
The house took up the following
resolution as offered a few days
since hy Mr. Fort of Baldwin, to wit ;
Whereas it is important that the
will of the people should prevail in
all important elections, and in none
is it more so than in that of President
ofthe United States, —and it being
manifest that general Andrew Jack
son, if not the first is decidedly the
second choice of the people of this
state, and that his popularity in a
large portion of the United States
and especially in that section in
which we are placed is far greater
than that of any other individual,
and believing as we do that on this
subject we act in conformity with
the wishes of our constituents,
lie it therefore resolved by the legis
lature of Georgia, That in the event
of the election of President of the
United States coming before the H.
Representatives, and it appearing
that Mr. Crawford who has received
the electorial vote of this state, can
not succeed to the Presidency, our
Representatives in Congress he and
they are hereby requested to give
the vote of this state to Gen. Andrew
Jackson, he being the second choice
of Georgia.
And the same being read,
Mr. Foster of Greene offered the
following as a substitute, to wit ;
The General Assembly of this
tat having already expressed by
the election of electors of Preside!: 4
and Y r ice President its decided pre
ference for William 11. Crawford foi
Die Presidency ofthe United States
Resolved, That it is inexpedient
ir the legislature at this time |<
•vc any further opinion on the si; 1 .
' 4 —and that should the c!?ctior
‘resident come into the Housr
Representatives of (lie United
tafes w e have full confidence in the 1
(J K ()R GIA ST ATE SM AN.
wi'dc m and integrity of our Repre
sentatives to whom it belong- to
give the vote of this state on tbi
important question.
And tbe same being also read,
Mr. Lumpkin moved that the
original & substitute (lie) on the ta-j
hie for the remainder ofthe session, j
When Mr. Fort of Baldwin railed j
for the previous qur*tion.
And on the question. 4 shall the
main question he now put V
The veas and nays were required
to he recorded—and are yeas 88,
nays 63.
Those who ' oted in the affirma
tive, are
Messr*. Adams; Anderson, Ash,
Bates, Blackburn, Burnside Cpllins.l
Cull ins, Day, Denmark, Echolls, Fort,
of Baldw in, Foster of Columbia, j
Fleming. Gholson Gilder, Hazzard.
Hendrick, Hutching*, Ingersoil, Ken-j
•in, King, Martin, Mattox, McClen
don, Murray, Pool. Primrose. Ren-!
der, Robinson, Saffold, Scarborough.
Watkins, Watson, Wiggins, Wilkin
son. Wood of Fayette, Watford.
Those who voted in the nega
tive, are
Messrs. Baxter, Henning, Bled
soe Brailsford, Branham, Brockman,
Barton, Clarke, Clayton, Clopton,
Cochran, Cone, Copp. Crocker Da
venport, Dillard, Dougherty, Feath
erston, Foster of Greene, Freeman,
Gilmore, Graves, Hagan. Holt,ll )rnc,
Hudson, Hull,, Kelly, Kolb, Lane
Law, Lawson, Leonard, Lumpkin.
.Mays. Meroncv, Morriwcthor, Mitch
ell of Wilkinson, Mitchell, of Pulas
ki, Moreland, Myers, Oliver, Pooler,
Pope, Quarterman, Randolph, Rea,|
Rembert Reynolds, Roberts, Sco
vell, Smith of llryan. Smith of]
Scriven, Stapleton, Stewart, Thom
as of Mclntosh, Thomas of Warren,
Turner, 'Untie Walthour, Warren,
Welch, Witt.
So the House refused to put the
main qu stjon, and the original and
substitute ordered to lie on the ta
ble for the present.
Tuesd.iv, Dec. 14.
On motion of Air. Lumpkin to
take up the original resolution and
substitute on the Presidential ques
tion, as entered on tbe journals of
yesterday, and ordered to lie on the
table— ’
The yeas and nays were required
to be recorded and are—yeas 50,
nays 42.
Those who voted in the affirma
tive, are
Messrs. Baxter,Bledsoe,Brailsford
Branham, Brockman, Burton, Clarke
Clopt on,Cochran, Cone,Copp,Croc le
er,Cullins,Davenport .Dillard, Dough
erty.Feathersfon, Foster of Greene,
Freeman, Gilmore, Graves, Hadley
Hagan,Harden, Holt, Horne, Hudson
Hull, Kelly, Kolb,Law, Lawson, Leo
nard, Lumpkin, Mays, Meriwether,
M itchell of Pulaski, Moreland,Mvre-,
Oliver, Pooler, Pope, Quarterman.
Randolph, Rea, Rembert, Reynolds,
Roberts, Scovell, Smith of Bryan,
Stapleton, Thomas of Mclntosh,
Thomas of Warren, Tutlc, Walthour,
Warren, Welch, Witt,
Those who voted in the negative,
are
Messrs. Adams, Anderson, Ash,
Bates, Benning, Blackburn, Burnside,
Clayton, Collins, Day, Denmark,Ech
ols, Foster of Columbia, Fleming,
Gho’ on, Glider, Hazzard, Hendrick.
Hicks, Hutchings, Ingersoil, King.
Martin, Mattox, McClendon, Mero
nnv, Murray, Pool, Primrose, Bor
der, Robinson, Saffold, Scarborough,
Smith of Scriven, Stewart, Turner,
Watkins, Wiggins, Wilkinson, Will
cox, Wood of Early, Wood of Fay
ette.
The original resolution and the
substitute were then taken up and
read—when
Mr. Hendrick, moved that they
lie on the tabic for further consider
ation,
Upon which motion,
The yeas and nays were required
to he recorded, and are—yeas 38,
nays 00.
Those who voted in the affirma
tive, arc
Messrs. Adams, Anderson, Ash,
Bates, Benning, Blackburn, Burnside,
Clayton, Collins, Day, Denmark,
Echols, Foster of Columbia, Flem
ing, Gholson, Gilder, Hazzard, Hen
drick, Hicks, Hutchings, Ingersoil,
Kelly, King, Martin, McClendon,
Murray, Pool, Primrose, Render,
Robinson, Saffold, Stewart. Turner,
W iggins, Wilkinson, Willcox, Wood
of Early, Wood of Fayette.
Those who voted in the nega
tive, arc
Messrs. Baxter, Bledsoe, Brail-*
ford, Branham, Brockman, Burton,
Clarke, Clopton, Cochran, Cone,
Crocker, Cullins, Davenport, Dil
lard, Dougherty, Featherstou. Foster
ol (ireene,Freeman,Gilmore, Graves,
Hadley, Hagan, Hardin, Holt. Horne,
Hudson, Hull, Kolb, Law , Lawson,
Leonard, Lumpkin, Mays, Mattox,
Meroney, Meriwether, Mitchell of
Pulaski. Moreland, Myers, Oliver
Pooler, Pope, Quarterman,!’andolph,
Rea, Rembert, Reynolds, Roberts.
Scarborough, Scovell, Sini ! h of Brv
an, Smith of Scriven, Stapleton.
Thomas of Mclntosh, Thomas o
Warren, Tutle, Walthour, Warren
Welch, V\ It.
So the House r. fused to lav th •
the original resolution and su! stitute
on the table for further consider;.-
t ion.
The question then recurred on tin
motion offered hy Mr. Lumpkin <
Yesterday, to lay the ori; ‘aal aud
substitute on the table for the re
mainder of the session.
Upon which motion,
’fhc yens and nays were required
be recorded, and are—yeas 63,
nnvs 43.
Those who voted in the affirma
tive, are
Messrs. Baxter, Benning. Bledsoe,
Brailsford, Branham. Brockman, Bur
ton, C larke, Clopton, Cochran.(done.
Copp. Crocker, Davenport, Dillard.
Dougherty, Feathorston, Foster ‘of
Greene, Freeman, Gilmore, Graves,
Hadb v, Hagan, Harden, Holt,Horne,
Hudson, Hull, Kelly, Kolb, Law,
Lawson, Leonard, Lumpkin, Mays,
Meroimv. Merriwether. Mitchell of
Pulaski, Mitchell of Wilkinson,More
land. Mvers, Oliver, Pooler, Pope,
Quarterman. Randolph, Rea, Rem
hert .Reynolds. Roberts, Scarborough.
Scovell, Smith of Bryan, Smith of
Scriven. Stapleton, Thomas of Mc-
Intosh, Thomas of Warren, Turner.
Tutle, Walthour, Warren, Welch,
Witt.
Those who voted in the nega
tive, are
Messrs. Adams. Anderson, Ash,
Bates, Blackburn. Burnside, Ciavton,
C-illins, Cnllins. Dav, Denmark,Ech
ols, Fort of Baldwin. Foster of Cc-I
lntnbia, Fleming, Ghol on. Gilder,!
Hazzard, Hendrick, Hicks, Hutch-;
; ings. liurer.-011, Kenan, King. Lane, I
Martin,Mattox, Met Hendon. Murray,
Pool, Primrose, Render, Robinson,
Saffold, Stewart, Watkins, Watson,
W iggins, Wilkinson, Will cox. Wood]
of Early, Wood of Fayette. Wofford,
So the original resolution and the
: substitute as entered on the journals
| of yesterday, were ordered to lie on
j the table for the remainder of the
I session.
Wednesday, Dec. 15.
i On motion of Mr. Fort of Baldwin,
j To reconsider so much of the jour
; an! of yesterday as relates to the
i resolutions on the presidential ques
j t ion.
j Tho yeas and nays wore required
Ito be recorded, and are—yeas 38,
j nnvs Cl.
Those who voted in the affirma
■ live, arc
i Messrs. Adams, Anderson, Is!:,
[Bates, Blackburn, Claylori, Collins,
Day,Denmark. Echols, Fort of Bald
win, Foster of Columbia, Fleming,
Gholson. Gilder, Hazzard, Hendrick,
Tlicks, Hutchings, Ingersoil, King,
Martin, Mattox, McClendon, Pool,
Primrose, Render, Robinson, Saffold,
Stewart, Watson, Wiggins, Wilkin
son, W lcox, M ood of Fayette, Wof
ford.
Those who voted in the negative,
are
Messrs. Baxter, Benning, Bledsoe,
Brailsford, Branham, Brockman, Bur
ton, Clarke, Clopton, Cochran,Cone,
Copp, Crocker. Davenport, Dilliard,
i Feathorston,Foster of Greene, Free
man, Gilmore, Graves, Hadley, Ha
gan, Hardin, Holt, Horne, Hudson,
Hull, Kcliv, Kolb, Law, Law
son, Leonard, Lumpkin, Mays, Mer
onev, Meriwether, Mitchell of Wil
kinson, Moreland, Moncrief, Myers,
Oliver, Pooler, Pope, Quarterman,
Randolph, Rea, Rembert, Reynolds,
Robert “.Scarborough,Scovell, Smith
of Scriven, Stapleton, Thomas of
Mclntosh, Thomas of Warren, Tur
ner, Walthour, Watkins, Warren.
Welch, Witt.
So the House refused to reconsid
er.
AN OBSERVER.
FOR TITE STATESMAN.
TO TIIE PEOPLE OF GEORGIA.
In the Georgia Journal of the 31st
January last, you were presented
with an extract from the Avgusta
Constitutionalist, in the nature of a
commentary upon an Act, passed at
the last session of your Legislature,
“to lay off tho State into se% r en Con
gressional Districts.” Whatever may
have been the feelings or emotions
excited in the bosoms of others, at
any attempt, either organized or sin
gle. to defeat the object of this law,
it is certainly calculated to impress
upon the mind of every sober, moral,
and impartial citizen, sensations of
deep and melancholy regret. For
where is the man of tbe least pre
tensions to candor or liberality of
sentiment, I mean that degree which
pervades the breast of every one
who glows with a genuine love for
his country, that would consent to
see the will ot her Legislature de
fied, the majesty of her laws tramp
led upon, and in tlieir stead substi
tuted (he quibbles of those who are
misnamed jurists, and the machina
tions of partizans restless in defeat,
and ambitious of ascendency.- 1 speak
here, upon tho supposition that the
fundamental law has not been viola
ted hy the Legislative provision—
that shall he reserved for subsequent
inquiry. This ground conceded for
the present, upon what principle, ofj
either moral, or political philosophy
can those he justified, who endeavor i
to defeat the known will of the body i
politic, of which they are members ? I
Is not the intention of the
plain to flic most common under
standing ? Does any one doubt it,
except those who stickle for “the
grammatical structure of our lan
: uage, and the principles of legal
,construction 7 ” Are these 4 princi
ples of legal construction,” in reality,
rtj thing more than the rules of
anmon sense ? Does not cm- glance
i this useful faculty discover to the
mhm-a! mind !hu olficct of the
law ? And is it not demonstrably the
duty of every citizen to promote that
object ? Is this not more especially
the case in relation to all remedial
statutes, the rule being restricted ip
penal cases, in favor of life, liberty,
and personal security ? Beware then,
my countrymen, how you confeder
ate to paralize a law, which, not be
ing in violation of any of your natural
rights, has been declared for your
benefit bv the supreme authority of
the government which you acknowl
edge. Its policy cannot regularly be
questioned by any political proce
dure of your own, prior to the ses
sion of ilic next Legislature. It is
not a subject for a revolution ; —it is
not taxation without representation.
If it be oppression, your sister States
have long groaned under the yoke,
and many of you, who have lived
under the system, had happily found
an asylum here, until this “ last felt
swoop" of usurpation! For this the
presses teem with portentous warn
ings, and even venture to propose
plans & arrangements for the security
of the people’s rights! God of Free
dom! shall the mighty engines that
confounded George and his legions in
their march to tyranny, be perverted
(to such unhallowed purposes ? And
| •hall tho gorgnn head, which Democ
; racy so lately execrated as treason on
jibe Hartford Convention, be now es
teemed Lor “ fairest best gift” from
Heaven ? No, there is a redeeming
power in the tranquility and good
sense of rural life, that curbs the rage
of the riding whirlwind and rebukes
the restless-spirits of those who would
ride on its wings, and directs its ter
rors. How often lias it bound in
chains the genii who meditate the
tempest, and even stilled the agita
ted wave while chafed under their
commands? How many a despot
masking Lis designs and revolving in
bis Ivreast schemes of dominion, has
sickened and trembled at the sim
plicity and %’iituc ofthe husband
men, that make his empire a mocke
ry, and the thought of it a malady of
1 the brain, or a canker of the heart ?
j And this power will surely prevent a
j solemn act of your Legislature from
j being disregarded and defeated hy
the stratagems of the few. But we
! are not content to rest here, though
it might be boldly confided to the
people to carry the law into opera
tion without diving into “the gram
matical structure of our language,
and tbe principles of legal construc
tion.”
The article contained in the Con
stitutionalist, embraces three princi
pal propositions which it will be ne
cessary to examine, viz : That the
Act is contrary to the Constitution
of the United States—that it is in
eff ctual as to its end—and finally,
that it is contrary to good policy. It
is not intended at present, to extend
our research into the last proposi- 1
lion, any further, than it may he re
garded as incidental to the one im
m diately preceding. Under the first
head, to w it. that the Act is contrary
to the Constitution of the United
States, it is hardly necessary to ob
serve that, the fundamental law is
paramount to all others, and should
be regarded as a sacred law of our
nature that cannot he infringed with
out serious danger to our happiness.
The clause of the Constitution sup
posed to he violated is, the Ith un
der the 2d sec. of the Ist art. of that
! instrument.—“ No person shall he a
Representative who shall not have
| attained the age of twenty -fit e years,
! and been seven years a citizen ofthe
United Slates ; and who shall not,
when elected, he an inhabitant, of
that State in which he shall he chos
en.” To prevent misapprehension,
it may he proper to remark that,
there is a variance of four years in
our recital and that of the Constitu
tionalist. Tiic error was probably
the result of accident, and seems no
way material to the subject, except
by illustration. The language of the
Constitution is negative and not posi
tive. It provides for its own safety,
that none shall be Representatives
who have not those qualifications—
yet it is not said that all who possess
them, shall be eligible as Represen
! tatives. Neither can this latter he
implied from the former; for there
is no necessary dependence of the
one proposition on the oilier. ‘All
that can i;e required of (lie General
Government is, that it shall not ex
clude Representatives possessing
these qualifications, when chosen
pursuant to the laws of the States.
They seem not to he inhibited by
this clause from imposing additional
restrictions at their discretion; nor
is there any express prohibition of
this right. The rule of construc
tion is, that w hen a power is delega
ted that is not exclusive in its na
ture, it must be expressly prohibited
to the States, in order to deprive
them of it. For instance; Congress
has power “ to lay and collect taxes
vet it not being exclusive or prohib
ited, the States have a concurrent
power. Thus much may suffice in
answer to objections arising under
this clause, especially when we should
not be concluded, even hy admiting
the construction contended for, rois
sidnring that particular clause as
seperate and distinct from the other
parts of the same instrument. But
it is a rule of interpretation that the
w ilow instrument shall be (ake.i to
gether. for the purpose of expound
ing it s different parts; they mutually'
qualify and explain each other. The
[March 21,
4th sec. of the Ist art. of the s*ne
instrument, provides that, 4 the time*,
places, and manner of holding elec
tions, for Senators and Representa
tives shall be prescribed in each
State by the Legislature thereof;
but the Congress may at any time,
by law, make or alter such regula
tions, except as to the [daces of
choosing Senators ” The manner of
holding elections, is the particular
characteristic mode in w hich a choice
is made, and w ill be admitted to em
brace at least, the vote by ballot, or
viva voce, by the general or the dis
trict plan. But it will be said this
latter may still be adopted hy tho
States, without restricting the resi
dence of the Representative to a
particular district. It is admitted to
be so in some of the States, particu
larly in Virginia. But the reverse is
believed to be true in a large majori
ty of the States of the Union.—lt is
presumable that those varying plans
w ere all taken into view by the con
vention, and the manner of holding
elections confided primarily to the
prescription of the State Legisla
tures. The general controlling pow
has not yet been exercised by the
Congress. In conformation of this
view, may be adduced the practice
long since established of admitting
members to their scats whose resi
dence has been restricted to tlieir
districts. It is believed that the
point is settled beyond dispute in
the Federal Councils. We have
now passed the giants cause way, and
approach the second proposition,
viz; That the Act is ineffectual as
to its end, or in other words, is void,
upon the grounds of its non-confor
mity to the “ grammatical structure
of our language, and the principles
of legal’ construction.” And here
you will! permit me to reply to this
scholar, in your behalf; —“ though it
is our mi sfortune to 1m- rude in speech
and unacquainted with your rules of
legal construction, though wc have
not the c legant polish of your style',
the hartnonious modulations of your
voice, at id the profound knowledge
of laws and government which you
hare had leisure to acquire; yet our
father’s 1 ave taught us a common
language., by which “ we are mutual
ly Understood in conveving our ideas,
or our w ants ; and when our inten
tions are signified, the end of lan
guage beii ig; answered, we have been
accustom* and to hold it unkind to re
mind us ol .any error in the form in
which it was conveyed.” Yes, mv
countrymen, it is one of the first
blessings arising out of the institu
tions under which we live, that the
making of our laws is generally en
trusted to tii'isc of the same habits
and pursuits with ourselves; and
though they may not be drafted with
the fastidious precision of a Coke,
or the perspicuity of a Mansfield, are
yet sufficiently plain for the direction
of those, who are not disposed to
throw obstacles in the way of the
Government. But, we must even
meet this champion, upon at least,
one of his grounds; and that is, le
gal construction ; —and from this po
sition we shall make one effort to
close his avenue of approach to the
other, and if that prove unsuccessful
i disdain to make a second attempt.
It is a fundamental maxim of in
terpretation, that 41 false grammar
does not vitiate a deed.” A fortiori
it cannot vitiate a lave. Such is the
barbarous protection which common
consent lias thrown around the illit
erate man, and such will be Ins safe
guard, until the hardy strength of
the fields shall again he charmed in
to submission hy the arts and devices
of the cloister"! Until then, italics
mny in vain point to prepositions
misapplied, or used in an obsolete
sense. But the philological contest
now comes on in w hich each must
contend with each, “ Then comes
the tug of warand shall there bo
no mediator between these puissant
words? Is there nothing of concilia
tion in the subject matter?- The
title of the Act is, “to lay off the
Stale into seven Congressional Dis
tricts. I he districts arc then form
ed, and the manner of holding eh c
tions for Representatives prescribed
as follows—“ It shall, and may be
lawful for the qualified voters, (for
brevity s sake) resident in each of the
aforesaid districts, to elect owe Re
presentative in Congress in each of
the aforesaid Congressional Districts.
1° T ,rov « the fallacy of literal inter
pretations, it would seem according
to that test, to adopt the reasoning
w Inch has been used, that on the day
ol general elections the voters of
each district should perform the act
ol choice, or elect, Representatives,
in every one of the districts. That
is to say—tlie voter in one rs the
districts shall give his vote in every
district on the same day . This would
be enduing him with a kind of elec
toral übiquity, which would he im
possible in tlie nature ol things, and
the idea preposterous in point of
policy. As it is an absurdity, it must
therefore be discarded as foreign
ironi the intention ol the Legislature.
I hose, then who would claim a right
ot voting for seven Representatives
by choosing one out of rarli district
cannot demand it from the letter of
the law, as will he discovered by a
strict attention to its verbal construc
tion; and cannot take refuge with
any kind ot consistency under tho
reason and spirit of the Act.
AGRICOLA
•To !>r ronrludril in mir nrxf.)