before the power was exercised by Congress,
some years since, in 1842, when they deter-
mined that the whole of the United States should
be districted? I ask if he can show me any
power to deny the right of any State to lay
itself off into Senatorial districts?
Mr. HOWARD replied. I cannot show any
such case, nor do I believe it is necessary for
the support of the argument. But what, sir, I
deny is this: I do not deny the power of the
States to lay it off into districts, so far as to en-
able the voters of the district to cast their votes,
because is it nothing more than an execution of
the power of prescribing the manner of elect-
ing representatives, which right was reserved
to the States by the Constitution of the United
States. But there is a distinction between the
manner of electing members of the House of
Representatives and the manner of electing
Senators. In that respect, and that only, do I
think there is any difference in the effect of this
clause upon the election of Senators and Repre-
sentatives. I only speak of the manner of elect-
ing to each, and of the necessary distinctions
which exist from the very thing itself. The
manner in which the Legislature proceeds,
either by a concurrent vote or a joint ballot in
the election of a Senator is one thing, and the
manner in which the people shall assemble to-
gether to elect a representative is a very differ-
ent thing. For example, there is no necessity
for electing a Senator upon any given day, be-
cause the appointing power is in daily exist-
ence. But the people must have notice of the
time at which they are to assemble at the polls
in their respective districts. Hence there must
be a law to regulate the latter, whilst there need
be none to regulate the former. That is all
comprehended under the constitutional word
"manner" of electing a Senator or Representa-
tive; and when you come to prescribe the man-
ner of electing of members of the House of
Representatives, the State then exercises the
power by dividing itself into districts, owing to
the necessity of the case. The State must pre-
scribe the manner how the people can get to-
gether; consequently, there must be some will,
some common instruction as to where they must
meet and upon what day. They must be gath-
ered together in accordance with some previous
notice. That, however, is not necessary in the
case of a Senator; but I do say, that while I ad-
mit the power of a State to district itself under
the clause prescribing the manner of electing
members of the House of Representatives, it
has no right to declare that a citizen of the State
who may not be a resident of the particular dis-
trict shall be ineligible, although he may possess
the qualifications required by the Constitution of
the United States. So that the operation of the
clause is the same as to either branch of Con-
gress. The State has no more right to annex
the disqualification of non-residence to Repre-
sentatives than she has to Senators.
The people in your district, Mr. President,
had as much right to elect me to represent them
as they had to elect you. Each House of Congress
as a right to judge of the returns and |
qualifications of its own members; and in the
exercise of this right, the wise policy has been
pursued of keeping open and unobstructed the
avenue which leads from the people or the Le-
gislatures to the respective branches of Congress,
so that the best talents of the nation may
find their way to the Government of the United
States. Congress has a right to keep the path
free from any impediment which the States
may put there.
The case cited is a very old case, and I do
not think it has been overruled; and the same
question would be decided by the Senate in the
same way, notwithstanding any article which
we may place in our constitution.
Mr. BLAKISTONE. Does the gentleman con-
tend or entertain the opinion that the people
living without the district (as prescribed and
defined by the Legislature or by Congress) have
the right and power to vote and control the
election within the district, and elect a per-
son as Representative to Congress without his
having a majority of the legal votes within the
district, and without his being a resident of the
district for which he shall be elected?
Mr. HOWARD, By no means. That Legis-
lature has a right to specify the qualifications.
The Congress has nothing to do with that—the
elective franchise belongs exclusively to the
State. The Legislature have a right to say
where they shall vote, and when to vote. That
is a different thing altogether.
Mr. BLAKISTONE. The authority to which
the gentleman from Baltimore county (Mr.
Howard) has referred, is the case of Joshua
Barney vs. William McCreery, of Maryland, in
the volume of contested elections in Congress.
This was the case of an election in a congres-
sional district composed of Baltimore city and
county, and entitled to elect two Representa-
tives. Nicholas P. Moore had 6,164 votes, and
resided in Baltimore county. William Mc-
Creery had 3,559 votes; Joshua Barney, a resi-
dent of Baltimore city, had 2,063 votes, and
John Leal, also a resident of Baltimore city,
had 353 votes. William McCreery, whose scat
was contested, had for a number of years resi-
ded in the city of Baltimore. In 1803, he and
his family removed to his country seat in Balti-
more county, and from that time spent the sum-
mer in the county, the winter in Baltimore
city, and that at the time of the election he re-
sided in Baltimore city. He had 1,496 more
votes than Barney, and I believe the Congress
did right in giving him his seat. But I do not
arrive at that conclusion by the same process
of reasoning adopted by the committee. It
would have been anti-republican to have given
the seat to the contestant Barney, he having a
minority vote greatly below the vote given to
McCreery, This, no doubt, had its influence,
and right it should, all other things being equal.
McCreery, when he went to reside upon his
country seat in Baltimore county, in the sum-
mer of 1803, went with the intention of return-
ing to Baltimore city (where he had resided for
a number of years) in the winter. He did so, |
