II HE TRIB u NE.

MIR. Adams's Report,
{"character_count": 6196, "word_count": 1042, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9483000040054321], "ccnet_perplexity": [1184.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
asl,sn President Tyler announced to Congress


s,he had signed the Appcrtionment bill and de.


Sad his reasons therefor in the Office of the


Astary of State, the novelty Of the course indiA


Ia excited a very general solicitude. Rea-


Il, for signing bill passed by Congress! Why


!El Thousands of bills had been signed by eight
G.nl Presidents during period Of over half


.tary. VET no one ever offered or flied reasons


10 doing. If he vetoed bill, he gave reasons


III but never for signing one. The act Of Pre-.


Hsa Tyler is therefore wholly unprecedented,


ID, in this day of Executive eneroachment and


ssative Legislation, is calculated to excite the


ss, serous apprehensions. If the President had


s4len,ed himself with merely stating that he had


horned his official action to the will Of Con


fss, while his own private opinion was different,
esould have justified him in thus defining his
h,sti,n; but the insidious and extraordinary
Wmlc,sr Of his Reasons are entirely without
ti6cation.


ir. Adams, having obtained a copy Of the


sAsons and Select Committee thereon, made
hport to the House the subject, which has
| q for seme days awaiting place in our col
ms. We are no,a constrained to omit the first
| Eof the Report, containing constitutional ex-
spation and argumentatve denial of the right OF
tspnsidcnt Of the United States to accompany his


nprobatou of bill presented to him with any
Aalication or reservation whatever. From this,
BIZ Adam, proceeds to Ell exposition of Mr.. Ty-
Ehrs reasons, as follows:


< The President announces that one of his reasons


IN entertaining deep and strong doubts of the con-


tu,iouality Of the law which he has approved
( d signed is, that it purports to be mandatory on


h State to form districts for the choice OF Repre-


nalives in single districts.


HTha Committee believe this to be by far the
sbst importsn, ana most useful provision OF the
Fla. They believe, indeed, the establishment of
he principle absolutely Indispensable to the pre-
iraaop of the Union. The representation OF
jh 'opc by single districts is undoubtedly .he
~ .aode by which the principle OF representation
tsuccport.9g ~ nWm6eTS, can be carried into exc
tgion. TIE provision OF the Constitution is, :ha,
lie apta sCntatives sail not exceed one for every


trty ,hou.asd Of federal numbers, and every act
Ia apportionlncnt has necessarily prescribed one
3nmber for every addition of the common multiple
jithiu each of the severu! States. A more unc-
| aal mode of assembling representation of the
seopie in deliberative odv could not easily ne
5onrived than that Of zone portion chosen by agen-
|al ticket throughout the State, another portion
|y single districts, aud 4 third portion partly by


ouble, treble, and quadruple districts. This forms,
d the mass, representation not of one represcn-
alive for the common standard number throughout
he whoe Union, but of States, and cities, and sec
tonal divisions in knots and dclusters of population
y to be governed by the spirit of party lhan of pa
,riotism. Az present, seven of the smaller States
acquire an undue share Of locally concentrated
power in the House, by general ticket elections.
sitting the voices and smothering the opinions Of
State thus dsfranchized by the overbear.ng inso-
ease of majority, always meagre, and as itgrows
eaner growing more nexorable and oppressive
Tie larger States have hitherto passed over with
little notice this practical iniquity, by which the
State Of New Hampshire, with five members, pre-
'sndenes over the State ofNew-York, with forty
But tits tse nature of things impossible that this
should be suffered to continue long. The manner
# election for the members of this House must be
,nform. The general ticket or the single district
must be the common rule for all; and if the small
er States will insist upon sending members to this
House all of one mind, Newly ork, or Pennsylva-
ia, or Ohio or all three together, will, ero long,
each them by other results the arithmetical COM
inaton ofconcentrated numbers


Should the general ticket system universally pre-
all, it is obvious that the representation in this
louse will entirely change its character, from
presentation Of the People to representation of
tates, and transform the constitutional Govern
lent of the United States into mere contedera-
ion like that which, hfty-four years ago, fell to


cces for the want ofligatures to held 1t together.


1t is in the spirit of this dissolution OF the Con-
titution, and consequently of the Union, that the
resident records his surrendered doubts of the
of the apPortionmens act, because
purports to be mandatory onthe States to form
lsric,s for the choice of Representatives 10 Con-
ress in single districts. But what schpolboy does
lot know that it is the vital properly Of las to be
what is not mandatory cannot be
aw! The very definition of municipal law, by
he great jurist of England is a rule Of civil con-
lQct prescribed by the supreme power in the State
wha, is right, and prohibiting what
wrong. 1t is equally clear that the existence of
liberty herself, in any community of men, is iden-
lea! with the mandatory character of the law; and
ne only distinction between free and an arbitrary
government is, that the one is Government Of
avs, and the other Government of men.


Is the objection of the President, that this man
ssory character of the law is made applicable to
he action OF the sovereign States But the law
lerives its mandatory authority from the Consttu-
ion itself, which the States have bound themselves,
y the most solemn obligations, to obey. The COM
nand Is in the Constitution which has in express
erms vested in Congress the power exercised this
cc.ion of the act. The President admits that the
'ower of Congress, by law, to alter State regu'a-
ions respecting the manner of holding elections
or Representatives is clear; but he has felt deep
md strong doubts of the power to command the
states to make new regulations, or alter ther ex-
sting regulations.


This objection would invalidate every apportion-
nent act which has been prescribed by Congress
nying the existence of this Government. Every
u.