The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, Eighteenth Congress, First Session, [Volume 2] Page: 1,817
1697-3280, cxxxvi p.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1817
HISTORY OF CONGRESS.
March, 1824.
Massachusetts Contested Election.
H. of R.
United States, as established by the Constitution,
affords in itself a strong presumption against the
inference, that persons, who remain here in the
execution of public functions, intend to relinquish
their domicii and concomitant privileges in the
States from which they came. Those functions,
in many cases, cannot be performed elsewhere,
and the territory of ten miles square is allotted as
the central point in the Union for their perform-
ance. Add to this the fact, that the citizens of
this District are governed by laws, in which no
representative, elected by their suffrage, has any
voice, and it is evident that an ambition of po-
litical distinction, such as the sitting member has
repeatedly evinced,-could not here be successfully
indulged. Surely it ought to be only in clear
cases that the House- should adopt a conclusion,
which divtests a citizen of rights in his native
State, without remitting him to equal rights else-
where. The case of a navy yard or arsenal, is
analogous in principle, the jurisdiction of those
places being ceded to the United States. Sup-
pose a citizen of Charlestown, an officer in the
navy or marines, to reside within the limits of the
navy yard with his family for a course of years,
as is often the case; will it be alleged that his
residence within the territory and jurisdiction of
the United States, divests him of his rights as a
citizen of the State? JMo such doctrine can be
supported. The injustice is too obvious. The
residence in the public ground is like residence
on board a public ship, and an absence for years
in a public ship will not be pretended to produce
disfranchisement. Residence in this District, solely
employed in public business, without the power of
acquiring and enjoying the common privileges of
eitizens of the United States, and without the in-
tention or wish to possess the imperfect and muti-
lated rights of the citizens here, ought by no
means to be construed a divestment of the ample
rights and privileges of a free citizen of one of the
sovereign States of this Union.
A gentleman from New York yesterday, (Mr.
Storrs,) proposed several questions, all of them
in substance admitting of one answer. He asks
what would be the condition of an inhabitant of
this city, in case of a retrocession of the territory
to Maryland"? My reply is, the citizens would
then be citizens of Maryland ; but the residents,
not citizens, would then, as at this time, retain
their rights in their several States.
The Committee of Elections suppose it to have
been a favorite provision in the Constitution, ob-
tained by the exertions of those who were cham-
pions for maintaining " State distinctions and
State feelings," that the representatives should be
inhabitants of the States in which they are elect-
ed. Admitting this to have been the fact, the de-
finition of the term, contended for by the commit-
tee, would defeat this desirable purpose. Since
the " local existence," required by the report, is,
in its nature, transient; whereas the construction
I have supported supposes continuity and perma-
nence of domicii. Another object of the provision,
supposed by the committee, was to prevent those
who had held offices under the " General Govern-
ment," meaning, probably, the Executive branch
of the Government, from being elected to the Le-
gislative branch; and, yet, by their construction,
those who have held such offices, for any period
whatever, have only to transfer their " local exist-
ence," their temporary abode, from the Seat of the
General Government to the State where they are
to become 'candidates, and the objection is re-
moved ! Nay, the necessity of even, this tempo-
rary return is only necessary forsubordinate "
officers, clerks, &c., but is not affirmed to be ne-
cessary for the chief officers and H^ads of De-
partments. Had the framers of the Constitution
had this object in view, they would not have made
a provision so easily evaded, nor would they have
guarded against the election of inferior officers,
while those of superior station remained eligible.
Against the latter there might sometimes be
grounds of jealousy. They, when resident here,
might, indeed, sometimes, too much identify them-
selves with the Executive, and their partiality
might remain after they should have obtained
seats in this House; but of inferior officers there
can be very little danger of this sort. The hum-
ble sphere in which they moye precludes' the sus-
picion. On the other hand, it cannot escape the
attention of the sagacious people of this country,
in selecting their representatives, that the knowl-
edge of public business, of the intricate details of
the various departments, which may be acquired
in this subordinate situation, may be highly ad-
vantageous in the halls of legislation. Knowledge
of this nature would enable Congress, while it
ferreted out and exposed depredations upon the
public treasury, if any existed, to do justice to the
honorable and faithful in all the Departments of
the Administration.
It is impossible, by provisions in a constitution,
to supply the want of knowledge, or virtue, or
vigilance, in the people. If these are wanting,
the strongest barriers will be overleaped or pros-
trated. But, happily, in our country, and I speak
especiallyof theStatefrom which I have the honor
to be a representative, the people are the faithful
guardians, by whom the purity, the spirit of the
Constitution will be most strenuously defended.
The letter of the instrument may be evaded by
cunning or corruption; the spirit is secured, re-
posing on the affection of millions of freemen.
If the member from Norfolk is to be deprived
of his seat, on what ground, let me inquire, will
the House decide? Let him, at least, have the
consolation of knowing whether he is disqualified
because his "local existence" was not in Massa-
chusetts at the time of the election, or because the
intention of returning was not sufficiently estab-
lished, or because he married a. wife in this city,
or, lastly, because he held a subordinate office in
an Executive Department; or, if not for either of
them, severally, whether the disastrous result is
the consequence of all these causes conjointly ?
I trust, however, the decision will be in favor
of the member; in favor of the Constitutional
elective franchise; in favor of the respectable ma-
jority of his fellow-citizens, who have already
passed judgment upon the very point now in con-
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Gales and Seaton. The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, Eighteenth Congress, First Session, [Volume 2], book, 1856; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30369/m1/63/: accessed March 29, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.