{"character_count": 5171, "word_count": 947, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9294999837875366], "ccnet_perplexity": [1942.9000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
mites have ever been united II hdzZdrC


nothing in saying, that there is not an IN


stance IN oer political history, from the


meeting Of the first Revolutionary Congress


TO the present day. Of the delegates Of an,


Stale voting by majority and counting pc


capita nor dc believe an instance of tht


kind can be found in The history Of any con


federated community. There Is. indeed


something monstreus IN the idea of giyinl


to The majority the right of impressing th,


vote of the minority into lis service, and


counting them as lis own. The plain rule


that which has ever prevailed, and which


conforms TO :he dictates al common sense. is


that where a State votes as State by ma


jorlty OF lis delegates the votes count one.


be they few or many. or the State large or


small. On the contrary. where the votes


OF ell the delegates are counted, they vote


individually and independently. each for


himself counting one-And ii IS To be no.


tad. that whenever this latter mode of voting


exists among confederate States, it is In all
cases founded on com pact. TO which the


consent of each State IS required.-ln the


absence OF compact the invarabIe mode OF


vote in such States is in all cases by the ma
jority. their voting counting Que. The
course which Virginia has resolved to AXE


is in violation ofthis pain and fundamental


rule, and destructive OF the foundation on


which the whole structure ON The state ri2ht
doctrine is reared.


hold il. N the next place, TO be an indis-
penSable principle, that the convention
should be so constituted as to give 10 each !
State. 10 the nomination Of candidate, the
sa me relalion Of President, making due
In far IL
BY the election mean the whole-the =. /
ven;ua choice when it goes into the House /
of Representatives. as we'll rs the primary /
vote IN the electoral College


The one Is as much par, Of The election !
as the other, The two make the whole. The I
adoption Of the one in The conventiou which I
'rdInt d the constitution. drpendtd on the a.
3option OF The ether. Neither could posi-
ply be adopted alone. The two were The


e>nt OF compromise b. tween the larger
md smaller States. afera long and doubt
al Struggle. which threatened the losS of
he constitution itself The oliec; Of giving
o The smaller Stales an quality with the
anger IN the evenlfu choice of the house.
vas to eounterpose The preponderance ofthe
hfgrr IN the electoral college. Without
his the smaller would have voted against
re whole provision. and its rejection would
ave been the consequence Even as il
idndS, Delaware voted against il. In con.
I.mation OF what | state. refer TO Mr.
dadison's repou ofthe proceedings of the ,
onventlon Having stated what | mean +
y the election II will require but few ;
,oIds to exclain my reasons for the princi-
Is have laid down. Fhevare few and .
mple and test on the ground tnat the nom
iaiIon is III reality the election If concur :
ID IN, as ar as the patty is concerned. [. +,


50 Intended To be. The leading reason :
ssigned for making it is to prevent i dlvis n
N OF the patty. aud thereby prevent The Il
ection from going into the house. where !.
e smaller Stats would have the advan. >,
ge intended to be secured 10 them by the 81
invention, by being placed on an equality n
nh the larger. Such being The intended IN
,Ject and effect, nov submi. TO every can p,
d mind. whether the conventson ought no; n,


be SO constituted as TO compensate IN The y,
'minatlon for the important advantage in ~
e election, which the smaller States wouid in
rrender by gong into convpntion2 81
nnli It not be unfair palpable want of -
cd filth and subversive of the comnrom. =.


ofthe cons, tuition 10 withhold il Or n
lem tnded would it be short ofan insul, =,
refuse2 Can it b. thought that the SIN H. ga


States are SO d~based and absorbed in n
party politics ofthe DIV, as to pprmit m
'mselves to be indirectly stripped Of a ",
III. which their high minded and patriot W.
ancestors held so dear, as even TO rref-r B,


loss OF the constitution itself rather than W,
render 1t. object then to the proposed tol
lvention ~ this connection, because il m
kes 70 compensation 10 the smaller statcs DR.
the surrender ofthIs unque stionabIe and We.
1oftant constitutional right Instead o. it .
lis advocates perempiorily and indio- ito
lily refuse any. and treat with scorn ev let


ailemPtto to secure II. Some have oone COZ
n so tar, as to deny that the eventual sid
ice OF the house constitutes any nortion cor
he election, and TO manifest open hostili. for
lgalnst the provision of the constitution me
lch contains it Tor,


there was no other objection, The one nn4ar ate
siceraiton would be inSnperable with me pet
r utterly from the advocates % The proDos- Iv
convention IN reference TO this provision -.
fd II As one nfthe first importance. moi h. "o''
e oetIeVe u TO be an indispens tble means Cip
le hands of the smaller States of nreSerVing | rep
Just and constitutional weight in The praSfo The
ial election, and through hat in The Exec -.
III believe 10 be essential ~ fbe cou
OF our sublime federal system regard tba forT
Snpnt N The ratats "a ,ra;.xL.