Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« David E. Young's books on half price sale | Main | Disgruntled progressives stocking up on guns »

Electoral College nonsense from the NY Times

Posted by David Hardy · 21 December 2016 06:07 PM

The editorial's author(s) apparently can't be bothered to do a little research before writing that the Electoral College was a concession to the slave states:

"The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America's original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes."

The EC was a concession to small (in population) states. If we go back to the Census of 1790 to see which those were, just counting while males above the age of 16, the largest state was Virginia, with 110,000 of them. That was just about equal to the COMBINED populations of the same class of persons in Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Maine, and Delaware. North and South Carolina each had such populations larger than Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Delaware, taken individually. The only small southern states were Kentucky and Georgia, which were on the western edge and growing. It was widely assumed that this would continue, since the southern states could expand into good farm land to their west, while the midwest, still unexplored, was thought to be too cold for farming.

So the Electoral College was a concession to the small states, the great bulk of whom were located in the northeast, not the south.

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Mark-1 | December 22, 2016 7:28 AM | Reply

β€œHe who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984

CDR_D | December 22, 2016 4:26 PM | Reply

I think it was Mark Twain who observed "if you don't read newspapers you are uninformed, and if you do read newspapers you are misinformed."

Timeless truth, that.

Leave a comment