October 28, 1803

I am not )gnorant,liawever, that a very different turn has been given to this business; that the proposed alteration in the mode of electing the President and Vice President has been presented under a very different aspect to the public view. A respectable member from Pennsylvania (Mr. Orbod) has indeed undertaken to give us the whole history of the amendment, as he terms it, and infers from thence, that such an alteration in the Constitution has been long contemplated and wished for by all parts of the Union. He tells us that a former member from South Carolina, the State I have the honor at this time to represent, had brought forward a proposition to the same effect; that a similar one had once originated in New Hampshire; that the State of New York had two years ago submitted to the consideration of Congress a resolution proposing in substance the verv alteration now about to be adopted, and that it had been before us during both of the last sessions. All this, sir, is no doubt true, but I draw a very contrary inference from it to that of the honorable gentleman. He has proved to be sure that certain individuals, some parts even of the Union, have at different times, for party and local purposes, or from whatever cause, proposed and EErhaps been desirous that an alteration of this ind should be made in the Constitution. He has proved however at the same time, and not less evidently, that the great body of the Union have always been opposed to any such change; that the public mind has not heretofore been ripe for it : and even at this moment, sir, I feel the most perfect conviction, that if the people had time and could take a correct and temperate view of the real merits of the question, if the irritation of . the moment, the party feelings of the day, could be laid aside, the small States in particular could never become so wantonly felo de ae — to commit such evident self-murder if I may be allowed the expression — nor could the Constitutional majority in the two Houses of Congress, still less the Constitutional number of States, ever be found to ratify so great, so all important an innovation and change in the fundamental principles of the Federal compact. The chance of ultimate success depends, I am confident, even now, upon the party feeling and party zeal of the times, and the itiita* tion which was excited and has been so industriously kept up since the late contested election of the President. I was myself, as you know, sir, one of the actors in that scene, and I may venture to say, that, from the peculiar situation in which I was placed, I had it m my power lo judge more cooly and dispassionately oi the occurrences of that day than almost any other individual in the United States. It is well known to every one who knew anything of me at the time, that I was a warm, sincere, and zealous advocate of the two gentlemen who were understood to be the Federal candidates. The majority of the Electors, however, having given the votes to the two candidates who were brought forward and supported in opposition to them, and they having- been found to have equal voles, it devolved upon the House of Representatives to fix upon the one of the two characters who should fill the office of Chief Magistrate. In ibis state of things, it is no secret, that although we afterwards voted by ballot, that I separated from my political friends, and those of my colleagues who were on the floor, and performed the painful taskof acting in direct opposition to them; I consequently voted invariably for the candidate who ultimately prevailed, and now fills the office of Chief Magistrate of the United Stales, until the last ballot, when I withdrew into an adjoining committee room, in order to facilitate a decision of the contest. Situated as I was, therefore, it may well be imagined that I could not be over zealous, or feel any very peculiar interest in the success of either of the two candidates who were opposed to each other. 1 had acted according to the best of my judgment, and in compliance with the dictates of my conscience, in voting for the one; while my political friends gave a preference to and supported the other. I could consequently take a perfectly dispassionate view of the subject, and must say that the zeal and violence of party appeared to me lo give much more importance to the contested election than it was intrinsically entitled to. I showed, by my vote, my own opinion and wishes to be in favor of the person who was elected; and inasmuch as I believed that he would be more acceptable to the majority of our fellow-citizens out of doors, and more especially to those in that portion of the Union from whence I came, and of whose opinions and feelings I could judge most correctly ; insomuch, I acknowledge, that I should have I fretted and deemed it a misfortune if the eleciioD ad terminated differently.

But, sir, I could not then suppose, nor do 1 yet think, that the salvation and political happiness of the Republic depends so entirely on the elect! of any one man as President, however great good tie niieht be; nor could I persuade myself that it would be so monstrous and terrible an event] JD an elective yet complicated government like ours, if, of two individuals brought forward by precisely the same description of Electors, to Gil the two tirsloffices underthe Government, that one of them, whom they were supposed to hold up for the second office, (and consequently in case of accident to the other to supply his place, and be to all intents and purposesChief Magistrate,) should have been preferred by their political opponents, and through their means have in the first install ce been constitutionally elected to the highest office. I well know that of the two federal gentlemen whom had originally advocated, although I should no doubt have given a preference myself to the one, yet I should have been perfectly satisfied lo see either of them put at the head ofthe Qovernment, had they had the majority and equal votes; for, I repeat it again, I cannot persuade myself ihal the political salvation of the Republic depends upon the election of any man as President. To me indeed it appeared, during the whole course of the election, that there was one result far more to bedeprecated, and which might have given rise to consequences beyond the ken of human foresight.' I frequently shuddered at the idea, that it might possibly happen, from the enthusiasm of party zeal, the violence of party prejudices, and the irritation ofthe moment, that neither side would give way, and the country might be left in a sort of interregnum, without executive officers, or perhaps any Constitutional means to obtain them ; and it has often struck me as a peculiarly fortunate circumstance that the contest was between two individuals originally brought forward by Electors of the same political description, and not between the favorite candidates of the two opposite parties, each supported by his immediate parly friends. In my humble opinion, the great desideratum, the only thing necessary to be done, is to make some provision, which would insure, in such or any other case in which the election of the Executive devolved on the House of Representatives, that a selection of one or other of the candidates should take place before the House separated, or its political dissolution took place; or that, if an election did not take place, one of the candidates, io consequence of superior age or whatever other cause preference might be deemed most eligible, should of course be the President. I have not however touched upon the late contested election, in the intention of discussing the pro and con with respect to the relative merits of it, neither is it my intention to deny the abstract proposition, that the will and the wishes of the people ought to be coolalled in elections. I wish only losliowthat this alteration — even allowing it for a moment to be desirable, yields but a partial remedy, to a partial and comparatively speaking trivial and temporary i, whilst we leave a most awful and very possible event unnoticed and unguarded against.

My further object has been, to recall to the nr collection of this House, and, as far as my feeble voice avails, of the nation at large, that our Government isnot only Republican but Federal; that the provisions of the Constitution are of a very complicated nature ; that they have been formed upon the general principles of free government, so modified as to comport with those of a federative alliance ; and at the same time to quiet tbe fears, jealousies, and apprehensions, and to compromise the clashing interests and opposite pretensions of therespeclive States which compose this great and flourisning Union. 1 beg of gentlemen therefore to pause and reflect and then decide, whether it be: really correct and agreeable to thedictates of sound sense and good policy to alter or rather totally annihilate one of the great and leading features an original compact, in order to obviate, at the most, a momentary inconvenience. For t trust 1 have gone far enough to prove, whilst I venture to foretell, without pretending to the j[i ft of prophecy, that a case similar to the one which has lately taken place will never again happen ; yet Ihaiif suchan event should again turn up, and of 1 two individuals who had an equal number of the votes of all the Electors appointed, the one should be made President, (by the selection the House of Representatives voting by States,) and in consequence of the present indiscriminate mode of election, who might not perhaps be the most immediately acceptable to the majority of all the inhabitants of the Union, taken in the aggregate, (and the inhabitants of the large States must of necessity form such a majority.) yet I say, should such an event take place in the course of things, I have I trust gone far to prove that it is at worst, but a partial, temporary, and very restricted evil, arising necessarily out of a peculiar form of government, the natural consequence ofour territorial divisions and the political provisions and modifications advisedly adopted to compromise our various interests, foreseen at the lime our national compact was formed, yet adopted as a minor and necessary sacrifice to ml far greater evils ; and as presenting the perhaps the only mode of compromising the jarring interests, of satisfying the opposite pretensions, and of quieting the jealousies, fears, and apprehensions of the various members, so unequal ■" -■'■* power, population, and riches, who are at le so happily united in one great confedSuch, Mr. Speaker, is, in my humble opinion, e true point of view in which this and every other proposition to alter our national compact ought ever to be considered — such is the point of view in which the subject now under consideration has presented itself to my luiod. 1 have therefore complied with my sense of duty and obeyed the dictates of my conscience in opposing the alteration to the Constitution, which it is now proposed to make. I know full well the popular feelings and sentiments are against me on this question, and that what falls from a gentleman on this side of the House, is, in the actual state things, not very favorably received out of di and for the raosi part atiributed merely to party feelings and parly opposition. In the present in- ■tance, however, I can in honor and with truth declare that 1 act from no party motive or party considerations whatever. My objections and opposition to the resolution on your table, are the lemlt of B sincere conviction in my own mind; after the most dispassionate and attentive consideration I have been able to bestow on the subject; and 1 most fervently pray that whilst we are endeavoring to extricate ourselves from a dilemma of secondary importance, necessarily growing out of our peculiar mode of government. and to provide a remedy against a partial inconvenience, we ftaaj not inadvertently place ourselves in a tabyriDih of difficulties and expose our posterity to a multitude of evils, more fatal to the peace and happiness of this Union, than we are any of i this time aware of.

Mr. HASTiHoa. — Mr. Speaker, t do not rise the purpose of going into an elaborate discussion upon the subject of the proposed amendment the Constitution, (for that has been already very fully debated,) but merely to slate some of the reaRODs which will influence me in voting against it. I have always believed, sir, that the Federal Constitution was as much the result of compromise and mutual concession, as of great deliberation and wisdom; and that alterations in this charter of our national union ought to be made with extreme caution. In respect to the amendment proposed, I have understood that in the Convention of delegates that framed the Constitution, variety of ways for electing President and Vice President were proposed and all rejected, until the new Constitutional one was offered, which was agreed to; with this mode of electing a President and Vice President, I am satisfied. I believe many advantages result from it; by the present mode, the Electors in giving their votes for two persons to be President and Vice President, will be induced (from the uncertainty which of the two voted for will be elected President) give their ballots for two persons, either ot whom shall be well qualified to discharge the important eiwers or duties of First Magistrate of the nali nt, if the proposed amendment prevails, will the office of Vice President, in all future elections. be considered as a mere sinecure? And though the person voted for to fill the office may be well qualified to perform the duties incumbent upon im as President of the Senate, yet he may be wholly unqualified to fill ibe office of President of the United Slates, and a person in whom the American people would have no confidence as such: but by the proposed amendment, upon such unfit person — in the event of the removal of the President from office,death, resignation, or his inability to discharge the duties and powers of the office — will devolve all the duties and powers of First Magistrate. Another advantage that I conceive may be the effect of the existing Constitutional mode of electing a President and Vice President, Is, that it may be the means of checking and moderating the rage and violence of party spirit, and of controlling and putting down faction, by the election of a President who may be agreeable to the wishes of the minority, and thereby produce an equilibrium of power between contending parties. Besides, sir, I fear, if the amendment obtain^ that it may give a weight and influence to tbc large Stales in the Union, in the election of a President and Vice President, that ibey ought not to possess ; and though I have the honor to be a Representative from a State of some consequence in ifae Union, on accountof its population and resources, still I cannot wish that Massachusetts, in this or any other way, should acquire any uadne advantage or improper influence over xba smaller States.

In fine, the reasons and arguments that I have heard in this House in the course of the debate, particularly those offered by the honorable gentleman from Bomb Carolina, last up, (Mr. HnoER,) have convinced me that the proposed amendment ought not to made. I will not say, Mr. Speaker, that the Constitution is perfect w all its provisions; there is a particular part of it, in article first, section second, and third paragraph, that fixes the rule of representation, which I wish to see altered in due time. I wish to see this part of the Constitution altered, because I wish to see upon the floor of this House an equal representation of free citizens, and of free citizens only. As the Constitutional rule now is, the representation is made unequal. But this it will be said was also the effect of a spirit of accommodation and compromise. It was a compromise, however, by which one part of the Union has obtained a great, and in my opinion, unjust advantage over other parts of the Union. A compromise, sir, by which the Southern States have gained a very considerable increase of Represenfeiatives and Electors, founded solely upon their numerous black population. 1 hope, sir, that in the year 1808, an alteration will be made in this part of the Constitution, and that the representation, by being proportioned only to the number of free persons, will be rendered equal and just. I hope; also, that those gentlemen who now advocate the proposed amendment to the Constitution, will then, if tneroben of this House, be also the advocates for altering and amending this part of the Constitution — the friends and advocates of an equal representation, founded upon the population of free persons only. I will not occupy the attention of the House with further observations, or repeat what has already been said by gentlemen against the amend* ment : I will only say that, in my opinion, it is neither necessary nor expedient to make the proposed alteration in the Constitution, and that I hope it will not be made.

Mr. Tbatober. — Having waited in expectation of hearing the arguments of gentlemen in favor » the resolution, I feel great regret at the silence which they have thought proper on this occasion to observe. This course, though not entirely novel, was not anticipated upon a question of great national importance; a subject which invites, which demands investigation.

Mjr colleague (Mr. Eustis) has slated to the House ihal, in the year 1797, the Legislature of Massachusetts voted to instruct the Senators and to request the Representatives of that State in Congress, to propose an alteration of the Constitution similar to that now proposed. A gentleman from New York (Mr. Thomas) has informed Ds that a similar vote passed in the Legislature of that Stale. As these two stale meats are the only answers (if such ihe^ can be considered) to the various arguments which have this day been adduced in opposition to the resolution, and as the gentlemen who have made them appear to consider these votes of the State Legislatures obligatory upon the membersof the House who now represent those States, I beg leave to state as succinctly as possible some of the reasons which will induce me to vote against the resolution.

An amendment of the Constitution must be sanctioned not only by two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, but must be ratified by three-fourths of the State Legislatures. The Constitution considers these different Assemblies as entirely independent of each other. They must act with perfect independence upon this subject, or this provision of the Constitution is virtually destroyed. Most certainly the resolution of a State Legislature, in 1797, ought not to control the votes of members of this House in 1803. It is, I conceive, not only their right, but their duty to decide upon this question with the most perfect independence of opinion.

It has been alreadyurged that the Constitutional mode of electing the President and Vice President is admirably calculated to disappoint intrigue and prevent corruption. Should an aspiring and dangerous faction obtain the ascendency in this country, this mode of election affords the means of counteracting its influence, of checking its control. For although such a party will make the greatest exertions to elect that leader who may chance to be the idol of the day, while the Electors are obliged to vote for two candidates, without designating which is intended, those Electors who are not devoted to the interest of the ruling faction will exercise a preference of great importance, they will select the candidate least exceptionable.

The article, which this resolution proposes to alter, has always been considered as the great barrier and shield of the smaller States against the encroachments of the large. By the present mode of election, provided it is effected by the Electors, each Slate has its due proportion of influence. If it be decided by the House of Beprelentatives, the Constitution has put the States upon the ground of perfect equality. But, if the proposed alteration takes place, it will undermine the very basis of the Confederacy ; it will throw the whole power, in this most important election, into the hands of a few States exclusively. With the present population five States ma7,bv combination, exclude the other twelve from all participation in the choice. It will be totally impossible, by any precaution whatever, to prevent such a combination.

The situation of the States forming the Federal Constitution, and the nature of the compact itself, furnish strong evidence of the policy of the article under consideration. It was absolutely necessary that some of the rights of the individual Slates should be secured for the interest and safety of all. This Constitution, to use the language of the Convention who framed it, "was the result of a spirit of amity, and of that mutual deference and concession which the peculiarity of our political situation rendered indispensable. Upon no other principle is it possible to account for ihnl article of the Constitution which provides for the representation of slaves. This article operates with peculiar inequality in the Northern and Eastern The represent a lion of slaves adds thirteen members to this House in the present Congress, and eighteen Electors of President and Vice President at the next election. Yet the whole of New England contains but thirteen hundred and thirtyone slaves. Massachusetts and Vermont have The New England States have submitted to this inequality, sensible of the extreme danger of tampering with the Constitution. But, if it is to be altered, justice requires that the article authorizing the representation of slaves should be the first to receive amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I know that the objections to the article proposed to be altered are plausible — they are popular ; but I am confident that, upon close examination of the different modes of electing our First Magistrate which have been proposed, none will be found to combine so many advantages as that prescribed by the Constitution. The Journal of the Convention evinces that this was a subject of long discussion and mature deliberation. It was devised by a most illustrious assembly of sages and patriots; itwas adopted at a time when the heat of party had not influenced the country ; shall we then, at a time when party feelings animate all parts of the Union, shall we destroy one of the firmest pillars of our political fabric? I trust, sir, we shall not venture into the boundless region of hypothesis, that we shall not alter one of the fundamental principles of the Federal Constitution.

Mr, J. C. Smith rose and observed, that the friends of the resolution had been so occupied with its details, he feared they had lost sight of its principle. And he was not a little confirmed in this suspicion, from their profound silence on the present occasion. But as he felt so, he could not but express a faint hope that a Constitutional majority of the House would not be found to yield their assent to the proposition. Mr. S. said, it was worthy of remark that no alteration had yet been made in the national compact. Of ihe eleven articles subjoined to the Constitution as amendments, ten were mere declarations of certain rights, not materially affected by that instrument, and which had their origin in State jealousy, and the remaining one was intended only to settle the construction of an article in the Constitution , which had before been considered of doabtfulimport; he alluded to the BmeDdroeni tespectiog the suability of States. ll had been repeatedly acknowledged, Mr. S. said, by gentlemen od all sides of the House, that the CoDsiilulioD of the United States was an affair of compromise — Iheresuh of a spirit of amity and mutual concession. But was there a gentleman on that floor who could inform what were the precise terms to that compromise? What sacrifices were made? What equivalents were eiveat If so, he would thank him to state to the House what mighty bcoo was accorded to the eastern section of the nation in return for that remarkable provision of the Constitution, which permits slaves to become a basis of representation ID that House, and which indeed renders them no jneflEcient agents even in the choice of the Chief Magistrate himself. For his part. Mr. S. said, he would confess he knew not what recompense could have been adequate to so extraordinary a concession. In truth, neither he nor any other member present could declare the exact manner in which the jarring interests, the conflicting claims oftheseveral Stales, were adjusted in Convention. It, therefore, became a matter not only of delicacy but of extreme hazard, to touch the instrument with ever so slight a hand, lest the arrangement, thus happily made, should be broken down and destroyed.

Mr. S. said, he had ever understood the smaller States were, in Convention, peculiarly tenacious of that particular provision in ibe Constitution which was now proposed to be modified. The reasons were appareni— and they had been so clearly and forcibly stated by the gentleman who had preceded him, that it was quite unnecessary for him to detain the House upon that point. The consequence of those States, in the election of President, was thereby, in some measure, preserved ; they were enabled, in some degree, to counteract any combination which might be formed between four or five of the larger States to keep the office of Chief Magistrate in perpetual rotation among themselves. But, Mr. S. said, cogent u these reasons were, he apprehended they were not the only object of the provision. He said, it ■was no doubt desirable that the Executive power ot the Government should be vested in an individual ; but the Convention must have perceived, as indeed it was very obvious, that such an office in an elective Government must become a prodigious lure to ambition; that as the power, the patronage, the duration, and the emoluments of the office were augmented, in the same proportion would be the violence of competition between rival candidates, in the same proportion would the order and tranquillity of the nation be endangered at the return of every election. This evil, so formidable in its nature, if not rescinded, is at least mitigated by the existing provision of the Constitution. For, while it effectually secures'to the nation an eventual choice, it places it wholly beyond the reach of any candidate to calculate confidently on the issue of his pretensions. Such an uncertainty, arising not from the casualties incident to ordinary elections, but from the cttcumit even a majority of the electoral votes ultimately secure the office, must ever - powerful check to corrupt or ambitious views. The aspiring demagogue, willing to barter wealth for distinction, would hardly be induced to lavish his treasures upon so hazardous an eZ' periment. And even the man in possession of the office would scarcely be templed to use unworthy means to retain it, when its preservation must be so much a thing of chance. It was, (Mr. S. said,) to complete this refined process; to complicate it in such a manner as to effectuate this great object alone, that the office of Vice President was instituted. And I demand of gentlemen what apology they will make to the American people for retaining this officer if the present amendment is to prevail? What duties has he to perform other than such as are devolved upon the Speaker of the House? Why will you pay him five thousand dollars, annually, merely to preside in the deliberations of the Senate, who might as well elect one of their own body for that purpose? And why, sir, will you keep here a high officer, with a liberal salary, for no other earthly purpose than to enable him, from his proximity lo the Government, to cabal with greater effect for the succession? If pretensions to economy rest not solely in profession, gentlemen will now abolish this sinecure; they will finish their amendment by expunging the office of Vice President from the Constitution.

Mr. S. said he would close his remarks by seriously asking gentlemen whether the present resolution had not grown out of an overweening anxiety lo secure, at all hazards, the re-election of the present Chief Magistrate ? ^ The Speaker said it was improper to introduce the Chief Magistrate into the debate.

Mr. SuETB said he was not about to speak disrespectfully of the President, but he would say that no modification whatever of the Constitution, having for its object either to enlarge the power, or to facilitate the attainment of that office, ought to be attempted, so long as the incumbent, whoever he may be, is considered as a candidate for a re-election. Sir, said Mr. S., I will again ask gentlemen, whether they will suffer themselves lobe influenced on this great question by their predilection for an individual ? Are they prepared to immolate the Constitution of their country upon an altar erected to private friendship and personal esteem ? Will they remember that the conservative Senate of France " desirous of furnishing a proof of national gratitude," proposed to the French people, to amend their Constitution by creating napoleon Bonaparte Consul for life! IC the two cases are not altogether parallel who can say there is much diff'erence in principle? And who, sir, will be answerable for ine consequences, if the National Legislature will permit themselves to be governed by considerations of a personal nature, when acting upon a subject infinitely momentous, not only to themselves but to remotest posterity ?

Mr. Thomas said that he was in favor of the amendment as it then stood in the resolution, and hoped that it would receive the support of a ConstituiioD&l majority of that House. Atibe same time, he confessed that heshould have been betrer satisfied had it gone no further than lo designate the President and Vice President, because he thought the more it was trammelled with detailed provisions, the greater the hazard of its final ratification by the respective State Legislatures.

He was not at all alarmed at the variety of opinions which had been expressed on that question, even by those in favor of the general principle. Ou a subject of so much importance to the welfare of this country, it was natural to expect a difference of sentiment, as to its bearings, and the lengths to which it ought to go. He was happy, however, to find the appearance of a disposition on the part of those honorable gentlemen to concur in passing the amendment, since it embraced the important object of designation, although it was not shaped exactly agreeable to their wishes. He rejoiced to find that, with respect to the great principle contained in the resolution, there appeared but one opinion in that House, unless it was from a quarter from whence we look for opposition on all occasions.

On this question, however, said Mr. T., I do confess that I am greatly disappointed in finding two of my honorable colleagues (Mr LivirfoeTON and Mr. O. QRiawoLD) hostile to this measure ; considering that the Legislature of the State from which those gentlemen are Representatives, in January, 1303, unanimously recommended, in the most impressive terms, the adoption of this amendment to our Constitution, notwithstanding at that time a respectable minority of one branch, and a large majority of the other, coincided with those gentlemen in political sentiment. Knowing this, Mr. Speaker, I did expect, and I think I had a right to expect, different conduct on the part of those honorable gentlemen on this occasion. With the permission of the House, he would read a letter addressed to him as a Representative of the State of New York, on that floor, by the President of the Senate, and Speaker of the House of Assembly of that State, enclosing two resolutions, one of which embraced this object.

[Here Mr. T. read the letter alluded to, and then remarked, that it was not his intention to enter into the merits of the question; he only rose with a view to state this circumstance, and to express his disappointment in finding those gentlemen opposed to this amendment.]

Mr. LtviNoaTON said he should net have risen but for the remark of his colleague. (Mr. Thomas.) He had, at the time alluded to the honor to be a. member of the Legislature of New York, but he was in a small minority. He had then the .same opinion of the majority as at present. He did not, therefore, imagine that anything that came from him would succeed, and did not think it in the least useful to oppose himself to the torrent.

Mr. Eustis did not rise to discuss the merits of the amendment, but to answer the call of his colleague, QMr. Habtihgb.) In 1797, as well as he recollected, the Assembly of Massachusetts in- ■tiucted their Senators ud advised their Representatives lo vote for an amendment to the CoU' stitution, founded on the same principle with the present amendment. He presumed the gentleman from Massachusetts was ignorant of this fact, or he would not oppose the voice of the people of that State.

Mr. Hahtinos confessed his ignorance of this circumstance. But, had he known it, he should not have considered himself bound to make sacrifice of his own opinion to such instructions. He had no idea that, when a person was chosen to represent the people, he was under any obligation to pursue a line of conduct contrary to the dictates of his own mind, whatever might be the instructions of his constituents. If, after a thorough consideration of a measure, which heshould be thus instructed to vote for, he should be coO' vineed that it would operate against the interest of his constituents, he asked if ne were not under a solemn obligation lo act in opposition to his instructions? Because such measure, if carried into effect, might operate to the disadvantage, perhaps destruction, of the public good. He would not, however, enter into a discussion of this point, but satisfy himself with saying that, if he was instructed by every free citizen of Massachusetts to vote for a measure, which, after mature reflection, he was convinced would prove injurious, he should pursue the dictates of his own judgment and vote against it.

Mr. Dama.— It is extraordinary that the gentleman (Mr. EusTis) should rise to make this explanation. Does he mean to say to the Representatives of the people, the State Legislatures may issue their mandates to you, and though they are not your constituents, you shall, nevertheless, obey them 7 They are not our constituents ; they are not authorized to give us instructions ; and we are not bound to obey them when given.

Mr. Eustis said, he had barely risen to^ive the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts informmerely to state a fact, for the information of his colleague, as, from the observations he had made, it might be inferred that the State of Massachusetts was adverse to the principle of this amendment. It was far from his intention lo oppose the sentiments of the Legislature of Massac n use Its to the will of that House. He honored the independence his colleague expressed. It was, to be sure, an independence that went lo the utmost limit a Representative could have of his constituents. Yet, he did not censure him for asserting ■ On ■ subsequent day, Mr. Eustis stated that he had made inquiry respecting the instructions of the Legi>- tature of Massachusetts, to which he had on a preceding day referred, without having been able to obtain satisfactory information. He was inclined to think he had been in error in stating their existence; ; and, with this impression on his mind, he considered it due to his colleague (Mr. Hastings) lo render an apology for the remailia he had applied to him.

Since the period of the above debate, a letter baa been addressed to the Secretary of the Commonwealth Mr. Tbomas ssbfd bU colleague. (Mr. LivinoSTOH,) as a member of the Legislature of New York when 'iusir jctionr were given to vote for a similar amendment, whether a majority of the Senate of that State were not of the same political sentiments with himself?

Mr. LyoN said, he should not have risen on this occasion had he not heard the old subject of irritation harped upon. Gentlemen opposed to the amendment of ilie Constitution, under consideration, had introduced the hackneyed topic of the leprese Dial ion of the slaves, and talked of that as being a sacrifice in the formation of the compact 00 the part of the States who held no slaves, and as included in the general compromise ; for himself, although he had formerly the honor of representing a State where there were no slaves, and now had the honor of representing a State where slavery is allowed of, he had not changed his opinion, nor held two opinions on the subject; he always considered the article of the Constitution alluded to as containing the compromise on that subject within itself, and that the sacrifice was on the part of the people where slavery is admi^i- Me. Numbers was agreed on as the basis of representation ; it certainly was the best criterion to form an estimation of the property and of the ability of the States to contribute to the public expenditure; but the States where the blacks were free, say to the States where the blacks were slaves, your slaves must not be counted in the on the subject, who has returned a certified copy of the instructions, the nature of which appears to have been correctly stated by Mr. Eaitii. It will be perceived that their date varies from that stated by him. and that Ihoj are more recent by two year* than he represented them. They are u follow: Commonwealth of Mittaehuteltt.

U SiHiTi, Ftb. 38, 1800. WAtmu the LcfisIatdTeorthe State of Vermont, on the fifth day of November last, passed two resolves, in the words following, vii :

"SriTaov VjiajioiiT. "In General Assembly, Nov. 6, 1799. " Resolved, That the Senators andRepresentatiieB of this Bute in the Congress of the United States be, and they hereby are, requested to use their best endeavors that Congress propose to the Legislatures of the several States the following amendment to the Constitution of the United States, vii : That the Electors of President and Vice President in giving in their votes, shall respectively distinguish the person whom they desire to be President from the one they desire to be Vice President, by annexing the word President or Vice President, as the CBBO may require, to the proper name voted for; and the person having the greatest number of votes for Vice President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors chosen, shall be Vice President ; and if there be no choice, and two or more persons shall have the highest number of votes, and those equal, the Senate shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for Vice President ; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list, the Senate shall in like manner choose the Vice President; but in choosing tbe Vice President, the votes shall be taken by States, the Sauton from each State having numbers to be represented. The natural reply was, why not count our black people as well as you count yours? we enter not into your local policy, nor examine what kind of freedom yoa allow to black or while ; yet they gave up iwolifihs of their slaves as a compromise, so the sacrifice was made by them. For myown part,said Mr. L., the opportunity 1 have had of feeling the operation of both the freedom and the slavery of the black people, convinces roe that the blacks who are slaves are much more useful and beneficial to the community and to the nation, according to their number, than those that are free ; and 1 always have considered this subject, when brought up, as mere matter of exclamation, and intended to create popular murmur and discontent.

Oa the question whether the resolution should pass, it was carried in the affirmative — yeas 86, nays 31, as follows :

NiTB — Willis Alston, jr., Nathaniel Alexander, Isaac Anderson, John Archer. David Bard, George M. BeditiKer.Pbsnael Bishop, William Blackledge, John Boyle, Robert Brown, William Butler, George W. Campbell, Levi Casey, Thomas Claiborne, Joseph Clay, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Frederick Conrad, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, William Dickson, John Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, John W. Eppes, William Eustis, William Findley, John Fowler, Peterson Goodwyn, Andrew Gregg, Wade Hampton, one vote. A quorum for this purpose shall consist «C a member or members from two-thirds of the States; ; and a majority of all the States shall be necessary to a choice. And in case the Senators and Representatives of this State in Congress, shall find that the aforesaid amendment is not conformable to the sentiments of a Constitutional majority of both branches of the National Legislature, they are hereby requested so to modify tba same as to meet the sentiments of such majority.

" Provided, however. That any amendment which may be agreed on, shall oblige the Electors todesignata the person they desire to be President, from the one whom they desire to be Vice President.

" Resolved, That his Excellency the Governor be requested forthwith to transmit the same to die Supreme Executives of the several States."

Which resolves have been communicated by the Supreme Executive of the State of Vermont to the Supreme Executive of this Commonwealth.

Kaohtd. That the Legislature of this Commonwealth have a high sense of the wisdom and patriotism of the Legislature of the State of Vermont, and accord with them in the opinion, that it is expedient that the Constitution of the United States be amended in lbs manner contemplated in the aforesaid resolves of the Legislature of the State of Vermont.

^UD/rerf,/urfAer, That the Senators and Representatives of this Suie in the Congress of the United States be, and they are hereby, requested to adopt Ihcne eosBsry measures to effect the amendment aforesaid.

Remhed, further. That his Honor Urn Lieutenant Govemorbe,andheiBhereby,requested(o commnnieata the foregoing resolves to the Supreme Executive of the State of Vermont, and also to transmit copies Ibeleof to the Senators and Representatives of this Cl wealth in the Congress of the United States.

Approved, March 4, 1300.

John A. Hanna, JoaUb Hasbrouck, Daniel Heister, Jo- ■eph Heister, James Holland, David Hnlmea, John G. Jacluan, Walter Jones, William Kennedy. Nehemiah Knight, Michael Leib, John B. C. Lucas, Matthew Lyon, Andrew McCord, William McCreery, David Meriwether, Samuel L. Mitchill, Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Moore, Jeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Thos. Newton, jr. Joseph H. Nicholson, Gideon Olin, Beriah Palmer, John Patterson, John Randolph, jr., Thomas M. Randolph, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, Jacob Richards, Cesar A. Rodney. I^rai Soot, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Elieni Seaver, John Smilie, John Smith of New York, John Smith of Virginia, Richard Stanford, Joseph Stanton, John Stewart, David Thomas, Philip R. Thompson, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Philip Van Corttandt, Isaac Van Home, Joseph B. Vamum, Daniel C. Verplanck, Matthew Walton, John Whitehill, Marmaduke Williams, Richard Winn, Joseph Winston, and Thomas Wynns.

Nats — John Campbell, William Chamberlin, Martin Chittenden, Clifton ClBggetl,Manaveh Cutler, 8amael W. Dana, John Davenport, Thomas Dwight, Calvin Goddard. Thomas Griffin, Gaylord Griswold, Roger Griswold, Seth Hastings, William Hoge, David Hough, Benjamin Huger, Samuel Hunt, Joseph Lewis, jr., Thomas Lewis, Henry W. Livingston, Nahum Mitchell, Thomas Plater, Samuel D. Purviance, Joshua Snnds, John Cotton Smith, William StedmBn,JamcB Stephenson, Samuel Taggart, Samuel Tenney, Sam. Thatcher, and Lemuel Williams.