W A S H | N G. I @ N /.

WEDNESDAY EVENING, NOV. 80, ls43.

ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSE.
{"character_count": 4779, "word_count": 818, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9649999737739563], "ccnet_perplexity": [2042.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



A very important question will arise in the
organization Of the House OF Representatives
now ab,u to assemble. 1t IS known to our
readers that law was passed by the last
Congress- requiring members to be elected uni
formly, by single districts, under the authority OF
the clause in the Constitution which runs thus !:
sThe times, places and manner OF holding cleo
tons for Senators and Representatives shall be
prescribed in each State by the Legislature
thereof; but the Congress may at any time by
law make or alter such regulations, except as to
the places Of choosing Senators"


The passage Of tire law was warmly opposed
nv the Locos as unconstitutional, notwithstand-
mo the above clause of the Constitution ex-
pressly conferring the authority upon Congress
to pass such an act; and the States OF New
Hampshire, Georgia, Mississippi, and Missouri,
have acted in utter disregard Of it, treating it as
nullity One of the first questions, perhaps
the very first, that will arise, therefore, will be
whether the members from these States, elected,
not according to law, but in violation OF It, shall
be permitted to participate in the organization
of the House. Either the district act is the law
Of the land, or it is Unconstitutional, and there
fore null and void. If it be the former, those
who have been elected to Congress from the
States above named are no more entitled to seats
as members than we are, and any act which
Congress may pass, they being admitted as
members, NAV be decided to be unconstitutional
and void But suppose the district law to be
unconstitutional what tribunal has the right to
~ orD
tives? By no means. So long as it stands upon
the statute book, having gone through all the
forms Of legal legislation, it is the law OF the
land until its unconstiutionaty is declared by
the proper judicial tribunal, the Supreme Court
of the United States. Neither Congress as
body, nor either branch separately, can declare
an act, once passed, unconstitutional. Congress
may repeal it, or it may be declared unconstitu-
tional by the Supreme Court; but until it is re-
pealed, or jldicially decided upon, it is the law
Of the land, and must be respected as such, or
there is an end of Government.


The ground taken by the opponents Of the
single district law is, that Congress cannot COM
pei States to divide themselves into districts, and
that each State has right to be represented in
the national legislature. This argument is thus
satisfactorily answered by the Baltimore Amer
lean:


"The States, as such have no right to send
Representatives to Congress at all except under
the Constitution and the laws of Congress pass
ed in accordance Herewith. For the General
Government was created by the Constitution 1t
is special, separate existence, independent OF
the States it is Government In It's own right,
and as matter of course, it has full power to
say how its officers and functonares shall be
chosen, what their duties shall be, and in short
to prescribe such rules as to it shall seem fit for
the proper performance of its uses. The Consti-
tuition does this in respect to fundamentals, and
Congress has discretion to act farther when me-
cessary, in accordance with the terms Of the
Constitution. Now the States may be as sove-
reign as they please in their particular sphere
. but here is another Government beyond their
spheres and including them. Their original SOW
ereignty gives them no right whatever TO inter-
fere with this other government; their only right
is derived from the Constitution. The States, on
the plea of their individual sovereignty, have abb
stractly no more right to send Representatives
to Congress than they have to claim seats for
their delegates in the British Parliament. III
then the General Government prescribes form
according to which the members of one branch
Of its Legislative council shall be chosen--and
its constitutional right to do this no one can
deny--it follows, that the States have no alter
native but TO comply with such regulation or &c
unrepresented. The notion of a compulsory die
tation on the part Of Congress towards the States
commanding them to pass laws for single dis
tricts, is founded upon fallacy. Congress nei
ther dictates, commands, nor compels. Itmerely
saws that representatives shall be chosen in q
particular way, and until that act of authority is
proved to be unconstitutional, there is no room
for a single word of gainsaying. If the States
wish to send representatives all that they have
TO do is to elect them according to the mode ant
manner prescribed. If they have hitherto pre-
scribed the mode and manner themselves, it has
been by sufferance merely. OF themselves ant
in themselves, apart from the Constitution, they
have no right to do so-no more than they have