number of not less than four, nor more than eight Senatorial districts, to be always composed of contiguous territory; so that each district shall elect an equal number of Senators annually, as nearly as may be; and no county shall be divided in the formation of such districts."

By the schedule annexed to the constitution, and forming a part of it, five Senatorial districts were created, and provision was made for the election of sixteen Senators, who were so classified in accordance with section 5, article 4, as to require the election of eight Senators annually, under that apportionment.

In 1838, the State was divided into seven Senatorial districts, and a new apportionment of Senators was made, providing for the election of 17 Senators. (Laws of 1838, p. 169.) By a subsequent act of the same year, it was provided that the first district should, at the then next election, elect two Senators, one of whom should be elected for one year, and one Senator annually thereafter, and that the fourth and sixth districts should elect two, one of whom should be chosen for one year, &c. (Laws of 1838, p. 247.)

By a law of 1841, (p. 147,) the State was divided into six Senatorial districts, and a new apportionment made, increasing the number of Senators to 18, and by a subsequent act, (Laws of 1841, p. 190,) it was provided, that the two Senators elected at the then next annual election in each of the first and second districts, should, at the first session after their election, be classified by lot into two classes, one of whom to serve for one year, and one for two years.

The next division and apportionment is that provided for in the act referred to in the resolution under consideration, and which also provides for the classification contemplated by said resolution.

These several acts have received the approval, successively, of three several chief executive officers of this State; and those of 1838 and 1841, the acquiesence without question, so far as the committee are aware, of those personally interested; and, so far as precedent can have any authority, they establish the true construction of the provisions of the constitution referred to, in favor of the validity of the law in question, and the power of the legislature to provide for a classification of Senators in such cases.

Section 3, article 1, of the constitution of the United States con

tains the following provisions :

"The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legislature thereof for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote."

"Immediately after they shall be assembled, in consequence of the first election, they shall be divided, as equally as may be, into three classes. The seats of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year, of the second class at the expiration of the fourth year, and of the third class at the expiration of the sixth year, so that one third may be chosen every second year."

There is no provision in the constitution of the United States for any classification after the first; and yet, as new States are from time to time admitted into the Union, and choose their two Senators for six years, those Senators are classified, and their seats are vacated at the expiration of two, four, or six years, according to their classes.

There is so striking a parallel between these provisions and those of our own constitution herein referred to, and the course of proceeding under each, that your committee are induced to believe that the former were adopted as a model in framing the latter.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that the Legislature have no power under the constitution, to classify the senators after a new division and apportionment, and that when senators have been elected for two years, their seats cannot be vacated at the end of one year by a classification, as provided by the act of 1846. The constitution requires that one half the senators "as nearly as may be, shall be chosen annually," after the first session of the legislature, and that "the state shall be divided, at each new apportionment, &c., so that each district shall eleet an equal number of senaof 1846, apportions

tors annually, as nearly as may be." The law to the first and second districts four senators each, and requires three of them to be chosen in the same year, and it apportions to the fourth district two senators, and requires the election of both in the same year. It fixes the number of the senators at twenty

therefore all the senators elected in 1846, hold for the term of two years, but one can be elected in each of the first and second districts in each alternate year, none in the fourth, and only nine in all. This assumption would make the law of 1846, most clearly and palpably a violation of both the provisions of the constitution last above referred to, and would render the election of senators under that law in each of said districts, a nullity.

But these last mentioned provisions of the constitution must be complied with, and how else can this be done but by a classification as provided in the acts of 1841 and 1846? No other mode has occurred to the committee, and this mode seems, upon examination, to be free from all constitutional objection. The first senators under the constitution were elected indifferently, for two years; subject however to the provisions therein contained relative to their classification.

The senators elected in 1846 were, in like manner, chosen indifferently for two years; but subject to the law enacted in accordance with the subsequent provisions of the constitutionherein before referred to.

It appears to the committee therefore, for the reasons above se forth, that a compliance with the law of 1846, in regard to the classification of senators, cannot with propriety be deemed a violation of even the strict letter of the constitution, when the several provisions relating to the question are construed with reference to each other, much less can it be deemed a violation of the spirit of that instrument.

The resolution committed to us, does not provide any mode of effecting a classification, and the act therein referred to is silent on that subject. In order to accomplish the object of the resolution, we have therefore framed an amendment to it, which is herewith reported.

S. M. GREEN, Ch'n.

Of the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, to the Congress of the United States, respectfully shows:

That the time has arrived when, in the judgment of this Legislature, it becomes their duty respectfully, but earnestly, to solicit the attention of Congress to the adoption of some measure for the liquidation and settlement of the land titles at and near the falls of St. Mary's, in this State.

The ancient rights, in virtue of which possession is now claimed, and in most instances held, of these lands, aer understood to have their origin in the stipulations contained in the second article of the treaty of amity and commerce between Great Britain and the United States, of the 19th November, 1794, commonly called "Jay's Treaty ;" and to have derived additional validity under various acts of Congress, especially under the act of 21st February, 1823, entitled 66 an act to revive and continue in force certain acts for the adjustment of land claims in the territory of Michigan," and the adjudication of Commissioners acting under its authority. By reference to the proceedings of these commissioners which are to be found in the fourth volume of State Papers, published by Duff Green, in the year 1834, page 830, and the seventh volume of reports there referred to, it will be seen that most of those land claims were, by a majority of the board, recommended to Congress for confirmation. By the act of April 17th, 1828, entitled “an act to confirm certain claims to lands in the territory of Michigan," various confirmations were passed in pursuance of the recommendation of the same commissioners not including however any of the claims at St. Mary's. Your memorialists believing that the policy of the various acts of Congress on this subject was dictated by a just sense of obligation, arising under the second article of "Jay's Treaty," above referred to, are of opinion that the ends of justice

can only be secured by a confirmation of all the claims recommended for confirmation by the commissioners under the act of February 1st, 1823, and they respectfully ask legislation to that effect.

The necessity of immediate settlement of these claims will be readily seen to consist in the rapidly increasing importance of the position of St. Mary's. A town is rapidly rising there, and in the absence of titles to land, collisions have already arisen; others are certain to ensue which must inevitably result in possession acquired and retained by violence, be productive of long, expensive and vexatious litigation.