LAW LIBRARY 
 
 Duke University 
 durham, n. c. 
 
Digitized by 
 
 the Internet Archive 
 
 
 
 in 2015 
 
 
 
 I- 
 
 https://archive.org/details/proceedingsdebat01virg 
 
PROCEEDINGS 
 
 AND ^ J 
 
 DEBATES 
 
 , OF THE 
 
 VIRGIIVIA STATE CONVEXTIOX, 
 
 OF 
 
 1829-30. 
 
 TO WHICH ARE SUBJOINED, 
 
 THE NEW CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 VOTES OF THE PEOPLE. 
 
 No free government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people j but by a firm adhe- 
 rence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to funda- 
 viental principle*. —Ymai^^i a Bill of Rights. 
 
 LAW UBRARY 
 
 RICHMOND ! 
 
 PRINTED BY SAMUEL SHEPHERD &1 CO 
 FOR RITCHIE & COOK, 
 
 1830. 
 
Eastern District of Virginia, to wit 
 
 Be it remembered, That on the thirteenth day of August, in the fifly-fiflh 
 I****""*; year of the Independence of tlie United States of America, PtiTCHiE & 
 * L. 8. ♦ Cook, of the said District, have deposited in this office, the title of a book, 
 the right whereof they claim as proprietors, in the words following, to wit; 
 
 " Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention, of 1829-30. To which 
 are subjoined tJie jXezo Constitution of Virginia, and the Votes of the People. JYo free 
 Government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm 
 adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent re- 
 currence to fundamental principles. Virginia Bill of Rights." 
 
 In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, " An Act 
 for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts and books, 
 to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned." 
 
 R'D JEFFRIES, 
 Clerk of the Eastern District of Virginia. 
 
PREFACE 
 
 It IS vini)*-:ccssaiy to go into the liibtorv oi tlie various attempts, 
 which have been niade in Virginia to revise her Constitution. It is 
 enough to say, that alter repeated failures in the Legislature, a bill 
 was passed durmg the session of 18^7-28, for taking the sense of 
 the voters on the call of a Convention. In the course of the year 
 1828, the polls were opened, and the question was carried by 21,896 
 to 16,646 votes. Immediately a deep interest was spread through 
 the Commonwealth. The people began to cast about for such men 
 as were best qualifie4 to serve them. There was no restriction in 
 their right of selection, either as to the office which was held, or as 
 to the place where the Delegate resided. Each of the twenty-four 
 Senatorial Districts, into which the State had been previously divided, 
 was entitled to four Delegates ; and in some cases, the people of one 
 District were induced to look into others for such men, as they thought 
 best fitted to represent them. The consequence of this great ex= 
 citement was, that an assembly of men was drawn together, which has 
 scarcely ever been surpassed in the United States. Some have even 
 held it to be equal to the celebrated Convention, which met in Vir= 
 ginia in the year 17SS, to pass upon the Federal Constitution. Much 
 of what was venerable for years and long service ; many of those 
 who were most respected for their wisdom and their eloquence ; 
 two of the Ex-Presidents* of the United States ; the Chief Justice 
 of the United States ; several of those who had been most distin- 
 guished in Congress, or the State Legislature, on the Bench or at 
 the Bar, were brought together for the momentous purpose of laying 
 anew the fundamental law of the land. 
 
 The scene was truly an interesting one, not only to the State itself^ 
 but to the L^nion. Almost all eyes were fixed upon it. Several distin- 
 guished strangers, as well as many of the citizens of the State, were 
 spectators. The great importance of the subject, as well as the high 
 character of the members, diffused an interest over it, which has 
 been very seldoni equalled : and it may be truly said, that the reahty 
 did not disappoint the pubhc expectation. The Debates were of the 
 most animated sort. The fundamental principles of Government, 
 the elements which should enter into the composition of all its va- 
 rious departments, were discussed at great length, and wdth much 
 mgenuitVs The struggles between the local interests of difi:erent 
 parts of the State, were likewise maintained with great spirit and 
 
 * It is remarkable, that Mi Madiaon tvas the only survivor of the Convention, 
 -^Thich formed the first Constitution of the State; and one of the two surviving mem- 
 bers of thi Convention^ which formed the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 ^^^^^ LAWUBRARY 
 
iv 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 perseverance. At length, after a session of three months and a half, 
 and after a contest, which called into play most of the wisdom and 
 eloquence of the House, a Constitution was formed, which was sub- 
 sequently proposed to the people, and ratified by a vote of 26,055 
 to 15,563. 
 
 The present volume comprises the Proceedings and Debates of 
 this important Convention. It is as complete a history of them, as 
 can be obtained : Not a resolution, nor projet, nor vote, which has 
 been designedly overlooked : Scarcely a Debate, which is not attempt- 
 ed to be sketched. The Pubhshers, fully aware of the deep interest 
 which these proceedings would excite, not only at the moment of ac- 
 tion, but for all future time, were anxious to rescue them, as far as 
 possible, from oblivion ; and they accordingly looked around for the 
 best Reporter that could be obtained. The skill of Mr. Stansbury, 
 of Washington, in reporting the proceedings of Congress, is well 
 known to the citizens of the United States ; and the Pubhshers deem 
 themselves fortunate in having obtained his ^rvices, as a Reporter 
 for the Convention. The public may be assured, that they have 
 spared no pains in making their volume as perfect as possible. Many 
 of the Speeches have since been revised by the members, and many 
 of the Debates are now published for the first time. Yet the Pub= 
 lishers cannot be insensible to the imperfections of the work. No 
 Stenographer can take down every thing accurately. No elforts of 
 our own could supply what was defective. Some of the orators had 
 neither the time nor the inclination, nor even the means, of enlarg- 
 ing the sketches of the Stenographer ; and we feel it due to some of 
 them, frankly to confess, that we are far from having done justice to 
 some of their Speeches, It is not easy to report the Speeches of 
 such orators as Randolph, and Leigh, and Giles; and if these, or 
 any other gentleman, should think fit to complain, that their argu- 
 ments have been omitted, or misrepresented, we can only assure 
 them, and the public, that we have done the best within our power. 
 If the volume we now lay before the public be not complete, we are 
 sure at least that it is valuable ; and we may be perhaps excused the 
 harmless vanity of expressing our surprise, that instead of not doing 
 more, we have done so much. Such as it is, it is calculated to assist 
 in interpreting the provisions of the Instrument itself, by shewing 
 the ^'fundamental principles,'''' and the various views to which " re- 
 currence''^ has been had in its formation. 
 
 We subjoin to the proceedings of the Convention, a copy of the 
 Constitution which they framed, and the Votes of the people upon it. 
 
 Ail which is now respectfully submitted. 
 
 RITCHIE & COOK, 
 
 Richmond. .luo;ust, }SSO, 
 
FROCF.SmNGS ANI> DEBATES 
 
 OI^ THE 
 
 COMYENTIOW OF YIKGI^^IA. 
 
 MONDAY, OcTOBKR 5, 1829. 
 
 The Convention elected for tlie purpose of revisijig the Constitution of this State, 
 assembled this da}'- in the Capitol. The attendance was very general, the entire 
 number of Delegates being present with tlie exception of six persons, detained by- 
 indisposition. 
 
 At a little after 12 o'clock Mr. Tvladison rose and addressed the Convention. He 
 stated the propriety of organizing the body by the appointment of a President; and 
 he therefore nominated James INIonroe as qualified to till the Chair ; and one whose 
 character and long public services rendered it unnecessary for him to say more than 
 present him respectfully to the notice of the House. 
 
 No other candidate being put in nomination, the question was put on the nomination 
 of Mr. Monroe ; and he was elected nem. con. 
 
 Messrs. ivladison and jMarsiiall having conducted him to the Chair, he addressed the 
 Convention nearly in the follovring terms : 
 
 Having served my country from very early life, in all its highest trusts and most 
 difficult emergencies, from tlie most important of wliich trusts I have lately retired, I 
 cannot otherwise than feel with great sensibility, this proof of the liigh confidence of 
 this very enlighiened and respectable Assembly. It was my earnest hope and desire, 
 that a very distinguished citizen and friend, who has preceded me in several of these 
 high trusts, and who had a just claim to that precedence, should have taken this station, 
 and I deeply regret the considerations which have induced him to decline it. The 
 proofs of his very important services, and the purity of his life, will go down to our 
 latest posterity ; and his example, aided by that of others, Vvdiom I need not mention, 
 will give a strong prop to our free system of government. 
 
 I regret my appointment from another consideration : a fear, that I shall not be able 
 to discharge the duties of the trust, with advantage to my country. I have never 
 before held such a station, and am ignorant of the rules of the House. I have also 
 been afflicted of late, vdth infirmity ,"which still exists to a degree, to form a serious 
 obstacle. Being placed, however, here. I v.^ill exert my best faculties, physical and 
 mental, such as^they are, at every hazard, to discharge its duties to the satisfaction of 
 tliis Assembly, and of my country. 
 
 This assembly is called for the most important object. It is to amend our Consti- 
 tution, and thereby give a new support to our system of free republican government : 
 our Constitution was the fii-st that Vas formed in the Union, and it has been in opera- 
 tion since : We had at that period, the examples only of the ancient republics before 
 us ; we have novv' the experience of more than half a century of this, our own Con- 
 stitution, and of those of all our sister States. If it has defects, as I think it has, 
 experience will have pointed them out, and the abiUty and integrity of this enlightened 
 body, will recommend such alterations as it deems proper to our constituents, in whom 
 the power of adopting- or rejecting them is exclusively vested. 
 
 All other republics have filled. ° Those of Rome and Greece exist only in History. 
 In the territories wliich they ntied, we see the ruins of ancient buildings only ; the 
 
2 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Governments have perished, and the inhabitants exhibit a state of decrepitude and 
 wretchedness, which is irightful to those who visit them. 
 
 On tlie subject of order, and the method of proceeding, I need not say any thing 
 to this Assembly. The importance of tlie call, and the manner of election, give am- 
 
 ple assurance that no danger need be apprehended on that subject. Our fellow-citi- 
 zens, in the elections they have ;nade, have looked to the great cause at issue, and 
 selected those whom tliey thought most competent to its duties. They have not de- 
 
 voted tiiemselves to individuals, but have regarded principle, and sought to secure it. 
 In this [ see strong gronad to confide in the stability and success of our system. It 
 inspires me with eqn:i\ confidence that the result of your labors will correspond with 
 tiieir jnost sanguine hopes. 
 
 i\Ir. Gordon then moved that the Convention proceed to the election of a Clerk, and 
 nominated Mr. Spottswood Garland of Nelson, as a suitable candidate. 
 
 Mr. B. W. I.eigh proposed tlie name of Mr. George W. Munford of this City, late 
 Clerk c)f the J louse of Delegates. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, tii:it of Erasmus Stribblinfr of Augusta. 
 Mr. Morris, tiiat of Ednmnd Pendleton of Caroline. 
 Mr. Green, that of David J. Briggs ; and 
 Mr. Stan.u-d, that of Thomas B. Barton. 
 
 These nominations were accompanied with recommendatory remarks, and in some 
 cases with documentary testimony in favor of the respective candidates. 
 
 The Convention then T>roceeded to ballot ; and a Committee, consisting of the gen- 
 tlemen who had nominated the candidates, having been appointed to count the votes, 
 Mr. Gordon of tliat Committee, reported them as follows : 
 
 For Mr. Munford, 38 votes. 
 
 " Stribbling, 18 
 Garland, 6 
 Briggs, 16 
 " Barton, 4 
 Pendleton, 4 
 The entire number of ballots put into the box having been 86, and consequently 44 
 being requisite to a choice, it appeared that neither of the candidates had been elected. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge observed, tliat according to the rule of the House of Delegates, the 
 lowest on tlie ballot is tlrop]H!d on the next ballot. 
 The result of a second l)allot was as follows : 
 
 For Mr. Munford, 45 votes. 
 
 Stribbliiig, 19 
 " Gorland, 18 
 Briggs, - 6 
 
 Barton, 1 
 Pendleton, 0 
 89 ballots were given in, and 45 being necessary to a choice, Mr. George W. Mun- 
 ford was declared to be duly elected, having received that number precisely. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now stated that at a former Convention, the rules of the House of 
 Delegates had been adopted, so far as they would apply, to regulate the proceedings : 
 in conformity with that precedent, he then proposed the following resolution : 
 
 Rcsnlrrd, That the Rules of the late House of Delegates be adopted by this Con- 
 vention, as rules to govern its proceedings and deliberations, so far as they apply. 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 On motion of Mr. M'Coy, the Convention then proceeded to elect a Serjeant at 
 Arms. 
 
 Mr. Powell nominated as a suitable person for that situation Mr. William Randolph 
 of Frederick county. 
 
 Mr. Cabell nominated Col.. Tames Sawyers of Pittsylvania. 
 Mr. Samuel Taylor proposed Mr. Wade Mosby of Powhatan. 
 Mr. Garnett nominated Mr. David Meade Randolph. 
 Mr. Morris nominated Mr. Samuel Jordan Winston ; and 
 Mr. Campbell proposed the name of Peter Francisco. 
 
 The ballot being taken, the result was reported by Mr. Powell, from the Committee 
 appomted to examine the ballots, as follows : 
 
 For William Randolph, 25 votes. 
 
 " James Sawyers, 14 
 " V/ade Mosby, 12 
 " David M. Randolph,' 4 
 Samuel J. Winston, 14 
 " Peter Francisco, 17 
 Scattering, 3 
 
 The entire number of ballots having been 89, and 45 requisite for a choice, there 
 was of course, no election by this ballot. ' 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 3 
 
 A second trial was equally unsuccessful, the votes standing as follows : 
 For William Randolph, 39 votes. 
 
 James Sawvers. 12 
 Wade3Iosbv. ' 11 
 David 31. Randolph, - 0 
 
 Samuel J. Winston, 11 
 Peter Francisco. 16 
 A third ballot being taken, the issue was as follows : 
 
 For William Randolph, • 59 votes. 
 
 Janies Sawvers, 15 
 Wade Mosbv, ' 0 
 Samuel J. Yi'inston, ■ ~ 0 
 Peter Francisco, 13 
 Scattering, 2 
 So William Randolph was duly elected Serjeant at Arms, 
 On motion of 3Ir. Clopton. the following resolution was then adopted : 
 Resolved, That the P.eporters for the IS'ewspapers in the town of Richniond, be 
 admitted to seats for the purpose of taking notes of the proceedings of the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 The Roll of the House was called, and the following was the result : 
 
 A LIST OF DELEGATES TO THE CO^^VENTION. 
 
 r 4 • t -c a T rn ^ n 7 f John W. Jones, of Chesterfield, 
 
 district of .Amelia. C fie stern da. Lumber- -n • ■ w t • i ^ + 
 1 1 i' .. ' r> 7 / ' 7 J Reniamm W. Leisrh. oi Cheste 
 
 land Aot oiray, PawhcUan, a,id Toiai^ g^J,^^^ rj. of Chesterfield, 
 
 of Petersburg, . Willi.m R r.Hp.«. rr^n^.^ nf At^ 
 
 W^illiam B. Giles, (Gov.) of Ameha. 
 
 r William H. Brodnax. of Dinwiddle, 
 District of Bi'unsfcick, Dijuciddie, Lu- J George <D. Dromgoole. of Brunswick, 
 yienburg , and Mecklenburg, j Mark Alexander, of INIecklenburg, 
 
 t^Yilliam O. Goode, of Mecklenbm-g. 
 
 District of the City of WiJliiimshurg, f J. IVIarshall. (C. J. U. S.) of Richmond City, 
 Charles City, Fdizabeth City, James ] John Tyler, of Charles City, 
 City, City of Richmond, Henrico, ycic] Philip X. Nicholas, of Riclnnond City, 
 Kent, Waricick, and York, ' i^JohiiB. Clopton. of 2Sew Kent. 
 
 r Peachy Harrison, of Rockingham, 
 rx-^ • , r c7 J 1 J T> I ■ 1 j Jacob 'Williamson, of Rockuio-ham, 
 District of Shenandoah and Rocknighrcm,^ ^y^y-^^^^ Anderson, of Shenandoah, 
 
 Samuel Coftman. of ShenandoaJi. 
 
 f Briscoe G. Bald^vin, of Augusta, 
 District of Augusta , Rockbridge and Pen- \ Chapman Johnson, of Augusta, 
 dleton, ^ ] William M'Coy. of Pendleton, 
 
 [_ Samuel ^I'D. Moore, of Rockbridge. 
 
 !. of Monroe. 
 
 District of Monroe, Greenhrier, Bath, Bo- \ ^y^^^-^ of Greenbrier, 
 
 eming B. Miller, of Botet 
 j^John Baxter, of Pocahontas 
 
 tetourt,.meghany,Pocuhofitas and AV^ Fienfino- B. MiUer. of Botetourt, 
 
 District of Sussex, Surry, Southampton { ^f^]} ;y^l^^^^^^^^ 
 
 Isle of night, Prince George andJ,^ Auo-ustine Claiborne, of Greensville, 
 Lrreen^viue, j^^-^ Urquliart, of Southampton. 
 
 f John Randolph, of Charlotte, 
 District of Charlotte, Halifax and Prince j "William Leigh, of Halifax, 
 Edward, i Richard Logan, of Halifax, 
 
 1^ Richard N. Venable, of Prince Edward. 
 
 f James Madison, (Ex-P.) of Orange, 
 j Philip P. Barbour, of Orange, 
 j David Watson, of Louisa, 
 [_ Robert Stanard, of Spottsylvania, 
 
 District of Spottsijhania, Louisa, j Philip P.^ Barbom:, of Orange, ^ _^ 
 
 Orange and Madison, I David Watson, of Louisa, 
 
4 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 James Monroe, (Ex-P.) of Loudoun, 
 Cliarles F. Mercer, of Loudoun, 
 DisLricL of Loudoun and Fairfax, ^ William H. Fitzhugli, of Fairfax, 
 
 Richard Fi. Henderson, of Loudoun. 
 
 r John Pc. Cooke, of Frederick, 
 J Alfred H. Powell, of Frederick, 
 Vtdlricl of Frederick and Jtjj'craon, liierome L. Opie, of Jefferson, 
 
 * Thomas Griggs, jun. of Jefferson. 
 
 f William Naylor, of Hampshire, 
 District of Ihnnpshire, Ilardi/, Berkeley \ William Donaldson, of Hampshire, 
 aiuL Morgan, \ Elisha Boyd, of Berkeley, 
 
 (^Philip C. Pendleton, of Berkeley. 
 
 f John B. George, of Tazewell, 
 District of Washinirton, Lcc, Scolt, Rus- j Andrew M'Millan, of Lee, 
 
 D'clL and luzcwcU, | Edward Campbell, of Washington,, 
 
 1^ William Byars, of Wasliington. 
 
 f John Roane, of King William, 
 District of King William, King and ) William P. Taylor, of Caroline, 
 Q,uccn, FsseZy Caroline and Hanover,] Richard Morris, of Planover, 
 
 James M. Garnett, of Essex. 
 
 r Gordon Cloyd, of Montgomery, 
 District of Wijthc, Montgomery, Grayson \ Henley Chapman, of Giles, 
 and Giles, \ John P. Mathews, of Wythe,- 
 
 William Oglesby, of Grayson. 
 
 District of Kamuoha, Mason, Ca&cW, [^^''"1 ^- 
 
 Randolph, Uarnson Lewis, iVoodand\ "J^^"^. ^^'^^^J^ Ca^^^l. 
 
 Lossan, 
 
 I ^ewis Summers, of Kanawha, 
 l^Adam See, of Randolph. 
 
 f Philip Doddridge, of Brooke, 
 Disl' ict of Ohio, Tyler, Brooke, Monoii- \ Charles S. Morgan, of Monongalia., 
 galia and PrvMon, j Alexander CanipbeU, of Brooke, 
 
 (^Eugenius M. Wilson, of Monongalia. 
 
 rJohn S. Barbour, of Culpeper, 
 
 District of Fauquier and Cvhwpcr, \ f^f Fauquier, 
 
 ^ ] John Macrae, of Fauquier, 
 
 l^John W. Green, of Culpeper, 
 
 r Littleton W^. Tazewell, of Norfolk Borough, 
 Dtslnct of Korfolh, Princess Anne, J\an- j Joseph Prentis. of Nansemond, 
 
 semond and Borough of Aorfolk, 1 Robert B. Taylor, of Noriblk Borough, 
 
 tGeoige Loyall, of Norfolk Borough." 
 
 . , f William Campbell, of Bedford, 
 
 District of CamphcU, Buckingham and j Samuel Ciaytor, of Campbell 
 ^*^dJord, ^ Callohill Mennis, of Bedford,' 
 
 t James Saunders, of Campbell. 
 
 n- , • , r 7 7- r> • , f ^eorge Towucs, of Pittsylvauia, 
 
 District of Iranklm, Patrick, Henry and J Benj. W. S. Cabell, of Pittsylvania, 
 PUtsylvanm, \ Joseph Martin, of Henry, 
 
 t Archibald Stuart, jun. of Patrick. 
 
 n; /}// / ..7 f James Pleasants, of Goochland, 
 
 District of menmrtc, Aviherst, Kelson, \ William F. Gordon, of Albemarle, 
 FLuvanrut and Goochland, < Lucas P. ThompsoA, of Amherst,' 
 
 i^Thojuas Massie, jun. of Nelson. 
 
 District of King George, Westmoreland fiTI^^^^^^ A^' ^" of Prince William, 
 
 Lancaster, Northumberland, Richmond \ ■J^%son Curne, of Lancaster, 
 UlaJ/'ord and Prince WiUiaw. ' ) ^^^^^"^ Taliaferro, of King George, 
 
 ' U'^leming Bates, of Northumberland 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 5 
 
 rTlioma,s R. Jojnes, of Accomack, 
 District of Mnttheics. Middlesex, Acco- \ Thomas M. Ba.yly. of Accomack, 
 mcLck, jVoriluinipton and Gloucescsr, j Calvin H. Read, of Nortliampton, 
 
 [_xADel P. Upshur, of Northampton. 
 
 All the above members v/ere present, and answered to their names, v^-ith the fol- 
 lowing exceptions : 
 
 Ahsentccs — William B. Giles, from the First District ; David Watson, from the Ninth 
 District, who has notified the Executive of Iris inability to serve: Calloliiil Mennis, 
 from the Tv/entieth District ; William A. G. Dade, from the Twenty-third District, 
 (and who, it is believed, will resign, in consequence of indisposition) ; Ellyscn Cnr- 
 rie, from the Twenty-third District, dead ; and Calvin H. Read, from the Twenty- 
 fourth District (sick.) 
 
 P»Ir. Doddridge then oltered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention, be authorised and required to 
 provide the same vrith stationery, and that he do also contract for, and superintend 
 all such pub^^c printing as shall be ordered by this Convention, on the most beneficial 
 terms for the Commonv/ealth in his povrer. 
 
 In advocating the adoption of tins resolution, Mr. Doddridge observed, that he had 
 been induced to offer it to the Convention, by a desire to avoid the occurrence of any 
 thing like strife or party collisions, so apt to be excited whenever the public printing 
 of dehberative bodies was given by resolution or election to a particular individual. 
 He understood that the public printing of Congress had, for many years, been confided 
 to the management of the Clerk of tiie House of Representatives, and if he had been 
 rightly informed, it was done as well, and as much to the satisfaction of the members, 
 as it had been since the mode had been changed and a public printer appointed. He 
 feared, if the Convention should proceed to the election of a printer, its members 
 would be thrown into parties, and an mipleasant contest ensue. This he earnestly 
 wished to avoid : he believed the resolution he had had the honour to propose was 
 calcidated to avoid it, and he thought it would be acknovvledged to be practical, rea- 
 sonable and fair in its character. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas was opposed to the resolution. He most fully agreed with the mem- 
 ber, who had proposed it in deprecating the introduction of party spirit and party col- 
 lisions into this body. But he did not see why such consequences must follow the 
 election of a printer to the Convention, any more than the election of an}^ other offi- 
 cer. He presumed that oil the members would vote, in such an election, from the 
 same regard to the pubhc good and the same conviction of the fitness of the candidate 
 proposed, as they would in any other, or as they had in the ballots justtaken. He could 
 perceive no necessity whatever of putting out the small amount of printing required 
 by this body to be contracted for. The appointment of a pubhc printer was the stand- 
 ing, permanent usage of this State. There had always been such a printer appointed 
 by her Legislature, as well in the Senate as in the House of Delegates. He could see 
 no motive for a change of that usage in the present case. The public v/ork ought to 
 be done by an officer responsible immediately to the House itself: v/here vras the ne- 
 cessity for any intermediate agency He vras aware of the very respectable character 
 of the Secretary, with vrhom the resolution proposed to pla.ce this trust, nor vras it any 
 objection to that officer wliich induced him to object to the measure ; but he -wished to 
 avoid any subordinate agency as unnecessary and improper. Let the printer be ap- 
 pointed by the House itself: let liim be responsible directly to the House which ap- 
 pointed liim. As to the stationery, he took it for granted, that had already heen fur- 
 nished b}^ the Clerk of the House of Delegates : if so, he sa.v7 no need of any farther 
 provision on that subject. He was, however, uninformed on this point, being now for 
 the first time a member of a deliberative body. Seeing no good end to be accom- 
 plished by the resolution which had been presented, he Vv^as opposed to its adoption : 
 he hoped the House would reject it, and then proceed to appoint such person to exe- 
 cute its printing, as it should deem most fit and competent to that duty. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said, that he also was opposed to the resolution wlficii had been read. 
 He had had some experience on this subject as a member of Congress, and he knew 
 that so long as the public printing of that body had been put out on contract, it had 
 been very badly executed. Constant complaints had arisen, and so greatly had the 
 House of Representatives been dissatisfied, that it had been driven to resort to another 
 mode, and had consequently employed a pubhc printer appointed by law. As to the 
 idea tlnrov.m out by his friend on the left (Mr. Doddridge) that the election of such an 
 officer must necessarily excite party feehng, he could not for his part very well unagine 
 why the election of a printer should produce this effect any more than the election of 
 a door-keeper. Mr. ]M'Coy said, he did not exactly knov/ what was the practice of the 
 State Legislature on the subject of stationery, as it was now many years since he had 
 held' a seat there, but he believed it used formerly to be procm-ed by the Clerk. His 
 experience, however, was of long standing, and he did not knov/ vvliat might be the 
 
6 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 present practice in the matter ; but he hoped what stationery they needed might be 
 procured in the ordinary Avay. 
 
 Mr. Chapman Johnson said, that as there appeared to be some difference of opinion 
 in relation to the resolution before the House, and its further discussion at this tiine 
 might delay the full organization of the body, he would move that, for the present, it 
 lie 'upon the table ; and he made that motion accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge expressing his assent, the motion was agreed to nem. con. 
 Mr. Johnson then moved that the Convention proceed to elect two door-keepers ; 
 which beino- agreed to, the following persons were put in nomination : by Mr. Nicholas, 
 Littleberry^Alfen ; by Mr. Pleasants, Ellis Puryear; by Mr. Morris, Anselm Baily and 
 Samuel Ford; by Mr. Tyler, John S. Stubblefield and Henry H. Southall ; by Mr. 
 Clopton, Pleasant Pomfrey, Ritchie Ayres, William W. Gray, JuHus Martin, Chris- 
 topher S. Roane, and Thomas Underwood. 
 
 The House having ballotted for the appointment of one of its two door-keepers, no 
 choice was made : after a second ballot, Mv. Kicholas, from the Committee appoint- 
 ed to examine the votes, reported that they stood as follows : 
 
 ^ For Littleberry Allen, 62 . 
 
 Ellis Puryear, • 0 . 
 
 Anselm Baily, 2 
 Samuel Ford, ■ 0 
 
 John S. Stubblefield, . • 7 • 
 
 • Henry H. Southall, 0.: - 
 
 Pleasant Pomfrey, - 2 ' ' ■• 
 
 Ritchie Ayres, : 0 . ^ ^- 
 
 William W. Gray, ; ' - ^2 ' - 
 
 Julius Martin, - ' 0 . . 
 
 Christopher S. Roane, . 0 -•• 
 
 Thomas Underwood, 0 
 Thomas Davis, 1 
 So Littleberry Allen was declared duly elected. 
 
 Two ballots were also taken for a second door-keeper, on the ballot of which 
 John S. Stubblefield had 20 votes, and William W. Gray, 55 ; 42 being the requisite 
 majorit}^, William W. Gray was declared to have been duly elected. 
 Mr. Wilson then offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Convention v/ill proceed to-morrow, to the election of a Chaplain. 
 
 In introducing this resolution, Mr. Wilson said, that apart from all higher conside- 
 rations which belong- to the subject, he thought that a decent respect for themselves, 
 as weW as for the opinions and feelings of the community, requires of the members 
 the adoption of a resolution of this kind. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that he was by no means opposed to the object of the resolution 
 just read: very far from it: it had, on the contrary, his most hearty approbation : he 
 was, however, opposed to the mode in v/hich the object was proposed to be attained. 
 He thought a better course would be, to request the President of the Convention to 
 present to the Clergy officiating statedly in Richmond, an invitation to serve in rota- 
 tion as Chaplains to this House. This would obviate all imputation of invidious dis- 
 tinctions as implied in the election of a particular individual. Under this impression, 
 Mr. Powell said he v/ould move that the re;5olution lie for the present upon the table. 
 He accordingly made the motion, and it vv^as agreed to without opposition. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Johnson, the House then adjourned to meet to-morrow at 12 
 o'clock. 
 
 TUESDAY, October 6, 1829. . 
 The President took the chair at a little after 12 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. William B. Giles, a Delegate from the First, and Mr. Mennis, a Delegate from 
 the Twentieth Senatorial Districts, appeared and took their seats. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge of Brooke county, moved to take up the resolution he had yesterday 
 offered on the subject of the public printing, with a view to its withdrawal. Mr. Dod- 
 dridge said he was induced to take this course by a fear that his x-esolution, if pressed, 
 might possibly lead to the very evil (the excitement of party spirit) which he had 
 wished to avoid by its presentation. 
 
 The motion prevailing, the resolution was accordingly withdrawn. 
 
 Mr._ Doddridge then submitted the following resolutions, not, he said, with any view 
 to their being taken up at this tirae, but hoping that they might be permitted to lie on 
 the table, as, probably, other gentlemen might have prepared resolutions on the same 
 subject, more acceptable to the Plouse. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 7 
 
 1> Resolved, Thai a Comniittee be appointed to take into consideration the Bill or 
 Declaration of Riglits^and to report to tliis Convention whether , in their opinion, any, 
 and if an", what amendments axe necessary therein. 
 
 2. Resui ccd, That a Committee be appointed to take into consideration the Legisla- 
 tive Department of Government as established by the present Constitution, and to 
 report to tliis Convention, either a i^ubstitute for the same, or such amendments thereto, 
 as, in then opinion, are necessary. 
 
 3. Resolved. Tiiat a Comniittee be appointed to taie into consideration the Execu- 
 tive Department of Government as estabhshed by the present Constitution, and to 
 report to this Convention either a substitute for the same, or such amendments tliereto, 
 as, in their opinion, are necessary. 
 
 4. Resoiccd, That a Committee be appointed to tate into consideration, the Judicial 
 Department of Government estabhshed by the present Constitution, and to report to 
 tliis Convention either a substitute for the same, or such amendments thereto, as, in 
 their opinion, -are necessary. 
 
 5. Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to take into consideration so much of 
 the Constitution as relates to the Paght of Suffirage and qualifications of persons to be 
 elected, and to enquire whether any, and if any, what alterations or amendments are 
 necessary therein, and report the same with their opinions tliereon. to this Convention, 
 
 6. Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to take into consideration tlie proper 
 basis of representation, and the proper mode of apportioning representation among the 
 people, and to make report thereon to this Convention. 
 
 7. Resolved. That a Connnitcee be appointed to take into consideration all such parts 
 of the Constitution as are^ not referred by the foregoing resolutions, and to report to 
 this Convention either substitutes for such parts or such amendments thereto, as, in 
 their opinion, are necessary. 
 
 8. Resolved, That each Committee appointed under the foregoing resolutions, shall 
 consist of members. 
 
 On motion of ]Mr. Doddridge, these resolutions were accordingly laid upon the table. 
 Mr. fiercer moved that they be printed ;. but 
 
 ^Ir. ]M'Coy objected to this order being passed as premature, until a printer should 
 be appointed ; and, in order that the House might have such ofiicer, he moved to lay 
 the motion of Mr. ->Iercer, for the present upon the table, and that the Convention do 
 now proceed to the election of a printer. The motion prevailed : whereupon 
 
 Mr. -M"Coy nominated Mr. Thomas E-itchie as a smtable person, and accompanied 
 the nomination by a few brief remarks in its support. 
 
 Mr. Ciopton then nominated Mr. John H. Pleasants, in whose favour he said a few 
 words. 
 
 Mr. Gamett added to these nominations the name of Z>Ir. Tliomas W. ^"Miite, to 
 whose competence he brieSv bore witness. 
 
 The House then proceeded to ballot: when Mr. M" Coy from the Coimnittee ap- 
 pointed to examine the ballots, reported that 69 votes had been given, and consequent- 
 ly 45 were necessary to a choice : that 
 
 Tiiomas PJtchie had received, 54 votes. 
 
 John H. Pleasants, US 
 Thomas W. White, 7 
 Whereupon, Thomas Ritchie was declared to have been duly elected printer to the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. Wilson now asked permission to withdraw the resolution he had yesterday of- 
 fered on the subject of appointing a Chaplain : and having obtained it, lie offered the 
 following as a substitute, viz 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary be directed to wait on the Clergy of tliis city, and re- 
 quest them by an anrangement between themselves, to open the session of the Con- 
 vention each morning by prayer ; and the question having been put on its adoption, 
 Mr. Powell demanded that it be taken by yeas and nays ; but ha'v'ing failed to make 
 this demand in time, the question was taken in the usual mode, and the resolution 
 adopted ; 50 members rising in the aSirmative. 
 
 Mr. ZvI Coy now moved that the series of resolutions previously offered by ISIr. Dod- 
 dridge and now lying on the table, be printed. 
 
 ISIr. Johnson said he had not the least objection to the printing of the resolutions ; 
 but he had a proposition which he wished previously to offer to the House, and which, 
 if adopted, might perhaps render that order unnecessary : He would state it for the 
 consideration of gentlemen, and the mover of the order to print might determine 
 whetlier it would not be best to withdraw that motion for the present. What he wish- 
 ed to ask. was, that a Committee might be appointed to report upon the best course to 
 be pursued in'relation to the subjects embraced in the resolutions which it was pro- 
 posed to prhit. If such a Committee shouldbe raised, the resolutions would, as of course, 
 be referred to it for consideration, and this would supersede the necessity of printing 
 for the consideration of the House. 
 
8 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. J. said lie should not at, this time present the reasons which had induced him 
 to sug-gest this coursn of proceeding, but would try the sense of the Convention upon 
 his resolution, if the pending resolution to print should be withdraTv^n. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge expressed his hope that this would be done, as he approved of the 
 object which seemed to be the aim of the gentleman's proposition. 
 
 Mr. ]\rCoy siud, he would very clicerlully withdraw his motion, having made it 
 under a sense of obligation, in courtesy to do so, as he had caused its postponement 
 when made by another. 
 
 The motion to print was thereupon v/ithdrawn, and 
 
 Mr. Johnson offered his resolution in the following form : 
 
 Rcsohcd, That a Committee of seven be appointed to enquire and report what 
 method will be nrost expedient in Ijringing l)efore the House amendments to the Con- 
 stitution which may be preferred. 
 
 Mr. J. said that he offered this resolution in conformit}^ to a precedent set in the 
 Convention held in the State of New York, where sucli a proposition had been pre- 
 sented and received with favoia-. We was well satisfied that the opinions of the 
 members of liiis body as to many of the subjects embraced in the series of resolutions 
 on the table, were very variant, and that tliere must be nmch difficulty in deciding on 
 the proper course to be adopted. The resolution he had offered presented itself to 
 him as being the best expedient which covdd be resorted to. 
 
 Mr. Powell suggested a modification of the resolution by changing the number of 
 the Connnittee from seven (as originally proposed) to thirteen; to which modification 
 the mover readily assented. 
 
 Mr. Mercer thereupon suggested that the resolution be farther modified by enlarg- 
 ing the number of the Committee, so as to embrace one member from each Senatorial 
 District. This lie thought would be a ready and the best mode of gathering the 
 sense of the whole body. The truot committed to the Convention was an important 
 one; the enl.u-gement of the Committee would not be great, and each delegation 
 would then be "heard on the arrangement of tlie course of proceeding. 
 
 JMr. Johnson said he had no particular partiality to either of the numbers which had 
 been proposed; his main anxiety had been that such a Committee should be raised; 
 and if the enlargement last proposed met the sense of the House, he was content. 
 He therefore adopted the modification suggested by Mr. Mercer, and the resolution 
 was then agreed to, without opposition. 
 
 The President then rose and addressing the Convention, said that' he had to express 
 a wish that the appointment of this and of all subsequent Committees might be made, 
 not by the presiding ofiicer, but by the House itself. Such a course would be much 
 more agreeable to him. He had now been long absent from deliberative assemblies: 
 he had never presided in any. Many of the gentlemen present were, or had been 
 members of the State Legislature, and were much better acquainted with the proper 
 course of doing the business of such a body than he could be expected to be; his 
 health, besides, was delicate, and it would be very gratifying to him if the Convention 
 would consent to relieve liini fl-om the charge of making appointments of its Com 
 mittees. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, though very desirous of lesE^ening as far as practicable the burden 
 imposed on the presiding oiiicer, did not see how the wish just expressed vv'ould be 
 complied with, unless by a resolution altering, so far, the rules by which the Conven- 
 tion had resolved to be governed. He would cheerfullj'^ ofi'er such a resolution, did 
 lie not feel persuaded that the duty of appointing would be performed v/ith more facility 
 as well as greater propriety and more to the satisfaction of the Convention, in the 
 mode at present prescribed. They were disused to such a course as v^^as now sug- 
 gested in any of the public assemblies in the State, and he could not but desire that 
 the established mode should be adliered to. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, talving it for granted that until the resolution nov/ before the House 
 should be disposed of, no farther business v»^culd be done, moved an adjournment to 
 the afternoon, in order to give time for the selection of suitable persons to constitute 
 the Committee proposed, but subsequently withdrew the motion. 
 
 Whereupon Mr. Macrae offered the following resolution : 
 
 Ecsolred, That a Committee of members be appointed to consider and report 
 
 what rules of proceedings of the House of Delegates are applicable as rules of pro- 
 ceedings of this Convention, and what amendments thereof, if any, ought to be made. 
 
 In introducing the resolution, Mr. Macrae observed that from a defect of Parlia- 
 mentary experience, he was unacquainted with the rules of the House of Delegates, 
 wliich had in part been adopted for the government of the Convention ; and unless 
 those rules were to undergo some amendments, he should be obliged to move for their 
 being printed in their present forin. But he thought it best to afford the opportunity 
 of their being modified, if necessary. 
 
 The resolution was adopted, and the blank, on motion of Mr. Scott, was filled with 
 the word seven. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 9 
 
 The following gentlemen were thereupon nominated by the President to constitute 
 this Committee, viz : 
 
 Messrs. Macrae, Scott, Johnson, ^Mercer, Leigh of Chestertield. Barbour of Orange, 
 and Gordon. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Scott, a Committee of Privileges and Elections was appointed, 
 and the following gentlemen were named by the President as its members, viz : 
 
 Messrs. Scott, Doddridge, Nicholas, Taylor of Norfolk, TaUaferro, Pleasants and 
 Baldwin. 
 
 Oa motion of Mr. M'Coy, the House then adjourned till to-morrow, 12 o'clock. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, October 7, 1S29. 
 
 The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, and its sitting was opened with 
 prayer by the Right Rev. R. C. 2vIoore, of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 The followmg Committee of twenty-four members, one from each Senatorial Dia- 
 txict, was announced as having been appointed by the President, viz : 
 
 William B. Giles from the 
 
 1st 
 
 District. 
 
 William H. Brodnax 
 
 2d 
 
 do. 
 
 John Marshall 
 
 3d 
 
 do. 
 
 Peachy Harrison 
 
 4th 
 
 do. 
 
 Chapman Johnson 
 
 5th 
 
 do. 
 
 Andrew Beirne 
 
 Gth 
 
 do. 
 
 Joim Y. Mason 
 
 7 th 
 
 do. 
 
 John Randolph 
 
 8th 
 
 do. 
 
 James ^ladison 
 
 9th 
 
 do. 
 
 Charles F. Mercer 
 
 10th 
 
 do. 
 
 Alfred H. Powell 
 
 11th 
 
 do. 
 
 William Naylor 
 
 12th 
 
 do. 
 
 John B, George 
 
 13th 
 
 do. 
 
 John Roane 
 
 14th 
 
 do. 
 
 Henley Chapman 
 
 loth 
 
 do. 
 
 Lewis Summers 
 
 16th 
 
 do. 
 
 Philip Doddridge 
 
 17th 
 
 do. , 
 
 John W. Green 
 
 18th 
 
 do. 
 
 Littleton W. Tazewell 
 
 l^Jth 
 
 do. 
 
 William CampbeU 
 
 20th 
 
 do. 
 
 George Townes 
 
 21st 
 
 do. 
 
 James Pleasants 
 
 22d 
 
 do. 
 
 John Tahaferro 
 
 23d 
 
 do. 
 
 Thomas R. Joynes 
 
 24th 
 
 do. 
 
 On motion of 3Ir. Johnson, the resolutions introduced on the first day of the sitting 
 of the Convention, by Mr. Doddridge, were referred to the above Committee ; when 
 the House adjourned to 12 o'clock to-morrow. 
 
 THURSDAY, October S, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 12 o'clock, which it is understood will be the stated hour 
 of meeting. After prayers by Bishop Moore, 
 
 Mr. Madison from the Select Committee, consisting of one member from each of 
 the 24 Senatorial Districts, to whom the duty had been referred of devising tlie best 
 mode of arranging the business of the Convention, made the following Report : 
 
 The Committee of one from each Senatorial District, appointed to enquire into the 
 most convenient mode of proceeding in brino-ino- to the consideration of the Conven- • 
 tion, such amendments as mav be proposed to the present Constitution, have had the 
 same under consideration, and are of opinion that the most convenient method is to 
 adopt the following resolutions, viz : 
 
 1. Resolved. That a Committee be appointed to take into consideration the Bill or 
 Declaration of Rights, and to report to this Convention whether in their opinion any, 
 and if any, what amendments are necessary therein. 
 
 2. Rcsolreil. That a Committee be appointed to take into consideration the Legis- 
 lative Department of Government, as established by the present Constitution, and 
 to report to this Convention, either a substitute for the same, or such amendments - 
 
 2 
 
]0 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Uioreto, as in tlieir opinion are necessary, or tliat no substitute or amendment is ne- 
 
 'i. Rf solrrtK That tlie Ivxecntivo Department of Government as established by the 
 pn'-seut Coustitntion, be referred to a (Jommittee, to enquire and report whether any, 
 and if auv, wliat amendments are necessary. ,,.,11., 
 
 4. Rrsuh-nL Tliat tlie Judicial Department of Government as established by the 
 present Constitution, be referred to a Committee, to enquire and report whether aJiy, 
 and if any, what amendments are necessary therein. 
 
 r>. Itrsnlrcd, Tiiat all such parts of the present Constitution as are not referred by 
 the il.rt^oroing'resolutions, be referred to a Committee, to enquire and report whether 
 any, and if any, what amendments are necessary therein. 
 
 i). J ir..-(>li:cd,' That no original resolution offered to the Convention proposing any 
 aniiuuhn'-Mit to the CDustitulion or Declaration of Rights, be discussed on its merits in 
 the I louse, till it shall have been referred. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, the report was laid on the table, and ordered to be 
 printed. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell then said, that a.<3 he took it for granted that the object in laymg the 
 fori'goinT report on the table and printing it, was that the other members of the 
 ConventTfui Avlio had not been members of the Committee, might have an opportunity 
 of informing tliemseh^es of the contents of the report, he presumed it would be agree- 
 able to thein also, to be made acquainted with some other propositions v/hich had been 
 moved in the Conmiittee, but rejected ; under this persuasion, he would move that 
 the following resohition, which he had himself j)roposed to the Committee, but which 
 had not received its approbation, slioukl be jirinted and laid on the table together with 
 the report, viz : 
 
 .Rrsolvcd, That the most expedient method of bringing before the Convention any 
 amendments to the Constitution which may be proposed, will be, to take tip the ex- 
 istinf Constitution or form of Government of Virginia, with the Declaration of 
 Rjo-lits, and regarding them for the purposes of examination and discussion, merely, 
 as a plan proposed and reported by a Select Committee, to refer the same to a Com- 
 mittee of the v/hole House, there to be examined section after section, and to be dealt 
 with in all other respects as a bill so referred by the House to that'Committee usu- 
 ally is. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that under impressions similar to those which had just been ex- 
 pressed by the gentleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell) he would move the printing 
 of the two fallowing -resolutions, which he had had the honour to propose in the 
 Committee, and Vvdiich it was his purpose to make the subject hereafter of a motion 
 in the Convention. 
 
 Rrsnlrcd, That so much of the Constitution as relates to .J;he right of suffrage, be 
 referred to a Committee to consider and report whether any, and if any, what amend- 
 ments are necessary therein. 
 
 Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates to the basis of representation, 
 be referred to a Committee to consider and report whether any, and if any, what 
 amendments are necessary tJierein. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax of Dinwiddle, observed that as in any conceivable disposition of the 
 matter to be submitted to the Convention, the existing Constitution of the State, to- 
 gether witli the Declaration of Rights, must be the substratum of the whole, it ap- 
 peared proper that these also should be printed and should be in the hands of every 
 member. The substance of them, it Avas true, was, he had no doubt, familiar to the 
 minds of all the gentlemen, and the documents themselves might be consulted in 
 the lil)rary, but as they would be a perpetual subject of reference in the approaching 
 discussions, it was certainly convenient and proper that they should be printed, toge- 
 ther with the report of the Select Committee. He therefore made a motion to that 
 effect., whicli v.'as agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Macrae, from the Committee appointed to revise the rules of the House of 
 Dele(fate.=?, made a report upon tlie subject. 
 
 After som,e conversation between Messrs. Green of Culpeper, Powell of Frederick, 
 and Leigh of Chesterfield, it Avas agreefi to take up this report and proceed to act 
 upon it, 
 
 The rules reported were thereupon read successively at the Clerk's table, and after 
 some verbal corrections in the 14th and 30th rules, "and a modification of the 32d, 
 which went to include members of both Houses of the State Legislature, among the 
 persons privileged with admission to tlie floor of the Convention : 
 
 On motioii of Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, the 7'th rule of the House of Delegates, 
 which, as originally reported, forbids a member to vote on all questions in which he 
 has a personal interest, was so amended as to confine this prohibition to questions 
 " touching his own conduct in, and rights and privileges as, a member of this Con- 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXTEXTIOX. 
 
 11 
 
 IMr. L. considered tiiis alteration as necessary, both as better expressing the true 
 spirit of the rule, and because in the discussions of this Convention, very mah}- ques- 
 tions must of necessity arise, in which every member would have a personal interest 
 of the deepest kind. 
 
 JMr. Alexander of iNlecklenburg, was desirous farther to amend this rule in that 
 pai't of it; which forbids a member to vete on any question, unless he was present when 
 the question was put. Mr. A. considered this prohibition as involving a question of 
 grave importance, and as abridging improperly the exercise of a most important right. 
 A diiFerence of opinion- might exist and had actually been expressed, aa to the con- 
 struction of the phrase ■'•when the question w£is put."' The understanding of its 
 meaning in the House of Delegates vras. that the question is put in the sense of- this 
 rule when it is stated from the Chair ; but in the House of Representatives of the 
 United States, a different construction prevailed : here the question was understo-od 
 as being put to each member only, when that member was called upon to vote ; then, 
 the question was put to him. Mr. A. said, he would put a case to shew that the rule 
 as it stood, might operate great injustice : he had indeed, himself, been subjected to 
 its effects. When the yeas cind nays were demanded, the roll is iisually called from 
 east to west. The question is put, a,nd each member answers to his name. If a 
 member residing in the west comes in while it is calling, he is preciude;d firom voting, 
 although his name has not yet been called, because the question has been put. So in 
 the House of Representatives, when the yeas and nays are demanded, the names of 
 the members are called in csiphabetical order. JLf a c-entleman enters the Hall, whose 
 name happens to stand near the head of the hst, he finds that the Clerk has ah-eady 
 called it. and he is, of course, precluded fi-om voting, while another gentleman enter- 
 ing at the same moment, but having the good fort"ane to stand lower cn the list, is 
 admitted to a privilege of which his^coUeague, though not more neghgent than him- 
 self, and equally early in his attendance, is deprived. As almost everj- question likely 
 to be presented' to this Convention, would be of weighty consideration, Mr. A. con- 
 sidered it as hiofhly important thct every member should have a right to "^ ote upon 
 it, provided he should be present before the final decision was announced fi-em the 
 Chah-. 
 
 Mr. M"Coy said that he did not see the liai-dships which his friend saw in this rule : 
 the practice in the House of Representatives was, that members not in the House 
 .when the Speaker puts the question, are not admitted to vote ; but when the yeas 
 and nays are taken, the question is considered as put to each man when that man's 
 name is called. When the members were called in alphabetical order, there was 
 some hardship in the result: members whose names begin with A and B were some- 
 times taken by surprise, but that could not happen under the rule as interpreted in 
 the House of Delegates: but even if some hardship did occm', Jlr. Ivl' Coy thought, 
 it best upon the whole to let the rule stand as tending to compel members to be pre- 
 sent at their post. The more- the mis was relaxed, the greater would be the negh- 
 gence of the members. 
 
 Sir. Stanard of Spottsylvania, observed that the interpretation of the phrase in the 
 rule had been so definitively fixed by the practice of the House of Delegates, that no 
 sort of difficulty could occur in imderstanding its meaning. The construction refer- 
 red to by the gentleman n-om Mecklenburg, was one which had never prevailed here. 
 No additional chance of voting was enjoyed by any member of the House of Dele- 
 gates from the fact of his name standing "low npon the alphabet. The rules and the 
 practice of that House, as was well knovrn, had their origm in the Parhamentary law 
 of England. By the estabhshed usage in the House of Delegates, no question was 
 taken as definitively stated till the alternative had been propounded. If, therefore, a 
 member entered the House after the afnrmative votes had been collected, but before 
 the members of the opposite opinion had been called upon to vote, his vote was re- 
 ceived. When the yeas and nays were called for, so soon as one member had an- 
 swered to his name, the questioii before the House was considered as defhiitively 
 propounded, and if a gentleman entered the Hall after that time, his vote could not 
 be received.' Very great inconvenience must unavoidably ensue, should the Conven- 
 tion depart fi'om this well estabhshed rule. He, therefore, earnestly hoped that the 
 amendment would mt prevail, 
 
 Mr. Alexander having so modified Ins amendment as to forbid voting only when a 
 member had not been present before the final decision of the question : 
 
 The decision was taken on his amendment, and it was rejected by a large majority. 
 
 The question was tlien pat on the vrhoie report as amended, and carried ?i€jn. con. 
 
 The rules, as adopted, v%'ere as follows : 
 
 1. No member shall absent hhnself from the ser^dce of the House without leave, 
 unless he be sick eind unable to attend. 
 
 2. When anv member is about to speak in debate, or dehver any matter to the 
 House, he shall rise from his seat, and without advancing from thence, shall, with 
 
12 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 due respect, address himself to the President, confining liimself strictly to the point 
 iu debate, avoiding all indecent and disrespectful anguage 
 
 3. No men.ber shall speak more than twice m the same debate ^^^^^^^^J ^^fj?;^^^^^ 
 
 4. A question being once determined, must stand as the judgment of the House, 
 and canu(^t again be drawn into debate. 
 
 5 While the President is reporting, or puttmg any question, none shall entertain 
 private discourse, read, stand up, walk into or out of the House. 
 
 ^ G No member shall vote on any question touchmg his own conduct m, or rights 
 and privileges as, a member of this Convention, or in any other case, where he was 
 not present when the question was put by the President or Chairman of any Com- 
 
 T^'^Every member who shall be in the House when any question is put, shall, on a 
 division, be counted on the one side or the other. .,0 + u ii 
 
 t!. Each day, before the House proceeds to any other business, the Secretary shall 
 
 read the Orders of the Day. ^ i x i r +1. t^r.}^ 
 
 y. The Secretary shall not suffer any records or papers to be taken from the table, 
 or out of his custody, by any member or other person. 
 
 10 A maiority of' the meniljers of the Convention shall be necessary to proceed to 
 business, and every question shall be determined according to the vote of a majority 
 of the members present. Any smaller number shall be sufficient to adjourn, and ht- 
 teen to call a House, and send for the absent, and make any order for their censure or 
 
 nl'^wiien the House is to rise, every member shall keep his seat until the Presi- 
 dent passes him. j a 
 
 12. The Journals of the House shall be daily drawn up by the Secretary, and after 
 bein(r examined by the President, be prhited, and one copy "be delivered to the Secre- 
 tary ,°and one to each member without delay. 
 
 13. A majority of any Committee shall be a sufficient number to proceed to bu- 
 siness. . .1 
 
 14. Any person shall be at liberty to sue out an original writ or subpoena m chan- 
 cery, in order to prevent a bar by the statute of limitations, or to file any bill in equity, 
 to examine witnesses thereupon, for the sole purpose of preserving their testimony 
 ao-ainst any member of this House, notwithstanding his privilege; provided that the 
 cferk, after having made out and signed such original writ, shall not deliver the same 
 to the party, or tcTany other, during the continuance of that privilege. 
 
 1.5. Any person sumuaoned to attend this liouse, or any Committee thereof, as a 
 witness in any matter depending before them, shall be privileged from arrest, during 
 his comino" to, attending on, or going from the House or Committee ; and no such 
 witness shall be obliged to attend, until the party, at whose request he shall be sum- 
 moned, do pay, or secure to him, fi)r his attendance and travelling, the same allowance 
 which is made to witnesses attending the General Court. 
 
 IG. If any person shall tamper with any witness, in respect to his evidence to be 
 given in this House, or any Committee thereof, or directly, or indirectly, endeavor to 
 deter or hinder any person from appearing, or giving evidenc-e, the same is declared 
 to be a high crime, or misdemeanor ; and this House will proceed, with the utmost 
 severity, against such ofTender. 
 
 17. No person shall be taken into custody by the Sergeant at Arms, on any com- 
 plaint of a breach of privilege, until the matter of such complaint shall be examined 
 by the Committee of Privileges and Elections, and reported to the House. 
 
 18. The Sergeant's fees shall be as follows, to wit : for taking any person into cus- 
 tody, two dollars ; for every day he shall be detained in custody, two dollars ; for 
 sending a messenger to take any person into custody b:;^ warrant from the President, 
 eight cents per mile for going, and the same for returning, besides ferriages. 
 
 ly. On a call of the House, the doors shall not be shut against any member, until 
 his name is once enrolled. 
 
 20. When any member shall keep his seat two days, after having obtained leave of 
 absence, such leave shall be void. 
 
 21. No business shall be introduced, taken up, or considered, after 12 o'clock, until 
 the Orders of the Day shall be disposed of. 
 
 22. Any member, on his motion made for that purpose, on being seconded, provided 
 seven of the members present be in favor of the motion, shall have a right to have 
 the ayes and noes taken upon the determination of any question, provided he shall 
 give notice of his intention to call the ayes and noes, before the question be put, and 
 in such case the House shall not divide, or be counted on the question, but the names 
 of the members shall be c died over by tlie Secretary, and the ayes and noes shall be 
 respectively entered on the Journal, and the question shall be decided as a majority of 
 votes shall thereupon appear : provided that after the ayes and noes shall be separately 
 taken, and before they are counted, or entered on the Journal, the Secretary shall 
 read over the names of those who voted in the affirmative, and of those who voted in 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 13 
 
 the negative ; and any member shall have hberty at such reading to correct any mis- 
 take wiaich may have been connnitted in hsting liis name, either in tlie athrmative or 
 negative. 
 
 2'S. The petitioner who contests the election of a member returned to serve in this 
 Convention is entitled to receive his Avages only from the day on vliich such peti- 
 - tioner is declared duly elected. 
 
 24. Select Committees shall be composed of some number not less than five nor 
 more than thirteen. 
 
 25. It shall be the rule of the House, in all cases of balloting, to fill one vacancy 
 only at a time. 
 
 2(3. The Committee of Privileges and Elections shaU report to the House in all 
 cases of privilege or contested election, to them referred, the prmci|)ies and reasons 
 upon wliich their resolutions shall be founded. 
 
 27. In all cases of balloting for the election of any officer by this Convention, if ojji 
 the first ballot no person shall have a majority of the whole number, on the second 
 ballot the person who had the smallest number of votes shall not be balloted for; and 
 so on each succeeding ballot till some person shall have a majority of the whole. 
 
 28. In all cases wherein a division of the House on any question propounded from 
 the Chair, is rendered necessary, in the opinion of the President, by the equality of 
 somid, or required by the motion of any member, the members voting on the ques- 
 tion which occasions such division, shall be required to rise in their places ; and if on 
 a general view of the House, a doubt still remain in the President, or any member 
 thereof, on what side the majority is, the members shall be counted standing in their 
 places, either by the President, or by two members of opposite opinions on the ques- 
 tion, to be deputed for that purpose by the President. 
 
 29. The Committee appointed to examine the ballot-boxes shall count no blanks 
 therein. 
 
 30. The documents ordered to be printed by the House shall be printed on paper of 
 the same size of the Journal of tliis Convention, and a copy shall be bound with 
 each Journal, to be furnished to the members at the end of the session : and it shall 
 be the duty of the printer of the House to print one hundred additional copies of 
 each docmnent ordered to be printed for the above purpose. 
 
 31. It shall be the duty of the Committee of Privileges and Elections to examine 
 the certificates of election furnished by the sherifis, in order to ascertain the members 
 of this Convention duly elected, and to report thereupon. 
 
 32. Seats withm this House, such as the President shall direct, shall be set apart 
 for the use of the members of the General Assembly and of the Executive, of the 
 Judges of the Superior Com-ts of this State, and of the United States, and of such 
 other persons as the President may think proper to invite within the bar. 
 
 33. It shall be a standing rule of the House that the President be authorised to call 
 a.ny member of tlie House to occupy the Chair, and exercise the functions of Presi- 
 dent, until he ma}' resume the Chair ; with tins proviso, that the power given by this 
 rule shall not be construed to confer on the President a right to place any member ia 
 the Chair of the President for a longer period than one dax. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge the Jcurnal and other papers before referred to were 
 ordered to be printed in the octavo form. 
 
 On motion of Mr. fiercer, it was ordered, tliat t]ie act of the State Legislature 
 which authorised the organization of tliis Convention, be added to the papers to be 
 printed, and then the House adjourned. 
 
 FPJDAY, October 9, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 12 o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Bishop Moore. 
 
 Mr. Scott firom the Committee on Privileges and Elections, made the following 
 report : 
 
 The Committee of Privileges and Elections have performed the duty assigned them 
 by the rules of the House, and beg leave to report, that they have examined tlie re- 
 turns of the sheriffs, and find that the foUowing persons have been duly elected 
 members of this Convention, to vrit : 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Amelia. Chesterfield. Cumberland, Not- 
 toway, Poichntan, and the toicn of Petersburg — John W. Jones, Benjamin W. Leigh, 
 Samuel Taylor and William B. Giles. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Bruiiswich, Diniciddie, Lunenburg and 
 MecMenhurg — Wilham H. Brodnax, George C. Dromgoole, Mark Alexander and Wil- 
 Ham O. <TOode. 
 
14 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 From the District composrd of the counties of Charles City, Elizahcth Cifij, James 
 Citi/, Henrico, jVciD Kent, Warioick, York, ond the Cities of Richmond and li illiams- 
 bursr—John IVIarsliall. John Tyler, Philip N. Nicholas and John B. Clcpton. 
 
 Fro/n the District composed of the counties of Shenandoah and Rockingham — V/illiam 
 Anderson, Samuel Coftinan, Peachy Harrison and Jacob D. WiUiamson. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Jiugjista, Rockbridge and Pc7idIeto7i — 
 Briscoe G. Baldwin, Chapman Johnson, William M'Coy and Sainuel M'D. Moore. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Monroe, Greenhrier, Bath, Botetourt, 
 ^Qlhghanij, Pocahontas and Mcholas — Andrew Beirne, William Smith, Fleming B. 
 Milfer and John Baxter. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Sussex, Surry, ScxdharrqUon, Isle of 
 Witrht, Prince George and Greensville — John Y. Aiason, James Trezvant, Augustine 
 Claiborne and John Urquhart. 
 
 • From the DisLrict composed of the counties of Charlotte, Halifax and Prince Edward — 
 John Randolph, William Leigh, Kichard Logan and R.ichard N. Venable. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Spottsylvaiiia, Louisa, Orange and Ma- 
 dison — James Madison, Philip P. Barbour, David Watson and Robert Stanard. 
 
 From the District composed of tlic counties of Loudou7t and Fairfax — James Monroe, 
 Charles F. Mercer, Wilham H. Fitzhugh and Richard H. Henderson. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Frederick and Jefferson — John R. Cooke, 
 Alfred PL Powell, Hierome L. Opie and Thomas Griggs, jr. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Berkeley and Mor- 
 gan — William Naylor, William Donaldson, Elisha Boyd and Philip C. Pendleton. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Washington, Lee, Scott, Russell and 
 Tazeiccll — John B. George, Andrew M'Millan, Edward Campbell and Wilham 
 Byars. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of King William, King ^ Quec?i, Essex, 
 Caroline and Hanover — John Roane, William P. Taylor, Richard Morris and James 
 M. Garnett. 
 
 From the District composed of the co7iniics of Wylhc, Montgomery, Grayson and 
 Giles — Gordon ClojA, Henley Chapman, John P. Mathews and William Oglesby. 
 
 From the District comjjoscd of the counties of Kanaivha, Mason, Cabell, Randolph, - 
 Harriso7i, Lewis, Wood and Logan — Edward S. Duncan, John Laidley, Lewis Smn- 
 jners and Adam See. 
 
 From the District composed of the. counties of Ohio, Tyler, Brooke, Monongalia and 
 Preston — Charles S. Morgan, Philip Doddridge, Alexander Campbell and Eugenius 
 M. Wilson. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Fauquier aiid Culpeper — John S. Bar- 
 bour, John Scott, John Macrae and John W. Green. 
 
 From, the District composed of tJic counties of jXoifolk, Princess Anne, JVansemond 
 and lite Boroiigli of Norfolk — Littleton W. Tazewell, Joseph Prentis, Robert B. Taylor 
 and George. Loyall. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Campbell, Buckingha7n and Bedford — 
 William Campbell, Samuel Claytor, Callohill Mennis and James Saunders. 
 
 Fro7Ji the District co7nposed of the .counties of FrankVm, Patrick, Heiiry and Pittsyl- 
 vania — George Townes, Benjamin W. S. Cabell, Joseph Martin and Archibald 
 Stuart. 
 
 Fro7n the District co7nposcd of the counties of Mbemarle, Atnherst, Nelson, Fluvan7ia 
 and Goochland — James Pleasants, William F. Gordon, Lucas P. Thompson and Tho- 
 mas Massie, jr. 
 
 From the District co7nposcd, of the counties of King George, JVcstinoreUmd, Lansaster, 
 Northumherland, Richmond, Stafford and Prince WilUa7n — William A. G. Dade, Ellyson 
 Currie, John Taliaferro and Fleming Bates. 
 
 From the District composed of the counties of Matthews, Middlesex, Accomack, North- 
 ampto7i and Gloucester — Thomas R. Joynes, Thomas Bayly, Calvin H. Read and 
 Abel P. Upshur. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mercer, the report was laid on the table. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Fitzhugh of Fairfax, a Committee was appointed to fix the com- 
 pensation to be allowed to officers of the Convention; whereupon, the following gen- 
 tlemen were appointed by the Chair, viz: Messrs. Fitzhugh, Loyall, Stanard, Barbour 
 of Orange, and Bayly. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved that the report of the Committee of twenty-four, should now 
 be taken up for discussion, but expressed his wilhngness to withdraw the motion, 
 should any member express a wish for farther time to consider it. 
 
 No such wish being expressed, the motion was agreed to, and the report taken up 
 accordingly. Previous to its discussion, however, 
 
 Mr. Mercer of Loudoun, explained to the House the reasons why he should not 
 offer the resolutions which he had yesterday laid upon the table, and which had been 
 printed together with the report of the Committee. He stated it to be his intention 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 15 
 
 to offer at a suitable time, the resolution wliich he had yesterday read in his place, 
 and which had subsequently been laid upon the table : the object and purport of 
 wliich he now explained. It was to suspend that rule of proceeding wliich limits the 
 number of members composing Select Committees to tliirteen; with a view to move 
 the reference of the first and fifth resolutions reported, to a Select Committee, consist- 
 ing of one member from each Senatorial District, and then to refer the tliird, fourth 
 and fifth resolutions to similar Committees. His design in this proposition was to 
 avail liimself of all the intelligence of the body in devising and maturing the best 
 course to be pursued in arriving at the objects of its appointment. Should this plan 
 be adopted, its effect would be to bring into employment the whole faculty of the 
 House : the talent, knowledge and v/isdom of all the members would thus be brought 
 into requisition, and exerted at one and the same tune. - Mr. M. said, he had thought 
 it his duty to give this explanation by way of apology for not now offering the reso- 
 lutions, which at his request had been laid on the table and printed. 
 
 I\Ir. Tazewell, of Norfolk Borough, now rose and said that it would be more sa- 
 tisfactory to him, if the scheme to which he was desirous of offering his own resolu- 
 tion as a substitute, was made by its advocates as perfect as they desired it to be, be- 
 fore his substitute was considered : he had no wish to urge his own proposition as a 
 substitute to another, wliile that other was confessedly in an imperfect form : he de- 
 sired, on the contrary, that gentlemen would first make their proposition as perfect as 
 they could, and when they had done this, that the House should judge between the 
 scheme thus complete, and that wliich he presented to it. But, if the gentlemen 
 who had reported the resolutions now before the Convention, were willing to wave 
 tiiis advantage, and leave their plan as it was, he should now proceed to redeem the 
 pledge which he had given to the Convention yesterday, and move as a substitute for 
 the resolutions, reported by the Committee of twenty-four, that wliich, at his request, 
 had been printed and appended to them. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell then offered tlie following-resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the most expedient method of bringing before the Convention any 
 amendments to the Constitution which may be proposed, will be, to take up the ex- 
 isting Constitution or form of Government of Virginia, with the Declaration of Rights, 
 and regarding them for the purposes of examination and discussion, merely, as a plan 
 proposed and reported by a Select Committee, to refer the same to a Committee of the 
 whole House, there to be examined section after section, and to be dealt with in all 
 other respects as a bill so refeiTed by the House to that Connnittee usually is. 
 
 In making tliis motion, Mr. President, it is but fair, said Mr. T. to preface it by 
 stating to the Convention that the same motion was made by me in the Committee, 
 and rejected by a majority. But, Sir, notv.'ithstanding this, I deem it due to the in- 
 terest and importance of the subject, as well as to the solicitude of gentlemen who, 
 not having been members of the Committee, have enjoyed no opportunity of record- 
 ing their opinions in the case, to make this motion, in order that, at least, every mem- 
 ber of this body may have the opportunity of expressing here liis views and senti- 
 ments on the subject. 
 
 In examining the two schemes which are now before the Convention, it must at 
 once be perceived by every gentleman, that in neither is there any principle involved. 
 Each of them contemplates only the most convenient mode of conducting- the busi- 
 ness before us : it is a question merely of expediency and convenience. The simple 
 question to be settled is, by which of two modes proposed, can the task imposed upon 
 us by om- constituents be best accomplished. The discussion is, therefore, narrowed 
 down to a comparison of the different degrees of convenience presented by the two 
 propositions. The difference between them Ues in tins only. By the scheme con- 
 tained in my resolution, the existing form of Government is to be referred at once to 
 the whole body, acting in Committee of the Whole, and to undergo a detailed exami- 
 nation there. The whole scheme will be before the whole body at the same time. 
 Under such a state of things, every step that we take will be in reality a step in ad- 
 vance : whatever we do will diminish, so far, what remains to be done. But what 
 will be the effect of adopting the scheme reported by the Committee ? You dissect 
 the subject submitted to you. and distribute its several parts to distinct and indepen- 
 dent Committees. What then will be the condition of the body ? If my plan be 
 adopted, we shall, at once, on the spm* of the occasion, begin to act. The Constitu- 
 tion will be printed immediately ; we shall forthwith commence its revision ; we 
 shall make actual progress in omx business, this very day, and so de die in diem, and 
 the entire examination will very soon be completed. But if you pursue the other 
 course, you cut up the whole subject into five, six or seven parts, and distribute these 
 five, six or seven parts, among five, six or seven separate and distinct Conunittees ; 
 when this is done, what will remain to the body.^* Nothing, Sir. You have a Com- 
 mittee for what belongs to the Executive Department of the Government ; another 
 Connnittee for what pertains to the Legislative Department; another for what per- 
 tains to the Judiciary : and another Committee for what pertains to neither Executive, 
 
16 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Legislative nor Judicial, and then, Sir, what is this body itself to be doing? It must 
 stand with arms folded, until the Committees, or some one Committee, give it some- 
 thing to do. Its faculties all suspended, it must meet only to adjourn ; and how long 
 sucli a state of things shall continue, must depend solely on the diligence_ of the 
 Committees. But by my plan, the body can act at once; can act to-day, this very 
 day it can begin and malce actual progress in the great duties assigned to it by the 
 people. 
 
 But, Sir, this is not all that will ensue upon the adoption of the report which has 
 been presented by the Committee. The action of this body must be suspended, not 
 only till some one of the Committees shall report, but till one certain particular Com- 
 mittee shall report. We are to have one Committee on the Bill of Rights ; another 
 Committee on the Executive ; another on the Legislative; another on the Judiciary 
 Department ; another on some part of the plan of Government which is neither Ex- 
 ecutive, Legislative nor Judicial in its character, (though what that can be, I do not 
 understand J for all writers that I have read, maintain that every function of Govern- 
 ment is of necessity, either Executive, Legislative, or Judicial in its character :) thus, 
 Sir, we are to have five Committees in operation all at one and the same time. On 
 which of their reports must this body first act ? On that relating to the Executive ? 
 No, Sir; on that relating to the Judiciary.? No, Sir; on that which relates to neither 
 of the Departments of Government ? No, Sir. This body cannot act if all these re- 
 ports were received, until the Committee on the Legislative Department have brought 
 in its report ; for this Department is universally and justly held to be the foundation of 
 the system of all Government. How vain were it to proceed to any other part of the 
 Constitution, till we had first settled that which is the supreme power in the State ! 
 How absurd to set about erecting an edifice, and to begin at the top ! To attempt to 
 proceed till the Legislative Committee shall have reported, must involve you in 
 contradictions and difficulties at every step ! For example ; you come .to take up the 
 subject of the Judiciary ; the very first question must be, how many judges are to be 
 appointed ? What shall be their duties ? What their compensation ? You take up the 
 report of tlie Executive Committee, and your first enquiry is, what power shall your 
 Governor have ? Shall it be concurrent or exclusive ? But all these things must de- 
 pend on the report of the Legislative Committee ; the details in the investigations of 
 that Committee, are necessarily great ; they must unavoidably consume a great deal 
 of time ; but be the delay ever so great, the Convention must wait till that Commit- 
 tee shall have completed its report ; till then the whole body must remain on its oars, 
 with nothing to do. 
 
 Nor is this all. He is little acquainted with the nature of Government, who does 
 not at once perceive that in distributing its several functions into various Departments, 
 it is utterly impossible to keep them completely distinct from each other ; do what you 
 will, like the colours of the rainbov/, they will necessarily run into each other, and be- 
 come more or less blended together. The ingenuity of man, never yet has devised 
 a form of Government, in which the powers of the different Departments, were not 
 more or less confounded. What, then, becomes of the Committees proposed by the 
 report before you.? We are to have one on the Executive Department; another on 
 the Legislative ; another on the Judiciary ; and another on things anomalous. The 
 first question to be settled, will necessarily be, what part of the Constitution is to be 
 referred to tliis last Committee. If it is not to touch things Legislative, nor things 
 Executive, nor things Judicial, it can, as I conceive, have nothing to do. If it does 
 touch them, or either of them, what happens ? You have two distinct independent 
 bodies, acting at the same time upon the same subject ; and in all human probability, 
 rendering to this body difierent and conflicting reports. Sir, it must be so. It can- 
 not be otherwise. Their duties are co-ordinate ; their powers the same ; and unless 
 they exhibit more of unanimity than has ever yet been witnessed among mankind, 
 they must and will differ from each other. Sir, it is asking too much, to expect that 
 gentlemen so situated, should concur in their reports. What follows ? Each of these 
 conflicting reports will be referred to the Committee of the Whole, and then the Con- 
 vention will have to begin just where I wish them to begin now. Your Executive 
 Committee and your Legislative Committee both, for instance, report in relation to the 
 veto of the Governor. One says he shall have an absolute veto; or a qualified veto. 
 The other that he shall have no Veto at all. Both these reports come into the Com- 
 mittee of the Whole ; we take up one and decide upon it, and then comes a new re- 
 port and a new discussion. We have passed on the report of the Legislative Commit- 
 tee, and then comes in the report of the Executive Committee. The first question 
 which will present itself must be a question of order ; and thus the Convention will 
 soon find itself involved in the meshes which are of all others, the most unpleasant 
 and perplexing. But suppose you get clear of the question of order ; then comes 
 each Committee, urging and defending its own views; and on the next report the 
 same scene must be acted again ; and so over and over<igain, so long as there remains 
 any other Committee to report. Thus the scheme proposed by the Committee, must 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 17 
 
 necessarily involve a vaste of the time of the C«onvention : the stripping it of all 
 power of action until the Committees shall please to give it something to do : the ac- 
 tion of different independent Committees on the same subjects ; the re-examination 
 of discussions already gone thi'ough with, and the endless conflict of contradictory 
 opinions, each urged by gentlemen already pledged by their votes in Conmiittee ; each 
 and all of Triiich present insuperable objections to the adoption of such a scheme, while 
 to that which I have had the honour of proposing, none of them apply in whole or in 
 part. 
 
 But there exists another objection ; more perhaps in appearance than in fact, but one 
 which I confess, weighs heavily with me. A bare majority of the people of Virginia, 
 the majority was very small indeed, have given their decision in favoin: of the call of 
 tliis Convention. A most respectable minority, (less by only a few votes than the 
 majority which called us here.) though they admit the existence of some defects in 
 the existing Constitution ; yet think it better to bear the ills we have, than fly to 
 others that we know not of."' This minority is every way respectable, as much so in 
 character as numbers. And of what is the majority composed 1 Of a most mixed and 
 heterogeneous mass, of which I will ventm-e to affirm, that there are not ten men who 
 agree in their objections to the Constitution. Each man has an objection of liis ovrn ; 
 all they agree in is, that they are objectors. Well, Sir, when one of the reports of 
 these Cormnittees shall come in, what wihbe the consequence each man will be ac- 
 tuated by his own individual objection, and will of course, struggle for his own opin- 
 ion. In the mean while, what becomes of the minority of the people i Is there no 
 necessity of looking; at all to their opinions ? To their prejudices Yes, Sir, to their 
 false notions, if you please to call them so ? Will a wise statesman ever disregard the 
 opinion of his people? No, Sir, if he did. he would be no longer wise. Sir, we must 
 have regard, and a respectfiil regard, to the opinions of the people of Virgina. What 
 is proposed to you, Sir i Instead of taking up a Constitution to which a portion of that 
 people have been long attached, and considering it section by section, and word by 
 word, that we may cautiously discover and remedy its defects, by one fell swoop you 
 seize at once upon the whole ; teaj it limbless, and scatter its various fragments to the 
 wmds of Heaven : then you set to work to gather these scattered and dissevered limbs, 
 and you attempt to join and dove-tail them together, and piece them up into some other . 
 form. What will be the pubhc impression from such a procedure The public will 
 very naturally conclude, that this Convention has determined to destroy at a blow, 
 every vestige of their Old Constitution. This is the notion tha.t must go abroad ; the 
 people will at once believe that you are resolved to explode every thing at a blast, and 
 then to build upon the same, or on a diiierent fomidation, a Government, vdiich l)ut 
 few can hope, icill do as much for the pubhc happiness and prosperity as that you de- 
 stroy lias done. Sir, it is due to this aflectionate reverence, the people bear to their 
 long-tried form of Government, to deal tenderly with it ; it becomes us to talie up this 
 beloved offspring of theirs with every feeling of kind regard, to extol its virtues and 
 to lay our correcting hand upon its vices alone. Thus, I have endeavored to show, 
 that not only the convenience of the body, but the good opinion of tlie people, whose 
 voice has brought us here, requires the adoption of the scheme I have proposed. 
 
 There are other considerations besides these which ought to lead you to the cora-se 
 I advocate ; which ought to warn you to aim no fell and reckless blow at the existing 
 Constitution. Will you dissect, will you dissever the body said to be gangrenous, be- 
 fore you know where the gangrene is ^ Will you at once cut into tlie vitals and separate 
 it limb from limb, under pretence of searcliing for the unsoimd part.^ By whom was 
 this Government formed ? By a body which, I "s^dll say, united as much wisdom as can 
 be fomid any where ; with as much public virtue as will ever again be assembled. Is 
 tliis an instrmnent to be torn to pieces and distributed fragment by fragment to Com- 
 mittees of tliirteen men ? Is it not due to such a docmnent, that we shall contemplate 
 the whole of it at once 1 That we shall take a view of its parts as sustaining their re- 
 spective relations to each other and to the whole ? Can we judge of it correctly if 
 you judge of it only by parts Is it ^\'ise thus to judge of any thing compounded and 
 complex Is it not the most ready course to err different course is surely due to 
 tlie character and the virtues of those who formed the Constitution.- And ftu-tner, 
 Sir, is nothing due to upvv ards of fifty years experience ? This Constitution has been 
 in operation for fifty-four years : it has borne us safely through peace and through 
 waT ; through all tiie excitement of party contest, as well as the calmness of more 
 tranquil times : And is there in tliis body a single member, or is there a single one 
 of our constituents, who is able to name one practical evil it has brought upon us 
 Can more be said ? A Goverimient, born of -^-isdom and of virtue, which has been 
 in operation for fifty-four years, and has done no harm. When was there a Govern- 
 ment, of wln.ch this could be said Certainly it is due to such a system, to consider it 
 cLS prima fnrit good: it is due to it, to give it a close and dehberate examination : it 
 must suriiy 1)^ ra^b. to cut it at once to pieces; scatter all its parts ; and tJien see if 
 we cannot make sunietliiui!: out of them, that may peradventm^e do better. It is due to 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the feelino-s of a very large portion of the people of this State, who are attached to 
 the Constrtation in all its parts ; to the whole and to every part ; to refer such a docu- 
 ment to all tlie wisdom which can be commanded for its contemplation ; to the col- 
 lective wisdom of all tliose whom they have deputed to the task of its revision. But, 
 if the other course shall be pursued, what will be the result? We are to set thirteen 
 men to examine the Leo-islative part of it; other thirteen to examine the Executive 
 purtioa of it; other thirfeen to examine the Judicial portion of it; and so on; piece 
 by piece. throus.-h half a dozen different Committees. It is vain to reply, that all the 
 reports of these'various Committees, must come at last to this body ; how are they to 
 come They will come with majorities of each respective Committee, enlisted in 
 favor of their own report, and pledged for its support. It must be so. They stand 
 o|)enLy pledo-ed to their constituents and to the world. But, if my proposition shall be 
 adopted, nolnan will be pledged to any thing, till he has the whole ground before him. 
 St-nd it to Coimnittees, and'' the majorities will be pledged ; they must be : and they 
 will enter this Hall in solid phalanx, each devoted to the maintenance of the work of 
 his own hands. The consequence I need not predict. 
 
 Sir, the question before you, is one of mere form. I considered it as of importance 
 to the time, and to the rightful deliberations of this body ; and, therefore, thought 
 something ought to be said upon it. I felt it a duty, to explain the nature of the course 
 1 wished to see pursued. 1 have done : and should consider it unwarrantable, to waste 
 more of that time, which it is my aim and my desire to save. 
 
 Mr. jNIkrckr rose in reply. He said,' that wlien he at first rose, he had been well 
 aware of the ingenuity and the ability of the gentleman who had just addressed the 
 House, and was not ignorant of the generous feeling from which what he conceived to 
 be the error of tliut gentleman proceeded. Yet he believed it only necessary to trace 
 the course of the gentleman's ov/n argument, to show him how widely he had departed 
 from the principles v/ith which he set out. That gentleman, said Mr. Mercer, early 
 told us tliat the two propositions before the Convention involved no principle. Yet, 
 in support of the substitute he has proposed to the resolutions reported by the Com- 
 mittee, he has gone back and traced the origin of the existing Government, and had 
 delivered an eloquent eulogy upon the Constitution ; to the greater part of which, my 
 own heart very fully accords. Sir, was this no appeal to principle The gentleman 
 tells us, that if tlie course he advocates shall not be pursued, we shall bring into this 
 House in solid phalanx, pledged and opposing majorities from the Committee rooms. 
 Is there no i)rinciple in this Sir, there arc principles involved in any course we may 
 pursue. How can we, who have thought tiiat there are defects, and very serious ones 
 in the Constitution, reconcile it to ourselves to be told that the course we have pro- 
 posed, tears the Constitution to pieces.? The honourable member from Norfolk, has 
 treated the Constitution as if it were an organized sensitive being, and its reference to 
 Committees, must necessarily tear it piece-meal and destroy it altogether. 
 
 I say. Sir, we purpose to treat tlie Committee with more respect. What is our pro* 
 position ? It is first to see whether there be iti this body a majority who do disapprove 
 of its present form : and this before we submit it to the promiscuous and accidental 
 motions (if the expression may be pardoned me) of every gentlenian who chooses to at- 
 tack it. We desire first to submit it to Committees of tweiity-four members, who, com- 
 ing from every Senatorial district, may be fairly presumed to represent the judgment of 
 the whole State : and then, after Ave ascertain that a majority m such Committee of 
 twenty-four concur in recommending an alteration in any of its features, to submit 
 that proposed alteration to the deliberate action of the whole body. Sir, is this to treat 
 the Constitution with levity Is this tearing it asunder, and scattering its fragments 
 to the winds of Heaven 1 Is this inconsistent with the tenderest and the deepest reve- 
 rence for the work of our forefathers.? No, Sir: Nothing like it : just the reverse. 
 On the contrary, it is an expedient calculated to save the time of this assembly, and to 
 promote the harmiony as well as the speed of its decisions. Mr. President, even 
 forms necesarily involve principles. If, however, our plan saved no time, the argu- 
 ment of the gentleman over the way would have more weight : but it does save time. 
 How can it be otherv/ise .? Surely it must be obvious that if every proposition before 
 it be discussed, inust be approved by a majority of a large Committee, we shall have 
 the fewer propositions before us. It is most palpable that such an arrangement must 
 save our time. 
 
 But the gentleman has said, that we cannot analyse the Constitution, so as properly 
 to consider it by separate Committees. The honourable member very truly said, that 
 all Governments are capable of being resolved into Executive, Legislative and Judicial 
 Departments. Admit it. Yet, at another time, he says that these Departments melt 
 like the colours of the rainbow into each other. The gentleman certainly reflects upon 
 the authors of the report before you, when he says that the last Committee which they 
 propose will have notliing to act upon. Sir, are there not many subjects, which stand- 
 ing in precisely the same relation to each one of the Departments, and having nothing 
 in tlieir nature to attach them to one more than the other, will very naturally be thrown 
 
DEBATES OF THE C 0>;VE>:TI0X. 
 
 19 
 
 out by each of the other Committees as not being appropriate to the subject of their 
 examination ? What is to be done with these ? if the report be adopted, they -will 
 go to this last Conmiittee. of which the gentleman speaks as if tliey must be idle. 
 There are, for example, some principles laid doTm in the Bill of Rights, which per- 
 tain alike to all the Departments of Government ; take as an instance that clause in 
 the Bill of Pviglits wliich treats of rights not surrendered : the proposition there laid 
 down belongs equally to all the dlTisions of GoTennnent : they are ail alike bound to 
 respect the residuary rights of the people. 
 
 But, Six, let us leave^^theory for a moment, and look to the practical difficulties be- 
 fore us. What seems very imperfect in. theory, is often foimd to be attended with 
 no evil consequences, when reduced to practice, and submitted to the test of experi- 
 ence. The gentleman's theory is, that you cannot, in the natm-e of things, form a 
 pi mi of Government, by the action of these independent Committees. But the sim- 
 ple remedv to this very formidable difficulty, is to let the Convention act upon the 
 reports as they are received, or in the order in which they are taken up. This will 
 prevent all collision of Committee majorities, and obviate the difficulty arising from 
 contradictorv reports, (if they shall prove contradictory.) For example : A report is 
 receiyed from the Committee on the Executive ; the Convention takes it up and acts - 
 upon it, adoptincr or rejecting its provisions that report reconnnends a certain course 
 respecting the veto of the Executive. By and bye comes tlie report of the Legisla- 
 tive Committee, and recommends a dilFerent course respecting the veto; but this re- 
 commendation comes too late : the Convention has decided on the subject of the 
 veto, and that subject is at rest ; none can stir it anew. Here is-an end to the gentle- 
 man's difficulty. The Convention loses no time ; if any time is lost, it is that of the 
 Committee which discussed a subject already anticipo.ted. Why should the Conven- 
 tion decide upon it again .' Has the Convention changed its judgment It is to be 
 presumed it has not. But gi-anting that it has, all that is to be done, is to suspend^ 
 the rule quod hoc, and open the subject for revision just as might be done in any 
 other case. Nothing here is either gained or lost. 
 
 As to the period at which we must commence our discussions, the honorable gen- 
 tleman from Norfolk says, that we must necessarily wait till we have the reports of all 
 the Committees, and thus get the whole subject before us. 
 
 "Sir, is this necessary ? I say no : not at all. I heard a figure used the other day, 
 (not here, but elsewhere.) in support of the gentleman's position, which strongly eh- 
 cited tins general remark : tliat figurative lang-uage has place in argument only for the 
 purpose of illustration ; and not as itself a source of argument. If we attempt to 
 found argmnents upon figures of speech, we shall ever be led astray. The figure 
 used was this ; it was said that a sculptor cotild not possibly know how to carve one 
 lunb of a statue, till he first knew the height and proportions of the whole figure he 
 was to produce. This even, if true, would decide nothing in the ease before us : for 
 this body could decide, for example, on the question touching the unity of the Exec- 
 utive, without having any reference to the number of members of the House of De- 
 legates, and so of many other branches of the general subject of Government. It is, 
 indeed, true, that there are some points which have a bearino- upon the whole system ; 
 but this is not true of all the points, nor is it true of many. Sir, were this not so, the 
 House could not decide upon any question whatever ; for: obviously, we can go but 
 step by step; one subject ordy can be taken up at once, and we must and do presume 
 the rest, and act accordingly. We must anticipate, and it will be fair and just to do 
 so, that the coming reports will concur with what the Connnittees have alreadv done. 
 Give the gentleman all he asks: and suppose we go into Committee of the Whole, 
 and take up the Constitution clause by clatise. A member otters an amendment to tlie 
 first clause; he does so. and can do so. only in anticipation of what is to be done, 
 w ith the remaining clauses. So that it ^vill come precisely to the same thing, and 
 the difficulty, if it be one, applies as much to the one plan as to the other. I think we 
 shall save much time, by adoptuig the plan of the Committee. 
 
 Besides, there will be this additional advantage. The several propositions will not 
 only be each considered in Committee, but they will be considered in their bearing on 
 all the other portions of that Department of Government to which they appertainTbe- 
 cause all that Department will be in the hands of one Committee. Thus, for exam- 
 ple, if, in the Legislative Committee, a proposition is reported to reduce the jnmiber 
 of members in the House of Delegates, the same Committee will have it in their 
 power to consider the propriety of also reducing the numbers of the Senate. Thus, 
 there will be a harmony in the sub-divisions of each general Department of Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 This puts an end to the gentleman's conjectm-e, that no ten men will agree as to 
 what amendments should be made in the Constitution. But. if that were the fact, 
 it only follows that there is the greater need for the Committees proposed ; for there 
 may, according to the gentleman, be no two in the Committee of the Whole, who 
 will fliUy agree in aU their views, and so the debates wiU be interminable. In Com- 
 
20 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 mittee of tlie Wliole, there is no restraint as to speaking ; each member may speak as 
 ofte-.i as he pleases; and, For auo-ht^ I see, we shall be in session here till mid-winter, 
 if his plan prevails. If the previous question to be taken is, whether the Constitu- 
 tion is to be amended at all, let it be taken. That, after all, is the argument of the 
 gentleman fmiu Norfolk, though it is not his plan. Such a resolution would be in 
 order, and it ])roves tiiat we have still a subject to act on here, even if the Committees 
 shall be appointed. So we may also give instructions to the Committees. The 
 whole subject is open to the body. 1 take it for granted, the delay produced by dis- 
 cussions in the Connnittees will not be great, and the gentleman can put an end to 
 it whenever he will, the Convention concurring. But, Sir, to prevent the evil he 
 suggests, I shall offer a proposition to enlarge all the Committees so as to make them 
 each consist of twenty-four members. This will prevent the a])pearance of that solid 
 pbalan.x which glares before the gentleman's imagination so formidably. If there 
 shall be thirteen to eleven in each Committee, the majority will not be very large ; 
 and this is anotlier advantage attending the scheme. The Committees, like the 
 Cunveiition itself, will in this way be prepared to act upon a knowledge of the wholo 
 subject before us. 
 
 Mr. M. concluded by an apology for having trespassed so long upon tlie time of the 
 Coj) vi-ntion, and then resumed his seat. 
 
 'i'he (|ne.stion was then called for on Mr. Tazewell's amendment. 
 
 Mr. Ilandolph demanded that the question be taken by yeas and nays : it was so 
 taken accordingly, and the yeas and nays were reported by the Secretary, as follows : / 
 
 AvKS. — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brod- 
 nax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason, 
 Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Vennbls, Madi- 
 son, Barbour of Orange, Roane, Tajdor of Caroline, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, . 
 Scott, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Townes, Taliaferro and Upshur — 34. 
 
 NoKS. — Messrs. Monroe, (President,) Anderson, Cofiman, Williamson, Baldwin, - 
 Jolmson, WCoy, Moore, Beirne, Smitti, Miller, Baxter, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, 
 Henderson, Cooke, Powell, Opie, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, 
 George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapnian, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Macrae, Taylor of Norfolk, Claytor, Ptlennis, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuartj Plea- 
 sants, Gordrju, T]iom])son, Massie, Bates, Joynes and Bayly — 54. 
 
 So Mr. TazewelFs amendment was rejected by the Convention. 
 
 The rei)ort of the Conunittee was then read at the Secretary's table by sections: 
 
 And the question being "on the first resolution by the Committee, as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to take into consitieration the Bill or De- 
 claration of Rights, and to report to this Convention whether, in their opinion, any, - 
 and if any, what amendments are necessary therein. 
 
 A desultory conversation arose, in v/lucli Messrs. Jolmson, Mercer and Doddridge 
 took part, and which resulted in a motion by Mr, Mercer to lay the first resolution for 
 the present upon the table : the motion v/as agreed to. 
 
 The second resolution having been read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, Tliat a Connnittee be appointed to take into consideration the Legislative 
 Department of Government as established by the present Constitution, and to report 
 to this Convention, either a substitute for the same, or_ such amendments thereto, as 
 in their opinion are necessary, or that no substitute or amendment is necessary, 
 
 Mr. Benjamin W. Leigh referring to the notice given by Mr. Mercer, that he should 
 move to enlarge thq Committees to twenty-four members each, protested against this 
 being taken for granted cis about to pass, and being thus made an argument with the 
 House. He was opposed to such enlargement, and hoped it would not take place. 
 Committees of tv/enty-four members v/onld scarcely deserve the name ; they would 
 bo so many debating bodies, with all the forms of debate observed elsewhere, instead 
 of tixe colloquial discussion appropriate to Committees, and which constituted indeed 
 their cliief advantage. Mr. Mercer declined a formal reply till the resolutions should 
 have been gone through with. 
 
 The third and fourth resolutions from the Committee were then read and adopted, 
 as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That tlie Executive Department of Government as established by tlie , 
 present Constitution, be referred to a"^ Committee, to enquire and report whether any, 
 and if any, what amendments are necessary. 
 
 Resolved, That the Judicial Department of Government as established by the pre- 
 sent Constitution, be referred to a Committee, to enquire and report whether any, and 
 if any, vWiat amendments are necessary therein. 
 
 The fifth resolution was then read as follov/s : 
 
 Resolved, That all such parts of the present Constitution as are not referred by 
 the foregoing resolutions, be referred to a Committee, to enquire and report whether 
 any, and if any, what amendments are necessary therein. . 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 21 
 
 This resolution being- amended, so as to add, the Declaration of Rights," among 
 the subjects transferred to the Committee, it was, thus amended, adojited by the 
 House. 
 
 The sixth and last resolution of the Committee was then read as follows : 
 Resolved, Tiiat no oi-iginal resolution offered to the Convention proposing any 
 
 ameiidment to the Constitution or Declaration of Rights, be discussed on its merits in 
 
 the House, till it shall Iiave been referred. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin W. Leigh called for the reasons in its favor. 
 
 Mr. Johnson briefly stated them as consisting in a desire for tlie maturest discussion 
 of every proposition before it was adopted, and for the prevention of the points refer- 
 red to the Committees being mooted at the same time in the House. 
 
 Mr. Leigh objected to the v/ords of the resolution as going to prevent any member 
 who might propose an amendment in the House, from explaining the nature and in- 
 tention of such amendments. 
 
 Mr. Johnson denied that such consequence would follow, and referred in support of 
 his view of the case, to the usage in the House of Delegates, where it was a standing 
 •rule that no projiosition could be discussed until it had been seconded, and still a gen- 
 tleman offering a resolution was held in order to give a succinct explanation of its 
 purport, provided the discussion stopped there. 
 
 Tlie question being put on the adoption of the sixth resolution, a division was called 
 for, and the votes being counted by INIessrs. Leigh and Johnson, stood as follows : 
 Ayes 48, Noes 32 : so the resolution was adopted. 
 
 The first resolution was then taken from the table, and rejected ; its contents having 
 been siiperseded. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then moved the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That so m.uch of the twenty-fourth rule of the Convention, as limits the 
 number of a Select Committee to thirteen, be suspended, for the purpose of enlarging 
 the three Committees required by the. preceding resolutions, to such extent, as that 
 each Committee shall comprehend one member from every Senatorial District, and 
 composing the Committee required by the fourth resolution of such members as may 
 not be placed on tlie preceding Committees. 
 
 Mr. M. now replied to the objections before stated by Mr. Leigh, and referred to 
 precedents in the Journals of the House of Delegates, to shew that Committees of 
 twenty, of thirty-three, and one of forty-tliree members, had been appointed on im- 
 portant subjects. No great evil, he thought, arose from the formal mode of discussion, 
 pursued in large Committees, though he acknowledged, that he should prefer the col- 
 loquial mode of debate. 
 
 A desultory conversation ensued, in which Messrs. Leigh, Stanard, Mercer, Fitz- 
 hugh and Doddridge took part, and in which several modifications of the resolution 
 were proposed. Mr. Marshall enquired of Mr. Mercer, if he intended to bring for- 
 ward, at all, the two resolutions he had read yesterday.^ 
 
 Mr. Mercer replying in the negative, 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, that if he had brought them forward, he should have drought, that 
 one Committee of twenty-four was sufficient ; as the subject to be referred to it, was 
 geographical in its nature, and had a bearing on members, according to the part of the 
 State where they resided. In such' a Coimnittee, twenty-four members might be re- 
 quired, in order to collect the opinions of everj^^ part of the State ; but this v/as not 
 equally necess?ay on questions not geog-raphical in their nature. Y/hen the measure 
 proposed, was to affect all the citizens alike, there was not the same reason for a differ- 
 ence of opinion, in different districts. Still, if no objection arose from the proposed 
 number of members in the Committees, Mr. Marshall said, he should have submitted 
 to the arrangement; but tliere was an objection, and a serious one, which did arise 
 from it : it was the wish, he presumed, of evejy member, that at least some portion of 
 the business before the Convention, might be entered upon and completed as soon as 
 practicable. But it must be obvious, that if each of the Committees were to consist 
 of twenty-four members, more time would be consumed in preparing their reports, 
 than if the number were smaller. If, for example, the Committees should consist of 
 tliirteen members, the reports, though he hoped not less considered, would be consi- 
 dered and reported upon in less time. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend the resolution, by striking out the word tlu-ee," so as 
 to read, " the first of the Committees," instead of " the first three of the Com- 
 mittees." 
 
 Mr. Mercer observed in reply to Judge Marshall, that there was not a part of the 
 Constitution, in which all parts of the State were not deeply interested. How could 
 the Convention know the opinions of the people, for instance, respecting the Execu- 
 tive Department of Government, but by consulting the people ? and how could it 
 consult them, but through their reiwesentatives ? So respecting the Judiciary; he 
 could assure the honorable and venerable gentleman that that was a question of a 
 local character ; there did exist on that subject, evils of very great magnitude ; but 
 
22 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 those evils were not universal, but local in their extent. The gentleman was ready 
 to admit that the principle involved in the first of the resolutions was such as required 
 a Committee from all parts of the State ; he believed the same principle would be 
 found to apply to all the other resolutions. Mr. M. then stated the reasons why he 
 Bhould not ofter his two resolutions, and concluded by a compliment to the judgment 
 and standing of the gentleman from Richmond. 
 
 Mr. Marshall rejoined. If liis friend had understood him to say that every part of 
 the community was not interested in every part of the Constitution, he had greatly 
 mistaken his meaning. But the interest they take in the other parts of the Constitu- 
 tion not geographical in their bearing, was not local or geographical in its kind. 
 Gentlemen on one side of James River, for instance, had the same interest in the 
 Executive Department of the Government, as th%se on the other side. That interest 
 did not depend at all upon their residence \ on that Department, therefore, he could 
 see no reason for a Committee taken from all parts of the State ; but the case was 
 very different when the question of the basis of representation was involved. As 
 that subject was not necessarily separated from the Legislative Department, he saw no 
 need of reporting on it by a separate Committee. As there was nothing geographical 
 in the Executive or Judicial Departments of Government, he could not see the need of 
 having a Geographical Committee to consider them ; and as a large Committee was 
 likely to be slow in reporting, he preferred one of more limited numbers. 
 
 After some remarks of Mr. Johnson, going to shew the inconvenience of large 
 Committees, he expressed his determination to vote for the amendment, leaving all 
 other Committees but one to be appointed in the ordinary mode by the Chair. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Scott, and decided in the 
 negative — Ayes 39, Noes 46. So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 The resolution was then carried, ayes 51. 
 
 A conversation now arose as to certain documents, the priiiting of which was de- 
 sired with a view to ascertain as far as practicable, the present population of the State. 
 Mr. Joynes offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary cause to be printed for the use of the members of this 
 Convention 100 copies of the Census of this State, taken in the years 1790, 1800, 
 1810 and 1820 ; and also, in separate tables, 100 copies of the aggregate militia returns 
 of each county in those years, and in the year 1820, and the three years preceding. 
 
 Messrs. Joynes, Claytor, Doddridge, Green, Mercer, Upshur, Scott, and B. W. 
 Leigh, took part in this discussion ; but before the gentlemen had agreed upon all the 
 documents to be printed, Mr. Powell moved to lay the resolution of Mr. Joynes upon 
 the table. 
 
 Whereupon, on motion of Mr. Stanard, the House adjourned. 
 
 The Convention met at 12 o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Lee. 
 
 The following gentlemen were announced as having been appointed to constitute 
 the several Committees ordered on Friday : 
 
 Committee to consider the Legislative Department of the Government. 
 
 Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Messrs. George, 
 
 SATURDAY, October 10, 1829. 
 
 Chapman, 
 Summers, 
 Doddridge, 
 Green, 
 
 Roane, 
 
 Anderson, 
 Johnson, 
 Beirne, 
 
 Mason , 
 
 Tazewell, 
 Campbell of Bedford, 
 Townes, 
 
 Randolph, 
 Madison, 
 Mercer, 
 
 Pleasants, 
 Taliaferro, 
 Joynes. 
 
 Cooke , 
 Pendleton, 
 
 Committee on the Executive Department. 
 
 Messrs. Giles, 
 
 Dromgoole, 
 Nicholas, 
 
 Messrs. Campbell of Washington, 
 Garnett, 
 Cloyd, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CO^'TENTION. 
 
 23 
 
 Messrs. Coffman, 
 MCoy, 
 . Smith, 
 Trezvant, 
 Leigh of Halifax, 
 Barbour of Orange, 
 Fitzhugh, 
 Powell, 
 Naylor, 
 
 Messrs. Duncan, 
 Morgan, 
 
 Barbour of Culpeper, 
 
 Loyall, 
 
 Claytor, 
 
 Cabell, 
 
 Gordon, ■ . . " 
 
 Bates, 
 
 Upshur. 
 
 Messrs. Jones. 
 
 Committee on the Judicial Department. 
 
 Messrs. ^NI'Millan. 
 
 Alexander, 
 
 Morris, 
 
 Marshall, 
 
 ISIathews, 
 
 Harrison, 
 
 Laidley, 
 
 Baldwin, 
 
 Campbell of Oliio, 
 
 Miller, 
 
 Scott, 
 
 Claiborne, - 
 
 Taylor, 
 
 Venable, 
 
 ■ Mennis, 
 
 Stanaxd, 
 
 ?vlartin, 
 
 Henderson, ■ 
 
 Thompson, 
 
 Grigo-s, 
 
 Bayly. 
 
 Boyd; 
 
 
 Committee to consider the Bill of Rights, and other matters not referred to the foregoing 
 
 Committees. 
 
 Messrs. Taylor of Chesterfield, 
 Goode, 
 Clopton, 
 Williamson, 
 _ - Moore, 
 Baxter. 
 Urquliart, 
 Logan, 
 
 Opie, " V 
 
 Donaldson, 
 
 Byars, 
 
 JNIessTS. Taylor of Caroline, 
 Ogiesby, 
 See, 
 Wilson, 
 INIacrae, 
 Prentis. 
 Saunders, 
 Stuart, 
 IMassie, 
 Read. 
 
 The President then laid before the Convention the follo\\'ing letter received b_j 
 from the honorable Judcre Dade, a member elect to the Convention: 
 
 imu 
 
 To the honorable the President of the Convention, called to alter or amend the Constitu- 
 tion of the State of Virginia. 
 
 Sir : — Being unable from ill health to attend my duties m the Convention, I take 
 the earliest opportunity of enclosing to you nw resignation of that high trust. 
 
 Occurring after tlie meeting of tiie Convention, it will, of course, devolve the fill- 
 ing of my vacancy on the remaining Delegates. 
 
 With the most earnest wishes for the success of your labours, and v-ath the liighest 
 respect for yourself and the body in which you preside. I am vour most obedient 
 servant, ' W^I. A. G. DADE. 
 
 October 5th, 1829. 
 
 Mr. Taliaferro of King George, said, that he believed in expressing liis unfeigned 
 regret for the cause that had produced the commimication just read, he should hazard 
 nothing by saying, that in Judge Dade tlie Convention had lost one of its most valuable 
 members. He was very sure he should hazard nothing in the view of all those to 
 whom that gentleman was known. As he presmned that some autlientic record of 
 the fact of Judge Dade's resignation was requisite, it was his piirpose to move that the 
 letter annoTincing it, should be put on file by the Secretary, and entered upon the Jour- 
 nal of the Convention, but as a previous motion was required by order, lie would first 
 move that the letter be laid upon the table: which motion beins: agreed to, JNIr. T. 
 moved that the communication firom Judge Dade be entered on^^the records of the 
 Convention. 
 
 This motion was carried nem. con. 
 
 Mr. Jovnes of Accomack, now moved again the resolution which he offered yester- 
 day, and wliich was modified so as to read as follows: . ... 
 
24 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Resolved, That the Auditor of Pubhc Accounts, be requested to prepare and lay 
 before this Convention, Tabular Statements, shewing* tlie free white, free coloured, 
 and slave population of each county of this Commonwealth, according to the Census 
 taken in the years 1790, ISOO, ISIO, and 1820, respectively ; the area in acres of each 
 county; the quantity of land taxed in each county, in the year 1828; the amount of 
 taxes assessed in each county, in the year 1823; the amount of tax paid into the 
 Public TreasuBft, from each county, in that year ; the amount of tax accruing on each 
 subject of taxation ; the white, free colourecl, and slave tythables of each county, in 
 tlie years 1800, 1810, 1820, and 182!); and also a statement of the free white, free co- 
 loured, and slave population of each county, in the year 1829, so far as he can deduce 
 the same by a comparison of the tj'thables, and the entire population in the years 1800, 
 1810, and 1820. 
 
 Resolved, That the Auditor be also requested, in addition to such Tabular State- - 
 ments, in reference to each county, to state the information above requested, in rela- 
 tion to the four following divisions of this Commonwealth, viz : 1st, from the sea-coast, 
 to the head of tide-water ; 2d, from the head of tide-v/ater to the Blue Ridge; 3d, 
 from the Blue Rit'o-e to the Allegliany ; and 4th, from the Alleghany to the wetward. . 
 
 The above resolutions having been agreed to, 
 
 Mr. Green of Cidpeper, moved the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Auditor be also requested to furnish a statement, from tlie pro- 
 perty books in his oHice, of the nmnber of persons in each county and corporate town - 
 of tliis Connnonwealth, assessed to the payment of any revenue tax, in the year 1828. 
 
 TJie resolution was adopted. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, it Avas ordered, that the foregoing list of the mem- 
 bers of Committees, be printed for the use of the House. And then the House ad- 
 journed till Monday 12 o'clock. , 
 
 MONDAY, October 12, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, at 12 o'clock, and was opened with 
 prayer by the Rev. Mr. Kerr (of the Ba])tist Church.) 
 
 Mr. JNeal, (hjm the District of King George, a]>])eared and took his seat. 
 
 The President laid beibre the Convention the following letter, which was read at 
 the Clerk's table : 
 
 Richmond, October 12, 1829. 
 
 Sir : — We discharge a melancholy duty in announcing to you the death of Calvin 
 I.I. Read, Esq. a Delegate to the Convention of Virginia from the twenty-fourth Dis- 
 trict, who departed this life on the night of the Gth inst. 
 
 This event having occurred since the meeting of the Convention, we, the remain- 
 ing mem])ers of that Delegation, have proceeded, according to the provisions of the 
 act of Assembly, to fill the vacancy thereby occasioned. V/ e have appointed William 
 K. Perrln, Esq. of the county of 'Gloucester, as the successor of Mr. Read, as will 
 ap])ear by the document which we have the honor to enclose. 
 
 With high consideration we are, your ob't serv'ts, 
 
 THOS. R. JOYNES, 
 
 THos. M. bayly; 
 
 A. p. UPSHUR. 
 
 Tlic honorable James Monroe, Prcsidcvt 
 
 of ike Convcidiou — Present. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Joynes of Accomack, the letter was laid upon the table. 
 Mr. Joynes tliereupon moved the follov/ing resolution : 
 
 Resolved, Tliat the members of this Convention will Avear crape for thirty days in 
 testimony of their respect for the memory of Dr. Calvin II. Read of Northampton, 
 who was elected a member of this Convention and who has died since the meeting 
 of the Convention. 
 
 On offering the above resolution, Mr. J. said, that wlien he Iieard of the death of 
 Dr. P-ead, he liad at first been in doubt as to the propriety of moving such a resolution 
 as he now had the honor to submit. He v/as not then apprised of the practice in the 
 House of Deleo-ates on such occasions ; but he had since ascertained, that it was usual 
 on the death of a member, to adopt such a mark of respect, as that he had just pro- 
 posed. Tlie gentleman, in remembrance of whom, he asked the Convention to wear 
 crape for thirty dayi^:, was one of the most amiable and upright citizens of the State, and 
 although this slight tribute of regard, was in itself, pei-iiaps, but of little value, it 
 might be some consolation to the weeping v/idow of the deceased, and to his family 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 25 
 
 and friends, to know, that a testimonial of public respect, usual in other cases of a 
 similar kind, had not been withheld from the memorj' of Dr. Read. 
 
 The resolution was unanimouslj' adopted. "Whereupon, Mr. Jojnes moved the 
 following additional resolution : 
 
 Resolved, Tnat the Sergeant at Arms cause to be delivered, as soon as practicable, 
 to Mr. Widiam K. Perrin of Gloucester, a notification of his appointment as a mem- 
 ber of this Convention, to supply the vacancy, occasioned by tne death of Dr. Calvin 
 H. Read, of Northampton. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, from the Committee appointed to fix the compensation of ofiicers, 
 reported in part as follows : 
 
 '•' The Committee appointed to enquire into the compensation proper to be allovved 
 tlie officers of the Convention, have^ agreed to tlie following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the allowances to the ofHcers of this Convention for their services, 
 during its Session, shall be to the President, in addition to his mileage as a member of 
 the Convention, eight dollars per day, to the Secretary on&-hundred and fifty dollars 
 per week, to the Sergeant at Arms thirty dollars per week, to each of the door-keepers 
 twenty-eight dollars per week, and to the person who cleans the Capitol, fotirteen 
 dollars per week." 
 
 Mr. i\ observed in explanation, that the Committee had not found it possible to in- 
 clude in thair report, a proper compensation for the public printer, inasmuch as no 
 correct estunate could at present be formed of the amaunt of public printing lie would 
 have to execute. They had also included in their report, an allowaiiee to a person 
 not strictly an officer of the Convention, but performmg a subordinate duty in its ser- 
 vice, viz : the sweeping the Hall and passages. In taking this liberty, thej* conceived 
 itself as acting in coniormity witlr the spirit-, though not the letter of their appoint- 
 ment, and in doing so they liad followed a precedent set by the practice in the House 
 of Delegates. 
 
 The resolution recommended by the Committee, was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge then offered the following resolutions : 
 Resolved,^ l^hat the several Committees consisting of a member from each Sena- 
 torial District,-have power respectively to appoint a Clerk, and to cause such printing 
 to be done as they may deem expedient in the performance of their respective duties. 
 
 " Resolved, That the Comaiittee appointed to enquire into the compensation proper 
 to be allowed the officers of the Convention, be insti-ucted to provide and report a fit 
 compensation for such Clerks as ma}^ be appointed under the preceding resolution." 
 
 Tlie resolutions were agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Joynes then moved the folloAving : 
 
 *' Resolved, That the Auditor of Public Accounts be requested to prepare and lay 
 before the Convention a statement of the number of persons in each county of this 
 Commonwealth, who are charged on tlie land books of the years 1S26 and \t2'd, v/ith 
 taxes on a quantity of land not less than tvv-entj'-five acres, or on a lot or part cf a lot 
 in a town established by law." 
 
 This resolution having been adopted, 
 
 On motion of Mr. Brodnax, the Convention adjourned to meet to-morrow at one 
 o'clock. 
 
 [This alteration in the hour of meeting, being designed to allow further time to Uie 
 severed Comnnttees now in session.] 
 
 TUESDAY, October 13, 1S29. 
 
 The Convention met at one o'clock, and was opened with prayer bv the Rev. Mr. 
 Kerr. . r . . 
 
 Mr. Marshall of Richmond said, that he was charged with a memorial from a nu- 
 merous and respectable body of citizens, the non-freenolders of the city of Richmond. 
 The object sought in the memorial, was an extension of the right of suffrage. The 
 language of the memorial was respectful, and the petitioners accompanied their re- 
 quest with such arguments, as to them appeared convmcing, in support of the object 
 in view. 
 
 The memoriil -was thereupon received, and read as follows : 
 
 The Memorial of the JSVa- Freeholders of the City of Richmond, rcspccfidJy addressed 
 to the Convention, tioic assembled to deliberate on amx^ndmcnts to the Slate Constitution : . 
 
 Your memorialists, as their designation imports, belong to that class of citizens, who, 
 not having the good fortune to possess a certain portion of land, are, for that cause 
 only, debarred from the enjoyment of the right of suffrage. Experience hae but too 
 
 4 
 
26 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 clearly evinced, what, indeed, reason had always foretold, by how frail a tenure they 
 hold everyr other right, who are denied this, the hi gliest prerogative of freemen. The 
 want of it h is afforded both the pretext and the nieans of excluding the entire class, 
 to which your uieinorialists belong, from all participation in the recent election of the 
 body, they now respectiully address. Coniprising a very large part, probably a ma- 
 jority of luale citizens of mature age, they have been passed by, like aliens or slaves, 
 as it destitute of interest, or unworthy of a voice, in measures involving their future 
 political destiny : whilst the fteeholders, sole possessors, under the existing Constitu- 
 tion, of the elective franchise, have, upon the strength of that possession alone, as- 
 serted and maintained in themselves, the exclusive power of new-modelling the fun- 
 dauientjl laws of the State: in other words, have seized upon the sovereign authority. 
 It cannot be necessary, in addressing the Convention now assembled, to expatiate 
 on the momentous importance of the right of suffrage, or to eimmerate the evils con- 
 sequent upon its unjust limitation. Were there no other than that your memorialists 
 have brought to your attention, and wliich has made them feel with full force their 
 degraded condition, well might it justify their best efforts to obtain the great privilege 
 they now seek, as the only effectual method of preventing its recurrence To that 
 privilege, they respectfully, contend, they are entitled eqv.ally with its present pos- 
 sessors. Maav are bold enough to deny their title. None can show a better. It rests 
 upon no subtle or abstruse reasoning ; but upon grounds simple in their character, in- 
 telligible to the plainest capacity, and such as appeal to the heart, as well as the un- 
 derstanding, of all who coinprvhend and duly appreciate the principles of free Govern- 
 ment. Among the doctrines inculcated in the great charter handed down to us, as a 
 declaration of the riglits pertaining to the good people of Virginia and their posterity, 
 as the basis and foundation of Government," we are taught, 
 
 *■ That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain in- 
 herent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot,' by any 
 compact, deprive or divest their posterity: namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, 
 with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining hap- 
 piness and safety. 
 
 " That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people. 
 That a majorit}' of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefea- " 
 sible right to reform, alter or abolish the Government. 
 
 " That no man, nor set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or ' 
 privileges, but in consideration of public services. 
 
 " That all men, having sufScient evidence of permanent common interest with, and 
 attacliinent to, the community, have a right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed, or de- 
 prived of their property, without their consent, or that of their representative, nor . 
 bound by any law, to which they have not, in like manner, assented, for the public 
 good." 
 
 How do the principles thus proclaimed, accord with the existing regulation of suf- 
 frage .'' A regulation, wliich, instead of the equality nature ordains, creates an odious 
 distinction between members of the same community ; robs of all share, in the enact- 
 ment of the laws, a large portion of the citizens, bound by them, and whose blood and 
 treasure are pledged to maintain them, and vests in a favoured class, not in conside- 
 ration of their public services, but of their private possessions, the highest of all privi- 
 leges • one which, as is now in flagrnnt proof, if it does not constitute, at least is held 
 practically to con'ier, absolute sovereignty. Let it not be urged, that the regulation 
 complained of and the charter it violates, sprung from the same honored source. The 
 con.^ict between the n ia not on that account the less apparent. Nor does it derogate 
 from the fair fame of the Convention of '70, that they should not have framed a Con- 
 stitution perfect in all its parts. Deliberating amid the din of arms, not merely on a 
 plan of Government, but on the necessary means for conducting a most unequal strug- 
 gle for natimal existence, it was not to be expected, that the relative rights of the 
 citizens, could be maturely considered, or adjusted in detail. From any change of 
 the regulation, in regard to suffrage, a subject prolific, always, of much dissention, 
 they might have feared to generate feuds among those, upon whose harmony of feeling 
 and concert of action, depended the salvation of their country. They left it, there- 
 fore, as tliey found it. The non freeholders, moreover, unrepresented in the Conven- 
 tion, and for the most part, probably, engaged in resisting the common enemy, it is 
 fair to infer, in the actual condition of the country, had neither the opportunity nor 
 the inclination to press their claims. Nor should it be forgotten, that the Convention 
 having been chosen by the freeholders, whose political power was derived from the 
 abrogated Government, many of our wisest Statesmen regarded the Constitution 
 itself, as wanting in authority, or at least as repealable by a succeeding Legislature : 
 and, accordingly, it has, in point of fact, since undergone a material change, in the 
 very provision now in question, toucliing the right of suffrage. 
 
 If the Bill of Rights may not challenge respect, the opinions of any individual, how- 
 ever eminent, will be still more lightly regarded. Yet your memorialists cannot but 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 27 
 
 exult in the countenance their cause has received from him, who was ever foremost 
 to assert the rights of his fellow men; the venerated author of the Declaration of In 
 dependence, and of the Act <>f Religious Freedom. When those rights are brought in 
 question, they know of none whose sentiments are worthy of higher estimation. To 
 none among the founders of our Republic, are we indebted for more in its institutions, 
 that is admirable in theory, or valuable in practice. His name is identiiied with the 
 independence of his country, with all that is liberal and enlightened in her policy. 
 Never had liberty an advocate of more unaifected zeal; of more splendid abilities; of 
 purer principles. Nor is there in ancient or modern times, an example to be found of 
 one, who in his life and conduct, m.ore strongly exempLfied the sincerity -of his faith, 
 or more brightly illustrated the beauty of his tenets. 
 
 Your memorialists could not on this occasion, in iustice to themselves, omit all allu- 
 sion to the avowed sentiments of this illustrious Statesman, nor withhold from his 
 memory, a passing tribute of admiration and gratitude. 
 
 JDreading the influence of the doctrines and opinions now adverted to, conscious of 
 the futility of any attempt to reconcile with them their favorite policy, the enemies of 
 extended suffrage have not hesitated to deride tiiem as the crude conceptions of 
 visionary politicians. The Bill of Rights, until it became necessasy for their purposes 
 to assail it, the theme of unqualified approbation, whilst they affect to admire the beauty 
 •of its theory, they paradoxically assert, tends in practice to mischievous results. Its 
 principles, they cannot deny, are founded in truth and justice. But these practical 
 politicians look to a higher sanction, and sacrihce without remorse both justice and 
 truth on the altar of expediency. Would it not be well they should enlighten the 
 world with a system of their own, which should conform to the practice they would 
 approve, and substitute the exploded theories of the wisest Statesmen, the purest Pa- 
 triots, and the soundest Republicans, who ever adorned any age or country. 
 
 But not to the authority of great names m.eroly, does the existing restriction upon 
 suffrage stand opposed: reason and justice equally condemn it. The object, it is pre- 
 sumed, meant to be attained, was, as far as practicable, to admit the mtritoricus, and 
 reject tlie unworthy. And had this object really been attained, whatever opinions 
 might prevail as to the mere right, not a murmur probably would have been heard. 
 Surely it were much to be desired that every citizen should be qualified for the proper 
 exercise of all his rights, and the due performance of all his duties. But the same qua- 
 lifications that entitle him to assume the management of his privn,te affairs, and to claim , 
 all other privileges of citizenship, equally entitle him, in the judgment of your memo- 
 rialists, to be entrusted with this, the dearest of all his privileges, the most important 
 of all his concerns. But if otherwise, still they cannot discern in the possession of land 
 any evidence of peculiar merit, or superior title. To ascribe to a landed possession, 
 moral or intellectual endowments, would truly be regarded as ludicrous, were it not for 
 the gravity with which the proposition is )naintained, and still more for the grave con- 
 sequences flowing from it. Such possession no mere proves him who has it, wiser or 
 better, than it proves him taller or stronger, than him who has it not. ^ That cannot _ 
 be a fit criterion for the exercise of any nght, the possession cf wh'ch dees not indi- 
 cate the existence, nor the want of it the absence, of any essential qualification. 
 
 But this criterion, it is strenuously insisted, though not perfect, is yet the best human 
 wisdom can devise. It affords the strongest, if not the oni}^ evidence of the requisite 
 qualifications; more particularly of what are absolutely essential, "permanent com- 
 mon interest with, and attachment to, the comm.■anit3^" Those who cannot furnish 
 this evidence, are therefore deservedly excluded. 
 
 Your memorialists do not de-sign to institute a comparison ; they fear none that can 
 be fairly made between the privileged and the proscribed classes. They may be per- 
 mitted, however, without disrespect, to remark, that of the latter, not a few possess 
 land : many, though not proprietors, are yet cultivators of the soil : others are engaged 
 in avocations of a different mture. often ;is useful, pre-supposing no less integrity, 
 requiring as much intelligence, and as fixed a residence, as agricultural pursuits. 
 Virtue, intelligence, are not among the products of the soil. Attachment to property, 
 often a sordid sentiment, is not to be confounded with the sacred flame of patriotism. 
 The love of country, like that of parents and ofF^prnof, is enrrafted in our nature. It 
 exists in all climates, among all classes, under every possible form of Government. 
 Riches oftener impair it than paverty. Who has it njt is a monster. 
 
 Your memorialists feel the difficulty of undertaking calmly to repel ch<arges and in- 
 sinuations involving in infamy themselves, and so large a portion cf their fellow- 
 citizens. To be deprived of their rightful equality, and to hear as an apology that they 
 are too ignorant and vicious to enjoy it, is no ordinary trial of patience. Y"et they will 
 suppress the ind'gnant emotions these sweeping denunciations ure well calculated to 
 excite. The freeholders themselves ki\ow them to be unfounded : Why, else, are 
 arms placed in the hands of a body of disaffected citizens, so ignorant, so depraved, 
 and so numerous In the hour of danger, they have drawn no invidious distinctions 
 between the sons of Virginia. The muster rolls have undergone no scrutiny, no com- 
 
28 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 parison with the land books, with a view to expunge those who have been etruck from 
 the ranks of freemen. If the landless citizens have been ignominiously driven from 
 the poll;-!, in tiaie of peace, they have at least been generously summoned, in war, to 
 the uat tle-field. Nor have thty di obeyed the summons, or,li;ss prolusely than others^ 
 poured out their blood in the defence of that country wliich is asked to disovm them. 
 Will it be said tliey ov/e allegiance to the Government that gives them protection ? 
 Be it so : and if they acknowledge t!ie obligation ; if privileges are really extended to 
 them in defence of which they may reasonably be required to shed their blood, have 
 they not m')tives, irresistible motives, of attachment to the community ? Have they 
 not an interest, a deep interest, in perpetuating the blessings they enjo}^, and a right, 
 consequently, to guard those blessings, not Irom foreign aggression merely, but from 
 domestic encroacnment ? 
 
 But, it is said, yield them this right, and they will abuse it : property, that is, landed 
 property , will be rendered insecure, or at least overburthened, by those who possess it 
 not. The Ireehoiders, on the contrary, can pass no law to the injury of any other 
 class, Vv'hich will not more injuriously affect themselves. The alarm is sounded too, 
 of danger irom large manufacturing institutions, where one corrupt individual may 
 Bway tiie corrupt votes of thousands. It were a vain task to attempt to meet all the 
 flmisy pretexts urged, to allay alb the apprehensions felt or feigned by the enemies of 
 a just and liberal pjlicy. The danger ot abuse is a dangerous plea. Like necessity, 
 tlie detested plea of the tyrant, or the still more detestible plea of the Jesuit, expedi- 
 ency ; it serves as an ever-ready apology for all oppression. If we are sincerely repub- 
 lican, we must give our confidence to the priciples we profess. We have been taught 
 by our fathers, thit all pDwer is vested in, and derived from, the people ; not the free- 
 holders': that the majority of the community, in whom abides the physical force, have 
 also the political right of creating and remoukf ng at will, their civil institutions. Nor 
 can this r'ght be any .where mere snfely deposited.- The generality of mankind, doubt- 
 less, dss're to becom.e owners of property : left free to reap the fruit of -their labcurs, 
 they will seek to acquire it honestly, it can never bs th(^ir interest to.overburthen, 
 or render precarious, Vv'liat they themselves desire to enjoy, m peace. But should they 
 ever prove as base as the argument supposes, fbi-ce alone ; arms, not votes, could effect 
 their designs ; and when th it shall be aitempted, what virtue is there in Constitutional 
 restrictions, in mere wax and paper, to v/ithstand it.^ To deny to the great body of 
 the people all share in the Government ; on suspicion that they may deprive others of 
 their property, to rob thein, in advance of their rights ; to look to a privileged order as 
 the fountain and depository of all power ; is to depart from the fundamental maxims, 
 to destroy the chief beauty, the characteristic feature, indeed, of Republican Govern- 
 ment. Nor is the danger of abuse thereby diminished, but greatly augmented. No 
 community can exist, no representative body be formed, in which some one division 
 of persons or section of cmntry, or some two or more combined, may not preponde- 
 rate and oppress the rest. The east may be more powerful than the west, the low- 
 landers than the liighlnriders, the agricultural than the commercial or manufacturing 
 classes. To give all power, or an undue share, to one, is obviously not to remedy but 
 to ensure the evil. Its s ifest check, its best correcti^ e, is found in a general admis- 
 sion of all upon a footing of equality. So intimately are the interests of each class 
 in society blended and mt TVv'oven, so indispensible is justice to all, that oppression in 
 that case becomes less prcLable ifom any one, however pov/erful. Nor is this mere 
 speculation. In our ecclesiastical -polity it has been reduced to practice ; and the most 
 opposed in doctrine, the most bitter in controVersy, have forgotten their angry conflicts 
 for power, and now mingle in harniony. 
 
 The example of almost every other State in the Union, in which the patrician pre- 
 tensions of the landholder have, since their foundation, been unknown or despised, 
 in many of wliicli, too, manufacturing institutions exist on an extensive scale, ought 
 alone to dispel these visionary fears of danger from the people. Indeed, all history 
 demonstrates that the many have oftener been the victims than the oppressors. Cun- 
 nlng has proved an over-m itcli for strength. Tiie few have but too v/ell succeeded in 
 convincing them of their incapacity to manage their own affairs ; and h.aving persua- 
 ded them, for their own good, to submit to the curb, have generously taken the reins, 
 and naturally enough converted them into leasts of burthen. 
 
 _ As to the danger from large manufacLuring establishments in Virginia, when is their , 
 disastrous influence to be experienced.? is it not apparent that such establishments 
 musr.for an indefinite period, be at the mercy of those who affect to dread them, and 
 rnay be shackled or suppressed, as i'vax or fancy may dictate.? For how many centu- 
 ries must the defranchised citizens be content to relinquish their rights, because, in 
 some remote age of the world, a distant posterity, similarly circumstanced, may be 
 pov/erful enough, and base enough withal, to trample upon the rights of others.? 
 
 But >r justice' is not to be expected, if self-aggrandizement is to be assumed as the 
 Eole ruling principle of men in power, then, your memorialists conceive, the interests 
 of the many deserve at least as much to be guarded as those of the few. Conceding' 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 29 
 
 the truth of the proposition assumed, what security, they would enquire, is there 
 acrainst the injustice of the freeholders? How is the assertion made good, that they 
 can pass no I iw affecting tlie rights of others without more injuriously alFecting their 
 own ? They cannot do this, it -is said, because they possess, in common with other 
 citizens, all personal rights, and, in addition, the rights pertaining to their peculiar 
 property. And if this be a satisfactory reason, then one land-holder in each county 
 or district would suffice to elect the representative body ; or, the impossibility of in- 
 juring others being shev/n, a single land-holder in the Commonwealth might still 
 more'^conveniently exercise the sovereign pov\-er. Jut, is not the proposition obvi- 
 ouslv false ? What is there to prevent their imposing upon others undue burthens, 
 and conferring on themselves unjust exemptions? Supplying the pxiblic exigencies 
 hy a capitation or other tax exclusively or oppressively operating on the other portions 
 of the community ? Exacting from the latter, in common with slaves, menial services ? 
 Placing around their own persons and property more efficient guards ? Providing for 
 their own injuries speedier remedies? Denying to the children of all other classes ' 
 admission to the public seminaries of learning ? Interdicting to all but their own 
 order, indeed, the power to elect, and the right to be elected, are most intimately if 
 not inseparably united ; al^ offices of honor or emolument, civil or military ? Why 
 can they not do all this, and more ? Where is the impossibility ? It would be mi- 
 just: admirable logic ! Injustice can be predicated only of non-freeholders. 
 
 Still it is said, the non-freeholders have no just cause of complaint. A freehold is 
 easily acquired. The right of suffrage, moreover, is not a natural rio-ht. Society 
 may grant, modify, or withlrald it, as expediency may require. Indeed all agree that 
 certain regulations are proper : those, for example, relating to age, sex, and citizen- 
 ship. At best, it is an idle contest for an abstract right whose loss is attended with no 
 practical evil. 
 
 If a freehold be, as supposed, so easily acquired, it would 5eem highly impolitic, to 
 say no more, to insist on retaining an odious regulation, calculated to produce no 
 other effect than to excite discontent. But the fact is not so. The thousands expell- 
 ed from the polls too v\' ell attest the severity of its operation. It is by no means easy 
 or convenient for persons whom fortune or iuclihation have engaged in other than 
 agricultural pursuits,' to withdraw from these pursuits, or from the support of their 
 famihes, the amount requisite for the purchase of a" freehold. To compel them to do 
 this, to vest that sum in unproductive property, is to subject them, over and above the 
 original cost, the assessments upon it, and ,the probable loss by deterioration, to an 
 annual tax, equivalent" to the profits they niight have derived from the capital thus 
 unprofitably expended. What would be thought of a tax imposed, or penalty inflict- 
 ed, upon all voters, for exercising what should be the unbouglit privilege of every 
 citizen? How much more odious is the law that imposes tliis tax, or rather, it may be 
 said, inflicts this penaltj^, on one portion of the community, probably the larger and 
 least able to encounter it, and exempts the other? 
 
 The right of suffrage, however, it seems, is not a natural right. If by natural, is 
 meant what is just and reasonable, then, nothing is mors reasonable than that those 
 whose purses contribute to maintain, whose lives are pledged to defeiid the country, 
 should participate in all the privileges of citizenship. But say it is not a natural 
 right. Whence did the freeholders derive it ? How become its exclusive possessors ? 
 Will the}'- arrogantly tell us they own the country, because they hold the land ? The 
 right by which they hold their land is net itself a natural right, and hy conseauence, 
 notliing claimed as incidental to it. "Whence then did they derive this privileo-e ? 
 From grant or conquest? Not from the latter. No war has ever been wao-ed to as- 
 sert it. If from the -former, by whom was it conferred? They cannot, if they 
 would, recur to the P«.oyal Instructions of that English monarch, of infamous memory, 
 who enjoined it upon the GoverJior of the then Colony of Vu'ginia, to take care that 
 the members of the Assembly be elected 0/^7;/ by the freeholders, as being more aoreeable 
 to the custome of England:" he might have added more congenial also with^'monar- 
 chical institutions. If Colonial regulations might properly be looked to, then the 
 right, not of freeholders merely, but of freemen^to vote, may be traced to a more dis- 
 tant antiqmty, and a less polluted source. But, by our ever-glorious revolution, the 
 Government whence these regulations emanated, -vras annuHed, and v/ith it all the 
 pohtical privileges it had conferred, swept away. Will they rely on the Constitutional 
 provision ?_ That was the act of men delegated by themselves. They exercised the 
 very right in question in appointing the body from, whom they profess to derive it, and 
 indeed gave to that body all the power it possessed. What is this but to say they ge- 
 nerously ccm'erred the privilege upon themselves ? Perhaps they may rely on length 
 of time to forestal enquiry. We acknov.dedge no act of limitations against the op- 
 pressed. Or will they disdain to shew any title : and, clinging to power, rest on 
 force, the last argument of Kings, as its source azid its defence?'' This were, doubt- 
 less, the more politic course. 
 
30 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Let us concede that the right of suffrage is a social right ; that it must of necessity 
 be regulated by society. Still the question recurs, is the existing limitation proper? 
 For obvious reasons, by almost universal consent, women and children, aliens and 
 slaves, are excluded. It were useless to discuss the propriety of a rule that scarcely 
 admits of diversity of opinion. What is concurred in by those who constitute the 
 society, the body politic, must be taken to be right. But the exclusion of these classes 
 for reasons peculiarly applicable to them, is no argument for excluding others to whom 
 no one of those reasons applies. 
 
 It is said to be expedient, however, to exclude non-freeholders also. Who shall 
 judge of this expediency The society : and does tliat embrace the proprietors of 
 certain portions of land only ? Expedient, for whom ? for the freeholders. A harsh 
 appellation would he deserve, wlao, on the plea of expediency, should take from ano- 
 ther his property : what, then, should be said of him v/ho, on that plea, takes from 
 another his rights, upon which the security, not of his property only, but of his life 
 and liberty depends ? 
 
 But the non-freeholders are condemned for pursuing an abstract right, whose pri- 
 vation occasions no practical injury. 
 
 Your memorialists do not, perhaps, sufficiently comprehend the precise import of 
 this language, so often used. The enjoyment of all otlier rights, whether of person 
 or property, they will not deny, may be as perfect among those deprived of the privi- 
 lege of voting, as among those possessing it. It may be as great under a despotism, 
 as under any other form of Government. But they alone deserve to be called free, or 
 have a guarantee for their rights, who participate in the formation of their political 
 institutions, and in the control of those who make and administer the laws. To such 
 as may be disposed to surrender this, or any other immunity, to the keeping of others, 
 no practical mischief may ensue from its abandonment; or if any, none that will not 
 be justly merited. Not so with him who feels as a freeman should ; who would think 
 for himself and speak what he thinks; who would not commit his conscience or his 
 liberty to the uncontrolled direction of others. To him the privation of right, of 
 that especially, which is the only safeguard of freedom, is practically wrong. So 
 thought the fatliers of the republic. It was not the oppressive weight of the taxes 
 imposed by England on America: it was the assertion of a right to impose any bur- 
 tliens whatever upon those who were not represented ; to bind by laws those who had 
 no share, personal or delegated, in their enactment, that roused this continent to 
 arms. Have the principles and feelings that then prevailed, perished with the conflict 
 to which they gave birth ? If not, are they not now grossly outraged ? The question 
 is submitted to your candor and justice. 
 
 Never can your m.emorialists agree that pecuniary burthens or personal violence are 
 the sole injuries of which men may dare to complain. It may be that the freeholders 
 have shewn no disposition greatly to abuse the power they have assumed. They 
 may have borne themselves with exemplary moderation. But their unrepresented 
 brethren cannot submit to a degrading regulation which takes from them, on the 
 supposition of mental inferiority or moral depravity, all share in the Government un- 
 der which they live. They cannot yield to pretensions of political superiority found- 
 ed on the possession of a bit of land, of whatever dimensions. They cannot acqui- 
 esce in political bondage, because those who affect to sway over them the rod of em- 
 pire, treat them leniently. The privilege which they claim, they respectfully insist, 
 is theirs as of right; and they are under no obligation to assign any reason whatever 
 for claiming it, but that it is their own. 
 
 Let the picture be for a moment reversed. Let it be imagined that the non-free- 
 holders, possessing the physical superiority which alone can cause their political in- 
 fluence to be dreaded, should, at some future day, after the manner of the frcclioldcrs, 
 take the Government into their own hands, and deal out to the latter the same mea- 
 sure of justice they have received at their hands. It is needless to enquire into the 
 equity of such a proceeding; but would they not find for it in the example set them 
 at least a plausible excuse, and to the freeholders' remonstrance retort the freeholders' 
 argument ? That argument your memorialists will not now recapitulate ; they leave 
 it to others to make the application. 
 
 Your memorialists have thought it due to the magnitude of the question, to exa- 
 mine at some length the grounds on which their political proscription is usually de- 
 fended. If they have occasionally been betrayed into warmth of expression, the 
 transcendanl importance of the franchise they claim, and the nature of the objections 
 they have been compelled to meet, will plead their apology. Deep would be their 
 humiliation in now addressing you, delegated as you have been by those who hold 
 them in political subjection, did tliey not but too well remember, it is their brethren 
 to whom they impute their wrongs, and from whom they solicit reparation. Never, 
 indeed, can they cease to protest against the measures which have made you, not the 
 representatives of the people, but the organ of a privileged order. Still they approach 
 you as the guardians of the public weal, however so constituted; as dispensers of the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 31 
 
 public justice ; as an assemblage of distinguished citizens T;\-ielding the poiver, howe- 
 ver irregularly conferred, of new-modelliug the fundamental institutions of the State. 
 They bow with respectful deference to the virtues and talents which have raised you 
 to the eminent station you now occupy. They appeal, through you, to the justice of 
 their country, and confidently trust, under your auspices, to assume that equal 
 rank in the' community, to wliich they conceive themselves justly entitled, and 
 which, until they shall indeed be xmwortliy to enjoy it. they can never v,-illingly re- 
 nounce. 
 
 In behalf of the meeting, 
 
 WALTER D. BLAIR, Chairman. 
 
 Teste, 
 
 JoHv B. R.iCHARi)So:?, Secretary. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said that, however gentlemen might differ in opinion on the question 
 discussed in the memorial, he was sure they must all feel that the subject was one of 
 the deepest interest, and well entitled to the most serious attention of this body. He 
 therefore moved its reference to the Committee on the Legislative Department of 
 Government. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. and the memorial referred accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then presented a memorial, winch, he said, came from a highly res- 
 pectable body of citizens in Fairfax county. Its purport and tenor were^very si- 
 milaj: to tliat which had just been read; and he moved its reference to the same 
 Committee. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. and the reading of the memorial having been dispensed 
 with, it was referred to the Legislative Committee. 
 
 On motion of Mr. M'Coy, the House then adjourned, to meet to-morrow at on© 
 o'clock. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, Octobt.r 14, lr29. ^ - i~ 
 
 The Convention met at one o'clock, and its sitting was opened ^-ith praver by the 
 Rev. Mr. Taylor, of the Baptist Church. 
 ]So business presenting itself, 
 
 Mr. M"Coy moved an adjournment, but withdrew his motion in favor of Mr. Dod- 
 dridge, who moved a recess of the House till four o'clock, hoping that the First Au- 
 ditor might have had time to prepare and lay before the House the documents which 
 had been ordered by the Convention. 
 
 The President then laid before the House the followina: letter from the Au- 
 ditor : 
 
 Auditor's Office, ) 
 October 13. 1629. ] 
 
 Sir: — In compliance with one of the resolutions adopted by the Convention on the 
 10th inst. I have the honor to transmit a statement of the number of persons in each 
 county, and corporate town, within this Commonwealth, charged with State tax on 
 rnoveable property, for the year 1628. The documents called for by the other resolu- 
 tions will be furnished as soon as they can be prepared. 
 I have the honor to be. Sir, 
 
 With great respect and consideration. 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 JAMES E. HEATH, 
 Aiulitor of Public Accomits. 
 
 James Moxroe, Esq. 
 
 President of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to lay the communication on the table and print it, and that 
 the Auditor should dehver the residue when prepared to the public printer. 
 The motion was aoTeed to. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, with a view to give the Committees more time, moved tliat when the 
 House adjo-orned. it adjourn to meet at two instead of one o'clock, wliich being agreed 
 to, on motion of Mr. Doddridge, the Convention adjourned. 
 
32 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 THURSDAY, October 15, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, agreeably to adj.^urnment, and was opened 
 with prayer by tlie Rev. Mr. Kerr, of the Riptist Church. 
 
 Mr. Anderson presented a memorial froiii the non-freeholders of Shenandoah, 
 praying the extension of the right of suffrage ; which, on Mr. Anderson's motion, 
 was referred to the Legislative Committee. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy rose to observe, that having no disposition to sit there, or see others sit 
 there, without having something to do, he moved that the Convention rise; which was 
 agreed to witliout opposition. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned until to-morrow, two o'clock. 
 
 FRIDAY, October 16, 1829. ; 
 
 The Convention assembled at two o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Taylor, of the Baptist Church : ' , 
 
 And (liaving no business before them) on Mr. Naylor's motion, the Convention 
 adjourned till to-morrow, two o'clock. ' • '- . " - 
 
 SATURDAY, October 17, 1829. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Kerr ofFtJred up a prayer; after which, the Convention was called to 
 order. 
 
 No business being yet ready to be laid before the Convention, Mr. Doddridge moved 
 that the Convention adjourn; he stated that some additional documents had been 
 prepared by tbe Auditor of Public Accounts, which would be placed in the hands of 
 the public printer under a previous resolution of that body. 
 
 TJie motion to adjourn prevailed without opposition ; and the Convention accord- 
 ingly adjourned till Monday, two o'clock. 
 
 ' MONDAY, October 19, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Arnistrong, of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, from the Committee on Compensations, made the following farther 
 report, in part : V ' 
 
 The Committee appointed to enquire into the compensation proper to be allowed 
 the officers of the Convention, have agreed to the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the sum of sixteen dollars be allovv'ed the Sergeant at Arms for no- 
 tifying William K. Perrin of his election to the Convention. 
 
 The report was adopted. - . - 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Chesterfield, from the Committee on the Bill of Rights, ^-c. made 
 the following report: 
 
 The Committee to whom was referred the Bill or Declaration of Rights, and all 
 such parts of the present Constitution as are not referred to the Committees on the 
 Legislative, Executive and Judicial Departments of the Government, have had the 
 subjects to them referred, under their consideration, and have in part performance of 
 the duties devolved on them, agreed upon the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That in the opinion of this Committee the Bill or Declaration of Rights, 
 &c. requires no amendment." 
 
 The report v/as laid upon the table. . '- " - — 
 
 Mr. Harrison of Rockingham, presented a 'memorial from the non-freeholders of 
 that county of a similar general import to those heretofore presented ; and which was, 
 on his motion, referred without reading to the Legislative Committee. 
 
 No farther business being before the Convention, on motion of Mr. Mercer, the 
 House adjourned. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 33 
 
 TUESDAY, October 20, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, when its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Hamner, of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 Mr. Marshall, from the Connnittee on the Judiciary Department of Government, 
 made the following- report from the Committee : 
 
 1. Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such 
 Inferior Courts, as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish, and in 
 the County Courts. The jurisdiction of these tribunals shall be regulated by law. 
 The Judges of the Court of Appeals and of the Inferior Courts, shall hold their offi- 
 ces during good behaviom-, or until removed in the manner prescribed in this Consti- 
 tution ; and shall, at the same time, hold no other office, appointment, or public trust: 
 and the acceptance thereof, by either of them, shall vacate his judicial office. No 
 modification or abolition of any Court, shall be construed to deprive any Judge thereof 
 of his office ; but such Judge shall perform any judicial duties which the Legislature 
 shall assign him. 
 
 2. Resolved, That the present Judges of the Court of Appeals, Judges of the Gen- 
 eral Court, and Chancellors remain in office until the expiration of the first session of 
 the Legislature, held under the new Constitution, and no longer. But the Legisla- 
 ture may cause to be paid to such of them, as shall not be re-appointed, such sum as, 
 from their age, infirmities, and past services, shall be deemed reasonable. 
 
 3. Resolved, That Judges of the Court of Appeals and Inferior Courts, except Jus- 
 tices of the County Courts, and the Aldermen or other Magistrates of Corporation 
 Courts, shall be elected 'by the concurrent vote, of both Houses of the General As- 
 sembly, each House voting separately, and having a negative on the other ; and the 
 members thereof voting tiva voce. The votes of the members shall be entered on the 
 Journals of their respective Houses. Should the two Houses, in any case, fail to 
 concur in the election of a Judge, diu-ing the session, the Governor shall decide the 
 election, by appointing one of the two persons who first received a majority of votes 
 in the Houses in which they were respectively voted for. But if any vacancy shall 
 occur during the recess of the General Assembly, the Governor, or other person per- 
 forming the duty of Governor, may appoint a person to fill such vacancy, who shall 
 continue in office until the end of the next succeeding session of the General As- 
 sembly. 
 
 4. Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals, and of the Inferior Courts, 
 shall receive fixed and adequate salaries, Avhich shall not be diminished during their 
 continuance in office. 
 
 5. Resolved, That on the creation of any new county, Justices of the Peace shall 
 be appointed, in the first instance, as may be prescribed by law. When vacancies 
 shall occur in any county, or it shall, for any cause be deemed necessary to increase 
 their number, appointments shall be made by the Governor, by and with the advice 
 and consent of the Senate, on the recommendation of their respective County Courts. 
 
 6. Resolved, That the Clerks of the several Courts shall be appointed by their re- 
 spective Courts, and their tenure of office be prescribed by law. 
 
 7. Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals and of the Inferior Courts, 
 offending against the State, either by mal-administration, corruption, or neglect of 
 duty, or by any other high crime or misdemeanor, shall be impeachable by the House 
 of Delegates, such impeachment to be prosecuted before the Senate. If found guilty 
 by a majority of two-thirds of the whole Senate, such persons shall be removed from 
 office. And any Judge so impeached sliall be suspended from exercising the func- 
 tions of his office until his acquittal, or until the impeachment shall be discontinued or 
 withdrawn. 
 
 8. Resolved, That Judges may be removed from office by a vote of the General As- 
 sembly : but two-thirds of the whole number of each House must concur in such vote, 
 and the cause of removal shall be entered on the Journals of each. The Judge 
 against whom the Legislature is about to proceed shall receive notice thereof, accom- 
 panied witli a copy of the causes alleged for his removal, at least twenty days before 
 the day on which either Plouse of the General Assembly shall act thereupon. 
 
 The report having been read, on motion of Mr. Marshall, it was laid upon the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. Gile s, from the Committee on the Executive Department of Government, 
 made the following report, which was read, and on his motion, laid upon the table. 
 
 The Committee appointed on the Executive branch of the Constitution, have, ac- 
 cording to order, had under consideration the subjects referred to them, and have 
 come to the following resolutions thereupon : 
 
 1. Resolved, That the chief Executive Office of this Commonwealth, ought to be 
 vested in a Governor. 
 
 5 
 
34 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 2. Resolved, That there ought to be appointed a Lieutenant-Governor of this Com» 
 monwealth. . i 
 
 3. Resolved, That the Execxitive Council, as at present organized, ought to be abol- 
 ished, and that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council. 
 
 4. Resolved, That in case of the removal of the Governor from office, or of his death, 
 resio-nation, or inability to discharge the duties and powers of his office, the said pow- 
 ers and duties shall devolve on the Lieutenant-Governor; and the Legislature may 
 provide for the case of removal, death, or similar inability of the Lieutenant-Governor. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the sheriffs in the different counties in the Commonwealth, 
 shall, hereafter, be elected by the voters qualifi<«d to vote for the most numerous- 
 branch of the Legislature. • , • J 4. 
 
 (3. Resolved, That the commissioned officers of militia. companies be nominated to 
 the Executive by a majority of their respective companies. 
 
 7. Resolved, That the field officers of regiments be nominated to the Executive by 
 a majority of the commissioned officers of their respective regiments. 
 
 8. Resolved, That no pardon shall be granted in any case, until after conviction or 
 judgment. 
 
 Both reports were subsequently ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. Giles farther stated, tliat he Avas instructed by the Committee, to ask that they 
 be discharged from the farther consideration of the subjects referred to them, and he 
 made that motion accordingly, which was agreed to, and the Committee was thereupon 
 discharged. 
 
 Mr. Fowell of Frederick, said, that having belonged to the Committee which had 
 last reported, and having in' that Committee been in a large minority of its members, 
 who were in favour of a very different organization of the Executive Department of 
 GoverniTient, from that which the Committee had adopted, and just reported to the. 
 House, he asked permission to read, and to lay upon the table, certain resolutions 
 which he held in his hand. Leave having been granted, Mr. Powell then offered 
 the following, which were read, laid vipon the table, and ordered to be printed, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That the Executive Department of the existing form of Government 
 ouo-ht to be amended as follows : 
 
 §EC. 1. The Executive power shall be vested in a Governor. He shall hold his of- 
 fice for years, and be ineligible for the term of years thereafter. And a 
 Lieu' enant- Governor shall be chosen at the same time, for the same term, and under 
 the same restrictions. 
 
 Sec. 2. The Lieutenant-Governor shall act as President of the Senate, but he shall 
 have no right to vote except the Senate be equally divided upon any question ; in 
 which case he shall have the casting vote. 
 
 Sec. 3. No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor or Lieutenant-Gover- 
 nor, except a citizen of the Commonwealth, nor any who shall not have attained the 
 age of years, and who shall not have resided years next preceding his 
 
 election, in the State. 
 
 Sec. 4. The Governor and Lieutenant-Governor shall be elected at the times and 
 places of choosing members of the most numerous branch of the Legislature, l^y the 
 voters qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly ; provided that the 
 election shall take place throughout the Commonwealth on the same day. The per- 
 sons respectively having the highest number of votes for Governor and Lieutenant- 
 Governor, shall be elected. In case two or more persons shall have an equal number 
 of votes for Governor or for Lieutenant-Governor, the Legislature shall immediately 
 by joint ballot of both Houses, choose of the persons having an equal number of 
 votes for Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, 
 as the case may be. 
 
 Sec 5. The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the militia. He shall have 
 power to convene the Legislature on extraordinary occasions. He shall, from time 
 to time, give information to the Legislature of the condition of the Commonwealth, 
 and recommend to their consideration, such measures as he shall judge necessary and 
 expedient. He shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon by the Le- 
 gislature, and shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed. 
 
 Sec 6. The Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, shall, at stated times, receive for 
 their services, a compensation which shall neither be increased nor diminished during 
 the term for which they shall have been elected. 
 
 Sec 7. The Governor- shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons after con- 
 viction, for all offences, except treasons and in cases of impeachment. Upon convic- 
 tion for treason, he shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence, until 
 the case shall be reported to the Legislature at its next session, when the Legislature 
 may pardon, or direct the execution of the criminal, or gi-ant a farther reprieve. 
 
 Sec 8. In case of the removal of the Governor from office, or of his death, resig- 
 nation, or inability to discharge the duties of his office, his powers and duties shall 
 devolve on the Lieutenant-Governor; and in case of the removal, death, or resigna- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 35 
 
 tion, or like inability of the Lieutenant-Governor, the Legislature may provide by 
 law upon whom the duties of Governor shall devolve, until such disabilities shall be 
 removed, or a Governor shall be elected. 
 
 Sec. 9. The Governor shall have power to nominate, and by and with the advice 
 and consent of the Senate, appoint Judges of the Supreme Court, or Court of Final 
 Jurisdiction, and Judges of such Inferior Courts as may from time to time be estab- 
 lished by lav/ ; all militia officers from the rank of Colonel inclusive ; the Treasurer, 
 Auditor of Public Accounts, Register of the Land-Office, and Attorney- General. 
 The Legislature may by law vest the appointment of all other officers of the Com- 
 monwealth, whose appointments are not laerein otherwise provided for, in the Gover- 
 nor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, or in the Courts of Law. 
 
 Sec. 10. The Governor shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen 
 during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions, which shall expire at the 
 end of the next session of that body. 
 
 Sec. 11. The Governor shall have power to require in writing, the opinions of the 
 Lieutenant-Governor, and of the Attorney- General, upon all matters appertaining to 
 the duties of his office. 
 
 Sec. 12. No person, whose tenure of office depends on the pleasure of the Gover- 
 nor, shall be removed from office without the advice and consent of the Senate to 
 such removal. But the Governor shall have power, at any time, to suspend such 
 officer, and appoint another to discharge the duties of his office, until the next session 
 of the Senate, and until their advice and consent to such removal shall be ascertained 
 and expressed. 
 
 Mr. Gordon of Albemarle, presented a petition from citizens of that county, on the 
 subject of freedom of religion. 
 
 The petition was received, and without reading, referred to the Committee on the 
 Legislative Department. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said he was a member of the Committee which had been so unfortu- 
 nate as not to agree upon all the propositions, properly referred to them, under the 
 Executive Department of the Government, and like the gentleman from Frederick 
 (Mr. Powell) he would ask leave to submit for the consideration of the Convention, 
 several resolutions on the subject of that Department, which he wished read and laid 
 on the table. 
 
 Permission having been granted, Mr. Morgan thereupon offered the following, which 
 were read, laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed : 
 
 The Executive power shall be vested in a Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, to 
 assist in the administration of the affiiirs of Government, when required by the Go- 
 Yernor; and who shall act as Governor in case of the death, resignation, or removal of 
 the Governor from office, until another be appointed ; and in case of impeachment, 
 temporary incapacity of any kind, or absence of the Governor from the seat of Go- 
 vernment, until his restoration or return. And if at any time there should be no 
 acting Governor, and the Lieutenant-Governor shall be impeached, or from any 
 other cause not acting, the Executive authority shall devolve on, and be exercised by, 
 some person appointed by law for that purpose. 
 
 The Governor and Lieutenant-Governor shall be annually appointed by joint ballot 
 of the Senate and House of Delegates, and their terms of office shall end on the last 
 day of December of every year; but no person shall be ehgible to the office of Go- 
 vernor for more than three years at any one time, nor again, until after he shall have 
 been out of that office four years ; and in hke manner after the end of every three 
 years of service. 
 
 The Governor shall exercise the Executive power of the Government, according 
 to the laws of the Commonwealth, and see that they shall be faithfully executed. 
 He may, at his own discretion, and shall, on application of a majority of the Senate 
 or House of Delegates, convene the General Assembly : And he shall have power 
 to grant reprieves and pardons, except where the prosecution shall have been carried 
 on by the House of Delegates, or the law shall otherwise particularly direct; in 
 which cases, the House of Delegates shall alone have and exercise the power of 
 granting them; but no pardon shall be granted in any case, until after judgment ox 
 conviction. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned, till to-morrow, two o'clock. 
 
36 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, October 21, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Armstrong. 
 
 Mr. Marshall, from the Committee on the Judicial Department of Government, 
 then rose and said, that although it was not probable the Convention would take up 
 any one of the reports of the Select Committees which had been appointed, until the 
 reports of all those Committees should have been received, yet, with a view to put the 
 reports which liad been rendered in a way to be acted upon by the Convention, if 
 such should be its pleasure, he moved that the report made by the Committee on the 
 Judicial Department, be referred to a Committee of the Whole Convention, and be 
 made the Order of the Day for to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Upshur of Accomack, said, that he had understood a wish to be entertained by 
 some members of the House, that -a smialler Committee than a Committee of the 
 Whole, should be raised for the purpose of receiving and digesting the reports of the 
 Select Committees, and laying the whole before the Convention to receive its action 
 thereon. Should such a course be adopted after the report of the Judicial Committee 
 had gone to a Committee of the Whole, it would have again to be withdrawn from 
 their hands and put with the rest under the care of tlie Sub-Committee. He would, 
 therefore, very respectfully suggest to the member from Richmond, whether it would 
 not be expedient to withdraw for the present the motion which he had made. Mr. 
 U. said that he was the rather induced to this course, by observing that the Chairman 
 of the Committee on the Executive (Mr. Giles) was not in his place, and he knew 
 that it was not the Vv^ish of that Committee, that their resolution should take the 
 course now proposed. 
 
 Prlr. Marshall said, that he was by no means solicitous that the motion he had made 
 should be adopted : his only object had been to put business in such a train, that it 
 might be taken up and acted upon whenever the House should wish to consider it. 
 The reference of the report to a Committee of the Whole, implied no sort of neces- 
 sity that the report should be immediately acted upon. As to the suggestion of the 
 gentleman from Accomack, (Mr. Upshur) if the House should agree to refer all the 
 reports to a Select Committee before the Committee of the V/hole should have per- 
 fected its action on the particular report Vvdiich was the subject of his motion ; all that 
 would have to be done, would be to discharge the Committee of the Whole from the 
 further consideration of it : the motion he had made,. would not be at all in the way of 
 such a course. It seemed to him very possible, and extremely probable, that the House 
 would not refer the respective reports to a Select Committee, until they should have 
 received some report from the Committee of the Whole : nevertheless, he was en- 
 tirely willing to withdraw his motion, if the gentleman insisted upon it. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge of Brooke, observed that if the suggestion of the gentleman from 
 Accomack, (Mr. Upshur) had been occasioned by any thing that had fallen from him, 
 (Mr. D.) the gentleman had certainly misunderstood him. The course he had desired 
 to see pursued, was that each report should be referred to a separate Committee of this 
 House, and after all the reports should then have been considered and fully discussed 
 in Committee of the Whole, they be finally referred to one general Committee, wliich 
 might properly be called a Copying Committee, who should transcribe and report the 
 whole to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Upshur, after a few words of explanation, withdrew the suggestion he had made, 
 and the question having been taken on the motion of Mr. Marshall, it was decided in 
 the affirmative, and the report of the Judicial Committee was accordingly referred to 
 a Committee of the Whole Convention, and made the Order of the Day for to-mor? 
 row. 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, now moved the following resolution: 
 . Resolved, That it be a standing order of the Convention, that the Convention shall 
 every day resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole Convention, to consider the 
 existing Constitution of the Commonwealth, and such propositions for amendment or 
 alteration thereof, as shall be referred to or made in the said Committee. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to lay the resolution upon the table, suggesting, as a reason, 
 that its adoption would involve the Convention in difficulty. One of the rules they 
 hid adopleJ fir the r pr ceed'ng, required that the Order of the Day should be called 
 at twelve o'clock. If the resolution of the gentleman from Chesterfield should take 
 effect, the Convention would have to meet to-morrow at twelve o'clock, and take up 
 the report of the Judiciar}^ Committee at once : but he did not suppose it to be the 
 wish of any gentlenian to take up that, or any other of the reports, until the Legis- 
 lative Committee should have reported. The course proposed would cut short the 
 sittings of that Committee, which he was happy to say had now drawn so far toward a 
 close, that some glimpses of the morning light could be perceived, and a hope was 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 3t 
 
 entertained that if they were allowed, as at present, to sit till two o'clock, they might, 
 perhaps, finish their discussions to-morrow. 
 
 A debate on a question of order now arose, in which Messrs. Stanard, Doddridge, 
 P. P. Barbour, Mercer, Leigh, M'Coy and Johnson took part. 
 
 It was affirmed on the one hand, that nothing would be gained by laying the reso- 
 lution of Mr. Leigh on the table, because the report of the Judicial Committee, hav- 
 ing been referred to a particular Committee of the Whole, and made the Order of the 
 Day for to-morrow, the Convention would still have to meet, go into Committee of the 
 Whole, and take up the report, unless the order were postponed : and a general order, 
 if necessary, might as well be postponed as a specified one, though indeed, the gene- 
 ral standing order would not involve any necessity of postponement. If the resolu- 
 tion siiould be adopted, the Committee of the Whole would be at liberty to take up, 
 at its own election, either one of the reports referred to it; comparing each with the 
 corresponding portion of the existing Constitution. It might pass, at will, from one 
 of these reports to the other, without tlie ceremony of rising, reporting, and again 
 sitting, for that purpose. It might sit on any day, without being confined, as must 
 otherwise be the case, to a particular day specified : and its powers in this respect 
 were illustrated by reference to the practice, as well of the House of Delegates, as of 
 the House of Representatives of the United States. 
 
 It was insisted, on the other hand, that there was no rule which now bound the 
 Convention, to make the consideration of a subject referred to a Committee of the 
 Whole, the Order of the Day, for any particular day. That the Committee of the 
 Whole existed already, and a subject had been referred to it : Vvhen that Committee 
 met, it might take up any subject whatever, which might have been referred to a 
 Committee of the Whole : in this Convention as in the House of Delegates, there 
 existed but one Committee of the Whole ; and ail subjects referred in that form, be- 
 longed to it, as of course, and might be taken up in such order as tJie Committee it- 
 self should choose. There was no need of referring to it the existing Constitution, 
 because a comparison of the proposed amendments with that which they proposed to 
 amend, was necessarily involved in the discussion of such amendments ; nor was it 
 at all desirable, that the Constitution should go to such Committee, and there be taken 
 up, and considered by sections, as though it were a reported bill. When an amend- 
 ment to a law was referred, either in the House of Delegates, or in Congress, to a 
 Committee of the Whole, it was never the usage to refer to that Committee the origi- 
 nal law also. 
 
 The question being at length taken on tlie motion of Mr. Doddridge to lay Mr. 
 Leigh's resolution on the table, it was decided in the affirmative — Ayes 40 — Noes 37. 
 So the resolution was laid upon the table accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Nicliolas, who had been in a minority of the Committee on the Executive, in 
 relation to some of the features of the report of that Committee, particularly that part 
 of it which related to tlie abolition -of the Executive Council, asked and obtained 
 leave to lay the following resolutions on the table, and to have them printed, viz : 
 
 Resohicd, That the ninth and tenth sections of the present Constitution be retained, 
 and that the eleventh be substituted by the following resolution : 
 
 A Privy Council, or Council of State, consisting of four members, shall be chosen 
 by joint ballot of both Houses of Assembly, eitlier from their own members, or the 
 people at large, to assist in the administration of Government. They shall annually 
 choose out of their own members, a Lieutenant-Governor, who, in case of the death, 
 inability, or necessary absence of the Governor from the Government, shall act as 
 Governor. The Governor shall be the President of the Council, and shall in all cases 
 of division, have the casting vote. Two members, with the Governor or Lieutenant- 
 Governor, as the case may be, shall be sufficient to act, and their advice and proceed- 
 ings shall be entered of record, and signed by the members present (to any part 
 whereof, any member may enter his dissent) to be laid before the General Assembly, 
 when called for by them. The members of the Council shall be elected by joint bal- 
 lot of both Houses of the General Assembly, for four years. At the first election, 
 the two Houses shall, by joint resolution, divide the persons elected into two classes: 
 The seats of tlv3 Councillors 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; so that one 
 half may be chosen every second year ; and if vacancies happen by resignation, or 
 otherwise, they shall be filled by joint ballot of the two Houses of the General As- 
 sembly. An adequate but moderate salary, shall be settled on them, during their con- 
 tinuance in office, and they shall be incapable during that time, of sitting in either 
 House of Assembly. 
 
 In consequence of the failure of Mr. Leigh's resolution, the order which directed 
 the Committee of the Whole, to consider the report from the Judicial Committee to- 
 viorrow, was, on motion of Mr. P. P. Barbour, re-considered, and altered to Monday 
 next ; .whereupon, on motion of Mr. Powell, the Convention adjouined to meet to- 
 morrow, at two o'clock. 
 
38 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 THURSDAY, October 22, 1829. , 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Armstrong, of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 Mr. Giles moved, that the report from the Committee on the Executive, be now 
 taken up ; which motiqn being agreed to, he then moved that the report be referred 
 to a Committee of the Whole. 
 
 Mr. Stanard susrgested to him the propriety of forbearing his motion till the House 
 should have come^to some decision upon the resolution offered yesterday, by the gen- 
 tleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) and now lying upon the table : the Conven- 
 tion had not yet determined whether it would have a Committee of the Whole, analo- 
 o-ous in its duties and powers, to a Committee of the Whole, in the House of Dele- 
 gates. If the motion should be pressed at this time, the effect would be, that the re- 
 port would go to a distinct Committee of the Whole, from that to which had been re- 
 ferred the report from the Judicial Committee : for, as there has been separate orders, 
 there would, of course, be distinct Committees. But if the Convention should agree 
 to adopt the resolution upon its table, the order referring each report to a distinct Com- 
 mittee of the Whole, would have to be rescinded. 
 
 Mr. Giles observed, in reply, that not having been present yesterday, he was not ap- 
 prised that any difficulty would arise from the motion he had made, but seeing that 
 some embarrassment was apprehended, he would, with great pleasure, withdraw the 
 motion ; and he withdrew it accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that although he did not regard it as at all important that the report 
 should be referred at this time, he did not perceive the same difhculty as had presented 
 itself to the member from Spottsylvania, (Mr. Stanard.) The report might, certainly, 
 be referred to the same Committee of the Whole to which had been referred the report 
 from the Judicial Committee ; and in like manner, the reports from all the Select Com- 
 mittees, might be referred to one and the same Committee of the Whole ; who would 
 then have the whole before them at once. He saw, he said, the gentleman from 
 Orange, before him (Mr. P. P. Barbour,) shake his head, and he was well aware that 
 he had far less experience in Legislative proceedings than that gentleman ; but un- 
 less he was greatly deceived, indeed, the covirse he had indicated was frequently pur- 
 sued in the House of Representatives of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Barbour replied, that the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Powell) was certainly 
 correct, when he stated that several analogous subjects were often referred to the 
 same Committee of the Whole ; but then those subjects were not all held to be be- 
 fore the Committee at one and the same time ; but were taken up consecutively, and 
 each considered and discussed by itself, and as distinct from the others. 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Chesterfield, from the Committee on the Bill of Rights, made the 
 following report in part, which, on his motion, vvas laid upon the table and ordered to 
 be printed. 
 
 The Committee to wliom was referred the Bill or Declaration of Riglits, and all 
 such parts of the present Constitution as are not referred to the Committees on the 
 Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Departments of the Government, have, according 
 to order, had the subjects to them referred, under their consideration, and have further, 
 in part performance of the duties devolved on them, agreed upon the following resolu- 
 tions : 
 
 1. Resolved, as the ojnnion of this Committee, That the Constitution of this State 
 ought to be so amended, as to provide a mode in which future amendments shall be 
 made therein. 
 
 2. Resolved, That the first and second sections of the present Constitution, ought to 
 be stricken out, and that an introductory clause, adapted to the amended Constitution, 
 be substituted in lieu thereof. 
 
 3. Resolved, That the twelfth, twenty-first, and twenty-second sections of the pre- 
 sent Constitution, ought to be stricken out as no longer necessary. 
 
 4. Resolved, That the freedom of Speech and of the Press, ought to be held sacred and 
 guaranteed by the Constitution. 
 
 5. Resolved, That no title of nobility shall be created or granted ; and no person 
 holding any ofRce of profit or trust under the United States, or under any King, 
 Prince, or foreign State, shall hold any office under this State. 
 
 C. Resolved, as the ojoinion of this Committee, That the Constitution ought to be so 
 amended, as to provide, '■' that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any re- 
 ligious worship, place or ministry, whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, mo- 
 lested, or burthened in his body, or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of 
 his religious opinions or belief ; but that all men, shall be free to profess, and by argu- 
 ment to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion ; and that the same shall in no 
 wise, duninish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." 
 
 On motion of Mr. M'Coy, the House then adjourned. 
 
DEBATES 
 
 OF THE CO^'TEXTIOX. 
 
 39 
 
 FRIDAY, October 23, 1529. 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, and Tvas opened with prarer tv the Rev. Mr. 
 Parks, of the 3Iethodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Madison from the Committee on the Judicial Department, asked and obtained 
 leave, that that Committee might sit for the discharge of its duties dxiring the sittings 
 of the Convention. 
 
 3Ir. Taylor of Norfolk, a member of the Committee on the Bill of Rights, and other 
 matters not referred to the previous Committees, asked and obtained leave to lay upon 
 the table the following propositions, which were read and ordered to be printed : 
 
 Resolved Ist. That the elective franchise should be uniform: so that, throughout the 
 State, similar qualifications should confer a similar right of sufirage. 
 
 Resolved 2d, That, among those entitled by the Constitution to exercise the elec- 
 tive franchise, there should be entire equality of suffrage : so that, in all elections, the 
 suffrage of one qualified voter should avail as much as that of another qualified voter, 
 whatever may be the disparity of their respective fortunes. 
 
 Reso'red 3d, That equal numbers of qu alif ied voters are entitled to equal represen- 
 taUon throughout the State. 
 
 Resolved 4th, That as individual suffrage should be equal, without respect to the dis- 
 parity of individual fortune, so an equal number of qualified voters are entitled to equal 
 representation, witliout regard to the disparity of their aggregate fortunes. 
 
 Resolved otli. That in all pecuniary contributions to the pubhc service, regard should 
 be had to the abihty of individuals to contribute ; and as this ability to pay, from dis- 
 parity of fortune is unequal, it would be imjust and oppressive- to require each citizen to 
 pay an equal amount of public taxes. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Summers, the Convention then adjourned. - 
 
 SATURDAY, October 24, 1529. 
 
 The Convention met at two o'clock, and its sitting bavins' been opened with prayer 
 by the Rev. Mr. Parks, of the Methodist Church, 
 
 Mr. Madison, from the Committee on the Legislative Department of the Govern- 
 ment, made the following report : 
 
 The Comixuttee appointed on the Legislative Department of the Government, have, 
 according to order, had under consideration the subjects referred to them, and have 
 agreed to the following 
 
 REPORT. • . - ■ 
 
 1. Resolved. That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard should be had to the wlfite population excliisively. 
 
 2. Resolved, That a Census of the population of the State, for the purpose of ap- 
 portioning the representation, should be taken in the year 1531, the year 1545, and 
 thereafter at least once in every twenty years. 
 
 3. Resolved, That the right of suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who now 
 enjoy it under the existing Constitution : Provided. That no person shall vote bv vir- 
 tue of his freehold only, unless the same shall be assessed to the value of at least 
 $ for the payment of taxes, if such assessment be required by law : And shall 
 be extended : first, to every free white male citizen of the Commonwealth resident 
 therein, above the age of twenty-one years, who owns, and has possessed for six 
 months, or who has acquired by marriage, descent, or devise, a fireehold estate, as- 
 sessed to the value of not less than " doUars for tlie payment of taxes, if such 
 assessment shall be required by law ; second, or who shall owiia a vested estate in fee, 
 in remainder, or reversion, in land, the assessed value of which shall be dollars ; 
 third, or who shall own and have possessed" a leasehold estate with the evidence of 
 title recorded, of a term originally not less than five years, and one of which shall be 
 unexpired, of the annual value, or rent of dollars ; fourth, or who for twelve 
 months next preceding, has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the 
 county, city, borough or election district, where he may offer to vote, and who shall 
 have been assessed viith a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the pre- 
 ced'ng year, and actually paid the same : Provided, nevertheless, that the rio-ht of 
 suffrage shall not be exercised bv any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a 
 pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, soldier, sailor or maiine. in the service of the 
 I nited States, nor by any person convicted of any infamous offence ; nor bv citizens 
 born without the Commonwealth, unless they shall have resided therein for five 
 
40 
 
 DEBATES OF TH2 CONVENTION. 
 
 years immediately preceding the election at which they shall offer to vote, and two 
 years preceding the said election, in the county, city, borough or election district, 
 where they shall offer to vote, (the mode of proving such previous residence, when 
 disputed, to be prescribed by law,) and shall possess, moreover, some one or more of 
 the qualitications above enumerated. 
 
 4. Resolved, That the number of members in the Senate of this State ought to be 
 neither increased nor diminished, nor the classification of its members changed, 
 
 5. Resolved, That the number of members in the House of Delegates, ouo-ht to be 
 reduced, so that the same be not less than one hundred and twenty, nor rnore than 
 one hundred and fifty. 
 
 (j. Resolved, Tliat no- person ought to be elected a member of the Senate of this 
 State, who is not at least thirty years of age. 
 
 7. Resolved, That ho person ought to be elected a member of the House of Dele- 
 gates of this State, who is not at least twentj'-five years of age. 
 
 8. Resolved, Tliat it ought to be provided, that in all elections for members of either * 
 branch of the General Assembly, and in the election of all officers which may be re- 
 quired to be made by the two Houses of Assembly, jointly, or in either separately, 
 with the exception of the appointment of their own officers, the votes should be given 
 openly, or viva voce, and not by ballot. 
 
 9. Resolved, That no man sliall be compelled to frequent or support any religious 
 worship, place, or ministry whatsoever; nor shall be enforced, restrained, molestedj 
 or burtliened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his reli- 
 gious opinions or l^elief ; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to 
 maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise di- 
 minish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. 
 
 That the Legislature shall have no poAver to prescribe any religious test whatever, 
 nor to establish b}^ law any subordination or preference between different sects or de- 
 nominations, nor confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any one sect or de- 
 nomination, over others; nor pass any law, requiring or authorising any religious so- 
 ciety, or the people of any district within this Commonwealth, to levy on themselves 
 or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house for public worship, or tlie 
 support of any church or ministry, but tiiat it be left free to every person to select 
 whom he pleases as his religious instructor, and to make for his support, such private 
 contract as he pleases : Provided, hoAvever, that the foregoing clauses shall not be so 
 construed, as to permit any minister of the gospel, or priest of any denomination, to 
 be eligible to either House of the General Assembly. 
 
 10. Resolved, That no bill of attainder, or ex-jwst facto law, or law impairing the 
 obligation of contracts, ought to be passed. 
 
 1.1 . Resolved, That private property ought not to be taken for public uses without 
 just compensation. 
 
 12. Resolved, That the memb3rs of the Legislature shall receive for their services, 
 a compensation, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the public Treasury ; 
 but no law increasing the compensation of members of the Legislature shall take 
 effect until the end of the next annual session after the said law may have been 
 enacted. 
 
 13. Resolved, That no Senator or Delegate shall, during the term for Vv'hich he 
 shall have been elected, be appointed to any civil office of profit under this State, 
 which shall have been created, or the emoluments of which shall have been in- 
 creased during such term, except such ofiices as may be filled by elections by the 
 people. 
 
 Mr. Madison moved thot tlie report be printed, and referred to the same Committee 
 of the Whole, to which liad been referred the report from the Committee on the Ju- 
 dicial Department. 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, requested the venerable mover to vdthdraw his motion 
 for the present, until the Convention should have taken up, and decided upon, a reso- 
 lution now lying on its table ; and which, if adopted, would supersede the necessity 
 of such a motion as had just been m.ade. 
 
 Mr. Madison said, he v.'ould A'ery readily consent to V\^ithdraw the motion, v/hich he 
 had made only in pursuance of the course taken with the other report ; and the motion 
 was thereupon withdraAvn. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Leigli, the Convention then took up the following resolution, 
 moved by him on Thursday last : 
 
 " Resolved, That it be a &ta.nding order of the Convention, that the Convention 
 shall every day resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole Convention, to consider 
 the .existing Constitution of the Commonwealth, and such propositions for amend- 
 ment or alteration thereof, as shall be referred to or made in said Committee." 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, tliat when this resolution had been offered, it had been encountered 
 by objections from various quarters of the House, all of which, he hoped, further re- 
 flection had since removed.^ The whole purpose of the resolution was, to conform 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTIO!?, 
 
 41 
 
 tlie practice of this Convention, in relation to its Committee of the Whole, to the 
 course ptixsued in the House of Delegates ; and did he believe that precisely the same 
 object could be obtained in any other -way. he should not have the least objection: 
 but he did- not think that that was the case. -The original design, as proposed by 
 some gentlemen, was. that the Convention should resolve itself into a Committee of 
 the Whole, on the state of the Commonwealth; and there take up and discuss the 
 various subjects reported upon by the Select Committees. But, said Mr. L. this 
 Convention heis not been charged with the state of the Commonwealth, but ooly 
 with the revision of its fimdamental law. The only duty assigned to us, is to con- 
 sider the existing Constitution, and to propose therein such amendments as we may 
 deem requisite and proper : for that reason, I suggest that instead of raising a Com- 
 mittee of the Whole, on the state of the Commonwealth, our's shall be a Committee 
 of the Whole on the business before us. The cotirse indicated by the resolution must 
 be familiar to all who have served in the Hoiase of Delegates. I do not say that 
 the practice there pursued, is the best that exists in^the world; but it is the course 
 best known to us. - - — 
 
 Messrs. ZNIercer and Doddridge stated, that having had conversation with _the gen- 
 tleman, from Chesterfield, in relation to the object and bearing of his resolution, the 
 - objections they had formerly entertained were removed, and they were now fully sa- 
 tisfied that it should be adopted. , " - 
 
 The question being thereupon taken, the resolution was adopted nem. cgji. 
 "Mr. Madison now moved the reference of the report from theXegislative Coinmit- 
 tee, to a Committee of the Whole ; and it was so referred. 
 
 3Ir. Giles made a similar motion, "v\T.th respect to the report of the Committee firoA 
 the Executive Department, which was also agr.eed to. . 
 
 Mr. ^vlarshall observed.- that it was obviously convenient, that all the reports firom 
 the Select Committees, shotild be before the same Committee of the Whole ; and as 
 he beheved, though he was not entirely sure, that the repOTt of the Committee on 
 the Judicial Department, had been referred to a particular Committee of the Whole, 
 distinct from that recognized in the resolution this day adopted, he moved, if that 
 were the case, that tiie partiTiular Committee of the Whole, to which the report had 
 gone, might be discharged from the farther consideration' of it, and that the report 
 might take the same direction, as had been given to those from the other Select Com- 
 mittees. The motion prevailed, and the report from the Judicial - Comniittee jwas- 
 thereupon referred to the Committee of the Whole. ' - ' ^ . 
 
 Mr. Powell moved, that certain resolutions, which at his request had been yesterday 
 laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed, should now be referred to the Commit- 
 tee of the Whole. ' , 
 
 The motion was agreed to^ and then on motion of !Mr. Leigh, of Chesterfield, a 
 general order was passed, directing that all reports made by any of -the Select Com- 
 mittees, as weR as all propositions, heretofore moved in- the' House, be referred' to the 
 Cormnittee of the Whole. " . " ~ . " 
 
 On motion of Mr. Stanard, it was resolved, th^ when the House adjourned, it ad- 
 journ to meet on Monday next, at eleven o'clock. A. M. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, that he should have forborne to submit his personal views on the 
 subjects referred to the Committee of the "^^Tiole, but for the course pursued by other 
 gentlemen. As his views difiered probably from both of what might be called the 
 great parties in the House, he wotild ask the attention of the Convention to four re- 
 solutions, which he had drawn up, and which he asked leave to layjipon the table, 
 and have pruited, and referred to the Connnittee of the Whole. ^ . 
 2>Ir. F. then read in his place the following resolutions : . 
 
 1. Resolved, That the Senate ought to be divided once in every ^ ' years into 
 
 election districts, containing as nearly as possible, equal portions of white 
 population ; and that each district should be entitled to one Senator, and Dele- 
 gates; the former to be elected by tlie whole district, and the latter to be distributed 
 amonorst, and elected l)v the counties composing the district, as nearly as possible, in 
 proportion to their white population. 
 
 2. Resolved. That the power of the Legislature to impose taxes, ought to be so li- 
 mited, as proliibit the imposition on-property, either real or personal, of any other 
 than an ad zcdorenv' tax ; and that in apportioning this tax, either for State or county 
 purposes, the whole visible property (household furniture and wearing ajjparel ex- 
 cepted) of each individual in the conmaunity^. ought to be valued, andlaxed only in 
 proportion to its value : Provided, however, that no individual, whose property (with 
 the above exception)" does not exceed in value dollars, ought to be subject to 
 any propertv tax whatever : And provided, moreover, that the Legislature may im- 
 pose on all professions and occupations, usually resorted to as a means of support, 
 such tax as mav be deemed reasonable. 
 
 3. Resolved, That to prevent any unfair distribution of the revenue of the Com- 
 monwealth, the Legislature ou^ht to be prohibited from making appropriations (ex- 
 
 6 
 
42 
 
 PEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 cept by votes of two-thirds of the members of both its branches) to any road or canal, 
 until tiiree-fifchs of the amount necessary to complete such road or canal, shall have 
 been othi;r\vise subscribed, and eitlier paid or secured to be paid as the law may 
 direct. 
 
 4. Resolved. That the right of suffrage ought to be extended to all free male white 
 citizens of twenty-one years of age and upwards, who having been months 
 preceding the election, freeholders or house-keepers in the county where they offer to 
 vote, shall, within that time, have been assessed on property (exclusive of household, 
 furniture and wearing apparel) exceeding in value dollars, or in a tax other 
 
 than a property tax, of the amount of dollars, and shall have actually paid 
 
 all tlie taxes with which they may have been legally charged, during the current 
 year. 
 
 The resolutions were referred accordingly. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, it was ordered, that all the papers referred to the. 
 Committee of the Whole, should be printed consecutively, in one connected body. 
 
 Mr. Clay tor of Campbell, offered tiie following resolutions, which, on his motion, 
 were referred to tlie Committee of the Whole, and ordered to be printed.^ 
 
 - 1. Resolved, Tliat the right of suffrage, belongs to, and ought to be exercised by, all 
 free white male citizens within this Commonwealth, who have attained the age of 
 twenty-one years, and are able to give sufficient evidence of attachment to, and a 
 permanent common interest with, the community." 
 
 2. Resolved, That nativity, or residence within the Commonwealth, for a suffi- 
 cient time, and the payment of all taxes imposed, and performance of all public 
 duties required by the laws of this Commonwealth, ought to be deemed sufficient 
 evidence. 
 
 3. Resolved, therefore, That the right of suffrage ought to be exercised and enjoyed 
 by all free white male citizens of this Commonwealth, who have attained the age of 
 twenty-one years, except, first, paupers ; second, persons convicted of infamous 
 crimes; third, persons of unsound minds ; fourth, persons who have refused or failed to 
 pay all taxes assessed or imposed upon them by law, for the year next preceding any 
 election; at which they may offer to vote; fifth, persons in tlie military or navaT ser- 
 
 _ vice of the United States, or of this State ; and sixth, persons not native born citizens" 
 of this Commonwealth, who have not resided at- least three years within the same, 
 and one year in the county, city, borough or election district in which they offer to 
 vote, and been regularly assessed for taxation; and if liable to militia, duty, enrolled 
 in the militia of tlie same : Provided, however, that this last restriction shall not be 
 so construed as to deprive any person of the right of suffrage, who had under this 
 Constitution previously been qualified to exercise the same in any county, city, bo- 
 rough or election district, of tliis State : And provided, moreover, that wherever any 
 question arises as to the right of an individual to vote, the onus probandi shall be 
 upon the person claiming the right. ' , ; 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, stating that he was in a considerable minority in the Ju- 
 dicial Committee on the propositions there adopted, would beg leave to submit his 
 own views in the resolutions which had been rejected by that Committee. They 
 were as follows : 
 
 ^ Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, and in 
 such Inferior Courts as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish. 
 The jurisdiction of these tribunals sliall be regulated by law. The Judges of the - 
 Court of Appeals and of the Inferior Courts shall hold their offices during good be- 
 haviour, or until removed in the manner prescribed in this Ccnstitution ; and shall, at 
 the same time, hold no other office, appointment or public trust; and the acceptance 
 thereof by either of them, shall vacate his Judicial office. 
 
 Resolved, That the counties, cities and boroughs shall be divided into wards for the 
 apportionment of Justices of the Peace among the people ; and the persons authorized 
 to vote for members of the General Assembly in each ward, shall elect the Justices 
 of the Peace therein, who shall be commissioned to continue in office for the term of 
 years, but removeable for any bribery, corruption, or other high crime or 
 misdemeanor, by - indictment or hifornlation, in any Court holding jurisdiction 
 thereof. 
 
 Resolved, That the Constables shall in like manner be elected annually in said wards. 
 
 Resolved, That the appointment of the Clerks of the several courts, and their tenure 
 of oflice, shall be regulated by law. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, also offered the following, which were made the objects 
 of a similar order. 
 
 1. Resolved, That all persons now by law possessed of the right of suffrage, have 
 sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the com- 
 munity, and have the right of suffrage. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 43 
 
 2. Resolved, Tliat all free white males of twenty-three years of age, born vritlain the 
 Commonwealth, and resident therein, have suiScient evidence of permanent common 
 interest with, and attachment to, the community, and have the xioht of sufirage. 
 
 3. Resolved. That every free white male of twenty-one years of age, not included 
 in the two preceding resolutions, who is now a resident, or who may hereafter become 
 a resident within this Commonwealth, who is. desirous of having the right of suffrage 
 in this Commonwealth, shall, in open court, as may be prescribed by law, make a de- 
 claration of his intention to become a permanent resident in this State, and if such 
 person shall, six months after making such declaration, solemnly promise to submit to, 
 and support the Government of this Commonwealth, and if he shall not have been 
 con^-icted of any liigh crime or misdemeanor atniuist the la-n's of this Commonwealth, 
 such person shall be considered as having permanent common interest with, and at- 
 tachment to, the community, and shall have the right of suffrage. 
 
 And then, on motion of Mr. Doddridge, the Hoxise adjotirned until Monday, eleven 
 o'clock. 
 
 MONDAY, October 20, 1S20. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the E.ev. 
 Mr. Sykes, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Morgan of Monongaha, submitted the following resolutions, wliich. on his mo- 
 tion, were referred to the Committee of the Whole Convention : 
 
 ^•Resolved. That the Legislative power shall be vested in the General Assembly of 
 Virginia, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Delegates. But no ^linister 
 of tlie Gospel of any denomination, or person holding any lucrative office, place, or 
 appointment, shall be a Senator or Delegate. - 
 
 The Senate shall consist of thirty-two Senators, a majority of whom, and no less, 
 shall form a quorum, to do business ; for whose electioii the State shall be divided from 
 time to time as equally as may be accordino-.to the number of free white citizens, into 
 sixteen districts; and at the first election, there shall be two Senators chosen in each 
 district : the Senator having the greatest number of votes, tor the term of four years : 
 tlie other, for the term of two vears; And to keep up the succession, every second 
 year thereafter, one Senator shaii be chosen in each district, for the term of four years : 
 But no person shall be a Senator, who shall not be a free white male citizen -of the 
 Commonwealth; of the age of twentj^-five years, and an actual resident freeholder of 
 his district, at the time of election. - 
 
 •'• The House of Delegates shall consist of not less than sixty-four, nor more than 
 one hundred and seventy-six Deleo-ates, who shall be apportioned among the people, 
 and chosen annually, in such mamrer that one equal sixteenth part of the whole ninn- 
 ber shall be elected in each Senatorial District : But nojjerson shall be a Delegate, 
 who shall not be a free white citizen of the age of twenty-one years, and an actual 
 resident of Ms Senatorial District at tiie time cTf election. 
 
 Each House shall have power to appoint its own officers : settle its own rules of 
 proceeding ; judge the qualifications, and determine the contested elections of its own 
 members ; issue writs of election to supply vacancies occmring during the sessions • 
 originate bills, and adjourn without the consent of the other; but afl. laws shall be 
 whollv approved and passed by both Houses. 
 
 "The General Assembly shall meet once or oflener in every year, and the mem- 
 bers thereof, shall be exempt from arrest, and enlarged from hnprisonment, in all cases 
 except treason, felony, or perjury, during their sessions, and for the term of twenty 
 days before and after : And no disqualification, prohibition or test, shall ever be de- 
 clared, imposed or required by law, whereby to change or alter the ehgibility of ajiy 
 person qualified under this Constitution to be a Senator or Delegate. But. all Sena- 
 tors and Delegates, before they shall enter upon the discharge of tlieir duties, in pre- 
 sence of some person authorised to administer the same. -shall make oath or solemn 
 
 affirmation in this form, to wit : •• I, , do declare myself to be a citizen of the 
 
 Commonwealth of Virginia, owing no alleofiance to anv foreign power. Prince, or 
 State ; and I do swear (or affirm) that I sSall be faithful and true to the said Com- 
 monwealth of Virginia, so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faith- 
 fully, impartially, and justly, according to the best of my sldll and judgment, perform 
 the duties of my office (Senator or Delegate.) So help vie God.'' 
 
 That all free white men of this Conmionwealtli, are of right, and forever shall be, 
 equally free and independent : And suffirage, without regard to birth or condition of 
 estate, being the indefeasible right of every such effective man. provmg permanent 
 conmion interest with, and attachment to, the commimitv. it is delared to belong to, 
 and, in the election of Representatives m the General Assembly, shall be exercised 
 
44 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 by all free white male citizens of the Commonwealth, of the age of twenty-one years, 
 who shall reside in the county, city, or borough, in which they respectively propose to 
 vote, and shall have so resided for one whole year next before the time of election ; 
 other than those who shall have failed, in this Commonwealth, to pay any public tax 
 or levy, or part thereof, within either of the two years next preceding the one in which 
 they propose to vote ; or paupers ; or those under judgment of felony or other infamous 
 crime ; or soldiers, mariners, or marines in the service of the State, or of the United 
 States : And that the right of suftrage may be exercised only by persons disposed for 
 the prosperity and well-being of the Commonwealth, there shall be a tax of twenty -five 
 cents per annum, levied on every free white man of the age of twenty-one years, to 
 be collected and paid into the public treasury ; and the Legislature shall annually set 
 apart an amount of the property-tax equal to the whole amount of poll-tax so paid in ; 
 and these two sums shall be annually appropriated and constitute a principal fund, al- 
 ways to be preserved and vested in profitable stocks, or put to profitable uses, the in- 
 terest and profit whereof, shall, in the best manner, be applied every year to the educa- 
 tion of the youth of Virginia." 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he perceived that it seemed to be the understanding of gentlemen, 
 that imdeAhe rule reported by the Committee on rules of order, all propositions for 
 amendments to the Constitution, must be made in the Convention itself, before they 
 could be laid before the Committee of the Whole.^ Gentlemen, he saw, were acting 
 on such an understanding. He had not so apprehended the meaning of the rule when 
 it was adopted ; on the contrary, he had supposed that members were at full liberty to 
 move their proposed amendments in the Committee, without previously submitting 
 them to the Plouse. If this were not the just understaning of the rule, it ought to 
 be known : and he now asked for information. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mennis, the resolution containing the rule was read. 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that his understanding of the rule was, that when the_^ Consti- 
 tution in any of its parts, or the Bill of Rights, should be taken up in Committee of 
 the Whole, it would then be in order for any gentleman to propose such amendments 
 as related to the subject under consideration. If such a construction were not adopt- 
 ed, the Convention might have the whole political creed of every one of its members 
 spread upon its minutes in the form of resolutions. The substance of the resolutions 
 which had just been read, would have been properly presented in Committee of the 
 Whole at the appropriate time. For instance : the great subject of the right of suf- 
 frage had been reported upon by the Legislative Committee, having been specified un- 
 der three disLinct resolutions. As each of these came before the Committee, every 
 gentleman could propose to amend it in such way as to him seemed expedient, by strik- 
 ing out, for example, the property qualification, or that in relation to freehold, and so on. 
 He trusted this course would be pursued, as it was obviously the most convenient. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that he had so understood the rule : All that it forbade, was the dis- 
 cussion and decision of any question of amendment, before it should have been sub- 
 mitted and considered in Cominittee of the Whole. 
 
 Mr. Stanard observed, that the resolution offered by the gentleman from Chester- 
 field, (Mr. Leigh,) would remove all diliiculty on this subject. It includes in its pro- 
 visions, a permission for new propositions being offered in Committee of the Whole. 
 Tliis was, indeed, the very end and purpose of that resolution : that the Committee 
 of the Whole, in this Convention, might have the same liberty in this respect, as be- 
 longed to a Committee of the Whole, on the state of the Commonwealth, in the 
 House of Delegates. He called for the reading of Mr. Leigh's resolution; audit was 
 read accordingly. - 
 
 On motion of Mr. Leigh, the Convention then proceeded to the Order of the Day, 
 and went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. P. P. Barbour in the Chair. 
 _ The Chairman stated, that the subjects assigned to the Committee for its considera- 
 tion, were the existing Constitution of Virginia, together with the several reports from 
 the Select Committees, proposing amendments thereto, and such other amendments^ 
 as had been offered by individual members : the Committee were at liberty to take up- 
 any one of these subjects, in such order as might be determined on. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge observed, that the report from the Committee on the Legislative 
 Department, would, he presumed, be generally considered at first in order of impor- 
 tance, among the reports before the Committee, ffom the nature of the subjects on 
 which it treated. But, according to the form of the resolution under which the Com- 
 mittee had been appointed, that Upon the Bill of Rights had precedence ; and he there- 
 fore moved, that the report of the Select Committee on the Bill of Rights, be now 
 taken up. 
 
 The motion was agreed to, and that report was thereupon read at the Clerk's table; 
 and the question being on concurring with the Committee in their report, it was de- 
 cided in the affirmative, nem. con. 
 
 So the report was concurred in by the Convention. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 45 
 
 Mr. Powell now suggested, as a question of order, whether, as the report had de- 
 clared, that the Bill of Rights needs iio amendment, and the Convention had adopted 
 that report, it was to be understood as precluding all additions to the Bill of Rights ; 
 and thereby shutting out the resolutions, which had, on Friday last, been submitted 
 and laid upon the table, by his friend from Norfolk, (Mr. Taylor.) 
 
 The Chair replied, that, as the Convention had just decided, that the Bill of Rights 
 needs no amendment, the propositions to amend it, whether by diminution, alteration, 
 or addition, would be out of order. 
 
 Mr. Taylor said he was very unexpectedly called to address the Chair ; he had had 
 no expectation that the subject of the resolutions which he had had the honor to sub- 
 mit, would come up in any shape to-day ; and so uninformed was he, as to the forms 
 .of parliamentary proceeding, as not to have apprehended that the rules of order would 
 lead to such a decision as laad just been pronounced by the Chair. It was not cer- 
 tainly for him to question that decision ; but he should have apprehended, that when 
 the Convention, by adopting the report of its Committee, had decided that the Bill of 
 Rights needs no aviendmcnt. it had not in effect, said, that all additions were inadmis- 
 ~ sible. If, however, he was mistaken in the apprehension, he felt persuaded, that there 
 existed in this body, a disposition that would lead it rather to consent to re- consider 
 its vote, than, by insisting upon it, to exclude from consideration, resolutions, which, 
 'whatever might be their merit, referred to questions of the deepest importance. He 
 asked, therefore, from the candour and generosity of the House, that they would 
 consent to a re-consideration, with a view to let in the resolutions, he had had the 
 honor to submit. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that perhaps he had misapprehended, either to what resolutions 
 the gentleman referred, or else their true character. If they were those resolutions 
 which he had seen printed in the papers, as offered by the gentleman from Norfolk, 
 he could not conceive that the}'^ were at all excluded from the consideration of the 
 Committee, by its having adopted the report in relation to the Bill of Rights. Those 
 resolutions proposed an amendment, not to the Bill of Rights, but to the Constitution 
 of Virginia. They ^lertained, as he understood them, to subjects reported upon by 
 the Legislative Committee, and would be perfectly in order when the report of that 
 Committee should be taken up for consideration. 
 
 The Chair observed, that it had expressed no opinion as to the nature or tendency of 
 the resolutions, but had merely decided, that, if proposed as an addition to the Bill of 
 ■ Rights, they must be considered technically as an amendment to that instrument, and 
 therefore out of order, inasmuch as the House had said the Bill of R-ights should not 
 be amended. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved, that the report of the Legislative Committee be taken 
 up and considered ; and the motion was carried — Ayes 48 — Noes 33. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that he had thought there was a subject already before the Com- 
 mittee, viz: the question of re-consideration. 
 
 The Chair replied, that no express motion to that effect had been made, and the 
 suggestion of the gentleman from Norfolk, had, as he understood, been waived in con- 
 sequence of the remarks of the gentleman from Augusta. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he had certainly so understood the matter, or he should not 
 have made his motion : he trusted the vote would be re-considered. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that it was only necessary to lay the report of the Legislative 
 Committee on the table ; and he made that motion; which being agreed to, the report 
 was laid upon the table accordingly. The vote, approving the report of the Commit- 
 tee on the Bill of Rights, was then re-considered, and the Bill of Rights itself was 
 taken up, read at the Clerk's table, and afterwards read from the Chair by sections, 
 for amendment. 
 
 No amendment being proposed by any other member of the Convention, 
 On motion of Mr. Campbell of Brooke, the resolutions offered on Saturday by Mr. 
 Taylor were read, and the tliird resolutio-n having been modified by the mover so as 
 to read as follows : " Representation shall be uniform throughout the State," the whole 
 were taken up for consideration in the following form : 
 
 1. Resolved. That the elective franchise should be uniform; so that, throughout the 
 State, similar qualifications should confer a similar right of suffrage. 
 
 2. Resolved, That, among those entitled by the Constitution to exercise the elective 
 franchise, there should be entire equal itij of suffrage; so that, in all elections, the suf- 
 frage of one qualified voter should avail as much as that of another qualified voter, 
 whatever may be the disparity of their respective fortunes. 
 
 3. Resolved, That representation shall he uniform throughout the State. 
 
 4. Resolved, That as individual suffrage should be equal, without respect to the dis- 
 parity of individual fortune, so an equal number of qualified voters are entitled to 
 equal representation, without regard to the disparity of their aggregate fortunes. 
 
 5. Resolved, That in all pecuniary contributions to the public service, regard should 
 be had to the ability of individuals to contribute ; and as this ability to pay, fiom dis- 
 
46 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 parity of fortune, is unequal, it would be unjust and oppressive to require each citizen 
 to pay an eqiud amount of public taxes. 
 Mr. Tavlor then rose and addressed the Committee in substance, as follows: 
 Mr. Chairman, — As the resolutions just read were ofl'ered by me, parlimentary usage 
 requires that I should explain and defend them. I should enter on this duty, under 
 the most auspicious circumstances, with great diffidence and embarrassment. The 
 incidents, which have just occurred in the presence of the Convention, are by no 
 means calculated to diminish these feelings. I do not affect not to have bestowed 
 upon these resolutions the consideration wliich is due to their own intrinsic impor- 
 tance ; due to the intelhgence of the body which I now address ; due to the deep in» 
 fluence which all that is done here is likely to have on the destinies of our country : 
 nor can I forget that self-respect forbids me to lay before such an assembly a collec- 
 tion of crude, undigested thoughts. But I am taken by surprise, both as to the time 
 and the manner in which this subject has been brought up, and have not, therefore, 
 marshaled my ideas, humble as they are, in a manner to exliibit them as I could have 
 wished them to appear. Nevertheless, 1 shall not shrink from the duty which I con- 
 ceive to be enjoined upon me by every sentiment of manhood and patriotism ; but 
 shall perform it. to the best of my poor ability, with all the sincerity which the deepest 
 conviction of their truth can demand, with the zeal which its great importance ought 
 to inspire ; and, believe me, Sir, with all that deference, not of manner or of speech 
 alone, but that deep deference of the hea,rt which I ought to feel and to acknowledge, 
 in the presence of such an assembly. . 
 
 Sir, I will own franklj'-, that I have scarce any thing of reasoning or of argument 
 to bring forwiird in support of these resolutions. This, 1 hojie, however, will not 
 throw any discredit upon them : for, I confess to you, it is the very circumstance 
 which recommended them to my adoption. There are some truths, so simple and 
 self-evident, that their most perfect demonstration is liirnished by the terms of the 
 proposition itself. Axioms, or self-evident truths, carry conviction to the human mind, 
 the moment they are announced. And, it may be safely affirmed of all propositions 
 which the wit of man can suggest, that the probability of their truth, is in an inverse 
 ratio, to the reasoning and proof required to sustain them. Just in proportion as any 
 affirmation approaches the axiomatic character, in tliat same degree is the range of ar- 
 gument in its support, limited and restrained. If the resolutions I have submitted 
 have any merit, it lies in this solely : the principles they contain are so evident and 
 obvious, that they neither require nor admit of argument to sustain them. What I 
 have to say, therefore, is rather by way of explanation than of argument: believing, 
 as I do, tliat this will constitute their sufficient defence and best apology. 
 
 I pray the Convention to recollect that the resolutions refer to two distinct objects; 
 the elective franchise and the princijple of taxation ; and that their purpose is to give to 
 these two great principles a constitutional consecration. 
 
 The principle of taxation, and ilie elective franchise, at all times most important, 
 especially in a country of free institutions like ours, lj:a.ve now a peculiar interest, 
 from their bearing on the great and paramount question, v.-hich occupies every head, 
 and throbs in every heart in this Convention : I mean tlie question oi basis and appor- 
 tionment of representation. They are presented mainly with a view to their bearing 
 on that object. 
 
 When 1 arrived here, my opinions on these subjects, v.'ere not formed : the only 
 sentiment in my heart, was a most ardent and sincere desire to know what was truth, 
 and when found, to pursue it. 1 sought light every where ; conversed with gentle- 
 men of various and opposite opinions ; sought for facts in all directions, and listened 
 to the reasoning which was founded on them, with the honest intention of giving due 
 effect to both. But I confess to you, Sir, that as I proceeded, my own judgment be- 
 came bewildered in tiiis process. Nor is such a result at all surprising ; for, the men- 
 tal, like the bodily vision, we all know, may be destroyed as well by the excess, as by 
 the absence of light. Tvly intellect, I own, was insufficient to take in so many con- 
 flicting and various principles, at a single glance ; still less was it able to pursue them, 
 through all their multiplied and endless combinations ; least of all, was it capable of 
 blending them into one mass, giving, to each fact, and to each argument, its proper 
 force, and deriving a result, which should be satisfactory to my own mind. Under 
 circumstances so perplexing, I resorted to what I conceived to be the only remedy : 
 one which rarely had deceived me : it was, to simplify, to disentangle this skein of fact 
 and argument, to analyse the materials of which it v/as composed ; to search for prin- 
 ciples ; to learn the reasons of them ; and finally, to draw a just conclusion, to the 
 best of my humble capacity. The result is embodied in those resolutions : which, if 
 they sliall answer no other purpose, u:iay at least furnish channels into which the 
 thoughts and arguments of otlier gentlemen may be directed ; by which means the 
 talent and intelligence of the House may be drawn out and concentrated. I certainly 
 should not have offered them, had I not believed them true. But, Sir, I value truth 
 more than consistencv: I will, therefore, endeavour to subdue in rnv breast, that pride 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 47 
 
 of opinion, so natural to man; and am ready to abandon these resolutions the moment 
 I shall be convinced of their fallacj-. To have committed, and to have proclaimed, 
 what shall aftervrards prove to have been an error in judgment, is a venial offence ; 
 an offence, fully expiated by the mortification of confessing it (which I am ready to 
 endure :) but to persist after the judgment is convinced of its error, is an unpardon- 
 able sin. 
 
 Four of the resolutions refer to the elective franchise : by the leave of the House, 
 I will read them. 
 
 [Here Mr. T. read the first four resolutions.] 
 
 The Committee will perceive that all these several propositions grow out of one 
 principle, and refer but to one object, the elective francliise, and the mode in which 
 it is to be exercised. Permit me to preface what I have to say respecting them, by a 
 very few general remarks. 
 
 All our institutions, whether State or Federal, in their character, are founded in the 
 assumption of three political truths : 1. That a free Government is the best calculated 
 to promote human happiness, if not universally in all countries and in all times, at 
 least in the American States : 2. That the sovereignty resides, of right, and in fact, 
 in the people : 3. That the best mode of administering Government is by agents, in- 
 stead of tlie people personally. I shall not stay to enquire whether these assumptions 
 be false or true : I do not indeed, for myself, hesitate to declare my unquahfied belief 
 that they are consonant with all the dictates of reason and of truth; and I beheve 
 that I express the sentiments of every individual in this Convention, when I make 
 the declaration. But I allude not to .these principles, either to justify or to condemn 
 them ; I only call the attention of the Committee to the fact, that all our institutions 
 rest on these great principles of Representative Republics : Repubhcan in this, that 
 they repose the sovereignty solely in the people : Represeritativo in this, that that so- 
 vereignty shall be exercised through the administration of agents, of representatives ; 
 and not personally, by the people." Nor is it my intention to enquire who are the peo- 
 ple, in whom tills sovereignty is supposed to reside.? Some gentlemen think that 
 they include every individual in the community, without regard to age or sex : others 
 maintain that the people are, all who fight and pay ; all who defend their country in 
 the hour of peril, or contribute to supply its purse in/ ^ the piping times of peace :" 
 while others, again, insist, that •■ people ' means those only on whom the Constitution 
 confers the right of exercising political power ! (I used a wrong word; 1 will correct 
 the language ; I should haTe said not those on whom the Constitution confers, but in 
 whom it recognizes the right of exercising pohtical power.) Gentlemen may enter- 
 tain as many different opinions on this point as they please ; I meddle.not with them 
 now; the resolutions do not even approach these opinions. On the contrary, they 
 pre-suppose that the Constitution has already determined by whom the elective fran- 
 chise is to be exercised, and only attempt to regulate the mode of its action. The 
 principle of the resolutions is as applicable to one svffragan (I know not if the term 
 be strictly proper.) to one voter, as to another ; and -.vill be equally just, whether you 
 shall adopt the plan of freehold sufi!"rage, or any other, in its stead. 
 
 I have made these general remarks with a view of shewing that the elective fran-^ 
 chise is an essential part of our system; that it furnishes the mode, and the only 
 mode, whereby effect can be given to tlie principle of rejrresentative administration. 
 
 The elective franchise looks to two objects : first, the persons who are to exercise 
 it; that is, suffrage : secondly, to the effect of suff^rage ; that is, representation. 
 
 Suffrage, then: shall it be uniform throughout the State.' or sliall it be diverse in 
 divers parts of the State.' so that, one man shall have a right in one part of the 
 State, which, in circumstances exactly similar, shall not be enjoyed by another, in a 
 different part of the State ? This question, it is the purpose of the first resolution to 
 settle. The Bill of Rights declares that all elections shall be free : I would farther 
 add and shall be uniform." Convenience recommends it. It will avoid the confu- 
 sion of having different rules in different places ; rules local and personal ; instead of 
 universal and uniform. Justice and equal rights require it. There can be no depar- 
 tiure from the rules of uniformity, v/i^hout conferring on some, immunities and privi- 
 leges which are denied to others, in direct opposition to two other articles in this same 
 Bill of Rights. The propriety of inserting such a resolution in your Constitution, 
 arises from the fact, that the present Constitution has not so provided ; but, on the 
 contrary, establishes the very reverse. Its basis of representation, is the possession of 
 freehold. In this, its rule may have been thought uniform ; but there are portions of 
 the State, in which the Constitution establishes a local rule, applying to that portion 
 alone. In West Au^justa, the existing Constitution recognized the^right in '-Jdnd- 
 koldcrs' who were not freeholders. West Augusta, at the time the Constitution 
 was adopted, comprehended a large extent of territory, from which many counties 
 have since been formed. It then formed a barrier against Indian warfare; and their 
 titles, founded on occupancy only, were held by the tenure of the rifle, and not by 
 parchment. There were others, Vvho were incapable of perfecting their title by the 
 
48 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 existing law. In 1752, it was the policy of the Colony, to erect a barrier against the 
 Indians, on our western frontier. With a view to this object, we invited within out 
 boundary foreign Protestants aliens, who could neither hold nor transmit lands. 
 So, in the Borough of Norfolk, and in the City of Williamsburg, the right of suffrage 
 was extended to individuals, in a manner different from what it is in the other por- 
 tions of Virginia. These rights I hope to see extended to others similarly situated. 
 The object of my resolution is, to remove these anomalies, and to establish one laic, 
 and one rule, fov all who enjoy the privilege of voting at all. To establish such 
 uniform rule, is the only object of the first resolution. 
 
 Suflrage being established, whether uniform or diverse, another enquiry presents 
 itself of great delicacy and importance. What shall be the effect of suffrage? I 
 mean not as it regards representation, but as between the voters themselves. Are all to 
 be units ? all of alike value ? or, will you graduate the votes given Will you regu- 
 late their value by the excess of the j^ropcrty the voter may oion, over and above the 
 standard which you shall have' erected 
 
 The resolution proposes, when you have fixed the qualification to be possessed by 
 all voters, to malie all the votes equal, without regard to any disparity of fortune among 
 the voters : and I pray the House to indulge me, while I attempt the development of 
 the principle I advocate, by a particular application of it. But I premonish the 
 House, that I offer an explanation on this subject, not because I suppose there exists 
 among us any diversity of opinion, as to creating this uniformity loithin the same 
 district. My object is, to ascertain ])rincij)les, with a vieia to their ulterior ajjplication. > 
 Imagine a county containing three hundred qualified voters ; of these, two hundred ' 
 and fifty vote for A ; the remaining fifty vote for B .-^ Tell me which ought to be the 
 representative of that county.'' The question may seem strange. Yet the House will 
 perceive, that the decision of this question depends upon another, viz: whether you 
 will graduate the votes given by the icealth of the voters, or whether you will make all 
 the voters count as units, all of equal value. For explanation Suppose of the two 
 hundred and fifty voters for A, each owns a freehold worth one hundred dollars, and 
 that the fifty who vote for B, besides possessing this qualification, own besides, each a 
 large estate, say worth one thousand dollars. If numbers are to elect, A is elected, by 
 five to one : but, if icealth is to elect, if property is to be taken into view, not merely 
 for the safety, but for the effect of elections, then B is elected ; fifty thousand dollars 
 is on B's side ; but twenty-five thousand dollars en A's. If numbers elect, A is cho- • ■ 
 sen, five to one ; if wealth, then B is chosen, two to one. But, suppose you adopt a 
 compound r«i«o, produced by multiplying' wealth into numbers ; what will then be 
 the result.? While A gets but twenty-five thousand two hundred and fifty, B gets 
 fifty thousand and fifty. So that the result is still precisely the same ; the effect is 
 just what it would have been, if reference had been had to icealth alone. 
 
 Perhaps I may be told, this is a subject about which it is impossible for gentlemen 
 to differ. Excuse me : it is the subject on which alone there is any great difference 
 of opinion in the House. For the contemplated ratio, the compound uf numbers and 
 taxation, so earnestly insisted on as the true basis of representation, is neither more nor 
 less, hoicever it may he disguised, than this very thing. Let me imagine an argument 
 on this subject. Let me suppose the question between A's right and B's to come up 
 here, and you to be the umpires between them; and then let me endeavour to ima- 
 gine the argument in behalf of B, (having fifty votes.) The advocates of B would 
 tell you that Government was formed chiefly, if not solely, for the protection of pro- 
 perty : That there is a natural, inherent enmity between capital and labour : That 
 the contest is interminable hetween persons and icealth, (for, strip the subject of the 
 mystification, by which it is usually surrounded, and labour and capital mean no 
 more !) That the two hundred and fifty voters who voted for A, though individually 
 honest, are, through the ignorance and infirmity of human nature, not worthy of be- 
 ing intrusted with political power: Will they not appeal to experience, and insist 
 that that touch-stone has tried what the nature of man is, and has decided that when 
 the many possess the power of exercising rapine upon the fcui, it has ever followed 
 that they exercise such power and commit the depredation : That, if the Govern- 
 ment were so constituted as to give the power of "representation by numbers only, and 
 so admit the two hundred and fifty to elect their representative, the efi'ect would be, 
 that as he would be bound to obey his constituents, the rapine would still take place, 
 with tills only difterence,. that it would be accomplished by the forms of legislation, 
 instead of force, without any form at all : That there can be no guarantee against 
 the effect : That the guarantee afforded by the power of law, the sanctity of the 
 Constitution, and the force of moral principle, however they may be found sufficient 
 for the protection of life and of reputation, proye totally inadequate as a safeguard for 
 property : That the only effectual, only sufficient guai^antee, is to give to the fifty 
 votes for B more effect than the two hundred and fifty votes for A : That, in a word, 
 the only means of guarding property is to place ihe poiver of Government in the hands 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 49 
 
 of those xcho possess most property ? Would not tliese be the topics of argument by 
 which the cause of B Trould be advocated on tliis floor ? 
 
 It is not my purpose to fatigue the Conxniittee or occupy its time by giving, in re- 
 ply, the answers which might be adduced in A"s behalf. This question is settled in 
 the mind of every gentleman in the Convention : it is settled by the general senti- 
 ment of this nation : by the deep, the universal, and, I trust, the changeless feeling, 
 which attaches us all to our firee and happy institutions; a feeling which has its 
 source in the conviction of the equality they mabvtain atnong the citizens of the Re- 
 public, and the justice xchich floics from that equality. 
 
 If I am ricfht in this, can the House have any difhculty in adopting the resolution 
 What does it ask ? Nothing but what, in the practical administration of the Govern- 
 ment, aheady actually exists : But it proposes to give a Constitutivnal sanction to what 
 does indeed exist in fact, but which the Constitution does no ichere guarantee and secure. 
 
 I pray you to refer to the existing Constitution. I say, that although in fact equa- 
 lity of sulirage does exist, it rests on sufferance merely. I wish it not only to exist, 
 but to have a Constitutional consecration. 
 
 The only clause in the Constitiition which bears upon the subject is this brief sen- 
 tence : The right of suflrage shall remain as it is exercised at present." I would 
 not be hypercritical in examining this declaration ; but to me it does appear to provide 
 against taking aicay any rights already possessed and exercised, and not to regulate 
 the equahty of suffrage among the voters. All it prohibits is the strippmg those of 
 the right of suffrage, who now hold it: no more : it does not take from the Legisla- 
 t\ire the power of determining the relative effect of votes between the voters them- 
 selves. Yet, surely in a matter of such vital importance, nothing ought to be left to 
 doubt and uncertaintv. If the existing Constitution does what this resolution p\ir- 
 ports to do, all the effect of the resolution will be to confirm the declaration of the 
 Constitution : but if it does not, then this resolution will supply the deficiency, and 
 it is proper that the question should be settled now. Such are some of the considera- 
 tions which unite to reconmiend the adoption of tiiis resolution. 
 
 There are two others, the tliird and fourth, wliichhave reference to representation ; 
 that is, to the effect of the elective franchise, xchen exerted. 
 
 The third resolution seems to be only a corollary from the first : it affirms, especially 
 zs, now modified, nothing more than that the xmiforraity of individual siiffrage shall be 
 extended to its effect, that is, to representation. 
 
 The fourth resolution is nothing more than a corollary to the second. It is only. . 
 the expansion and apphcation of the same principle to representation, which is pro- 
 posed to the voters themselves: i. e. that representation shall be uniform, IhaX like 
 numbers shall confer like rights of representation, iciihout regard to the disparity of 
 fortune tchich may e.zist in the agsregate. 
 
 One woxild thirik there could be no difficulty in admitting a conclusion like this. 
 Representation is hut the effect of a number of sxffrages. If. then, the suffrages are - - 
 all equal, it would seem perfectly plain that equal numbers of equal suffrages should 
 produce an equal aggregate amount ; and so equal representation. Wotdd any gentle- 
 man here hesitate to adopt such a principle, except in a particular mode of its ope- ■ 
 ration ? 
 
 1 stated a case supposed to exist in one county. Now imagine the same case to ex- 
 ist in every county. Is there any reason why fifty voters should outvote two hun- 
 dred and fifty in one county rather than in another.'' Locality. cannot alter right. If 
 fifty- voters are to do this in the county of Norfolk, then fifty voters should do the 
 same in the covmty of Brooke : and in every other county in the State. There is no 
 difference of opinion as to making the effect equal icithiti' any one county or district. 
 On this, all are agreed. Where, then, does the difficulty arise in assenting to the 
 principle ? When, you consider its operation not icitkin any district, but between 
 different districts, then only do gentlemen differ from me. But shall any one district, 
 by any arrangement whatever, introduce a principle which you all repudiate zcithin a 
 county? -Shall it give an effect to property when in extensive combinations, which 
 is denied to property in a more limited field .= Suppose you divide your district into 
 three comities, containing each nine hundred voters. There is not one o-entieman 
 here who will hesitate to say, that a majority of qualified voters shall give the rule of 
 election icithin each of these counties. But suppose, again, that in iavincp out your 
 district boundary, you take the other rvile, and say that property shcdl elect :^what will 
 the operation of such a principle be ? 
 
 But the proposed compound ratio wholly disregards this principle of equahty of 
 right in the organization of districts. Let me illustrate this : 
 Tlnee counties in Eastern Virginia, such as I have described before, are 
 formed into a district, and the nine hundred qualified voters become en- 
 titled to one representative. In another part of the State, nine hundred 
 other quahfied voters claim similar representation. But it is fotmd that in 
 
 7 
 
50 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the first district the nine hundred voters pay each say ^ 1 tax, - - ^ 900 
 And that there are one hundred and fifty persons among the nine hundred 
 
 v/ho pay beyond the others the sum of 600 
 
 Making an aggregate of taxes . . . ^1^500 
 The otlier nine hundred persons who claim a representative, are also (like 
 the seven Imndred and fifty of tlie first district) all qualified voters, and 
 pay $ 1 each, 900 
 
 Leaving a diflJerence of - - - - - $ 600 
 This difference is wholly produced by the superior wealth of the one hundred and 
 fifty persons in the first district. To equalize the district, the compound ratio propo- 
 ses to throw a quahfied voter into the scale to counterbalance this wealth. 
 
 Thus, then, said he, one county will contain nine hundred men, the other fifteen 
 hundred ; you add six hundred men to make up for the difference of property. And 
 is tJie evil less, because it is disguised Disguise it as you will, this is not equal re- 
 prescntation ; and if the principle of all our tree Republican institutions cries out 
 against fftif men electing a candidate against tico Imndred and fifty in a single county, 
 why not in more extended portions of tiie State You give to wealth in a district 
 a power you refuse to it in a county, though the district is but a collection of coun- 
 ties. While there, it lies dormant ; exerts no power at all : but the moment you go 
 beyond tlie county line, it then recyives vigour and effect ; I fear, a pernicious vi- 
 gour, and an effect fatal to freedom. Pray, let me be understood. I disclaim, in 
 these remarks, the least possible disrespect toward gentlemen, who differ from me in 
 sentiment : but in my judgment it is an oligarchical principle ; it gives the minority 
 power to control tlie majority, although admitted to be equal participants in political 
 power. And, if you would consider this as an ohgarchical principle, if introduced into 
 counties, I conjure you to consider how you give to wealth, when in large masses, 
 what you refuse it in the elements of which those very masses are all composed. If 
 the principle be wrong in itself, it is only the more dangerous from being concealed. 
 The danger which I know, courage may enable me to brave, or skill to elude ; but if 
 the dinger approach unseen, if it assails me unwarned and unprepared, it only the 
 more certainly destroys. Masses of men act with an effect not in exact proportion 
 to tlieir numbers. The effect increases more rapidly than the number. A single 
 griin of gunpowder may explode in a lady's boudoir, without producing any effect 
 su licient to wave one of her lightest plumes; but when aggregated masses of those 
 grains are exploded, castles topple to their foundations, and towers fall before its re- 
 S;stless power. Do not say the principle is harmless, because it operates on masses 
 only : as you aggregate men into masses, instead of diminishing, you increase the 
 mischief I say that this principle, of giving the power to wealth, corrupts and viti- 
 ates the very person's it is intended to benefit. The safety of our free institutions, 
 consists in the profound conviction of their justice and equpJity of operation. Des- 
 troy this conviction; weaken it; lead the people to doubt the salutary operation of 
 those principles, and what will be the result ? You have taken the first step in the 
 downward road tliat lias conducted all the free nations in the world, first to faction ; 
 then to convulsions ; and finally to the sword, and a monarch, for protection. Oh, 
 then, let no consideration* induce us to weaken, in the slightest degree, that feeling of 
 sacred regard towards free institutions, which is the best safeguard of their perpetuity. 
 When you say, that nine hundred men in one district, and fifteen hundred men in 
 another, shall have hxd the same representation in the Government, you bribe and 
 ten:ipt the honest simplicity of your fellow-citizens, to commit a fraud upon their 
 brethren. You make them the instruments, willing instruments, if you please, by 
 which the influence of property is brought to bear upon political power and civil li- 
 berty. Thus, you prepare them more readily to yield, whenever the influence of 
 wealth, zoithin their oion county, shall advance its claims to the same power, it enjoys 
 without the county line. 
 
 Men of property within all our counties, are deeply interested in this question. 
 Let me I'emind such men, that the Chieftain in the border war who tempted their 
 kinsmen and retainers, to pass the line and foray for spoil upon the land of their 
 neighbours, destroyed their loyalty, corrupted their fidelity, lost their attachment; and 
 a--, last have been actually compelled to pay Mack-mail to their own vassals for protec- 
 tion. We are all interested in preserving the great principles of Republican freedom : 
 Men of property not less than others : It is to these principles that our most valuable 
 institutions owe their being and preservation, and our people their national happiness. 
 
 G-:ve me leave to ask of gentlemen one question. Representation; what is it? It 
 is the effect of suffrage. Suffrage is the cause, representation the effect: Suffrage is 
 the parent, representation only its offspring. What then ought to follow What ought 
 the relation to be between the cause and its result.-' What the similitude between pa- 
 rent and child ? Should there be no familv likeness ? No correspondence between him 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXYEXTION. 
 
 51 
 
 who represents, and him who confers the power of representation? Is there to be in 
 the Deleofate no principle of resemblance to the individual who sends hun? Surely 
 the representative is but the mirror, which, if true, throws back the just image of the 
 zoters who gave him his place. R-epresentation, to be perfect, must throw back such 
 an image of the people represented^ in all their proportions, features, and peculiaiities. 
 I hope gentlemen will excuse me for a remark, which may not correspond -odth their 
 views and feelings; but to ma it appears inconceivable, how there can be a represeiita- 
 tive without constituents : and how can there be constituents, without power to dele- 
 gate,? How can a man be a constituent, and him he creates not be his delegate. Pro- 
 perty cannot vote ; it cannot delegate power; and yet we are told that it is to have a 
 representative. The voter sxixely, and the voter only is the representative, when we 
 speak of representatives. 
 
 I hope, said Mr. T. that the Committee will perceive, that I have had no other ob- 
 ject hitherto but merely to explain the nature and the effect of the resolutions I have 
 proposed ; that I am offering but little argument ; relying as I do upon their own in- 
 trinsic truth. I have purposely avoided all answer to the objections, which may be 
 urged against them : and I am led to adopt this course by two considerations : First, 
 my object in only explaining, is that the undivided attention of the House might be 
 dra-\vn to the principles themselves : but I have another reason ; I thought it decorous, 
 fmr and honorable, to allow to gentlemen who differ from me in sentiment, the advan- 
 tage of presenting their own views in their own form ; that those views may produce 
 their entire effect upon the House. If in the progress of debate, it shall become ne- 
 cessary, I may pray the House to indulge me in reviewing the most important objec- 
 tions, when they shall have been made ; and in fortifying my original resolutions, if 
 I shall be able. To my course in this respect, there is but one exception ; and that 
 iias reference to the fifth resolution : 
 J^flere Mr. T. read the resolution.] 
 
 It refers to taxation; and I will own that I introduced it in connexion with the other 
 subjects for the purpose of asserting what the true principle of taxation is ; but I com- 
 bined this principle of taxati^on, with the resolutions respecting representation, to show 
 that one should have no influence in regulating the other. The one looks to property 
 only ; the other to qualified, zoters only. In the resolution, a proposition is affirmed in 
 the first member of it; then, a fact is affirmed; and the last clause is an inference 
 from the two, though not in strict syllogistic form. Some may think the premises are 
 false ; but none will deny that it is unjust to require each citizen chargeahie icith taxes^ 
 to pay an equal aviouni. What would be the effect of such a principle Evidently 
 this ; that in time of foreign v^'ar or domestic need, be the exigencies of the State 
 what they may, no greater sum can be raised by taxation, than the amount which the 
 very poorest man in the coixununitv is required to pay, multiplied bv the total number 
 of the citizens of the State. You can lay nothing- more on the richest man, than on 
 the poorest; if each is to pay an equal sum ; and thus the wealth of its citizens woiild 
 be totally iiseless and unproductive to the Commonwealth, though the Republic be in 
 danger. 
 
 Whence does the obligation to public contribution arise i Whence but from the 
 consideration that each individual is bound to pay to the public for the protection of 
 his property. The Government itself, I mean by its moral as well as physical force, 
 is in fact the underwriter of all the property in the communitv : and each indi-\-idual 
 should pay for the general protection in proportion to the risk incurred; that is, ac- 
 cording to the amount of property he has to be insured. The principle is founded in 
 the eternal nature of justice ; which requires that contribution should be in proportion 
 to the good received. I think that even if my resolution should be convicted of false 
 logic, and that neither the major nor the minor members of the syllogism were true, 
 and that the conclusion did not follow ; still, the proposition itself, contained in the 
 conclusion, must be acknowledged by all to be true and evident. None doub»ts the 
 fact, that property is unequally distributed ; nor do I see huw any can deny the prin- 
 ciple, that each man ought to pay to the State in proportion to his ahility to pay. I do 
 not say in proportion to his capital, or to the profits upon his capital ; l3ut in propor- 
 tion to Ills '• ability to pay.'' I put the proposition in the broadest terms : and in such 
 a form as -will apply to any system of political economy, gentlemen may respectively 
 think fit to adopt. 
 
 If the ground I have taken, be tenable, then we have arrived at the true sources of 
 representation and taxation ; they are not two twin streams, which have their com- 
 mon source in the same distant glen; which chance mav have separated for a time, 
 and which afterwards re-unite : they issue from different fountains : flow to different 
 oceans, and never can be united but by some power which perverts the object for 
 which nature destined them. When you look to representatioji, yon look to men: 
 when you look to taxation, you look to the ability to pay, and to the property from 
 which this payment is to be made. 
 
52 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Taylor concluded by a short peroration ; apologising for the time he liad occu- 
 pied, disclaiming all intention to offend, and deprecating such an imputation ; and 
 professing his readiness to renounce his views as-soon as convinced they were untrue. 
 He then moved that the resolutions be received and added as an amendment to the 
 Bill of Rights. 
 
 The question being on the adoption of the first of Mr. Taylor's resolutions, 
 Mr. Green of Culpeper, said, that he should vote against all the resolutions, 
 although he approved of some of the principles they contained ; and he should do so 
 beca.use he thought their proper place was not in the Bill of Rights, but, if any where, 
 in the Constitution of the State. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas of Richmond, said, that he did not rise to discuss the resolutions 
 which had been submitted, although there were various considerations in respect to 
 tiiem, which forcibly struck his mind. Any man who had turned his attention much 
 to politics must know, that in those matters, there was no such thing as abstract truth. 
 Political maxims were valuable, only as applying to the actual circumstances of the 
 country, and must always be considered as in connexion with them. It would not 
 do to apply principles, suited to one state of society, to a state of things entirely dif- 
 ferent. He understood the gentleman from Norfolk, as having said that he had 
 brouo-ht forward these propositions with a view to settle the great question which the 
 Convention was called to decide. Mr. N. said, he was unwilling to decide that ques- 
 tion hi this way. That question grew out of various considerations in the state of the 
 country, and must be considered as applying to them. He was willing to admit the 
 abstract truth of some of the gentleman's propositions ; there were others of them 
 which he should be disposed t ) deny, and the two were so far blended that he could 
 not assent to the resolutions. It seemed strange to him, that instead^ of waiting for 
 the discussion of the report of the Legislative Committee, the Convention was, at 
 this stage of its proceedings, called to decide upon doctrines in the abstract, without 
 any attempt at applying their practical bearing. If they were adopted and added to 
 the Bill of R.ights, their effects would all have to be discussed again, Avhen the other 
 report came before the Convention. Cui bono? why go over the same matters twice? 
 Besides, the Bill of Rights was drawn up by some of the wisest, most virtuous and 
 most patriotic men this country had ever produced ; it was truly a noble production, 
 and it declared truth so well, that he felt unwilling to add to it, or substitute another 
 in its room. But, surely the Convention should not attempt to decide on so great a 
 question ; a question, which would go to produce an entire revolution in the condi- 
 tion of the State without knowing something more of the effects of their decision. 
 The gentleman had much better reserve his resolutions, till the Legislative report 
 should come up. He would not be excluded, and that opportunity would be a more 
 fit one. Mr. N. ^aid he should have said nothing, but olsserving, that no other gen- 
 tleman seemed disposed to rise, he had given briefly the reasons which would induce 
 him to vote against the resolutions. 
 
 Mr. Johnson moved to lay ilie resolutions upon the table, but professed his willing- 
 ness to withdraw the motion, if any member of the Convention was desirous of sub- 
 mitting his views. He was satisfied some -gentlemen would vote against the resolu- 
 tions now, who would vote for them when they should hear their practical application 
 discussed. The proper time for that discussion would be when the report of the Le- 
 gislative Committee should come up for discussion. 
 
 Mr. Taylor observed in reply, that he had not the least objection that the reso- 
 lutions should be laid upon the table : but the gentleman had thought this was not the 
 proper time to discuss these principles. He differed entirely on that point, and con- 
 sidered this as the " accepted time." If gentlemen thought the resolutions should be 
 acted upon at all, it should certainly be in connexion with the Bill of Rights. What 
 was the object of the Bill of Rights.^ It was to settle the very abstractions, to which 
 the gentleman seemed so averse ; to settle principles ; to set up certain landmarks for 
 the framing of a Constitution. It prescribed the general rules which it was the pur- 
 pose of the Constitution to develope and expand. Its use was to familiarise the people 
 to a consideration of these great principles of free Government, and thereby to con- 
 trol the action of the Legislature. If the principles he had brought forward were 
 right in themselves, and worthy of adoption in any form, it should be in the Bill of 
 Rights. Let them stand there as touch-stones, to try with what fidelity the Constitu- 
 tion should be drawn, and the legislation of the State carried on under it. Gentlemen 
 object to abstractions : the Bill of Rights declares all men to be born by nature, free 
 and equal. Does the gentlem?^n call that an abstraction ? Why is it any more so, 
 , when by another declaration, the equality of men is stated, not as in a state of nature, 
 but as in a state of political society ? It was but carrying out the object of that instru- 
 ment. He could not agr^e with gentlemen, who thought the proper time for fixing 
 such principles, would be when the report of the Legislative Committee came up for 
 consideration. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 53 
 
 On motion of Mr. Johnson, the resolutions were then laid on the table. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, the Convention proceeded to consider the report of 
 the Committee on the Legislative Department of Government. The report was read 
 at the Clerk's table, and the first section having then been read by the Chairman for 
 amendment, as ibllows : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard should be had to the white population exclusively." 
 
 Air. Green moved to amend it by striking out the word exclusively," and adding 
 in lieu thereof the words " and taxation combined. 
 
 And the question being on this amendment : 
 
 Mr. Green stated, there were some documents expected momently from the Audi- 
 tor, which had a bearing on the amendment ; and he therefore wished the action of 
 the House suspended till they should be received; and he, thereupon, moved that 
 the Committee rise. 
 
 It arose accordingly, and the President having resumed his seat, Mr. Barbour re- 
 ported, that the Committee had, according -to order, liad the subjects referred to them 
 under consideration, and had made some progress therein ; but had come to no con- 
 clusion thereon. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned till to-morrow, eleven o'clock. 
 
 TUESDAY, OcTOEEn 27, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Parks, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Scott, it then proceeded to the Order of the Day, and again 
 went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. P. P. Barbour in the Chair. 
 
 And the question lying over from yesterday, being on the amendment proposed by 
 Mr. Green of Culpeper, to the first resolution reported by the Committee on the Le- 
 gislative Department of Government, viz : To strike out the word exdnsively,'' in 
 the resolution, (which declares that in the apportionment of representation in the 
 House of Delegates, regard should be had to the white population exclusively,'') and 
 insert in lieu thereof, the words " and taxation comhitiedJ' 
 
 Mr. Green observed, that he had proposed this amendment with a view to bring up 
 the whole subject for discussion ; so that both sides of the great question in relation 
 to the basis of representation, might be before the Committee : and it was under the 
 impression that the whole field being thus opened, some gentleman would enter upon 
 the subject, b}^ stating the grounds on which it was desired to introduce a new prin- 
 ciple of representation into the Constitution. He now hoped that some gentleman, 
 who was friendly to the change, would present to the Committee his views. 
 
 After a short pause, 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, said, that he did hope that the friends of the proposition 
 reported by the Legislative Committee, would assign their reasons in support of a 
 plan which proposes, in effect, to put the power of controlling the wealth of the State, 
 into hands different from those v,-hich hold that wealth; a plan, which declares that 
 representation shall be reofulated by one ratio, and contribution by another : that re- 
 presentation shall be founded on the white popiilation alone, and contribution on a 
 ratio double, treble, and quadruple in proportion. Pie hoped the friends of these new 
 propositions, new at least in our State, if not new throughout the world, would give 
 to those who differed from themselves, some reasons in support of their scheme ; some 
 better reasons than that such principles were unknown to our English ancestors, 
 from whom we have derived our institutions ; better than the rights of man as held 
 in the French school; better than that they were calculated in their nature to lead to 
 rapine, anarchy and bloodshed, and in the end, to military despotism : a scheme, which 
 has respect to numbers alone, and considers property as unworthy of regard. Give 
 us, said Mr. L. some reasons ; reasons which may excuse us in our own self-esteem, 
 for a tame submission to this (in my opinion) cruel, palpable and crying injustice. Let 
 us have at least some plausible reason ; something which has at least tire colour of rea- 
 son, wliich may excuse us to ourselves : something which may gild the pill and dis- 
 guise its bitterness : something to save us from the contempt of this present time, and 
 the assured curse of posterity, if we shall betray their interest. Give us something 
 which v,^e may at least'call reasons for it : not arithmetical and mathematical reasons; 
 no mere abstractions ; but referring to the actual state of things as they are ; to the 
 circumstances and condition of this Com.monwealth ; why we must submit to what 
 I cannot help regarding as the most crying injustice ever attempted in any land, I 
 call upon gentlemen for these reasons. 
 Mr. Cooke of Frederick, rose in reply. 
 
54 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that lie could not but express his unfeigned astonishment, that the 
 able gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh) should have ventured to say to that 
 assembly, that the principle of representation recommended by the Legislative Com- 
 mittee, was new to him, and new in the history of the world." Can the gentleman 
 have forgotten, (said Mr. Cooke.) that the principle which he treats as a novelty, and 
 an innovation, is asserted in the " Declaration of the Rights of the people of Virgi- 
 nia.^" And does he not know, that when the Convention of 1776 promulgated, in 
 that instrument, the principles of Government on which their infant Republic was 
 founded, they did but announce, in solemn form, to the people of Virginia, principles 
 which had received, a century before, the deliberate sanction of the most enlightened 
 friends of liberty, throughout the world 
 
 Sir, the fathers of the Revolution did but reiterate those great and sacred truths 
 which had been illustrated by the genius of Locke, and Sydney, and Milton : truths 
 for which Hampden, and a host of Ixis compatriots, had poured out their blood in 
 vain. 
 
 Driven from Europe, by Kings, and Priests, and Nobles, those simple truths were 
 received, with favour, by the sturdy yeomanry who dwelt on the western shores of 
 the Atlantic. The love of liberty, aye, Sir, and of equality too, grew with the growth, 
 and strengthened with the strength, of the Colonies. It declared war, at last, not 
 only against the poicer of the Kino-, but against the privilege of the JYohle, and laid 
 the deep foundations of our Republic on the sovereignty of the people and the equality of 
 men. 
 
 The sacred instrument, for sacred I will dare to call it, notwithstanding the sneers - 
 which its very name excites in this assembly of Rejjuhlicans, the sacred instrument in 
 which those great principles were declared, was ushered into existence under circum- 
 stances the most impressive a,nd solemn. The "Declaration of the Rights of the > 
 people of Virginia," was made by an assembly of sages and patriots, who had just • 
 involved their country in all the horrors of war, in all the dangers of an unequal con- 
 test with the most powerful nation on earth, for the sake of the noble and elevated 
 principles which that instrument announces and declares. For the sake of those 
 principles, they had imperilled their lives, their fortunes, their wives, their children, 
 their country ; and, in one word, all that is dear to man. For the sake of those prin- 
 ciples, they had spread havoc and desolation over their native land, and consigned to 
 ruin and poverty a whole generation of the people of Virginia. 
 
 And for what did they make these mighty sacrifices ! For wild " abstractions, and 
 metaphysical subtleties !" No, Sir. For principles of eternal truth ; as practical, in 
 character, as they are vital, in importance ; for principles deep-seated in the nature of 
 man, by whose development, alone, he can attain the happiness which is the great 
 object of his being. Those principles are, 
 
 " That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people.'" 
 " That all men are, by nature, equally free." And 
 That a majority of the community'' possesses, by the law of nature and neces- 
 sity, a right to control its concerns. 
 
 These are the principles which the gentleman from Chesterfield regards as " wild 
 and visionary ;" as abstractions and metaphysical subtleties;" and which are con- 
 temptuously styled by others, who think with him, " mere abstract principles." Pass- 
 ing by, without comment, the curious fact, tliat these " abstract principles" received 
 but yesterday the sanction of an unanimous vote of this body (so far, at least, as a 
 nanine contradicente vote can be called unanimous) : passing by the fact, I say, that 
 the resolution of a special Committee declaring that the Bill of Rights requires no 
 amendment, was but yesterday adopted, without a dissenting voice, I will pause, for a 
 moment, to enquire what these gentlemen mean by their favourite phrase, " mere ab- 
 stract principles .''" If I rightly apprehend the import of the term abstract," when 
 applied, in a disparaging sense, to any general principle, it means that the principle, 
 though true, as expressed, is, nevertheless, expressed in terms so general, that when 
 an attempt is made to apply it to any given subject, it is almost always found that 
 the subject is included, not within the principle itself, but within one or other of 
 those exceptions, which detract from the universal correctness of all general princi- - 
 pies. That the principle is an unmeaning generality, and scarcely susceptible of ap- 
 plication to the e very-day business of men. In short, that it is wild, visionary and 
 unpractical. 
 
 Let us see, then, whether the principles which are announced by the Declaration 
 of Rights, as the basis and foundation of Government," are of this wild and vision- 
 ary character. Let us see whether they do not, on the contraiy, come home to the 
 " business and bosoms of men." 
 
 • It declares, then, in the first place, " that all pov^^er is vested in, and consequently de- 
 rived from, fAepcopZe." 
 
 Look to the situation and circumstances of those who made this declaration, to the 
 occasion on which it was made, and to its bearing and operation on the existing insti- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 55 
 
 tutions of Virginia, and then say whether it was not a. practical principle, and one 
 too, of great pith and moment. Tiie colonies had long been smarting under the ty- 
 rannical exercise of power, not derived from the people : Under the exercise of power 
 assumed, by the King and Parhamentof Great Britain, tcithout the consent of thepeojjJe. 
 Here, then, is a bold denunciation of this usurped authority; an abolition of kingly 
 power ; a declaration that thejJeopilc of Virginia are the only sovereigns of Virginia, and 
 that they would tolerate, in all tune to come, neither foreign Parliaments, nor Kings, 
 nor Caesars. A declaration tliat the only legitimate Government, is a Government of 
 vutgistrates , deriving their power from the people, and responsible to the people. 
 
 With whatever colour of plausibility tliis might have been called an abstract princi- 
 ple, in Europe, in tlie time of Locke and Sydney, who first maintained and supported 
 it. thanks to the indomitable spirit of our ancestors, it became practical in Virginia, in 
 1770 5 was gallantly sustained through all the vicissitudes of the war, and received the 
 sanction of roj^alty itself, at the peace which ensued. It was then that the slavish 
 doctrine of the jus dtvinum of Kings, openly supported, but a century before, in the 
 country from whence we sprung, received its practical refutation : and it might have 
 been hoped, in Virginia at least, its final doom. From the period of the revolution 
 till the meeting of this Convention, the doctrine " that all povrer is vested in, and con- 
 sequently derived from, the people," was considered a great practical truth. A'ow, it 
 is an abstract principle,'' a wild and visionary speculation ! 
 
 But again, Sir. I'he Bill of Hights declares, that all men are, by nature, equally 
 free." And tliis is considered an abstraction par excellence; the very abstraction of 
 abstractions. It is even pronounced to be absurd on the face of it," because it 
 amounts, as it is said, to a declaration, that '■' all men, all women, and all children, are 
 entitled to an equal share of political power." 
 
 I shall briefly examine this principle, Sir, in connexion with that which stands by 
 its side in the Declaration of Rights, which is, in eftect, that the sovereign power, the 
 supreme control of its affairs, is vested in the majority of every free community. 
 And I hesitate not to say, that taken in connexion, and they must be taken in con- 
 nexion, they are so far from being speculative and abstract truths, much less absurd 
 speculations, that they constitute in fact, a compendium of the whole law of rational 
 and practical liberty, and were peculiarly appropriate and practical in tlieir application 
 to the actual condition of Virginia. Taking first the insulated proposition, that all 
 men are, by nature, equally free ;" I pronounce it to be a great practical truth ; a self- 
 evident proposition; the primary postulate of the science of Government. Sir, what 
 does this proposition mean, but that no a?ie man is born with a natural right to control 
 any other man ; that no one man comes into the world with a mark on him, to desig- 
 nate him as possessing superior rights to any other man; that neither God nor nature 
 recognize, in anticipation, the distinctions of bond and fi-ee, of despot and slave; but 
 that these distinctions are artificial ; are the work of man ; are the result of fraud or 
 violence. And who is so bold as to deny this simple truth 
 
 But is it a mere '^abstract'' truth.? Was it not, when declared by the authors of 
 the Declaration of Rights, replete with practical meaning ? What was their actual 
 situation ? The Government of England, against which tiiis principle was directed, 
 was incumbered with privileged orders ; there was the King v/ith his hereditary pre- 
 rogative, and the noble with his hereditary privilege. The colonists had found, to 
 their cost, in the earlier stages of their struggle, that prerogative and privilege, de- 
 rived from birth, were the sworn and mortal foes of liberty. In announcino- and re- 
 instating the original equality of men, they declared war against both, and from that 
 time, neither privilege nor prerogative derived from birth, have been tolerated in the 
 Commonwealth wliich they established. And is there nothing practical in this Is 
 tliis a mere abstract principle ; a mere metaph^fcal subtlety 
 
 But it is said, that if it be true that ''all men are by nature equally free," then all 
 men, all women, and all children, are entitled to equal shares of pclitical power; in 
 other words, that they are all entitled to the right of suffrage, which is. practically, 
 political power. 
 
 Sir, no such absurdity can be inferred from the language of the Declaration of 
 Rights. The framers of that instrument did not undertake to write dov/n in it all the 
 rules and all the exceptions wliich constitute political law. They did not express the 
 self-evident truth that the Creator of the Universe, to render woman more fit for the 
 sphere in which He intended her to act, had made her weak and timid, in comparison 
 with man, and had thus placed her under his control, as well as under his protection. 
 That children, also, from the immaturity of their bodies and their minds, were imder 
 a like control. They did not say, in terms, that the exercise of pohtical power, that 
 is to say, of the right of suffrage, necessarily implies free-agency and intellige?ice ; 
 free-agency, because it consists in election or chaice between different men and'differ- 
 ent measures ; and intelligence, because on a judicious choice depends the very safety 
 and existence of the community. That nature herself had therefore pronounced, on 
 women and children, a sentence of incapacity to exercise political power. They did 
 
56 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 not say all this ; and why ? Because to the universal sense of all mankind, these 
 were self-evident truths. They meant, therefore, this, and no more : that all the, 
 members of a comaninity, of mature reason, and free agents by situation, are origi- 
 nally and by nature, cquatly entitled to the exercise of political power, or a voice m 
 the Government. 
 
 But at the same time that they recognized and expressed the general principle, the 
 general right, they recognized and c?cprcssed a limitation of that general right imposed 
 by nature and necessity. In affirming and declaring the jus majoris to be the law of 
 all free communities, they did but declare the simple and obvious truth, that the es- 
 sential character of a free Government, of a Government whose movements are re- 
 gulated by numbers, involves the necessity of a submission by the minority to the 
 majority. For the right of deliberation and election necessarily involves some decision 
 between the men or the measures which are the subject of deliberation and election. 
 All deliberation must come to a close, and every exercise of the right of election must 
 terminate in a choice. To bring deliberation to some close, and election to some choice, 
 it must of necessity be adopted- as a rule, either that the majority or the minority 
 must put an end to the deliberation, by pronouncing a decision: And the necessity 
 of adopting the rule that the majority shall so pronounce, is founded on the necessity 
 of a sanction to every law, on the fact that the majority possesses, in its superior phy- 
 sical force, tliat sanction, and on the certainty that it would not permanently submit 
 to the opposite regulation. I say, -permanently : Because, though the majority may 
 be deluded for a time, by the artificial and vicious institutions of society, into a sub- 
 mission to the voice of the minority, they will arise, at last, and assert and enforce 
 their natural superiority. 
 
 Neither did the framers of the Declaration of Rights carry out the jus majoris into 
 certain other plain and obvious results : for they were not writing a treatise on politi- 
 cal law, but merely announcing, in a brief and compendious form, its leading princi- 
 ples. They declared, for example, that the majority of every community has a right 
 to adopt such a form of Government, and such a fundamental law, as to them seems; 
 best. They left unexpressed the plain and obvious propositions, that in forming that 
 fundamental law, the majority have a right to act, and ought to act, on the principles, . 
 that the safety of the people is the supreme law ; that the legitimate object of all Go- 
 vernment, is to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number ; and that the 
 perfect and entire protection of life, property, and personal liberty, constitutes the es- 
 sential basis of the greatest happiness of the greatest number. That to effect these 
 essential objects, the anajority have a perfect right to prescribe, by a fundamental law, 
 still further limitations to the universality of the right of suffrage. That they have 
 a right to exclude, and ought to exclude, by their fundamental law, from the exercise 
 of the right of suffrage, all those, who in the honest and deliberate opinion of the ma- 
 jority, cannot safehy be entrusted with the exercise of it ; or in other vv^ords, all those 
 whose exercise of this right would be, in the honest and deliberate opinion of the 
 majority, incompatible with the safety and well-being of the community, which is the 
 supreme law. They did not set down, in express terms, all these distinct and con- 
 secutive propositions. But they did state the result to which they lead, when they 
 said, in effect, that, in a well regulated community, those alone should be permitted 
 to exercise, the right of suffrage, who have a permanent common interest with, and 
 attachment to, the community." 
 
 I say, then, Sir, with a confidence inspired by a deep conviction of the truth of what 
 I advance, that the principles of the sovereio-nty of the people, the equality of men, and 
 the right of the majority, set forth in the " Declaration of the Rights of the people of 
 Virginia," so far from being '■' wild and visionary," so far fromJjeing " abstractions and 
 metaphysical subtleties," are the v&i^ principles which alone give a distinctive cha- 
 racter to our institutions, are the principles which have had the practical effect in 
 Virginia, of abolishing kingly poiocr, and aristocratic privilege, substituting for *hem 
 an elective magistracy, deriving their power /rom the people, and responsible to the 
 people. 
 
 But it has been said that the authors of the Declaration of Rights themselves, ad- 
 mitted, in effect, the abstract and wipraciicaZ character of the principles which it con- 
 tains, by establishing a Government whose practical regulations are wholly inconsis- 
 tent with those theoretical principles. That while, in the Declaration of Right^, 
 they asserted that all power is vested in the people, and should be exercised by a ma- 
 jority of the people, they established a Government in v/hich unequal counties, ex- 
 pressing their sense by the representatives of a selected f civ in those counties, to wit, 
 the freeholders, were the real- political units, or essential elements of political power. 
 That the right of the majority, in this frame of Government, Avas violated in two dif- 
 ferent modes : First, by vesting the power, within each county, in the freeholders, 
 who are a minority of the people ; and next by investing small masses of people in 
 the small counties, and large masses in the large counties, with equal power in the 
 Government, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 57 
 
 Sir, the argument would be a good one if the premises which support it were cor- 
 rect. But it is iiot true that the authors of the Declaration of Rights estaUished the 
 anomalous Government mader which we have hved these fifty years and more. 
 There can be no grosser error than to suppose that the Constitution of Virginia was 
 formed in 1776. Its two great distinctive features, the sectional, and the aristocratic 
 had been given to it a century before. The equal representation of the counties, which 
 was the remote cause of its sectional character, was established, in 1661, by a General 
 Assembly representing a population residing exclusively in the tide-water country, 
 and consequently, at that time, liomogeneous in character and identical in interest. 
 The limitation of suffrage to frceJwlders which gave to it an aristocratic character, was 
 imposed on the Colony in 1677, without any act of Assembly, by a letter of instruc- 
 tions from the King of England to his Governor in Virginia, backed and enforced by 
 two regiments of British soldiers, who had been sent to the Colony for the express 
 purpose of suppressing a popular insurrection. At the sera of the revolution, then, 
 these two provisions had been the constitutional law of the Colony for more than one 
 hundred years. The freeholders had learned to pride themselves on their superior 
 power and privileges, and the smaller counties on their equality with the larger. The 
 body of the people were reconciled by habit to their actual condition. 
 
 What, then, was the situation in which the framers of the Constitution were placed ? — 
 While they framed that instrmnent they were almost \\-ithin hearing of the thunder of 
 hostile cannon. The invader was at the doer. They were in continual danger of 
 being driven from the very hall of legislation by the bayonets of the enemy. The 
 whole undivided physical force of the country was barely sufficient to defend it against 
 the superior force of a foreign enemy. It was utterly impossible, under such circum- 
 stances, to pull down, and erect anew, the whole fabric of Government. And it 
 would have been to the last degree unwise and impolitic, at such a fearful crisis, to 
 distract the minds of the people by attempting a new distribution and arrangement of 
 political power. It would have been the very height of folly, at such a crisis, to create 
 disaffection in the minds of the freeholders, by stripping them of their exclusive 
 powers, and to exasperate the smaller counties by degrading them from the rank 
 which they had held under the royal Government. In leaving the freeholders and 
 the counties as they found them, the framers of the Constitution bowed to the supreme 
 law of necessity, and acted like wise and practical statesmen. Weak and mistable, 
 then, is the argument which infers the impractical character of the principles con- 
 tained in the Declaration of Rights from the inconsistency of the actual Government 
 formed, with those principles. The very language resorted to in disposing of a sub- 
 ject of such vital importance as tire regulation of the right of suffrage, the brief and 
 summary way in which it is disposed of, would shew, in the absence of all other 
 evidence, that it was a subject which the framers of the Constitution scarcely dared 
 to touch. — •'• The right of suffrage shall remain as at present exercised." 
 
 No, Sir, it was not reserved for tms to discover the inconsistency between their theo- 
 retical principles, and their practical regulations. They saw it themselves, and de- 
 plored it. In the very heat of the war which was waged for these abstractions'' — in 
 the hurh'-burly of the conflict, one statesman, at least, was found, to point out those 
 inconsistencies, and to urge home on the people of Virginia the new and unheard 
 of" principle, that in the apportionment of representation, regard should be had to 
 the white population only. As early as 1781, Mr. Jefferson exhorted the people of 
 Virginia, in the most earnest and impressive language, to reduce the principle to 
 practice, --so soon as leisure should be afforded them, for intrenching, within good 
 forms, the rights for which they had bled." 
 
 From that'^time to this, the spirit of reform, has never slept. From that time to this, 
 the friends of liberty have continually lifted up their voices against the inequality and 
 injustice of our system of Government. Incessantly baffled and defeated, they have 
 not abandoned their purpose ; and afler a struggle of fifty years, that purpose seems 
 at length on the eve of accomplishment. The Represematiyes of the people of Vir- 
 ginia have at length assembled in Convention, to revise the Constitution of the State. 
 A special committee of this Convention has recommended, among other measures of 
 reform, the adoption of a resolution, 
 
 " That in the apportionment of representation, in the House of Delegates, regard 
 should be had to white population exclusively." 
 
 It is this resolution which has called forth the denunciations of the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield. It is this proposition, ■• new in the history of our Government, if not 
 throughout the world ; new certainly to him," which he calls on us to support. 
 
 Sir, I have ventured to assert, in the commencement of the remarks which I have 
 had the honour to address to tlie Committee, that this proposition, so far from being 
 
 new andunheard of," is but a reiteration, a practical enforcement, of tlrose principles 
 of political law which were solemnly announced by the fathers of the revolution, in 
 that noble paper, the >' Declaration of the Rights of the people of Virginia, which 
 
 8 
 
58 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 rights do pertain to them anJ their posterity, as the basis and foundation of Govern- 
 iiient." 1 proceed to redeem the pledge. 
 
 The Bill of Ptio-hts declares, that the jjeople are the only legitimate source and foun- 
 tain of political power. — The resolution of the Committee affirms this doctrine, by 
 proposing, that in apportioning representation, or political power, regard shall be had 
 to the pcup!a exclusively. Not to wealth, not to overgrown sectional interests, not to 
 tlie supj)osed rights of the coujities ; but to the white population ; to the people only. 
 
 The Bill of Rights asserts the political equality of the citizens. — The resolution pro- 
 poses to give to that principle a practical existence in our*Government, by abolishing 
 the inveterate abuse of the equcd representation of unequal counties, and equalizing, 
 as nearly as may be, the electoral districts throughout the Commonwealth, on the basis 
 of free white population alone. 
 
 Tlie Bill of Rights pronounces the jus major is to be the law of all free communities, 
 by attributing to the majority of a corhmunity, the power to reform, alter or abolish, 
 at its will and pleasure, the very Government itself, and Consequently the lesser pow- 
 er of deciding, without appeal, in all matters of ordinary legislation. — The resolu- 
 tion proposes to give practical effect to the jus majoris, by making each Delegate the, 
 representative of an equal number of the people, so that the voice of a majority of the 
 Delegates, will be the voice of a majr)rity of the people. It proposes, in short, to 
 establish that beautiful harmony between our theoretical principles and our practical 
 regulations; the want of which, has been, for fifty years, the reproach of Virginia. 
 
 The resolution of the Committee, then, proposes no new and unheard of scheme ; 
 no innovation on the established principles of our Government. It calls on you to 
 listen to the warning voice of the fathers of the revolution, who, in this despised de-' 
 claration," have told you, that no free Government, or the blessings of liberty, can 
 be preserved to any people, but by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles." 
 
 But the accordance of the resolution with these great fundamental principles, has 
 not obLained for it, the approbation of the gentleman from Culpeper, (Judge Green.) 
 He proposes to amend it by striking out the word " exclusively," and addmg the words 
 and taxation combined;" so that the resolution, as amended, would be. 
 
 That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, regard 
 should be had to white papulation and taxation combined.'" 
 
 It wili be perceived, at once, that the object of this amendment, is to substitute for 
 the principle of representation contained in the resolution of the Committee, one of a 
 totally new and different character. It proposes a mixed or compound basis of re- 
 presentation, the elements of which are property and people, in lieu of the simple basis 
 of people only. For the total amount of taxation does, and must, bear a just propor- 
 tion to the total amount of property, the possession of which constitutes the ability to 
 pay. The direct tendency, then, of this amendment, is to give political power to the 
 wealthy in proportion to their wealth, and to inflict political insignificance on the poor 
 in proportion to their poverty. To confer on an electoral district, containing few 
 electors but great wealth, equal power with another district containing many electors 
 but little wealth. To give to th.Q few, who are rich, a control over the many who are 
 poor. So that if Stephen Girard, the great millionaire of the north, were to become 
 a citizen of Virginia, and fiscal ingenuity could reach his abounding wealth, the di- 
 rect or apparent operation of this amendment, would be to augment incalculably, the 
 political power of the county he sht)uld select as his residence, while its real effect 
 would probably, if not certainly, be, to confer all the accumulated mass of power, thus 
 artificially produced, on Stephen Girard himself If Richmond, in the vicissitud-es of 
 human affairs, should chance at a future day, to attain the opulence which is even 
 now possessed by the commercial metropohs of the Union, the operation of the 
 amendment would be, to give it uncontrolled power over the legislation of the Com- 
 monwealth. , 
 
 But, Sir, without commenting further on the practical operation of the proposed 
 amendment, let us apply to it the same test to which we have subjected the resolution 
 of the Committee. Does itaccord v/ith the principles of the Declaration of Rights;" 
 with the principles to which the gentleman from Culpeper, in common with us all, 
 has given,, but j^esterday, the sanction of his approving vote 
 
 If win be perceived, on the slightest examination, that it violates, not one only of 
 those principles, which I have mentioned, but erery one. 
 
 1. It repudiates the doctrine that the people are the only legitimate source and foun- 
 tam of political power, and that all power is derived from the people," and makes 
 property one of the sources of power, and declares it to be derived, in part,/ro7re pro- 
 perty. 
 
 2. It denies the correctness of the principle, that all the electors in the Common-, 
 wealth are equal in political rights, by conferring on a small number of wealthy elec- 
 tors, congregated in one electoral district, the same power that it confers on a large 
 number of poor electors, congregated in another electoral district. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 59 
 
 3. It subrerts the jiis majQris, the tliird great pmaciple alluded to, and which is, in 
 fact, but a corollary from the first, that the sovereignty is vested in the body of the 
 people, and substitutes for it the control of the vrealtliy few; or in other words, the 
 most odious, pernicious and despicable of all aristocracies — an aristocracy of wealth. 
 
 And for what purpose, I pray you, are we thus to dilapidate the very foundations 
 of our free institutions ? — For what purpose are we to make this retrograde move- 
 ment in the science of Government, and in llie practicaJ institutions of our country, 
 which should rather keep pace with the improvements of that science, and the march- - 
 of intellect ? — While human liberty is maldng a progress, which, though slow, is yet 
 certain, even in countries where the jus divinum of Kings is still the prevailing doc- 
 trine, why should we alone run counter to the spirit of the age,-and disavow and re- 
 pudiate the doctrines consecrated by the blood of our fathers ? — While most of the 
 old, and all the new Repubhcs of tliis extensive confederacy, are carrying out the 
 principle of the sovereignty of the people to its full extent, why should we alone, 
 seek to narrow, and limit, and restrain its operation? — What mighty good is to be at- 
 tained by this abandonment of the principles of the revolution r 
 
 The members of this Committee, in general, are left to imagine the objects and 
 views of tlie learned and distinguished gentleman who has proposed the amendment 
 in question. For though parliamentary usage, so far as I understand it, imposed upon 
 him the task of developing the principles of his amendment, and though we were re- 
 gularly notified yesterday, in the manner in which such notices are usually given, 
 that he would proceed, to-day, to the performance of that duty, he has pursued a dif- 
 ferent course, and the fi-iends of the resolution reported by the Select Connnittee, 
 have been invi'ed, or rather challenged, by the gentleman from Chesterfield, to com- 
 mence the discussion. 
 
 Having been myself a member of that Committee, however, and having heard the 
 arguments by which the same amendment was there sustained, I will endeavor to 
 perform the duty of the mover by stating, and my own by answering them. 
 
 It is alleged, tlien. Sir, *hat the principles of Gove:P.meut contained in the Decla- 
 ration of Rights, I mean those elevated and elevating principles which, in an assem- 
 bly of Virginia Statesmen, I have tliis day been compelled to defend, are little better 
 than mere abstractions. That whether they are correct or not, as •'• abstract princi- 
 ples," there is a great practical principle, wholly overlooked in the resolution of the 
 Select Committee, of vital and paramonnt importance. The principle in question, 
 and the argument by which it is sustained, when broadly and fairly developed, amount 
 to this : ' - 
 
 1. That the secxirity of property is one of the most essential elements of the pros- 
 perity and happiness of a community, and should be sedulously provided for by its 
 institutions. 
 
 2. That men naturally love property, and the comforts and advantages it will pur- 
 chase. 
 
 3. That this love of wealth is so strong, that the poor are the natural enemies of 
 the rick, and feel a strong and habitual inclination to strip them of their wealth, or, at 
 least, to throw on them alone all the burthens of society. 
 
 4. That the poor, being more numerous in every community than all the classes 
 above them, would have^tlie poiccr. as well as the inclination, thus to oppress the 
 rich, if admitted to an equal participation with them in political power ; and 
 
 5. That it is therefore necessary to restrain, limit and dimiinish the power of this ^ 
 natural majority; of this, many-headed and hungry monster, the many, by some arti- 
 ficial regulation in the Constitution, or fundamental law, of every community. And 
 
 if this be not done, either directly, by limitations on the right of suffrage, or indirect- 
 ly, by some artificial distribution of political power, in the apportionment of represen- 
 tation, like that contained in the amendment, property will be invaded, all the multi- 
 plied evils of anai-chy will ensue, till the society, groaning under the joke of unbri- 
 dled democracy, will be driven to prefer to its stormy sway, the despotic Govern- 
 ment of a single master. And tliis is said to be tlie natural death of the Government 
 of numbers. 
 
 Sir, if this statement of the argimientbe a little over-coloured by imputing to those 
 who advance it epithets which tliey are too .prudent to use, it is nevertheless, like all 
 good caricatures, a striking likeness. 
 
 To tliis argument I answer that, like most unsound arguments, it is founded on a 
 bold assumption of folse premises. It-is fotmded on the assumption that men are, by 
 nature, robbers, and are restrained from incessant invasions of the rights of each 
 other, only by fear or coercion. But, is this a just picture of that compound crea- 
 ture man ? Sir, I conceive it to be a hbel on the race, disproved by every page of its 
 history. If you vAW look tliere you ^^411 find tliat man, though sometimes driven by 
 stormy passions to the comixussion of atrocious crimes, is by natme and habit neither 
 a wolf nor a tiger. That he is an affcctiwiate, a social, a patriotic, a cmscicntious and 
 a religious creature. In him, alone, of all animals, has nature implanted the feeling 
 
60 
 
 DEBATES -OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of affection for 'his kindred, after the attainment of maturity. This alone is a restraint 
 on tii8 excess of his natural desire for property as extensive as the ties of blood that 
 bind him to his fellow man. Designing, moreover, that man shall live in communi- 
 ties, where alone he can exist, nature has given to him the social feeling ; the feeling 
 of attachment to those around him. Intending that for the more perfect development 
 of his high faculties, and for the attainment of the greatest degree of comfort and 
 happiness of which he is susceptible, man should associate in nations, she implanted 
 in him a feeling, the glorious displays of which have shed lustre around so many pa- 
 ges of his history. I mean the love of country or patriotism. Designing that he 
 should attain to happiness through the practice of virtue, and in that way only, she 
 erected in each man's bosom the tribunal of conscience, which passes in review all the 
 actions of the individual, and pronounces sentence of condemnation on every manifest 
 deviation from moral rectitude. To add sanctions to the decisions of conscience, she 
 also implanted in his bosom an intuitive belief in the existence of an intelligence 
 governing the world, who would reward virtue and punish vice in a future state of 
 being. Man is therefore, by nature a religious creature, whose conduct is more or 
 less regulated by the love or fear of the unknown governor of the Universe. Above 
 all, the light of revealed religion has shone for ages on the world, and that Divine 
 system of morals which commands us "to do unto others as we would have them do 
 unto us," has shed its benign influence on the hearts of countless thousands, of the 
 high and the low, the wise and the foolish, the rich and the poor. But we are asked 
 to believe that all these natural feelings, all these social affections, all these monitions 
 of conscience, all these religious impressions, all these Christian charities, all these 
 hopes of future rewards and fears of future punishments, are dead, and silent, and 
 inoperative in the bosom of man. The love of property is the great engrossing pas- 
 sion which swallows up all other passions, and feelings, and principles ; and this not 
 in particular cases only, but in all men. The poor man is fatally and inevitably the 
 enemy of the rich, and will wage a war of rapine against him, if once let loose from 
 the restraints of the fundamental law. A doctrine monstrous, hateful and incre- 
 dible ! 
 
 But, Sir , if I were even to admit, for a moment, the truth of the revolting propositionthat 
 the desire for property swallows up all the other feelings of man, does it follow that the 
 aspirants after the enjoyments that property confers, will seek to attain their object in 
 the manner which the argument in question supposes ? If it be contended that man is 
 a greedy and avaricious, it will, still, not be denied, that he is a reasoning and calcu- 
 lating, animal. When he desires to attain property it is in order that he may possess 
 and enjoy it. But if he join in estabhshing the rule that the right of the strongest is 
 the best right, what security has he that he, in his turn, will not soon be deprived of 
 his property by some one stronger than himself.? Sir, the very desire for property im- 
 plies the desire to possess it securely. And he who has a strong desire to possess it, 
 and a high relish, in anticipation, of the pleasure of enjoying it securely, will be a 
 firm supporter of the laws which secure that possession, and a decided enemy to every 
 systematic invasion of the rule of meum and tuum. In other words, man is saga- 
 cious enough to know that as a general and public rule of action, the maxim that ho- 
 nesty is the best policy, is the safest and best maxim. And when he deviates from 
 that rule he always hopes that the violation will go undiscovered, or otherwise es- 
 cape punishment. So true is this, that I am persuaded that if a nation could be 
 found consisting exclusively of rogues and swindlers, there would not be found in the 
 legislative code of that nation a systematic invasion of the right of property, such as 
 the argument for the proposed amendment apprehends and seeks to provide against. 
 
 Communities of men are sagacious enough to know and follov/ their real interest. 
 And, Sir, I do not, and cannot believe that it is, or ever was the real interest of any 
 class in the community, or of any community to commit gross and flagrant abuses of 
 power, to disregard the monitions of conscience, to break down the barriers and 
 obliterate the distinctions between right and wrong, and thus to involve society in all 
 the horrors of anarchy. The principles of justice are the foundation of the social 
 fabric, and rash and foolish is he and blind to his true interest, who undermines the 
 foundation and tumbles the fabric in ruins. 
 
 Thus far I have reasoned a priori. 3ut what are the lessons which history and 
 experience teach us, in pursuing this enquiry ? — We need not go far for examples. 
 Let us look at the experience of our good old Commonwealth of Virginia. From the 
 foundation of the Commonwealth the slave-holding population of Virginia has held 
 the supreme power in the State. From the foundation of the Commonwealth there 
 has existed and there still exists, a numerous population on our western frontier, who 
 are comparatively destitute of slave-propertj', and whose wealth has ever consisted 
 in cattle more than in any other description of property. Now if the argument of those 
 who support the proposed amendment be a sound one, it would follow that as it is 
 and always has been the interest (according to their vie^vs of interest) of the slave- 
 holding population to shift from themselves, and to lay on others, the burthens of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 61 
 
 Government, they would impose heavy taxes on the cattle, the property of the help- 
 less minority, and oppress them by this and every otlier species of fiscal exaction. 
 And yet the very reverse is the fact. For the slave-holders, invested with supreme 
 power, and urged to its exercise by their interest,'' have not only not overtaxed the 
 cattle of their western brethren, but have, in fact, imposed on them, except at one 
 period of danger and distress from foreign war, no tax at all, and when the pressure 
 ceased the law imposing the tax was instantly repealed. And why? — Because they 
 were governed by the principles of justice, and the feelings of honour. Because they 
 thought, and justly, that the people of the frontier, burthened as they were with 
 " the first expenses of society," and engaged in laying the very foundations of the 
 social fabric, could ill endure the additional burthen of a tax on their flocks and herds. 
 Because the non-slave-holders of the west were at their mercy, and every feeling of 
 honour and magnanimity forbade them to oppress the weak. I say, then. Sir, that 
 the slave-holders of Virginia have shewn by their conduct in this particular case, the 
 incorrectness of the theory which supposes man to be habitually governed by a blind 
 and reckless cupidity - by the sordid feelings alone of his nature, to the exclusion of 
 the nobler. 
 
 I say, then, that arguing a priori, or taking for our guide the conduct of the slave- 
 holders of Virginia, we are led to the conclusion, that the property of the wealthy 
 would not be imperrilled, as gentlemen imagine, by entrusting the powers of Govern- 
 ment to numbers, without regard to their wealth. That property would be abundantly 
 secure, without investing its holders with a factitious power, derived from its posses- 
 sion. And that there is not the least necessity for the proposed innovation on the 
 great principles of Government, asserted by our ancestors at the aera of the revolution. 
 
 But it is not in Virginia alone, that we see evidences of the futility of the appre- 
 hensions that are entertained for the safety of property. We have in the history of 
 our Sister-Commonwealths, a rich fund of experience from whence we can draw ar- 
 guments to illustrate the utter futility of these apprehensions. In fifteen States of the 
 Union, representation is apportioned according to numbers alone, and wholly without 
 reference to property, or the wealth of the electors. In eight of these States citizen- 
 ship is the sole qualification of the elector, and in the remaining seven the payment 
 of any tax, either local or general, is the only qualification superadded. The numbers, 
 the needy many, have had the supre.me control over the wealthy /eto, in some of those 
 Stj,::es for forty years, in some thirty, in some twenty, in some ten, and in some five. 
 And what has been the practical result Look at their situation, Sir, and look aiours. 
 Do we not see among them the richest and most prosperous States of the Union 
 Has a single instance occurred of a Legislative invasion, by the poor, of the rights of 
 the wealthy Not one. The machine of Government has rolled smoothly on, and 
 property has been found, as it ever will be found, able to protect itself, without consti- 
 tutional barriers in the shape of odious ■privileges. So much for the general question, 
 whether property is endangered by leaving the people in possession of their natural 
 and equal rights. 
 
 But I know, Sir, incidentally, that the mover of this amendment entertains the 
 opinion, that the case of Virginia is, from peculiar circumstances, a case sui geyieris. 
 His opinion is that the comparatively non-slave-holding population of Virginia, must 
 ere long constitute, if it does not now constitute, a decided majority of the people, 
 and that majority inhabiting a particular section of the State, alienated from their slave- ♦ 
 holding fellow-citizens, by distance, localities and dissimilar views on questions of gene- - ^ 
 ral policy. — That it will be, or v/hat amounts to the same thing, that they will suppose 
 it to be, their interest to lay the burthens of Government almost exclusively on the 
 slave property of their eastern brethren. And that it is, therefore, necessary to invest 
 the slave-holding minority with factitious power, under the new Constitution, to en- 
 able it to protect itself against the injustice and oppression of the comparatively non- 
 slave-holding majority. 
 
 Supposing the facts which I have just stated to be as he imagines them to be, I do 
 not see any thing in the case stated, which takes it out of the operation of the prin- 
 ciples of security which I have supposed to exist in regard to property in general. 
 He 2cill not contend that the people of the west are less operated on by the princi- 
 ple of honor, by sentiments of justice, and by a sense of their real interests, than the 
 people of the east. — And if this be so, his fears are groundless. For the people of 
 the east, under similar circumstances, have repelled the base suggestions of a sordid 
 and short-sighted interest, and have been governed by nobler and more enlarged 
 views of expediency and right. But, Sir, his premises fail him. — Look at the map 
 of Virginia, and at the tables of population wliich have this day been reported by the 
 Auditor. He estimates the white population east of the Blue Ridge of mountains, 
 at 362,745, and the white population west of those mountains at 319,516. The peo- 
 ple of the east have, therefore, a majority of 43,229 over those of the west. I need 
 scarcely, Sir, tell this assembly, that the whole white population east of the Ridge is 
 a slave-holding population. The black population is even more dense along the 
 
62 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 eastern base of the Ridge, than along the shore of the Atlantic. For while the two 
 senatorial districts bordering on the ocean, contained, by the Census of 1820, one of 
 them but 17,416, and the other but 18,3C3, three of the districts along the eastern 
 base of the Ridge contained, one of them 27,417, another 27,514, and tlie third 30,621. 
 Thus you perceive. Sir, that the slave population is crowded up' to the very foot of 
 the mountain. But tliis is not all. The slave-holding population extends beyond the 
 Ridge. The district which I have the honor in part to represent, contains about 
 12,01)0 slaves. The four western counties of Berkeley, JeiFerson, Frederick and Bo- 
 tetourt contain 17,070. They are therefore, fairly to be considered as slave-holding 
 counties, to the practical intent of being interested in exempting slaves from undue 
 ta.xation. These four counties are estimated to contain, ^at present, a white popula- 
 tion of 47,013. Add this slave-holding population, west of the mountain, (to say no- 
 thing of other western counties which contain slaves to the amoimt of several thou- 
 sands more,) to the slave-holding population east of the mountains, and you have an 
 aggregate of 409,753. The comparatively non-slave-holding population in all the re- 
 maining counties of^ Virginia, is but 272,503. There is, therefore, a majority of 
 slave-holding population, amounting to 137,255. 
 
 And yet, strange to tell, an apprehension is entertained, that if representation be 
 cqualhj apportioned among the ^vliite population, slave property will be burthened by 
 unequal and oppressive taxes ! — If the resolution of the Committee be adopted, the 
 slave-holding population will possess, in the House of Delegates, a majority of repre- 
 sentatives in the proportion of 409,758 to 272,503 ; and yet a fear is entertained, that 
 the representatives of the 272,503 non -slave-holders will overtax the property oJf the 
 409,758 slave-holders ! And to avert this imminent peril and flagrant injustice, you 
 are asked to invest the 409,758 witli factitious Constilutionnl power — to destroy the 
 great landmarks of natural right, established at the Esra of the revolution — to repudi- 
 ate all the principles of Government whicli have been, until now. held sacred and 
 inviolable. Such, Sir, is the argument by which the proposed amendment is sup- 
 ported. 
 
 Mr. Green said, it was with extreme diffidence that he rose to state his sentiments 
 in support of the amendment. He was well convinced of his incapacity to do justice 
 to the argument; but being urged by a sense of duty, he should make the effort 
 even though he might sink under it. The Committee were now apprised of what was 
 to be urged as the foundation of the claim for a new basis of representation ; t-'.-y 
 liad been referred to the principles contained in the Bill of Rights, And accordino- to 
 the version of those declarations just given by the gentleman from Frederick, the°de- ^ 
 claration, that all men are by nature equally free, amounted to a declaration that every 
 man in the community possesses, and ought to exercise, equal rights with every other 
 man. And this was very true^ if understood, as referring only to natural rights; but 
 it was not true if applied, as the geiitleman would wish to apply it, to rights of a poli- 
 tical character. On the contrary, he hoped to shew that the Bill of Rights, so far from 
 holding such a position, was explicitly opposed to it. The meaning of the declaration, 
 as he understood, was this: that all men are b}^ nature, so far equally free as that none 
 might claim, in the social state, a natural right to govern others: this was the extent 
 of the proposition : unless, indeed, they claimed to govern by tiie jus majoris, founded, 
 as the gentleman contended, in the possession of physical force. To him, (Mr. G.) 
 ' however, it seemed that there could arise no right from mere force. The gentleman 
 from Frederick had determined, that because the majority possessed the physical force, 
 they have, of course, the right to govern ': but he thought that this did not follow. 
 
 Again, the gen+leman had reminded the Committee,, that the Bill of Rights declares 
 that all power resides in the people. This was perfectly true ; but it did not follow 
 that the possession of the pov\^er of government by the people, gave to each member 
 of the body politic equal weiglit in its government. Once more ; the gentleman had 
 contended, that according to the same Bill of Rights, a majority must govern in all 
 things, and were of right entitled to supreme control. Such, no doubt, would have 
 been the doctrine of the Bill of Rights, if the frainers of that instrument had thought 
 that its foundations were Laid in the right of nature, or of conquest; and would have 
 declared that to be the best Government which gives the most perfect effect to the will 
 of the majority. Yet they do, in effect, instead of affirming this, deny it, by saying that 
 Government being instituted for the security of the people, " that is best, which is capa- 
 ble of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually se- 
 cured against the danger of mal-administration." • 
 
 The affirmation is not that the majority shall rule by absolute power, but that they 
 may establish such a Government, as shall produce the greatest amount of happiness, 
 and as shall best be guarded against the dangers of mal-administration. I admit, said. 
 Mr. G. that in a community, where all the members are in circumstances of equality 
 as to fortune, and so situated, that no one part of the society can injure the residue, with- • 
 out, at the same time, inflicting equal injury upon themselves, the rule that the nume- 
 rical majority shall govern, is the best ; and the foundation of all our institutions, is 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 63 
 
 the assumption, that the people know, and will always pursue their own true interest ; 
 a;iid, therefore, that a majority is lik&ly to decide rightly. But, it is equally the prin- 
 ciple of those institutions, that the majority havea.n interest in doing what is right. Un- 
 less tliis is taiien for granted, the abstract proposition is of little value. Now, I ask of 
 gentlemen, whether, in the peculiar situa.tion of Virginia, circumstances will not pre- 
 sent a strong inducement to the . majority to opjiress the minority for their own 
 beneht ?- 
 
 lily first proposition in support of the amendment is this : that it is perfectly 
 certain that in a very short thne, possibly within ten } ears, the majority of the 
 free white inhabitants- of this State vdll be found to the west of the Blue Ridge. A re- 
 ference to the several enumerations of our population since 1190, will sheAV the grounds 
 of this conclusion ; a conclusion which is farther fortified by the report just received 
 from the Auditor, and now in the hands of every 'member. In 1S20, the difference of 
 population between the eastern and western sid^e of the Blue Ridge was near 100,000 
 m favor of tiie eastern side ; now it is only 43,000. Thus, the western comities have 
 experienced an increase in eight years, of more than 59,000 inhabitants: if such has 
 been the ratio of gain in these eight years,' it is not too much to beheve that in ten 
 years more, they will have a majority of the whole State. 
 
 Tiie report of the Auditor makes the population of the Valley 10,000 more than I 
 supposed : allowing for that ditierence (which is, as far as it goes, in favour of my ar- 
 gument.) The population west of the Alleghany mountains has increased in the same 
 tmie 4c>,000 ; or about at the rate of thirty-six per cent, on its former population ; 
 wliile the Valley has increased 15,000 ; and putting both those divisions of the State 
 together, their ao-gregate increase has been at the rate of twenty-five per cent. But 
 wixat has been tne rate of increase in the country cast of the Blue Ridge It has in- 
 creaot'd but by a ratio of four per cent ! 
 
 Let us look, now, at the results of the system of taxation. The average amount of 
 a^capitation tax in the region' west of the mountains was twenty- five cents per head: 
 in the V^aliey, forty-eight cents : putting these two divisions of the State together, the 
 average will be thirty-two cents. And what was it in the country east of the Blue 
 Ridge eighty-eight cents per head. 
 
 Look now at the land tax in these two grand divisions of Virginia ; set slaves on 
 one side. On the other side of the Ridge lands were taxed one dollar, while on-this 
 side they were taxed about two and a half : more than double. 
 
 From aggregate results go down to details : the same general result meets you still. 
 Durmg last war there was a tax on cattle in Virginia, (one of the articles which the 
 gentleman has alluded to in his argument as more peculiarly pertaining to the wes- 
 tern inhabitants) and even on cattle, more v.- as ps:id on this side the mountain than on 
 the other side. From all these facts, I am led to conclude that the existing inequahty 
 is likely to continue. If not, the amendment can do no harm. When there is no 
 unequal taxation, it can do no harm to say that representation shall be regulated by 
 taxation and population ; for then it vnW result in the very- thing the gentleman wants; 
 he will have representation based upon the ^vhite population exclusively ; or if it shall 
 happen that the people of the west pay more taxes, then the efiect will be to throw 
 the weight of legislative power into that part of the State which now complains for 
 the want of it. 
 
 The gentleman asks us, what motives the people of the west can have to misuse 
 Ih^ir power .'^ 1 vvill state one inducemeiit. They have one great object of desire, and 
 the vv'hole history of our State Legislature will prove it, and that is the construction 
 of roads and canals. The desire of roads and canals has of late years grown into an 
 enthusiastic passion among them.. The whole of the country beyond the Ridge has 
 passed tiiose improvements by an unanimous vote, when they were proposed. The - 
 improvements on James River, in their extended form, were assented to solely for the 
 benefit of the people of the v/est : a much more limited work would have answered 
 all the ends and wishes of the people in the east of the State. A proposition was once 
 before our House of Delegates to borrow three millions and about seven hundred 
 thousand dollars for objects of this description, and every western man supported and 
 voted for the scheme ; nay, it was but last year that a loan of a million was brought 
 forward, and, I believe, every western vote was given in the affirmative. Here, then, 
 is an induceuieni, and here are iictual efforts,- to tax the lowlands for the benefit of 
 western interests. 
 
 But it has been said that property has, and always will, protect itself Sir, I admit 
 that when property is unequally held by persons, ail residing in one district together, 
 and, therefore, having all one conmion interest, there may be truth in the position. 
 Bat where it is dispersed in different and distant positions of the State, there is no 
 such motive to restrain the attempts of tliose who have little common feeling with its" 
 possessors. 
 
 It has been farther said, that the restraints of conscience furnish an ample security ; 
 but, I believe, all political institutions, as w-ell in this as in ever}* other country, go on 
 
64 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the assumption that all men, when acting, especially in large bodies, are governed by 
 a feeling of interest, and do with little or no scruple, whatever they suppose their in- 
 terest to dictate. I consider it as a self-evident proposition. 
 
 On the subject of slaves, it is true that one purpose of the amendment, is to secure 
 them from undue taxation. The gentleman tells us that those living on this side the 
 movintain, have a majority of the slaves, and a majority in the Legislature, and will 
 continue to have both. But it will be found that if any question shall arise in the 
 Valley on that subject, almost all the voters there are destitute of slaves. In those 
 four counties the one class is to the other as nearly three to one. 
 
 Let us, in the next place, look at the relative effect upon the general state of our 
 affairs from the adoption of the resolution as it stands, and with the amendment. If 
 the white basis shall be adopted, the people in the lowlands will never feel secure; 
 jealousies and an interminable hostility will be generated, and perpetuate feuds and 
 heart-burnings between different sections of the State. But if you adopt the covi- 
 pound basis, although, possibly, tlie people of the west may, for a time, be very angry, 
 as considering themselves deprived of political weight and privileges, they never can 
 feel themselves insecure as to their property ; for no law can be passed in the Legis- 
 lature affecting property at all, that will not be felt to a much greater extent on this 
 side the mountains. 
 
 I have heard in various forms, (though not as yet in this Committee,) of adequate 
 guarantees. For myself, I believe that we can have no adequate guarantee but in re- 
 presentation. A majority in the Senate alone, I consider as wholly insufficient; the 
 larger number of delegates in the other House will always, in the course of two or 
 three years, prevail in carrying any object they have at heart: they always over- 
 whelm the Senate in the end. I shall not advert to the other guarantees that have 
 been proposed : for I am unwilling longer to detain the Committee. I feel regret at 
 having already been compelled to trespass on their time. Important facts were what 
 I wished principally to present to them, and those I have stated are in my judgment 
 entitled to great weight in the mind of every reflecting man. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, said, that he did not rise for the purpose of making a 
 speech ; nor of attempting a reply to the speech he had just heard : but to offer a re- 
 mark or two in relation to the order of the Committee's proceedings. Order he con- 
 sidered as the first law of heaven : but if he were to judge of its importance by what 
 he saw here, he should conclude that this body were departing from it entirely ; and, 
 by a constant law of nature, they were incurring the penalty of such a course, for 
 confusion and darkness were likely to accompany their proceedings. Yesterday the 
 Committee had been occupied in the development of the grand principles which lay 
 at the bottom of the science of government, and it seemed to be the understanding, 
 that this Convention would have for its object to settle those fundamental principles, 
 the sub-basis, as they might be termed, of the fundamental law of the community. 
 Some very interesting remarks had, in that connexion, been submitted to the Com- 
 mittee. But the positions taken were treated as mere abstractions, and it was held 
 that the proper course was to lay these aside, until the Committee should first have 
 gone down to the practical details of Government. Now, for liimself, Mr. C. said, 
 he knew of nothing that could rightly be called a principle, that was not an abstract 
 idea. Justice, goodness, truth, might be so called, and they were all abstract ideas. 
 All the principles in science were abstract ideas. But in reviewing the course adopt- 
 ed, he perceived that it had been taken on this ground, that it was said to be inexpe- 
 dient to settle principles first, for they were mere abstractions, and gentlemen nnist 
 try their practical effect first, before they could espouse them. They must go to the 
 practical part of Government, irrespective of principles. This doctrine had thrown 
 the Committee into complete confusion. It had been then proposed to take up the 
 first resolution reported by the Committee on the Legislative Department, and there- 
 upon came in the amendment now under consideration. The amendinent certainly 
 threw the onus probandi on the gentleman wiio proposed it ; but as the mover yes- 
 terday asked delay, the amendment had been laid over, and was now pending. The 
 expectation of the Committee had been that some proof should have been adduced in 
 its support ; but the gentleman from Culpeper (Mr. Green) had opened the debate by 
 declining to offer any, and both he, and the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh) 
 called on the advocates of the resolution for arguments in its support. Certainly the 
 burden of proof lay upon the gentlemen themselves. Onus probandi incumhit affir- 
 vianti. The gentleman from Culpeper had offered an amendment, which he affirmed 
 ought to be added to the resolution in place of a word which he proposed to strike 
 out. To call on the friends of the resolution for arguments, when the obligation to 
 argue lay on the opposite party, was as great an aberration from the correct principles 
 of order as that wliich had taken place yesterday. Either adopt the principles in the 
 Bill of Rights as canonical, and base all your subsequent proceedings upon them ; or, 
 if those principles are considered as unsound, let them be modified or amended ; or 
 else let gentlemen propose other principles as a substitute for them. Let them give 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 65 
 
 us their principles distinctly and in numerical order, first, second, third, and so on ; 
 then, said Mr. C. we shall know where we are. In a word, I consider the order 
 yesterday to have been no principles that to-day seems to be no proof." 
 
 The Chair having stated the question to be on the amendment of the gentleman 
 from Culpeper, (Judge Green,) and the question being called for by severafmembers, 
 Judge Upshur of Northampton, said, that it seemed to have been concluded b}-- tacit 
 agreement, that the debate was to be conducted by a member on each side alternately, 
 and he considered that a convenient mode of proceeding. He felt disinclined to sub- 
 mit his own views at this time ; and from the backwardness manifested by gentlemen 
 on the opposite side of the question, (if, indeed, the Convention was to be considered 
 as thus divided into sides.) he presumed they were taken somewhat by surprise, and 
 were not now ready to submit their ideas. Instead, therefore, of carrying on the ar- 
 gument at present, with a view to give gentlemen time and opportunity for farther 
 reflection, as well as that the order of discussion miglit be preserved, he thought it 
 most fair and most expedient, that the Committee now rise; and he made that motion j 
 but withdrew it at the request of 
 
 i\Ir. Mercer, who said, that he could not undertake to speak for other gentlemen; 
 but he certainly could say, very confidently, as it respected hhuself, that the presump- 
 tion just expressed by the gentleman from Northampton, was totally without founda- 
 tion, viz : that the friends of the resolution reported by the Legislative Committee ; 
 in other words, the friends of the white basis, as it was technically and familiarly cal- 
 led, were not ready to reply : he hoped he might be permitted to say, that he was en- 
 tirely prepared to reply, but was perfectly wilhng to rest the vote on the amendment 
 upon the argument they had already heard. 
 
 Judge Upshur replied, that the gentleman from Loudoun mistook liim if he sup- 
 posed him to insinuate for a moment, that that gentleman, or his friends, were unpre- 
 pared, in the sense he seemed to have supposed. He took it for granted, that gentle- 
 men on that side of the question were all fiilly prepared to address the Conventioii, 
 so far as familiarity with the facts and arguments pertaining to the subject was con- 
 cerned : all he had meant to say was, that they did not seem deskous to proceed with 
 the discussion on this day. He had rested his motion for the rising of the Commit- 
 tee, on the plan which seemed to have been agreed upon, of spealiing alternately. 
 He thought such a plan very fair, and on the whole the best course. If. tlierefore, it 
 was not the intention of some of the gentlemen on that side to submit his views to 
 the Coixmiittee, he hoped the Committee would rise : and he thereupon renewed his 
 motion to that effect. 
 
 Mr. Mercer rejoined. If the gentleman from Northampton and his friends were 
 not ready to speak farther in support of the amendment which they had brought for- 
 ward, perhaps it would be better to pass it over for the present, and take up some 
 other pai't of the report ; but he hoped the House would not adjourn at so early an 
 hour, and thus waste the residue of the da}'. For himself and those who acted with 
 him, they were ready at any time to proceed. 
 
 The question being put on the motion for the rising of the Committee, it was nega- 
 tived. 
 
 And the question then recurring on the amendment of Mr. Green, (viz. in adding 
 the words '• and taxation combined'' to the first resolution of the Committee proposing 
 the white basis of representation,) 
 
 Judge Upshub rose and addressed the Committee, nearly as follows : 
 I cannot saj, Mr. Chairman, that I have been driven into this discussion without 
 some degree of preparation. Yet I may be permitted to declare, tliat I did not antici- 
 pate that I should thus early be called on to submit my vie-ws to the Committee. It 
 is true, Sir, that the few simple ideas which it is my purpose to submit, do not require 
 a laboured preparation of any sort ; but I should at least, have entered mto the debate 
 with more pleasant feelings, had not circumstances deprived me of the power of choos- 
 ing my own time. 
 
 There seems to be some difference of opinion among us, as to the proper order of 
 debate. A question has arisen whether the friends or the foes of tlie mimediate mea- 
 sure before us, are bound to open the discussion. For my own part. I do not attach 
 the slightest importance to that inquiry : to me it seems of no consequence whatever, 
 wliether the advocates of a compound basis of representation, or those of the popular 
 basis, begin tliis discussion. I could have wished, so far as I feel any wish upon the 
 matter, that the two parties should have addressed the Committee in alternate order ; 
 for this, it seems to me, would be at once, equitable and respectful, at the same time 
 that it would best conduce to the elucidation of the subject. It was my wish that 
 each party should be heard in turn ; but it is still more my wish, that each sliould be 
 heard with patience and candour, and answered in a spirit of kindness and respect. 
 
 For myself, Mr. Chairman, I trust that I have entered this body, without any feel- 
 ings of local partiality or local prejudice. I entertam a deep conviction, that in the 
 discharge of the solemn trust reposed in me, it is my duty to consider myself the re- 
 
 9 
 
66 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pres^ntative of the whole State, and not of any pecuhar part of it. I came here with 
 an earnest, and an honest desire, to fix the foundations of Government with reference 
 to the common welfare ; and not upon the narrow basis of local interest. I brought 
 with me also, another feeling; a feehng which is the result of long and mature reflec- 
 tion, and which 1 had hopecTto make the guide of my conduct here. It appears to 
 me impossible, that in a body like this, representing many differing, if not conflicting 
 interests, any party can reasonably hope to carry all its measures. Nay, Sir, even if 
 this were practicable, it admits of great doubt indeed, whether it would be in its results, 
 either safe or wise. In a community like our own, no Government can gain the un- 
 divided affection, nor secure the undivided support of the people, unless it spring from 
 a fair and equitable compromise of interests. It Vv^as therefore my earnest hope, that 
 there would be no necessity for a formal array of parties upon this point. I have fore- 
 seen that we could not be much divided upon any other subject within the range of 
 our duties ; and it was therefore, peculiarly desirable, tliat on tlds subject, we should 
 agree to meet on some middle ground. I was, and still am ready, to advance quite, 
 nay, more than half way; for I feel entirely assured, that the great interests commit- 
 ted to our charge, require this temper in every one of us. Unfortunately , however, I 
 have not found a single individual on the other side, who would agree with me in 
 opinion.*' I am therefore, driven to the necessity of relying on the strength of my 
 own principles ; and I shall attest the sincerity with which 1 entertain them, by the 
 vote I am about to give. 
 
 It is contended by our opponents, that the proper basis of representation in the Gene- 
 ral Assembly, is wliite popula.tion alone, because this principle results necessarily from 
 the right which the majority possess, to rule the minority. I have been forcibly 
 struck with the fact, that in all the arguments upon this subject here and elsevv'here, 
 this right in a majority is assumed as a postulate. It has not yet been proved, nor have 
 I even heard an attempt to prove it. It is for this proof that I was desirous to wait. 
 Assuming this right as conceded, tlie whole scope of the argument has been to prove, 
 that in the application of the right to tlie practical Government, we must of necessity, 
 graduate political power according to white population alone. It may not perhaps, be 
 more curious than profitable, to examine somewhat in detail, the grounds upon which 
 this pretension rests. 
 
 There are two kinds of majority. There is a majority in interest, as well as a ma- 
 jority in number. If the first be within the contemplation of gentlemen, there is an 
 end of all discussion. It is precisely the principle for which we contend, and we shall 
 be happy to unite with them in so regulating this matter, that those Avho have the 
 greatest stake in the Government, shall have the greatest share of power in the ad- 
 ministration of it. But this is not what gentlemen mean. They mean, for they dis- 
 tinctly say so, that a majority in number only, without regard to property, shall give 
 the rule. It is the propriety of this rule, Avhich I now propose to examine. 
 
 If there be, as our opponents assume, an original, a priori, inherent and indestruc- 
 tible right in a majority to control a minority, from what source permit me to inquire, 
 is that right derived ? If it exist at all, it must I apprehend, be found either in some 
 positive compact or agreement conferring it, or else in some order of our nature, in- 
 dependent of all compact, and consequently prior to all Government. If gentlemen 
 claim the right here as springing from positive compact, from what compact does it 
 spring ? Not certainly from that Constitution of Government which we are now re- 
 vising ; for the chief purpose for which we have been brought together, is to correct 
 a supposed defect in the Constitution, in this very particular. Not certainly from any 
 other Constitution or form of Government, for to none other are we at liberty to look, 
 for any grant of power, or any principle which can bind us. The right then, is not, 
 conventional. Its source must be found beyond all civil society, prior to all social 
 compact, and independent of its sanctions. We must look for it in the law of nature ; 
 we have indeed been distinctly told, tiiat it exists in " necessity and nature ;" and upon 
 that ground only, has it hitherto been claimed. I propose now to inquire whether the 
 law of nature does indeed, confer this right or not. 
 
 Let me not be misunderstood. Sir. I am not now inquiring whether, according to 
 the form and nature of our institutions, a majority ought or ought not to rule. That 
 inquiry will be made hereafter. At present, I propose only to prove that there is no 
 original a priori principle in the law of nature, which gives to a majority a right to 
 control a minority; and of coTirse, that we are not bound by any obligation 7?? w <o 
 society, to adopt that principle in our civil institutions. 
 
 If there be any thing in the law of nature which confers, the right now contended 
 for, in what part of her code, I would ask, is it to be found For my own part, I in- 
 cline strongly to think, that, closely examined, the law of nature will be found to con- 
 
 * Judge Upshur takes great pleasure in acknowledging that he has learned, since the ahove remark 
 was made, that there are some gentlemen on the other side, who have always been willing to meet any 
 proposition of fair compromise. Their number however, is not large enough to authorise a liope that 
 the measure could bo carried, even with their assistance. 
 
DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONVENTTION. 
 
 67 
 
 fer no other riffbt than this : the right in every creature to use the powers derived 
 from nature, in such mode as will best promote its own happiness. If this be not the 
 law of nature, she is certainly but little obeyed in any of the living departments of 
 her empire. Throughout her boundless domain, the law of force gives the only rule 
 of right. The Hon devours the ox ; the ox drives the lamb from the green pasture : 
 th« lamb exerts the same law of power over the animal that is weaker and more timid 
 than itself; and thus the rule rmis, throughout all the gradations of life, until at last, 
 the worm devours us all. But. if there be another law independent of force, which 
 gives to a greater nmnber a right to control a smaller number, to what consequence 
 does it lead .' Gentlemen must themselves admit, that all men are by nature equal, 
 for this is the very foundatiun of their claim of right in a majority. If tliis be so, 
 each individual has his rights, which are precisely equal to the rights of his fellow. 
 But the right of a majority to rule, necessarily implies a right to impose restraints, in 
 some form or other ; either upon the freedom of opinion or the freedom of ac- 
 tion. And what follows ? Each one of three, enjoys the same rights with each one 
 of four, and yet it is gravely said, that because four is a majority of the seven, tJiat 
 majority has a right to restrain, to abridge, and consequently, to destroy all the rights 
 of the lesser number. That is to say, wliile all are by nature equal, and all derive 
 from nature the same rights in every respect, there shall yet be a number, only one 
 less than a majority of the whole, who may not by the law of nature possess any 
 rights at all ! 
 
 If, Sir. it be possible to carry our minds back to such a state of existence, let us sup- 
 pose that the wild children of nature are for the first time, assembling together for the 
 purpose of forming a social compact. Each one of them would bring with him aU 
 the rights which he derived from nature, and among these rights, would be fomid the 
 right to say ichether a majority should rule him or not. And. suppose a civil compact 
 should be entered into by ever}' member of the savage assembly, save one. Is that 
 one bound by what the rest have determined ? If he has griginalh- a right to say 
 whether he will agree to the compact or not. at what time does that right cease to ex- 
 ist, and by what au.t]iority is it taken away Vntil the compact is formed, there is no 
 majority in existence ; and after it is formed, he is no party to it ; and therefore not 
 bound by its majority. 
 
 Again. — How is this majority to be ascertained ? Who shall appoint the tellers, and 
 who shall announce on which side the majority is? All these are necessary opera- 
 tions, without wliich the idea of a majority, is indeed, an ■'• abstraction and vet these 
 very operations presuppose a degree of order and arrangement inconsistent with a 
 state of nature, aiid which cannot exist except in a state of society. 
 
 Again. — Within what limits is this majority to act ? Is it a majority of the whole 
 world, or only of a part of it .' ' If of the whole world, then two millions of savoges who 
 range the forests of America, ma}^ prescribe the law to one million who inlfabit the 
 Asiatic Islands ;. two milhons who live by hunting the elk and the buffaloe with a bow 
 and arr(^w, have authority to say that one million, among whom these animals of the 
 chase may not be found, shall not draw their subsistence from the ocean which sur- 
 rounds them 1 Is this the law of nature : Has the Creator really ingrafted upon the 
 nature of man, a principle which gives sanction to such monstrous cruelty and in- 
 justice 
 
 But suppose, instead of looking to the wliole world, you limit your majority to par- 
 ticular districts of it. It is impossible to do this, according to any fixed rule, except 
 by supposing that the world is divided into separate and distinct communities, pos- 
 sessing separate and distinct interests. And this is precisely what we understand by 
 a state of society, as contradistinguislied from a state of nature ; and of course, the 
 majority which is to be found there, is not the majority wliich the proposition supposes. 
 
 But again. If nature really gives this right to a majority ; if as the clear-minded 
 gentleman from Frederick (^Nlr. Cooke) supposes, there be impressed upon us by na- 
 •ture, a principle of this sort, which is mandatory upon us, and which we are not at 
 liberty to disregard, in what does the right consist? Is it in mere numbers.' If so, 
 every . creature must be counted, men, women and cliildren ; the useless as well as 
 the useful the drone who hves upon the industry of others, as well as the most pro- 
 fitable member of the human family. The law of nature knows no distinction be- 
 tween these classes, and indeed, one of the v&ry postulates on which gentlemen rely, 
 is that " all are by nature equal.'' In point of rights, nature does not own any dis- 
 tinction of age or sex. Infaircy has equal rights with mature age ; and surely it does 
 not consist with the gallantry of the present day, to say that the ladies are not at least 
 the equals of ourselves. Nay, more Sir, nature as strongly disowns all invidious dis- 
 tinctions in complexion : in her eye, there is no difference between jet and vermilion. 
 A distinction does indeed prevail here, Sir, and a vdde one it is. But the same rule 
 of taste would not answer in Africa : for the African paints the devil white. Accord- 
 ing to your rule of numbers, all these various classes and descriptions of persons 
 must count. And if so, what estimate have gentlemen themselves put upon their 
 
68 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 own rule? If in the estimate of numbers, all are counted, why exclude any from 
 the right' of suffrage? Why are not women, and children, and paupers, admitted to 
 the polls ? The rule, even if it exists in nature, is worth nothing, unless its fair ana- 
 logies will hold in a state of society. And how can gentlemen venture to limit them- 
 selves to -white population alone, and yet found their claim on a law of nature which 
 knows no distinction between white and black ? By their rule, we are entitled to re- 
 presentation of every slave in our land ; and if they will give us this, we shall dis- 
 
 ?ute with them no longer. The majority will then be with us. God forbid, Sir, that 
 should propose this seriously. I am as ready as any gentleman here, to disclaim 
 every idea of the sort. I use the argument only to shew to what consequences this 
 demand, founded on a supposed law of nature, must inevitably conduct us. Gentle- 
 men may not claim the benefit of a rule, which will not bear to be pushed to its legi- 
 timate results ; a rule which they themselves are compelled to abandon, at the very 
 first step which they take into practical Government. 
 
 If then, there be no inherent virtue in numbers which confers this right, in what 
 else does it consist? I have heard elsewhere, of another ground on which gentlemen 
 have been pleased to rest it, and it is now distinctly announced by the able gentleman 
 from Frederick. It is j^hysical power. I do not understand the gentleman from Fre- 
 derick in the objectionable sense, of which his language was probably susceptible. 
 He did not mean that this power in a majority would or ought to be applied, in the 
 actual Government ; it is impossible to attribute to the clear head and sound princi- 
 ples of that gentleman, any meaning so uncourteous as a threat. I understood him, 
 as he meant to be understood, in this sense only : Every law implies the necessity 
 of some sanction ; force is the only sanction in the case before us, and as this force 
 is presumed to reside in the greatest degree, in a majority, it follows that a ma- 
 jority only can apply the sanction, and of course that a majority ought to give the 
 law. 
 
 Here, Sir, we are under the necessity of looking back upon the preceding proposi- 
 tion. From what sources are we to derive this majority? I have endeavored to 
 shew that by nature, all are equal and possess equal rights. Then -woinen and chil- 
 dren must be counted here also, as well as men. Now, we learn from good authority, 
 that throughout the universe, the sexes rank to each other as thirteen and fourteen. 
 Suppose then, the females to be all ranged on one side of the question, with a few 
 children in their laps, and a few superannuated and decrepid men, at their sides. 
 They may thus very well constitute a majority of the whole number ; but will the 
 physical power be with them ? No Sir. That power has ever been found with per- 
 sonal strength, and intrepidity and skill. These qualities have at all times, and in all 
 places, been an overmatch for mere undisciplined numbers. Here then is a case in 
 which the majority do not possess the power of applying the sanction ; and of course, 
 the right to rule, which is supposed to follow the sanction, is in this case,_ with the 
 minority. The case is quite as apt to occur, and quite as easy to be supposed, as that 
 state of existence to which it refers, and from which gentlemen borrow their argu- 
 ment. And the necessary conclusion, upon the hypothesis assumed, is, that in one 
 state of things a majority may have a right to rule, and in another state of things a 
 minority may have that right; and this too, by the very same fixed and uniform law 
 of nature ! 
 
 To such- absurdities are we inevitably driven when we attempt to apply principles 
 deduced from a state of nature, to a state of society ; a state which pre-supposes that 
 nature with all her rights and all her laws, has been. shaken off ! Indeed, Sir, the 
 whole reasoning is fallacious, because it is founded on a state of things which in all 
 pi-obability, never had existence at all. It goes back to a state prior to all history, and 
 about which we know nothing beyond mere conjecture. The first accounts which 
 we have of man, are of man in a social state. Wherever he has been found, and 
 however rude his condition, he has been bound to his fellows by some form of associ- 
 ation, in advance of a state of nature. If we may indulge any conjecture upon such- 
 a subject, the probability is that he was first urged into society, by a strong feeling of 
 property implanted in his- nature ; by a feeling that he had, or at least, that he ought 
 to have, v-. better title than anotlier, to whatever his own labour had appropriated. 
 The necessity of securing this right and protecting him in the enjoyment of it, in all 
 probability, first suggested the idea of the social compact. Although property there- 
 fore, is strictly speaking the creature of society, yet a feeling of property was proba- 
 bly its creator. The result would be, that at the very moment that two human be- 
 ings first came together, the social compact was formed. And gentlemen have fallen 
 into another error also, of a kindred nature. They build their systems upon the no- 
 tion of an abstract equality, for which there is no warrant in any thing we know of 
 the history of man. Sir, I am about to use a borrowed idea ; but it is valuable for its 
 truth, and perfectly applicable to the subject. The first account that we have of 
 man, is that contained in the Bible ; and how will this notion of original equality 
 stand, when tested by that orthodox book ? Adam was the first of created beings ; 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 69 
 
 Eve was created next ; and the very fiat which brought her into existence, subjected 
 her to the dominion of her husband. Here then was no equaJity. Cain was the 
 first born of men, and at what period did he become the equal of his father ? _ Was it 
 at the moment of liis birth, while he was yet scarcely conscious of his own existence, 
 a helpless dependent upon the care of his parents ? And if not then, at v.-hat age did 
 this equality first attach ? Was it at ten, or fifteen, or- twenty-five, or tliirty-five years 
 of ao-e ? Where is the law, or the doctrine of nature, wliich enables us to say with 
 certainty and precision, at what age the child becomes the equal of his father ? Sir, 
 the true meaning of the equality of men, as. applicable to this subject, was happily 
 expressed by the gentleman from Culpeper (Mr. Green) when he said that all men 
 are so far equal by the law of nature, that when they enter into a state of society, no 
 one can claim a natural right to rule over another." And for the same reason, no ten 
 men can claim a natural right to rule over any nine men. 
 
 The subject. Mr. Chairman, is scarcely worth the examination it has received, I 
 will pursue it no farther, since I have no intention to give you a treatise on natural 
 law, instead of an argmnent upon the practical subject of Government. I have 
 thought it necessary to go thus far into an examination of the subject, because gen- 
 tlemen have founded themselves upon what they are pleased to consider an axiom, 
 that there is in a majority, an a priori, inherent and indestructible right to rule a mi- 
 nority, under all circumstances, and in every conceivable condition of things. And 
 one of them at least has been understood by me, as referring this right to the law of 
 nature; a law which he supposes, no society cannot repeal, and which therefore, is 
 of original and universal authority. Surely this is a very great mistake. Nay Sir^ 
 there is proof enough before us that gentlemen tliemselves, who claim this right, and 
 who seek to give it solemnity by referring it to the very law of our being^ do not 
 venture to carry it into the details of their own system. If there be a right in a majority 
 of persons or of ichite persons, to rule a minority, upon what principle is it that the 
 right of suffrage is restricted ? All are counted, in making up the majority ; and 
 each one of the majority, ought of consequence, to possess a share in its rights. Why 
 then do you not admit women to the polls ? Nature has stamped no such inferiority 
 upon that sex, as to disqualify it under all circumstances, for a safe and judicious ex- 
 ercise of the right of suffrage. And why exclude minors ? Infants who have not 
 acquired lancruage, or whose intellects are not sufhciently unfolded to enable them to 
 understand their own actions. ma3' be excluded from the necessity of the case. But 
 at what time, in the ordinary course of nature, do these disabilities cease ? Gentle- 
 men say, at tlie age of twenty-one years. And why so ? Not certainly because na- 
 ture declares it ; for the faculties attain maturity- at different periods, in different lati- 
 tudes of the earth. In one latitude we are ripe at sixteen ; in another, not until 30 ; 
 and even among ourselves, we see many, under the age of twenty-one, who possess 
 more wisdom and more power of general usefulness, than can be found in others of 
 fifty ; far more than in those who have approached their second cloildhood. What is 
 there then, wliich indicates the precise period of twenty-one years, as the earliest at 
 which these riiembers of the ruling majority, may exercise the rights wliich belono- to 
 tliem ? This, and this only : that tlie rule which is furnished by nature, is unfit'^for 
 a state of society, and we are compelled, in our own defence, to adopt an arbitrary 
 rule of our own, wliich is better suited to our actual condition. There is no one 
 among us so wild and visionary, as to desire universal suffrage ; and yet it is perfectly 
 certain that, at the moment when you limit that right, in however small a decrree, you 
 depart from the principle that a majority shall rule. If you establish any disqualifi- 
 cation whatever, there is no natural necessity, nor even a moral certainty, that a ma- 
 jorit}' in any given community, will not come within the exception. A*iid this state 
 of things may by possibility, exist within every election district in the Common- 
 wealth : and thus you establish a rule, with reference to the mtire body, which is re- 
 jected in every constituent member of that body. Surely, gentlemen cannot claim the 
 benefit of a principle, which will not bear to be pushed "to its practical consequences; 
 a principle which they themselves are obliged to desert as unu-ise, unsafe and im- 
 practicable, in the details of actual Govermnent. 
 
 In truth. Mr. Chairman, there are no original principles of GovemmeyU at all. No- 
 vel and strange as the idea may appear, it is nevertheless, strictly true, in the sense 
 in which I announce it. There are no original principles, existmg in the nature of 
 things and independent of agreement, to which Government must of necessity conform, 
 in order to be either legitimate or philosophical. The principles of Government, are 
 those principles only, which the people who form the Government, choose lo adopt and 
 apply to themsehes. Principles do not precede, but spring out of Government. If this 
 should be considered a dangerous novelty in tliis age of iriiprovement, when all old 
 fashioned things are rejected as worthless ; let us test the doctrine by reference to ex- 
 amples. In Turkey, the Government is centered in one man; in England, it resides 
 in King, Lords, and Commons; and in the R.epublicsof the United Suites, we profess 
 to repose it in the people alone. The principles of all these Governments are essenti- 
 
70 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ally different ; and yet will it be said that the Governments of Turkey and England are 
 no Governments at all, or not legitimate Governments, because in them, the will of a 
 majority does not give the rule ? ^ Or, will it be said, that our own Governments are not 
 legitimate, because they do not conform to the despotic principles of Turkey, nor re- 
 cognise the aristocracy of England ? If there be these original principles at all, we 
 must presume that they are uniform in themselves, and universal in their application. 
 It will not do to say tliat there is one principle for one place, and another principle for 
 another place. The conclusion resulting from the reasoning of gentlemen will be, 
 that there is one Government in the world which is rcaUij a Government, rightful and 
 legitimate ; and all other forms of social compact, however long, or however firmly 
 established, are no Governments at all. Every Government is legitimate which springs 
 directly from the will of the people, or to which the people have consented to give al- 
 legiance. And I am not going too far, in asserting that Governments are free or 
 otherwise, only in proportion as the people have been consulted in forming them, and 
 as their rulers are directly responsible to them for the execution of their will. It mat 
 ters not what form they assume, nor who are the immediate depositories of political 
 power. It may suit the purposes of the people, as it once suited those of Rome, to 
 invest all authority in a Dictator; and if the people choose this form of Government; 
 if their interest and safety require that they shall submit to it, what original principle 
 is there which renders it illegitimate ? If the majority possess all power, they pos- 
 sess the power to surrender their power. And if it be just and wise that they should 
 do so, it is still their own Government, and no one can impugn its legitimacy. 
 
 I have thus, Mr. Chairman, endeavored to prove, that there is not in nature, nor 
 even in sound political science, any fundamental principle applicable to this subject, 
 which is mandatory upon us. We are at perfect liberty to choose our own principle ; 
 to consult all the circumstances which attend our condition, and to mould our Gov- 
 ernment as our interests and necessities may require. We are now to ascertain what 
 rule of representation, those interests and those necessities suggest, as wise, just and 
 expedient. 
 
 1 admit, as a general proposition, that in free Governrnents, power ought to be given 
 to the majority ; and why The rule is founded in the idea that there is an identity, 
 though not an cyu«,/i/!// of interests, in the several members of "the body politic: in 
 which case the presumption naturally arises, that the greater number possess the 
 greater interest. But the rule no longer applies, when the reason of it fails. And 
 liere we should be careful to remember, that the question does not relate to the admin- 
 istration of an actual Government. It is not contended that the Legislature, when 
 the Government shall go into operation, ought not to adopt the rule of a majority in 
 acts of ordinary Legislation. The question before us, is prior to actual Government: 
 it is not whether a majority shall rule in the Legislatvire, but of 2vhat elements that 
 majority shall be composed. If the interests of the several parts of the Commonwealth 
 were identical, it would be, we admit, safe and proper that a majority of persons only 
 should give the rule of political power. But our interests are not identical, and the 
 difference between us arises from property alone. We therefore contend that property- 
 ought to be considered, in fixing the basis of representation. 
 
 What, Sir, are the constituent elements of society ? Persons and property. What 
 are the subjects of Legislation ? Persons and property. Was there ever a society 
 seen on earth, which consisted only of men, women, and children .? The very idea of 
 society, carries with it the idea of property, as its necessary and inseparable atten- 
 dant. History cannot show any form of the social compact, at any time, or in any 
 place, into which property did not enter as a constituent element, nor one in which 
 that element did not enjoy protection in a greater or less degree. Nor was there ever 
 a society in which the protection once extended to property, was afterwards withdrawn, 
 which did not fall an easy prey to violence and disorder. Society cannot exist with- 
 out property ; it constitutes the full lialf of its being. Take away all protection from 
 property, and our next business is to cut each other's throats. All experience proves 
 this. The safety of men depends on the safety of property ; the rights of persons 
 must mingle in the ruin of the rights of property. And shall it not then be protected.? 
 Sir, your Government cannot move an inch without property. Are you to have no 
 political head ? No Legislature to make laws ? No Judiciary to interpret them ? No 
 Executive to enforce them.? And if you are to have all these departments, will they 
 render their services out of mere grace and favor, and for the honor and glory of the 
 thing ? Not in these money loving days, depend on it. If we would find patriotism 
 thus disinterested, we must indeed, go back to a period prior to Bible history. And 
 what are the subjects upon which the law-making power is called to act.? Persons 
 and property. To these two subjects, and not to one of them alone, is the business of 
 legislation confined. And of these two, it may be fairly asserted that property is not 
 only of equal, but even of more importance. The laws which relate to our personal- 
 actions, with reference to the body pohtic ; which prescribe the duties which we owe 
 to the public, or denne and punish crime, are comparatively few in number, and sim- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 71 
 
 pie in their provisions. And one half of these few find their best sancti(Jiis in public 
 opinion. But the ramifications of the rights of property, are infinite. Volume upon 
 volume, which few of us, I fear, are able to understand, ai"e required to contain even 
 the leading principles relating to them, and" yet new relations are every day arising, 
 which reqmre continual interpositions of the Legislative power. If then, Sir, pro- 
 perty is thus necessary to the very being of societ}' ; thus indispensable to every move- 
 ment of Government; if it be that subject upon which Government chiefly acts; is 
 it not, I would ask, entitled to such protection as shall be above all suspicion, and free 
 from every hazard .' It appears to me that I need only announce the proposition, to 
 secure the assent of every gentleman present. 
 
 Sir, the obligations of man in liis social state are two-fold ; to bear arms, and to pay 
 taxes for the support of Government. The obligation to bear arms, results from the 
 duty which sooiety owes him, to protect his rights of person. The society which pro- 
 tects me, I am bound to protect in return. Tiie obligation to pay taxes, results from 
 the protection extended to property. Not a protection against foreign enemies ; not a 
 protection by swords and bayonets merel}' ; but a protection derived from a prompt 
 and correct administration of justice ; a protection against the violence, the fraud, or 
 the injustice of my neighbor. In this protection, the owner of property is alone in- 
 terested. Here, then: is the plain agreement between Government on the one hand, 
 and the tax-paying citizen on the other. It is an agreement which results, of neces- 
 sity, from the social compact; and when the consideration is fairly paid, how canyon 
 honestly withhold tiie equivalent? Indeed, gentlemen adroit that property is entitled 
 to protection ; and that uur property is entitled to it, when they ofier us guarantees. 
 I shall have occasion to speak of these by and by ; at present I will only say, that 
 although they are certainly oifered in good faith, tliey would prove in practice, wholly 
 unavailing. 
 
 Let us now inquire of ichat kind, this protection must be, if we would give it any 
 value. I agree with the gentleman from Culpeper {Jslx. Green) that it cannot be any 
 thing short of a direct influence in the Government. 
 
 There is one consequence, supposed to resrdt from our doctrine on this subject, which 
 all the gentlemen opposed to us, seem to contemplate with a sort of horror : ''What." 
 say they, will you balance money against the bone and sinew of the countrj^ ? Will 
 you say "that fifty men on this side of tlie mountain, shall he counted against one hun- 
 dred and fifty on the other .'" 
 
 Sh, no man supposes that property should be represented eo 7io??ime ; it would be 
 grossly absurd to place a bag of guineas upon your table, and call it a constituent en- 
 titled to representation. We do not propose to represent money, but the rights and in- 
 terests ichich spring from the possession of iiioneij. This is not a metaphysical refine- 
 ment, an unmeaning distinction. It is easily comprehended, and it ought to remove 
 every shadow of odlaai from our proposition, considered in this view. If men enter 
 into the social compact upon unequal terms ; if one man brings into the partnership, 
 his rights of person alone, and another brings into it, equal rights of person and all 
 the rights of property beside, can they be said, to have an equal interest in the com- 
 mon stock.' Shall not he who has most at stake ; who has, not only a greater inter- 
 est, but a peculiar interest in society, possess an authority proportioned to that interest, 
 and adequate to its protection? I certainly do not mean to say, that the right of suf- 
 frage in the indicidual ought to be in proportion to his property ; that if a man own- 
 ing one thousand dollars is entitled to one vote, a man owning two thousand is en- 
 titled to two votes. I do not expect to be so understood after the admission which 
 I have already made, in announcing the precise limit to which my proposition extends. 
 Where there is an identity of interest, no difference should be made. in the rights of 
 the voter, in consequence of a difference in the extent or degree of that interest. But 
 where there is not this identity ; where there are different and distinct m.iQx&-6ts, exist- 
 ing in masses sufficiently large to form important objects in the Government, (as I 
 shall presently show is the precise case before us.) there tlie rule emphatically applies. 
 
 The view which we are now taking, presents a sufficient answer to an argument 
 urged the other day by the eloquent geiitleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Taylor.) He told 
 VIS that representative and constituent were correlative terms : that there could be no 
 notion of a constituent without a power of choice, and that it would be absurd to at- 
 tribute this power to a mass of metal. Sir, money is in no sense, the constituent. 
 Man is the constituent, and money has no other concern in the matter, than to regu- 
 late and graduate the rights and powers, wliich man, the constituent shall enjoy and 
 exercise. Such a constituent has more interest in the community than another, and 
 therefore he has, a natural right, if gentlemen please ; certainly a just right to a grea- 
 ter weight in the management of its concerns. 
 
 Here Mr. Upshur gave way for a motion of Mr. Taylor of Norfolk, that the Com- 
 mittee rise. The gentleman, he said, must feel exhausted, and it was not probable that 
 he could finish liis very able argument during the present sitting of the Committee : 
 
72 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 with a viev/, therefore, to the accommodation of the gentleman, as well as to allow 
 the Committee time for further reflection, he moved that it now rise. 
 
 The motion prevailed, the Committee rose, and thereupon the Convention immedi- 
 ately adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, Octobkr 28, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by 
 the Rev. Mr. Sykes, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhug-h, from the Committee on Compensation, reported, in part, as follows : 
 
 The Committee appointed to enquire into, and report on the compensation to be 
 allowed the officers of the Convention, have agreed to the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That five dollars per day be allowed each of the Clerks of this Conven- 
 tion, for every day's actual attendance on said Committees. Which was agreed to by 
 the Convention. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, the Convention then proceeded to the Order of the 
 Day, and again went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. P. P. Barbour in the Chair; 
 and the question still being on the following amendment, proposed by Mr. Green of 
 Culpeper, to the first resolution, reported by the Committee on tiie Legislative De- 
 partment of Government, which resolution reads as follows, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation, in the House of Delegates, 
 regard should be had to the white population exclusively, viz : to strike out the word 
 " exclusively,'' and to insert in lieu thereof ^' and taxation combined." 
 
 Judge Upshur continued his argument. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — I have to express my acknowledgments to the Committee for the 
 indulgence extended to me on yesterday ; an indulgence which I should not have 
 asked, had it not been necessary. 
 
 And now, it may perhaps, be proper, before entering further into the discussion, 
 that I should recapitulate, and I will do it in as few words as possible, the leading 
 propositions which it has been my object to prove. And I do this only that the con- 
 tinuity of the argument, may be preserved in the minds of such gentlemen as may 
 have been pleased to attend to it. I commenced with the broad proposition that there 
 is no original, abstract, a priori right, in the majority of any community, to control 
 the minority. That if such a right did exist at all, it must be either by positive agree- 
 ment, or by the law of nature. As it was not pretended that it existed by agree- 
 ment, I then endeavored to demonstrate that it was not derived from another and a 
 higher source. I admitted as a general proposition, (an abstract proposition, if gen- 
 tlemen prefer the terra,) that it might possibly be a safe general rule, that the majority 
 should govern. But here permit me to remark on the doctrine I subsequently ad- 
 vanced, that the allowing a portion of political power to property, does by no means 
 violate that rule. This may perhaps appear somewhat paradoxical, but it is suscepti- 
 ble of proof, without going very deeply into metaphysics. The question is as to what 
 time the principle shall apply. If it applies only after the Government has been es- 
 tablished, then those who established the Government, have already determined in 
 what form the right of the majority shall be exerted ; and, if they have said, that the 
 majority which governs shall be constituted in "part by wealth, and in part by the 
 number of people, the rule, that the majority shall govern, is not violated. But prior 
 to the existence of any Government, the question is, what rules it is icisest to adopt. 
 I am willing to admit, that after the Government has been established, and put into 
 operation, it is a safe and proper rule, that the will of a majority shall regulate the 
 administration of its affairs ; but this admission leaves the question still open, as to 
 the materials of which that majority shall be composed, 
 
 I further endeavored to prove, that it was a fair and just principle that property is 
 entitled to protection : first, because it is an important constituent element of society ; 
 without it, society could not exist for a moment, and if it did exist, could not move a 
 single inch : Secondly, because, in the operations of Government, as they are con- 
 cerned in legislation, the most numerous and most interesting class of subjects, on 
 which the power is to be exerted, are all derived from property, and intimately con- 
 nected with it. It must, therefore, necessarily receive protection, both in the form, 
 and in the fundamental principles of Government, of which, property is always a 
 part. 
 
 I will now proceed to the further development of this part of the subject. Sir, it 
 is worthy of inquiry, in what the principles for which we contend differ from those, 
 in defence of which, our ancestors of the American Colonies, felt themselves autho- 
 rised to enter into that great and arduous struggle, by which they shook off tlie yoke 
 of the mother country. What was, in the early days of the Revolution, the topic of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 73 
 
 complaint, which filled every mouth, and troubled every heart in these Colonies ? It 
 was the attempt to tax the people of the Colonies, without allowing them any voice 
 in the matter. Here, then, is our doctrine already established : a doctrine testified, 
 at the utmost hazard, by all the people of this country, that those who pay the taxes, 
 ought alone to have the power of imposing them. They declared it to be oppression 
 of the very worst kind, that they should be compelled to pay a tax, while the}- had 
 no voice in imposing it. But why was this doctnne any more true, when applied to 
 America and England, than in its bearing on matters now before us ? If it be a dic- 
 tate of eternal justice, that those who pay a tax ought to have a voice in the imposi- 
 tion of it, why is it not as just now, and here, as it was then, and there ? This is 
 that protection which property claims, and insists upon : and which it has always en- 
 joyed, under every Government, which has proved either lasting or wise. And v.-hy 
 does it require this particular form of protection ? In reply. I ask, when you lav a tax, 
 by what rule is it to be imposed .'' By the ability of the taxed party to pay ; and that 
 ability is regulated by the extent of his property. But, who can ascertain the extent 
 of that ability, but the party himself.? What right has another to judge of it 
 What right has the man who owns no land, to say to his neighbour, you own a 
 large and splendid farm, well stocked with slaves ; you ought to pay a tax of a thou- 
 sand dollars Would you not call it very presumptuous in him to undertake to 
 measure the extent and value of your property, and to fix the price at which you, 
 ought to purchase the protection of it from Government Would you not reply to 
 him, you cannot tell the labour, care and anxiety, attending the possession of this 
 property, nor form any idea at v/hat cost it is, that I derive the little income I receive 
 from this soil. You do not know how small that income is ; and would, no doubt, be 
 surprised to learn, that splendid as it seems to you, it does not yield me one half tlie 
 sum at which you say it ought to be taxed ?" And would not this be a fair answer ? 
 It is an admitted principle, that property must pay for its own protection ; but who 
 can tell what that protection is worth, so well as he who receives it ? Another man 
 knows little, or nothing about the matter. He may impose upon it a tax which is 
 greater than its annual income ; and if it be an annual tax, the owner would of 
 course rather surrender his property, than consent to paj^ it. 
 
 Again : 1 must remind the gentlemen, that they have admitted the principle, that 
 property must be protected, and protected in the very form now proposed ; they are 
 obliged to admit it. It would be a wild and impracticable scheme of Government, 
 which did not admit it. Among all the various and numerous propositions, lying upon 
 your table, is there one v/hich goes the length of proposing miivcrsal. sujjrage? 
 There is none. Yet this subject is in dii-ect connexion with that. Why do yon not 
 admit a pauper to vote ? He is a person : he counts one in your numerical majority. 
 In rights strictly personal, he has as much interest in the Government as any other 
 citizen. He is liable to commit the same offences, and to become exposed to the 
 same punishments as the rich man. Why, then, shall he not vote Because, there- 
 by, he would receive an influence over property ; and all who own it, feel it to be 
 unsafe, to put the power of controlling it, into the hands of those who are not the 
 owners. If you go on population alone, as the basis of representation, you will be 
 obliged to go the length of giving the elective franchise to every human being over 
 twenty-one years ; yes, and under tv/enty-one years, on whom your penal laws take 
 effect : an experiment, which has met with nothing but utter and disastrous failure, 
 wherever it has been tried. No, Mr. Chairman : Let us be consistent. Let us openly 
 acknowledge the truth ; let us boldly take the bull by the horns, and incorporate this 
 influence of property as a leading principle in our Constitution. We cannot be 
 otherwise consistent with ourselves. 
 
 I was surprised to hear the assertion made by gentlemen, on the other side, that 
 property can protect itself. What is the meaning of such a proposition ? Is there 
 any thing in property, to exert this self-protecting influence, but the political power 
 which always a tends it Is there any thing in mere property alone, in itself consi- 
 dered, to exert any such influence .? Can a bag of golden guineas, if placed upon 
 that table, protect itself? Can it protect its owner.? I do not knew what magic 
 power the gentlemen allude to. If it is to have no influence in the Government, 
 what and where is its power to protect itself.' Perhaps the power to buy clF vio- 
 lence ; to buy off" the barbarian who comes to lay it waste, by a reward which will 
 but invite a double swarm of barbarians to return nextj^ear. Is this one of the modes 
 alluded to .? This, I am well assured, never entered into the clear mind of the very- 
 intelligent gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Cooke.) How else, then, ma\- property be 
 expected to protect itself? It may be answered, by the influence which it gives to 
 its owner. But in what channels is that influence exerted ? It is the influence 
 which prevents the poor debtor from going against the will of his creditor ; which 
 forbids the dependent poor man from exerting any tiling like independence , either in 
 conduct or opinion ; an influence which appeals to avarice on both sides, and depends 
 for its effect on rousing the worst and basest of passions, and destroying all freedom 
 
 10 
 
74 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of will, all independence of opinion. Is it desirable to establish such an influence as 
 this ? an influence which marches to power through the direct road to the worst, and 
 most monstrous of aristocracies, the aristocracy of the purse ? an influence which 
 derives its effect ifrom the corruption of all principle, the blinding of the judgment 
 and the prostration of ail moral feeling ? and whose power is built on that form of 
 aristocracy, most of all to be dreaded in a free Government ? The gentleman ap- 
 peals to fact, and says that property always has protected itself, under every form of 
 Government. The fact is not admitted. Property never has protected itself long, 
 except by the power which it possessed in the Government. There may, indeed, ex- 
 ist in some part of the world, a form of Government like that which the gentlemen 
 wish to establish in the amended Constitution, where this influence is excluded ; but 
 if there does, it is utterly unknown to me. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I will submit to the gentlemen; not tauntingly, but respectfully, 
 and by way of illustration, this proposition. Will they agree to pay all the taxes and 
 to take all the representation.? Sa-, they will not accept the offer ; nor ought they to 
 accept it : it is not seriously made. But still it may serve in some degree to show how 
 necessary is the connexion between the duty of paying the tax, and the right of im- 
 posing it ; at tlie same time that it will indicate the only point on which we feel alarm. 
 
 Every view, Mr. Chairman, wliich 1 am capable of taking of this subject, has led 
 me to the conclusion that property is entitled to its influence in Government. But if 
 this be not true as a gmeral proposition, it is true as to vs. 
 
 Gentlemen have iallen into a great error both in their reasoning and in their con- 
 clusion, by considering the subject before us, as if we were now for the first time, en- 
 termg into a social compact. If we stood in the nakedness of nature, with no rights 
 but such as are strictly personal, we should all come together upon precisely equal 
 ground. But such is not the case. We cannot now enter into a new compact upon 
 the basis ol" original equality ; v/e bring more than our fair proportion, into the com- 
 mon stock. For fifty-four years we have been associated together, under the provi- 
 sions of an actual Government. A great variety of rights and interests, and a great 
 variety of feelings dear to the heart and connected Avith those rights and interests, 
 have grown up among us. They have grown up and flourished under a Government 
 whicli stood pledged to protect them ; that Government itself, was but a system of 
 pledges, interchangeably given among those who were parties to it, that all the rights 
 and all the interests which it invited into existence, should be protected by the power 
 of the whole. Under this system, our property has been acquired ; and we felt safe 
 in the acquisition, because under the provisions of that system, we possessed a power 
 of self-protection. And by whom was that system ordained ? Not indeed, by the 
 same men who are now here assembled, but by the same community, which is now 
 here represented. It was the yeople of Virginia, who gave us these pledges ; and it is 
 the people of Virginia who now claim a right to withdraw them. Sir, can it be fair, 
 or just, or honourable, to do this.'' The rights and interests which you are now seek- 
 ing to prostrate, you yourselves invited into being. Under your own distributions of 
 political power, you gave us an assurance that our property should be safe, for you put 
 the protection of it into our own hands. With what justice or propriety then, can 
 you now say to us, that the rights and interests which you have thus fostered until 
 they have become the chief pillars of your strength, shall now be prostrated; melted 
 into the general mass, and be re-distributed, according to your will and pleasure ? 
 Nay, Sir, you do not even leave us the option whether to come into your measures or 
 not. With all these rights, and all tliese interests, and all these feelings, we are to be 
 forced, whether willing or unwilling ; we are to he forced by the unyielding power of 
 a majority, into a compact whicli violates them all ! Is there not. Sir, something of 
 violence and fraud, in this ? Gentlemen are too courteous to suppose me capable of 
 charging iniquity of this sort, upon them. They have too just an estimate, both of 
 themselves and of me, to attribute to me so offensive a thought. If I really intended 
 to express it, it might indeed expose me to just censure ; but it would be worthless as 
 an argument. I urge this view of the subject, because I feel entirely assured, that if 
 gentlemen can discern either fraiid or violence in their measures, they will themseh'^es, 
 be the first to abandon them. 
 
 I am sensible, Sir, that there is nothing in this view of the subject, unless the rights 
 and interests to which I have alluded, are of a peculiar and distinctive character. 
 What then are they I purposely wave all subjects of minor importance, as too in- 
 considerable to give any rule. But a peculiar interest, and a great, and important, 
 and leadi t{>; interest, is presented in our slaves; an interest which predominates 
 throughout the Eastern divisions of the State, whilst it is of secondary consequence 
 West of the Blue Ridge. And what, let us now inquire, are its claims to considera- 
 tion 
 
 Will you not be surprised to hear. Sir, that the slave population of Virginia pays 30 
 per cent, of the whole revenue derived from taxation ? Did there ever exist in any 
 community, a separate and peculiar interest, of more commanding magnitude ? But 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 75 
 
 this is not all. It affords almost the whole productive labour of one half of the Com- 
 monwealth. What difference does it make whether a certain amount of labour is 
 brought into the common stock, by four hundred thousand slaves, or four hundred 
 thousand freemen ? The gain is the same to the aggregate wealth ; which is but an- 
 other name for the aggregate power, of the State. And here permit me to remark, 
 that of all the subjects of taxation which ever yet existed, this has been the most op- 
 pressively dealt with. You" not only tax our slaves as property, but you also tax their 
 labour. Let me illustrate the idea by an example. The farmer who derives his in- 
 come from the labour of slaves, pays a tax for those slaves, considered as property. 
 With that income so derived, he purchases a carriage, or a horse, and these again are 
 taxed. You first tax the slave who makes the money, and then you tax the article 
 which the money procures. Is not this a great injustice; a gross inequality.? No 
 such tax is laid upon the white labourer of the V\^est, ar.d yet the product of his la- 
 bour is of no more importance to the general welfare, than the same product from the 
 labour of slaves. Here then, is a striking peculiarity in our property ; a peculiarity 
 which sujects it to double impositions, and which therefore, demands a double security. 
 
 There is yet Sir, another view of this subject which is not only of importance with 
 reference to the immediate topic under consideration, but w^hich furnishes a strong ar- 
 gument against the change which gentlemen contemplate. One eleventh* of the 
 power which we possess in the national councils, is derived from slaves. We obtain 
 that power by counting three-fiflhs of the whole number, in apportioning representa- 
 tion among the several States. Sir, we live in times of great political changes. Some 
 new doctrine or other is broached almost every day ; and it is impossible to foresee 
 what changes in our political condition, a single year may bring about. Suppose a 
 proposition should be made to alter the Clonstitution of the United States in the parti- 
 cular now under consideration; what could Virginia say, after embracing such a basis 
 as gentlemen propose ? Would she not be told by those who abhor this species of 
 property, and who are restive under the power which it confers, 5^ou have abandon- 
 ed this principle in your own institutions, and with what face can you claim it, in 
 your connexions with us.''" What reply could she make to such an appeal as this.-* 
 Sir, the moral power of Virginia has always been felt, and deeply felt, in all the im- 
 portant concerns of this nation ; and that power has been derived from the unchang- 
 ing consistency of her principles, and her invincible firmness in maintaining them. 
 Is she now prepared to surrender it, in pursuit of a speculative principle of doubtful 
 propriety, at best, and certainly not demanded by any thing in her present condition.'' 
 If you adopt the combined basis proposed by the amendment, this danger is avoided. 
 You may then reply to the taunting question above supposed, " we have not abandon- 
 ed our principle ; on the contrary, we have extended it. Instead of three-fifths, all our 
 slaves are considered in our representation. It is true, we do not count them as nu ji, 
 but their influence is still preserved, as taxable subjects. The principle is the same, 
 although the modes of applying it may be difierent. V/ e are not inconsistent \\ath 
 ourselves." To my mind, there is much force in this argument, and I think that the 
 gentlemen opposed to us, to whom the influence of our common State is as dear as it 
 is to us, cannot but feel and acknowledge it. The topic is fruitful of imposing reflec- 
 tions ; but I will not pursue it farther. 
 
 I have thus endeavored to prove, Mr. Chairman, that whether it be right as a gene- 
 ral principle or not, that property should possess an influence in Government, it is 
 certainly right'as to us. It is right, because our property, so far as slaves are concern- 
 ed, is peculiar ; because it is of miposing magnitude ; because it affords almost a full 
 half of the productive labour of the State; because it is exposed to peculiar imposi- 
 tions, and therefore to peculiar hazards; and because it is the interest of the whole 
 Commonwealth, that its power should not be taken away. I admit that we have no 
 danger to apprehend, except from oppressive and unequal taxation; no other ir justice 
 can reasonably be feared. It is impossible tliat any free Government, can establish an 
 open and palpable inequality of rights. Resistance would be the necessary conse- 
 quence ; and thus the evil would soon cure itself. But the pow-er of taxation often 
 works insidiously. The very victim who feels its oppression, may be ignorant of the 
 source from which it springs. 
 
 Gentlemen tell us that our alarms are unfounded ; that even if we should give 
 them power to tax us at their will and pleasure, there is no danger that they will 
 ever abuse it. They urge many arguments to prove this ; and among the rest, they 
 tell us that there is no disposition among them, to practice injustice towards their east- 
 ern brethren. Sir, I do firmly believe it. It gives me pleasure to say, that in all my 
 associations with the people of the west, I have never had reason to doubt either their 
 justice or their generosity. And if they can give us a sure guarantee that the same 
 just and kind feelings which they now entertain, shall be transmitted as an inheri- 
 tance to their posterity forever, we will ask no other security.? But who can answer 
 
 * Judge Upshur corrects a mistake in his calculation. The proportion is about one sLxtli. 
 
76 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 for the generations that are to come. It is not for this day only, but I trust for distant 
 ages, that we are now laboring; we are very unwisely employed, if we are not making 
 provision for far distant times. And can gentlemen feel any assurance, thatunderno 
 change which time may work in our political condition, there shall be found any clash- 
 ing of interests, or any conflict of passions ? Will they, who are just noio be alwais 
 just, under whatever temptations of interest, or whatever excitements of the feelings ? 
 Shall there be no jealousies in time to come ? No resentments ? Nothing to mislead 
 the judjmen', even if it does not corrupt the feelings? Even if no disposition to op- 
 press us sh uld exist, how can we be assured that the people of the west shall view 
 their own acts in all time to come, in the same light in which they may appear to us ? 
 That which theij may consider mere justice, may appear to us as the worst oppression. 
 Surely it is not surprising that we should claim a right to say, whether we are op- 
 pressed or not. 
 
 Again. — We are told that slave-holders cannot be in danger, because in point of 
 fact, they comprise a majority of our white population. If so, it would seem to fol- 
 low that no good objection could be urged to the basis proposed by us ; it is the basis 
 required by the interests of the majority, and therefore right by our opponents' own 
 rule. Bat while the fact as stated, is literally true, the conclusion deduced from it, is 
 not so. How is this majority made up ? By counting the slave-holders in all parts 
 of the State ; by taking a few, scattered here and there, through the western coun- 
 ties, where slaves are scarcely considered at all, and if considered, are absorbed in 
 other and greater interests, and adding them to the numbers on this side the moun- 
 tain, where slaves constitute the leading and most important interest. I need not 
 press this view of the subject. It must be manifest to all, that the slave-holder of the 
 east cannot calculate on the co-operation of the slave-holder of the west, in any mea- 
 sure calculated to protect that species of property, against demands made upon it by 
 other interests, which to the western slave-holder, are of more importance and imme- 
 diate concern. 
 
 We are told also, that slave population is rapidly increasing to the west, and that in 
 a few years it will constitute a predominant interest there. If so. Sir, the same few 
 years will, upon the principles of our own basis, transfer to the west, the very power 
 which they are now seeking through another channel. They cannot lose niore by 
 waiting for this power, than we shall lose in the same time, by surrendering it. But, 
 Sir, although it is admitted that slave population is increasing to the west, yet its in- 
 crease is by a continually decreasing ratio. In the period between 1800 and 1810, the 
 ratio of increase was sixty-five and a half; between 1810 and 1820, it was forty-six; 
 and between 1820 and 1829, it was twenty-eight. Whence is this ? It arises from 
 causes which cannot for ages be removed. There exists in a great portion of the west, 
 a rooted antipathy to this species of popul tion ; the habits of the people are strongly 
 opposed to it. With them, personal industry, and a reliance on personal exertion, is 
 the order of society. They know how little slave labour is worth ; while their feel- 
 irigs as freemen, lorbid them to work by the side of a slave. And besides. Sir, their 
 vicinity to non-slave-holding States, must forever render this sort of property preca- 
 rious and insecure. It will not do to tell me that Ohio no longer gives freedom, nor 
 even shelter, to the runaway ; that Pennsylvania is tired of blacks, and is ready to 
 aid in restoring them to their owners. The moral sentiment of these States is against 
 slavery ; and that influence will assuredly be felt, notwithstanding the geographical 
 line or narrow river, which may separate them from us. And again. Sir, the course 
 of industry in the west, does not require slave labour; slaves will always be found in 
 the grain-growing and tobacco country alone. This is not now the character of the 
 western country, nor can it be, until a general system of roads and canals, shall facili- 
 tate their access to market. And when that time shall arrive, the worst evils which 
 we apprehend will have been experienced ; for it is to make these very roads and ca- 
 nals, that our taxes are required. 
 
 1 think Sir, it must be manifest by this time, unless indeed, my labovtr has been 
 wholly thrown away, that property is entitled to protection, and that our property im- 
 periously demands that kind of protection which flows from the possession of power. 
 Gentlemen admit that our property is peculiar, and that it requires protection, but 
 they deny to it the power to protect itself And what equivalent do they offer to us? 
 The best, I own, which it is in their power to devise ; and it cannot be doubted that 
 they offer it in perfect sincerity and good faith. It is due to them to say this, but 
 it is also due to us to say that they can give us no security, independent of political 
 power. They offer us Constitutional guarantees ; but of what value will they be to 
 us in practice ? No paper guarantee was ever yet worth any thing, unless the whole, 
 or at least a majority of the community, were interested in maintaining it. And this 
 is a sufficient reply "to an idea of the gentleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Taylor.) " Will 
 you," said he, trust your lives and liberties to the guarantees of the Constitution, 
 and will you not also trust your property Sir, every man in the community is in- 
 terested in the preservation of life and liberty. But what is the case before ua ? A 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 77 
 
 guarantee is offered us by that majority who claim to possess all po\yer, and who have 
 a direct and strong interest to violate their own pledges. In effect, it amounts to this. 
 Gentlemen are indeed, ready to give us their bond, provided we will permit them to 
 say whether they shall pay it or not. No guarantee can be worth a rush, if the very 
 men who give it, have the power to take it away. Suppose your guarantee shall be 
 violated, to whom are we to look for redress 1 Will the majority hold themselves re- 
 sponsible to the minority, for an abuse of their powers? To whom shall our com- 
 plaints be addressed ; on whom shall we call to relieve us from the unjust burthens 
 which bear us down to the earth ? On none, Sir, but the very men who have imposed 
 them. We may appeal from Caisar to Csesar himself, and that is the only sanction 
 Avhich is given to this law for our security. 
 
 But let us examine the guarantees which are offered. The first is a Constitutional 
 provision, that personal property shall never be taxed, except in a given ratio to land. 
 The first objection to this is, that it is wholly unphilosophical ; and must depend altogether 
 upon accident for its fitness, so far as slaves are concerned. There is no fixed and 
 uniform ratio between the value of slaves and of land. So far as labour is concern- 
 ed, there may be indeed, something like a ratio : for the value of land itself, and of 
 the labour which renders land productive, depend very much upon the same causes ; 
 and of course are subject to like fluctuations. But the value of slaves as an article of 
 property; and it is in that view only, that they are legitimate subjects of taxation ; 
 depends much on the state of the market abroad. In this view, it is the value of 
 land abroad, and not of land here, v/hich furnishes the ratio. It is well known to us 
 all, that nothing is more fluctuating than the value of slaves. A late law of Louisi- 
 ana reduced their value 25 per cent, in two hours after its passage was known. If it 
 should be our lot, as I trust it will be, to acquire the country of Texas, their price will 
 rise again. Thus it appears, that their value depends on causes wholly extrinsic to 
 us, and in no degree connected with the value of our soil. 
 
 But, even if tiiis ratio were suitable, it may be useful to inquire in what manner we 
 are to arrive at it, and what would be its operation upon society. You must either 
 value the whole personal property of the country, or only such parts of it as you pro- 
 pose to tax. Let us view the subject in each of these aspects. I venture to affirm, 
 that there cannot be a measure more directly hostile to the genius of free Governments, 
 than that which proposes to value the whole property of every citizen who lives un- 
 der it. Who is there that would submit to the exercise of such an inquisitorial pow- 
 er Nay, can any measure be more unwise among a people essentially commercial in. 
 their character. Credit is necessary to the very existence of trade. It will not do to 
 proclaim to the world, the uttermost farthing which a trading man is w^orth. It is not 
 his interest that it should be known : this might, and in most cases, would frustrate 
 the best planned speculations. But is it practicable to make this valuation.-* Will you 
 permit the assessor to go into your chambers ; to search among your wife's apparel for 
 concealed treasure ; to demand your purse, that he may count the dollars it contains ? 
 And, if you will not give him authority equal to all this, and more, what assurance can 
 you have that his valuation is correct .'' You will compel the tax-payer to swear. 
 And suppose he will not swear .'' Are you to excuse him trom paying his tax because 
 he will not tell you how much it ought to be ; or will you punish him for not telling .'' 
 Subject him io peine forte et dure, for resisting the impertinent exercise of an inquisi- 
 torial power ^ But suppose he xoill swear, and what then The humble farmer who 
 owes no man a shilling, and who is silently laying up his little gains from year to year, 
 careless of the reputation of wealth, has a direct interest to put the smallest possible 
 value, upon his taxable property. The less the assessor thinks him worth, the less 
 will he have to pay. The merchant who lives by credit, and whose profits depend on 
 the opinion which others may entertain of his wealth , has a direct interest to make 
 the amount as large as possible. Here then is an invitation to perjury on both sides ; 
 a fiscal law whose direct tendency is, to corrupt the purity of the main channel of 
 public justice ! Nay, this is not all. Even if the citizen be disposed to swear to the 
 truth, it is not always possible for him to do so. Suppose that A holds the bond of B 
 for a thousand dollars, and that B holds the property for which the bond was given ; 
 to which of the two shall that sum be assessed ? Not to B, because it is a debt which 
 he owes ; not to A, because the debt may never be paid. B may indeed, be taxed for 
 the property which the bond has purchased, but A cannot be taxed for its equivalent, 
 unless he will swear not only that the debt is due, but that the debtor is able to pay it. 
 Who is there that would venture to do this.^ Not one. 
 
 Let us now take the other alternative. Instead of valuemg all the property of the Com- 
 monwealth, let us suppose the valuation to be made of such articles only, as you pro- 
 pose to tax. Unless property is to have a fixed, permanent, and unalterable value : a 
 value which is to experience no change among all the changes which are going on 
 around us : you will be driven to the necessity of making your valuations so frequent, 
 that the expenses of collection would add seriously to the burthen of taxation. And 
 you could not do otherwise, than make them frequent, for property is continually 
 
78 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 changing hands ; and he who, to-day, is liable to a heavy tax, may not, to-morrow, 
 possess a single taxable subject. This Sir, must necessarily prove a fruitful source of 
 discontent and murmuring. There is no man, whose justice is so unimpeachable, or 
 whose skill is so great, as to satisfy every one, in the discharge of this delicate duty. 
 Even in this view, the plan must be pronounced altogether unwise. But at what time 
 is the valuation to be made ? You must make it either at the moment of passing your 
 tax law, or before, or after it. If at the same time, the Legislature themselves must be 
 the assessors ? Here then you have all the play in your own hands. It is the same to 
 me, whether you value my property at two hundred dollars, and tax me five per cent, 
 or value it at one hundred dollars, and tax me ten per cent. I pay the same svim in 
 both cases. Of what value then, is your guarantee, if the same power which taxes 
 my property, shall possess the right to mZ«c it ? But, suppose your valuation to be 
 made by a different power, and hcfore the tax law is passed ? What articles shall be 
 valued There is no law to guide the assessor ; no law which declares what articles 
 you mean to tax, and what you do not mean to tax. The consequence is, that every 
 thing must be valued : the same impertinent scrutiny which I have already supposed, 
 must be made in this case also ; a scrutiny which would not fail to raise up more than 
 one Wat Tyler in every county of the Commonwealth. But there is yet another 
 horn of the dilemma. Suppose your valuation made, after the tax law is passed. 
 It is the peculiar office of that law to fix upon the taxed subject, an ad valorem value : 
 and this I presume, must always be regulated by the wants of the country. But how 
 can you tell what rate per centum on property, is necessary to raise a given sum, un- 
 less the value of that property is previously ascertained ? Either w^ay, therefore, this 
 scheme must be abandoned as wholly impracticable. 
 
 The next guarantee which gentlemen ofl:er us, is a check on the power of appro- 
 priation. Much of the reasoning which has already been urged, would tend to prove 
 that this also, would afford us no protection whatever. For myself, however, I desire 
 no such guarantee ; I should regret to see such a restraint imposed upon the power of 
 the Legislature. My principle is this : As the payer of the tax, I have a right to be 
 the judge of my ability to pay, and of the value of that protection for which I pay. 
 But when my money has gone rightfully into the public fund, God forbid that it should 
 not be applied wherever it may be most needed. It would rejoice me personally, to 
 see every cent of it contributing to useful improvements beyond the mountain. I do 
 not want any part of it back again ; let it go wherever it will do the most good. 
 
 These, Sir, are the only Constitutional provisions which are offered us, in lieu of ' 
 that power which we claim, as belonging of right to our greater stake in the Govern- 
 ment, and as rendered necessary by the hazards to which our property is exposed. 
 The conclusion to which I have arrived, (and I congratulate the Committee that I am 
 fast drawing to a close,) is this : It is necessary to the well being, and even to the very 
 existence of society, that property should be protected ; it cannot in any case, and least 
 of all, in our own case, hope for protection, except in the power of protecting itself; and 
 no adequate substitute for that power, has been, or can be offered, in any other form of 
 Constitutional provision. And now, permit me to ask, with whom can this power be 
 most saf el u deposited? I grant, Sir, that gentlemen opposed to us, are equally patri- 
 otic in their feelings; equally just in their purposes, and equally sincere in their de- 
 clarations, with ourselves. Still, I ask, even upon the very principle of this equalit}'-, 
 where can the political poAver of this Commonwealth, be most safely deposited ? So 
 far as riglits of person are concerned, we are a.ll precisely equal, and the slave-holder 
 can have no imaginable motive to do injustice in that respect. In the exercise of the 
 tax-laying power, from which alone, injustice is to be apprehended, he has not the 
 power to make any injurious discrimination. Among all the articles which have ever 
 yet been made the subjects of taxation within this Commonwealth, which of them is 
 not found on this side of the mountain, in just and fair proportion, at least? How, 
 then, can we tax the west, without also taxing ourselves, in the same mode, and in 
 just proportion? But reverse the case. There is not in the west, in any considerable 
 degree, owe species of property which constitutes the full half of our wealth, and 
 which has always presented a ready subject for taxation. Give the power to the 
 west, and will there be no temptation to abuse it ? no temptation to shake off the pub- 
 lic burthens from themselves, and throw an unjust proportion of them upon the slave- 
 holder? Sir, there is much in this view of the subject. I am not indulging in mere 
 speculation and conjecture. The experiment has been actually tried. For fift}'-four 
 years, the taxing power has been with with us, and who can say that it has ever been 
 abused ? The gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Cooke) himself, has admitted that we 
 have never abused it. I heard the admission with great pleasure ; it was honourable 
 to his candour, and valuable to us, for the source from which it sprung. Why, then, 
 change this deposit of power, which has been thus justly and safely exercised for 
 more than half a century? Shall we, for the sake of mere theoretical principles, or 
 speculative doctrines, throw our interests and our safety, upon new and hazardous 
 experiments ? Let us not forget, Sir, that after all, Government is a practical thing, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 79 
 
 and that Government is best v/hicli is best in its practical results. "There is no end of 
 speculative systems. Tiie world has been full of them, from Plato, down through 
 Harrinofton and Moore, and a host who succeeded them, even to tlie prolific bureaux 
 of the French revolutionists. Of all their schemes, not one has ever been reduced 
 to practice, in any part of the world. Experience is the best guide in Government. 
 That guide we have; let us not shut our eyes to the lights which it affords us. For 
 more than half a century, the political power of this Commonwealth, has been in the 
 hands which nov/ hold 'it. During all that time, it has not been abused. Is it tlien 
 without cause, that I ask for a good reason why it should now bt taken away.'' 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now rose and addressed the Conunittee in answer to Judges 
 Green and Upshur, as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman. — Although I had not the least expectation of embarking in this dis- 
 cussion, at the present time, yet seeing no one disposed to reply to the argmnent just 
 concluded, (Judu-e Upshur's) I feel myself irresistibly invoked to submit a few re- 
 marks, in answer both to the gentleman from Northampton (Judge Upshur) and to 
 tlie gentleman from Culpeper (Judge Green.) From want of proper time for ar- 
 rangement, my remarks will be more desultory than 1 could wish, and I fear too 
 diffuse for my own purpose, which is brevity ir. this debate. Having been the mover of 
 the resolution under consideration in the Legislative Committee, I should not feel my- 
 self justified in permitting a vote to be taken until further discussion, whicli it is both 
 my wish and my hope to elicit. In pursuing this subject, I feel myself both relieved 
 and delighted, by the frank and friendly course of the gentlemen from Northampton 
 and Culpeper, and particularly by that sinceritj^ which the former displayed towards 
 those opposed to him. Both gentlemen have furnished an example, to us wliich I 
 hope to imitate, while they have lessened our labours by such a candid statement of 
 the principles relied on to support the amendment under consideration, as leaves us 
 no room for doubt. 
 
 The gentleman from Northampton, yesterda}^, carried us back to the original state 
 of man, m order, thence, to deduce the elements of the social state. His remarks 
 were of such a general character, as not to require from me a close or critical exami- 
 nation. So far as the natural or supposed savage state of man has been referred to, 
 the effort is entitled to the reproof of the late Judge Asliurst, in which the gentleman 
 from Northampton more forcibly seems to concur. By botli, tliis course is condemn- 
 ed as a vain effort to end our researches into the present rights and condition of so- 
 ciety, in that rude chaos from which society is supposed to have originally sprung. 
 I agree with the gentleman from Nortliampton, that if man ever existed in a savage 
 state, in which he was under no control of Government, we must go back to a pe- 
 riod anterior to Bible history, to find liim. Although the barbarous tribes on our 
 borders obey no written code, they have their unwritten laws, to which they yield 
 obedience ; wliich they not only permit to exist, but assist to execute. In our wil- 
 derness, we find not that supposed state of savage life, to v.diich in disquisitions of 
 tliis kind, reference is so often made. If this forced state of man ever existed, I -will 
 agree with the gentleman from Northam.pton, that, what he calls a " feeling of pro- 
 perty," may have been one of the strongest inducements for leaving it, and for seek- 
 ing in social life, and under a social compact, security for that property. This secu- 
 rity consisted in the force of society, and it was for this, that man subjected himself 
 to the restraints of the social compact ; and as, in the nature of things, this force 
 abides with the majority, man and his property became subject to their will. Of this 
 position, I will say more hereafter, when I shall notice the gentleman's views of 
 the rights of majorities, and contrast them witli, what he supposes to be, those of 
 minorities. 
 
 The gentleman from. Northampton has said, that our Constitution is a compact 
 made by all, for the benefit of all ; that if there was in the majority a right to govern 
 and control society, it must be derived, either from the law of nature, or from a Con- 
 ventional source ; and if firom the latter, we must look for it in our wTitten Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Here the gentleman first touched Virginia ground, and alluded to Virginia history ; 
 and here it is my purpose to meet liim, and to follow him with frankness through 
 each postulate maintained in his most able and eloquent argument. 
 
 Although not for the purpose of questioning its legal obligation, I deny the very 
 first assumption of fact stated by the gentleman. The Constitution of Virginia is not 
 a pact ••' made by all, for the benefit of all." It is well known, that the present Con- 
 stitution was got up in a time of difficulty and danger. It was adopted as an expe- 
 dient for existing circumstances, to serve the purposes of the time, and not looked 
 upon as an instrument which would meet the wants and bear the test of experience 
 for future ages. So far from all the members of society having had an agency in 
 making this Constitution, none were, even, consulted except freeholders, and those 
 only of a certain class, holding fifiy acres of cultivated, or one hmidred of uncultiva- 
 ted- land 3 the property quahiication then, being double what it is now. The Con- 
 
80 
 
 DEBATJiS OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 vention which made the election law under which that of 177G was elected, was no 
 other than the last House of Burgesses elected under the Colonial Constitution. 
 When tliey were dissolved by an act of regal authority, they were reduced to the 
 condition of so many private gentlemen freeholders. They possessed at least the 
 confidence of the freeholding class of the community, of which their recent elections 
 to the House of Burgesses was evidence. To the condition of private gentlemen 
 they were constitutionally reduced ; for the very act by which they were dissolved, 
 was that by which the whole regal Government, of which they were but a part, was 
 ended. Before their dissolution, they constituted only one of three legislative branches, 
 yet when they met in March, and styled themselves a Convention, they assumed the 
 exercise of all the powers of Government. In their March session, they passed ma- 
 ny laws and resolutions, by the last of which, they declared that their powers were 
 at an end. The country submitted to their authority, which it was wise to do, in the 
 existing state of things. Seeing this, the members met again, and held another ses- 
 sion, in the months of May and June, 1775 ; in the latter of which months, they pass- 
 ed an election law, which is the basis of that which now exists ; and under this lr,w, 
 the Convention of 1776, who made our present Constitution, were elected. 
 
 When this election law was made, 'f'y whom was it made ? to whom addressed 
 and by whom accepted and executed ? The answers to these questions are plain, and 
 are so many historical truths. The Convention of 1775, have certainly earned to 
 themselves the thanks and gratitude of posterity ; but this consideration by no means 
 alters the facts. They were a body of freeholders, of a certain class, who, unautho- 
 rised by the whole, or any part of the people, assumed authority. They authorised 
 that class of freeholders to which they belonged, to elect others of the same class, as 
 their successors, and these latter made the present Constitution. The Constitution 
 thus made is, therefore, not a compact, made by "all, for the benefit of all," as has 
 been said, but by a part of society, for the benefit of that part, in a very great degree. 
 Had there been but one class of men in Virginia at the time, holders of the necessary 
 quantity of country or town property, the Constitution might have been considered 
 as the agreement of all, for the common benefit; and for aught I know, might have 
 been adapted to the wants and exigencies of future times. This, however, was not 
 the case. The Convention of 1770', did little more than to continue the existing state 
 of things. In the place of the old House of Burgesses, they erected the House of 
 Delegates, while the Legislative Council gave place to the Senate ; each new branch 
 possessing precisely the powers, and privileges of its predecessor ; and the members 
 possessing the same qualifications respectively, and elected by the same electors. The 
 Executive head was, alone, substantially changed. 
 
 Mr. Chairman : I have made the foregoing remarks, as I have already mentioned, 
 not to disprove the legal authority of the present Government, but for another, and 
 very different purpose. When we shall come at the discussion of the resolution con- 
 cerning the right of suffrage, the foregoing remarks will serve to show who they 
 were, who, not having been consulted in the formation of the present Constitution, 
 will have a right to be consulted on the adoption of that which it is now proposed to 
 make. 
 
 The greatest grievance proposed to be remedied, is the inequality in the represen- 
 tation, and this especially in the House of Delegates ; the next, in point of magnitude 
 and general concern, is the freehold restriction on the electoral franchise. The latter 
 of these will claim more particular attention, when the third resolution of the Legis- 
 lative Committee shall come under consideration. As to the first, the distribution of 
 representation, as conferred by the Royal charter of Government, may have been to- 
 lerably fair and equal at the date of that charter. There were then but few counties 
 or settlements, perhaps not more than six or seven, in the Colony. They were all 
 contiguous ; they had but one interest, and but one pursuit, which was agricultural. 
 Each county had its frontier. When war existed on the border, it affected all ; when 
 peace reigned, all enjoyed it alike. In process of time, this state of things became 
 materially changed. When the settlements extended far from the Capital, owing to 
 the unprotected state of the country, and the sparseness of population, frontier coun- 
 ties were exposed to almost continual wars, while the interior enjoyed the blessings 
 of profound peace. With few, and but short intervals, this state of things continued 
 until Wayne's victor3^ Whatever may have been the justness, or equality of repre- 
 sentation, at the beginning of the Royal Government, great changes were made be- 
 fore the Revolution. Around Williamsburg, the seat of Government, counties and 
 settlements were sub-divided into small precincts, to each of which a representation 
 of two members in the House of Burgesses was allowed, while no more was allowed 
 to the large counties farther removed from the influence of Executive favor, and to 
 those on the frontier. No more, indeed, was allowed to all West Augusta. Hence, 
 if we look at the map, we will perceive representation distributed in double, treble, or 
 even quadruple proportions round Williamsburg ; and this representation grew up to 
 be so unequal, and the consequent evils so intolerable, as no longer to be borne with. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 81 
 
 In consequence, public opinion,. in 1816, was brought to bear on the Senate, and in 
 the session whicli commenced in that year, representation in that body, was distribu- 
 ted and apportioned on the basis of white population. I mention this fact now, in or- 
 der to meet and refute a positive assertion, here and elsewhere, that the proposition 
 to equalize representation on the basis of white population, is a nevr, cruel, and un- 
 heard of innovation I 
 
 Since the year 1700, scarcely one session passed, in which petitions were not re- 
 ceived in the General Assembly, prapng for a reform of abuses in this particular, and 
 in the law of suffi-age. From the counties of Patrick and Henry , these petitions were 
 as regularly looked for as tlie commencement of tlie session. In iSlo, a bill was 
 brought into the House of Delegates, for making a new arrangement of the counties 
 in districts, for the choice of Senators, on this very abused white basis. At tliat time 
 two-fiflhs of the free white population, were represented by four Senators, wliile the 
 other three-fifths had tvscnty. This inequality was sensibly felt by those of our citi- 
 zens who lived west of the Blue Rido-e ; and it is impossible for any gentleman to re- 
 sist the conviction, that from that inequality, there must have resulted much misrule 
 and practical evil. Every exertion was made, bv western members, to pass that bill. 
 Every effort, however, tailed. The bill was naifed to the table -after the second read- 
 ing, and although motions were repeatedly made to take it up for consideration, they 
 were scornfully rejected, by a silent vote. 
 
 At this time, 1;1.5. there was not. in the House, one eastern constitutional lawyer, 
 who did not maintain that no Legislative act could chano-e the districts. They argued, 
 that the same power that madelhe Constitution, had ordained the districts, -and that 
 they were as sacred as the Constitution itself, and could only be altered by a general 
 Convention of the people. 
 
 One of the natural consequences of this doctrine was. that large assemblage of dis- 
 tinguished men, commonly called the Staunton Convention of 1>16. That body ad- 
 dressed to the General Assembly, of lc'16, an able memorial, praying for tire passage 
 of a law, to take the sense of the people on calling a C nivention. iS'umerous peti- 
 tions were, at the sauie^time, received irom various quarters of tlie State, on the same 
 subject, and uniting in tJie same prayer. All who felt deeply ao-grieved by the unjust 
 rule of apportionment, looked forward to such a lavv . and to a Convention, as the only 
 means of redress. Ail demanded that basis which we now demand. The bill which 
 grew out of those memorials, and petitions, provided for taking the sense of the peo- 
 ple, on the expediency of calling a Convention, with power to consider the propriety 
 of adopting certain amendments. Tiie friends of re, ■:':■.']. d' ; not then suppose the 
 people prepared for one with full powers like the pr^ - amendments propos- 
 
 ed, were, first, to equalize rcprcscmaiiuii aincng the j) - -yjjle acccrding to num- 
 
 hers ; second, to equahze tlie land-tax. To these was aaaed a xinrd, on the motion of a 
 member from Fairfax, amended bv his colleague, to extend the right of sutlrage to all 
 free white male citizens, twentv-one vears of age, wlio have evidence of perma- 
 nent common interest with, and attachment to. "tiie communitv."' — The words of the 
 Bill of Rights. 
 
 The bill passed in that limited form. It provided for taking the sense of the people 
 on so amending the Constitution, as to extend the right of sulTrage : to equalize re- 
 presentation on the basis of vrhite population, and to equalize the land-tax. After in- 
 effectual struggles to strike out the first and second clauses, it passed the House of 
 Delegates, and was sent to the Senate. The ma-joiitv in th- TT i;.-^- . outiiis vote, re- 
 presented more than three-fiiths of tlie vrhole white inhab/ : ^'iitlenian. then 
 from Norfolk borough, and now a member of tills Coiiven cd that bill with 
 all his zeal. In its progress, he moved an amendment to it, t j m.ruuuce a representa- 
 tion of slaves. Whether, he intended a representation of all, or three-fifths onhv , 1 
 cannot undertake to say, as no proposition was made to fill the blank in tliis amend- 
 ment. This proposition was maintained, by ihe gentleman fi-om 2Ncrfclk, with the 
 most eloquent and cogent exertions of his matchless powers. I have ever yet heard. 
 He was opposed by so.ne of those who are opposed to him n r.v : a.i.i n twilhstanding 
 his exertions, to tiie best of my recollection, there were but tv e:it;, --'.x votes on his 
 side, in the whole H^)use of Delegates. (\ '\ ■ :;se numoer, I cann it be certain. 
 The proposed amendment appears on the J i the vote, but not the number on 
 either side. Had that bill passed the SenaL.-, .... . .iventicn, then to be called, v\-ould 
 
 have represented the free white population accorJmg to numbers ; and it is so far from 
 being new and unheard of, that the demand for it in tliat session, and its establish- 
 ment in the Senatorial bill of the same session, form parts of our record history. 
 
 When this bill was sent to the Senate, it was for a time laid on the table, and not. 
 acted on. Tiie reason was as bUows : The belief was suggested, and had gained 
 ground, that some eastern Constitutional lawyers had changed their opinions touch- 
 ing the power to leoislate over the districts, and iiopes were entertained, that in or- 
 der to tranquilize the public mind for a while, like tlir owing a tub to the vvhale, they 
 would bring in a bill to equalize the Senatorial Districts, and to apportion represen- 
 
 11 
 
82 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tation in the Senate on the basis of free white population, which would relieve the 
 Senate from the responsibility of accepting or rejecting the Convention bill. These 
 hopes were not disappointed"- for the opposers of a Convention brought in a bill to 
 equalize the districts, and to apportion representation accordingly, and passed it. 
 This bill is at present the law, and it establishes the Senate as the representative of 
 the free white population, in equal numbers. Thus, in one and the same session, 
 there were those politicians, who opposed and supported that very basis, which they 
 now denounce as so new, unheard of, cruel and oppressive. That pure element was 
 thus sustained, and is supported by the precedent then made, of so changing the dis- 
 tricts from time to time, as to give to it its proper vigour. Nevertheless, there was, 
 even then, some cause to complain. The only tabular statement of population in 
 our power, was the Census of 1810, and from this the state of population had chang- 
 ed, so as to produce about the same injustice which the last General Assembly would 
 have inflicted, if they had based our present representation here, on the Census of 
 1B20, instead of the more gross injustice of establishing it on that of 1810. From 
 these facts, Mr. Chairman, we perceive that our basis has been solemnly settled, and 
 this not rashly, but after meeting opposition from the first talents in the land. 
 
 The change in the Senate was publicly known. It could not be concealed, as it 
 not only appeared in the Statute Book, but affected the elections of the three follow- 
 ing years, in giving to the new principle its full operation. This was not fully ac- 
 complished, until the election of 1820 ; and the Census of that year, shewed the 
 people the extent of the inequality yet remaining, and which, accordmg to the pre- 
 cedent of 1816, may be corrected after the next enumeration, by a new arrangement 
 of districts. I admit tliat after power had thus, partially, changed hands in the Se- 
 nate, the public mind rested from its excitement, and took a breathing spell, vintil the 
 autumn of 1824, and spring and summer of 1825. During this period, the represen- 
 tation in the House of Delegates, and a proposition to equalize it on the white basis, 
 became the subjects of newspaper controversy. Writers on one side endeavored, by 
 exposing the misrule of the minority, and the evil tendency of that rule, to awaken 
 public attention to the subject, and to bring about reform. On the other hand, at- 
 tempts vv^ere made to alarm the people. They were taught to believe that those who 
 proposed to reform, meant to destroy ; that the judicial tenure of office, the right of 
 suffrage, and even property:' of a certain description, nay, all that was valuable in so- 
 ciety, would be hazarded by the call of a Convention. It was then maintained, as it 
 is now maintained, that the majority suffered no practical evil from the government 
 of the minority. Out of these discussions, arose the second meeting at Staunton, 
 called the Staunton Convention of July 1825. That Convention was a body which 
 would have suffered but little disparagement by a comparison with this. It contained 
 upwards of one hundred delegates of the friends of reform. They came from the 
 borders of the State ; from the east to the west ; from the sea to the Ohio. Their 
 object was to increase the numbers, and strengthen the confidence of tlieir friends; 
 and to weaken and reduce the number of their opponents, by publishing to the whole 
 Commonwealth the grievances of which they complained, and the redress they 
 sought. In a word, they intended to act on public opinion, and in this they succeed- 
 ed. Their coincidence in opinions and views was remarkable. It was matter of as- 
 tonishment to themselves. They acted openly ; they sat publicly, and kept and pub- 
 lished a journal containing their proceedings and resolves. By their resolves, they 
 claimed reformation of representation on the white basis ; the reduction of numbers 
 in the House of Delegates ; the abolition of the Executive Council ; a more respon- 
 sible Executive, and an extension of the right of suffrage to all those, whether freehol- 
 ders or not, who have evidence of common interest and permanent attachment. This 
 journal was published in all the Gazettes. It was communicated to the General As- 
 sembly, and together with the memorial of that meeting, and the petitions of the 
 people, became the subject of the most grave and animated discussions in the three 
 following sessions, and until in that of 1827, their prayer was granted by the passage 
 of the law for taking the public sense on calhng a General Convention. All those 
 principles were again discussed last winter, during the progress, and on the passage 
 of the law under which we are now assembled. I will briefly notice the proceedings 
 of last winter on this subject. The bill for organizing a Convention, was prepared 
 arid reported early in the session. It proposed representation by the Congressional 
 Districts. This scheme was resorted to, to give representation in this body for three- 
 fifths of the slaves, or what is called the Federal number. It was maintained on that 
 ground most perseveringly, until towards the close of the session. The principle was 
 then called the black basis, and it became so odious within these walls, and through- 
 out the country, that its friends were compelled to abandon it. It was perceived, 
 however, that if their arguments proved any thing to sustain a representation of 
 three-Jifths, they equally sustained a representation of all the slaves. From the mo- 
 ment that it was determined to abandon the black basis, the bill was sustained as one 
 founded on the very combined ratio proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper, now 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 83 
 
 under consideration. Some of those who had, by argument, maintained the black 
 basis, denied that any thing but a basis of population and taxation, was ever contem<> 
 plated, and they wound up their efforts by endeavoring to shew that the arrangement 
 of Congressional Districts, reasonably effected their new pretensions, and had been 
 resorted to for that purpose. After all this, it would be paying but a poor compliment 
 to the intelligence of our constituents, to suppose them ignorant that the white basis 
 would be here claimed, and that the battle between that and a compound one of 
 some sort, would be the one most severely contested. la this brief review of the 
 proceedings of last winter, I speak with confidence, and to the memories of many 
 gentlemen now present, who must sustain me wlien I say, that the friends of the mi- 
 nority in this Convention, have commenced here, precisely where they ended last 
 winter. It was then said, that if one slave ought to be represented, all ought, and 
 in the form of taxation, the same thing is now claimed by the combined ratio of the 
 gentleman from Culpeper. It is the same principle, in disguise. After the candid 
 admissions of the gentlemen from Northampton and Culpeper, proof of this has be- 
 come unnecessary. Whether you count him as a whole man, or as a fraction, it is 
 still the same question, covered, indeed, by a few flowers and flounces, but it cannot be 
 concealed, that a slave representation lies at the bottom of the combined ratio. Both 
 gentlemen admit that, but for the purposes of security for that species of property, 
 the principle would not be insisted on. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I will now proceed to notice more particularly, and in their order 
 of time, several postulates urged by the gentleman from Northampton. 
 
 Although that gentleman had agreed, that in order to settle our rights in the social, 
 nothing could be deduced from the natural state of man, whether considered as a re- 
 ality or as a fiction, I understood him to take up and espouse the position of the gen- 
 tleman from Culpeper, that the rights spoken of in the Declaration, are such as 
 were natural, and do not pertain to the social state." To this position, the words in 
 the first section of that Declaration are a conclusive answer, i. e. All men are by 
 nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, 
 when they enter into society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their 
 posterity ; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and 
 possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." Now it is 
 manifest, that what is here spoken of, are those a priori rights, which are supposed to 
 exist in a state of nature, and are retained to man in society, so as to be social rights, 
 secured by the social compact. 
 
 The gentleman from Northampton, however, qualified the position of his friend, by 
 supposing him to have said that, " no man in a social state, has a natural right to con- 
 trol another." This may be true, and yet, in order to pursue happiness and safety, or 
 even to acquire and possess property, a majority may well be supposed to possess the 
 right, both natural and social, to prevent the minority from ruling them ; from con- 
 troling their actions, and from endangering their lives, liberty, properties or safety. 
 I will say nothing as to the suppositious case of one savage tribe of hunters on this 
 continent, dictating law to another of fishermen, on the isles of another. Nor will I 
 follow the gentleman either to the first family of the human race, or into the enquiry, 
 80 oflen made and so oflen answered, why females, infants and lunatics are not count- 
 ed as parts of society in settling the question of what majority should rule. The 
 common sense and experience of mankind has determined that there is a state of in- 
 fancy and a state of maturity, and the necessity, in all climes, of fixing on a certain 
 period of human life at wliich, for legal purposes, the one shall terminate and the 
 other commence. As to lunatics, the same common sense has excluded them for 
 want of mind. All the excluded cases are founded on, either the imbecility of mind, 
 or its subjection to the will of another, whereby it loses its freedom. The exclusion 
 of the other sex, has been most eloquently accounted for by the gentleman himself. 
 Of woman he says, that the fiat of God which brought her into existence, subject- 
 ed her to the will of her husband." 
 
 I dismiss all these speculations, as more calculated to amuse than instruct us, and 
 proceed to the postulates of the gentleman from Northampton, which belong to the 
 subject in dispute, and serve to explain it. The first ground insisted on is, that there 
 are two majorities to be considered : one of persons, and the other of interests, both 
 of which he contends ought to be counted, in order to arrive at and ascertain the 
 majority which is entitled to rule. The gentleman has pushed his principles farther, 
 and has contended that when men enter into society and form the social state, each 
 brings with him his person and his property. Whether, indeed, on entering into so- 
 ciety, man and his property become parts of that society, is a question which I will 
 consider, briefly, as that is one of those in dispute. One Indian, we aj-e told, enters 
 society with two bows and arrows ; another with one, and a third with none, while 
 another brings nothing but his age, his infirmities and his wants. From these facts, it 
 is attempted to draw the conclusion, that he who brings the most property to protect, 
 is entitled to the most influence in Government, instead of the obvious one, that he 
 
84 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ehould be subjected to the greatest share of the expenses of its protection. It has 
 certainly been left to the men of Virginia of the present day, to make this discovery 
 in tht2 science of Government; for 1 may safely challenge them to produce any au^ 
 thority for it,, ancient or modern. To get alongwith this argument, it was found ne- 
 cessarj'- to denounce the principles laid down in the Declaration of Rights, which 
 have already been nanctioned by an unanimous vote of this Convention. Their ar» 
 gmnent is, not that men alone constitute society, but that property enters into and 
 forms a component element of it. The interests growing out of property, they say, 
 must be represented. He who owns a tobacco field, must have repxcsentation for that 
 interest, as well as his person. Not only do the gentlemen contend that the protec- 
 tion of property is one of the great ends of Government, but that, inasmuch as rights 
 to property require more legislation to define and protect them than personal rights 
 do, it IS the principal and greatest end of Government. Property, then, it seems, is 
 more entitled to consideration than persons. Simple laws, it is said, are sufficient for 
 all personal rights, while those required for property are complex and voluminous. It 
 seeais that a large code of laws are requisite to define and protect our rights to a knife 
 and fork, and tT understand them the consumption of a thousand lamps ; while those 
 that concern our persons, may be studied in a week. By this course of reasoning, 
 gentlemen have arrived at their conclusions as to the greatness of the interests of 
 property, and the comparative littleness of all that concerns our persons. We are re~ 
 minded, that he who enters into partnership v/ith the greatest capital, is entitled to the 
 greatest share of influence, and that the same principle must be carried into Govern- 
 ments. This, however, is not true, according to the laws of partnery. There, he who 
 has the greatest capital, shares the greatest profit, and bears the greatest loss, which is 
 precisely our doctrine. The greatest influence is not conferred on the largest capital- 
 ist by the laws of partnery. Wherever it does exist, it is by express stipulation in the 
 articles of co-partnership. Will gentlemen push their principle to its legitimate re- 
 sults ? Will they give to the largest capitalists, the largest suffrage in the State I 
 imagine they are not prepared for this. 1 will suppose the case of a man'in any small 
 county, who can bring two hundred able bodied slaves to the plough ; will they confer 
 on him votes according to the amount of his property or, will not a man in the 
 same county, with an house and lot in some decaying village, and who lives by 
 catching the jumping mullet, be entitled to the same suffrage This must be admit- 
 ted, and yet the gentleman declares that he never will sustain a principle which will 
 not bear to be pushed to its practical results. The argument must be carried to this 
 extravagant length, or it must be abandoned altogether. The whole of this argu- 
 ment, is manifestly sustained, only by reference to some supposed original social pact 
 made by men just emerging from a savage state ; for surely gentlemen cannot say 
 that the state of society here in 1775, furnished any thing to support these deduc- 
 tions, or that the social compact then formed, contained any such stipulations in fa- 
 vour of wealth. _ 
 
 I will here bestow some reflections upon the supposed analogy of the question of a 
 combined ratio now, to the Colonial dispute with Great Britain. From this an at- 
 tempt is made to prove the position that taxation should not only- go hand and hand 
 with representation, but that they should be measured by each other; that the amount 
 of the former should determine the quantity of the latter. This was not the Colonial 
 question. The Colonies claimed redress, not because taxation was not in proportion 
 to representation, but because they were not represented at all. This was the point 
 of all the appeals made by Statesmen of that day, whether addressed to King or Peo- 
 ple. The priiiciple maintained was totally different. I refer here to a State paper 
 written by Doctor Franklin in London. The Colonies were compared with the king- 
 doms of Ireland and Scotland before the union. Each of these was a separate king- 
 dom orj-ealm, to every intent and purpose, subject, only, to the same sovereign. 
 Each had its Parliament, which could alone tax the subject or grant supplies; and it 
 was maintained that the Colonies stood in the same situation. Each had its own Le- 
 gislative Assembly, and each was subject, like Ireland and Scotland, to the same 
 Crown ; and the argument, was, that as the Parliament of England had no right to 
 grant supplies to be paid by the people of Ireland or Scotland, so neither could they 
 vote sup;.)lie3 to be paid by the Colonies. The King, it was contended, could only 
 draw a revenue from Ireland, or Scotland, before the union, in his political character 
 of King of Ireland, or King of Scotland, granted by their respective Parliaments, and 
 it was urged that each of these Colonies bore the same relation to the Crowii and 
 Parliament of Great Britain, that Ireland then bore. It had never been pretended 
 that the discontents in the Colonies arose out of the question, whether taxation and 
 representation^were correllatives They rested on the grounds I have just mention- 
 ed ; for the correctness of which I might appeal to the personal recollections of seve- 
 ral members of the present Convention, and to the historical reading of all. Repre- 
 sentation is not the correllative of taxation. The question is by whom, or by what 
 Government, were we to be taxed.? 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 85 
 
 Whatever may have been the viev\'s with which the gentleman from Northampton 
 endeavoured to enforce the position that man coming out of a state of nature into so- 
 ciety, brought with him his property as an element of that society; I cannot pretend 
 to say. Certain it is, hov/ever, tiiat he yielded the whole of this argument, when he 
 declared that when man enters into civilized life under a social compact, " nature 
 and all her principles are swept av^^ay." Perhaps, in Virginia this doctrine might 
 have been seriously and successfully urged, had it not been lor the conservative words 
 in the first article of the Bill of Kights, wliich I have before quoted. With the above 
 declaration, the gentlemian returned to the true point in dispute. He admitted that 
 in arriving'at the majority of society entitled to rule, if any be entitled, negroes, bond 
 and tree, were to be excluded, but that the jusmajoris, could only apply to a majority 
 of white persons and interests combined, calculating slaves as property. 
 
 The gentleman contends, that among the rights of individuals at the moment of 
 forming a compact of Government, is the right to say whether a majority shall govern 
 the minority or not And he enquires what is to be done where one alone refuses his 
 assent.^ The answer is an easy one: he must submit or leave the society, and thus pre- 
 serve all his rights. It is again urged that the jus majcris, to rule the minority, does 
 not exist in Vfrginia. Here the point of dispute at which we have arrived seems to 
 be overlooked. We are now a majority, claimmg to have cur political powers accord- 
 ing to our numbers. These powers are denied to us, and we have been met with a 
 subtle distinction between civil and pohtical rights. It is admitted that in relation to 
 the former, each citizen, is equal to each ocher citizen} but it is contended, that the 
 safety of the whole v/ill not permit this equaiity in respect of the latter. If this equa- 
 lity of political power, and consequently the rights of a majority of numbers to govern 
 does really exist, it is said that it must be found written in the Constitution. This 
 shows how ingeniously gentlemen can vary their views of that document in which 
 our rights are declared. — The Declaration of Rights. At one moment that document, 
 and the makers of it, are extolled to the skies : at another, the principles it contains 
 are termed metaphysical abstractions ; as visionary theories, which appear very well on 
 paper, but are wholly unfit for practical application. One of our opponents has seri- 
 ously maintained that the Bill of Bights is, in fact, no part of the Constitution, al- 
 though the contrary has been determined by the Court of Appeals. And it is abso- 
 lutely necessary for gentlemen to get over the Sill of Rights, and to reverse their votes 
 in its fav^our the other day, in order to get along with their argument at all} because 
 the third article of that instrument is in their way. That article declares " that Gov- 
 ernment is, or ought to be instituted for tlie common (not unequal) benefit, protectioH 
 and security of tlie people ; and that whenever any Government shall be found in- 
 adequate to the purposes for which it was created, a majority of the comviunity hath 
 an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to retorm, alter or abolish it," &c. 
 Thus the very right in question; the jus majoris, is contained in the Declaration of 
 Rights ih express terms; and further, that whenever a Government shall degenerate 
 into misrule and become unfit for the accomplishment of the great purposes for which 
 it was instituted, the majority of the coiimamity have a right to amend it, or to pull it 
 down and build up another. Here the right in question is given to the majority in 
 express terms, and this is the j^ostalute advanced and demanded. This right is always 
 abiding v/ith the majoritj^ from whatever source derived, and with them, and with 
 them alone, abides the sanction for its protection. This right is asserted by those 
 whom we have been taught to look on as the greatest of men and the first of patriots. 
 But the assertion of this right is only found in that part of the Constitution, called 
 the Declaration of Pdghts, which as yet, although once re-enacted by ourselves, lies 
 on our table and is open for discussion. Perhaps this state of the argument furnishes 
 a clue to the desire we have manifested to write the book first, and last, the preface. 
 However, in an evil hour for their argument, they had agreed to the preface first. 
 
 We have already decided by an unanimous vote, that the Declaration needed no 
 amendment. It is true that vote has been rescinded, but this was only done to make 
 room for the present debate. We have treated tlaat document as one of the subjects 
 committed to us by our constituents. As a part of the Constitution itself. We have 
 treated it with the first respect among the Departments of Government by giving it 
 the first reference, and by giving to the first report made on it the most prompt atten- 
 tion in the House. Our Committee has revised the Bill of Rights, and on their report 
 we have concurred with them, that it needs no amendment. And shall we now be 
 told that it abounds only in abstractions unfit for use ? This report is, it is true, on 
 the table, but is, professedly, to be disposed of, and every one knows what the dispo- 
 sition will be. 
 
 In our course we have not exactly followed in the footsteps of our predecessors 
 who made the present Constitution. They acted as master builders : we have not. 
 They laid the foundation first, and then proceeded to the superstructure. After they 
 had declared the Government of the King of England at an end, the first tiling tliey 
 did \vas to appoint a Committee to prepare and report a Declaration of Rights. For 
 
86 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ■what purpose ? To serve as a basis of Government. They first determined the powers 
 they would surrender, and the powers they would retain, and they acted upon and 
 passed the Declaration of Rights first, and then,, and not until then, they proceeded 
 to erect upon their declared principles, the Constitution. If it must be so called, they 
 made the preface first, and then the book. 
 
 In the course of his very eloquent argument, the gentleman from Northampton ad- 
 mitted, that it was the safest rule that a majority of the units of the community should 
 govern, but only when property was equal. Unless property was equal he did not 
 admit the principle at all. 
 
 [Mr. Upshur rose to explain. He said the gentleman from Brooke had mistaken 
 his meaning. He had not said that the rule was only safe when the property of one 
 individual was equal to that of another. He disclaimed, alike, the prmciple, and the 
 effect that might be deduced from it. He applied the remark to large masses of popu- 
 lation having not only unequal but discordant interests.] 
 
 Mr. Doddridge proceeded. I must have misunderstood the gentleman yesterday, 
 but I did not misunderstand him to-day, and this, had be listened a little longer, he 
 would have discovered. The gentleman from Northampton has laboured, and I am 
 sure he thinks successfully, to maintain that, in Virginia the majority of free white 
 persons have not the right (and he almost denies their power) to govern the State. 
 This j«5 majoris, he says, is not derived to them, from the law of nature; ("that, 
 with all its principles, is swept away,") nor from the exigencies of society; nor from 
 the nature and necessities of Government ; nor yet from any Conventional source, 
 which can only be by an express provision in the present Constitution. Argumcnti 
 gratia, let the gentleman be right, and for this purpose let it be conceded that the ma- 
 jority covild only derive this right, if at all, from some one of those repudiated sources. 
 His conclusion then is, that a majority of freemen in this free land are not possessed 
 of the right or power to govern. But Government there must be, or we instantly 
 sink into anarchy Pray whence, then, will the gentleman derive the power in ques- 
 tion to the minority.'' 
 
 Surely he will not go back to the natural state, where force prevailed. That state 
 of things " with all its principles, was swept away," when the present Government 
 was formed. He cannot deduce this right from the exigencies of society ; nor from 
 the nature or necessities of Government ; nor if not from these sources, can he claim 
 the right from any thing written in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. These look to, 
 and declare the rights of the majority. Every source by which the right of govern- 
 ing could be derived to the majority, is repudiated by the gentleman's argument, and 
 the same argument, conclusively denies the right claimed for the minority ; and if the 
 gentlemen are right, we are now in a perfect state of anarchy, which, we know, is 
 not true. 
 
 Both gentlemen have, as I have before stated, admitted, that, but for the possession 
 of slaves, in great masses, by the minority, residing mostly in a particular part of the 
 State, the rule of the majority would be safe now. But this property they fear to sub- 
 ject to the Legislation of a majority, lest it might be oppressively taxed. Against this 
 abuse the majority had labored to suggest a satisfactory guarantee ; but nothing which 
 their ingenuity could invent was satisfactory. Each plan was denounced as mere pa- 
 per work, which the majority might disregard when invested with power, and that to 
 complain of this, would be like appealing from Caesar to Ca?sar. To maintain the 
 insufficiency of any Constitutional guarantee, it is insisted that neither the dictates of 
 duty, the oblio-ations of oaths, of conscience, and honor, are any thing when interest 
 isconcerned. That interest is the tyrant passion which can never be controled. Gentle- 
 men have gone so far in their zeal, as to declare that there are no principles in Gov- 
 ernment at all. We are candidly told that the minority can accept no security at all 
 except in representation ; that the majority in this free land, cannot be trusted by the 
 minority ; and that unless the minority can be protected in the way they claim, they 
 never can, nor will be satisfied ; and it is to be feared, that their discontents may break 
 out in something serious, because there can be, as they say, no security except in re- 
 presentation ; that is, in the power to govern the State, and thus to rule the majority. 
 This was the language of both gentlemen. Take away the gilding, what is it ? The 
 pill whicii could not be swallowed last winter ; the black ratio again ; not of three- 
 fiflhs, but the whole. They say to us, "we have many slaves, and you have few, 
 or none. The possession of this property by us, although it is not your crime, is the 
 reason, however, that we claim to exercise over your persons, lives, and property, des- 
 potic power;" (for Government in the hands of the few is always despotic, whether 
 it be "called an aristocracy, or an oligarchy, it is still despotic ;) " and though it be a 
 despotism, yet we must claim, and you submit to it, as nothing else can secure us 
 against your rapacity." 
 
 We are comfilimented, it is true, with many expressions of kindness ; of confidence 
 in our integrity ; in our generous and liberal feelings. But then the most serious fears 
 are entertained of our children. It is feared, that forsaking the example of their 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 87 
 
 fathers, they will become freebooters ;. not that they will plunder their immediate 
 neio-hbors, ijor that they will haye courage enough to attack the minority with open 
 force. The fear is, tha't the rights of the nnnonty may be inyaded by a system of Le- 
 gislative rapine, because there are no principles in Goyernment." 
 
 Were we disposed to act in that manner, or should our children be so disposed, it 
 would only be necessary to look at the census of 1790, and the tabular statements since 
 made, to enable you to'discoyer how feeble would be the resistance you would shortly 
 be able to make'to such yiolence. Ton may there see. that a race is rising up with 
 astonishing rapidity, suriiciently strong and powerful to burst asunder any chain by 
 which you" may attempt to bind' them, with as much ease as the thread parts in a can- 
 dle blaze. I refer gentlemen to the documents iurnished us, to shew them how vain 
 must be the attempt to impose a yoke, and how illusory the hope that it will be long 
 %vorn. 
 
 In 1790. the whole white population east of the Blue Ridge, was 314;5"23, and the 
 whole population west. 1-27. oiU ; 1~00, east of the Pvidae, 3oU,3Lr9. and west, 177,476 ; 
 1810, east of the Ridge 33-,>37. and west 212,726 ;. 1?20, east of the Ridge 34s,e73, 
 and west 254.30c ; by estimate, east 3(32,745, and west 3]!:i.516. 
 
 The balance of white population in 1790, in fayor of the east was 1S5.S32 ; in ISOO, 
 159,903 ; in IciO, 12o',n4 ; in lr20. 94.965 : and by estimate in lt29, 43,229. 
 
 In the first district. Ivni'Z between the Alleghany and the Ohio, the increase of white 
 population is truly surprising, in 1790. it ainounled to 3>.c34 only, and in 1829, to 
 l5l,3;4, being nearly hve tunes the number in 1790 ; and haying increased by a ratio 
 of 24"2| per cent. AVithin thirty years more, that district will contain a population 
 more than equal to half the present white inhabitants of the whole State, if the same 
 ratio of increase should continue. During the same period, the 4th district has only in- 
 creased its white population 15,754. being at a ratio of eight per cent, onh* ; and in the last 
 year but little more than two per cent, 1 his yast change is efiected in thirty-nine years ; 
 a considerable period indeed, in human life, but a yery short one in the life of a State. 
 The whole population in. 3 790 was 442.117. and in lz29, 6^2.261. In 1790 the whole 
 slave population was 292, 027. and in l:r29. 44-^.294. By which it appears that during' 
 a period of tliirty-nine vears, the white population has increased at a ratio of 36'-^ per 
 cent, oiiiy, and skive population 412- notwithstanding the drains made from the latter 
 by sale and otiierwise. Tne increase of free people of colour is yet more surprisinn-. 
 In 1790 this class amounted to only 12,t66, and in 1S29 to 44,212, This increase of 
 coloured population, is a subject of regret and alarm. I looked oyer these statements 
 of population last evening, and noted them down, with the different principles dis- 
 closed in this debate. This I d^d both for present and futm'e use. A view of them 
 will enable my constituents to appreciate the arguments and claims of the minority, 
 and to discern, if we should be successful in reiorming the Government as we hope, 
 the depth of that gulph of political degradation, which was prepared for them, and 
 from wliich they will have, happily, escaped ! The arguments of the friends of the 
 minority here, look to our perpetual slavery; for they maintain that tiie great mass of 
 slave property, not only is. but ahvays must be, in the east, because, they sa}', both 
 tlie physical and moral constitutions of the western people, forbid the adaptation of that 
 species of property to their uses. At the same time, it is admitted, that if a majority of 
 white population is not now in the west, it will soon be there, and there increase forever. 
 It will not vary their principles in the least, if at a future tuue, ten white men should 
 be found west for one in the east. Their principle is, that the owners of slave pro- 
 perty, must possess all the powers of Goyernment, however small their own numbers 
 may be, to secure that property from the rapacity of an overgrown majorit}' of white 
 men. This principle admits of no relaxation, because the weaker the minority be- 
 comes, the greater will their need for power be, according to tlieir own doctrines. 
 This, to be sure, is pushing their argument in ahsurdimi, but the fault is in the argu- 
 ment, that it admits this crit'xism. It applies to a case far distant, in point of time, I 
 own, when the tide-water population will be, to the whole, but as a drop in the bucket. 
 East of the mountain, slaves are increasing more rapidly than wliites. Between tide 
 and the Ridge, this increase is truly alanmng. In a short tinie, such will be the pre- 
 ponderance of numbers in the west, that the citizen will scai'cely know vrhere to find 
 tlie power that rules him. and will be induced to ask with astonishment, to whom it 
 is that he must submit I say again, tliis western increase must proceed. It cannot 
 be checked ; it will go on while the east oppressed b}" the increasino- weight of 
 another race will be stationary ; and if you have cause to fear us now, that cause will 
 increase, and with it your fears and desires for power. I will not stop here to inquire 
 into the causes of this western growth, but I can satisfactorily shew why it has not 
 been much greater. In 1790, the United States' otiices were opened for the sale of a 
 tract of country separated from us only by the Ohio, at two dollars per acre. Ever 
 since then, masses of public lands near us, haye been brought into market in Ohio, 
 Indiana and Michigan, first, at the price I have mentioned, and last, at one dollar and 
 * twenty-five cents. These land m.arkets checked emigration to western Virginia from 
 
88 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 other States, and drew off some of its native po] ulation. Ohio is now filled up, and the 
 lands nearest to us in Indiana and Michigan, are very generally sold out. The reniain- 
 nig land markets are removed farther west, and to countries less inviting. It is owing 
 to these circumstances that the ratio of increase during the last nine years, has been 
 greater than during the nine or nineteen years preceding. The proximity of those 
 land markets, have had an effect on all Virginia, but more especially beyond the Alle- 
 ghany. 
 
 With the present state of population in view, and contemplating the prospects before 
 us, with the full belief that upwards of 400,000 white people are with us, and that we 
 are the majority at the present moment, sliould we be weak enough to agree to your 
 terms, and submit ourselves to your Government, what would our indignant constitu- 
 ents say when a Constitution founded on your clainis of superiority should be presented 
 to them They would scorn to accept it, and displace us from their confidence for- 
 ever. 
 
 The Committee will be good enough to indulge me while I submit to their conside- 
 ration a few reflections. We iiave often heard that wealiii gives power, or that v/ealth 
 itself, is power. By this axiom I suppose, is meant nothing more tlian the natural and 
 moral influence which wealth gives to the possessor, by increasing- his means of doing 
 good or evil. Whenever power is directly conferred on wealtii by Government, the 
 additional power thus conferred, is a corrupt one. It is a jyr/? / V^'c conferred contrary 
 to the Bill of Rights, because not conferred Jbr vicrit or public scrriccs. It is too, an 
 exclusive privilege in its very natm'e. It is an immoral diatinction tiiat is conferred, 
 because it makes no discrimination between the possessors of estates honestly cicquired, 
 and those of ill-gotten stores. 
 
 Perhaps no blessing of this life is so transitory as riches. To-day you are ricli and 
 powerful ; to-morrow poor and despised. This thing property, while possessed, makes 
 you a Sovereign, and the loss of it a slave. 
 
 We have long been in tlie habit of considering this Ancient Commonwealth, as the 
 freest and happiest in the world ; our Constitution as the best on earth, and ourselves" 
 the most fortunate of men. What would the citizen of another State think, or how 
 would he feel, at the sight of an hundreti wretches exposed to sale, singly or in fami- 
 lies, with their master's lands, if in addition to the usual commendations of the auc- 
 tioneer to encourage bidders, he should hear him tell them, that if they should pur- 
 chase his goods, they v/ould instantly become Sovereigns in this free land, and the 
 present possessor would become their slave Do I misrepresent or exaggerate when 
 I say your doctrine makes me a shave I may still live in the west ; may pursue niy 
 own business and obey my ovm inclinations, hut so long as you hold political domi- 
 nion over me, I am a slave. We are a majority of individual units in the Stale, and 
 your equals in intelligence and virtue, moral and political. Yet you say we must obey 
 you. You declare that the rule of the minority has never oppressed us, nor visited us 
 with practical evil ; but of this, we are the best judges. We have felt your weight and 
 have suffered under misrule. We never expected you to acknoAvledge this. You are 
 not competent judges. It was not expected that you would make this acknowledg- 
 ment, or part with power willingly. To do either, would he to furnish a precedent of 
 the first impression. 
 
 We do not know to a ccrtninty, v.'hat districts may vote Avith us, but if the results 
 of the public jjolls furnisli any sure indications, rur strength in the community is to 
 the minority as 402,000 to 2o0,000 souls. And if tliis be so, the heroic resistance 
 made to our claims, proves a degree of moral firmness, equalled < nly by the moral 
 worth of those who make it. 
 
 Among the propositions of the gentleman from Northampton, there was one which 
 I wish to notice more particularly ; that a majority in society, means not a niajorlty 
 of men, but of men and interests. 
 
 [Jud^e Upshur explained. — He did not intend to say, this was, of necessity, the 
 case. He had said, that in faxins" the apportionment of representation, there must be 
 a majority of interests, and it did not necessarily follow, that it must be a majority 
 of any particular character. It might be a majority of the units of society.] 
 
 Mr. Doddridge. — I did not misunderstand the gentleman. I '.mderstood liim to 
 say, that a majoritAj combined of men and interests, did not 7zcc<"5s>'/77''?/ r ;ean a ?«ifi(//7Y</ 
 of men, but might possibly contain but a minority. 
 
 [Judge Upshur. — He had supposed the Government in operation, and he had never 
 contended, that in tlie Senate and House of Delegates, a majority was not the proper 
 rule. But we are enga.ged in the formation of a Government, and it is for us to say 
 out of what elements that majority is to be formed. You may get one out of num- 
 bers alone, or out of nunihers and property. In a state of Government a maji,:ity is 
 the rule ; but we are here assembled to fix the original law as to the materials out of 
 which the majority shall spring, and we may deterjnine whether it shall he composed 
 of one element or of both.] 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 89 
 
 Mr. D. I am sure I understand the gentleman. The doubt is as to that majority which 
 the Bill of Rights declares have the power to alter or amend the Constitution : whe- 
 ther the majority there spoken of, is composed of men, or of men and wealth. Surely 
 the Declaration of Rights means numbers alone : that is the plain English of the 
 text, which might be safely lefl to the decision of any man or woman, having a 
 common knowledge of our mother tongue. Local interests, and slave property, ex- 
 isted in 1776, as well as now. These interests and localities bore the same relations 
 and ratios to each other as now, yet they are neither alluded to nor provided for by 
 the Bill of Rights or Constitution. Had it been intended to take property into the 
 scale of representation, this silence could not have been observed. This brings me 
 to the conclusion, that slaves were not regarded in 1776 as an element of society, 
 but merely as property. The Convention of that day, left representation where they 
 found it; based on the freehold qualification, just as it had been based in the Colony, 
 when there was scarcely a slave in it. It results, that while gentlemen are demand- 
 ing representation for this species of property, they are demanding a new thing, and 
 are proceeding on a principle never before recognized in the Colony or State ; while 
 we are only endeavoring to assert those personal rights which spring up in every so- 
 ciety, and can be absent from no Government or creature on earth. 1 therefore re- 
 peat, that when we demand equal political rights for ourselves, our constituents and 
 posterity, we demand no new thing. It was never known before, that constituent 
 powers were to be created out of a compound of this character. They certainly de- 
 mand a new thing, who thus would exalt a minority into rule, and require a ma- 
 jority of free citizens to submit their persons and properties to their dictation. 
 
 I will now call the attention of the Committee to the state of our representation in 
 this body. We have been elected here by a ratio marked by injustice. The Sena- 
 torial apportionment of 1816 was founded on the Census of 1810, which was unequal, 
 to be sure ; but that was then the last enumeration to w^hich we could refer. In this 
 body, we are apportioned by the same Census of 1816, although that of 1820 was in 
 being, and could have been resorted to. For this injustice, no reason was, or ever 
 will be assigned, except that those who practiced it, had the powder to do so. This 
 measure was a poor expedient for appeasing a discontented people. By it, the west 
 were deprived of more than four members on this floor. By the Census of 1820, we 
 were entitled to 40 293-603 members, instead of 36, and by the present population to 
 42 229-682. Yet, notwithstanding tliis injustice, I hope the cause of the people will 
 triumph. The majority here may be small indeed, but I hope they will represent at ■ 
 least two-thirds of the inhabitants of the whole State. 
 
 One word more respecting the slave property, the increase of %vhich is the subject 
 of some uneasiness. To allay this uneasiness in some degree, I will state what I ra- 
 ther anticipate and fear than hope , because I have no desire to see the slave i:)opula- 
 tion of my country increased. This property will hereafter find a market, to some 
 extent, in western Virginia. It has heretofore been of but little value near the Ohio 
 river, because runaways received aid and protection from the people in the new ter-- 
 ritories and States. The State of Ohio, at an early day, passed a law requiring all 
 people of colour migrating thither, to give bond and security to save them from be- 
 coming a public charge, and I believe to be of good behaviour. A general belief had 
 prevailed, that this law was unconstitutional, and it went unexecuted, until \sLtely. 
 The Supreme Judges of that State have decided in favor of that law, and as their 
 blacks cannot comply Avith it, they nuist remove. It is supposed their only retreat 
 will be in Canada, as the people of Indiana and Illinois must follow the example of 
 Ohio, in self-defence. In western Pennsylvania, public feeling is so far changed, 
 that instead of the facilities heretofore afl;brded to fugitives, the niaster meets with no 
 obstructions, bvit is even aided. Matters in Canada must soon take a turn. I have 
 no doubt that there are many western citizens who will purchase slaves again, when 
 the causes before mentioned, shall render the property secure. These considera- 
 tions, with the acquisition of Texas, will greatly enhance the value of the property 
 in question. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I acknowledge my gratitude to the Chair and the Committee, for 
 the attention with which they have listened to my remarks, desultory as they have 
 been. Having been hurried into the discussion, without proper arrangement of ma- 
 terials, they require your indulgence. 
 
 Mr. Green rose, for the purpose of correcting a misapprehension into which the 
 gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Doddridge) had fallen. 
 
 He had not, as that gentleman seemed to suppose, proposed, or supported, his 
 amendment, merely as a security to slave propert}'^ from excessive taxation : property 
 of every other kind, was liable to the same sort of injustice : and he should have 
 proposed the amendment, if there had not been such a thing as a slave in Virginia. 
 The gentleman must remember, that two-thirds of all the taxable property in the 
 State, w^as owned ea^t of the Blue Ridge. 
 
 12 
 
90 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The question was now propounded from the Chair : when, after an extended 
 pause, the Chairman rose to take the vote ; whereupon, Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, 
 moved that the Committee now rise : the motion prevaihng, the Committee rose 
 accordingly, and thereupon, the Convention adjourned, to meet to-morrow, at eleven 
 o'clock. 
 
 THURSDAY, October 29, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Parks, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The standing order being read by the Clerk, Mr. Doddridge moved that tlie Con- 
 vention proceed to execute the Order of the Day, which was accordingly agreed to, 
 and the President called Mr. Stanard, of Spottsylvania, to the Chair. 
 
 The Chair having again ntated the question before the Committee, 
 
 Mr. P. P. Barbour, of Orange, rose and said, that as the gentleman from Chester- 
 field (Mr. Leigh,) was entitled to the floor this morning, according to Parliamentary 
 usage, I tliink it proper to state to the Committee, that I am about to occupy it with 
 his consent. I am afraid, indeed, that I shall offer a very poor equivalent, for the rich 
 repast which that gentleman would have spread before the Convention ; but I have 
 this consolation, that though it will be delayed, it will not be ultimately lost. But, 
 Sir, I consider it a duty, which I owe to myself, to my constituents, and to the res- 
 pect which I entertain for the opinions of my fellow-citizens of the Commonwealth 
 at large, to state some of the views which I have taken of the subject under discus- 
 sion, and to vindicate the course, which I feel it to be my duty to pursue. In doing 
 this, 1 promise to be as brief as I can, consistently with rendering myself intelligible. 
 I would do so, at all times and under all circumstances ; but on the present occasion, 
 1 have the additional reason, that the able argument of the gentleman from Northamp- 
 ton, has relieved me from much of the labor, which would otherwise have devolved 
 upon me ; and I shall be much gratified, if it shall be in my power, to strengthen some 
 of the strong points which were so ably occupied by him. I do not remember in my 
 life, to have felt so deep a sense of responsibility, as on the present occasion ; nor is this 
 at all the language of affectation : i speak it in the sincerity of my heart. On former oc- 
 casions, as a member of a deliberative assembly, I have been engaged in giving ex- 
 ecution to the provisions of an existing Constitution ; under such circumstances, if 
 I should have chanced to fall into error, it would have been such, as would have found 
 a speedy remedy in the ordinary process of legislation ; but now, I stand on different 
 ground. I am called upon, to aid, not in executing an existing Constitution, but in 
 the creation of a new one ; a situation, in which error, though not wholly irremedia- 
 ble, must continue for a considerable time ; and if corrected at all, can only be correct- 
 ed by the original power of the people, in their primary capacity, or in such other 
 mode as may be adopted for the amendment of their organic law. 
 
 The task imposed upon us, is one of the grandest and most solemn import. We 
 meet together as the representatives of a great community, to mingle our counsels 
 for the conimon weal ; to lay the foundation of a Constitution, which shall secure 
 the permanent happiness and prosperity of a great Commonwealth. It has been the 
 fate of most of the nations of the earth, to have a Government imposed upon them, 
 without tlie least participation of their own will ; it is our good fortune, on the con- 
 trary, both in our character of an individual State, and as constituting an unit in our 
 great confedefacy of States, to have a Government of our own choice. "We meet, 
 free as the air which we breathe, not only unawed, but uncontrolled by any earthly 
 power, save only, the power of the people, who gave us our political existence ; and 
 before whom, as the ultimate arbiters of their own destiny, the work of our hands, 
 must pass for their approval. I feel, Mr. Chairman, not only the importance and so- 
 lemnity of the trust, but a more than usual deference towards the body which I am 
 addressing. It is composed of individuals, all of whom have participated in the 
 councils either of their native State, or of the United States ; and some of whom, as- 
 sisted, more tlian half a century ago, in laying the corner stone of the Constitution of 
 this ancient Commonwealth, the first Representative Republic in the world, which 
 we are now about to remove ; and who as chiefs, either of the Executive or Judicial 
 Departments of the Federal Government, have, for a series of years presided over 
 the interests of our common country. If under these circumstances, I shall be some- 
 ^vhat embarrassed, in presenting my views to the Committee, they will perceive in my 
 situation, an ample apology. 
 
 The most important of all our duties, is the organization of the Legislative Depart- 
 nientof the Government; it is in that Department, that the public will is concentrated ; 
 smce from it must issue in the form of laws, those rules of action, which control the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 91 
 
 lives, liberty and property of the people. Not only is this the most important Depart- 
 ment of the Government, but the immediate question now under discussion, is the 
 most important one, which the organization of that Department involves. It lies at 
 the very foundation of our civil edifice ; and it becomes us to examine, with the most 
 guarded caution, how we lay it. The report of the Committee on this Department, 
 has recommended, that in the apportionment of representation in the House of Dele- 
 gates, regard should be had to the white population exclusively. An amendment has 
 been offered by my friend from Culpeper (Mr. Green) which proposes the adoption of 
 a compound ratio, consisting of the number of white population, and taxation comhin- 
 ed. The precise question now to be decided, tlierefore, is between these two propo- 
 sitions. It will be my part, to endeavor to show, why the proposition of the gentle- 
 man from Culpeper, ought to be adopted. 
 
 With this view, let us first examine the arguments adduced in support of the other 
 plan. At the threshold, we are met with a principle laid down in the Bill of Rights, 
 tfmt all men are by 7iature, equally free. And here, I cannot forbear to remark, whilst 
 I am not controverting the position, that it appeared to me, to be singular, that the 
 gentleman from Brooke, who relied so muclr upon this principle, denied the authority 
 of the Constitution of the State, at the very moment when he was calling to his aid, 
 that of the Bill of Rights, though confessedly, they both rested upon the same foun- 
 dation, and consequently-are of equal obligation. But let that pass. I shall not stop 
 to enquire, whether this principle is, or is not abstract in its nature. But this I will 
 .say : That this, as well as every other principle in the Bill of Rights, is to be modified, 
 by reference to the time when, and the circumstances under whicla, they were de- 
 clared, and by reference also, to the people on whom they were intended to operate : 
 otherwise, if you give to the language, all the force which the words literall}'- import, 
 (and they are, I believe, but an echo of those in the Declaration of Independence,) 
 what will they amount to, but a declaration of universal emancipation, to a class of 
 our population, not far short of a moiety of our entire number, now in a state of slave- 
 ry f And if you were to give to such a declaration, its full operation, without the modi- 
 fications which 1 have stated, you might as a natural consequence, soon expect to see 
 realized here, the frightful and appalling scenes of horror and desolation, which were 
 produced in St. Domingo by a declaration of much the same tenor, issued by the fa- 
 mous National Assembly of France. I do not believe, Sir, that such is the intention 
 of those gentlemen who rely upon this principle, in support of their proposition ; I 
 only meant to show, that if we would come to a right conclusion, in interpreting the 
 meaning of this declaration, we must look at it, according to the condition and cir- 
 cumstances of the people, to whom it was intended to apply, and on whom it was ex- 
 pected to operate. 
 
 The principle taken from the Bill of Rights, is, that all men are hy nature, equally 
 free; and the conclusion wliich gentlemen draw from that principle, is, that therefore 
 all men are entitled to an equal share of political power. With due submission, this 
 conclusion is, in my estimation, wholly inconsequent. Suppose that all men are, by 
 nature equally free : what sort of connexion has that proposition, with the civil and 
 political rights growing out of the nature of Government : 
 
 Need I remind the Committee, that it is the very nature of the social compact, that 
 all who enter into it, surrender a portion of their natural rights, in exchange for whicli, 
 they acquire other rights derived from that compact, and dependent upon it, both in 
 character and extent ? Is it not a solecism, to say, that rights which have their very 
 being only as a consequence of Government, are to be controlled by principles, ap- 
 plying exclusively to a state of things, when there was no Government? The ques- 
 tion is, what are the political rights of the citizens ? These political rights never ex- 
 isted, till Government was instituted. The same charter wliich created that institu- 
 tion, can alone create and define them ; and yet in deciding this question, we are 
 gravely asked, to refer, not to the charter itself, but to those original principles of 
 Natural law, which not only existed, wlien the rights, whose extent is to be measured 
 by them did not exist, but which in tlieir very character, are in direct contradistinc- 
 tion, from those which govern the social state. Thus to exemplify : the present ques- 
 tion is, what shall be the basis of representation This term, by an irresistible associa- 
 tion, conducts the mind to the idea of election ; election necessarily involves the re- 
 lation between the constituent and representative ; and this relation derives its whole 
 existence from Government: it did not, and could not exist before. Surel}^ then, it 
 is only necessary to state the position, to show that it is utterly inapplicable to the case 
 before us. No laws, no rights, can possibly bear on relations, which have subsequently 
 come into being : relations, which belong to an entirely new state of things, and which 
 state, has principles of its own, derived from the instrument which created it. 
 
 But, suppose it to be conceded, that tlie rights pertaining to a state of nature, and 
 a system of rules deduced from the circumstances of that state, had relation to the 
 subject ; I ask, is the argument of gentlemen consistent with itself.'' They are them- 
 selves at the very outset, constrained to admit, that there are whole classes of persons, 
 
92 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and numerous classes too, who are not entitled to political rights. Many of these Imve 
 been already enumerated by the gentleman from Northampton -. females, minors, pau- 
 pers, convicts j and I will add, aliens. Now, Sir, females alone constitute a moiety 
 of the human race ; if to these be added all the minors who have reached years of dis- 
 cretion, and all the other classes under the acknowledged ban of exclusion, there is an 
 overwhelming majority of the whole population. But how come they to be excluded 
 Is it by the provisions of the social compact ? If that were the principle, it would be 
 intelligible. Is it by the laws of nature 1 I should answer no. For those laws, of all 
 invariable things, are the most invariable : they are the same yesterday, to-day, and 
 forever, (so far as human affairs are concerned,) until modified by the ordinances of 
 society. They operate upon all persons, of all countries, at all times, and under all 
 circumstances. For example : the rights to life, liberty, and the products of labour, 
 are natural rights. Are there any persons in the world, who by nature are not enti- 
 tled to these ? (I speak not now of the influences growing out of the domestic rela- 
 tions.) I answer without hesitation, none, no, not one. How then can it be said, 
 that the laws of nature refer to the subject, since those laws are uniform and invariable ; 
 and it is conceded, that these political rights, are neither uniform, nor invariable, but 
 subject to great diversity and exception ? Sir, the concession that gentlemen are con- 
 strained to make, that all are not equally entitled to these rights, involves Inevitably, 
 the further consequence, that they are not regulated by the laws of nature ; for diver- 
 sity cannot be the effect, where uniformity is the cause. 
 
 But it is said, that two of the enumerated classes, to wit, females and minors, are 
 excluded, by the laws of nature, for the want of free agency in both, and the want of 
 intelligence in the latter class. The want of free agency is founded upon the idea, 
 that these two classes, are subjected to the dominion of men. Let us first examine 
 the condition of females in a state of nature : I call upon any gentleman to shew me 
 a principle of natural law, which will sustain their exclusion, to the extent which is 
 thus laid down. I will suggest one case, in which surely they could not apply their 
 principle. We read of a nation which once existed, (I refer to the nation of the 
 Amazons.) in which there were no men : the society consisted of females alone. 
 Here, beyond all question, the principle could not be applied. But suppose a nation 
 made up both of men and women. Can any gentleman shew me a reason drawn 
 from nature, which subjects females, as such, and because of their sex only, to the 
 dominion of men ? Men might indeed govern them by a greater physical force ; but 
 so also, might they govern in the same way, all men as well as women, who were 
 weaker than themselves. I repeat, that if gentlemen have found any such principle 
 of natural law, they have had access to fountains of information, which are inac- 
 cessible to me. A female may change her relations by entering into the married 
 state, and impair her original rights, to the extent of the obligations contracted by 
 this change. But a female who is of mature age, and unmarried, is in possession of 
 all her rights ; those rights are by nature the same with those of the other sex ; and 
 men, merely as such, have no natural right to exercise any control over her whatso- 
 ever. And yet the reason assigned, for excluding females from the exercise of poli- 
 tical rights is, that they are under the dominion of men. When a female is married, 
 and the relation of husband and wife exists, then the power of the husband, is co-ex- 
 tensive with his duties ; but co-extensive only. The utmost bound, therefore, of the 
 dominion of men, even over married women, is limited to the circle of domestic rela- 
 tions. Gentlemen would find it difficult to prove, tliat if a woman were the wife of 
 a man, blindly attached to despotic Government, she would be obliged to sacri- 
 fice the enjoyment of all the blessings of civil liberty, to his whim, by being constrain- 
 ed to abide there against her will. It will not be contended, that females are to be 
 excluded for the want of capacity. I will not fatigue the Committee, by quoting many 
 examples to prove the contrary. History presents us the records of multitudes, who 
 have been illustrious in literature, in arms, and in council. Writers have selected 
 the reign of Elizabeth, as one of the brightest periods of English history ; and with 
 respect to the II. Catharine of Russia, I need only remind the House of a single in- 
 cident, which occurred in years long past by, but which proves the prophetic grasp 
 of her mmd, and which is illustrated by the almost literal fulfilment of the prophecy, 
 in the events passing in Europe at this very hour ; I allude to the fact, of her having 
 inscribed over a splendid gate, which she erected, near the frontier of her empire, 
 " This is the road to Byzantium." 
 
 Let us look for a moment at the case of the minor : the father's power over him is 
 precisely co-oxtensive too, and co-extensive only, with his duties, to wit, maintenance, 
 education, &c.: from the moment that he is able to take care of, and provide for him- 
 self, he is by nature, utterly free from the control of his father; his subjection was 
 only during his dependence ; remove the one, and the other ceases. 
 
 Municipal laws have fixed arbitrary periods for the maturity of man, and his inde- 
 pendence of paternal control : by some, it is fixed at twenty-one years ; by others at 
 twenty-three, and differently in others : nature has settled no period of months or of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 93 
 
 years : by her laws, whensoever lie shall acquire strength of mind and body to pro- 
 vide for himself, from that moment, he is under no control on earth. 
 
 Is the argument consistent in another particular ? Gentlemen say that taxation 
 must in no degree, be permitted to form a constituent element of the basis of repre- 
 sentation. Representation, say they, implies constituents ; taxation does not. Well, 
 Sir, does not the same reasoning apply, to exclude from the estimate of numbers, as 
 a basis of representation, all who are excluded from representation itself ? If you 
 must exclude taxation, because it has no constituent for its correllative, does not the 
 same reasoning apply to all. who do not possess the elective franchise ? They, too, 
 must be excluded from the basis ; and so upon gentlemen's own grounds, that basis, 
 instead of extending to all the white population of the Commonwealth, should be 
 confined to voters alone. 
 
 The gentlemen have pressed upon us certain other positions from the Bill of Rights; 
 the declaration that all power resides of right in the people, and that a majority, may 
 alter, rescind, or new-model the Government at pleasure. I shall not call in question 
 the truth of the doctrine, that all power resides in the people, nor is it necessary to 
 enquire into the truth of the next proposition, that a majority of the people may alter 
 their Government at pleasure. These two propositions, if I rightly understood the 
 able argument of the gentleman from Brooke, were brought to shew that a majority 
 must necessarily have the control in every free Government. I shall not retrace the 
 ground so well occupied on this subject by the gentleman from Northampton, except 
 so far as to confirm the truth of one of his remarks. As to any original and inherent 
 right of the majority to rule, it could not exist, antecedently to Government. Majo- 
 rity is a relative term. It implies an interchange of opinion among persons convened 
 for council, and whose decision is to control the action of the whole number so as- 
 sembled, or of others connected with them. But this state of things could not exist 
 in a state of nature. Nothing in the shape of Government belongs to that state. Each 
 man stands upon his own intrinsic rights. Nay, so far does one writer carry this princi- 
 ple, as to maintain that, in order to form a social compact, wliich shall bind all those who 
 enter into it, perfect unanimity is necessary among them all : and though the whole 
 family of man were to enter into such a compact, if one single, solitary individual re- 
 fuses his assent, the compact has no binding povv^er as it respects him. 
 
 I do not say that to carry the doctrine to this length, meets my approbation. Permit 
 me, while we are on this subject of majority, to make a few additional remarks. Some 
 writers give us a very quaint and affected account of it. One of great celebrity, so 
 defines the power of the majority, as to declare, that when a man is called upon to 
 vote, he is not to vote according to his own opinion, but according to his notion of 
 what is the public will : and if it shall turn out that the majority is against him, then 
 it only appears, that he has mistaken the public will. I do not say that I adopt any 
 such sentiment; but I mention this, as an example of one, among the infinite number 
 of theories, which have been broached on the general subject. Sir, is there any rule, 
 for the dominion of a majority, so invariable, as the gentleman seems to suppose.'' To 
 test this, let us look at the history of our own country; both in the State and the 
 Federal forms of its Government. Surely, if the gentleman is correct in supposing, 
 that the right of a majority to rule, is derived from a natural law, it ought to have 
 that character of uniformity, which distinguishes all such laws ; and then it could not 
 be subject to such multiplied exceptions, as we find to exist in fact, in its practical 
 operation. Look first at the Federal Government, whether in its Executive, its Le- 
 gislative, or its Judicial Department; and we shall find, that a majority is, in many in- 
 stances, subject to the control of a minority, greater, but by a single unit, than one- 
 third of the whole. If the President of the United States, shall refuse to sign a bill, 
 passed by both Houses of Congress, and shall return that bill to them with his reasons 
 for such refusal, the consent of two-tliirds of the members of both Houses is requisite 
 before such bill can become a law. 
 
 The Senate of the United States hold a double capacity, being a branch, as well of 
 the Executive, as of the Legislative Department of Government; and when it acts in, 
 its Executive capacity, two-thirds of the members present must concur, before any 
 treaty formed by the President, can receive its due ratification. Here, again, and in 
 concerns too, of the utmost importance, a majority is subject to the will of the mino- 
 rity. So, in the Judicial Department, (the quasi Judicial, at any rate, for the Senate 
 when it sits to try impeachments, is, in fact, a Judicative power, and acts entirely in 
 a Judicial character;) vAien the Senate thus sits, two-thirds of the members present 
 are necessary to convict the party impeached. Here, again, is found a minority, con- 
 trolling the will of the majority. 
 
 Again, Sir : — Let us now look nearer home. What is our sj'stem of elections, as it 
 exists in Virginia, and in most of the States of the Union, when brought down to its 
 actual practical operation ? Is it a majority only, which in each election district, has 
 the power of sending a Delegate, to either House of the Legislature? No, Sir, a sim- 
 ple plurahty enjoys that power. If, then, in a certain district, there be ten candidates 
 
94 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Bet up, and neither one of the ten shall receive even one-ffth, (far less a majority) of 
 all the votes given, yet, if he receive but a single vote wore than either of the other 
 candidates, he is returned to the Legislature as duly elected. And though so elected, 
 he is to all practical purposes, the representative of all the people of that district; yet 
 a majority of four to one was opposed to his election. Does the majority rule here, 
 Sir.^ I need not refer to the well known case of our Juries, where the vote of one 
 man balances the vote of eleven men; yet such an arrangement is thought wise, and 
 has, for centuries past, challenged and received the admiration of all reflecting men. 
 So far, then, from the rule's being a universal one, in all free Governments; in our 
 own Government, the freest upon earth, a minority of one-third controls a majority of 
 two-thirds : A minority of one-fifth may control a majority of four-fifths : Nay, Sir, a 
 minority of one, does every day control a majority of eleven. It is not as gentlemen 
 say, that a minority governs a majority ; no. Sir, the minority under certain circum- 
 stances, not having the power of action themselves, are enabled to control the action 
 of the majority : in the language of Tully, in relation to the Tribunes of the people 
 at Rome, they have not the power to do mischief themselves; they have only the 
 power, to prevent it from being done, by others. Let us pursue the chain one link 
 further, and let us bring the principle into the Halls of Legislation. It is susceptible 
 of mathematical demonstration, that you can have no certainty of hearing the voice 
 of a majority of the people of any State, unless that State votes by a general ticket. 
 Much as that practice has been objected to, as applied in another election, it may be 
 demonstrated, that in many, if not in most cases, a will prevails, which is contrary to 
 the will of a majority of the people. For example : If all the people of Virginia 
 should assemble on one day, I do not say in one place, but at their several polls, and 
 should all vote for the same individual, a majority of their votes would, no doubt, ex- 
 press the will of a majority of the people. But on any system of practical election, 
 your State must be cut up into districts, and as the fractional minorities of these seve- 
 ral districts, like the fractional minorities in different States, cannot be transferred 
 from one district to another, it may happen, and does happen, that an individual may 
 be elected contrary to the will of a very large majority of those who voted in the 
 election; and then, of course, so far as representation is concerned, there is the will- 
 of a great majority against any measure which may be passed by Delegates so chosen. 
 
 What, then, is the conclusion to which I am brought by this train of reasoning? 
 It is this: that there exists no such thing as a fixed, invariable rule, on this subject. 
 The parties to the civil compact, in establishing a Government, and organizing its va- 
 rious Departments, impart to the system which is the creature of their will, such prin- 
 ciples as they have found to be prudent and just. In politics, as in morals, the best 
 test of propriety is practical utility. There can be no other. No other has ever been 
 successfully acted upon. If you go to mere a priori principles, then a pure, unmix- 
 ed, democracy would seem the best form of Government: but the experiment has 
 been, long ago, abandoned; and why? upon grounds of practical utility. 
 
 The next step, in theory, is, that every one should vote : but this plan is abandoned 
 even by the friends of the present resolution : and why so for the same reason as 
 before, it cannot bear the test of practical utility. The same principle applies to any 
 other subject of enquiry. A majority of the people have a right to re-model the 
 Government, in any way they may consider as most promotive of the public welfare. 
 We, Sir, are now the representatives of that majority. What do we judge most 
 for the public weal ? Even if the doctrine of the power of the majority be conceded, 
 it is only necessary to point gentlemen to what is daily the fact, to shew that the 
 people, though they may not act nominally by a majority, yet do so substantially, and 
 in effect. Suppose we shall determine that a mixed basis of representation is to be 
 preferred to a basis of numbers only; then whether the voters be, as individual units, 
 a majority or not, yet there would, in truth, be a majority of the people acting : all 
 the members of the community would stipulate with each individual member, and 
 each individual would stipulate with all the rest, that this shall be their form of Go- 
 vernment. Because whatever should be afterwards done, no matter by whom, if 
 according to the Constitution, would be done by the will of the majority, because 
 the Constitution itself, would have been ordained by that will. A Judge sentences a 
 prisoner : the Judge is a solitary individual ; but he acts by the force of law, which 
 law is created by a majority of the people acting through their representatives, whom 
 they have appointed their agents to make the laws. The effect, therefore, is pre- 
 cisely the same as if the sentence of the Judge had been pronounced by a nominal 
 majority. 
 
 If I am right, we must discard mere theory, adopt nothing on the ground of mere 
 speculation, but proceed to men and things as they are. In the language of Solon, 
 we must establish not the best possible, but the best practicable Government. We 
 have our way open before us. There is no question as to our power to introduce 
 what principles we please ; the only question for us to ask is, whether the principle 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 95 
 
 be ftt ; whether it be mete and expedient ; vrhetlier it vrill bear tlie test of practical 
 utihtr ? 
 
 In' that vie-w. let us tlien investigate the principle which is novr olfered for our 
 adoption. 
 
 If, when men unite to form a social compact, they surrendered only their personal 
 rights, it might very plainly be concluded, tliat numbers, and numbers alone, consti- 
 tuted the proper basis for representation. Upon the ordinary principles of contracts 
 made between man and man, (for the social compact is only a contract of all the 
 members with each individual member, and of him with them,) if the contracting 
 parties surrendered only their personal rights, all would give, and, in returnj ail 
 would receive the same equivalent. But when they surrender, not only their per- 
 sonal rights, but their property, there the inequality commences. One man brings 
 one- amount of property, another man brings a different amount. I would put it on 
 the principle of compensation ; the principle of equivalents. Is it right, that he 
 who has surrendered only his personal rights, should receive as much as he who 
 surrenders much more .- "But. it is said, that the man who surrenders his property to 
 society, receives, as an equivalent, the protection of that property, and that the two 
 go on pari passu toofether. This argument is plausible ; and it would be sound, if 
 he could have an infallible securit}-. that the society, or the Government, which is 
 the same thing, should never demand from him a greater contribution from liis pro- 
 pertv, than merely what is requisite for its due protection. But we know that Go- 
 vernment claims the right (and exercises it too) of drawing on the purses of all the 
 members of the community, and expends hundreds, yes, myriads, and milhons of 
 monev, on schemes of internal improvement, and a thousand other objects connected 
 with the internal police of the country. When we come to this consideration, does 
 not the arofument fail : It is conceded to be a good argument as far as mere equiva- 
 lent for protection goes ;. but when you come to contribution far beyond such equiva- 
 lent, the argument is good no longer, but ceases and is at a stand. The eloquent and 
 ingenious gentleman from NorfoTk (Mr. Taylor) compared the relation between the 
 protection afforded to property on one hand, and the taxes levied by Govern- 
 ment on the other, to the case of the underwriter and the insured. But,'l need not 
 to remind that gentleman of what has been so well and so justly said, that nothing 
 is so apt to lead us into error as a simile. If we commence an analogy upon a sub- 
 ject where it wiU not hold throughout, and w-here there are other and strong points 
 of discrimination, of all sources of error there is none so fruitful and so fatal as such 
 mistaken analogy. Government, the gentleman tells us, is tlie underwriter: agreed. 
 We, he proceeds, who pay taxes, are the insiured. Sir, if in this case, as in ordinary 
 cases of insurance, we were allowed to state the premium we are willing to give, and 
 then hear on what terms the Government were willing to insure, there would be 
 some such analogy as he supposes. But if the underwriter may first demand what 
 premium he pleases, and afler taking that, may confiscate what portion of the capital 
 he pleases, besides, the case is altered. To a gentleman so well skilled in mercantile 
 law, as I know that gentleman to be. it is unnecessary that I cite authorities. I admit 
 that if we had the exact rate of premium fixed by compromise, as between buyer 
 and seller, the analogy he gives might be tolerably accurate. But where the under- 
 writer has the whole matter in his own hands, and the insured is neither consulted as 
 to the rate of premium, nor can be sure of not forfeiting a large part of his capital 
 into the bargain, the argmnent fails and comes to an end. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the object to be attained by the amendment, has been spoken of in 
 some parts of this debate, in terms which indicate that gentlemen consider us as 
 aiming to perpetrate injustice. Sir. if I know my own heart. I would not contend 
 for any object on this floor, which I did not conscientiously believe to rest upon the 
 soimdest principle, I may be wrong in my conclusions : I may mistake the causes 
 firom which the suo-gestions of my judgment have proceeded ,: but one thing I do 
 know, that I shall never advocate here, (whatever be the supposed case elsewhere.) 
 any principle or measure wiiich I do not most sincerely beUeve to be right. Sir, is 
 the principle for which the friends of the amendment are contending, a principle no- 
 vel and unknown : One of the most ardent whigs that ever advocated the cause of 
 free principles, a man who has done more to promote the cause of equal rights and 
 of Parliamentary reform than almost any man of this day in England, a man who has 
 pleaded for a more expanded right of sufirage in th?t country than any of his asso- 
 ciates, sums up his doctrine, and hi? demand in this : that the most just and adequate 
 representation would be. that which is i)i proportion to the contribution of the differ- 
 ent portions of society lo the pubhc expenses. Yet this man was an enthusiast for 
 liberty, burning with a holy ardour in her cause. 
 
 It is urged that numbers only are required, and a property qualification entirely dis- 
 regarded in many of our sister States. So far as this argum^ent goes. I answer that in 
 North Carolina a property tax of some sort is reqmred in the election of Senators ; 
 in South Carolina, the House of Representatives is founded upon just such a com- 
 
96 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pound basis as this amendment proposes, and in Georgia, an allowance is made of 
 three-fifths of all slave property, as in the Federal compact. And what is the fact in 
 respect to our sister States to the East? In New Hampshire and Massachusetts, tax- 
 ation, so far from being disregarded, is made the sole basis as respects elections to the 
 Senatorial branch of the Legislature : and in reference to Massachusetts particularly, 
 1 say that the example is pregnant with useful instruction. The experiment there has 
 borne the test of forty years experience ; and when, a few years since, an attempt was 
 made to alter this feature of their Constitution, after solemn argument, it was retain- 
 ed in her code. We are i-eferred to the experience of our sister States : Sir, so far as 
 experience goes, it is in our favor; so far as experiment is concerned, it is against us : 
 and let it be remembered that there is a strong and marked line between the two. Ex- 
 perience is like the light of the sun, bright, constant, and uniform. Experiment is a 
 meteor, transient in its splendor, and uncertain and irregular in all its movements. 
 Talk to me of the experience of States which came into being but yesterday ! Why, Sir, 
 I have myself, assisted in the creation of some half dozen of them. States in their 
 pupillage : or who have just escaped from it ! tell the people of Virginia of an ignis 
 fatuus like this for their guide ! talk about the result of an experiment in Government 
 \vhicli began but yesterday ! Sir, I beg leave to decline to follow any such guide. 
 If I must have guide and precedent, I had rather look toward the steady habits of 
 Massachusetts, where the experiment has continued forty years and more : and where 
 that experiment was in the full tide of successful progress, when those States, to 
 whose experience we are so reverently referred, were naught but trackless wilds, 
 roamed by savages in quest of game, and who have not had time even for an experi- 
 ment. Admitting that there was some analogy between the condition of Virginia, 
 and States, in circumstances so different, still 1 say, let me have experience, which, 
 according to Lord Verulam, is " the Mistress of the world," and not experiment, 
 which is the worst of all possible guides. And why. Sir.'' There is not a farmer in 
 your State, who will try an experiment, that is suggested to him, till he finds out that 
 somebody else has tried it before him. Shall we trust to an authority like this, in 
 laying the foundation of our Commonwealth 
 
 A strong case was put by the gentleman from Norfolk (Mr. Taylor) to shew the in- 
 justice that might flow from taking property into the account, in fixing our basis of 
 representation. He supposed a country to contain a few individuals of great v/ealth, 
 and others who were in comparatively humble circumstances, where fifty rich men 
 might, through the weight of their property, out vote two hundred and fifty poor men. 
 We are far from contending for such inequality among voters, nor do we desire to see 
 it prevail. In the same district, we would make all the voters equal, no matter how 
 unequal their property. But how did the gentleman get to his conclusion, from such 
 premises ? I believe he would find himself puzzled to make out the middle term of 
 his syllogism. His argument, however, has been already answered by the gentleman 
 from Northampton, and the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Messrs. Upshur and Leigh,) 
 and the answer is this, that there can be no danger of the rich oppressing the poor by 
 Legislation, where both reside within the same district of the State, and, therefore, 
 have a community of local feeling and interest. I have another answer to it. It is of 
 the nature of a representative Government, that it stands on the basis of responsibility. 
 The representative is answerable to those who gave him his power. But if we are to 
 be taxed, as a people, by individuals, not responsible to us for their public acts, the 
 Government is done from that moment. 
 
 I make a distinction between civil liberty and political liberty. Under a Govern- 
 ment of an oligarchical, or even a monarchical form, civil liberty may, nevertheless, 
 be enjoyed, and to a very considerable extent. For Princes, born to even a despotic 
 throne, may perchance, be of a gentle and benevolent temper, and in no wise dispos- 
 ed to exercise the oppressive pov/er with which the Constitution has invested them. 
 Augustus, as we all knov/, swayed the sceptre of the world, during, at least a part of 
 his reign, with clemency and forbearance. But this is not political liberty. I may 
 enjoy a large measure of personal freedom under such a Government, but I enjoy it 
 by permission, by sufferance merely. To convert this freedom into political liberty, it 
 must be made mine of right, and I must have the means of securing it. Now, to apply 
 this doctrine to the argument of the gentleman from Norfolk. The delegate, who re- 
 sides in the same district with his constituents, returns back to them, and is responsible 
 to them for his political acts ; the citizens hold him by a strong cord ; and if he has not 
 been a good steward, he may certainly calculate tDn meeting his reward. But, how 
 does this principle apply, when he who lays the tax, and they who are to pay it, reside 
 in dilferent portions of the State ? He may vote ruin to his tellow-citizens in a distant 
 part of the State, and never be called to account for it ! They did not elect him, and 
 they cannot call him to any account for his stewardship. 
 
 [Mr. Taylor here rose to explain : He said he had waited until the gentleman 
 from Orange had completed his argument on this point ; he had not risen to answer 
 it ; but solely for the purpose of starting the position he had taken, and the principle 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 97 
 
 on which he had relied, in the argument he formerly addressed to the Convention. 
 What I say, observed Mr. Taylor, is, that our Government rests on the principle of 
 equal rights, among all men who are worthy of political power ; and I contend that 
 on that principle rests the safety of our free institutions. If you fix the terms of qua- 
 lification by a fundamental law, declaring who may vote, and who may not, then my 
 position is, that there exists a perfect equality of rights, among all the voters thus 
 qualified. If, in a district giving 300 votes, 250 votes shall not elect a representative, 
 while the remaining 50 do elect him, I say that you destroy all free principle, and 
 disguise it as you will, call it what you please, you do, in effect, establish an aristocra- 
 cy, an odious aristocracy of wealth. You all oppose the admission of such a princi- 
 ple tcithbi your county lines ; and repudiate it as aristocratical in its character. 
 Why is it less aristocratical or less odious, when extended to districts, or to the State 
 at large These were my positions, and this was my argument.] 
 
 Mr. Barbour resumed. He had never knowingly misstated the argument of any 
 gentleman opposed to him : and with due submission, he still contended, that he had 
 neither misstated, nor misunderstood the argument of the gentleman from Norfolk. 
 His argument, said Mr. B. was based on the equality of all the voters within a given 
 district, and went to sho v that the same principle of equality ought to be extended to 
 all other districts ; and, in reply to this argument, I was going on to show the difference 
 between the cases of a representative elected (by whatever rule) from the district 
 where he resides, and returning again to that district, responsible for his publ c con- 
 duct, and that of a representative, chosen in one part of the State, and who has by 
 his public acts, oppressively injured another and a distant part of it, to which he is 
 not responsible, and by which he cannot be punished. And though rich and poor 
 men, have an equal vote in the same district, yet there is safety to property, not only 
 because there is a community of feeling and interest, but because of the responsibility 
 which the representative thus elected, owes to all his constituents, both rich and poor, 
 and who are interested in proportion to their respective property. And here permit 
 me to make an earnest and most sincere disclaimer of all intention to impute to my 
 fellow-citizens of Virginia, any thing like an improper purpose. I have no such belief 
 whatever, but give to them all that credit for integrity of motive, which I claim for 
 myself. But while faith is the surest of all foundations in jnatters of religion, the 
 very reverse of faith, is the true foundation of all free Governments. They are found- 
 ed in jealousy, and guarded by caution ; nor can the spirit of liberty long survive 
 among any people where this jealous vigilance is not kept in perpetual vigour. In 
 Monarchies, its action is against the Monarch. Here, in the United States, so fully 
 is it known and recognized, that the people have written it on all their gates, and ex- 
 ercise it not merely against their official agents, but even against themselves. To pre- 
 vent the people of Virginia from being carried away, by their own partialities, into a 
 premature confidence, they have themselves declared, that the people shall not elect 
 any man to the House of Delegates, who is under 25 years of age, nor to the Senate, 
 who is under 30. Sir, I speak of human nature as it is. I " nothing extenuate nor 
 aught set down in malice." I draw no lines of partial discrimination : but I take my 
 stand on the great principle which I have mentioned, that not faith, but the reverse of 
 faith, is the foundation of all good Government, and that no nation is free, unless 
 they possess political liberty, by which I understand the power to secure their own 
 freedom. 
 
 We have heard much said against the principle of the amendment, as going in 
 practice, to make an unjust discrimination in favour of the rich. But, gentlemen 
 should recollect, that it proposes, within the electoral districts of this State, no distinc- 
 tion between the high and the low. But no man, Mr. Chairman, need to feel greatly 
 alarmed, on the score of wealth among us. Those who have lived but for a few years, 
 may see, from an inspection of the map of Virginia, how fleeting are all human pos- 
 sessions. The wheel of fortune never stands still, but is in a state of perpetual revo- 
 lution. He who was on the summit yesterday, may be at the bottom to-day. It was 
 well said that primogeniture, and the law of entails, are the two columns of Monar- 
 chy ; and that the breakino- down of entails, and passing the act of parcenary, se- 
 cured a perpetual chanore in the possession of property. There exists not the slight- 
 est danger of a permanent concentration of wealth, in any one portion of our coun- 
 try, or among any particular class of our citizens. 
 
 With proper deference, I would take leave to suggest, that throughout a great part 
 of this discussion, gentlemen have confounded civil rights with political power. An 
 argument, which goes for the security of civil rights, involves considerations of one 
 kind ; wliile an argument for the distribution of political power, involves considera- 
 tions of a very different description. All the individuals of the discarded classes, to 
 which reference has already been made, are fully entitled to the enjoyment of civil 
 rights. Minors, women, (for, in this respect, the ladies are as fully in possession of 
 these rights, as any of the lordly sex,) and even aliens, except as to the tenure and 
 transmission of real estate ; and even that distinction has been gradually frittered 
 
 13 
 
98 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 away to a mere form. When the question has respect to civil rights, no distinction can 
 take place from age, sex, or any of the other causes which operate in the other case, 
 unless, indeed, under circumstances of an extraordinary kind ; but, when the ques- 
 tion has reference to political power, then we must have respect to age, to sex, to 
 birth ; and a variety of circumstances, which go, in practice, to exclude from the pos- 
 session of it, a large majority of every community. Here we must of necessity look 
 at the condition of the individual, and determine whether he has the requisites for the 
 enjoyment and exercise of that power. Some items of qualification, all must admit, 
 the payment of tax, and some residence within the State, are required by the gentle- 
 men themselves : they call the possession of these qualifications, a fitness for the elec- 
 tive franchise ; while some of them have so far extended the qualification, as to re- 
 quire permanent residence, and either nativity or naturalization. 
 
 Now, then, the question comes back upon vis ; if it be right, because Government 
 operates on persons, that persons ought to be represented ; is it not equally right, that 
 because it operates on property, property ought to be represented Take the con- 
 verse of this position ; and how will it work What would the gentlemen say to a 
 Government where property only was represented and persons excluded ? None of 
 them would accord to it ; yet we have an example of such a state of things in the 
 Roman Government. 
 
 It is the distribution of the State into centuries, where property alone was taken into 
 view. Afterwards, indeed, according to their usual course, that people went into the 
 opposite extreme ; and then the State was divided into tribes, in which people alone 
 were considered, and property was wholly disregarded. In the State of Massachu- 
 setts, as I have already stated, they go to the extent of making property the only cri- 
 terion in voters for one branch of their Legislature. But I ask, neither for Comitiahj 
 centuries, nor Comitia by tribes. I ask for a compound ratio of both. Both are equally 
 at the command of the Legislature, and both need security against an abuse of power. 
 j3 priori indeed ; as it is conceded by all, that because the Government acts upon per- 
 sons, they should be represented, so in like manner, as Government acts upon pro- 
 perty, tire owners of that property ought to have some representation in reference 
 to it, as between the different districts of the Commonwealth. If this be true as a 
 general principle, it applies emphatically to the particular condition of Virginia; in 
 the eastern part of which, there is almost half the population, which, as smcA, would 
 be excluded upon the white basis, whilst at the same time, that population as j)roperty, 
 pays an enormous disproportion of the tax ; thus presenting the striking fact, that the 
 very cause which would forever keep down the eastern i'epi*esentation,much below its 
 standard, would forever aggravate their taxation, far beyond a just standard. The 
 amendment under discussion, proposes some remedy for this great injustice. 
 
 It is the natural desii'e of us all, to lay the foundations of this Constitution in such 
 a manner, that it shall stand and endure. If that be our purpose, we must rest it on 
 these two great columris : Persons and property. Withdraw either, and you have a 
 weak and tottering edifice, whicii never can endure the shocks of time. If I might 
 venture upon a simile, I would compare our Constitution to an extensive and delicate 
 piece of machinery. If the engineer who devised its structure, shall so arrange its 
 internal wheels, that they act in opposite directions, and on antagonist principles, the 
 result must, of necessity, be, that its works can easily be put ovit of order, and. that 
 the machine itself is not likely to last. But, if, on the contrary, he shall so arrange the 
 various parts, that all its wheels shall move in one direction ; that all the principles of 
 its action shall be harmonious and uniform ; that there shall be no cla.sliing of wheel 
 against wheel, but all shall move by one law, and to one end ; then the machine, 
 while it reflects credit upon the skill and ingenuity of its author, will accomplish the 
 beneficial purposes for which it was designed, and will continue to work, without 
 needing any material repairs, to an indefinite period of time. We have an instruc- 
 tive warning on this subject in the history and fate of the Ancient Republics. When- 
 ever, in any of their Constitutions, persons and property, were set in opposition to 
 each other, the result invariably was found to be, heart-burnings, conflicts, confusion, 
 bloodshed, civil war, anarchy, and finally, the utter and disastrous downfall of liberty, 
 and the establishment of Despotic Government. I would place these two principles 
 side by side, in perfect harmony. I would encoutage nothing like distrust, or conflict 
 between them; but would blend their action into perfect concert, and thus produce 
 lasting tranquillity. If persons remained safely protected, beneath the overshadowing 
 power of the State, I would have property protected too. On the other hand, the 
 safety of property was put under the guarantee of the Constitution ; I would build 
 upon the same organic basis, the perfect security of persons. It is the interest of this 
 great community to keep the provisions of its Government, safe and inviolate : make 
 those provisions just, and then they will abide long; and the edifice of State, subject 
 only to that infirmity which is the inheritance . and the characteristic of man, shall 
 stand for posterity, secure from internal danger, and equally safe, as I trust and be- 
 lieve, from external violence. 
 
DEBATES OF THlT CONVENTION. 
 
 99 
 
 Mr. Baldwin, of Augusta, after assigning his motives for addressing the Commit- 
 tee at that period of the debate, and his intention to present his views of. the subject 
 with as much brevity as practicable, proceeded to state the question under considera- 
 tion. The resolution reported by the Legislative Conmiittee, and the amendment 
 proposed by the gentleman from Gulpeper, present the question, whether representa- 
 tion ought to be apportioned equally amongst the citizens of this Coiamonwealth, 
 who shall be admitted to the right of suffrage, according to numbers, or whether it ~ 
 shall be apportioned amongst them unequally, by adopting a basis compounded of 
 numbers and taxation. It is a question, so far as relates to numbers, between equa- 
 lity on the one hand, and inequality on the other ; and after the adirhssions made by 
 gentlemen opposed to me in this debate, I may surely venture to assert, without 
 much fear of contradiction, that according to the genius of our political institutions, 
 whenever a question arises concerning the distribution of pov»"er, amongst tlae people 
 themselves, the source of all power, the rule of equality ought to prevail, unless 
 some good reason be shewn to the contrary. The gentleman from Culpeper QAx. 
 Green) and the gentleman from Northampton (Mr. Upshur) have both conceded, 
 that under a Republican Government, it is correct, as a general rule, that the power 
 of the State ought to be placed in the hands of the majority of its citizens ; but 
 they contend tliat peculiar circumstances may exist, wliich would render the appli- 
 cation of that rule unjust and hnpolitic. On this occasion, they conceive that a suf- 
 ficient reason to justity an exception, may be found in the contrariety of interests 
 prevailing in different sections of this Commonwealth. If all the various portions of 
 Virginia were entirely assimilated in territory, population, wealth and resources, nei- 
 ther of the gentlemen referred to, nor I presume any member of this Committee, 
 would hesitate for a moment to approve the basis of representation proposed by the re- 
 solution we are now considering. 
 
 Notwithstanding the conflicting interests which some gentlemen siTppose to exist be- 
 tween different sections of the Stat«, none, I presume, are disposed to treat this contro- 
 versy as a mere struggle for power. If it were so regarded, all discussion of the subject 
 would be worse^than usekss. It would be mischievous. It would only ser^^e to in- 
 flame our own minds, and scatter throughout the community, the fire-brands of dis- 
 cord. No, Sir, we all profess, and I trust sincerely, to be desirous of arriving at a 
 correct conclusion, and to be engaged in this comparison of sentiments, for the pur- 
 pose of obtaining light from the spirit of our institutions, the character and feelings 
 of our people, the precepts of experience, and the dictates of sound policy. It has 
 been said by several gentlemen in this debate, that all men are actuated hy self-inter- 
 est ; and I have no objection to the proposition, when understood to embrace that no- 
 ble and enlightened self-interest, which teaches us the love of truth and justice, 
 and the sacrihce of all sordid and contracted prejudices, upon the altai's of duty and 
 patriotism. 
 
 In asserting the principles which in my opinion elucidate this subject, I shall not 
 incur the imputation of indulging in abstract discussion ; a mode of argument so 
 much deprecated by some of the gentlemen who have preceded me, and which I ac- 
 knowledge is less remarkable for its utility, than its intricate and almost intermina- 
 ble .character. For my own part. Sir, having always regarded Government as prac- 
 tical in its very nature, I do not expect that we shall derive much useful information 
 from the best constructed theories, though sustained with all the powers of intellect, 
 and adorned with all the charms of eloquence. I was delighted. Sir, with the logical 
 and beautiful abstract reasoning employed by the gentleman from Northampton (Mr. 
 Upshur,) with the avowed object of proving that abstractions cannot be safely relied 
 upon, in matters of Government. Let us leave, then, to school-men and sophists, all 
 the theories concerning the origin and nature of Government in general, and save 
 ourselves the trouble of enquiring whether it should be traced to patriarchal supre- 
 macy, physical force, or social compact. I would not dispute with any people, the 
 propriety af any political system which they have thought proper to sanction by their 
 approbation or acquiescence ; even though they acknowledge the Divine right of 
 Kings, and the duty of passive obedience, or boast the privileges and immunities ex- 
 torted from the fears or conceded by the clemency of monarchs, or cherish the 
 aristocratic notions of noble birth, subordination of ranks, and hereditary authorit}^. 
 
 And yet, Mr. Chairman, I am far from admitting the broad proposition which has 
 been asserted and reiterated in this debate, that there are no principles in politics. If, 
 indeed, gentlemen mean only by this assertion, that there are no abstract principles 
 of Government which must be regarded as true in all nations, in all ages, and under 
 all circumstances. I should consider it a waste of time, to enter into any controversy 
 with them upon the subject. But surely. Sir, there are principles of a practical na- 
 ture, without which,- no free Government can exist, and a frequent recurrence to 
 which is indispensable, in order to justify and illustrate its institutions. A Govern- 
 ment which rests upon public opinion, cannot be sustained" without the aid of such 
 principles ; the result, if you please, of observation and experince, but sanctioned by 
 
100 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the reason and cherished in the affections of the people, and which may be confi- 
 dently appealed to, on all important questions, affecting their safety or happiness. 
 
 Ours, iSlr. Chairman, is emphatically a Government of principles : principles es- 
 tablished by the wisdom, and consecrated with the blood of our fathers. It is cer- 
 tainly not our purpose to tear up the foundations of our political system, and estab- 
 lish a new one out of the ruins ; our object is to reform and amend, but not to revo- 
 lutionize. Witliout, therefore, indulging in abstract theories, or referring to the sys- 
 tems of other nations, let us resort to those fundamental truths which constitute the 
 basis of our own system. W e shall find them all-sufficient for every useful purpose ; 
 they will serve as " a lamp to our feet, and a light to our path," upon this or any other 
 subject of our duties. 
 
 lu this country, highly favoured, as we believe, by Heaven, and distinguished for 
 its civil and political liberties, we recognize the sovereignty of the people, the fiduci- 
 ary character of all public agents. We consider the people not only as the objects 
 and subjects of Government, but as the governors themselves in the last resort, and 
 the only safe depositories of unlimited power. We regard the organs of legislative 
 authority as representatives of the people, accountable to them, and constituted for 
 the purpose of expressing their will. We acknowledge that this general or public 
 will must prevail, whether in the ordinary legislative enactments, or in the construc- 
 tion and alteration of the fundamental laws. As unanimity in the operations of such 
 a Government, is in the nature of things, impracticable, the general Avill is to be ex- 
 pressed by the voice of the majority. This, as the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. 
 Cooke) has correctly stated, is a rule founded upon necessity ; for otherwise, the 
 public will would be nugatory, or would be expressed by the voice of the minority, 
 the absurdity of which is manifest. 
 
 None of these principles have, as yet, been controverted in this debate. It has not 
 even been denied, that the will of the majority ought to prevail ; the only controver- 
 sy is in regard to the application of the rule ; son?e gentlemen contending that a ma- 
 jority does not mean, necessarily, a majority of numbers alone. On this point, it is 
 only necessary that reference should be had to the language employed in our Bill of 
 Rights, which asserts that a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalien- 
 able, and indefeasible right, to reform, alter, or abolish the Government. It is impos- 
 sible thit any one can doubt the majority here spoken of, is a majority of numbers, 
 and not a majority of interests, or of interests and numbers combined. It is true that 
 this clause in the Bill of Kights Avas not intended as a declaration, that in all cases 
 whatever, in which a conflict of opinions may occur, the question in controversy is to be 
 decided by a majority of numbers ; and the gentleman from Orange (Mr. Barbour) has 
 stated various exainples in which tiae rule is not applicable. The principle declared, is 
 obviously in reference only to the sovereign right of the people, to establish or change 
 the fundamental law ; and it cannot be doubted, that the majority of the people may, if 
 they so determine, give an ascendancy in the Government to the minority. But is it 
 reasonable that they should do so and would not such a transfer of power be a gross 
 violation of the duty which they owe to themselves ? The majority have the un- 
 questioned right to change the very foundations of Government, and distribute poli- 
 tical power according to their own discretion ; and yet they are asked to subject 
 themselves and their posterity, by their own voluntary act, to the control of the mi- 
 nority. Should they do so, they will shew themselves well worthy of becoming " hew- 
 ers of wood and drawers of water." I would ask. Sir, if there is any one here who 
 would venture to propose, that when the Constitution, which we are engaged in pre- 
 paring, shall be submitted to the people for their approval or rejection, the question 
 shall not be decided by the majority of qualified voters .'' And should there be reserv- 
 ed to the people, as undoubtedly their right, a veto upon the enactments of the Le- 
 gislature, would they not, in the exercise of that direct power, decide according to 
 numbers ? The purpose of representation, is the delegation of power to agents, which 
 the people cannot, with convenience, immediately exercise themselves, and no ine- 
 quality ought to prevail, in regard to the delegated authority, which would not be 
 admitted amongst those from whom it is derived, if retained by them in their own 
 hands. 
 
 I have thus endeavored, by referring to well established principles, to shew that no 
 inequality ought to exist in the exercise of the elective franchise. It is true that the 
 right of suffrage itself, may, and ought to be limited. All those are to be excluded, 
 who cannot be expected to exercise it discreetly ; that is to say, in such manner as will 
 promote the safety and happiness of themselves and the rest of the community. 
 It is upon this principle, that various classes, embracing many individuals, are exclud- 
 ed ; of which, obvious and familiar examples have been stated in the course of this 
 debate. It is upon this principle alone, that any freehold or other property quahfica- 
 tion can be required from the electors. The qualifications, of whatever nature, are 
 the subjects of a sound and wholesome discretion, and ought to be fairly and imparti- 
 ally adjusted, with a view only to the public good, and not for the purpose of elevating 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 101 
 
 or depressing any portions of society . But when once established, aH those entitled to 
 the right of 'suffrage ought to be admitted upon terms of perfect equality. We can- 
 not with propriety, distinguish amongst individuals, or masses of individuals. There 
 is no doubt a wide difference between the merits of individuals, intrinsic or adventi- 
 tious. Moral integrity, talents, learning, reputable connections, the fruits of industry, 
 acquired or inherited, always give the possessor an influence over the opinions and 
 conduct of others ; but those advantages are sufficient in themselves and require no 
 artificial distinctions. Neither justice nor good policy requires that authority should 
 keep pace with influence, and be in like manner unequally distributed. If the rule 
 of equality for which I contend, be departed from, in order to distribute political pow- 
 er, in any degree, according to wealth, then I agree with the gentleman from Norfolk 
 (Mr. Taylor) that the Government must, to that extent, be regarded as a monied aris- 
 tocracy. 
 
 Having thus presented some of the considerations which, in my opinion, justify the 
 resolution reported by the Legislative Committee, I shall now submit a few remarks 
 upon the basis of representation proposed by the amendment. So far as taxation is 
 a constituent, it is a scheme of property representation; and one of the arguments 
 urged by its advocates is, that property ought to be represented, inasmuch as it is 
 one of the great objects of Government. I beg, Sir, that the purposes of Government 
 may not be confounded with the principles upon which it is to be organized. The 
 protection of the people in the enjoyment of their property is doubtless an important 
 duty of Government. But the same duty exists in relation to all the innocent and 
 legitimate enjoyments of which they are capable. Those enjoyments are not, how- 
 ever, the proper subjects of representation. -In a representative democracy, which is 
 founded upon the supposed intelligence and virtue of the people, the purposes of 
 Government are to be effected by a representation of the people tliemselves; and we 
 have been taught to believe, that under such a system, none of the important interests 
 of society will be prostrated or neglected. It can throw no light upon this subject to 
 distinguish between personal rights and the rights to property ; they are all squally 
 entitled to the protection of Government ; their relative importance cannot be gradu- 
 ated; nor is there any scale by which we can determine how much relative pohtical 
 power ought to be enjoyed by a citizen in order to ensure to him protection. 
 
 The advocates of the proposed amendment avow, that it is intended to operate upon 
 the relative political power of different portions of the Commonwealth ; and it is ob- 
 vious that the only security which it can afford to property is by protecting it against 
 the partial and unjust legislation, which may arise out of conflicting sectional inte- 
 rests. It can Imve no effect in securing proprietors throughout the State against the 
 assaults of the indigent. Power would be unequally apportioned amongst the electoral 
 districts, but in each district every elector would be entitled to an equal vote. If, there- 
 fore, a combination should be formed amongst the indigent, against the affluent, pro- 
 perty would find no protection in the basis of representation proposed by the amend- 
 ment. If gentlemen are correct in the supposition that property ought to be repre- 
 sented in order to afford it protection, they ought not to stop short of their principle, 
 and provide only a partial safe-guard ; but should propose giving political power to each 
 proprietor in proportion to the value of his propert}' or the amount of his taxes. Now, 
 I ask, Sir, what would be thought of a proposition that one elector should have twice, 
 or thrice, or ten times as many votes as another, in consideration of his owning proper- 
 ty to a greater extent ; and yet the principle is the same, whether it be applied to in- 
 dividuals or masses of individuals. 
 
 Several gentlemen have urged upon us, that taxation ought to be regarded in the 
 apportionment of representation, because it furnishes the means by which Govern- 
 ment is supported ; and we have been told, that those who pay the taxes ought to lay 
 the taxes. If by this assertion is meant, that all who pay taxes ought to be admitted 
 to the right of suffrage, it may be true as a general proposition, and will receive the 
 consideration of this Committee when another resolution of the Legislative Commit- 
 tee shall occupy our attention. If the idea intended to be expressed is. that none but 
 those who pay the taxes ought to have a voice in laying them, then the rule would 
 amount to nothing more than an exclusive property qualification. But if we are call- 
 ed upon to believe that political power ought to be unequally distributed amoncrst the 
 qualified voters, from a regard to the sums of money which they respectively contri- 
 bute to the support of Government, it remains to be proved wiiy contributions of that 
 character confer a better claim to political power than those of any other description. 
 There is no good reason wliy the aid which a citizen furnishes in the support of Gov- 
 ernment, in the form of taxes, should be placed on higher ground than that which he 
 yields in personal services. He who devotes the energies of his body and mind to the 
 welfare of his country, labours to promote her best interests, or defends her rights up- 
 on the battle field, ma}^ surelj?- claim the meric of having contributed to the support of 
 Government. He is not entitled to political pov\'er merely in consideration of such 
 services, but his right is not inferior to that of him whose aid is furnished from his 
 
102 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 purse. There is not^ as some advocates of the amendment seem to suppose, any pe- 
 cuHar relation between taxation on the one hand, and representation on the other, as 
 is evident from the principles which govj&rn their respective application. All are 
 bound to contribute" to the support of Government according to their means'^ all are 
 entitled to the right of suffrage who have sufficient evidence of permanent common 
 interest in, and attachment to, the community. - 
 
 I am at a loss to perceive, Sir, how this subject can be elucidated, by the refer- 
 ence which gentlemen have made to the controversy with Great Britain, which re- 
 sulted in our Independence. The British Parliament asserted the right of taxing us 
 without our consent, although we were in no wise represented in that body ; our re- 
 presentatives being here in our Colonial Legislatures. We resisted that despotic en- 
 terprize of a foreign Government, as we would have resisted any other invasion of 
 our civil liberties, and engaged in the perilous and unequal conflict, not to obtain re- 
 presentation in Parliament, which we would not have been willing to accept, whe- 
 ther according to taxation or numbers, but because we would not submit to laws 
 affecting our rights, to which we had not consented, either by ourselves or our repre- 
 sentatives. 
 
 As this amendment is justified, in the opinion of its advocates, by the conflicting 
 sectional interests supposed to exist in Virginia, in consequence of which the greater 
 wealth of the minority might, without some such security, fall a sacrifice to the ra- 
 pacity of the majority, I would ask gentlemen to reflect whether there is in point of 
 fact, any permanent contrariety of interests of that alarming character. We are 
 forming a Constitution which is to last for ages, and we should be careful not to mis- 
 take temporary and fluctuating varieties of interests, for those of a permanent and 
 irreconcileable nature ; and the changes in the relative wealth and population of dif-, 
 ferent parts of the. State, which have already occurred, and are still in progress, ought 
 to be sufficient to remove ail fears on this subject. 
 
 The only efi^ect of the proposed amendment would be, to give permanency to any 
 hostile sectional feelings which may now exist in this Commonwealth, and by exas- 
 perating those feelings, perhaps bring about that very insecurity of property which it 
 is the object of its .advocates to guard against. Representation in any degree, ac- 
 cording to taxation, would not prevent schemes of internal improvement • by which, 
 portions of the State may be made to aid in defraying the expenses of improvements 
 in which they might not consider themselves immediately interested. If enlarged 
 views of justice and sound policy should not satisfy the dominant party, however 
 constituted, that the interests of the whole State will be promoted by useful internal, 
 improvements, wherever required, you may rest assured that the sanje result will be 
 produced by combinations of Various sectional interests. And we are not to expect 
 that the east and the west will be always arrayed against each other upon such ques- 
 tions. The improvement of James River may, for example, be united with a project 
 to connect it with the western waters ; and in like manner a concert may be brought 
 about between those interested in the navigaiion of the Potomac, and that of the 
 Shenandoah. 
 
 All the arguments which have been urged to prove that Virginia is divided by hos- 
 tile and irreconcileable sectional interests, only tend to establish that she ought not 
 to continue united under the same Government, a conclusion abhorrent to the feel- 
 ings of every patriot, and however ingenioiis and eloquent gentlemen may speculate- 
 upon the subject, not justified by any facts which have occurred in the whole course 
 of our history. And afler all that has been said to destroy our confidence in the jus- 
 tice of the majority, it is the only rational security which we can have for the peace, 
 and happiness, and prosperity of the community. Our Republican Institutions rest 
 for their support upon the virtue and intelligence of the people ; and if they should 
 not be sufficient to ensure a faithful and wise administration of the Government, the 
 best hopes of human liberty and happiness which we have cherished must be disap- 
 pointed, and we shall be compelled to abandon the scheme of self-government, and 
 yield up the many to the protection of the few. 
 
 Mr. Baldwin concluded, by apologizing for the imperfect manner in which he 
 feared he had discharged the duty he had undertaken, and for the omission of sever 
 ral views of the subject, which he had intended submitting to the consideration of 
 the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Cooke of Frederick, availed himself of the pause which ensued, after the close 
 of the above speech, to correct a misapprehension into which Mr. Upshur had fallen, 
 in supposing him to have admitted, that in the whole period, during which the exist- 
 ing Constitution had been in operation, no instances of misrule had ever occurred in 
 any department of the Government : he had gone no farther than to admit, that while 
 the Gentlemen in the eastern part of the State, having the majority in the Legislature, 
 had it thereby in their power to lay oppressive taxes on the cattle of the west, they 
 had never exercised their power in that respect. As to, instances of misrule, he had 
 not said any thing, as he would gladly avow such a question. He went into a farther 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. ^ . vlQS 
 
 correction of the same gentleman, in relation to what Mr. Cooke had said, as to the 
 balance between the popnlaiion on the two sides of the Blue Ridge, and the relative 
 number of slaves in the lower country, and in the Valley, and he made a statistical 
 calculation to shew, that the fears entertaiued by the slave-holding part of the State 
 were groundless, 
 
 Mr. Upshur replied, and regretted that the gentleman had thought it necessary to 
 withdraw any part of a compliment, which, as coming from him, was highly appreci- 
 ated by gentlemen from the east of the State. Still the argument remained the same ; 
 for, if when they had the power, they had not oppressed the west by taxation, he was 
 •at a loss to conceive, in what other way they were under any temptation to oppress 
 them. Mr. Upshur still insisted on tlie ground he had before taken, as to the balance 
 of slave population ; and denied that any counties were to be reckoned to the slave- 
 holding interest, but those in which that sort of population formed the preponderating 
 interest. 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, asked whether it would be trespassing too far on the gentle- 
 man from Frederick (Mr. Cooke) if he asked him to state some of the prominent acta 
 of misrule, which had taken place in the Legislature of Virginia, during the time the 
 power of the majority in that body, had been in the hands of gentlemen residing in 
 the eastern portion of the State ? It had been a part of the fortune of his own very la- 
 borious life, to examine almost every act of that Legislature, since the Revolution. 
 On the subject of misrule, he confessed himself a beggar_for information, hungry and 
 destitute. He did not ask the gentleman to go into particulars, but merely to state some 
 of the prominent cases. Mr. Leigh would not say, that during that time no impolitic 
 measures had been adopted, nor would he say the Government had always pursued the 
 wisest and the best course ; but, he wished to have pointed out to him any very impo- 
 litic measure, justly chargeable upon the structure of the existing Constitution, and 
 to which tire people of the west had not been as much parties as the people of the east; 
 any wrong done either to individuals, or to classes of the community, springing out of 
 the principles of the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied, that he had not asserted the existence of misrule, and, therefore, 
 he was not called upon to prove what he had not asserted* Yet he would not ad- 
 mit, that he might not truly have made such an assertion. To make his meaning 
 more distinct, he would now say that he did assert the existence of such misrule. Yet 
 he should reserve to himself the right of taking what course he chose upon that floor ; 
 nor could he consent to have such course chalked out, and dictated to him by the 
 member from Chesterfield., He said he might, perhaps, give at some other time the 
 reasons on which his assertion rested ; but at present there were many gentlemen who 
 wished to speak to the question ; and he did not choose to have the time of the 
 Convention taken up by a discussion thus forced upon him by the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rejoined : he thought there had been nothing either unparliamentary or 
 indecent in the request he had preferred to the gentleman from Frederick. The gen- 
 tleman would certainly wait his own good time. But, in the mean while, he begged 
 leave to join issue with him, and to pledge himself to meet the charge, come it on 
 what ground it might : the history of the Legislature of the State would repel it. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Powell of Frederick, the Committee then rose, and thereupon 
 the House adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, October 30, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Sykes, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Tlie Convention resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. Stanard in 
 the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Powell rose to address the Commmittee, in opposition to Mr. Green's amend- 
 ment, and spoke in nearly the following terms : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : At no period, upon no occasion of my life, have I felt so much em- 
 barrassment as I do at this moment. I fear I have neither physical nor moral strength 
 to sustain the weight. It is not wonderful that I should be embarrassed, when I look 
 through this assembly, containing the assembled wisdom of the State ; when I see 
 before me, men grown grey in the pursuit of political service, and who have spent 
 their lives in the application of their science, to promote the happiness and prosperity 
 of their fellow men : men, who will hereafter be consecrated for their profound wis- 
 dom and tried patriotism. It would ill become so humble an individual to be other- 
 wise than embarrassed. Mr. Chairman, I have nothing to offer to this Committee, 
 but a plain, unvarnished statement of the grounds and arguments, which have brought 
 
104 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 me to my conclusions. I cannot invoke the rich stores of fancy or call the decora- 
 tions of eloquence to my aid. 
 
 We have, Mr. Chairman, been deputed here, and clothed with ample powers by the 
 people of Virginia, to form for them a compact of Government for the protection of 
 their lives, their liberty, and f )r the security of their property. In the discharge of 
 this duty, I know of but one moral or divine law which we are bound to respect and 
 obey : this is, that we shall observe the immutable principles of justice in framing the 
 instrument. There are certain political maxims, hallowed by time and sanctioned by 
 the wisdom of the sages and patriots of former days, and embodied in our Bill of 
 Rights, to which I shall have occasion to refer hereafter, that certainly have no bind- 
 ing or obligatory force upon us, either natural or divine, but which certainly are en- 
 titled to great respect and influence, where they are applicable. Our duty, as I have 
 said, is to form a compact of Government ; in doing this, certainly, every member has 
 an unquestioned right to offer his propositions, and insist on their admission into the 
 compact. In doing so, the member is the only proper judge of the justice and expe- 
 diency of his proposition, and is not bound to yield his own opinion to the influence 
 of any political maxim ; except where such maxim has intrinsic worth to recommend 
 it. We have, then, a moral rule to govern us, which, we are not at liberty to violate, 
 and we have political maxims to guide us, so far as we regard these maxims as appli- 
 cable to existing circumstances. There are also motives and rules of action, personal 
 to ourselves, that ought tobe adverted to. We were not sent here, to gain in this com- 
 pact, to seek to obtain advantages for those we represent, local or sectional advanta- 
 ges ; for myself, I would have indignantly rejected the honorable trust conferred upon 
 me, if it had been expected of me to struggle for local interests, at the sacrifices of 
 the interests of the whole community. I regard myself here, as the representative, 
 as much of the one as of the other sections of the Commonwealth, j regard it as 
 my duty to look to the interests of the whole community, and to provide fundamen- 
 tal laws for the community at large. 
 
 With these preliminary views, I shall proceed to the consideration of the questions 
 now before the Committee. It will be conceded, I presume, by every member of the 
 Committee, that in the formation of a compact of Government, the great and leading' 
 object ought to be, to conform the Government to the character of the people over 
 whom it is to operate. It will also be conceded, that a Representative Republic, 
 founded upon elementary principles, essentially belonging to such a form of Govern- 
 ment, is the best and happiest system for obtaining the end of all Government that 
 can be devised, when the people have the essential qualities to suit them to such a 
 form of Government. Those essential qualities ai-e virtue and intelligence in tlie peo- 
 ple. If they have those qualities, justice demands that they should receive this high- 
 est and best gift of Divine Providence, at the hands of those to whom is confided the 
 power of framing their Government. If, on the contrary, they are deficient in those 
 great essentials, such a Government would be to them a curse instead of a blessing. 
 All history and experience prove the truth of this proposition. No wise politician 
 would for a moment contend, that Turkey or Russia could live under such a form 
 of Government. Visionary and dreaming politicians made the experiment in France : 
 the result was a scene of carnage and hon-or, at which the mind revolts. But, in the 
 same ratio as it would be unjust and impolitic in these countries, to attempt to estab- 
 lish a Republican Government, it would be unjust to refuse a Government of that 
 description, to those who have those essential pillars, on which alone it can rest. 
 
 Our first duty, therefore, is to look to the character of the people of Virginia, for 
 whom it is our duty to form a Constitution. If we find them virtuous and intelligent, 
 it would be unpardonable in us, not to frame for them a Constitution, founded upon 
 the pure and essential elements of Republicanism. It would be without excuse, if, in 
 departing from those principles, we infused into the instrument, ohgarchical, aristo- 
 cratical, and monarchical principles, abridging, in any degree, their power of self- 
 government. What, then, is the character of the people of Virginia Have they 
 virtue; have they intelligence, fitting them for such a system of Government.^ If 
 they have not, it may be safely afiirmed, that there is not, upon the face of the globe, 
 a people of whom we have knowledge, that possesses these requisites; and we have 
 only to deplore the verification of the predictions of all the enemies of civil liberty, 
 who denounce the Republics in this country, as an idle and visionary experiment ; 
 and the friends of liberal principles, may sit down and lament over the prostration of 
 their best and fairest hopes. But I confidently maintain, that the people of Virginia, 
 is a community, who love virtue and intelligence. To sustain this proposition, I ap- 
 peal to every member of this Convention, and ask him to look at the people with 
 whom he lives in the district he himself represents, and to say whether they are not 
 a virtuous, an honest, and an intelligent people ? For myself, I could say, that the 
 people of the district with whom I five, possess this character. No one will deny 
 that the people of Virginia, were a virtuous and magnanimous people in 1776 ; that 
 tliey gave the most striking and conclusive evidence of the most sterhng virtue. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 105 
 
 With a vindictive and ruthless enemy at their very doors ; with every thing to appal 
 and to alarm ; in truth, with lialters round their necks ; the alternative was presented to 
 them, of abandoning their virtue, their principles, and their countr}', and thereby se- 
 curing their own safety, or nobly traversing the dangers that encompass them : are 
 the people of Virginia the degenerate sons of such fathers ? I think not. A similar 
 occasion would produce similar evidences of virtue at the present day. The demora- 
 lizing principle, has not here had the inviting channels which have been opened to it 
 in some other States of the Union. We have no large cities in Virginia, to present 
 an inviting refuge for the vicious, the profligate, and the convicts of foreign countries, 
 and in that way, to introduce them into the heart of the community, spreading their 
 baneful influence in all directions. 
 
 But a conclusive evidence of the virtue of the people of Virginia is to be found 
 in the body here assembled. I look around me, and of what materials do I find 
 it composed Does it not include men most distinguished for their wisdom and 
 for their virtue, their patriotism, and public services Were not these the qua- 
 lifications which recommended them to the people of Virginia? Would the people, 
 if themselves vicious, or demoralized, have selected them for such recommendations ? 
 What, I ask, is this Does the report of the Legislative Committee, which we are 
 now considering, recommend an essential, elementary principle, as the basis of a pure 
 Republican Government, suited to a virtuous and enlightened people ? If it does, and 
 the principles which I have attempted to maintain, be correct ; justice, wisdom, and poli- 
 cy demand that that report should receive our sanction. The principle there recommen- 
 ded, is, that representation in the Legislative Department of Government, should be 
 based upon white population, exclusively. I have said, that there were great political 
 maxims emanating from the wisest and most patriotic statesmen, and sanctioned by all 
 the elementary writers upon the subject of Government; acted upon too, and approved 
 by the people of this Commonwealth for fifty-four years, and embodied in our Bill of 
 Rights; and that we ought to regard them, not as binding authority, but as lights to 
 guide us to correct conclusions. One of these maxims is found in the second section of 
 that instrument, which, among others, is declared, in the preamble of that section, to 
 pertain to the people of this Commonwealth and their posterity, as the basis and foun- 
 dation of Government. That maxim is, " that all power is vested in, and conse- 
 quently derived from, the people ; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and 
 at all times amenable to them." To see the application of this maxim, we must first 
 ascertain in what sense the word people " is there used. It is unquestionably inten- 
 ded to embrace all those v/ithin the pale of the community : in other words, all those 
 who are participants in the enjoyment of political power. It follows, therefore, when 
 the community is ascertained, that all political power is vested in that community. By 
 the third article in the Bill of Rights it is provided that a majority hath an indubita- 
 ble, unalienable, and indefeasible right, to reform, alter or abohsh the fundamental 
 laws as shall be judged, &c. 
 
 Thus it is perceived that, by the Bill of Rights, and without the BiU of Rights it 
 would be equally true and undeniable, two great principles of Government are es- 
 tablished. 
 
 1st. That all power is vested in the people. 
 
 2nd. That a majority of the people must control the minority, and regulate the ex- 
 ercise of that power. 
 
 Apply these two principles to the resolution of the Committee, and they sustain the 
 proposition therein contained. 
 
 The truth of these two propositions must be denied, or the resolution must be sanc- 
 tioned : does this require argument to prove it ? The argument is brief. If all pow- 
 er is " vested in the people, and a majority is " to govern, in the exercise of that pow- 
 er, it follows of course, that such majority can only be ascertained by a general vote of 
 the people, or by their agents representing equal portions of the people. 
 
 I have thus, according to my intention, endeavored to shew: 
 
 1. That Government must be conformed to the characters of the people. 
 
 2. That Republican Government is the happiest form of Government, that human 
 wisdom can divine, for a virtuous and intelligent people. 
 
 3. That the people of Virginia,^ have the necessary virtue and intelhgence. 
 
 4. That the resolution of the Legislative Committee, recommends a principle essen- 
 tially and necessarily forming an element, of a pure Republican Government. 
 
 I will now, Mr. Chairman, proceed to the consideration of the amendment proposed 
 by the gentleman from Culpeper. He proposes to strike out the basis of white popu- 
 lation exclusively, as recommended by the Committee, and to insert a totally different 
 basis ; a basis to be composed of population and taxation combined : — As to the object 
 of this proposition of amendment, there can be but one opinion; it is intended, dis- 
 tinctly, to give representation (to a certain extent) to wealth, and not to nmiibers. 
 What, is the avowed operation and effect of the amendment, as admitted by its friends 
 and advocates ? It will be to give representation to slaves, and political power to their 
 masters in the Legislative Department of the Government ; and this, not because they 
 
 14 
 
106 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 are rational beings, having fi-ee will, and the power of exercising such free will, but 
 as property exclusively in the hands of their owners, by reason whereof, they are to 
 have and exercise political power. To illustrate : If an individual has one hundred 
 slaves, upon which he pays taxes, he is to have political power in proportion to his 
 number of slaves. Tliis doctrine is new in the political institutions of this State : it is 
 moreover, not only a departure from what has hitherto been regarded as republican, 
 but is in direct conflict with the political maxims, by which the statesmen and patri- 
 ots of Virginia have heretofore been guided and governed. Let us look, for a mo- 
 ment, to some of the inost leading and fundamental of these maxims : In the Bill of 
 Rights it is asserted, that all power is derived from the people, and of right belongs to 
 them. The proposed amendment affirms, that all power is not derived from the peo- 
 ple, and vested in them, but that a portion of political power belongs to, and is vested 
 in, 'property, and that not property in general, according to the argument, but in a parti- 
 cular species of property. There is another political maxim found in the same instru- 
 ment, which asserts, that the majority of the people have an indubitable, unalienable, 
 and indefeasible right, to reform, alter or abolish their fundamental laws. The amend- 
 ment affirms, that this right does not belong to a majority, but that this great and ab- 
 sorbing right, belongs to a vunority of the people and majority of toealth : both these 
 propositions cannot be true. The one or the other must be false. Are gentlemen pre- 
 pared to pronounce these maxims false They certainly have high, and I would al- 
 most venture to say, controlling sanction, when applied to people capable of self-gov- 
 ernment : they emanated from the wisest and purest statesmen, in the best of times. 
 They are liallowed by time and experience, and are interwoven with the habits and 
 affections of the people of Virginia. Will the Committee at this stage of my argu- 
 ment, indulge me in a simple and practical illustration of the truth of these political 
 maxims. I beg leave to use my illustration, not only to shew, to some extent, the 
 reasons upon which these truths are founded ; but also, as an answer to an argument 
 of the gentleman from Orange, in which he insists upon the quid j^'i'o quo^ in tlie com- 
 pact we are engaged in makmg. 
 
 I will suppose that a community of fifty individuals have assembled together for 
 the purpose of forming for themselves a system of Government. Of these individu- 
 als, forty are worth 100 dollars each : the residue ten, worth 2000 dollars each. They 
 agree as to the object of the compact. It is to jjrotect their lives, and their liberty, and 
 to secure their property. The next object is the details of this compact. 1 will take 
 the joint-stock principle of the gentleman from Northampton. Ten wealthy individu- 
 als bring into contribution, their lives, their liberties, and their two thousand dollars 
 each. The poorer and most numerous class bring also their lives, their liberties, and 
 their one hundred dollars each, which constitutes their all, into the joint-stock. The 
 rich say, " we have two thousand dollars each : you have but one hundred dollars 
 each. We have, consequently, twenty times as much property to protect by the pro- 
 visions of this compact as you have. We, therefore, insist upon having, in all mat- 
 ters about which we are to legislate, ten votes for your one. This provision is neces- 
 sary for the protection of our property, against your cupidity. Otherwise, having the 
 majority of numbers, you might legislate our two thousand dollars out of our pockets 
 into yours." What would be the obvious answer to such a demand ? " It is true you 
 have the most property ; but our lives and our liberties are as dear to us, as your lives 
 and your liberties can be to you. As to property, we bring into common-stock our 
 all, you do no more. Our all is as dear to tis, though not so great, as yours can pos- 
 sibly be to you. The compact can be only durable, as founded upon the mutual con- 
 fidence of the contracting parties. Besides, if yoii shall have, by virtue of your pro- 
 perty, the political power which you claim, you may exercise that power upon our 
 lives and liberties, as well as upon our property. If, by virtue of our numbers, we are 
 to be feared, as to matters of property, why may we not eqiially fear for our liberties, 
 if we give to you, who are the minority, the power to govern us ; especially as you 
 have the wealth, which is power in itself?" At this moment, when the Convention 
 is aljout to be broken up upon this matter, as to the distribution of power, a neighbor- 
 ing horde of marauders and plunderers are seen hovering round our suppotfed commu- 
 nity, with the evident intent of conquering and plundering them. What would the 
 wealthy minority think and say ? We have not strength to defend ourselves with- 
 out your aid. Not only our property, but our hves and liberties will fall a prey to our 
 enemies. It is our wealth especially which has allured them ; we shall be the peculiar 
 objects of their vengeance. We close with your terms : with your aid, our defence 
 and protection is certain." The invading foe is repelled, at the risk, perhaps at the 
 expense, of the blood of the majority. I would ask the gentleman from Orange, whe- 
 ther there would not be liere a quid pro quo. Sir, I hope the day is far distant, when 
 this Commonwealth will be exposed to war or invasion ; but it is certainly wise to 
 look forward and to make provision for such an event. When that day shall arrive, 
 depend upon it, the wealthy few will find their remuneration for the loss of political 
 power, which they now deprecate, in the dauntless bravery and ardent patriotism of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTIOX. 
 
 107 
 
 the free white population of Virginia,, in defending them from the only danger they 
 have a right to apprehend to their property. 
 
 I hare always thought, Mr. Chairman, that in a repubhcan form of Government, 
 so far from giving to wealth political power, the liberty of the citizen required that 
 safe-guards should be provided, to prevent wealth from drawing to itself too great a 
 portion of power. ISIore than one successftd conquerer has said, give me money, 
 and X will conquer the world." 
 
 But it is said, that Government is intended to protect property: this is certauily 
 true. But where is this protection to be found ? Is it to be fbimd in parchment 
 stiptdations in the compact of Government ? By giving to propertv. preponderating 
 pohtical power By declaring that the minority of the people shall o-overn the ma- 
 jority, because of their wealth .- By placing wealth in a hostile attitude to physical 
 strength .= Certainly not. Tliis would truly be a paper guarantee," which the 
 eloquent gentleman described and rejected the other day, as visionary and de- 
 lusive-; and all his Eirguments, as to its inefiicacy and futility, apply here with full 
 force. 
 
 Sir, the only effectual guarantee, against the abuse of power in a repubhe, is to be 
 found, and to be found only, in the xirtue and intelligence of the people, in whom all 
 power rests. Wliile virtuous and inteihgent. they will do no act of injustice or ra- 
 pine. And when they becouae vicious, and fit for violence and spoil, it is in vain to 
 attempt to restrain them by compact stipulations. "When vice prevails, the republican 
 form of Government cannot exist : it has, in itself, the elements of its dissolution. 
 Some other form of Government must be resorted to : under which, indeed, tlie ma- 
 ny may be restrained from plundering the few, but where the many will be plundered 
 by the few. " 
 
 Mr. Chairman, one leading objection to the amendment, wliich operates powerfully 
 on my mind, is, that we have been deputed here, under a hope, entertained by the ma- 
 jority of the people of Virginia, that the very principle reconnnended by the Com- 
 mittee, may be incorporated in the Constitution. If this hope is disappointed, you will 
 have a lasting cause of discontent. Sir, they will not be satisfied. The Constitution 
 you offer them will be rejected. I do not, indeed, beheve, nay, I am confident, that 
 the people of Virginia would not. in such an event, so far as I know them, rise in 
 their majesty, and demand the object of their wishes. I do not beheve that there 
 would be anv disorderly or revolutionary manifestations of their displeasure. God 
 forbid there should. 
 
 If I am mistaken, I pledge myself vriih my best powers, to prevent or delay any 
 such feelinofs. But. I am satisfied, they woitld unceasingly, year after year, crowd 
 the table of^this Hall with their memorials and petitions, complahiing of their wrongs 
 and demanding redress, until the call of another Convention would be extorted, un- 
 der a state of fearful excitement. Every gentleman would deprecate such a result. 
 
 Ouffht we, then, to infuse into the compact, any principle calculated to lead to 
 such consequences, unless demanded by considerations in themselves irresistible. 
 
 Let us. then, attentively examine the groimds on which the principle is supported. 
 
 It is said, that the slave-holding portion of the commtmity fear, that unless this 
 amendment is adopted,, their rights and interests in their slaves will be endangered, 
 or abused : that the pohtical power of the State, will, in the hands of the non-slave-hold-- 
 ing portion of the community, be used to their oppression. These fears are either weU, or 
 ill founded. I think I have shewn, by the aid of the gentleman from rsorthampton, that 
 if those fears are well founded . that no security is to be foimd in any paper stipulation 
 on the subject, or by the adoption of the amendment : because these fears presup- 
 pose that the people are vicious, corrupt, and dishonest : and if such be the fact, no 
 possible security can be formed, recognizing the riglit of self-government in the peo- 
 ple. But, Sir, depend upon it, there^is no ground of such fears, from any calcula- 
 tions I have been able to make. But. is there not a perfect security to the rights 
 of the slave-holders, if it be a fact, that thev will still retain the pohtical power of the 
 State, even upon the basis recoromended bv the Committee ? 3Iy friend and colleague 
 in his argimients to this Committee, proved, beyond question, by statistical calculations 
 and facts, that the adoption of the resolution 'by the Connnittee, would -not transfer 
 the controlling pohtical power to the non-slave-holding portion of the community ; 
 but that a majority in the Legislative Department of the Government, would still be 
 left to the slave-holders. If this be true, surely, no gentleman would apprehend, for 
 a moment, that those holdiug the power, would exercise it to the sacrifice of their oicn 
 interests. ' I pray the Committee, to look for a moment, to their statistical tables, and 
 they will find the most conclusive evidence, that the majority of the Legislative body, 
 if the priaciple of the white basis be adopted, would still remain in the slave-holding 
 portion of the community. Keeping out of ^-iew the slave-holding interest, which 
 exists to some extent, in "the countrv beyond the Alleghany, and assuming the eastern 
 base of the Blue Ridge, as the western boundary of the slave-holding population, 
 there it will be found the slave-holding interest predominates. If to this you add the 
 
108 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 slave-holding interest in the Valley, you give an overwhelming majority to the slave- 
 holders. The fears of gentlemen must vanish before facts so conclusive. But, Mr. 
 Chairman, we ask the high-minded honorable gentlemen of the east, to remember 
 the charitable rule of judging others by ourselves. It is with unfeigned pleasure, that 
 I bear testimony to the fact, that the slave-holding country of the east, have never 
 done us injustice on the subject of taxation, though it has alv^ays been in their pow- 
 er to do so. They have most liberally contributed to the revenue of the State, by tax- 
 ation on their slaves. Why, then, fear to trust the people of the west, if controlhng 
 political power, should devolve upon them Have we less vittue and honesty ? Are 
 we made of different materials ? We have not received injustice at your hands; why, 
 then, should you apprehend it at ours f 
 
 It is said, that there is a diversity of interests in the different parts of the State, which 
 must be harmonized by compromise. It is hardly possible to conceive a community in 
 which there is not a diversity of interests. 
 
 Sir, diversity of interests is always to be protected by wise legislation ; and there is 
 no fear that every interest will not be fully and fairly represented in our Legislative 
 bodv. If there be warring, and conflicting interests, the question would then be, 
 could a7iij Constitutional stipulations or provisions reconcile such interests ? But it 
 remains to be proved, that there are warring and conflicting interests within this Com- 
 monwealth. I do not admit the fact. 
 
 The gentleman from Northampton has asked us, whether we will consent to take 
 all the political power, and bear all the pecuniary burdens ? To this inquiry I indig- 
 nantly answer no. The gentleman would reject such a proposal himself. We will 
 neither buy nor sell political power ; we regard it as the unalienable property of the 
 people, which they have not a right to barter away or divest themselves of, either for 
 themselves, or their posterity. 
 
 The gentleman from Orange, has reprobated the idea of giving political power to 
 property alone. I concvir with him in his reprobation. But has the gentleman re- 
 flected, how far the amendment he advocates, in effect, leads to the same result ? He 
 must admit, that the minority of the people ought not to, and cannot, govern the ma- 
 jority ; but he contends, that property connected with that minority, ought to govern. 
 What, then, is it that constitutes this right to govern, upon his hypothesis ? It is cer- 
 tainly property. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have done. I have presented my plain views, in my plain way. 
 I am thankful to the Committee for their polite attention, whether it proceeded from 
 courtesy to myself, or from respect to any thing that I have said. 
 
 Mr. Morris of Hanover, then rose, and addressed the Committee substantially as 
 follows : 
 
 After the able discussion this question has undergone, I cannot flatter myself- 
 with the hope of throwing upon it much additional light. But, as my constitu- 
 ents feel themselves very deeply interested in its decision, I hope to be indulged, 
 while I assign the reasons which will govern my vote upon it. I promise, in so do- 
 ing, not to detain the Committee long. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, it seems to me, that the question, which the gentleman from Fred- 
 erick (Mr. Powell) has just been discussing, is not the question now before us for 
 consideration. The question we have to decide, is, whether representation in the Le- 
 gislative branch of our Government, shall be based upon numbers only, or on a com- 
 bined ratio of population and taxation : from some of the remarks which have fallen . 
 from the gentleman from Frederick, he seems to have considered the question to be 
 whether it should be based on all ivho enjoy the elective franchise, or on all the fighting 
 men in the community. These are not the matters which we are now considering. 
 When they shall be presented to us, if they ever shall be presented, the proper time 
 will arrive to attempt an answer to what he has advanced. The question now before 
 us is a very short one. Shall representation be based on numbers only ? Or upon po- 
 pulation and taxation combined The question is short, but in its decision is involv- 
 ed much of the happiness or misery of this our ancient Commonwealth. Before I 
 examine it more minutely, let me be allowed to make a remark or two, in reply to 
 some of the observations of gentlemen on the other side of this question. 
 
 As the end of all good Government is the protection of property as well as of per- 
 sons, it is not enough for those gentlemen to prove that their personal rights will be 
 endangered unless representation shall be based upon numbers alone. If they had 
 proved this, which I humbly conceive they have not, still, if we are not assured that 
 our rights of property will be secure under such an arrangement, their observations 
 fall short of the mark ; they do not cover the whole ground. Even, if it be true, that 
 they will not be protected in their personal rights, without the introduction of the 
 new clause in the Constitution, yet, if that clause, in its practical effect, goes to lay 
 prostrate our property at their feet, they have not proved to us that the article ought 
 to be inserted. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 109 
 
 Their argument might, indeed, shew us, that it will be right to propose to the peo- 
 ple of Virginia ttoo Constitutions instead of one ; or else that some middle principle 
 must be resorted to, which shall protect both persons and property ; but if no mode 
 can be found, of giving protection to both ; if the incongruity between the two in- 
 terests really be so great, that either one or the other must be sacrificed, I agree that 
 the Convention should provide two different Constitutions. I earnestly hope, howe- 
 ver, that no such necessity will be found to exist. I hope it will appear, that we may, 
 at the same time, be able to secure to the west the enjoyment of their personal rights ; 
 and to the east, the safe possession of their property. I hope this, as a Virginian : for 
 I feel my pride interested in keeping the lines of the State as they exist at present. 
 Sorry should I be, to run a new line across the whole of our ancient territory ; nor 
 can I ever agree to such a measure, unless it shall be found necessary for the protec- 
 tion of the personal rights of one portion of the State, and the property of the other. 
 I deprecate the existence of such a necessity. V^hether gentlemen on the other side 
 of the question, by the uniiompromising perseverance with which they insist on car- 
 rying all the points they have in view, shall bring us to this necessity, I will not even 
 allow myself to consider. 
 
 Let us see, Sir, whether there be any thing in representative Government, which 
 so imperiously requires the insertion of this clause ; whether it be indispensable for the 
 preservation of a Republican Government, that representation in the Legislative De- 
 partment shall be bottomed upon numbers only. If this principle be true, and our 
 conflicting interests be, indeed, so irreconcileable, as some gentlemen seem to suppose, 
 I know not, I confess, to what consequences it may lead. But whatever may be the 
 basis, upon which representation is made to rest, I am satisfied that we must have a 
 Republican Government. Our people are not only capable of enjoying that form of 
 Government, and desire to have it, but we cannot make for them any other. Because 
 there is another Government, of which we are also members, which has guaranteed 
 to every State within its operation, a republican form. 
 
 But is it necessary tliat such a Government shall be based upon numbers only 
 When this debate commenced, it seemed that the principal source of argument was 
 drawn from an inherent, independent, a priori right by which a numerical majority 
 were entitled to govern : such a right was urged upon us with great earnestness at first ; 
 but since the able and convincing address of the gentleman from Northampton (Mr. 
 Upshur) it appears to have been nearly, if not quite abandoned : and now the position 
 we are left to combat, is, that this right of the majority is a Conventional right ; that 
 it exists by the agreement of our ancestors, and, therefore, ought to prevail. They 
 derive the proof in support of this position from the Bill of Rights, and the general 
 principles there laid down ; and without paying the least regard to the specifications 
 in the Constitution itself, they insist that the general positions in the Bill of Rights 
 ought to be received as giving the universal rule for all free Governments. And real- 
 ly, Sir, were we to look at tlie language of that instrument and to look no further, 
 there might seem to be much force in their argument. But it is an established rule 
 of interpretation, that in order to get at the true meaning of any instrument, you are 
 not to look at one of its parts only, separately and apart from the residue, but you are 
 to take the whole record, and compare one part with another, and thus judge of the 
 connected meaning of the whole. If that rule is pursued here, we shall be obliged to 
 concede that the venerable men who were the authors, both of the Bill of Rights, and 
 of the Constitution of the State, were in the former stating general principles only : 
 they were laying the foundation, not building the superstructure ; and when they did 
 afterwards build it, built on no such interpretation of the first instrument as is now 
 contended for. The reason gentlemen give for this, is a very strange one. They tell 
 us that those illustrious men were too much hurried ; the roar of hostile cannon was 
 too audible, and their place of meeting was too near a ruthless enemy, to make their 
 work what it would otherwise have been. They, therefore, could not carry out the 
 principles they had laid down in the Bill of Rights, in the subsequent structure of the 
 Constitution. It does not seem to have occurred to gentlemen, that if the near neigh- 
 borhood of the enemy, and the roar of hostile cannon, and the dangers and alarms 
 of a state of war, operated with so much force upon their minds, when they were 
 drawing up the articles of the Constitution, the same circumstances may reasonably 
 be supposed to have operated with equal force when they were drawing up the arti- 
 cles of the Bill of Rights. If they were in too great a hurry to carry out general 
 principles in the Constitution, we may as well suppose they were in too great a hur- 
 ry to limit those principles, when they laid them down in the Bill of Rights. If we 
 must conclude, that they would have made the one of these instruments very differ- 
 ent from what it is, if they had had more time for dehberation, why is it not as fair, 
 to draw the same conclusion with respect to the other .? But, Sir, is the fact so : was 
 the Constitution drawn up in all this haste Were those wise men, after laying the 
 foundation of tlie house on one plan, obliged to build the house itself on another ? 
 1 am sure the gentlemen believe what they havei stated to be strictly true , but noth- 
 
110 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ing is5 more certain than that they are entirely mistaken. Sir, there are men now liv- 
 ing, I was almost ready to say, there are men here present, who could inform this 
 Committee, that every article in that Constitution was duly and diligently considered ; 
 aye, Sir, was debated, inch by inch. But I will not appeal to the living. I will ap- 
 peal to the testimony of one of the most distinguished statesmen, whom this State or 
 this country ever produced, but who is now no more. I could support by his testimo- 
 ny a multitude of facts on this subject, all going to verify the assertion I have made. 
 I refer to Mr. JeiFerson, who has left conclusive evidence to shew, that nothing hke 
 haste, nothing at all of the hurry supposed by gentlemen to have thrown the Consti- 
 tution into its present form, had any existence. He says expressly, that that instru- 
 ment was discussed, paragraph by paragraph, and disputed inch by inch : that the de- 
 bate was protracted so as to produce weariness, and that in consequence of this wea- 
 riness, a " projet" of his own, which he forwarded to a member of the Convention, 
 was not submitted to its consideration, and, of course, not adopted, wliilst its pream- 
 ble was. I think, therefore, that those who are driven to contend, that while the Bill 
 of Rights was drawn up with the utmost coolness and deliberation, the Constitution 
 was hurried over amidst the roar of cannon, and from fear of the enemy, are mistaken 
 in their facts : the evidence is all against them : and I am persuaded that they them- 
 selves, if they consult again the history of that time, will acknowledge that they have 
 been in error. Let the consideration have its due weig]it,that both these instruments 
 were drawn up by the same men, and at the same time ; and that, in the exercise of 
 the same wisdom, and with the same deliberation and care, they laid down, first, the 
 principles, and then the form of a Government for Virginia. Apply, then, to these two 
 valuable legacies of ovir forefathers, the principles of interpretation 1 have before men- 
 tioned. Do not take up one half the instrument, and say it means thus, and thus ; but 
 put both the parts together : They were both fashioned by the same hand : let all the 
 strings sound, and then, if I mistake not, we shall be led to a different conclusion. If 
 the framers of these two instruments understood tliemselves, and if on comparing the 
 one with the other, it shall appear that the meaning of the Bill of Rights is not such 
 as, taken alone, it might seem to bear ; we must give effect to the provisions of the 
 whole, so far as we can. For example, take the language of the Bill of Rights on the 
 subject of the right of suffrage. Then take up the Constitution, and ask what it has en- 
 acted on the same subject and see if there be any thing like contradiction between them. 
 The Bill of Rights declares, that all persons " having sufficient evidence of permanent 
 common interest with, and attachment to, the community," shall be entitled to vote. 
 The question to be settled is, what is the true meaning of this declaration .'' Some 
 gentlemen reply, that the fact of having been born within the State, furnishes all the 
 evidence required ; others tell us that a residence of two years is sufficient evidence ; 
 others require a residence of five years ; and almost every gentleman has some qua- 
 lification of his own. But do the framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights 
 tell us any such thing ? No, Sir ; they say that the evidence they considered suffi- 
 cient, is a FREEHOLD. " 
 
 Do gentlemen tell me'that here is a contradiction ? Why, Sir, take the general prin- 
 ciple in its abstract form ; and you might argue from it till you bring us at length to 
 universal suffi-age. But take the naked principle, and view it in connection with the 
 Constitution, and there you find, that freeholders, and freeholders only, were in the 
 contemplation of those who laid down the principle. The one gives the interpreta- 
 tion of the other. The general -principle, is in the Bill of Rights. The limitation is 
 in the Constitution. The same remark is true, as applied to every other article. 
 Let us apply the same mode of interpretation to the third article of the Bill of 
 Rights. 
 
 The gentlemen say that all free white citizens in the State, are to be numbered, and 
 that a majority of that number have the right to rescind, alter or new model the Con- 
 stitution as they please j that they are to have the law-making power ; in short, that 
 they are to have all the power of the State : and we might have supposed that the 
 framers of the Bill of Rights thought so too, had they not left on record a provision 
 to the contrary. When they come to make the Constitution and ordain the law-mak- 
 ing power, they liinit the general principle laid down in the third article of the Bill 
 of Rights, and confide that power, not to the free white people, but to the freeholders 
 in the several counties. 
 
 Here, Sir, you find that they intended, not a majority of the. free white male citi- 
 zens merely, but a majority of citizens, capable of affording sufficient pledges that 
 they would not abuse the authority entrusted to them. This is the majority to which 
 they looked, and here is the limitation of the principle in the Bill of Rights. Let 
 the gentlemen themselves say, if this comparison does not give the true interpre- 
 tation. 
 
 It was said by the gentleman from Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge) that the Constitution 
 has recognized no principle, by which slave-holders are to be protected. 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTIOX. 
 
 Ill 
 
 [Here ^Ir. Doddridge explained. What he had said was. that the Constitution re- 
 cosrnizes no such principle, as representation in. virtue of property.] 
 
 3lr. INIorris resumed. He had not roisunderstood the gentleman ; but would now 
 undertake to shew that he was mistaken. It is true, said he, that the word slave." 
 is not mentioned either in the Bill of Rights or in the Constitution : neither do we 
 ask that it should be inserted now. But when, in 1776. Virginia gave the control of 
 her Grovernment to freeholders, she granted it to slave-holders : nor could she have 
 given to the latter a more effectnal guarantee. The freeholder was himself a slave- 
 holder. Was it necessarV; expressly to say. that this was done for the protection of 
 property r Sir, we infer it from the act. Virginia by her act, granted the power of 
 the State, to men who held the very property,, we desire to secmre. And now let the 
 gentleman from Brooke, give to the slave-holders the same power which was confi- 
 ded to them bv the Constitution of '76, and so far as this subject is concerned, I am 
 ^siUing to adopt his proposition immediately. 
 
 It was said by my friend from Chesterfieid, that this principle of basing representa- 
 tion upon numbers' alone, is 7uic : and I concur with him in that sentiment. The 
 principle is not to be found in the existiag Constitution : that instrument confides the 
 power, not to a majority of free whites, but to a majority of freeholders. ISIy friend 
 did not say . that no such claims as are now advanced, had ever been made before. 
 He was well aware of the abortive efibrts, of which the gentleman from Brooke, has 
 favored the Committee with an account : he knew perfectly well, that this doctrine 
 had been asserted at Staimton twelve or fifteen years ago ; but he thought, as I do 
 also, that the memorial from Staunton, and the abortive efibrtsin the Legislature, had 
 not affixed this new principle to the Constitution : a principle so difierent from these 
 laid down by our forefathers ia 1776. and ^rhich are calculated to protect, not only 
 personal rights, but the rights of property also. The principle of a majority of mere 
 numbers, was not only, not the basis of the existing Constitution, but it haibeen ex- 
 pressly and most solemnly declared, on Vcirious occasions, that it is tmsaie to lay the ba- 
 sis of representation in any such principle. Such a declaration was the ground of the 
 provision in relation to slaves, which is contained in the Federal Constitution : a pro- 
 vision, not which we yielded, but on which we ourselves insisted. Virginia, before she 
 entered the confederacy, insisted that her representation in that confederacy should 
 not be according to the numbers of her white population alone. And who. Sir. were 
 the men that thus contended in the memorable Convention which framed the Fede- 
 ral Constitution ? Some of those very men who framed our own State Constitution, and 
 drew up the BiU of Rights. Yes, Sir. the very men, who laid down the abstract prin- 
 ciples, from which gentlemen attempt to maintain the doctruie of a white basis ex- 
 clusively, insisted that our Federal representation should be compoimded of property 
 as well as numbers. We did not acquiesce in the principle : We demanded the pranci- 
 ple. We demanded it as a protection fcr all tins great southern country, which was then 
 filled with slaves. Protection against whom .' against enemies dishonest and rapaci- 
 ous ? and who would be tempted by interest to depredation and rapine : ZS'o, Sir, against 
 men, just as kind-hearted, just as upright, just as honorable, just as c'enerous. as axe our 
 brethren now : Against men who had shed their blood in our conunon stru^a-le for 
 independence ; men, who had lain with us side by side in the camp, and stool with 
 us, side by side in the battle, not ten years before. And why, Sir : Why did we de- 
 mand such a pledge .' Because we held it necessary to ovir protection. Xot that we 
 suspected their motives : not that we imputed to tiiem wickedness ; but because we 
 knew then, as all men know now, that unless property is protected, it will be invaded. 
 Virginia stood in relation to the Union at that day. as we now stand towards our bre- 
 thren of the west. And will our brethren deny, what our sister States of the Union 
 granted .- I do not deny, that other considerations entered into the Federal Compact, 
 besides the mere distribution of power. Union was a most important object; so im- 
 portant, that almost any thing was to be sacrificed for the sake of attainiuor it : vet. 
 notwithstanding the importance of union, and the earnest, anxious desire for^ it. which 
 was felt by Virginia, she, nevertheless, insisted upon this poiat as a sine qua non : 
 Unless that was inserted in the Federal Constitution, Virginia would not take that 
 Constitution. 
 
 Sir, we are called upon now, when placed iu like circumstances . to c-ive up the great 
 principle for which they thus contended ; and can it be said that we have fewef mo- 
 tives to insist upon it than they had.- If such is the fact, let it be shewn : but if not, 
 as it is not, what apology can we make to posterity ? Let \ irginia give up this princi- 
 ple and what wiU be said ? Will it not be said, that the great southern State, has" o-iven 
 up the great southern doctrme for which she contendecfin 17S9 r And. when the de- 
 cision of that question shall be agitated in the Federal Government, how shall we 
 stand .'^ ^ irginia the great southern State, has given up the point. It is vain for the 
 rest of the south, to attempt to maintain it.'' ^But, Sir, there is a necessity for our 
 maintaining it. Tou have been told by the gentleman fmxa Northampton, that one 
 eleventh part of our power in the Federal Government, is derived from this princi- 
 
112 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pie, and rests upon it. Cut it down, by the act of this Convention, and how will the 
 south sustain itself in our National Councils ? Mr. Chairman, we have more motives 
 than our fathers had on this subject. We have given up to the Federal Government, 
 the entire power of laying duties upon imposts. We have surrendered all our most 
 valuable sources of revenue into their hands, and now we have few resources left but 
 direct taxation upon our lands and slaves. At the time of the adoption of the Fede- 
 ral Constitution, the wise men, who framed that instrument, knew that all the resour- 
 ces of foreign coimuerce were to be in the hands of the Federal Government, and that 
 the necessity of resorting to direct taxation, would seldom arise. If, then, our ances- 
 tors thought it necessary, at that day, to insist on the principle ; if they rejected a re- 
 presentation based on numbers, and insisted on a guarantee for the protection of pro- 
 perty, can our motives be less for a similar policy ? Surely not. They are magnified 
 ten-fold. Those who framed the General Government, were well aware of the vast 
 resources which must be derived to it, from foreign commerce : but, we know, by sad 
 experience, that a State Government can have no resources for wealth, but what she 
 derives from direct taxation. If our fathers insisted on a guarantee against the mere 
 <?Drttoo-c?ic//, that the General Government might, sometimes be. obliged to resort to 
 direct taxation, how much more ought we to be on our guard, whose direct taxes are 
 annually and daily recurring 
 
 But, Sir, we have given other evidence, that, in our judgment, the interpretation 
 which the gentlemen would put upon the Bill of Rights, is not the true one. Not 
 only did the very men, who drew up our Bill of Rights, themselves insist upon a 
 compound basis of numbers and property ; biit look, Sir, how we ourselves have dis- 
 posed of power, in the structure of the Senate of the United States. I know the 
 case is not, in all points, parallel ; but I refer to it, as going to shew, that, in the judg- 
 ment of Virginia, mere numbers never do constitute a fit basis for representation, 
 (unless, indeed, where the peculiar nature of the case is such, that they are, in them- 
 selves, an all-sufficient guarantee ;) but, wherever great interests, either political or 
 pecuniary, are about to be placed in jeopardy, a different principle is instantly resorted 
 to. I say, then, that in the construction of the less numerous branch of the Federal 
 Legislature, so far from admitting the principle of a mere majority of numbers hav- 
 ing the right to rule, we agreed, that that principle should be, in a still greater degree, 
 disregarded, than is proposed now by the amendment before us. We stipulated ex- 
 pressly, that all the States should enjoy, in that body, a strictly equal representation. 
 The little States of Delaware, Rhode Island, and New-Jersey, are precisely on a foot- 
 ing with Virginia, New- York, and Pennsylvania. Sir, is there any thing here like 
 an equality of numbers The inequality is vast ) it is infinite : far, far beyond any 
 thing that is asked or thought of between us and our transmontaine brethren. 
 
 Why was such an article as this, inserted in the Federal Constitution.'' It was for 
 the purpose of preserving the political sovereignty of the small States ; and it was ne- 
 cessary to that end. Numbers did not, and could not prevail. If they had, the small 
 States would have been in jeopardy every hour. We deliberately agreed to the ar- 
 rangement. We ourselves said, that in point of representation in the Senate, Rhode 
 Island and Delaware should be on the same footing with Virginia or New- York. 
 
 I know it may be urged, that this was not a compromise among individuals, but 
 among sovereign States. Granted. But, are we not making a compromise, similar in 
 character and principle A compromise to preserve the rights of individuals, as dear 
 to them, and as important to them, as political sovereignty can be to a State. Is it 
 not for the preservation of that on which their families are to subsist ? For the preser- 
 vation of their property ? 
 
 It is a compromise, on the same principle and for the same end ; with this only dif- 
 ference, that property is in the place of political power. 
 
 Numbers then, were not in 76 or in '87, the pi-inciple by which the people of Vir- 
 ginia, were regulated, in conferring power either on her own State authorities, or 
 those of the Federal Government. 
 
 Is there no great interest concerned in this question Shall we be told that it is 
 not a great interest which is to be protected ? Aye, but it is said that interest is not 
 in jeopardy. Sir, what is the present actual condition of this State ? In what position 
 do we stand ? In this position : The slave population on this side the Blue Ridge, 
 Y amounts to 390,000; the slave population beyond the Blue Ridge, amounts to 
 50,000. On this side the Ridge is raised more tlian three-fourths of the entire amount 
 of taxes paid in the State. Beyond that Ridge is raised less than one-fourth of those 
 taxes. Beyond that Ridge, lie 40 counties. Some of these of rich and fertile land, 
 and one of the most beautiful limestone valleys on which the sun shines. And yet, 
 Sir, this whole region of country, from the Blue Ridge to the Ohio river, is drawing 
 every year from the public chest, for the administration of justice, and the purposes 
 of representative Government, a sum greater than it brings into the general fisc. And 
 now, Sir, what are we asked to do ? While we pay three-fourths of the taxes, and 
 they one-fourth, and while they draw from the treasury, more than they pay into itj 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 113 
 
 we are asked to adopt into our Constitution an article by which the whole pohtical 
 authority and tax-laying power of the State, shall be transferred beyond the Ridge ! Sir, 
 I do not say. nor do I believe, that the people west of the Pvidge, are any less moral, 
 or in any respect, worse than those to the east of it : but I would ask them, with all 
 frankness, whether tlieij would feel safe in the like circumstances ? Whether such a 
 state of things could be called Republican ? Or, whether it would not interfere with 
 the very firsfprinciples of Republican Government? I ask, what is the money raised 
 by taxation in a free Government ? Is it a contribution e:ctorttd by the power of a des- 
 pot? By the King or his Nobles ? Has any power, existing in a RepubUc, a right to 
 take away from me, 10, *23, 50 per cent, of my property, without any consultation 
 with me or my representative ? No. Sir. It is of tlie very essence of Repubhcan 
 Government, that all money raised for pubhc purposes, shall be the voluntary dona- 
 tion of the people, by themselves or their agents. But what sort of a donation is 
 that, where another lays the tax and makes the donation out of my property ? Is that 
 the donation of the holder? Sir. I was surprised when the gentleman from Norfolk 
 said, the other day, that taxation and representation, sprang from different foun- 
 tains, and flowed into different and distant oceans. 
 
 My little reading had led me to believe, that the representative nrinciple in 
 modern times, and as it now exists upon the American Continent, owed its birth to 
 the British House of Commons ; where representation, according to our notion of 
 it, first existed. That vras the viodel from which all the various forms of representa- 
 tive Government, in North and South America, have been taken. In som.e instances 
 we have improved upon it : in others we have fallen below it ; but varied as our forms 
 are, the House of Commons was our original model. Now, that House had no au- 
 thority in the beginning, but from the fact that its members were the tax-layers. 
 They were called for the purpose of aUbrding aids to the King, out of their property. 
 Sir, it was this searching power of taxation, which gradually elevated the House of 
 Commons, until they were enabled to say to the proudest of their Monarchs, we will 
 not grant you the money for which you ask us. unless we know ana approve the pur- 
 pose to which it is to be applied. From this fountain have proceeded all the Repub- 
 lican Governments on the American Continent. The gentleman is much mistaken 
 in supposing that these two powers are so little together. But let us now recur to the 
 principle that the grantors have a right to be first consulted before their money is dis- 
 posed of. We are told, Mr. Chairman, that we must rely on the morality, on the in- 
 tegrity and virtue of the majority as a sufficient guarantee. I know the people who 
 live beyond the Ridge ; I am acquainted with tlieir character j and I most cheerful- 
 ly admit that there are none on whose virtue and honor I would more readily rely. 
 But the gentleman from Orange very truly said, that the principle on which all free 
 Governments rest, is not confidence, but jealousy . and watchfulness. Would not 
 the good sense of gentlemen feel shocked, if any one here should propose tliat the 
 Legislature of Ohio should be empowered to tax Virginia ? Is there a man on this 
 floor, who, on hearing such a thing mentioned, would not cry out that it was too 
 monstrous a proposition to be tolerated ? Now, Sir, I believe that the gentlemen who 
 constitute the Legislature of Ohio, have a general feeling towards Virginia of kind- 
 ness and good will ; and that their integrity is as great as our own. But why revolt, 
 then, at the very idea of their having power to ta^ us ? Cannot we rely upon their 
 morality, their integrity and virtue ? Sir, it is not because we deny, or even sus- 
 pect their morals, that we shrink from such a proposition : but because the Legisla- 
 ture of Ohio cannot know as accurately as we do. the situation cf this part of the 
 country, with which they have, comparatively, little connection, and no fellow-feeling; 
 and because men vote taxes with much less caution and care when they do not ex- 
 pect themselves to pay any part of the tax, than when they are personally interested 
 in its effects and responsible to those who must pay. It is one thing to give your as- 
 sent to a requisition which falls upon those you never saw, and quite another to vote 
 for it when you must go back and bear your own share in the contribution, and face 
 those who are to bear the burden with you. If this principle, viz : that those alone 
 should have power to lay a tax who will be required to pay it, be not a fundamental 
 principle of a representative Government, why is it that the tax-la3-ing power is, by 
 the Federal Constitution, confided to the House of Representatives alone ? Why.in 
 a great majority of the .States, is the same provision engrafted, that money-bills shall 
 originate in the popular branch of their Legislatures r And if it be, on what ground 
 does the principle rest ? Obviously on thelfact, that in that branch there vrill always 
 be foun.i more of the men who are to pay the tax, and who feel intimately with the 
 people, the weight of their financial burdens. Sir, these principles are the very cor- 
 ner-stones of a free Government, and they constitute very striking features in all our 
 State Constitutions. Grant now to the gentlemen, what they are asking by the re- 
 solution of the Legislative Committee ; and will any one of these principles be brought 
 to bear upon the property of the people who live in the south eastern portion of Vir- 
 ginia ? People who hold about 400,000 slaves, and who furnish nearly all tlie revenue 
 
 15 
 
114 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of the State ? Taxation is the grant of a people holding property for the purpose of 
 supporting the Government of their choice. But how is it to be a donation ? If it is 
 made by the Legislature of Ohio out of the funds of the people of Virginia, all men 
 see at once that it can be no such thing. But if it be done by those who pay less 
 than one-fourth, where we pay more than three-fourths, how is it more our donation 
 than. if it was given away by the Legislature of Ohio? Sir, all our property will be 
 swept from us by the plan we are gravely asked to adopt as fair and equal. The peo- 
 ple of the west, for example, want to make some Appian, or some Flaminian way, or 
 some Roman aqueduct, or some other such splendid work of Internal Improvement: 
 (It is not my purpose to ridicule works of Internal Improvement. There are some 
 of tliose works, in support of Avhich, under proper circumstances, I would go as far as 
 they ;) but they wish, perhaps, to unite the waters of the Ohio and Potomac, and so 
 they must tunnel the Alleghany. Well, Sir; what will be done.? Will they lay 
 taxes to effect these great projects No, Sir, not all : not at first: they will begin not 
 with taxes, but witli debt, and debt is always taxation at last: pay-day must come: 
 and when it has come, then comes tlie tax ; and how is the tax collected ? Why, Sir, 
 one-fourth part of it, and less than that, is collected to the west of the Blue Ridge, 
 (i. e. where the great project is carried on) and the remaining three-fourths of it is col- 
 lected ; where, Sir ? i)i the country south-east of that ilidge. When you come to the 
 vote for lajung the tax, every member from the south-eastern country is dissatisfied ; 
 every one of them is convinced the scheme is totally impracticable and a mere waste 
 of tlie public mone}^, and he speaks and votes against it. And what is the effect of 
 their votes just what it would have been had they all voted the other way. The do- 
 nation is made ; and it is made out of their property ; but it is made by others : it is 
 made by men who embrace entirely difterent views, and have entirely different in- 
 terests ; men who act most honestly in the matter, being sincerely and strongly of 
 opinion that the project is of great importance ; very practicable, and very desirable. 
 Sir, is this a donation.? I ask, are the three-fourths of this tax a donation of ours? 
 No, Sir, the money is taken: it is taken from us: not by Legislative " rapine;" not 
 by the perpetration of wickedness ; not at all ; but taken from us against our consent, 
 because they are of a different opinion from us ; and that with respect to matters on 
 which there is confessed to be room for a wide, yethoneot difference of opinion. Mr. 
 Chairman, I fear to entrust my brethren with such a power : 1 fear it because they are 
 not accountable to those whose money they take and have no common interest with 
 them : that is the reason, the republican reason, on which I ground a refusal of their 
 claims. 
 
 If I am right, then the highest degree of moral virtue, the most pure and unblem- 
 ished integrity, and I had almost said, the most sublime intelligence, afford us no ade- 
 quate protection : for men always have differed, and always will differ, in questions in- 
 volving great and expensive objects of national enterprize. When the time comes at- 
 which the taxes must be levied (though they will not, -as I said, begin by direct taxa- 
 tion; nay, it is probable there will be some diminution of taxes for a time, because 
 they will resort to debt, which the people cannot feel, but come they must.) they will 
 fall on those Avho were never consulted or who were voted down. 
 
 Sir, my friend did say that the great principle which lay at the foundation of our 
 revolution, was involved in the amendment now before you; and I am, I confess, of 
 the same opinion. Are not the cases parallel .? do they not rest upon the same princi- 
 ple .? viz : that the money of the people is nor to be taken but by the consent of them- 
 selves or their authorised agents.? Sir, what was the American Revolution.'' was it 
 not the resistance of a claim set up by the British Parliament to tax the Colonies with- 
 out their consent.? 
 
 We have been told by the gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Doddridge) that America 
 resisted the demand, because, though England and America were under the same 
 Crown, they were different nations; just as Scotland and Ireland were before the 
 union ; and so the Legislature of the one could not tax the other. But, Sir, the Co- 
 lonies came under the British Crown in a way very different from Scotland or Ire- 
 land. The question between America and the mother country could never have arisen 
 if she had been situated toward the Crown as was either of those kingdoms. The 
 Charter which fixed the boundaries of Virginia was granted by the King of England 
 to English subjects; to subjects who resided in London; and for a long time, the 
 vWiole Government of Virginia was conducted in London, subject, however, to the 
 control of Parliament ; and it was only after the Colony had become too populous to 
 be thus managed any longer, that the grant was made to it of having a Provincial 
 Assembly. Our situation was more analagous to that of British India, than it was to 
 Ireland or Scotland. But, Mr. Chairman, it was not because Parliament undertook 
 to tax us while we were not represented in that body, that America drew tlie sword : 
 it was because our Colonial Charters had declared that the Colonists should enjoy all 
 the rights of native-born British subjects ; and one of these rights was, that you should 
 not touch their property but by their own consent. That was the ground, and the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 115 
 
 true ground, of our revolutionary struggle. It was not that we liad no representation 
 in Parliament : for as to that, it was even pretended that as by our Charters, our lands 
 were to be held as of the ^Nlanor of East Greenwich in the kingdom of England by the 
 tenure of tree and common soccage, we constituted a part of the diocese of one of the 
 Enghsh Bishops, and were, therefore, virtually represented in tlie person of his lord- 
 ship in the Upper House, and by the members from Kent in the other. But our an- 
 cestors well knew that representation in Parhanient would be no security against op- 
 pression. Suppose, to quiet our discontents. Great Britain had offered to allow us to 
 be represented, to how many delegates should we have been entitled? Let ine see; 
 there were the two Adamses, and Hancock, and Franklin, and Lee. and Henry, and 
 tlie Rutledges. Why, Sir, upon the principle contended for by gentlemen, we could 
 not have been authorised to have more than twenty or twenty-five of them; thirty 
 perhaps. ^Here a shrill and very peculiar voice was lieard to say - less than the coun- 
 ty of Wilts.' J Less than the county of Wilts. I hear it suggested. Well, Sir; sup- 
 pose them seated in the House of Commons. A tea tax is proposed. They get up 
 and resist it: they tell the Parhament, in our ov,-n American phrase, that America 
 ••cant stand it." Suppose tiiem to declare that she ought not to stand it. till at 
 length, icaxing %v-armer as they proceed, they tell the House, America 2cHl not stand 
 it ; she wiU resist the tax. Sir, would it answer any purpose to say this to the JNIinis- 
 ter in a body containing five hundred members .' Some gentleman would immediate- 
 ly get up and say. " hy gentlemen, you are in a minority : you may vote against 
 this tax. if you please : but we, who are more capable of judging what is best for 
 America and for the whole empire, say the tax must be raised." What is the conse- 
 quence ? These old revolutionary men come back : they are asked in some town- 
 meetiag, or other assemblage of their fellow-citizens, •• How came you to suffer this 
 tax upon tea to be laid.'*' And they would say (according to gentlemen's doctrine) 
 
 we did not consent to the tax; we resisted it to the utmost of our power ; we were 
 fully heard : but, the majority was against us ; we couJd not help it ; and you must 
 pay the tax ; that's all. The money was wanted : It was necessary to aid iFrederick 
 to confirm his conquest of SOesia: it was indispensable to prevent a Trench Prince 
 from mounting the throne of Poland : it must be had to enable the German troops to 
 cross the Rhine/' The citizens very likely would reply, ■'• whv. what are all these 
 thins's to us .' We care nothing about Frederick, or Silesia either : is our money to o-q 
 for such projects? ' The old men would slirug their shoulders, and reply, youmi^ 
 e'en pay the tax." Would the men of the revolution, have saSered the powers of 
 this great nation to be crushed in tiie cradle by miserable sophistications like these ? 
 Sir. I ask you, if they were not made of sterner stuff? Would they not have said to 
 the people of the United States, (what they did say.) " miless you resist this, the re- 
 sources of your country will never be unfolded : you can never reach the period of 
 mauihood: you must resist, or be ruined.'" 
 
 Sir, I bring no charge or accusation against gentlemen on the other side : I have no 
 doubt whatever of the purity of their motives : but, for myself, I cannot imagine a 
 more frightful despotism than to enable one great division of the countrj- to set^itself 
 in opposition to another great division of it, and by a majority of one single vote, to 
 take from them whatever they please. 
 
 We are told that when we have given them supreme power, they intend to exer- 
 cise it with great mildness and moderation : that they will not avail themselves of it 
 to do the least injustice, but will manage our affairs ^v^th great forbearance and liber- 
 ality. 
 
 But might not the same language be held to the subjects of the most absolute des- 
 pot on earth ? Despotism does not consist in the actual exercise of arbitrarv power. 
 The greatest despot in the world may be constitutionally mild, and mav rule liis 
 people with great clemency. But it is tlie authority to oppress, which constitutes 
 despotism. And if we are to be so situated, as to be left alisolutely dependent upon 
 the will of others, and nothing we can do or say is to have the least effect in resisting 
 it : if we are to rely for our security upon the mere sic rolo of another roan, what 
 will they be but despots ? and what shall we be but slaves ? Sir, do we ask any thing 
 which may enable us to be thus despotic over thera ? No, Sir, we are but asking 
 what we have obtained already, in the Federal compact. We ask only that that 
 shEdl be done in Virginia, which has been done in the Carolinas, and has produceji no- 
 thing but perfect concord : and which has been done by o\ir sister Georgia, and pro- 
 duced there the most entire domestic tranqiaillity. If you yield to 'ur proposal, of a 
 mixed basis of representation, it will not tiu"ow the people of the v. rst at our feet, as 
 the adoption of the other plan must infallibly tlu"ow us aX theirs. Let us set off to 
 lay what taxes we please, to operate beyond the movmtain, and their operation must, 
 be precisely equal upon ourselves. With the exception of slaves only, the articles of 
 taxation are the same on both sides of that boundary : so that we must either tax 
 ourselves with them, or be guilty of the open barefaced villainy of saying in our law, 
 that the tax shall operate on A, but it shall not in like circumstances, operate on B. 
 
116 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 But, surely, Sir, there can exist no danger that either we or they will thus use the 
 taxing power. Among honorable men, it is surely not necessary to say that taxes 
 shall be made to operate equally on all in like circumstances. But, Sir, while we are 
 thus restricted, so that we cannot tax our brethren unless we also tax ourselves, xcc 
 have a species of property which tliey have not; and on which they may lay what 
 tax they please, without themselves paying under that law, a single dollar. And this 
 too, a sort of property, the most easy to be taxed of all others, and the most certain 
 of raisin o- the money. Payment is inevitable. But, suppose us to lay a tax upon 
 cattle : when we go to look for the cattle of our brethren of the west, where are they 
 to be found.? Their's, Sir, are the cattle on a thousand hills : they raise enough for 
 their own use, and ours : and have a large surplus besides, wherewith, to supply a 
 foreign market ; while we have so few, that we can hardly make our own butter ; 
 and yet, strange to tell, when we did once make the experiment, of laying such a tax, 
 we had ourselves to pay the greater part of it. Sir, it depends, altogether, at what 
 season the tax-gatherer happens to visit our brethren, whether they shall pay the tax 
 or ice. I don't believe, Sir, that the number of their cattle is known even to them- 
 selves ; and I dare say, there are gentlemen here present, who would not know their 
 own herds, if they should meet them on a mountain twenty miles from home. But, 
 lay your tax upon slaves, Sir, and they are not fattened this week, and gone the next, 
 before the tax-gatherer can come for his dues. They are here ; I had almost said they 
 are fixed here firmly ; but I know there are some gentlemen, who tell us, that we 
 shall, at some future day, get rid of them all. Sir, I give all credit to the integrity 
 of the west ; but, really, if tiiis plan of their's shall succeed, the prophecy may possi- 
 bly be fulrilled ; for, then, I think, we shall be obliged to give them up. Not that I 
 have any fear, that when these gentlemen get the power, they will pass a general 
 emancipation law ; but, if they raise the tax on slaves, much higher than it is, one of 
 two things must happen : either the viaster must run away from the slave, or the slave 
 from the master. The more fertile districts of the State ; the rich low grounds of 
 James River, for instance, may be able to bear a greater burthen ; but upon the in- 
 crease of the slave tax, much of it must be paid by that portion of the lower country 
 which consists of sterile ridges. Slave-labour upon them cannot stand it, and if they 
 go on to raise the taxes, our slaves must go somewhere else, because we cannot keep 
 them.. 
 
 Perhaps some gentlemen may consider it a very desirable thing, that we should be " 
 reduced to such a necessity ; but, Sir, let it once be known, that this separation of 
 the master and his slave is not a voluntary thing on either side, but a matter of com- 
 pulsion, produced by the agency of the Government : I care not, whether this agency 
 be manifested by the passage of a law of emancipation, or a tax-law depriving the 
 master of the power of holding his slave : and soon a sword will be unsheathed, that 
 will be red with the best blood of this country, before it finds the scabbard. This 
 thing between master and slave, is one which cannot be left to be regulated by the 
 Government. Compensation for 400,000 slaves, can not be made. The matter must 
 be left to the silent operation of natural causes. Sir, I impute no evil purpose to our 
 brethren of the west ; but 1 never can, nor will consent that it shall be left for them 
 to say what tax thall be paid on the slaves of Virginia, while their owners have no 
 voice in the matter. 
 
 Sir, let us choose a middle ground : a ground which so many of the Republics of 
 America have already taken : let us agree upon a compound basis of representation, 
 and remain a united and harmonious people. 
 
 After Mr. Morris had closed, the Committee rose, and the Convention immediately 
 adjouriied. 
 
 SATURDAY, October 31, 1829. 
 
 The Convention assembled at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Skid more, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 On motion of Mr. John S. Barbour, the Convention resolved itself into a Commit- 
 tee of the Whole, Mr. Stanard in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Campbell (of Brooke,) then addressed the Chair, in nearly the following terms : 
 
 Mr. Chairman — I have never been in the habit of making apologies ; 1 never liked 
 them. When I hear apologies from gentlemen, who, either have acquitted then .ielves 
 well, or expect to acquit themselves well, I am reminded of the lady in the play; 
 
 Who, in hopes of contradiction, oft would say, 
 Methink.s, I look so wretchedly to-day. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 117 
 
 But really, Sir, I am compelled to make an apology on the present occasion. When 
 I rise to address an assemblage composed of such illustrious patriarchs, sages and poli- 
 ticians ; when 1 consider their superior age, experience and attainments, and that I 
 am not only little experienced, but without ^jxperience in such addresses as I am now 
 to make, I cannot but feel embarrassed and intimidated. But, Sir, this embarrass- 
 ment arises most of all, from the fears which I entertain, that I may not be able to do 
 justice to the cause which reason and conscience have compelled me to espouse. Nay, 
 Sir, I know that I cannot do it justice ; and I sincerely say, that I do not expect to 
 meet the expectations of its friends. But I am compelled to contribute my mite ; and 
 well, I am cissured, that it will be a very small contribution indeed. 
 
 I am a man, Sir, and as such I cannot hut feel interested in every thing which con- 
 cerns the prosperity and happiness of man. 
 
 I feel myself one of the race, and when I consider our origin and our destiny, I see 
 so much to interest me, I cannot but feel a deep interest in every thing connected 
 with the happiness of my species. I am not, Sir, beheve me, under the influence of 
 district or local feehngs. In all matters to be discussed here, I am a Virginian. I feel 
 myself inspired with that spirit, which regards the interest of every man, slave-holder 
 or non-slave-holder in the State. If I lived in Northampton, 1 would advocate the 
 same principles which I now do in coming from Brooke. It was principles, Mr. Chair- 
 man, which brought me here. Principles, Sir, wliich reason, observation and experi- 
 ence convinced me, are inseparably connected with the temporal prosperity of men ; 
 and of our State of Virginia : And principles, Sir, which are not to be sacrificed. I 
 know. Sir, that local interests, and district feelings, can only yield to principles. Ani- 
 mosities and contentions must arise between rival interests, unless fellow-citizens are 
 determined to be governed by principles. Too often it happens, from clashing inter- 
 ests, tlaat — 
 
 Lands intersected by a narrow frith, 
 Abhor each other, mountains interposed 
 Make enemies of nations, wlio had else 
 Like kindred drops, been mingled into one. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, we are entirely out at sea in this debate. We set sail without 
 compass, rudder, or pilot. So anxious were some gentlemen here to put to sea, that 
 when we called for the compass and the pilot, they exclaimed : Never mind, we w^ill 
 get the compass and the pilot when we get to port. We are now a thousand miles 
 from land. G-entlemen are making fine speeches upon the elements of the ocean, and 
 now and then upon the art of sailing. It will be well if the rari nantcs in gurgite 
 vasto, apply not to us. 
 
 I wanted, Sir, to take the pilot, the compass, and the rudder aboard. But in the 
 good old laconic style, the gentleman from Augusta, exclaimed, " write the preface af- 
 ter you have icritten the hook.'''' Yes, Sir, we shall learn the language before we learn 
 the grammar; we shall demonstrate all the propositions in Euclid, and then learn the 
 axiomata, and the postulata ; we must build the house and then lay the foundation; 
 we must heal the constitution, and then feel the pulse. 
 
 I am sorry, Sir, that we did not first establish the principles, or at least, agree upon 
 all the principles on which the frame of Government should be based, before we at- 
 tempted to form the Constitution. 
 
 I see no reasonable bounds can be fixed to this discussion. Every gentleman here 
 has to tell us his own principles, or to oppose those of others ; and more than the 
 half of every speech yet pronounced, has been in defence of mere abstractions, as 
 some gentlemen would call them. For my part, I never could reason without some 
 principles to reason from, and some point to reason to. The Bill of Rights of '76 has, 
 it is true, been declared sound doctrine, but gentlemen seem to me, to be continually 
 oppugning it. 
 
 Call me orthodox, or call me heterodox, I confess that I believe, that in the science 
 of politics, there are as in all other sciences, certain fundamental principles, as true 
 and unchangeable as any of the fundamental principles of physics or mornls. * 
 
 It is just as true, that Government ought to be instituted for the benefit of the gov- 
 erned, as that a whole is greater than a part ; or that a straight line is the shortest pos- 
 sible distance between any two given points. 
 
 I had intended, Sir, to examine the arguments in detail, offered by gentlemen in 
 favor of the amendment. Not as if these arguments had not been already refuted, if 
 I may be allowed the expression, by other gentlemen who have preceded me, on the 
 side of the question I espouse. But, Sir, I have found such a sunilarity of argument, 
 used by the very eloquent pleaders for the basis of wealth and population, that I have 
 this morning rather abandoned the idea of going into these dry details. It will still 
 be necessary, that I pay some attention to some minor matters, which, in my judg- 
 ment, involve important principles, and the more especially, as the public mind will 
 consider every thing off*ered here, as of some importance. This community. Sir, will 
 be much indebted to the gentlemen, w^ho have been at so much pains to furnish all 
 
118 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the deliberations of this Convention, They will furnish much information, necessary 
 to prepare the public to judge of the merits of the Constitution, which we are to submit 
 to them. Although I am not capable of throwing much, if any light, upon these sub- 
 jects, I cannot but rejoice that so much will be elicited ; and that the public, both our 
 cotemporaries and posterity, will be able to decide upon the wisdom and utility of the 
 various schemes advocated in this Assembly. Yes, Sir, posterity will be able to ap- 
 plaud or censure the views presented, and the course pursued by the advocates of the 
 respective projects. 
 
 Tlie remarks, which I am now to offer, will tend to establish four important items : 
 
 1. That the principles of the friends of this amendment, are based upon views of 
 society, unphilosophic and anti-republican. 
 
 2. That the basis of representation, which they advocate, is the common basis of 
 aristocratical and monarchical Governments. 
 
 3. That it cannot be made palatable to a majority of the present freeholders of Vir- 
 ginia : And, 
 
 4. That the white population basis, yAW operate to the advantage of the whole State. 
 
 1. I could wish, Sir, that my sole object now was, to fortify and illustrate these po- 
 sitions; but with a reference to the matters before me, I can only attempt this inci- 
 dentally. My province is rather to follow those on the affirmative, or who plead the 
 policy of the amendment, than to go into new details. Yet still. Sir, I expect, that some 
 or all of these points will .be illustrated in the review proposed. 
 
 The gentleman (Mr. Morris,) from Hanover, gave us yesterday, a splendid display 
 of his rhetorical powers. I wish I could commend his logic, as sincerely as I do his 
 rhetoric. His whole speech was founded upon two or three assumptions, as, indeed, 
 have been those who preceded him on the same side. And, Sir, allow me two or three 
 assumptions, and I don't know what I could not prove. He assumed, that the only 
 legitimate meaning of the Bill of Kights, was to be learned from the Constitution : 
 That the meaning of the phrase " permanent common interest with, and attachment 
 to, the community," meant, a freeholder, with twenty-five acres of land, and a cabin 
 on it. But again, he defined the term freeholder , as signifying in the year '76,^ a slnve- 
 Iwldcr. He assumed in the next place, that slave-property was protected, though not 
 named in the Constitution, in confining the Right of Suffrage to freeholders alone. 
 So I understood him. Now, Sir, let these matters be conceded, and the gentleman 
 from Hanover,-has the foundation for a fine oration. But another assumption was yet 
 necessary to give wings to his imagination. He must, contrary to the very lucid and 
 statistical expose of the gentleman from Frederick, whose speech he never noticed, 
 he must, I say, assume, -that if white population only, should be adopted as the basis 
 of representation, then the non-slave-holders would have the exclusive control in all 
 Governmental arrangements, and would, at once, interfere with the rights of masters to 
 their slaves. Then, Sir, his feelings were roused to the height of true eloquence, and 
 with an inspiration drawn from this view of the matter, he retires with a sword in his 
 hand, stained to the hilt with the best blood in Virginia. I do not think it necessary, 
 Mr. Chairman, to expose an argument, an}'- farther, than to shew it is based upon as- 
 sumption only. Thus shewn, and although it may please our fancy, it cannot inform 
 our judgment. 
 
 He then took us with him to London, and shewed us the British Parliament, with, 
 some twenty or thirty Americans amongst them. The stamp and tea tax are in debate 
 in the British Parliament, and the American Colonists are found of course debating 
 and voting against it. But wlmt are '* twenty-five against five hundred !" Home 
 they come, and tell the doleful tale. They inflame the people, and preach rebellion. 
 They are a minority and must rebel, because they cannot submit. If this picture 
 was pertinent, and designed to operate upon this Committee, then, Sir, it must have 
 been designed either to discredit the popular doctrine of these Republics, viz : that the 
 minority must submit to the majority, or that if the gentleman should find himself in 
 the minority, he would not submit his property to the control of the representatives 
 » of white population alone : in fact, this doctrine would lead all minorities into rebel- 
 lion. I forbear to follow him to Ohio, as this allusion had no reference to any senti- 
 ment expressed in this House. 
 
 I am sorry to observe so strong a dislike to the doctrine of a majority, appearing in 
 many of the gentlemen's speeches on this floor. If this does not squint towards aris- 
 tocracy, if it does not lead us towards the principles assumed by the monarchists of the 
 old world, I am not a judge of such matters. 
 
 I go back tv» the honorable gentleman from Culpeper. His first axiom was, that all 
 men have equal natural rights, but not equal political rights. That they have the 
 former, he has conceded ; but why they ought not to possess the latter, he has not 
 shewn. If they have equal natural rights, they ought to have equal Conventional 
 rights ; else, one part of them surrenders a larger share of their natural rights, when 
 they enter into society, than another part. But logic is yet wanting to shew why A, 
 in entering into society, should surrender more of his natural rights than B. Will 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 119 
 
 some gentleman now, or at any future time, shew us the reason why A, in sur- 
 rendering a part of his natural rights, should be obliged to surrender more than B ? 
 
 I wish most sincerely, Sir, that that gentleman may yet be able to redeem a pledge 
 which he has staked. He said, he hoped to be able to shew from the Bill of Rights 
 itself, " that it was never contemplated to confer on any man, the right of governing 
 another against his own consent." He and I most cordially concur in this sen- 
 timent, and I hope he may be inclined to go as far in this matter, as his honorable as- 
 sociate, tlie gentleman from Northampton, who has affirmed, " that he will hold no 
 principle as true, which he will not carry out to its legitimate results." In this I con- 
 cur with the latter gentleman : and if all the members of this Assembly, concurred 
 with the gentlemaii'from Northampton, Virginia would soon be generated from North 
 to South, from East to West. 
 
 He next asserts that the jus majGris is not recognized as a natural right, but as a 
 Conventional right. This may be true, but it will prove as much for us, as for him. 
 In other remarks upon the Bill of Rights, this gentleman makes it a dead letter of 
 very questionable import, and of as questionable authority. Yet, Sir, he decided it on 
 one occasion, at least, to be a part of the Constitution of Virginia. In deciding the 
 case of Crenshaw versus The Slate River Company, Randolph's Reports, vol. 6, p. 
 276, he saj^s, " our Bill of Rights is, a part of our Constitution, and the general prin- 
 ciples thereby declared are fundamental kncs, except so far as they are modified by 
 the Constitution itself. They limit the powers of the Legislature, and prohibit the 
 passing any laws violating these principles. The first article declares, ' that all men are 
 by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they 
 enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their pos- 
 terity ; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and 
 possessi?ig propcrt]/, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety to deprive a 
 citizen of any property legally acquired, without a fair compensation, deprives him 
 quoad hoc of the means of possessi?ig property, and of the only means so far as the 
 Government is concerned, besides the security of his person, of obtaining happiness." 
 So decided the honorable gentleman from Culpeper, when the present question was 
 not before him ; but we have an excuse for him in this instance. He had been so 
 much engaged in fortifying his amendment from deductions from Cocker's arithmetic 
 the evening before to shew, that while the wise men all came from the East, the 
 march of empire was to the West, that his mental lights were, for the time beincr, 
 eclipsed. 
 
 " But, Sir, it is not the increase of population in the west which this gentleman 
 ought to fear. It is the energy which the mountain breeze and western habits im- 
 part to these emigrants. They are regenerated; politically, I mean. Sir. They soon 
 become icofking politicians ; and the difference. Sir, between a talking and a tcorhincr 
 politician, is immense. The Old Dominion has long been celebrated for producino- 
 great orators ; the ablest metaphysicians in policy ; men that can split hairs in all ab- 
 struse questiens of political economy. But at home, or when they return from Con- 
 gress, they have negroes to fan them asleep. But a Pennsylvania, a New-York, a 
 Ohio, or a western Virginia Statesman, though far inferior in logic, metaphysics, and 
 rhetoric, to an old Virginia Statesman, has this advantage, that w-hen he returns 
 home, he takes off* his coat, and takes hold of the plougli. This gives him bone and 
 muscle. Sir, and preserves his Republican principles pure and uncontaminated. 
 
 Bidding adieu for the time being, to the gentleman from Culpeper, I proceed to 
 make my devoirs to the honorable gentleman from Northampton. 
 
 This gentleman starts with the postulate, that there are two sorts of majoi-ities ; of 
 numbers and interests ; in plain English, of men and money. I do not well under- 
 stand, why he ought not to have added, also, majorities of talent, plwsical strength, 
 scientific skill, and general literature. These are all more valuable than money, and 
 as useful to the State. A Robert Fulton, a General Jackson, a Joseph Lancaster, a 
 Benjamin Franklin, are as useful to the State, as a whole district of mere slave-hold- 
 ers. ^ Now, all the logic, metaphysics and rhetoric of this Assembly, must be put in re- 
 quisition to shew, why a citizen, having a hundred negroes, should have ten times 
 more political power than a Joseph Lancaster, or a Robert Fulton, with only a house 
 and garden. And if scientific skill, physical strength, military prowess, or general 
 literature, in some individuals, is entitled to so much respect, why ought not those 
 majorities in a community to have as much weight as mere wealth 
 
 W e admit that fifty men in one district, may have as much money, as five hundred 
 in another ; but we can see no good reason, why the superabundant wealth of those 
 fifty should be an equivalent, or rather a counterpoise, against four hundred and fifty 
 citizens in another. Why should not fifty men, possessing as much talent, as much 
 military, scientific, or general information, in one district, outweigh four hundred and 
 fifty nabobs, who are mere consumers or political drones in the national hive, living 
 in another ? Amongst those who place mammon on the loftiest throne, I know no- 
 tliing weighs like gold. But according to the logic of the honorable gentleman from 
 
120 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Northampton, if Stephen Girard, an old man, without wife or child, now worth 
 12,000,000 of dollars, were to buy up one or two districts in Virginia, and depopulate 
 them, and cover them with sheep and cattle, he might, if he would, become a resi- 
 dent and elect himself, and become a member of both the Senate and House of De- 
 legates at the same time. But the property basis of representation, never can become 
 tolerably rational, until each vote is valued at a given sum, and every man have as 
 many votes, as he has the stipulated price. Fix the votes at two hundred or five hun- 
 dred dollars each, and let him who is worth one thousand dollars, have fifty or twenty 
 votes. This will give some semblance of equity to the procedure ; otherwise, a poor 
 man in one district, may have the power of ten in another. 
 
 Yes, Sir, according to the doctrine of the gentleman from Northampton, one poor 
 man, because lie lives in the n< ighbourhood of a very rich man, would have more po- 
 litical power than the wealthiest citizen in the west, who lived in the neighbourhood 
 of many poor men. This fact, alone, defeats the design of this gentleman's scheme, 
 and shews its incompatibility with itself. This gentleman could find no law, or right, 
 as he termed it, in nature, but the right of the strong to devour the weak. Brutal 
 force governs every thing. He presented the lion devouring the ox ; the ox driv- 
 ing the lamb, the lamb something weaker, but last of all, the worm eating the ele- 
 phant. 
 
 This, Sir, is but a small part of the incongruity of this honorable gentleman's doc- 
 trine with Republican principles. But he concludes, there are no pnnciples in Go- 
 vernment ; and his honorable associate (Judge Green) from Culpeper, declares, that 
 men are governed by interest only. And, as for the poor, they have no affection, no 
 love of country, no social feelings, no conscience, no religion ; they are all governed 
 by mere cupidity ! No wonder the eloquent gentleman from Orange, afiirmed that 
 
 This gentleman, 1 mean the gentleman from Orange, in his clear and forcible ora- 
 tion the other day, began with the Bill of Rights, as usual, and with the first article 
 too. I believe he admitted it to be true doctrine in theory, but dangerous in the ap- 
 plication : Ml men are horn free and independent. This is a position much older than 
 these United States, and flowed from a gentleman, to whom, more than any other, 
 these American States, are indebted for all their civil and religious liberties. Gentle- 
 men may encomiaze whom they please ; but there is no man more worthy of American 
 admiration, than the statesman, the philosopher, and the christian who is the legiti- 
 mate father of the first article of the Bill of Rights. I need not tell you, Mr. Chair- 
 man, that I allude to the Author of the Essay on Toleration, the Author of the Essay 
 upon the Human Understanding. Now, Sir, I do not, because I cannot, concur with 
 those gentlemen, who say that this article contains a truth, and yet maintain that it 
 is dangerous in its application. Truth with me, Sir, is eternal, and what was true in 
 morals, or in the science of man and Government five thousand years ago, is true still: 
 truth is at least one day older than error. And, Sir, it is dangerous to depart from a 
 truth so fundamental as that now before us. It will be found that the slightest depar- 
 ture from'it in practice, will soon or late prove a curse to mankind. The departure 
 may be gradual and imperceptible, like the gradual and almost imperceptible disincli- 
 nation of two straight lines. Project them at one end, they meet in an acute angle ; 
 but extend them a great distance, and at the other end they will recede from each 
 other to a great distance. So may our departure from correct principles issue in an 
 ultimate abandonment of our form of Government. The acute and discriminating 
 gentleman from Orange, seems also to find fault with the third article of the Bill of 
 Rights, which declares that a majority of the citizens of any State, have a right to al- 
 ter or amend the form of Government, when it becomes disagreeable to them. He 
 gave us a long recital of our failures to obtain majorities. He instanced the plurali- 
 ties which, in most instances, decide our County, State, and United States' elections; 
 the usages in Congress ; and finished his recitation of departures from the principle and 
 practice in presenting one juror controlling eleven. The genius who could find in a 
 jury of twelve men, called to decide a question of fact, or even a question in law, a 
 proof for our departure from the principle of a majority, could easily infer that our 
 republican institutions, might issue in a monarchy, and prove that we ought to estab- 
 lish a minority of men, with a majority of money ! But, Sir, in all these exam- 
 ples, it is mere convenience, and the supposed majority of wishes, coinciding with 
 the plurality obtained, which reconciles these communities to these usages. I except 
 the allusion to the Senate, and Congress of the United States, and the reference to 
 juries, as not apphcable to the question at issue, and as explicable upon otlier prin- 
 ciples. 
 
 But, since I am come to the subject of majorities, I wish to make a remark or two 
 upon the origin of them. The gentlemen on the other side, have triumphantly call- 
 ed upon us, to find the origin of majorities in the state of nature. Nay, indeed, they 
 almost ridicule the idea of men existing in a state of nature. We all know, that men 
 roaming at large, over the forests, could have no idea of majorities ; it is not applica- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 121 
 
 ble to them. But, so soon as men form a social compact,, it is one of the first things, 
 which, from nature itself, would present itself to them. The true origin of this idea, 
 is found in tue nature and circumstances, of men. Man is a social animal, and in obe- 
 dience lo this law of his nature, he seeks society, and desires the countenance of man. 
 But, as all men are not born on the same day, and do not all place tlieir eyes upon .the 
 same object, at the same time, nor receiA-e the same education, they cannot all be of 
 the same opinion. Some arrangement, founded on the nature of man, for men's liv- 
 ing together, must then be ad(,p:;ed. And the impossibility of gratifying their social 
 desires, but in yielding to ditferences of opin.on, presents itself among tiie very first 
 reflections. In all matters, tiien, of common interest, when a difference occurs, one 
 party must yield. They must either agree to yield, or to form a new community. 
 But, which shall yield : All nature cries, the inlerior to the superior ; the weaker lo 
 the stronger ; the less to the greater. \l is, then, founded on the nature of th.ngs. 
 And a moment's reflection will convince us, that, in case of a struggle, the minority 
 must yield to the rnajority ; for, they have the power, either to compel it, or to expel 
 the disaffected. It is, then, as natural a conclusion and arrangement, as can be con- 
 ceived. 
 
 But, Sir, there are some vrho deny the existence of a state of nature altogether. 
 Were it imaginary, v.'e can reason from it, as well as upon any other abstract subject 
 whatever. But, Sir, it is not altogether imaginary. History affords some instances, 
 of what is at least aualagous to it, of dispersed individuals forming a social compact. 
 We shall give an illustration of what history has recorded : Hist(,ry has informed us, 
 that political communities have been broken up, and irom their ruins, new ones have 
 been formed. For example : Should some Ibreign enem}^ invade this country \ and 
 may Heaven long avert that day 1 I say, suppose that for our iniquities in (xovern- 
 ment, some foreign enemy should invade our country, and spread devastation, ruin 
 and death througli the land, a few might escape and flee to the most distant wilds, saj 
 beyond the Rocky Mounlains. We shall select, for illustration of our principles, a 
 few individuals, who will illustrate this state of nature, as well as many thousands. 
 A community or a nation, is but a family on a larger scale. Suppose, then. A, B, C, 
 D, and E, aiter having lived some two or three years, unknown lo each otlier, in the 
 wilds, should at som.e time meel. A, in making his escape, had snatched a bag of 
 dollars; B had taken his Vv'ife ; C, his rifle : D, his children \ and E had notliing but 
 himself. . They are about to form a social compact. They have brought some of tlie 
 old ideas vvith them, from their former society. A is an old Virginian, and begins the 
 discussion. He says, " Gentlemen, Government is.chiefly for tke ■protection oj proper- 
 ty, and every man ought to have influence according to his property. I, therelore, con- 
 tend for an influence, proportioned to ray wealth. I know, that we have much need 
 of wealth, in forming a comfortable settlement here, and man}^ calls will be made up- 
 on me." B asks him, of what use Vvas his bag of dollars to him since his arrival in 
 the wilderness.'' Had he spent a dollar since he left the old society ? Not one. " Soci- 
 ety, Sir, continues he, is necessary to give use and importance to money; and you are 
 as much indebted to us, for giving you an opportunity to spend your money, to obtain 
 our aids, as we can be to you for such sums as we may call upon you for. Besides. Sir, 
 without our society and assistance, you could not prouct your money. We will aflbrd 
 you, not only the means of enjoying, but of protecting your wealth. I claim, Sir, 
 twice as much influence in society as you; because. Sir, I have a wile. She has her 
 interests and her wishes, as well as you or me." C rejoins : " I cannot, gentlemen, 
 agree, that either of you shall have mortj power in our new Government, than my- 
 self. My R'fle, Sir, is of as much use, and my skill to iise it, as either of your pos- 
 sessions. iNay, Sir, the day may be to-morrow, that the safety of our persons, and of 
 our community, may depend upon me; and I think, that my claims, because founded 
 upon the preservation of our very existence, are stronger than th( se of any f ther per- 
 son, and entitle me, more than any other man, to greater political power. You reccl- 
 lect, Sir, that the great men of the Old World, were all Warriors and Military Chief- 
 tains. As for my neighbour B, claiming infiuence for his wife, it is absnrd ! Has she 
 any sepTrate inierest from his? Has she not identified her interests with his ? Can she 
 have any will, affecting the community, but tlirough hiai? Is not she his property, by 
 the marriage compact.'" 
 
 D rises. My claims, gentlemen, are paramount to all others. I have many chil- 
 dren. They are, Sir, the hope of every community. I claim an infli;ence in Gov- 
 ernment, proportionate to my interest in it, and to the services which I n.ay yet ren- 
 der it. I have no money, no rifle, it is true ; but I hive seven sens and daughters 
 coming forward. They will be able yet. Sir, to create wealth, and to defend the com- 
 munity. 1 insist upon it, gentlemen, if an}^ man in this community has a right to any 
 more than his own voice, than his o\vtl personal weight; I have seven good reasons 
 to offer, why I should have seven times more than he." 
 
 E says : " Gentlemen, I have neither wife, son, daughter, rifle, nor a single dollar. 
 I am stripped of all extrinsic claims for superior weight in the Government. But, 
 
 16 
 
122 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Sir, I am not without other claims. I have learned to speak two or three of the In- 
 dian languages, since 1 became an inhabitant of these wilds. And, Sir, should any 
 misunderstandings arise between us and them, I can be an interpreter, and may do 
 more to prevent war, than any other member of our community. I claim, then, an 
 influence, equal to this rarest and most useful endowment, which, Sir, requires so 
 much labour and time to obtain, and which, when obtained, is so useful to society. 
 But, I must protest against D's having seven votes for his seven children. They are 
 minors, and under his control, and of immature reason. When they arrive at man- 
 hood, and are free agents, but not till then, shall they have a voice." 
 
 A rises : *• Gentlemen, I see we all have claims for various portions of political 
 power. I think we must abandon the idea of forming a social compact, upon these 
 ])rinciple3. I will claim only my single vote, and my single personal influence, and 
 will yield my pretensions, if every other gentleman yields his. I will agree, that we 
 all surrender ourselves, our property, our talents, and our iikiW, jrro bo7w publico ; that 
 each man shall have his own personal influence, and in all contributions for the pub- 
 lic service, each man shall contribute in his own way, according to his respective 
 ability." 
 
 Mr. Chairman : Here we have in miniature something analagous to this state of na- 
 ture, of whicii we have so often heard. And here we have the only true philosophy 
 of the social compact. In this compact. Sir, as I xmderstand it, every man surrenders 
 himself to the whole communit}^, and the whole community to him. We have no 
 occasion to travel so far South, as the gentleman from Northampton, who penetrated 
 those regions until he saw a lohite devil. Nor need we go so far Korth with the gen- 
 tleman from Orange, who found a nation composed entirely of v:Gmen. He seemed 
 greatly concerned for the political rights of such a nation. But, Sir, he need not 
 have troubled himself much on this account, for such a nation could not continue for 
 more than five hundred years. 
 
 While, Sir, I am on the subject of such a state of nature, or viewing man as com- 
 ing into society, may I not take occasion to observe, that man exhibits himself as pos- 
 sessing the rigiit of suffrage, anterior to his coming into the social compact. It is not 
 a right derived from, or conferred by, society; for it is a right which belongs to him 
 as a man. Society )nay divest him of it, but they cannot confer it. But what is this 
 right.'' It is that of thinking, willing and expressing his will. A vote is neither more 
 nor less than the ex[)ression of a person's will. God has given to man the power of 
 thinking, willing and speaking his will, and no man ever did as a free agent enter into 
 any society without willing it. And, we may add, no men could form a social compact, , 
 without first exercising what we must c'all tlie Right of Sufli-age. It is a right natural 
 and undcrived, to the exercise of which, every man by nature has as good a reason as 
 another. But this is only b}^ the way. 
 
 Having now glanced at this state of nature, and the meaning of the social compact, 
 wliicli in my desultory and extemporaneous way I have done without much method, 
 I would approach the great question, now pending before us: Remarking, however, 
 that so soon as we depart from the doctrine, contained in the three first articles of the 
 Bill of Rights, we abandon the radical principles of our Government, not only of the 
 State of Virginia, but of every other State of the Union. [Here Mr. C. read and 
 commented on the three first articles.] If the amendment should succeed, I shall 
 consider these principles abandoned. A new principle will be sanctioned ; the very 
 principle on which the aristocracies and monarchies of the old v/orld have been founded. 
 Give men political power according to their w^ealth, and soon we shall have a legal- 
 ized oligarchy ; then come the thirty Tyrants; then follow the Quin decemviri; then 
 the decemviri ; then the triumvirate ; and last of all, comes Julius Cajsar. Gentle- 
 men talk of the docking of entails, and the laws of Parcenary ; but a feeble resistance 
 will these arrangements present to a reigning oligarchy. Men love power, and in 
 proportion as they possess it, does that love increase. 
 
 This appears to me a controversy merely about povv^er. One party speak as though 
 they possessed it, and had it to bestow. Another contends for it as their right. It is 
 not with me a struggle for power ; it is for right, for principles, for justice. I do not 
 think that in order to secure my comfort, happiness, or prosperity, it is necessary to 
 invade the peace, comfort, or prosperity of any man. That I go for principles and not 
 for power 7>er se, I v/ill now shew. And in shewing this, I will shew how unreason- 
 able it is, for the opponents of reform to ask us for a guarantee against oppression. 
 The power will be vested in the very hands of those who ought to hold it as umpires be- 
 tween the rival interests of the east and the west. We shall take the present number 
 of Representatives for the data. That number is two hundred and fourteen : Of these, 
 the forty -five counties and four towns on tide- water, have at present ninety-four repre- 
 sentatives : on the white population basis, they would have only seventy -two and two- 
 tenths representatives: That is, according to the Census of 1820; which will as cor- 
 rectly demonstrate the principle, as any document we could obtain. The country 
 west of the Alleghany, containing thirty-three counties, has at present sixty-six re- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 123 
 
 presentatires. On the wliite population basis, that district of country would have only 
 sixty-one and four-tenths. We should tJien lose four and six-tenths representatives. 
 Thus the nine Senatorial Distiicts on tide-water would lose twenty-two representa- 
 tives, and we nearly five. In all, these two Districts would lose nearly twenty-seven 
 representatives. Now, the question is, what sections of the State would gain thh 
 power. We lose, but who gains ? I answer, the twentv counties maliing the six Sena- 
 torial Districts east of and along the base of the Blue Ridge, would gain nearly twelve, 
 representatives, and in this District, tliere are no less than 13'd,'ili:i slaves. The re- 
 maining fitl;een representatives would be gained by the seven counties, or three Sena- 
 torial Districts in the Valley beyond the Ridge, having •23.963 slaves. Thus, the 
 power lost in the counties on tide-water and west of the Alleghany would be deposit- 
 ed in that part of the State, which, from its central position and from its dense slave 
 population, would be the saifest deposit which the fears of the slave-holders could de- 
 vise, and wliich would aiford to them the strongest and best guarantee against those 
 encroachments of the non-slave-holders which Ihe evil-boding imaginations of some 
 gentlemen have conjured up. Vv^e are not, then, Mr. Chairman, contending for pow- 
 er for ourselves, but for principles, which, let them operate as they may, we believe, 
 cannot fail to benefit the whole State, by distributing power where it ought to be, and 
 by divesting our Government of those odious aristocratic features, which have caused 
 and are daily causing the sceptre to depart from Virginia. So repuonant are many 
 features in our Government to the Republican feelings which prevail in other States 
 in this Union, that a majorit}'- of our own freeholders cannot approve them; and if 
 they cannot approve them, how can we suppose that citizens from other States can be 
 induced to locate themselves amongst us.' 
 
 The statistical documents submitted, and the argument deduced therefrom, further 
 prove the fallacy of the hypothesis upon which the gentleman from Hanover, based 
 the greater part of his remarks. It shews these to have been as groundless as tliat 
 other assumption of liis : that we were goino- to lose, or in danger of losing, the 1-llth 
 part of our power in the Federal Government, if the doctrine of making three white 
 men out of five negroes, or of puttino- Jire souls into three bodies, should cease to be 
 the popular practice in Virginia. He did not tell us, indeed, why Virginia gave up 
 .2-5ths of her slave population to the Union ; in this she erred, unless she intended to 
 give up the other 3-5tlis to her own white population. 
 
 But that I may not too far impose upon the time or patience of the Committee, I 
 shall only now call your attention. Sir, to one or two other items. 
 
 I have been sorry, very sorry, Sir, to observe in sundry gentlehaen on this floor, a 
 disposition to treat us as aliens, or as persons, v\-ho have no common interest witli the 
 people of the east. We have given them no reason to suspect our want of fellow- 
 feeling, or of common interest. Let gentlemen but reflect upon the circumstances 
 of this State in the year 1814. When all the militia east of the Blue Ridge were 
 employed, or chiefly employed in patrolling the counties on the seaboard, and gene- 
 rally east of the Ridge, in order to preserve that property for which a guarantee is 
 now demanded : I say, when your militia, Mr. Chairman, were all needed to prevent 
 insurrections amongst your own discontented population, who was it that fled to your 
 succour and protection from an invading enemy, who were disposed to harrass your 
 seaboard, and to augment the discontents of your slaves r The Valley and the west 
 volunteered their aid. Yes, Sir, the single county of Shenandoah gave you twelve 
 hundred men to fight your battles, or rather, the battles of their own State. They 
 made a common cause with you. And. Sir, the bones of many a gallant and brave 
 citizen of the west, lie in the sands of Norfolk. Men, too, who had no suffrage, no 
 representation in your Government, sacrificed not their propert}^ t^i^ly? but their lives 
 also, in your defence. In one company. Sir, consisting of seventy -four persons, who 
 marched from Culpeper Court-house, but two had the right of sutrrage I Yet these 
 men gave not sufiicient evidence of common interest with, nor common attachment 
 to, the community ! ! ! Yes, Sir, from the very shores of the Ohio, from my own 
 county of Brooke, they marched to your succour, and hazarded their all, their eartlily 
 all, in defence of that very country, and that very Government, wliich treated many 
 of them as aliens in the land of their nativity. 
 
 We have been told that neai-ly 3-4ths of the tax has been paid by the counties east 
 of the Blue Ridge. But these o-entlemen tell us nothincp about who fight the battles 
 of the country. But, Sir. tlie disproportion between the east and the west, in the 
 tax-paying department, will every day diminish. As the west increases in population 
 and improvement, its ability to pay will increase, and its property will increase in 
 value. 
 
 It were endless. Sir, to notice the many objections made against the surrender of 
 power, or rather, the arguments offered, to retain a power already assumed and pos- 
 sessed. I will only remark, that it is said, that if the 2chite basis should obtain, there 
 will be endless discontentment among many of the citizens of this Commonwealth. 
 But, Sir, if the black basis, or the moyiey basis, as it should be called, should obtain, 
 
124 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 would it diminish, or terminate discontentment or complaint ? No, Sir ; in that case, 
 a majority, a large majority of the freeholders, would be irreconcileably discontented. 
 And, Su', if d.sc;onlents, niui-murs and conipiauits must, on any hypothesis, exist, the 
 question is, whether in policy and in justice, they had not better be confined to the 
 minority, than spread through a niajcnty of the citizens ot this Commonwealth ? 
 And which party would have the best reason to be discontented, let the umpires 
 throughout all Kej ublics decide. 
 
 But, Sir, in the last place, I must say that the policy of those gentlemen who advo- 
 cate the money basis, appears to me, not only an anti-republ.cau, but a shoit-sighted 
 policy. That policy whicli augments the power of wealth, which tends to make the 
 rich man richer, and the poor man poorer, is the worst policy for such a community 
 as this is, and must be, at least tor some time to come. tittle do the rich think, 
 whan char.ned with tiie fascinations of wealth and power, when the}^ are eager to se- 
 cure and augment both, by Consti'.u ional and LtgislatiYe prcvisicns, that they are 
 fightiiig against their own oifsprmg. and proscribing their own posterity. And, Sir, 
 is n;)t posterity, is not cur children's happiness dearer to us than our own Do wer 
 not duly see tiiat riches are ever making to themselves wings Is not the great 
 wheel of f )rtane, as some gentlemen call it, eternally revolving. Those at the sum- 
 mit must descend, and those in the mire must ascend. Wliere are the noble and 
 wealthy fauiilies that flourished in this Comimnweaitli some sixty or seventy years 
 ago ? S nne of their descendants may yet be found sustainmg the name, the talents 
 and respectability of tJxeir ances.'^^ry. Bat how many of them have, to use the words 
 of Bonaparte, sunk down into the Canaille There are few of the wealthy now liv- 
 ing, vvh) hive not their p^or relatives an J conn.ixion3, and how long, or rather how 
 sliort a time, will it be, till the decendants of most of us will have merged themselves 
 a.nongst the humble poor and the obscure My views of men, and of the revolutions 
 in human atfau's, make me a republican. My love for my own posterity would prevent 
 me frOiU voting for the ainendoieat, i£ 1 had no other consideration to govern ine. If 
 1 had the v/ealth of Stephen Girard, I could not, ieeling as I do, viewing human af- 
 fah's as I do, looking back into history, or forward into lu'.urity, 1 could not consent to 
 bu:lJ up an arisLocracy, because I should be erecting embankments and bulwarks 
 against those dearer to me than myself. I do" most s ncerely wish that gentlemen 
 would look a little before them, anil remember the lot of man, lest they should, in at^ 
 temp ing to secure themselves irom i mag nary evils, lay the foundation of real and last- 
 ing ones. To conclude, Sir, the policy of those gentlemen who are securing, or at- 
 tempting to secure to themselves exclusive privileges, and to defend themselves from 
 an im?.ginary evil, reminds me of a character which Dr. Johnson depicts in one of 
 the pipers in liis Rambler. A young gentleman much afiaid of thieves and robbers 
 brealdng into his roim at night, became distrustful of ail the locks and keys in com- 
 mon use, as guarantees of his person and property-. He put his ingenuity to work, to 
 invent a new lock and key, which could not be violated. iHe succeedtd to liis wish- 
 es. He had his room fortified to quiet all his fears. He one day called in a friend to 
 exhibit to him his ingenuity. It required some two or three minutes to lock and un- 
 loc'i the d >or. The g3ntleman after admiring and commending his ingenuity, re- 
 marked, why, sir, said he, this is certainly a great defence against thieves and rob- 
 bers, but it is so difficult to unlock, I should fear that if the house were to take fire, 
 you might be iconsumed before you could open the door and escape. I declare, sir, 
 said the young gentleman, I never thought of that. Hereafter I will sleep with my 
 door, not only unlocked, but half open. 
 
 Mr. Scott of Fauquier, rose to ask for the reading of the question before the Con- 
 • vention ; which being done, he proposed to amend the amendment by adding, " and 
 in the Senate, on white population exclusively." (The effect of this proposition would 
 be, to apportion the House of Delegates, by population and taxation combined-, and 
 the Senate by white population exclusively.) 
 
 Mr. ScoTT, rose and addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : Labouring under a disease which not only emaciates the frame, but 
 clouds the intellect, Vv^ere It") consult my own interest apart from that which I have 
 in common with the inhabitants of that portion of the State which 1 have the honor 
 in part to represent, I should abstain from troubling the Committee with any remarks 
 on the question now before it. But, Sir, I have a duty to perform which compels me 
 to make the effort, however unsuccessful it may prove. Mr. Chairman, the people 
 whom I in part represent, have not been in the habit of singing hosannas to the pre- 
 sent Constitution. They think it has def cts, and that they have suffereci evils under 
 its operation. I have participated in these sentiments." To rem.edy these evils we 
 have united with our brethren of the west to bring about this Convention. But I fear 
 they will prove Roman allies, and we shall onlyliave tlie privilege of changing our 
 masters. • 
 
 Mr. Chairman : After the frost-work of mere abstractions, constructed by the gen- 
 tlemen on the other side, had melted before the rays of the genius of the gentleman 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 125 
 
 from Northampton, the member from Ohio has endeavoured to build it up again, with 
 what success 1 leave the Committee to judge. When I set about a task, Sir, my first 
 enquiry is, what is the end to be accomphshed ? Having ascertained«this, I then look 
 about for tiie means which are at hand. The erd which Vv^e all have in view, is to se- 
 cure the blessings of hberty to the people of Virginia, and their posterity ; the means 
 by which we propose to accomplish it, is to recommend to tliem a frame of Govern- 
 ment best calculated to attain that end. In constructing this Government, we are 
 not necessarily driven back to the natural rights of man. If we are satisfied that the 
 safety of tlie whole community requires, that the powers of Government should be 
 placed in the hands of a minority, we are bound to recommend it to the people to place 
 them there. And if they give it their sanction, the right of the minority is as legiti- 
 mate as the majoris contended for by gentlemen on the other side. All the ques- 
 tions which can arise are mere questions of the fitness of means to an- end. I would 
 not be understood as discarding all principle. On the contrary it will' be found that I 
 agree with the gentlemen who are so very fond of theory in the principles which 1 
 shall take as my guide, although I shall apply them differently. The difference be- 
 tween tiiese gentlemen, and myself, is this: tiiey form a garment according- to their 
 ideas of exact symmetry without enquiring whether, or not, it will fit the person \A\o 
 is to wear it. I propose to take his measure before I apply the shears to the cloth. 
 They profoundly skilled in the healing art, compound a medicine, containing the quint- 
 essence of the Materia Medica, and administer it in all cases. I propose to feel the 
 pulse of the patient, and examine the symptoms, before I prescribe the" remedy. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have already said, that the object of our bbours, is to secure to the 
 people of Virginia, and their posterit}'-, liberty and safety of persons and property. 
 To effect this, a certain quantity of povv^er must be called into action. The first re- 
 flection which strikes us, is, that pov.'er entrusted to human agents, is liable to abuse. 
 To guard against this abuse, constitutes the chief difficulty in framing a Government. 
 The first expedient resorted to, is to call into action no more than is necessary to at- 
 tain the end. Too much power is liable to run into abuse from its mere excess. 
 The next expedient is not to confide all to the same hands : hence the separation of 
 the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Departments. But this separation has not in 
 practice been found sufficient. It is not enough to check power by power. Some 
 further security has been found necessary. The best reflection which 1 have been 
 able to give to the subject, has brought me to adopt this maxim, " as far as practicable, 
 to deposit power in the hands of those only whose interest it is not to abuse it." If 
 we look around us into the ordinary affairs of men, we shall find that interest is the 
 great spring of action. V^hat is it that makes agriculture flourish? What is it that 
 builds your cities, and makes commerce spread her wings What inspires the poet 
 and nerves the soldier's arm It is love of wealth, fame, and distinction. In a word, 
 it is self-love. I have not much experience in legislation, but I appeal to gentlemen 
 here who are experienced both in Federal and State legislation, wiiether they are ever 
 -so sure of a vote as v/hen they appeal to the interests of those whose vote they want. 
 It would be out of order, Sir, to speak of the members of this House : One remark, 
 however, I take leave to m^ake. Although so much devotion is shewn to principles, 
 the principles of gentlemen do quadrate most marvellously with the interests of their 
 constituents. I do not mean- to cast imputations on gentlemen. I do not mean to 
 question the sincerity of their attachment to principle. But when I see honourable 
 and intelligent m;n, with all their devotion to principle, imconsciously influenced by 
 interest, I set an higher value on the security which interest gives against the abuse 
 of power. The guarantee of interest constitutes the chief difference between Repub- 
 lican, and Aristocratic, or Monarchical Governments. The responsibility of public 
 agents, resolves itself into this principle. By causing the law-maker to mingle with 
 the people, and to be sul^ject to the laws whicli he has enacted, you make it his inter- 
 est to enact just laws. By subjecting him to re-election at short intervals, you make 
 it his interest to consult the v/elfare of his constituents in order that he may be re- 
 elected. Sir, I thhik I can boast of as many attached and disinterested friends as any 
 gentleman here, but my experience teaches me, that I am never so sure of the good 
 offices of another, as when I make it his interest to serve me. There are it is true, 
 many bright exceptions to the influence of the selfish principle. The annals of man- 
 kind occasionally set before us examples of self-sacrifice on the altars of patriotism 
 and virtue, but they are few when compared with the sacrifices of patriotism and vir- 
 tue on the altars of ambition and avarice ; and serve by their splendour, to render more 
 visible, the dark shades of the human character. Here then we have a great principle 
 founded in human nature, which will serve as a touchstone for every grant of power 
 that we propose to make. Let us bring the question before the Committee, to this 
 test. What will be the effect of the principle reported b}^ the Legislative Committee ^ 
 It will give to the people v/est of the Blue Ridge, if not immediately, in a very short 
 time, a majority in the Legislature. No gentleman has questioned this, but my friend 
 from Frederick. He seems to think that the majority of whites will remain, as it now 
 
126 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 is, east of the Ridge. If we look to the documents furnished by the Auditor, we shall 
 find that tlie increase of whites west of the Ridge, greatly exceeds that on the east ; 
 and if it should%;ontinue in the same proportion, a majority will, in a very short time, 
 be found west of the Ridge. If we look at tlie face of the country, we shall come 
 to the same conclusion. A .great proportion of the land below the head of tide-water, 
 is worn and exhausted. That between tide- water and the Ridge, is in a similar con- 
 dition, except a strip bordering on the mountain. This is capable of regeneration, 
 and will sustain an increased population. It is of less extent than what is called 
 the Limestone Valley, which, from the fertility of its soil, is capable of sustaining a 
 dense population. The country east of the Ridge, has no new lands to settle. There 
 is no room for a great increase of population. A large portion of fertile land west of 
 the Alleghany is yet unsettled ; and when it is brought into cultivation by the influ- 
 ence of the Chesapeake and Ohio canal, it must give a vast accession to tlie popula- 
 tion of that region. I will ask the gentleman, under whose patronage that work is 
 progressing, whether he does not expect it will succeed ? The population which this 
 will add to the west, must be exclusively white. From tlie vicinity of the country 
 through which it passes to Pennsylvania, slaves cannot be held there. But, Sir, it is 
 unnecessary to pursue this argument farther. We have it on the authority of the 
 gentleman from Brooke, (and no man is better acquainted with the situation and re- 
 sources of that country,) that in thirty years a majority of the white population 
 of the State will be found west of the Alleghany. 1 feel, therefore, warranted in as- 
 suming as the basis of my argument, that the country west of the Ridge, does npw^ 
 or soon will contain a majority of the white population of the State. 
 
 Let us now enquire whether the people of that region can give the security we 
 require against the abuse of the power which the Legislative Committee proposes to 
 give to them. I agree with the gentlemen on the other side, that as a general rule, 
 a majority ought to govern. A majority of persons will prima facie, comprise a ma- 
 jority of interests. But this rule is certainly liable to exceptions. The power of the 
 majority must have limits. We all propose to Mmil it by denying, to the Legislature 
 the power of passing ex post facto laws, suspending the privilege of the writ of 
 habeas corpus, &c. The only question is, what limitations shall we impose ? I an- 
 swer, all such as are necessary to protect the rights and- interests of the governed..^ 
 It is for me to shew that the limitation, which I propose, is necessary for our security. 
 To that end, let us take a survey of the points of difference between the portions of 
 the State, lying east and west of the Ridge. The first point of diiference wliich 
 strikes us, is the erroneous disproportion of the taxes paid by the two regions. I will 
 not dwell on this part of the subject, after the luminous exposition given by the gen- 
 tleman from Hanover. The next point of difference, is in the character of the po- 
 pulation. Eight-ninths of the slaves are found east of the Ridge. In all laws rela- 
 ting to this species of property, the people west of the Ridge are interested to the ex- 
 tent of one-ninth only. But the gentleman from Frederick thinks that this property 
 will not be in danger, because the slave-holders west of the Ridge, when added to 
 those of the east, will give a majority. Suppose it is so. Why, I ask, should the 
 people below the mountain, transfer all the power necessary for their protection, to 
 tlie people above This may be very agreeable to those who kindly offer to become 
 our guardians. But the people whom I represent have a notion, (it may be a very 
 unphilosophical one.) that their affairs will be never the worse managed, because they 
 have a hand in the management of them. But, Sir, in that part of the Valley to . 
 which we are invited to look for protection, the slaves are to the v/hites as one to four. 
 In the counties more particularly alluded to by the gentleman from Frederick, they 
 are as one to three. The proportion which the slave-holders bear to the non-slave- 
 holders, cannot be greater, and may be, and probably is less. It cannot be greater,: 
 because if the slaves be divided, so that no person shall hold more than one, there 
 will be three who hold none, for one who holds one ; arid v/hen the war between the 
 non-slave-holders and the slave-holders shall be waged, the slave-holders will be out- ' 
 voted at the polls. So far from protecting us, they will be unable to protect them- 
 selves. We cannot aid them, for they will have tied our hands. I ask the gentlemen 
 representing that part of tlie State to which I belong, and which is deeply interested 
 in this question, whether they are willing to accept of such a security as this ? Would 
 they not rather have the means of protection in their own hands ? Will they not 
 prefer the guarantee which I demand ? With that security, we shall not want the 
 lock of the gentleman from Ohio. I can trust my gold to a man whose interest it is 
 to restore it to me. 
 
 There is another interest connected with this branch of the subject, Avhich deserves 
 our serious attention. Of the tv/enty-tv/o members to whicli this State is entitled in 
 the House of Representatives of the United States, seven represent the slave popu- 
 lation. Now, if we establish it as a principle that the white basis is the true one for 
 apportioning representation in the State Legislature, will it not follow that as between 
 ourselves, it is also the true basis for apportioning members of Congress ? And, if 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 127 
 
 so, the seven members purchased, I may say, by the slave-holder, will be seized upon 
 as common property, and divided between the east and the west. I ask gentlemen 
 of the east, and more especially of the middle region, whether they are prepared for 
 this ? 
 
 And if not, what do they propose to do ? Insert an article in the Constitution for- 
 biddincv it ? Gentlemen from the west may say we will promjise you not to take from 
 you the representation in Congress which your slaves give you. I know not whe- 
 ther they will be willing to do this. Some gentlemen may think that this is a com- 
 mon fund, and may have this very thing in view, as a consequence of the measures 
 they are now pursuing. If such are their views, they will no doubt avow them. 
 But suppose such an article to be inserted in the Constitution, I doubt very much its 
 efficacy. I will not undertake to say that it will not be efficacious. But I will' say 
 that reasons may be found strong enough for those whose inclinations and interest 
 lead them to disregard it. Less plausible reasons have in practice been found suffi- 
 cient to justify violations of wliat we consider the spirit, if not the letter of the Con- 
 stitution of the United States. 
 
 The power to prescribe the tim.es, places and manner of electing members of the 
 House of Representatives, is, by the Constitution of the United States, given to the 
 State Legislatures, subject to the control of Congress. Not to the people of the 
 States assembled in Convention. When we have constituted a State Legislature, 
 this pov/er, it may be contended, is not conferred by us, but is derived from a liigher 
 source, the Constitution of the United States. We have given it being, and a capa- 
 city to receive this grant of power, but the grant is not from us, but another, and the 
 extent of tiie povvpr cannot be regulated by us, but is regulated by the instiiinient 
 which confers it. The argument may not be strong, but if we judge from experi- 
 ence, it will be found sufficient for those who seek power. I ask, are we willing to 
 -put this interest at hazard on no better security I answer no. I will not be satis- 
 fied with the bond, I must have a surety. 
 
 There are other interests to protect, and other abuses of power to be guarded against, 
 of greater importance than those to which I have called the attention of the Commit- 
 tee. The different divisions of the State are not more strongly marked by geographi- 
 cal features, than are the different interests of the people who inhabit them. The 
 Committee must at once perceive, that I refer to the subject of internal improvement. 
 Those different, and in some respects conflicting interests, cannot safely be confided to 
 the people of an^ one division. The people below the head of tide-water do not stand 
 in need of turnpike-roads and canals. The improvements which are suited to the 
 • country between the head of tide-water, and the Blue Ili-dge, will embrace the Poto- 
 mac, James River, and E-oanoke, as far as the Ridge, the branches of these streams 
 which rise below tJiat range of mountains, and the various branches of the Rappahan- 
 nock. The scale of improvement of the larger streams, suited to the wants of the 
 middle region, is much inferior to that demanded by the western people ; they would 
 therefore, be but partially benefitted by the improvements which the interests of the 
 people of the middle region, would lead them to make. Those demanded by the peo- 
 ple of the Valley, will afford for the most part, no benefit to the people of the middle 
 region, and little to those west of the Alleghany. They require that the Chesapeake 
 shall be united with the Ohio, the James lliver with the Kanawha. The scheme of 
 the people of the Valley, as we learn from the sages assembled at Charlottesville, is, 
 as soon as the Chesapeake and Ohio canal, shall reach the mouth of the Shenandoah, 
 to improve that river for two or three hundred miles, and when it shall reach the 
 mouth of the south branch of the Potomac, to hnprove that stream for some one or 
 two hundred miles : and when all these improvements shall have been accomplished, 
 some small attention is to be paid to the Roanoke. To shew that the scale of expen- 
 diture demanded by the western people, greatly transcends any thing that we of the 
 middle region have any occasion for, I will beg leave to call the attention of the Com- 
 mittee to the project which was before the last Legislature. It proposed to subscribe 
 .for stock of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company, to the amount of four hun- 
 dr(?d thousand dollars : a farther sum to make a lateral canal to the town of Alexan- 
 dria in the District of Columbia, and to improve the navigation of James river the 
 distance of twenty-four miles, in the county of Alleghany, afan expense of $260,000. 
 This would have been a mere donation, for no man can pretend that the tolls would 
 have been any equivalent for the expenditure. It was also proposed to subscribe the 
 sum of .^60,000 towards the improvem.ent of the various branches of the Rappahan- 
 nock. Unconditionally Bo, Sir : whilst the appropriation of $260,000 to be expen- 
 ded in the county of Alleghany, was to be an unconditional gift, stock of the Rappa- 
 hannock Company was to be subscribed for to the amount of $60,000, upon condition 
 that individuals would subscribe for and secure the paj^ment of a like sum. Near 
 half a million was to be allotted to the Potomac interest ; $260,000 to be given to the 
 county of Alleghany, paying a tax of $600 ; whilst $60,000 only, is conditionally al- 
 lotted to the counties of Spottsylvania, Stafford, Fauquier, Culpeper, Orange, and Ma- 
 
128 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 dison, which, united, pay a tax of more than ^30,000. This is the measure proposed 
 to be dealt out to the middle country, by our western friends, who ask us to place all 
 power in their hands. I ask gentlemen representing this middle country, if they are 
 willing to grant the demand. If we turn our eyes farther south, we find that at the 
 instance of western men, a scale of improvement has been comnnenced on James river, 
 which has resulted in the completion of twenty-nine miles of canal, near Richmond, 
 and about six miles in the Blue Ridge, which, together, cost one million of dollars ; 
 and we have the authority of the Charlottesville Convention, for saying that this mo- 
 ney has been thrown away, unless another million is expended, to connect these de- 
 tached works. What her efit have the people, living immediately under the Ridge, 
 derived from this expenditure None. Worse than none. When the law passed' 
 authorizing this large expenditure, a pledge was given them that no additional tolls 
 should be demanded for the transportation of their produce, until, by the improvement 
 of the navigation, the cost of transportation should be lessened. And how was that 
 pledge redeemed ? By a repeal of the lav/, and an increase of toils upon their to- 
 bacco. 
 
 Whilst upon tiiirty-one miles of canal, to subserve western interests, one million of 
 dollars have been almost thrown away, tlie improvement of the Rappahannock is es- 
 timated to cost about twelve hundred dollars a mile, including the great falls ; and it is 
 believed that it can be accomplished within tlie estimate. That of the Roanoke has 
 actually cost about $1,500 a mile, including the purchase of a number of slaves now 
 employed upon it." 
 
 I do not make these statements to throw odium on the scheme for internal im- 
 provements, but to shew that the different sections of the - State have separate inter- 
 ests, and that the interests of one, cannot safely be confided to the absolute control of 
 another. 1 do not ask you to give to the region, which I in part represent, power to 
 control any other ; I ask you- so to apportion representation in the two Houses, as to 
 guard and protect the interests of all. I do not ask you to give us power to do vds- 
 ckief, but to avert (wU. 
 
 Mr. Naylor then addressed the Chair to the following effect : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : If those gentlemen who have been long accustomed to legislative 
 debates; gentlemen who wer^e well able to sustain a distinguished station at all times 
 when thus engaged Jieretofore, felt embarrassed in addressing that Cliair before this 
 Convention, how much more ought 1 to feel embarrassment in making the attempt, 
 who, I may say, have never been accustomed to debate in an ordinary Legislature. 
 
 Yes, Sir, and I do most sensibly feel it; and nothing but the solicitude I experience, 
 arising from the importance of the question now to be decided, which creates a still 
 stronger sensation, could have overcome that repugnance which might have deterred 
 me from arising to address this body. 
 
 But I cast myself with confidence on its benignity and indulgence, while I occupy 
 a short space of time, v/hile no other gentleman seems disposed to occupy the time of 
 the Committee. I would premise the few observations I have to m.ake, by stating, 
 that though conflicting opinions on a m.atter in controversy may appear to coincide 
 with the interests of those respectively, who maintain those opinions, yet they may, 
 be held on each side v/ith all the honesty, and sincerity which a conviction of their 
 truth can produce. This. I believe to be the case on the-present occasion. With this 
 persuasion, and with the highest respect for the opinions of those gentlemen from 
 whom I am constrained to difier, I beg leave to state a few of those reasons which 
 thus constrain me to differ from them. 
 
 In attempting to remedy that glaring defect in the existing Constitution of Virgi- 
 nia, whereby the citizens of one section of the State have so much Vv^eight on the floor 
 of the Legislature, and the c'tizeus of another section have so little, (which is in the 
 extreme as twenty to one.) it is contended on the one side that representation in tlie- 
 Legislature ought to be based on v/hite population and taxation combined ; because, 
 as it is urged by the advocates of this basis, that property or wealth is of so much im- 
 portance in civil society, that it ought to be protected, by giving to it a voice through 
 its owners in the Legislature ; diminishing by so much the voice of the people. This, 
 on the other side, is resisted, because it is inferior in its nature to persons, in the same 
 ratio that persons are more valuable than property in a community, and that it would 
 thus be substituting the inferior for the superior, and usurping the place of and taking 
 from persons their natural rights ; and farther because wealth is adventitious, inciden- 
 tal, and too fluctuating in its nature for the basis of a fundamental law, which ought 
 to be founded on v/ell ascertained and unchangetible principles. But it is denied by 
 the gentlemen who contend for this mixed basis, that there are any fixed principles to 
 govern us in this case. 
 
 * At this rate, t'ne money thrown away on James River, would, jf applied to the improvement of the 
 streams wkicli rise below "the Ridge, have given us a navigation of near 1900 miles. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 129 
 
 It is contended by them, that Government is just what you can make it. (and there- 
 fore a struggle in which the most powerful may succeed ; a game at wliich the most 
 skilful may Vin ;) that it is altogether conventional, to be regulated entu-ely by expe- 
 dience. Therefore, the whole elfort of those gentlemen has been to disprove the ex- ' 
 istence of those principles which we contend for, and, indeed, of any principles what- 
 ever to regulate us in this case. It was necessary that they should do this, as -they 
 have denied the primary right of the majority to rule. Tliis principle is a barrier 
 in their way, and if they do not remove it they cannot get on. But this is not the 
 only one to defend us, although we might rely upon it with safety. Nay, we have no 
 cause to fear to meet them hand to hand in the open field of expediency. But if they 
 had even carried this barrier, there is another just behind it which I think the}- never 
 can pass ; that is the public sentiment, and universally received opinion, not only of 
 the people of Virginia; but of -the whole United States. If there is any political sen- 
 tmient common to them all, it is, that the majority ought to rule. You may travel 
 any distance you i>iease in Virginia, and aslc the question of every man you meet, 
 whether he thought the majority have a rtght to or ought to rule in a Republican 
 Government; and if he did not laugh at vvhat he thought so simple a question, he 
 would unhesitatingly answer in the atfirmative. Yes, Sir, and this would be univer- ' 
 sally the case, from the man of grey hairs down to the stripling of tender years. And 
 it has been truly said b}- a wise^nd experienced statesman, tiiat he was most unwise 
 in framing a Government, Avho disregarded the fixed opinions, and even prejudices of 
 the people. But by the proposed amendment it would be provided in the Constitu- 
 tion, that the minority might rule. Can it be supposed that a fundamental law like 
 this, so much at war with all those political opinions which have grown with the peo- 
 ple's growth and strengthened with their strength, and have become interwoven with 
 all their thoughts, could prevail with them or be endured by thenL^" Certainly not. A 
 Republican Government can only be sustained by public opinion : erect it on any other 
 foundation, and 3-0U build upon the sands : when the rain descends, and the storms 
 beat upon it, it will fall. But the gentleman from Hanover (Mr. Morris) seems to 
 think that we hav-e given it up as a principle in a Republican Government, that a ma- 
 jority have an inherent right to rule. I, for one, have-not given it up. and I do not 
 know, nor am I persuaded that any other gentleman has. I do contend that there are 
 fixed principles in the science of Government, as well as in other sciences, and that 
 this is one of those principles, and a leading one. To stop now to prove that there 
 are such principles, would be a work of supererogation, especially after wha.t the gen- 
 tleman from Frederick (Mr. Cooke) has said on that point. It would, indeed, be at- 
 tempting to prove axioms or self-evident propositions. 
 
 I would as soon believe that there was no truth, no justice, no rule of right or 
 wrong, as to believe this. If there is no undeniable truth here, such as are^called 
 first principles, we have notiiing to reason from ; we have no premises and can never 
 come to any conclusion. If^each is at liberty to choose their own premises, they must 
 always come to different conclusions. 
 
 We would be thus at sea witnoat star or compass to guide us, veering about to eve- 
 ry purpose, on the great deep of expediency. But, that there are such first principles, 
 the Bill of Rights declares, and in so many words recommends a frequent recurrence 
 to them, and this has been the political creed of Virginia ever since she became a 
 Republic, unless we have abandoned this creed and departed from the faith. And 
 since the existence of these first principles is indisputable, the only enquiry now 
 is, what are they ? and how are they to be -discovered The answer is, that they are 
 to be discovered in the same way as in all other sciences, that is, by tracing back 
 those sciences to their primary elements. We must then, in this case, refer to man in 
 his primitive condition. I know that tlie idea of man ever having been in what is 
 called a state of nature, is ridiculed as being imaginary only, and as being a state that 
 never had an existence in fact. It is not necessary to dispute about tliis, though 
 more instances than one of this kind can be referred to in "history. But in reasoning' 
 upon the subject, we have a right, for the sake of the analogy, to pre-suppose it, just 
 as a mathematician pre-supp-^ses a line and a point before he proceeds with the demon- 
 strations which carry conviction with them, and cannot afterwards be disproved, by 
 saying that the mathematical line and point were only imaginary, and that tliey never 
 had a real existence. We cannot, indeed, divest ourselves of the idea of the state 
 which man must have been in previous to the formation of the social compact. This 
 was a treaty to which every member of the community became a party, by which they 
 unanimousiy agreed to form one body, and so became incorporated as such. 
 
 This was formed not only by the consent of the majority, but by the consent of the 
 whole. And when tlie compact was formed, it resulted from the ver}^ nature of the 
 case, without any formal stipulation, that it could only act, move or be guided by the 
 consent of the majority. True, they might afterwards by tlie consent of that majori- 
 ty, agree that a minority should rule, or they could agree to create a monarchy ; but 
 still the act that created the oligarchv or the monarchy, was the act of the majority. 
 
 ■' 17 ■ 
 
130 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 This majority was still the fountain of the delegated power, which proves what I 
 contend for, that there was an original, inherent right in the majority. For this, I 
 have tlie authority of as gieat a political philosopher and constitutional jurist of the 
 last or present age, viz : John Locke, Esq. A passage from his work on civil society, 
 1 beg leave to quote : " For when any number of men have, by the consent of every 
 individual, made a connnunity, they have thereby made that community one body, 
 with a power to act as one body, wliich is only by the will and determination of the 
 majority. For that which acts any comnmnity, being only the consent of the indi- 
 viduals of it, and it being necessary to that, v,"hich_is one body, to move one way, it 
 is necessary tiie body should move tiiat way, whither the great i'orce carries it, which 
 is the consent of the majority ; or else it is impossible it should act or continue, one 
 body, one community, which the consent of every individual, that united into it, 
 agreed that it should ; and so every one is, bound by that consent, to be concluded 
 by the majority. And therefore, we see, that in asseniblies empowered to act by po- 
 sitive laws, where no number is set by that positive law, which empowers them, the 
 act of the majority passes for the act of the whole, and of course determines, as hav- 
 ing, by the law of nature and reason, the povt^er of the whole. And, thus every man, 
 by consenting \ -ii li others to make one body politic, imder one Government, puts 
 himself under au obligation to every one of that society, to submit to tlije determina- 
 tion of the majority, and to be concluded by it." And, I think, it further goes to 
 prove that man had an original, inherent right of sufirage, because it was by the ex- 
 ercise of this suifrage, that is consent, that he formed the social compact. He did 
 not derive it from the social compact, for it existed previous to the existence of the 
 compact, and by it he formed the compact ; it was the cause of the compact, not the 
 effect of it ; it was, therefore, original and inhere nt. Property could not be regarded 
 in this compact, for it v/as not recognized, and did not exist previous to it. There 
 must, then, have been a second compact formed, before any one could claim repre- 
 sentation for property. But if the majority of persons had and has an inherent right 
 to govern, upon what principles can you give that right to a minority because they 
 possess a majority of wealth ? None certainly of justice, none according to the eter- 
 nal fitness of things. This is what the gentleman from Northampton denominates a 
 . majority of interests ; that is, the rich man and man of weai Ji : but this is the prin- 
 ciple on which ail aristocracies and oligarchies have been, and the Holy Alliance is 
 founded, and therefore has tendencies to which that gentleman w^ould be averse. 
 But it is pressed upon us in answer to this, by the gentleman from Orange, why 
 were not women and children, and all other persc-ris taken into this majority, or 
 counted as members having a right of suffrage We answer that these are excep- 
 tions to the general rule, and that the Creator who gave the rule, formed the excep- 
 tions to it. He created Vv^omen with all the tenderness, softness and delicacy of that 
 sex, and when he placed them under the protection of man, he gave them an influ- 
 ence of another kind, more powerful than the right of sufirage ; an influence which 
 I have no doubt the gentleman from Orange will acknowledge. If suffrage at the 
 polls had been added, they would have -been entirely too powerful. They would 
 have had all the Government in their own hands. And, therefore, 1 think it would 
 have been difficult to form a society in the present-day, like the Amazons the gentle- 
 man has mentioned ; and I venture to say, that if ever such a societj'- did exist, it did 
 not exist long. It is not necessary to mention, why children are not taken in, or 
 idiots, &c.; these exceptions do not impugn, but they prove the rule. Give a person 
 one vote on his account, and another on account of his wealth, (which is ostensibly 
 the amount of the demand embraced in the amendments under consideration,) and 
 give another person one vote only, because he has not weallh, and it is the same thing 
 as if you would give to the first person one vote only, and the latter none. For, by 
 one of his votes, the rich man could annihilate the one vote of the poor man ; and 
 by the other, he could reign over him. It cannot be denied, that if a majority is to 
 rule, a minorit}'" cannot : but if wealth is to be represented, a minority will rule, and 
 if a majority of persons ought to rule, then wealth cannot be represented. [Accomi- 
 ing to the standard proposed, the value of a vote will rise and fall from year to year,, 
 according- to tlie taxes. If, in one year, the rich man pays twent}' dollars tax, and 
 the poorer nian only ten, the rich man or his friends on his account, will have two 
 votes, and the poor man only one ; and if the taxes should be so lessened that the 
 rich man the next year v.'ould have to pay only twenty cents, and the poor inan only 
 ten cents, still the rich man would have two votes to the poor man's one ; so that the 
 price of a vote would one year be ten dollars, and the next year, only ten cents; a 
 great variance in the price of that which ought to be above all price.] This would be 
 throwing the elective franchise of men to the winds of uncertainty, to be driven about 
 as something of no value. 
 
 In the scheme proposed, there appears to be no equivalents, no justice. It is the 
 object of all good Governments, to produce the greatest possible good. In doing this, 
 a choice of evils is often presented, that is of two evils, one of wliich is unavoidable, 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTIOX. 
 
 131 
 
 to choose the least. Now, it is said, to be an evil, that the poorer man should hare an 
 equal voice with the rich man. in laying the ta:s:es of which the rich man has much 
 the larger portion to pay ; and this can only be avoided by another evil ; and this is. by 
 givina the rich man a decided control in making or passing all the laws, whereby the 
 most vo-luable immunities of the poor man will be subjected to the^wiil of the rich 
 man". 2Sow. from which of these two evils, is it possible, for the greatest degree of 
 human misery to result .' Certainly from that which might fall upon the poorer man 
 in his personal safety and persouai hberty. by so much as these are above all equiva- 
 lents in money : and this proves tlie impohcy; injustice and total inadmissibihty of 
 the scheme proposed. But those who have the wealth, assure that those who have it 
 not. are in no danger ; that they will not abuse it. But why is not the virtue of 
 those who have not the wealth, as^much to be trosted .- They Jiave as much riofht to 
 this confidence, as the wealthy : especially as the security required -of them is so se- 
 vere. But it is said, that the weadthy can pass no lasvs affecting the poor, which will 
 not affect them : this is not sb^ for the cottager now, who is not wealthy enough to 
 own two slaves, must work on the roads, while those who have two slaves, Eire ex- 
 empt. They might also be taxed witii double duty in the mihtia, poll taxes, &c. 
 There is a furtlier injustice in it than this. It is only in money bills, that the rich 
 man can be endanger-ed, and these are in proportion generally to other lav%-s passed, as 
 one in fitly : and so to have the control -of the one money bill against the poor man, 
 he must have the control of the otlier forty -nine aofainst him. 
 
 In examining any thing which has been advanced by tlie gentleman from Culpeper, 
 it is with difiidence in my opinion, in perfect unison with that high respect and es- 
 teem which is accorded to hmi by all his fellow-citizens, as Avell for bis own personal 
 worth, as for the manner in wiiich he executes the duties of the onice wliicii he fills 
 with his compeers on the highest seat of justice in the State. That gentleman ad- 
 mits, that aU men are equal in their natural rights, but says, tliey are unequal in their 
 pohtical rights. It may -then be enquired, at vrhat point does the equality of natural 
 rights end. and the inequality of -pohtical rights begin.- And of what avail can the 
 equahty of natural rights be to a man, if the inequality of pohtical rights may destroy 
 them ? . 
 
 If personal liberty and personal safety, are natural rights, he must have a suiScient 
 share of political power to preserve them ; for pohtical ricrhts resolve themselves in- 
 to the power which every man must have to preserve his natural rights : and it is a 
 contradiction in terms to say, that he could hold liis natural rights at the will of ano-^ 
 ther, because that vrhich is held at the will of others is no rigiit at all. The gentle- 
 man from Northampton. (Judge Upshur.) denied that there was any inherent right in 
 the majority, derived from nature, to bind the minority in any case. To illusti-ate tliis, 
 that gentleman has said, that there was but one single right derived from nature, and 
 that is, the ricrht of all the creatures of God to use their powers in such mode, as .may 
 best promote their own happiness. That the hon devours the ox: the ox drives tlie 
 lamb from the tender o-rass : and the lamb drives the creatures more timid tlian itself. 
 Tins, then, is the riarht which superior strength gives, and according to this, they who 
 have.obtained illegitimate power, may keep it. if they can, and add to it if they are 
 able. 
 
 But, perhaps, this was not exactly what the gentleman means : otherwise, we need 
 not hope to adjust the matters in difference betv\-een us, as far as power could go. 
 But I know he possesses more liberal sentiments; though we differ materially as^to 
 the points on which we should meet so as to agree. Indeed the fascmating strain of 
 that gentleman's eloquence, was such, that I was sometimes astonished to find where 
 it had carried me, by which I was imperceptibly led to substitute the truth of one pro- 
 position which could not be denied, as the proof of another which was still to be de- 
 monstrated. 3Iost powerfully has the pohtical doctrines which we contend for, been 
 assailed, but I feel them to be a rock which torrents of eloquence cannot move, and 
 we stand in no need of their adventitious aid- Thrice is he armed who hath his quar- 
 rel just. Truth is all powerful and must prevail. He has further said that property 
 is one-hall the compound in the social compact, and persons the other. Again, that 
 it is not property, btrt the rights which grow out of it, whicii is to be represented. 
 The conclusion, forcibly drawn from these propositions, is, that a certain proporijon of 
 the suffrage ought to be given to property, which would be so much taken from per- 
 sons ; for just in proportion as you give weight to property in the Government, you 
 lessen that of persons. Now. wealth is defined to be the power, which he who pos- 
 sesses it has to command the labor of others. But the orentleman fr'->m Northampton 
 would add to this power, by giving it Legislative power: that would ce adding power 
 to power, and according to the state of the case, it would be increasing one of the com- 
 ponent parts of the social compact, so much as to destroy the whole equihbrium emd 
 proportion. Yes, Sir, wealth is power ; and wherever wealth is. there power will exist 
 independent of Legislation. Wealth is the object which keeps the world in motion : it 
 is the supreme object of desire amono-st men ; they are dispersed every where to seek 
 
132 
 
 DEBATES OT THE CONVENTION. 
 
 it with avidity, and to bow obsequiously before it ; the pursuit of it was ardent enough, 
 and the desire strong enough ; it was not necessary to increase it ; but it would seem 
 by the gentleman's argument, to be exalted to a higher station than it ever possessed 
 before ; it is now to be brought even into the Legislative Hall, and set up as an idol 
 to be worshipped. This would, indeed, be an idolatry which would corrupt the true re- 
 publican faitii, and such as we ought to hope and pray would never be introduced here. 
 
 But, if I am not much mistaken, this is the first attempt that ever was made in Vir-^ 
 crinia, formally to give representation to wealth, on the Legislative floor. Take the 
 Bill of Rights and the Constitution togetlier. The Bill of Rights states, that evidence 
 of attachment to, and permanent common interest with the community, shall be suffi- 
 cient to entitle a man to the right of sufl:rage ; and if he possesses this evidence, he 
 shall be entitled, whether he is rich or poor. And the Constitution only points out 
 one circumstance which shall be evidence of this attachment, &e. That is, that he 
 should be a freeholder. But, surely, it cannot be inferred from this, that there was 
 any intention or design, in the framers of that Constitution, that wealth should be re- 
 presented. For by that frame of Government, it could not, unless by mere contingen- 
 cy, because the poorest and least populous counties, were entitled to the same num- 
 ber of representatives with the most wealthy and most populous ones. 
 
 But 1 can shew now, that if the end was a good one, which the gentlemen seem to 
 be all aiming at, the means proposed never wilL accomplish it. So far from it, it will 
 operate directly the reyerse. Instead of protecting the rich from the poor, if there is 
 a danger of that kind to be apprehended, it would be increasing the power of the 
 poor against the rich ; which 1 can shew thus. It is proposed, as I understand, by this 
 scheme of representation, according to white populadon and taxation, to divide the 
 representation tliroughout the State, in such a manner that an equal number of white 
 people shall send a representative. And then the taxes are to be divided into equal 
 portions according to the number chosen in the mode above mentioned : and an addi- 
 tional representative is to be sent by every district or county, paying one-sixtieth part 
 of the taxes. Now, suppose the State to .be divided, by a line running, say from 
 north to south, near the Blue Ridge, so that the white population in each division was 
 exactly equal, and that there were thirty districts or counties in each, each of which 
 would send a member on account of its population. But when we come down to dis- 
 tribute that part of the representation resulting from wealth or taxation it is found 
 that there is so much more wealth in the eastern division, as to entitle it on the whole to 
 double or one half the number of representatives more than the western division. But, 
 suppose in that eastern division, ten of the counties or districts contain all the wealth 
 which has given the v/hole number of districts or counties in it tins increase of re- 
 presentation ; and suppose the other twenty counties or districts in the eastern section 
 are poor, possessing no mora wealth on an average than the counties or districts in the 
 west ; then to protect the wealth of these ten counties in the Legislature, you give each 
 of them one additional representative, but in doing that you give one additional re- 
 presentative to each of the poor counties. Thus while you advance them, or strength- 
 en the rich by tens, you weaken them by twenties. But, suppose we take one of the 
 rich counties whose wealth entitles it to double representation, and suppose in the rich 
 counties, there are one thousand voters, but all the wealth in this ricla county, which 
 entitles it to this double representation, is possessed by one hundred of those voters, and 
 the other nine hundred are poor men, of that class whose circumstances axe below 
 what miglit be considered mediocrity ; all the men of this rich county may, then, in 
 comparison with other poor counties, be considered as having two Votes at the p.olls, 
 to the voters in the other counties one. So then, to defend these rich men, you give 
 them on the whole, one hundred votes, but in doing so, you give nine hundred to the 
 poor voters, which, according to the gentleman's ov/n hypothesis, must be directly 
 against the rich. And thus, although the system contended for, may not come out 
 in numbers exactly in this way, yet it will operate in a certain degree in that way, so 
 as to increase the evil exactly in the same proportion that the poor do always outnum- 
 ber the rich in all sections or districts. 
 
 There is no way of obtaining the end proposed, so as to give the man who pays the 
 taxes, a voice in laying them exactly in proportion to the amount which he must pay, 
 but by collating him v/ith the tax-books at the polls, or by bringing him there with a 
 certificate, or so marked and stamped, that it may be known for what amount he could 
 be current at the polls : that is, to have it there ascertained, how many each ought to 
 count according to his wealth, say one, two, three, or four. But this the gentlemen 
 will not attempt : it would look too much like aristocracy to be endured in a free coun- 
 try. This, as far as can be learnt from the public journals, was introduced into the 
 French Government. The deputies to the Legislative Assembly, are elected in this 
 way. It was introduced by the ultra-royalists in that country, who seem to resemble 
 those politicians in England, who are called Tories. It is called the double vote, and 
 seems to have created great dissatisfaction among the people there. Those who are 
 called Liberals, with La Fayette at their head, are violently ^opposed to it. But it is 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTION. 
 
 13S 
 
 vain to disgiiise it. one way or the other. I do not say that the friends of the mea- 
 sure have made nse of any'disguise ; but the project disguises itself, and when strip- 
 ped of this dis2Tii5e, its enects will only be. to marshal one part or section of the State, 
 against another, producing sectional and hostile feehngs continually. It will be pro- 
 ductive of nothing but heart-burnings and jealousies. It would be producing a state 
 of thino-s. in some distant degree, between ourselves, hke that which subsisted between 
 this State and Great Britain, wiiile Virginia was a Colony. Great Britain sought to 
 rule the Colony for her own advantage T the Colony submitted witli great forbearance, 
 until provoked bevond endurance ; Virginia, then, with other States, broke the con- 
 nection with the mother country forever. I do not say that the State would be se- 
 vered, but the section which tiiought itself oppressed, would have such ahen feelings 
 towards the other, that we can hEirdly anticipate what the consequences would be. 
 We. in the unrepresented part of the State, have been seeking a redress of this our 
 grievance, for more than twenty years, and now, when we hav^. with great diffic\alty, 
 obtained an audience, the condition upon which it is offered, is worse than the pen- 
 alty ■; the remedv is worse thun the disease. Our situation is like that of these who 
 asked tor bread, and a stone was offered : for a fish, and a serpent was presented. 
 Were the amendment of the gentleman from Culpeper to prevail, viz. that represen- 
 tation should be fo\inded on the combined basis of wealth and population, the news 
 would be answered from the west, with groans of deep disapprobation and discontent, 
 if not witu indignation. Those men of that large portion of Virginia, who are now 
 eamestlv seeking an amendment to the Constitution, never will accept of this. They 
 would rather endure the ill they have suffered so lon^. than ffy to others, the ex- 
 tent of which can hardly be foreseen. We would, indeed, rather wear the old yoke, 
 which is almost worn out. and must of course tall of itseff, before long, than to put 
 our heads into a new one. to be riveted afresh, to last for generations to come. For, 
 in the common course of human events, the present state of things in Virginia, can- 
 not continue long. Pubhc sentiment is on its march : it may have advanced slowly 
 for some time ; it never ceases. It is a phalanx, which becomes deeper and stronger 
 as it advances, and will never stop short of its porat. The people of Virginia, are not 
 a volatile or fickle people : they are not easily aroused ; but when they are. it belongs 
 to such a character not to be stopped trntil they have obtained their object. They must 
 and will accomphsh it. not by physical force, but by moral force. To engralt that pro- 
 vision into the Canstitution. would be to leave us where we are. ^Vhy should those 
 gentlemen who advocate this amendment, be so tenacious of a state of things, under 
 which Virginia has prospered so httle ? AVhen a physician has pursued a certain mode 
 of treatment of his patient, for a long tune, dining which, the patient has uniformlv 
 grown worse, he knows, or ought to know, that if he does not change his course, the 
 patient will probably die. So Virs-inia has' been long in a state of decline, durino" 
 which time she has been strictly confined to a certain course of pohtical regimen, but 
 still she is sinking more and more. Is it not time to change it ? Virginia was as fair 
 a portion, of tiie earth, as any under the sun : her soil in its virgin state, was as fertile 
 ELS was by nature the most fertile, or best cultivated part of Europe : her coast is deep- 
 ly indented with bays and her territory intersected lar within by the most numerous in- 
 lets for commerce, any where to be found in the same space : her multiphed rivers ready 
 to roll down their tribute from the west : her climate congenial to all the most valua- 
 ble asxicultural productions : and Nature there, ready as it were to work for man with 
 both hands, if he would extend but one of his ; and yet, with all these natural advan- 
 tages, she is retrograding from her rank, and other States without half her advanta- 
 ges, are goinof far ahead of her. Her population in the eastern section is stationarv, 
 her fields are deserted, and improvements abandoned. I could weep over her desola- 
 tions : for 1 love Virginia. Now, though these things may proceed in part, but they do 
 not proceed altogether from her slave population. For, go to the western part of the 
 State where there are but few slaves, not enough to have any effect or influence on 
 the people, and step over the line, in the adjoining States, in soil and climate of the 
 same kind, and you wiU find the industry, the wealth, the population, the agriculture, 
 and all the tisefiil arts of life, two to one, in advance of Virginia. If, then, this dif- 
 ference between Virgioia and other States, does not proceed from want of natural ad- 
 vantages, and but in part from her slave popuiation. as I ha^-e shewn, what else c^m 
 it proceed from, bnt a defect in her fi^me of Government ? Let us remedy that, and 
 see if Virginia is not regenerated, disenthralled, redeemed, and whether she will not 
 again advEince and regain the station she ha,s lost. 
 
 Engraft the scion of genuine Republicanism upon the old stock of Virguiian pat- 
 riotism; and see whether it will not bud and blossom, grow and bear precious fruit, 
 without becoming too luxuriant, as it is feared. But the gentleman from Hanoverj 
 and the gentleman from Fauquier, have objected to giving us our due weight in the 
 Government, lest we should construct roads and canals. I need not take notice of the 
 disparaging mannei^in which those gentlemen, (the gentleman from Hanover at least) 
 have spoken of roads and canals. The gentleman from Hanover, having so little oc- 
 
134 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 casion for facilities of this kind, may not, indeed, set that vahie upon those improve- 
 ments, which we do, who have many rhountains and hills to pass, and rapid rivers to 
 descend to get our produce to market; and therefore, we have been unfortunate 
 enough to speak of those roads and canals to the Legislature, and to ask its aid to 
 make them. Unfortunate I say, indeed, if that is to create an objection against us in 
 obtaining our rights ; which rights, whether roads and canals are made or not, must 
 be at all times the same. But lest this should have an undue weight, or any weight 
 at all, by inducing the belief that we are disposed to be unreasonable on the subject, 
 I will first mention the true state of the case. 
 
 It was known, that we, as well as the rest of our fellow-citizens, had an interest in 
 a large, fund for internal improvement, which was thought, under its original consti- 
 tution, to be sufficient to afford a benefit to each part of the State. When we sought 
 a part of it in the first instance, we were told that the James river ought to have the 
 benefit of it for the first two or three years, but then we should have it. At the end 
 of that time, we applied again : the same answer was given us ; and so from time to 
 time, until we found 4Jiat the whole fund was swallowed up in the James river, and 
 the credit of the State mortgaged for further improvements. We thought then, that 
 as we had been bound with our other fellow-citizens for the improvement of the James 
 river, that it would not be presuming too much to ask for some assistance, not that 
 we asked the State to become bound for us. And this is the head and front of our 
 offending, v/hicli has given so much alarm to those ^-entlemen. For this -},e are to be 
 held in political durance ; and when we ask to be delivered from it, the a^nswer is no, 
 we are afraid if we give you your due weight, according to numbers, that you will 
 make roads and canals with our money. And when we offer terms equal to giving 
 security for our good behaviour, as to this, we still have the same denial, lest as it 
 might be presumed, we might seek some indemnification for our portion of the fund 
 for internal improveirtent, which has been taken from us. To give form and substance 
 to the Constitution from such considerations as these, would be to shape that Vvdiich 
 is to last for many generations, (as we would hope) according to transient circumstan- 
 ces, whereby the distortions of the instrument would remain long after the incidents 
 which produced them, were forgotten or were only remembered in the evil ihey had 
 produced, and long after these roads or canals Avere made or abandoned. It would be 
 a curious part of the history of this time, to be told, that the Constitution, then ex- 
 isting, would have been materially different, had it not been, that these internal im- 
 provements had been then or previously desired. Now, in conclusion, I would ask 
 this highly respected and venerated body, one such, as v/ith which I never again ex- 
 pect to be associated, not to permit this amendment to pass. 
 
 On the conclusion of Mr. Naylor's Speech, the Committee rose, on motion of Mr. 
 Barbour of Culpeper. 
 
 On Mr. M'Coy's motion, the Convention determined (41 to 39 votes) to change 
 their hour of meeting from 11 to 10 o'clock. 
 
 And then, on Mr. See's motion, the Convention adjourned till Monday morningj 
 10 o'clock. ' ^, - 
 
 ^ MONDAY, November 2, 1829. 
 
 The Convention was opened with, prayer by the Rt. Rev. R. C. Moore, of the 
 Episcopal Church, and a few minutes after ten o'clock, the President took the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Stanai'd, after a few prefatory remarks on the Inconvenience of meeting at this 
 hour, moved that when the Convention shall adjourn, it adjourn to meet to-morrow j- 
 at eleven o'clock. 
 
 The motion was opposed by Mr. M'Coy, who asked for a further trial of the present 
 course of proceeding. The question being taken, the votes stood. Ayes 37, Noes 37 j 
 the President voting in the negative, the motion was lost. 
 
 The Convention then passed to the Order of the Day, and went into Committee of 
 the Whole, Mr. Stanard in the Chair. . 
 
 And the. question lying over from Saturday, being on an amendment proposed by 
 Mr. Scott to the amendment offered- by Mr. Green to the resolution of the Legislative 
 Committee. 
 
 [The original resolution reads thus : 
 
 Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 respect shall be had to the free v/hite population exclusively.'] 
 
 The amendment of Mr. Green proposes to strike out the word " exclusively," and 
 insert in heu thereof, the Vv^ords and taxation combined," so as to read, " free white 
 population and taxation combined." And the am.endment of Mr. Scott proposes to 
 add, " and in the Senate to v/hite population exclusively :" (the effect of which last 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 135 
 
 amendment is, in substance, to adopt the mixed basis in the House of Delegates, and 
 the wliite basis in the Seiiate.) 
 
 ]Mr. Green expressed his willingness to adopt the amendment of r>Ir. Scott as a 
 modification of liis own, (the effect" of which would be -to prevent the necessity of 
 taking any distinct vote on 3Ir. Scotfs amendment.) 
 
 The Chair decided this course to be contrary to the rules of order of the House of 
 Delegates, (wluch the Convention have adopted as their ovrn so far as they. apply.) 
 wliich require that after an amendment has been moved and debated, it cannot be 
 modified by the mover, but must, if he wishes to alter it, be altogether withdrawn, 
 and another substituted. 
 
 On this decision a debate arose -; but as questions of mere order, though often dis- 
 puted long and warmly, have usually more interest in ilie House than out of it, we 
 are not in^the habit of"'presentmg more of them to our readers tlian the leading points. 
 The leading point in this case v^as, that if the amendment of 2Vlr. Scott v.-as suffered 
 to be united to that of Mr. Green, gentlemen who could not approve of both, might 
 appear as if voting against the basis in the Senate, while their vote was direct- 
 
 ed against the mixed^basis in the House of Delegates. An appeal was even taken by 
 Mr. "Doddridge from the decision of tlie Chair, but subsequently withdrawn. 2\Ir. 
 Green also wTthdrew his motion to unite the two ; and the question being as at first 
 on the a.mendment of Mr. Scott onlj', 
 
 3Ir. J. S. Barbour said, that he was gratified to find that by the amendment of his 
 honorable colleague (2vlr. Scott) the controversy could no longer be said to be one for 
 power, but that it now resolved itself into a question of protection. In reaching his 
 own conclusions on tiiis subject, he had looked mainly to the preservation of certain 
 great interests in the State, and he was anxious to take that course which would ef- 
 fectually defend them against encroachment. The end in view was one indissolubly 
 bound up with the harmony and the liberties of the people, and tlie means should be 
 adequate to the end. Power and protection seemed to him to be more closely allied 
 than gentlemen had admitted. They are correlatives, necessary to the objects of 
 civil society, and cannot be separated. Mv. B. said, it appeared to him that much of 
 the vice which pervaded the arguments on the other side, might properly be traced 
 to the misapprehension of the coiiservative principle of our political institutions. 
 
 Gentlemen had argued the question, as if the wiH of the majority should be the 
 only rule of action, it was certainly entitled to great weight, and would always ex- 
 ert great influence. But it is not the only consideration which merits enquiry. The 
 great safeguard in a Republican Government is, in my view, to be found in hmita- 
 tions of power ; whether that power be vested in the many or the few. Responsibi- 
 lity cannot be disregarded in the public functionary without destruction to popular 
 rio:hts, and yet, in a society made up of numerous and diversified interests, this prin- 
 ciple of responsibility would often fall sh-:rt of compassing the objects of justice. 
 For, if a majority of these interests be united in one common bond, the rights of a 
 minorit}-, having dissimilar interests, must be insecure. I have thought, said Mr. B. 
 that there were two important securities necessary in our representative system. The 
 first, to secure tlie fidehty of the representative to the constituent body ; the second, 
 to guard one part of the community against the injustice of the other. Without 
 these, justice will be overthrowu, and liberty cannot long survive the downfall of 
 justice. The first of these securities we possess in the frequency of elections ; to 
 the other we have'not (riven sufficient attention. . No form of Government has ever 
 subsisted, in wliich th^s principle of responsibihty was not at times seen and felt. 
 Even in the most frightful despotisms, it has often exerted a powerfixl dominion. The 
 great struggles v.^hickhave occurred between liberty and power, in the old as well as 
 the new world, have almost invariably terminated by imposing further limitations 
 upon power. If limitation upon power be unnecessary, and if the will of the majo- 
 rity is to be alone looked to, why is it that we have Constitutions at all ? In all the 
 contests in England, from 1628, when that act of Parliament passed, which is deno- 
 minated the Petition of R-ight, to the. Revolution of 1C8S, the first pm-pose seems to 
 have been, to impose new cliecks, and additional restraints, upon those hands tliat 
 wielded the sovereignt}^. If men were Angels ; if justice and magnanimity were, at 
 all times, to exert an uncontrolled sway there would be no need of any Govern- 
 ment upon earth. It is because we are not so constituted, that Governments are in- 
 stituted ; and political institution is unwisely constructed, if it be not so armed, and 
 so restricted too, as to ensure its rightful, and restrain its injurious action. It is not a 
 novel doctrine, that majorities, actuated by common interests, will unjustly encroach 
 on the minority. We have at this moment a strong illustration of it, in the operation 
 of those laws of the Federal Government, knovrn by the name of Tariff Acts. Res- 
 p )nsibility of the representative to the constituent body, is the direct cause of these 
 oppressive encroachments, upon the sufiering interests of the Southern States. The 
 evil here, is not in the Govermneiit, but in tlie community ; a community, imited by 
 interest, and acting under its influence, disregarding the obhgations of justice, and 
 
136 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 preying upon thtMninor portion of that conununity. The principle is identical with 
 that we are now discussing. 
 
 To shew that these unequal interests exist in the scale of contribution, gentlemen, 
 agreeing with me in sentiment, have offered numerous calculations to our view, and it 
 Will be worse than idle for me to repeat them. That great disparity exists in the con- 
 dition and the relations of this Commonwealth, nmst be apparent to all. Prudence, 
 duty and safety, call upon us to lay along side this striking disparity, this exposed in- 
 terest, a strong principle of protection. I look, said he, to the means of prevention, 
 and these can only be obtained in representative power. We are, however, gravely, 
 told upon the other side, that we need no protection; that our fears, are the creatures 
 of fancy ; that justice, honour and magnanimity, will be the efiicient guardians of cur 
 welfare. I make a just estimate of the virtues and integrity of gentlemen opposed 
 to me, when I declare, in perfect sincerity, that I would confide to them as much as 
 I could to any men whatever. But I confide to no man, that which it m.ay become 
 his interest to abuse; that which it is his interest to violate. When gentlemen tell 
 me that my fears are idle figments of the imagination, I put in opposition, to such sug- 
 gestions, facts, experience, that which is known to me from personal knowledge. Let 
 me ask the honorable member from Brooke (Mr. Doddridge) if he did not openly 
 avow in 1823, the propriety of basing representation from this State to Congress, up- 
 on white population exclusively And did he not refrain from moving it, only he- 
 cause he knew that it would be put down at tliat time, by force of numbers in the 
 Legislature.? With this fact staring me in the face, can gentlemen ask me to yield 
 this protection for the eleventh part of our representative influence in the General 
 Government.'' And to give up this representative power, as a mere gratuity to those 
 who give nothing for it, and to wliich we are entitled only in consequence of our 
 slave population. I do not blame gentlemen for entertaining or advocating such opi- 
 nions, but they^must pardon me for taking precaution against such schemes when- 
 ever they may be set on foot. Nor does this diversity of interest, with its correspon- 
 dent influence, pervade one region of the State more than another. I have lived long 
 enough, Mr. Chairman, to witness its operation in the General Assembly upon the 
 East, as well as the West. Give me leave. Sir, to remind you of an instance occur- 
 ring whilst we were botli of us members of the House of Delegates. There was a 
 time daring the late war, in which the progress of events was well calculated to arouse 
 and animate the patriotism of the whole land. It did arouse a-nd excite it. The Ca- 
 pital of the country had fallen. The arrogant and insulting terms of the enemy had 
 been promulgated at Ghent; and we had received an ofllcial connnunication from the 
 Commander of the hostile fleets in our r/aters, that he would lay waste every assail- 
 able point. The indignation of the General Assembly was kindled into flame, and 
 its feelings were expressed in the unanimous vote of the Legislative body. Yet, at 
 that very moment, and under the influence-of these exciting causes, both the East 
 and the West, demonstrated the powerful and' controlling sway of dissimilar interests 
 and local apprehensions. 1 allude to the vote given on the passage of the bill, then 
 denominated the Defence Bill." With all the patriotism, chivalry and gallant de- 
 votion, which they possessed and had displayed in an eminent degree during the war, 
 yet few, very few western members went along witli us in support of that measure. 
 The reason is obvious. They were- remote from the theatre of danger, and could not 
 have that community of feeling and sense of necessity, that pressed upon others not 
 sa situated. When the discussions occurred in the Senate, let me enquire of the 
 honorable member from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson,) if he did not witness the influence 
 of the same cause in ito efi^ects upon the debates of the Senate. The operation of the 
 bill would have been to withdraw portions of the local militia from the tide- water 
 country generally, and to concentrate military power, upon points more peculiarly 
 exposed, and presenting stronger temptations to the incursions of the foe. Does he 
 not remember the violent opposition that he encountered, in sustaining that measure, 
 from the Senators from Lancaster and Mathews I have mentioned these facts, for 
 the single purpose of shewing that in times peculiarly calling for union of hearts rnd 
 councils; for forbearance and oblivion offends; that local interests have exerted their 
 influence upon men, high-minded, and elevated in honour, principle and patriotism. 
 S.r, we are also told, that a safizcieut and adequ ite guarantee will be give n to us. 
 No other guarantee, but representative power can be sufiEicient or adequate. The his- 
 tory of the world shews that in all contests between virtue and interest, the latter has 
 finally prevailed. I wish to make them allies, not antagonists ; for in the union of in- 
 terest and virtue, have you the only safe pledge for happiness, for justice and liberty. 
 But, what is this guarantee 1 Why, an article in the .Constitution .'^ And who is to 
 tell us what that article means.? fiow far it is to operate, and when it is to cease .? 
 Who is to construe it .? Why, Sir, the majority ; and it cannot be necessary for me 
 to say, that wherever you deposit this power of construing, this right of interpreting 
 its meaning, there do you also deposit a sovereign power over it. Then, the amount 
 of this guarantee resolves itself at last into the will of the majority, who may make 
 
DEBATES or THE C ON^EN'TIOi^T. 
 
 137 
 
 it mean what they please, or strike it out altogether at pleasure. And this brings me 
 back to the enqairj, iicyw far it is safe to tra:<t even a majority with a power to oppress 
 a maioritr. wuen aai^ted with temptations and inducements to al')use. it is saia, liiat 
 this de/eaoa ox' the interest of jim irities is novel dootr.ne. incoiapiLble witii republi- 
 can principles. Sir, there is no mcampatibiiity between juslice and republicanism : 
 they can t exist apart, li* 1 am to be oppressed, deprived or my rigals or properly by 
 force, of what m:)ment to me is it, whetner that be tne force and injos'Llce oi the ma- 
 ny or the few.' If an honorable member over tlie way. (Mr. Rand Iph.) will pardon 
 me the usa of a hgare of tiis, I wJl say, tait 1 cro ror tae interest of tiie Stnck- 
 holders against that of tlie President, Directors and Casliiers of this thing called Gov- 
 ern jiaat.. 1 am for gaajJ-ng Lhe S; ?c;k-h /Ider's mterc-st, even if tae Pre^.dents, Cash- 
 iers and Directors be miiitiphed m.o tae more namer oiis body. J have iiigh authori- 
 ty to answer the intimarlon that this is novel doctrine. 1 ixope to be torg^vtn by a 
 venerajle geatlemin on this floor for using it. In the Virginia Ccnventiun. 3ir. iMa- 
 cisoa said : 
 
 " Bat on a candid esxmlnition of history, we shall find that turbQieuce, violence, 
 and aouse of power, by tiie maj )rity trampling on tiie righls oi tae minorit\-. have 
 produced factions aad coai.u jtions, which, m republics, have more trequenily than any 
 otn^r cause, produced despotism. If we go over ihe whole history of sncitnt and 
 modern repujlics, we shall and their destruj^tlon to hive generally resulted irom those 
 causes. If we consider the peculiar situation of tae Un.ttd States, and what are tlie 
 sources of the diversity of sentiments which pervades its Lnhab.tants, we shall find 
 great danger to fear, that the same causes may terminate here, m tiie same lalal ef- 
 fects, waicn they produced m those repubhcs. ' 
 
 Tae prmciple of numbers is srrenu^usiy urged upon us^. Yv^here do they get t!rls 
 principla ? iNot in Gjvern.aents or societies s-taated Lke us. "Where the v.- ants, the 
 ne?.es5.ties, and the contributions of the people were siijiilar, if they acted aliiie upon 
 every part, then the prmciple of numbers w.uld be jus:, and representative responsi- 
 bility a samcieat safe-guard against unjust enoroaehmeat. JSunibers are looked t be- 
 cause numbers indicate the abihty of society, to pay its contnbuticns. But what nmn- 
 bers.' For taxatim, you take llie whole numbers of population, witlirut regard to 
 age, sex, condition or colour. The reason is apparent. Taxes are denned, by writers 
 on political economy, to be coatrioutioas from the land and labor of the country, placed 
 at the disposal of tae Government. Contributions are made, and so levied upon 
 the whole labor of the country : and if the principle ofnuuibers is to be adhered to, 
 tlie same reason that is assigned for the imposition of taxe.s, vrould justify representa- 
 tion. But to this. 1 should oe un-^viillng. Id_seardtlie principle ot numbers altoge- 
 ther, and recur to that of taxation. 
 
 In recurriug to the question of taxation and representation as inseparaMe correla- 
 tives, we cannot avoid looking to the obligations of the Government, to protect pro- 
 perty as well as persons. Tms principle is not only derived to us, from that country 
 from which w have drauai most of our opinions of civil and religious liberty, but it 
 is the found ition of that revolution, which made tliese States free and independent. 
 From loin to it>:;i, it was the moving impulse to the great events then occurring in 
 England, and which tended m a high degree, to secure tlie freedom of that country, 
 and to inculcate here the genuine doctrines of civil an.J religious hberty. The Peti- 
 tion of Right, in Old England, did not only aim at enforcing the act against the ~fexac- 
 tion of aroitrary benevolencies, but to prevent tlie impositicn of any other tax, loan, 
 or such ch irge, without common consent in Parliament given. And to curtail the pre- 
 rogative of Cie Crown, to cut up its minora rega- iu, there was an express prohibition 
 against the power of hnprisonment. The Petition of . Right is known to be the pro- 
 duct of Lord Coke's pen, who had a just right to say, that he had won all the honors 
 of his distinguished Ih'e, " without prayers and without pence he courted nor flattered 
 neither Ca arch nor State. This important act of ParLament, conceded to the subjects 
 of the Crown the right of taxing themselves, and a perfect security of person and 
 property. There is nothing great and glorious in the liistory of England, that is 
 not in some way associated with their indissoluble union of taxation cmd representa- 
 tion. The Hibc'is Csrpu^ came from tills contest, as the shield of the subject against 
 the arbitrary power (jf the Crown. IN :r do I hazard any thing of error in the asser 
 tion, that these conservative principles of liberty and law, were laid in the blood uf 
 that monarch, whose head the people brought to the block, as an appr prlate sacrifice 
 for the liberties of Eagland. Pfiaciples, for which Hampden lost his life hi Chaigrave- 
 neid. and in support of which, Russell and Sidney died upon the scaff Id. I am tm- 
 VviUing. (said Mr. Barbour,) to surrender the principles of L':cke, and of ISIllton, for 
 the fancies of Rosseau, ave, as unwilhn^ as I am to disregard the hghts of cur own 
 revolution for the ignis fatuus of French politics and French irreliglcn. or rather for 
 the delusions of anarchy and atheism. The American revolution is the fruit of the 
 effort in the parent Legislature, to seize by taxation the property of the Colonies, with- 
 out their free and common consent in making the gift and grant. The offer was 
 
 IS ° 
 
138 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 made that representation be allovv^ed the Colonies, but it was rejected, because such 
 representation must be nominal only. 
 
 The sturdy Patriots and able Statesmen of that day, knew the inefficacy of such 
 representation. They pointed to the instance of Scotland, and insisted that represen- 
 tation in form, only, was but an apology for greater plunder and more oppressive ex- 
 action, if we turn our attention to the Coiistitution of the United States, the same 
 principle for which we contend, is therein engrafted. Direct taxes and representa- 
 tion in the popular branch of the Legislative Department, are locked together. If 
 power is wanted, it is to be had upon condition, that it bear the expenses of the so- 
 cial and Federal system. Pay the taxes, and you have the representatives. With 
 representation, power passes als.o, but the shadow must not and cannot quit its sub- 
 stance. My views are directed by practical utility, and not by speculative philosophy. 
 In looking through the Debates of the State Conventions, that ratified the Federal 
 Constitution, I perceive that the men of those days, recognized the principles for 
 which I contend, and acted on them. In New-York and Massachusetts, Mr. Jones, 
 Mr. Smith, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. R. King, and Mr. Samuel Adams, all contended, 
 " that taxation and representation, should go hand in hand, and that it was the lan- 
 guage of all America." Notwithstanding the. lights of our own revolution, and those 
 reflected by the lamp of history, we are now to disregard all, and to pursue a path as 
 yet untrodden, either by prudence or success. And why, Mr. Chairman, let me ask ? 
 Because petitions, it is said, have poured in for reform. I venture to predict, that 
 the people never dreamed of this sort of reform. Reform, which is to make one man's 
 property the property of another, without the owner's consent, and in flie end to en- 
 slave his person, by first stripping him of his property. When the gentleman from 
 Brooke, spoke of the annual petitions from the counties of Henry and of Patrick, 
 praying the call of a Convention, I was reminded of another sort of petition, that I 
 have sometimes seen from those counties, and the county of Franklin. I knew well 
 the character of the Delegates usually sent here by those people. Cautious, intelli- 
 gent and patriotic, they sought reform for the protection of property, and the security 
 of personal rights and equality. And the very men who held in one hand the peti- 
 tion for a Convention, brought in the other another petition to diminish disburse- 
 ments of public treasure and to retrench expenses. They were plain men, but they 
 haxl the sagacity to discern, as Mr. Dunning did, in maintaining his celebrated reso- 
 lution, 'Hhat the power of the Crown had increased, was increasing, and ought to 
 be diminished that reform was nothing without retrenchment and economy. I 
 know well that those people looked to the diminution of expenditure and to lighten- 
 ing the burden of taxation. Plad they imagined that all this thing of Convention 
 and reform was to resolve itself into a grant of power to take their money ad lihihim 
 and ad indejinitum, they would have done as we did in Culpeper : they would have 
 come to the " right about.'" For, if I were to selet t sentinels to guard the purse of 
 the State, I would as soon take them from that quarter of Virginia, as from any other ; 
 I should give full confidence to their vigilance, fidelity, intelhgence and honesty. I 
 well remember, some years since, that one of the gentlemen from that quarter, had 
 even the name of the watch-dog of the Treasury. And I speak it with all due res- 
 pect and with sincere commendation, that such representatives often make the best 
 and most useful public servants. Gentlemen deceive themselves in supposing that 
 the people are prepared to throw down the guards of prudence and self-love which 
 jpsually defend their property from encroachment. They will be guided by experi- 
 ence, rather than follow the lights of the French Revolution. Lights that shone 
 for a time upon the path of despotism, and were finally extinguished in blood, &c. 
 &c. &c. 
 
 Mr.' Gordon (of Albemarle) now rose and said: 
 
 That it would be presumptuous in him, to attempt to say any thing calcjalated to 
 guide tlie Connnitiee to correct decisions on the important subjects on which they 
 were called to deliberate: That he had, however, some opinions and facts, which 
 he felt it his duty to submit to the consideration of the Committee, that they might, at 
 least, be enabled to judge, by comparing his views and theirs, hov/ much he might be 
 in error, or that he migTit derive light from the great ability which distinguished this 
 Assembly. 
 
 The course of the deba,te had seemed to him, somewhat beside the question : most 
 of the arguments in favour of the amendment, proposed by the gentleman from Cul- 
 peper, (Mr. Green,) had gone the full length in opposition to all reform whatever; 
 and it would seem to a by-stander, that the gentlemen had not been called on to re- 
 commend amendments to the existing form of Government, but to determine M^iether 
 there should be a Convention called or not. That question had been already decided. 
 A majority of the freeholders <if Virginia, after years of deliberation, had determined 
 that a Convention should be called for the purpose of proposing amendments to the 
 existing Constitution. Public opinion, said Mr. G., cannot be misunderstood on that 
 subject ; unless, indeed, the ingenuity of gentlemen, shall be able to make the people. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 139 
 
 (as has been said.) come to the right about : and persuade us, their representatives, to 
 disregard the purposes for which we Avere sent here. Are there, in reahtj, any in- 
 equahties in the existing Constitution of Virginia, which need reform To me. Sir, it 
 seems evident that there are. and inequalities so great, tliat they cannot longer be 
 borne with. They must be corrected, not. Sir, by force and violence, but by the mild 
 operation of public opinion, acting through its appropriate representation on tliis floor. 
 A reform is due to the character of Virginia before the American public. 
 
 But, Sir, an attempt is now made, in the modification of this Constitution, to infuse 
 into it a new principle, unheard of till now, (so far. at least, as my knowledge ex- 
 tends,) in any free Government: a principle which is at war with every notion we, 
 'as Americans, have been taught to hold sacred, and which goes to make the elective 
 power quadrate with tcealtli. The design is, in effect, either to make slaves constitu- 
 ents to the Legislature, or to make the tax paid on them an ingredient in Legislative 
 power. To both these propositions, I have strong objections. Sir, the plan will be 
 utterly unavailing to the object its advocates seek to accomplish by it. If the conse- 
 quences which are to flow from granting us an equality of rights, are really such as 
 they apprehend, this scheme will never operate to prevent the evil. 
 
 The gentlemen on the other side have discussed this question, as if the injury so 
 much dreaded from equal rights of representation, and an extension of the right of 
 suftrage, was to be confined, in its extent, to one peculiar part of Virginia alone. If 
 the white basis is adopted, the most grievous oppression must. the_v1:hink, ensue to 
 that part of the Commonwealth, and nothing can save the interests of the majority of 
 the wealth of the State from the danger of misrule, when the power shall 20 into' the 
 hands of a minority possessing little wealth or influence. But. Sir, what are the facts 
 of the case.^ For it is not my purpose. -even if I had the ability vchich some other 
 gentlemen so conspicuously display, to indulge in beautiful speculation on mere ab- 
 stract theories, or in tiie brilliancy of illustration by classical allusions to history. My 
 view of this subject shall be altogether practical. I purpose to enquire how Virginia 
 can be rendered most happy and prosperous? And what effect is hktly to ensue, from 
 the proposed alterations in our Constitution? 
 
 The State of Virginia contains one hundred and five counties and four borouo-hs, 
 having representation. These counties are very various in their dimensions, in^the 
 comparative fertility of their soil, as well as in the character of their respective popu- 
 lation. The variety in these respects, is very great indeed. Some of these counties, 
 have more people than, by the present system, are fairl\- represented in the Legisla- 
 ture ; and have this redundancy on any theory gentlemen may be pleased to adopt, 
 whether we go on the white basis exclusively, or on the compomid basis of popula- 
 tion and taxation, or even on the plan of giving representation to all the blacks. Nor is 
 it a fact that these diversities and discrepancies are scattered about the State, here and 
 there only, at wide distances apart; but, on the contrary, large portions of the State, 
 and numerous counties lying contiguous to each other, present a spectacle of these 
 great and striking inequalities. The question is, whether we shall, soberly and calm- 
 ly, set ourselves to remedy such a state of thino-s ; or whether we shall press a subject 
 that is calculated to distress us all, and practically to divide us in feeling, by first teach- 
 ing us that we are divided in interest : the result of which can only be to bring us to 
 a conclusion, which all true friends of Virginia cannot but deprecate, and which I 
 hope never to see. 
 
 Do gentlemen ask us for facts ? Sir, I state this as a fact, for the truth of which I 
 appeal to the documents furnished us from the Auditor's office. From the head of 
 tide-water, (leaving out the counties of Spottsylvania. Caroline, Hanover, the county 
 of my friend, Mr. iNIorris, and the one which gave the first impulse to the revolution; 
 Henrico, Chesterfield and the City of Richmond.) what is the amount of population 
 and taxation as far west as the Blue Ridge ? This region contains a large proportion 
 of the white population of the State : it wants but little of containino- a majority of 
 the whole number of slaves: it pays a share of fhe revenue greatly drsproportioiiate 
 to its present representation ; and, if taken in connexion with the limestone vallev, 
 (which I consider as appertaining to the eastern portion of the State, in all essential 
 interests,) the two together-, by the Census of 1820, containing a majority of the total 
 lohite population ; a viajority also of the slaves ; and a majority of the taxation likewise, 
 by a balance of: ^17.000. Well, Sir, what is the representation enjoyed by that por- 
 tion of the State on this floor ? The fourteen counties of the Valley have twenty- 
 eight members. The region from the head of tide to the Blue Ridg'e. have twenty- 
 nine counties and fifty-eight members, making in all eio-hty-six. Thus, Sir, we see 
 tha.t in a House containing two hundred and fourteen Delegates, a region of the 
 State comprising a majority of whites, blacks, and taxation, is represented but by 
 eighty-six members ; leaving thus a majority of thirty-eight members in the Legisla- 
 ture, actually against a majority of the whole population and the whole taxation of 
 the State. Gentlemen ask for facts : here they are. I do not discuss the sectional 
 interests of these relative portions of the State : Would to God that I could consider 
 
140 
 
 DEBATES OF TrIE CONVENTION. 
 
 tha interest of them all as one and the same : but these views forced themselves on 
 my mind in consequenca ct" the course pursued on the other side. 
 
 Nor is thij all : t:i3 grossv.st inequaUt e.'S present theuiselves to our view in that 
 part oi tlie IState, wh.ch extends ironi the head of t de to the ocean : inequalities 
 gi-iriuT indeed, when the two parts of the State are compared together. The Sena- 
 torial District of which Ricl5niond icrms a part, and one other, have in the House of 
 Dcltrgates, exclusive of Richmond, twenty-nine, and inclus.ve oi Richmond, thirty 
 Delegates. Thus, while five counties, at the loot of the Ridge, paying a tax of 
 $3/.63J, have ten Delegates, tliese two Senatorial Districts have twtnty-nine Dele- 
 gates, and p-^y a tax of ;>2.45() only ; tliat being the actual amount of taxation paid 
 by the counti< s ; R.chm .nd, which pays ^ Jd,C7c5, being withdrawn. 
 
 Sir, I d ) n t say, tliat the cf untry beL.w tide-water, (God bless the country bolow 
 tide-water, and all Virgin, a !) dees not pay its lull proportion of taxes ; but I ask 
 v>rlietht!r tha very able oppo it. on on this floor, had not better unite with us, in devi- 
 sing an J perfe cting a feas.ble plan for the amendment of the Constitution, than obsti- 
 nately to daiea,t everj' plan th it can be proposed. 
 
 S r, I have made other calculations, In ni which it wiU appear, that the representa- 
 tion in the extreme west of Virginia is redundant; that that in the extreme east, is 
 alsD reJund mt ; and that while both these parts of the State will, it the basis of 
 white population shall be adapted, lose a porticn of their rt prestntaticn, the middle 
 region < f tiie State, which lies between them, will gain as much as they lose. The 
 strength will thus be carried to the centre, and if we sulftr death, it will be frcm a 
 disease o the heart, for which there is no remedy. 
 
 Agret-ably to the Census of Ib'^O, the whole white population of the State was 
 603, ;dl whites ; 425,148 slaves, and the whole taxes in tlie year lfc28, was $ 423,r.63. 
 
 The people west of the Alleghany mountains were r.53,ll2 whites, ]3,3t6 slaves, 
 and they pay ^ 3;J,01j9 in taxes. They have at present twt nty-six, counties and fifty- 
 two Delegates ; but, on the basis of representation by white numbers, they would 
 have forty-seven only, five less than tliey hare ot present. 
 
 The Valley between the Alleghany and the Blue Ridge, had a white population of 
 121.0.;6, and 29,785 slaves ; they pay ^ G5,r)37 taxes; they have fourteen counties 
 and twenty-eight Delegates. If equalized, they would have forty-two. There are in 
 the region of the State above the head of tide- water to the Blue Ridge, 187,186 
 whites, and 205,GOO slaves ; and it pays $ 1(J4,17U tax. They have twenty-nine coun- 
 ties and fifty-eight Delegates, and are entitled,, to sixty-six Delegates, eight more than 
 at present. The country below the head of tide-water had IGl ,687 whites, 176,4C6 
 slaves, and pays $ 157,756 in taxes ; they have thirty-six Counties and four boroughs, 
 and seventy-six Delegates. They are entitled to fifty-seven only, making a difference 
 of nineteen. 
 
 I have made other cnlculations, wliich go to shew, that there is no material differ- 
 ence, in the result, between basing the representation on Federal numbers, and on a 
 compound ratio of population and taxation. There will be not more than a differ- 
 ence of two Representatives in a ITcuse of Delegates containing one hundred and 
 twenty members. 
 
 , Novv^, Sir, I ask if it be wise to equalize the rej)resentaticn of tlie State on any 
 principle : If it be, tlien I deny that there is any other principle on which it can be 
 fairly done, but on a m-ijority of the free white inljabitants. 
 
 Property, Sir, inuny just soheuie of representation, is not to be regarded but as 
 claiming the protection of the scciety. It is in -aristocracy, that the argument is urged 
 which insists oh giving it political power as possessed by indivldiiais. When you ad- 
 mit that, you make a Hovse of Li rds ; you give the rich men a power Avhich he could 
 not claim in the Government without the influence of his wealth. But, gentlemen 
 prr p )se to g've this influence to pr perty, not as propertj' in the hands of individuals, 
 but as lying in certain, sections and sub-d visions of the State ; and does this bet- 
 ter ths matter.' N.ot in principle, for the princ'ple remains the same ; not in prac- 
 tice, f r there its only effect cm be (and is) to produce heart-burnings and jejslousies 
 of section against section, which is even worse than of man against man. Because 
 one part of the State has fewer slaves than the residue, will y( u nsake your basis of 
 renresentation rest upon that sort of property, of all others, the most objectionable ? 
 Whit nmst.be the efft ct of such a policy It must, it will produce discontent every 
 wh-re. save only among the slave-holders themselves. 
 
 Sir, I thought it unwise, and I feel that it is most unpleasant, to bring this sub- 
 ject into the discussion. I tried to prevent it last winter in the Legislature : but it is 
 forced upon \is, and we must meet it : the gentlemen will not let us avoid it. 
 
 I ask. what good would it do to Virginia, were we to admit representation on the 
 basis of the whole black population ^ Gentlemen argue as if the whole of the eas- 
 tern part of Virginia consisted solely of slave-holders ; but so far from this being the 
 case, 1 think it possible, and very probable, that there is, even in that portion of the 
 State, a majority who are not slave-holders. If that be the fact, cr any thing near 
 
DEBATES OF THE COKYENTION. 
 
 141 
 
 the fact, do they not see that, adopt what numerical basis you please, the prevailing, 
 moral influence of the State must be against this class of persons and the sort of 
 property they hold ? And if power is given to the slave-holders with a view to pro- 
 tect their slave property, will not the non-slave-holding portion of the community 
 feel it their interest to make the slaves pay for their own protection ? Will not the 
 non-slave-holders in east Virginia immediately have a common feeling with those in 
 v/estern Virginia ? Sir, whatever may be the natural passions of men, one thing is 
 very certain, that there is no very peculiar sympathy betv^^een non-slave-holders and 
 slaves. They will utterly oppose a principle which confers on this species of preperty 
 any political pov/er in the practical Government of Virginia. 
 
 Sir, my own portion of the country has a very deep interest in this matter ; and I 
 am as anxious as any one can be, to have tlieir interest secured, and their apprehen- 
 sions quieted ; but I would effect this in a very different mode from that suggested by 
 some of the very able and honourable men with v/hom, in time past, it has been my 
 pride to act. Sir, do you not perceive, that if property be your basis, you cannot ex- 
 tend the I'ight of suffrage Do not gentlemen see, that an extended right of suf- 
 frage is the' circle which includes all these powers ? Do they not perceive, that in 
 imp3.rting power to make laws and to vote for representatives, if they extend that 
 pov/er beyond the freeholders, they instantly get up an interest in the State which is 
 hostile to the very foundation of their scheme, and hostile to any Government that 
 shall be founded upon it .'' Sir, this is not an interest to be laughed at and despised. 
 Shall we not still be assailed year after yezx. with petitions from the north to ameho- 
 rate the condition of the slave population ? That interference we may well despise : 
 but if we get up this spirit at home, among our ov/n people, and your State shall be 
 sundered and severed in affection by those mountains, what I once looked to, as to 
 the barriers of her strength and safety : Sir, I say, if they get up this spirit on the 
 other side of those mountains, will it not come over ? Aye, and spread too, among 
 all that portion of the community who are not slave-holders If you extend the right 
 of suffrage, will not persons thus discontented and thus made inimical to the slave- 
 holding interest, vote for the man who w\\\ lay the highest tax upon slaves How do 
 you now retain that description of property in perfect safety ? I answer, by the pow- 
 er of the society itself. Yes, by that composed, silent, but tremend(ms power, which 
 resides in the free white popul-ition of the State: that pov/er which defends all, and 
 without noise, or apparent effort, keeps all things still in Virginia: and if you adopt 
 any other foundation of power, than the white people of the State, will not jealousies 
 and excitement exist towards that species of property which you thus endeavour to 
 protect, in all those who are not its owners 
 
 If you do not extend the right of suSrage, most painful discontent will ensue, and 
 if you do extend it. you put it into the power of those who exercise suffrage, and who 
 are not slave-owners to oppress that property the more relentlessly because a peculiar 
 power is claimed for it in the Government, and when, in truth, its guardianship 
 springs in a degree from the very numbers whose political power is diminished, by 
 making that property or taxes from it, an ingredient in the representative power of the 
 State. One would think, that in a free State, each man would have protected along 
 with his person, such property as his genius, talents, or industry might have obtained 
 for him: but this slave property is like having the wolf by the ear ; you do not 
 know whether to hold him fast or to let him go." It is a stumbling block in our way : 
 it balks us in all our deliberations, and we seem almost at a stand, whether we shall 
 adhere or not, to the principles of freedom and equal rights, for which our fathers 
 bled. 
 
 I ask whether there is any thing in this doctrine of a compound basis of represen- 
 tation, like those doctrines of freedom for which Virginia has alwaj^s contended } I 
 will not go for examples to English history : my recollection of it, is too general to 
 enable me to go into its particular detail. But I will go to the free Constitutions of 
 our own happy countrj', and I ask whether there is anj' tiling in this principle calcu- 
 lated to aid the reputation ever enjoyed by this ancient Commonv/eaith, for her zeal- 
 ous attachment to the true principles of Constitutional liberty ? 
 
 Gentlemen have perplexed themselves with abstract disquisitions on the rights of 
 mnjorities, and they point us to instances, where, in the Federal and other Constitutions, 
 the majority is excluded from a controlling power : these instances we well knew and 
 remembered ; but they are only exceptions, and exceptions do but confirm the gene- 
 ral rule to which they apply : yet genUemen would make these cases of particular ex- 
 ception, to give the principle on which to lay the foundations of our Constitution : 
 Sir, what would this be but, in the language of an eloquent man, " to make the medi- 
 cine of the State, its da.ily food 
 
 The veto of the President; the provision requiring majorities of two-thirds of the 
 Legislature, and others of the like kind are relied on, as proof that we are not to look 
 to a majority of the people for an expression of tlie public will, but must get a will 
 
142 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 made up of slavery and freedom, of money and free will : and this is to be out prO" 
 tection. 
 
 I had hoped, gentlemen would have reserved this proposition for a mixed basis, till 
 we came in reo-ular course to consider the subject of representation in tlie Senate. 
 
 The Senate, it seems, must be held as a check on the lower House : it is not to be 
 itself a movino- active body, but is to serve as a curb upon the enthusiasm of the other 
 branch of the Legislature. But little did 1 expect that it was to be proposed to us, to 
 make the first branch of our Legislature, unlike any other in the Union, unless it be 
 where one of the slave-holding States, have copied the Federal ratio of tln-ee-fifths of the 
 black population. But there is no analogy between the case which gave birth to that 
 ratio, and the case now before us. That was a treaty of one sovereignty with ano- 
 ther. A Constitution was then being constructed, which was to combine different 
 and totally distinct societies under one general Government, for their common bene- 
 fit. It was a Government of limited powers, the residue of power being retained by 
 those sovereignties as such. It is said, that able statesmen have doubted the wisdom 
 of that provision in the Federal Constitution ; and I myself shall regret it, if it be 
 made a precedent, to infuse an aristocratic ingredient into our State Constitutions. 
 The structure of the Senate of the United States, where States large and small have 
 equal representation, is brought forward as fiirnishing a proof, that a majorlt}^ of num- 
 bers does not, in fact, rule in this Republic. But the reason of the equality of re- 
 presentation, while numbers were so unequal, is manifest ; the Delegates on that floor 
 do not represent numbers at all ; they have nothing to do with numbers ; tliey repre- 
 sent sovereignties 5 and the sovereignty of a State, does not depend on its dimensions. 
 
 Gentlemen have denied the right of the majority to rule in part from the practical 
 difficulties in applying the rule ; and they have pointed us to the minorities in tlie 
 Districts, as often being, if united, sufiicient to contradict the vote obtained, by ad- 
 mitting a mere plurality to decide an election. Admitting this to be so, it does not 
 reach the point : for I have not said either that the voice of the majority does always 
 in practice prevail, nor that the majority always does what is right; but I ask gentle- 
 men to point out a safer depository for the ruling power. 
 
 Allusions have been made to some of the Governments of antiquity, and to that ' - 
 of England, as supporting the opposite view. But, Sir, what is this Government ; 
 of England, to which gentlemen so confidently appeal ? Has it not at length be- 
 come (notwithstanding the original freedom of its Constitution) little else than a mi- 
 litary despotism ? The people, it is true, submit; but take the arms out qt the hands 
 of the soldiery, and how long would that submission last ? I suspect they would soon 
 find out a very summary mode of paying their national debt. But the raw head and 
 bloody bones of the French revolution is ever and anon made to pass before us, and 
 we are reminded, as soon as we propose the least approach toward a greater equaliza- 
 tion of rights, of the political and moral earthquake tliat shook that ancient empire to 
 its foundations. Sir, I think there may be drawn from that very revolution a salutary 
 lesson on our side of the question. The evils of that great convulsion did not grow 
 out of the misrule of tlie rmjoritij alone, but out of the resistance of a minority. They 
 refused to submit to the principle for which we contend, and rejected the concessions • 
 offered them by the mild spirit of their King ; and it is not to be wondered at, that, in 
 the issue, the will of the majority should prevail. It is very true that there succeed- 
 ed a more settled state of things under Bonaparte ; but though the country was to ap- 
 pearance quiet, it was not the calm of contentment, but of coerced submission ; the 
 spirit of liberty was still throbbing in French veins ; and the issue has been, that after 
 desolating all Europe, and laying waste in its course almost all the Kingdoms of the 
 Old World, this very French revolution has terminated in advancing the rights of man. 
 It has given to France a more limited monarchy ; a free press, a representative cham- 
 ber, and the trial by jury. 
 
 But, Sir, have we any proud and haughty nobility, for whose pleasure the yeoman- 
 ry are to be taxed at will ? A fat and indolent privileged order, who roll in luxury at 
 the cost of the laboring classes of the community.^ No, Sir. There are none who 
 propose such a thing. What then has the French revolution to do with a case no way 
 analogous to tliat of France 
 
 Various other topics have been introduced into the discussion, which, in my appre- 
 hension, have no legitimate connexion with it ; (but I do not pretend to judge for 
 others, or to cast the least censure on them.) And among others the subject of internal 
 improvement has been conjured up ; (I should not say conjured up, for it sprang up 
 in our way.) And gentlemen oppose the white basis of representation on the ground 
 that if it be adopted, the lower country will be heavily taxed for objects they do not 
 approve, and the entire benefit of which will be enjoyed by the west. That this sub- 
 ject is known to be a favorite one among gentlemen who reside in that part of the 
 State. But, I ask, was that attempt at internal improvement which has been made, a 
 western project ? Its advocates and the engineers, I own, deluded me when I first 
 entered the Legislature ; they told us we could unite the eastern and western parts of the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTEXTIOX. 
 
 143 
 
 State at a small expense,, and I reflected that we had a fund provided expressly for ob- 
 jects of that character, and the basis of which was vdselr laid in the principle, thatin- 
 dividual enterprize was first to be called out. and then aided by the hand of the Gov- 
 ernment. B at. Sir, by whom was that wise restriction on the apphcation of this fund 
 ruptured ? Was it by srentlemen from the west .' Or was it not by what is familiarly 
 denominated the James Ptiver interest ? "Was it not they who told us that the object 
 was one of such vast importance,, that it ought to be made an exception from the rule, 
 and that a sum ou^ht to be raised for that object expressly, without reference to the 
 peculiar constitution of that fund ? I am castinGr no injurious imputations upon the 
 gentlemen : God forbid ! I know they were all honorable and high-minded men, 
 who were sincerely pursuing what they considered the best means of improving the 
 State. 
 
 But what has this question of internal improvement to do with the question of a 
 white or a compoimd basis for representation ? Nothing at all. Sir : Yet, they them- 
 selves have introduced it. and I must be suffered to go a little into it, by way of 
 reply. The gentlemen got httle by their scheme : all the money, I beheve, has been 
 sunk in James River. They made large loans to effect it, and now those loans have 
 to be re-paid, the country has come to a halt. The system of internal improvement 
 cannot move a peg. I Jmpw that the distinguished Convention held at Charlottesville 
 was got up with a view to revive the interest of the subject in the pubhc mind : and 
 what has been the result ? I believe the gentlemen must own that it has been any thing 
 else, rather than a revival of the public confidence in behaff of internal improvement. 
 Unless these projects axe carried on elsewhere in a very different manner from what 
 they have been here, they will ever result in mere jobs, wherever the pubhc or the 
 Goi^ernmeat hive any concern in them. The meeting at Charlottesville has produced 
 but very little effect in favor of the subj'eet. very httle indeed, Sir : insomuch that 
 you cannot, at this day. get the people of Virginia to consent to be taxed for works of 
 internal improvement any where, be it east or west, north or south. Freeholders or 
 non-freeholders ; ah reject the proposition. The only way in which they can advance 
 one step is by loans, and that mode I shall ever hereafter oppose. 
 
 3Iy friend from Hanover (Mr. Morris), when tlie gigantic scheme was first present- 
 ed to incorporate a Joint Stock Company, in which Virginia and other States were 
 parties with individuals and the United, States to make the Chesapeake and Ohio 
 canal, supported it with great effect against my friend from Norfolk Borough (Mr. 
 1/oyall) and mvself. Yet. notwithstanding this, such was the anxiety of the Virginia 
 Legislature not to connect the improvement of the State with Federal authority, that 
 the bill did not pass until a provision was made attempting to limit the Federal power, 
 within the boundary of the District of Columbia, as to its subscription. 
 
 Reference had been made to an application to the Legislature, for certain improve- 
 ments in the Shenandoah : but what argmnent could be drawn from a mere apphca- 
 tion. wliich was never granted, he could not perceive. 
 
 My friend from Orange (Mr. P. P. Barbour), for whose talents and character, I en- 
 tertain the most exalted regard, has informed us, that he is against mere experiments^ 
 and in favor of experience alone ; and so am I against experiments, when they are 
 of a wild and visionary character. But we must not forget, that it is from experiment 
 alone, that experience is obtained ; and that the most valuable institutions of the 
 cotmtry, that our whole free Government itseh", is but the result of an experiment, 
 which has happily succeeded, and has. as I fondly trust, converted this land into the 
 abode of freemen, to endless ages. Yet. the very semie arguments might have been 
 urged against that experiment, as are urged now against this. It was a fearful 
 conflict we engaged in, against the greatest nation in the world: the first in arts, 
 and arms, and liberal science, and all that can ennoble or adorn the name of man. 
 That was a fearnil experiment : and the heart of the firmest man might well pause, 
 if not tremble, at adopting it. But, Sir. is there any thing fearfiil in the Httle expe- 
 riment we are now going to make .' Almost all the States have re-niodelled thefr 
 Constitutions : and has any violence or public, calamity ensued I have heard of 
 none. In the old world, indeed, you cannot take up at pleasure the foundations of 
 your Government, and improve its form. ^Miy Because the principles of aristo- 
 cracy and monarchy, are there infused throughout the whole system. A hundred ranks 
 of dependent officers, are interested m upholding the existing abuses, and keepinsT down 
 the people : and if the people obtain a mitigation of their evils, they must rise in 
 their might, like the strong man, and tear down the temple wliich has become their 
 prison. But, doesun argument from that state of things, apply here, where we in- 
 habit a free State, and are surrounded by twenty-three other States, equally free ? Are 
 arguments of this sort to appal us ? Is there any demoniacal spirit ofone abroad in the 
 Commonwealth, so that there is nothing like justice or faith amono- men Suspicion, 
 it seems, is to be the order of the day : and jealousy the only safe foundation for a 
 civil community. Sir, men do not associate in communities, because they suspect, 
 but because they Igvs each other : because society is necessary to the heart, and man 
 
144 
 
 DEBATES OF THS CONVENTION. 
 
 is a savage without it. It is only when society has long been established, that the 
 spirit of selfishness makes man a misanthrope, and persuades him to deny, that true 
 *' Sfclf-iove and social, are the same." No, iSir. All the suspicion we ought to che- 
 rish, in laying the foundations of our new Constitution, is such as will teach us to be 
 very jealous, lest so much as a grain of aristocracy or monarchy, should any where 
 be found in it. Let us have no Nobles, no Kings ; but give us, and our children, the 
 equal rights of men. 
 
 Sir, if we shall fail in agreeing to any amendment to the Constitution, and shall 
 return to those who sent us here, with nothing in our hands, v/hat must be the con- 
 sequence Discontent, division, public confusion. Sir, it must happen. An excite- 
 ment Vv'ill take place, which cannot be allayed. The people expect that something 
 shall be done. They expect, that the basis of representation of the State shall be 
 equalized, and the right of suffrage extended : and they will be deeply dissatisfied, if 
 it is not done. I said, that you could not extend the right of suflrage, and engraft 
 this principle of a compound basis into your Constitution : and none are, or can be 
 consistent, but those who oppose the whole. For, tlie very moment 3'ou extend the 
 right of suffrage, you grant a power, which, if the white basis is rejected, will call 
 another Convention. And, Sir, permit me to say, that the calrnness vvith which we 
 have met, and the mutual respect and decorum, which distinguish the present bcdy, 
 sh&w clearly, that we are in no danger of that bloody sword, which was so omincmsly 
 brandished over us, by the gentleman from Hanover, (Mr. Morris) ; but, if we insist 
 on what the people disapprove, we shall have east and west, lowlands and highlands, 
 unite in the call of another Convention, v/ho will put out the obnoxious principle, 
 and then the just rights of the community will every where prevail. 
 
 And is there any thing to forbid this equalization of rights.'' If it shall prevail, the 
 majority will still remain below the mountains : In a House of one hundred and twen- 
 ty, there will be nineteen more Delegates from the eastern, than from the western 
 side of the Blue Ridge. I do not go on the speculations of the gentleman from Brooke, 
 (Mr. Doddridge.) I do not believe, that the majority v^dll ever be found beyond the 
 mountain, unless the policy of the Old Dominion shall be to encourage the growth of 
 the black population, and discourage that of the v/hite. I know, indeed, the immense 
 tract of mountainous country which the State possesses ; and I rejoice that she does 
 possess it. It is her impregnable security ; a stronger barrier than the Balkan. But 
 it is a region, v/hich never can possess a popidation so dense, as that below the moun- 
 tains; nothing like it. V/eil, Sir, this negro property (it is very disagreeable to me 
 to be obliged to touch the subject, but .the fault is not mine; it lies in my way, and I 
 cannot avoid it ;) this negro property has increased, is increasing, and calls for the 
 deepest consideration. I intend no idle appeal to the fears of Virginia; I know what 
 the old Virginans are too v/ell ; a more gallant people is not on the earth : the only 
 fear they know, is the dread of a dishonorable action. But what I state are facts. 
 There exists below the iiead of tide -water, a mass of that population, which besides 
 23,000 free blacks, contains 150,000"^ slaves. There they are. Sir.. The Colonization 
 Society has failed to remove them. You cannot get them to go out of Virginia; and 
 I think they would be blockheads if they did, living as comfortably as thej'- do. This 
 black population is fast increasing. The w-hite population is nearly stationary. There 
 lies a wide-spread region of country, as fan* and i'ertile, and every way desirable, as 
 any on wliich the sun shines : and when we contemplate its situation, to what conclu- 
 sion are we naturally led? To this. Sir: that the whole tide of its population, both 
 black and white, is moving with a steady but gradual current, to the west, and the 
 time must, therefore, come vi^^hen tliere v/ill be in the residue of the State, a most de- 
 cided majority against the tide-water country. Now, I ask, whether it is not better to 
 have this majority as friends, animated by a devoted attnclunent to their brethren (not- 
 v/ithstanding a certain division on the details of the Defence Bill,) than to irritate 
 them into a state of animosity, so that no reliance can be placed upon them in the 
 time of Vv^ar 
 
 I claimed the Valley as an Eastern country ; and I did so on the ground taken by 
 the gentlemair from Fauquier (Mr. Scott.) viz. because it was their interest to be so*. 
 The gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur) said that the Valley was not a grain- 
 growing country ; but if he lived as near it as I do, and saw as many of its huge 
 wagons and fat horses, he could not have retained that opinion. Now, Sir, the trade 
 of that region of the State must naturally folio v/ the course of its rivers. Can any man 
 believe that it will ascend the Alleghany Mountains, for the sake of going down the 
 Ohio.? And if not, what can be plainer "than that that Valley has, and must have, the 
 same interest as the lower part of Virginia.? Vv^hy will gentlemen resolve to believe, 
 that this our ancient Commonv/ealth, must be as "distinctly divided by conflicting in- 
 terests, as its several regions are divided on the maps ? 
 
 No, Sir ; it is the obvious interest of the Valley to be with us. Is it so on the Slave 
 question .? The tables v/e have received from the Auditor will shew, that there are 
 only tic3 v/liite titheables to one black, through all the Valley. The slave population. 
 
DEBATE? or THE CONVEXTIOX. 
 
 145 
 
 though numerous, is, in that paxt of the State, much more dlffosed, than it is in East 
 Virginia. The interest is divided: among more owners in proportion to tlie number of 
 slaves. Gentlemen to the west of the Alleghany, feel oppressed, as not beino repre- 
 sented; but candouj requires me to sav, that the taxes in that part of the State are 
 not paid in a manner proportionate to the population. Yet there are only five whites 
 to one black, even there. In the mean while, the tide of the black population moves 
 westward : and it increases more rapidly in the west, than in any part of the State. 
 2Vow, Mr. Chairman, what is the conclusion from all. these facts? Plainly this: That 
 if any body is so wild as to be disposed that Virginia should get rid suddenly of her 
 coloured people, the thing is impossible. They are fixed, fast -rivetted upon us. 
 
 Here, then, the whole subject rises before us : and would to God. I had the power 
 to do justice to it. But J feel that it is otherwise, and I must confine myself to a few 
 of its most prominent points. t 3^ 
 
 As it seems, that we must extend tne rig-ht of sum:^e, how vain will it be to in- 
 troduce into our Constitution, a principle odious to the people, from its aristocra- 
 tic character t JS^otwithstanding all that has been said on this floor, against the right 
 of men to vote, you find few men who wiU deny that they themselves have that right, 
 either by nature, or in some other way. I am for extending the right of sufirage, not 
 merely because 1 think it proper in itself, that every free white citizen, should have 
 some share in the Government, but because it is the only way to counteract the 
 effects of the increase of the black population in Virginia. I am against offering a- 
 premiam to induce our labouring white people to leave our soil. I would have that 
 class of the community retained and encouraged amono- us. as the best means of 
 preventing the disproportionate increase of the slaves. The labour of the coimtry is 
 the wealth of the country, be it performed by- white men or black. The black' la- 
 bourer is represented through the person of Ms master, but the white labourer is not 
 represented at all. 
 
 Here Ivlr. G. went into a series of illustrations on the relative importance of labour 
 and money : contending that there was nothing valuable in the community apart 
 from the soil itself, that was not the effect of labour ; that th^ resources of the coun- 
 try had not been yet drawn out : and .argued to shew that it was better entitled to 
 representation than wealth could be : and from thence insisted on the necessity of an 
 extension of the right of suffirage. He never thought that a freehold was the only 
 qualification on wliich men ought to be allowed to vote. Society hves on its labour, 
 not on its capital-: if not, its capital would soon be exhausted. If, said he, you extend 
 the right of suffrage in a fair and equitable manner, you will satisty the countr}-. 
 There wUl be no excitement, and the whole effect of the alteration y-ou produce, will 
 be to remove the seat of power, not across the mountains, but only a httie further up 
 the country, than where it now resides.- We, who live in tlie middle region of Vir- 
 ginia, have slaves as well as you. You profess to fear, that the Valley will go with. 
 Sie west, and that the two vdH unite their power to oppress and injure you. If that 
 fear be well founded, the measure you propose offers no remedy. Let the Valley 
 unite itself with the west, and let them be joined by all the non-slave-holders below 
 the motmtains. and anv resistance of vour's, on any scheme of representation, must 
 prove utterly futile. You cannot witlistand their will. Adopt what scheme you 
 please, they must have a majority in the Legislature. It is the interest of my portion 
 of the State to equalize representation on any basis ; that effect cannot be avoided, 
 and if it cotild be. there is nothing in that part of the State hostile to the interests of 
 any other part. 
 
 The gentleman from Or-ange, when argtiing for a minority, referred the Committee 
 to the Senate of Massachusetts, where property is the sole basis. But there is a 
 striking difference between the Senate of ^Massachusetts and the Senate of Virginia, 
 as to the frequencv of their election. In Massachusetts they are chosen annually ; 
 in Virginia, only "once in four years. And as to taxation, the cliiet" bmden of tlie 
 contributions in ]SIassachusetts is imposed by the people themselves as divided into 
 •wards. The taxes laid in the Legislative Hall axe comparatively few; and for 
 even these, the legislators are perpetually before the peoplB in their annual elections. 
 
 Gentiemen talk about checks and responsibihties. Is the responsibility of which 
 thev speak, the responsibility of a Governor or of tlie Senate to the House of Dele- 
 gates .- We all know hovr such checks may be counteracted by combination. The 
 onlv effectual responsibthty in a free State, is responsibility to tiie people. They are 
 never in favor of their own oppression ; and although individually, may think them 
 xmjust to tlieir claims, they are rarely so to the general interests, ^"he gentle.3nan 
 from Fauquier (Ivlr. Scott) speaking about projects to tunnel the Alleghany, referred 
 -to the case of the James River canal, in which he supposed a pledge was given, or at 
 least understood to be given, that. if the Legislature would make the necessary grant 
 to carry on the improvement, our produce should not be taxed. That a loan was ob- 
 tained."" and when diSculty was felt in paying the interest, a tax was imposed upon 
 tobacco. ' I was here at the time, and was in favor of the project of improvement, 
 
 19 
 
146 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and against the tax on tobacco. ^ Now, I ask, who voted for that tax on tobacco ? 
 The ^^'ilole lower Virginia interest. If there were any exceptions at all, they were 
 (as we heard lately) ravi nantcs. They all voted by a simultaneous movement, to lay ' 
 a tax of a dollar a hogshead on tobacco, notwithstanding the prohibition in the act 
 of incorporation of the James River Company, by which they were bound not to raise 
 their tolls, till the rate of transportation should be reduced. Yet the gentleman says, 
 that the pledge then given, was immediately violated, 
 
 ' [Mr. Scott here rose to explain. He had not charged a breach of faith on any indi- 
 viduals. He had. merely stated a fact, which he saw in the Statute Book.] 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, in reply, that it was much more agreeable to him to think^ tliat 
 all tlie gentlemen were equally just : and he had no doubt, that those who voted 
 the tax, v»''ere upright and honorable men, and did what tliey supposed to be right. 
 The case only proved, that a majority could sometimes do wrong : but, said , Mr. G. 
 come the imposition from where it may, one thing is certain, that we continue to pay 
 it to this day : and when I hear the niunificerit power of lov\'er Virginia lauded and 
 magnified, by a strange association, this tobacco tax always comes into my mind. It 
 was carried by a majority of one vote only : and 'well do I remember, with what ar- 
 dour and ability the gentlenivin from Augusta (Mr. Johnson) resisted it to the last, in 
 the Senate. Yet this case is brought up to have weight on the present question. 
 Sir, I have no doubt that the gentlemen voted from the fairest motives. The motive 
 avowed by some was to cure the country of middle Virginia, of its fondness for 
 internal improvement, and, to speak the truth, I believe it has, thus far, operated 
 very effectually to that end. Our country compiaiiaed of the tax, and endeavored to 
 -get it rejjealed but in vain : all who voted to lay it on, voted to keep it on. But 
 this case, so far from furnishing an argument, for inequality of rights, has its v/liole 
 bearing the other way. Do you give us our fair power in the Government, and then 
 tax our tobacco, if you can ? Sir, I am not against the tobacco country. As to the 
 increase of the tolls, it was referred to a committee of two gentlemen, who reported 
 in its favor. 'They were both enthusiastic advocates for internal improvement ; one 
 of them was successfully prosecuting a work of gre'at interest on the Roanoke, and '■ 
 the other had his own residence on the banks of James river, and was willing him- 
 self to be taxed. 
 
 And now, Sir, I ask, what have all these subjects of internal improvement to do- 
 with the question before us What prevents us from going on to lay the foundations 
 of a Republic, on those sacred principles of equal rights, for which the patriots of 
 America have always contended ? I, Sir, insist, that the people are capable of self- 
 government, and that they ought to enjoy it ; that the power shall not reside in A or 
 B, but in the whole community ; and that no free white male citizen should be 
 excluded, but those who have excluded ihemselves, by the immorality of their cha- 
 racter. 
 
 After an apology for occupying so long the time of the Committee, and a reference 
 to the embarrassment under which he had spoken, Mr. G. then resumed his seat. 
 
 Mr. Morris here went into an explanation of the course he had pursued in relation 
 to the incorporation of the Potomac Company, to which allusion had been made by 
 Mr. Gordon. He had voted for the act incorporating the company, not conceiving it 
 at all to involve the question, as to the right of the United States' Government to ■ 
 bring their spades upon the soil of Virginia. Tiie application of this company to Con- 
 gress, was totally distinct from their apj lication to .Virginia. They had applied to 
 Congress merely us constituting the local Legislature of the District of Columbia, 
 through a part of v/hich District they -wished to carry their canal. He could not per- 
 ceive, what this had to do with the question before the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that he did not rise to enter into a discussion, which had already 
 occupied the Committee for seA^en days : but simply to state the reason why he should 
 vote against Mr. Scott's amendment. That amendment proposes a basis which is al- 
 ready acted upon in the election to the Senate ; and being attached to the amendment 
 (of Mr. Green.) which- proposes a compound basis for the lower House, the vote in 
 favor of one must cover both. Such a vote he, could not consent to give. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, he had not risen to discuss the merits of the general question, but 
 only to say a word on the last am.endment ; for it was a little remarkable, that on this 
 which, strictly speaking, vv^as theonlj^ question before the House, not one word had 
 yet been said, calculated to indicate, either how any one would vote upon it, or how 
 any one ought. to vote upon it. The latitude which had been unavoidably allowed 
 in the course of the dis&ussion, had resulted in this, tliat the v\diole debate hitherto 
 had been occupied on the comparative merit of the resolution of the Legislative Com 
 mittee. proposing the v.'hite basis exclusively in the House of Delegates ; and the 
 amendiuent of the gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. Green) proposing as a substitute 
 the compound basis in- that House. The last amendment offered by the gentleman 
 from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott) sought to introduce the white basis in tlie Senate, going 
 on the ground that the compound basis shall prevail in the lower House. Mr. John- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 147 
 
 son said he sliould vote against this amendment ; not because he thought Avhite po- 
 pulation an improper basis for representation in the Senate, but because he thought 
 that question could be better considered, more fairly decided, as well as more laUy un- 
 derstood, when the Committee should have disposed of the question of representation 
 in the House of Delegates, and should come directly to consider the subject of the 
 Senate. Besides, said he, this amendment takes it for granted, that we are to have 
 representation on one principle in the one branch of the Legislature, and on another 
 principle in the other. Those who are of this opinion, must have a preference in re- 
 lation, to which of the two shall be on the white, and which on the mixed basis. Those 
 ■w^ho prefer giving the white basis to the House of Delegates, will, of course, be against 
 the amendment now last before us. 1 prefer it, as furnishing a check to the power of 
 the Senate, and shall, therefore, vote against it also. • , 
 
 Mr. Scott said, that the very reason given by the gentleman from Augusta (Mr. 
 Johnson) operated with him to vote the other way : But the gentleman from Loudoun 
 (Mr. Mercer) had said that the present amendment gave them no more than they had 
 already. He would ask of that gentleman to point out a single clause in the Con- 
 stitution which estabhshes a white basis in the Senate : he, at least, had never seen 
 such a clause. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied tliat he had not asserted that the Constitution has such a pas- 
 sage, but the Constitution certainly does not forbid it, and it has been established by 
 an act of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Scott said he was aware of that : but what he proposed by his amendment 
 was, to give that arrangement a Constitutional sanction. Its whole authority, at pre- 
 sent, is no more than that of any other ordinary bill passed by the Leoislatvu e. Gen- 
 tlemen insisted on having a white basis of representation : he could iiot go with them 
 the entire lengtii they demanded, but was willing, as an ultimatum, to consent to that 
 basis in the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Johnson would suggest one enquiry to the gentleman who advocated the 
 amendment last proposed. Where was the precedent, or where could an}^ just rea- 
 son be found., to sanction sucli a course as it liroposed ? No man in the Convention, 
 he presumed, was disposed to disturb that part of the Constitution which declares, 
 that there shall be two branches of the Legislature; one, numerous, and frequently 
 elected, and coming directly from the people, charged with their wishes and, stored 
 with a knowledge of all their wants, to present their petitions, advocate their rights, 
 and claim the remedy of their wrongs : The other, select in its character, few in its 
 numbers, a longer term of service, and so graduated in the rotation of those terms as 
 to render the body perpetual, charged with the duty of revising the proceedings of the 
 representatives of the people, of detecting their errors, and correcting them : in whom 
 confidence may be placed, that they wilf have the firmness to resist wrong, and the 
 intelligence requisite to perceive, and to decide upon, what is right. These doctrines 
 he understood to be acknowledged by all ; and these rules, none that he knew of, 
 wished to disturb. But the ground taken by those who wished to see the Constitu- 
 tion amended was, that in the popular branch of the Legislature, charged more espe- 
 cially with the wishes and wants of the people, the people do not now enjoy an equal 
 representation ; although in the other, and the controlling branch, they are justly re- 
 presented. You wish, said Mr. Johnson, a censor (for . you all contend for placing 
 some limit upon the majority,) and for that end, you provide a. Senate. But the effect 
 of the present amendment, instead of making the Senate a censor upon the House, 
 goes, in effect, to make the House of Delegates a censor upon the Senate. Now, I 
 call upon all who have any regard to the just principles of Government, to its harmo- 
 ny and its consistenc}'-, to tell me why such a distinction'should be established. 
 
 Mr. Scott observed in reply^ that he would give the gentleman one or two rearons. ^ 
 Both the branches of the Legislature were popular in their character : both being cho- 
 sen by the people, and responsible to them; and the question v/as, which of them 
 should be placed as a guard upon tlie taxing power 1 We contend that we are enti- 
 tled to place that guard in the stronger branch of the Legislature. We wish to have 
 our rights protected, inasmuch as we bring a larger stake into the community : we 
 bring our persons ixot only, but our property w'ith us ; and we ought, therefore to have 
 the stronger security. Again, the interests of property are more easily infringed than 
 those of persons. We expose our person in the streets, we place our less valuable 
 property within the walls of our houses, but we lock up .our gold in a strong box. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, that he washed to explain the vote he should give. He had lis- 
 tened with attention to the arguments urged on both sides, and his conviction was that 
 the compound basis of representation was the only true and proper basis in both 
 Houses. Why should the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson) impute any im- 
 proper motive to those who .were in favor of the present amendment ? For his own 
 part, he thought that the arguments of the gentleman from Fauquier (Mr. Scott) went 
 very conclusively to shew, not merely that the compound principle should be intro- 
 duced into the larger branch of the Legislature, but that it ought to prevail in both 
 
148 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 branches. But/it was possible, that the vote on his amendment, might serve to try- 
 how far gentlemen of opposite views could come to some compromise, and yield a little 
 of their respective convictions. Can it, asked Mr. JNicholas, be imputed to us as a 
 fault, that we are willing, at least, to make the experiment Or are the gentlemen 
 resolutely determined to go to all extremities The amendment appears to me wise 
 in another aspect. What. security have we who wish to take a middle ground, that 
 gentleiiien after having obtained that principle of representation which they "de- 
 sire in the lower House, will not , afterwards, when we come to fix the basis of the 
 Senate, insist upon, and carry it there also I am willing to take this amendment as 
 an experiment, to try what are the views and feelings of other gentlemen ; reserving 
 to myself to pursue such a course in the issue, as I may then deem expedient. As to 
 the propriety, of establishing the' white basis in the House of Delegates, rather than • . 
 in the Senate, the argument of the gentleman from Augusta, goes on a 2)etitio principii. 
 It takes for granted the very question in dispute, -viz. that tlie white basis of repre- 
 sentation is the most proper in itself. ¥/e think othervv'ise. We prefer the mixed 
 basis : and so thinking, we desire to have it first established in the airost numerous 
 Plouse of the Legislature. 
 
 The question was now taken on the amendment of Mr. Scott, and decided in the 
 negative. Ayes 43, Noes 49. . 
 
 So Mr. Scott's amendment, (proposing-the white basis in the Senate, and the com- 
 pound basis in the House of. Delegates.) was rejected. 
 
 The question then recurring on the amendment proposed by Mr. Green, viz : to 
 strike out the word "exclusively" from the resolution reported by the Legislative 
 Committee, and insert in lieu thereof, the Words "and taxation combined," and the 
 votiJ being apparently about to be taken, 
 
 Mr. MoiVROE, rose and spoke as follows : 
 
 It is with reluctance, Sir, that I now rise to address you, the reasons for which, I 
 need not repeat, but being under the necessity of giving my vote, I owe it to my con- 
 stituents who have generously placed me here, to the Commonwealth I have so long 
 served, and to myself, to explain the grounds on which I act. " I must do it with the 
 utmost brevity, and I fear that I shall fail, in giving the explanation which I wish. 
 
 I have seen v/ith the deepest concern, a concern I want language to express, the 
 divisions which exist in this body, and in the Commonwealth ; because I anticipate if 
 they shall be persevered in, the most unhappy consequences. I consider it the inter- 
 est of every section of the Commonwealth, to unite in some arrangement, which may- 
 be satisfactory to a great majority of this House and of the State ; and even to sacri- 
 fice a portion of their respective claims, rather than to fail in the accomplishment of 
 the great object, for which we have met. If we go home without having agreed upon 
 a Constitution, or if we shall agree upon one, and it shall be passed by a small ma- 
 jority, what will be the effect ? An appeal will immediately be made to the whole com- 
 munity, which v/ill excite repellant feelings among the people, in one section against 
 those of the other, which will endanger the dismemberment of the State. If it should 
 be rejected by them, or passed by a small majority, the same result might follow. 
 Sectional feelings already existing, will be nursed and cherished ; they will increase 
 and spread, till at length, one part of the community will be pitted against the other, 
 and a deep and malignant acrim-ony ensue, and where will it end ? In an actual dis- 
 memberment of the Commonwealth 5 which would be the worst evil that can befal 
 us ; a result which would be equally calamitous to all. Should it take place, the party 
 wliich had pressed its claims Avith most earnestness, would suffer as much as the 
 others. If the State should be severed, will the General Government agree, that 
 the dismembered part shall be admitted as a separate State into the Union ? I doubt 
 it. But if it should agree to it, could Ave then get fortv^ard, v/ith all our objects of in- 
 ternal improvement; objects which I have always advocated, and in the accomplish- 
 ment of which I have taken a deep interest, v/ith the same success, as in our present 
 situation ? I have considered these improvements, as very important to the strength 
 and welfare of the Commonwealth, and stability of the Union. I have wished to see 
 them prosecuted, but within the limited resources of the State, and with the aid of 
 the United States. What else is there that can so effectually bind y.s together ? If the 
 Atlantic States should be separated from those of the' west, the -country would be 
 ruined. The western States would then be arrayed against those on the Atlantic, and 
 endless strife be the consequence. If Virginia should be dismembered, on the ground 
 of the present controversy, will not the Carohnas and Georgia, experience the same 
 fate.? The same principles are involved, and causes exist there, though not to the 
 same extent. Those causes do not exist in the new States, where the emigration was 
 sudden, and the interests of all the emigrants, are nearly the same. There are cau- 
 ses of disunion among us, which do not apply to them, and if we can bind the States 
 together, hy opening coitimunicaiions between them, then our union will be perfected, 
 nothing can ever break it. 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 
 
 149 
 
 There are two great waters in Virginia, the James river and the Potomac, which I 
 am Ter.j anxious to have connected, with the western waters to vrhichthey approach. 
 The Roanoke is a third one. which may, in sorne degree, be connected with tL^ wes- 
 tern waters, and more intimately with those of the Chesapeake. These. objects may 
 be much better accomphshed, if the State remains united, than: if it shoidd-be dis- 
 membered. 
 
 "What are the grounds of this division On what does it-rest I regret that I am 
 incompetent to o-o at large into a consideration of them. It is contended by these 
 who reside in the western part of the State, that representation in the Legislature, 
 shall be based on white population alone : It is contended on the other hand, by those 
 who live in the east, that it shall be based on the principle of population and taxation 
 combined. These are tlie two grounds of dilierence. I am satisfied, that the xjlaim 
 of those m the west, is rational under particular circumstances. It hzis often been 
 suggested here, and I accord with that view, that putting the citizens in an equal con- 
 ditiofj, and the basts which they claim is just : It is founded on the natural rights of 
 man, and in pohcy also, under certain chcumstances. But look at the Atlantic coun- 
 try, and what is their claim ? They are the oldest portion of the State : they have a 
 species of property, in a much greater amount than the people of the west, and this 
 they wish to protect. It consists of slaves. I am satisfied, if no such thing as slave- 
 ry existed, that the people of our Atlantic border, would meet their, brethren of the 
 west, upon the basis of a majority of the free white population. 
 
 What has been the leading spirit of this State, ever since our independence was ob- 
 tained ? She has always declared herself in favour of the equal rights of man. The 
 revolution was conducted on that principle. Yet there was at that tune, a slavish 
 population in Virginia. V>^e hold it in the condition in which the revolution found it, 
 and what can be done with this .population ? If they were extinct, or had not been 
 here, white persons would occupy their place, and perform all the ofiices now per- 
 formed by them, and consequently, be represented. If the white people were not 
 taxed, they also would be n-ee from taxo-tion. If you set them free, look at the con- 
 dition of the society. Emancipate them, and what would be their condition ? Four . 
 hundred thousand, or a greater number of poor, witliout jDJie cent of property, what 
 would become of them.^ Disorganization would follow, and perfect confusion. They 
 are separated from the rest of society, by a different colour ; there can be no inter- 
 course or equahty- between them ; nor can you remove them. How is it practicable ? 
 The thing is impossible, and they must remain as poor, free from the controul of their 
 masters, and must soon fall upon the rest of the society, and resort to plunder for sub- 
 sistence. As tathe practicability of emancipating them, it can never be done by the 
 State itself, nor without the aid of the Union. And what would be their condition, 
 supposing they were emancipated, and not removed beyond the limit^; of the Union ? 
 The experiment has in part been tried-. They have emicrrated to Pennsylvania in 
 great numbers, and form a part, of the population of Philadelphia, and likewise of 
 New- York and Boston. But those who vrere the most ardent advocates of emanci- 
 pation, in those portions of the Union^ have become shoq^d at the charges of main- 
 taining them, as weU as at the effect of their, example, rsay, Sir, look at Ohio, and 
 what has s!ie recently done ? Ohio acknowledges the equal rights of all, yet she has 
 driven them off fi:om her territory. She has been obhged to do it. If emancipation 
 be possible, I look to the Union to aid in effectino; it. 
 
 Sir, what brought us togetiier in the revolutionary war.' It was the doctrine of 
 equal rights. Each part of the country, encom'aged and supported every other part 
 of it. None took advantacre of the other's distresses. And if we find that this evil 
 has preyed upon the vitals of the Union, and has been prejudicial to aU the States, 
 where it has existed, and is likewise repugnant to their several State Constitutions, 
 and Bills of Rights, why may we not expect, that they will unite with us, in accom- 
 plishing its removal ? If we make the attempt and cannot accompUsh it, the effect 
 will at least, be to abate the g-reat number of petitions and memorials, which are con- 
 tinually pouring in upon the Government. This matter is before the nation, and the 
 principles, and consequences, involved in it, are of the highest importance. But in 
 the meanwhile, seff-preservation demands of us union in our councils. 
 
 What was the origin of our slave population? The evil commenced when we were 
 in our Colonial state, but acts were passed by om* Colonial Leo-islature, prohibiting 
 the importation, of more slaves, into the Colony. These were rej^cted-by the Crown. 
 We declared our independence, and tlie prohibition of a farther importation, was 
 among the first acts, of State sovereignty. Vhginia was the first State, which in- 
 structed her Delegates, to declare the Colonies independent. She braved all dangers. 
 From Quebec to Boston, and fi-om Boston to Savannah, Virorinia shed the blood of 
 her sons. No imputation, then, can be cast upon her, in this matter. She did all 
 that was in her power to do. to prevent the extension of slavery, and to mitigate its 
 e\*ils. 
 
150 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 As to- our western bretliren, I feel as deep an interest for them, as for those on the 
 Atlantic border. I have so long represented the Commonwealth, that I have no sec- 
 tional feeling. I look to the Commonwealth, and seek the welfare of the whole. 
 
 As to the question of boundary, what was the conduct of Virginia ? Like the other 
 Colonies, she claimed the boundaries, and the extent of territory, granted to her by 
 her Charter. Virginia stood on the same footing with the other States. They all 
 held, under their Charters. But as the revolution advanced, it began to be contended 
 by. those States, whose territory was covered with population, that those who held 
 vacant lands, should throw them into a common stock, for the benefit of the whole, 
 and the contest was puslied to such an extent that menaces of hostility begun to be utter- 
 ed. To quiet this discontent, Virginia ceded to the United States, the territory which 
 she held, to the north-west of the Ohio, out of which three States of the Union have 
 been formed. Kentucky then, also a distant part of her territory, but separated by 
 mountains from the rest of the State, claimed independence. Virginia consented to 
 this also. And what did she then fix as the- western boundarj^ of the State.? The 
 Ohio River and the Cumberland Mountains Ail the residue of her boundary, was 
 left as it stood before, in confidence, that the extent was not too great, and that all the 
 inhabitants within it, would be held together by a common interest. What has been 
 her course, as to the settlement, qviite up to the boundary line.? It has been ever fair, 
 open, manly, and generous. She has seldom refused the erection of a county, when- 
 ever it was sought. So at least I am assured, for I have been absent, in the perform- 
 ance of other duties, and cannot be expected, to recollect the details, of this subject. 
 She has been guilty of no oppression, as has been acknowledged here, where, indeed, 
 I have witnessed with delight, the mutual respect and confidence, with which gentle- 
 men, on opposite sides, speak of each other ; and I most earnestly hope, that they will 
 remain, firmly bound together. 
 
 As to the best arrangement for the settlement of this question, I \Vill frankly state 
 my own views. I hold concession to be necessary on both sides. I think the claim 
 of the West strong; but that that of those, who reside on the Atlantic side, is equal- 
 ly so. It is said, that by the principle, the ktter contend for, the natural and political 
 rights of men, would be violated. I do not so view the case. I think that it admits 
 of a different view; that is, to a certain extent, and with the necessary modifications, 
 I am an advocate for the extension of the right of suffrage, and on that subject I 
 am ready to go, as far as the most liberal can desire. I will here state an incident- 
 which occurred when I was in the Legislature of Virginia in 1810. Petitions were 
 then presented, praying for a Convention, and one of the objects desired, or urged in 
 the debate, was an -extension of the right of suffrage. I had just seen the effects of 
 this right in other countries : I had recently been in England and France, and wit- 
 nessed popular movements in both countries, particularly in France. I was present 
 during three of the great movements of the -people, who seemed to act without any 
 check or control. I saw one of these movements directed against their existing Gov- 
 ernment, and by which it was literally torn to pieces. It was at length repressed, 
 with the bayonet, by Picheffl^u. In another the Convention was most violently assail- 
 ed; the multitude, burst into the Legislative Hall; they were met and opposed, by 
 the members ; they killed one, and cutting off his head, marched with it on a pike to 
 the President's Chair. I witnessed this scene. The third of these popular move- 
 ments, was also an attack on the Convention. The Convention was about to pass over 
 the Government to the Directory and the two Councils. The excitement among the 
 people was great, (being fomented, as I believe, by the agents of foreign powers, for 
 a political purpose,) and they had like to have overthrown the Government, but after 
 much bloodshed, they were at length repulsed.- 1 had seen also, popular movements 
 in England, though not of so niarked a tendency. I confess that this conduct of the 
 people of France, under a Government which was exclusively their own, made me 
 pause. I wished the tendency of the measures, asked for, to be carefully weighed. 
 I hesitated, not from any thing I had ever seen in my own country, but from what I 
 had seen of ma,n, elsewhere. I reflected long, and at length, became willing, to ex- 
 tend the right of suffrage to all those, who have a common interest in the country, and 
 may act, as free and independent citizens. We are differently situated from any other 
 nation on the face of the earth. If self-government can exist any where, it is in these 
 States, and in Virginia as well as in any other part of our Union. 
 
 I vv^iil carry the right of suffrage as far as any reasonable man can desire. Then 
 the rights of all the citizens will stand upon the same ground : the poor man and the 
 rich, will stand on the same level. As to the arrangement of -districts, and the pro- 
 tection of property by some reasonable e^uarantee, I do not see how it can affect the 
 question, of equal rights, among the citizens. It v/iil not affect it, within any one dis- 
 trict, wliere there are both poor and rich men. If the plan was to create an order of 
 nobility, or to m.ake the right of suffrage, depend on much property, it might enable 
 the rich, to oppress the poor; but that is not the case; it leaves both on the same 
 ground, and gives the one no advantage over the other. I only say, that representa- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 151 
 
 tion should be based, on the T^-hite population, with some reasonable protection for 
 property. But how is this to be done .= It may be done in two modes. First it may 
 be arranged, as it is in South Carolina, by taking both into consideration; base your 
 representation on the white population of the State, and combine that, with the pro- 
 portion of taxes tlu-ou9-hout the whole : then each district will have its own share. 
 The other mode is thus^: Let one of the brandies of the Legislatm-e be placed upon 
 the basis of white population alone, and the other branch, on the compound basis of 
 population and taxation. If this plan be adopted, then the question arises, in which 
 branch, shall the white basis prevail ? and in which the compound Will you give 
 the basis of white population only, to the House of Delegates or to the Senate.' I 
 think it will be more safe, for both sections, for the western and Atlantic country, if 
 you give it to the House of Delegates, and for the compound basis, to prevail in the 
 Senate. 
 
 If you could aoree on this arrangement, the country will, I think, be satisfied, and 
 there will be an'^ample check upon the course of legisl?ticn, by the structure of the 
 Senate. The popular branch, may then originate whatever it shall think most for the 
 o-ood of the country; and if, through the stimulus of heated feeling, tliey should pro- 
 pose any improper'measures, the Senate will operate as an immediate clieck. It was 
 on this principle, that I voted against the proposition to estabhsh the white basis for tlie 
 Senate. 
 
 Mr. Chau-man. I thouorht it was my duty , to rise and state the grounds of my vote, 
 so far as my abihty. and'^the state of my health, would admit. I wish to see the basis 
 of white population alone adopted for the House of Delegates, and the compound 
 basis of representation, consisting of white population and taxation combined, for the 
 Senate. This is my view. 
 
 Mr. Giles, in moving- for the rising of the Committee, took occasion to express his 
 gratification at the course and general tone of the debate, and his hope that some pro- 
 position for a compromise, would conduct it to a fortunate result. He intimated a 
 doubt whether the state of lois health would permit him to address the Committee to- 
 morrow, and he did not wish to be considered as bespeaking the floor : but made a 
 conditional promise, to present his views if able, and the attention of the Committee 
 should not be otherwise occupied. 
 
 The Committee thereupon rose, and on motion of Mr. Johnson, the House changed 
 its hour of meeting for to-morrow to eleven o'clock, and then adjourned. 
 
 - . TUESDAY, XovEAiBER 3, 1S.29. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and- was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Croes of the Protestant Episcopal Church. 
 
 The House havinof o-one into Committee of the Whole, jMr. Stanard in the Chair, 
 the question being on the amendment offered by Mr. Green to the first resolution 
 reported by the Legislative Committee, which resolution is in these words : Resohed, 
 That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, regard shall 
 be had to the free wliite popula.tion exdusizely : and which amendment proposes 
 to strike out the word ■•' exclusively." and insert in heu thereof, '• and taxation com- 
 bined." 
 
 Mv. Leigh of Chesterfield, said he rose to address the Committee, on this vitally 
 interestincf question, mider circumstances peculiarly disagreeable to him — having to 
 follow the^ venerable member from Loudoun (Mr. ^Monroe) who favored "the Commit- 
 tee with his views, yesterday — and who, from his advanced age and long experience, 
 from the high place he had filled in the service and in the confidence of liis country, 
 and from the large space he occupied in the eyes of mankind, possessed great weight 
 of character, to deepen the impression on the minds of others, of any opinions he 
 aaiight utter — weight of character, of which he liimself (as he ]>ad often felt before 
 and never more painfully than now) had none, hterall}- none.- Nevertheless, this was 
 an occasion, on which he could take counsel only from his sense of duty. And, he 
 believed, if George Washington were to rise from the dead, and to propose such a 
 compromise as that ottered by the venerable gentleman, so partial as in his conception 
 it was, so ruinous, so destructive, so damnatory, to the dearest interests of the people 
 who had sent him here, he should find the moral courage in his heart to reject and to 
 oppose it, even coming from him. The stcterunt covke. he might experience — but not' 
 (he thought) the tox faucihus hcEsit — on tlie contrary, he should be apf to utter a 
 shriek of alarm and terror, tliat would strike the dullest ear and the dullest under- 
 standing, though not perhaps the hearts of such reformers, as were willing to make 
 the. experiment on the body politic, how large a dose of French rights of man it can 
 bear, vrithout fever, frenzy, madness and death. 
 
152 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 xxe said, ail the little knowledge he possessed, and all his habits of thinking, were 
 merely professional ; habits of thinking, confined to narrow questions of municipal 
 law and justice, and little suited to the examination and discussion of great questions 
 of State, which require the greatest reach and the widest range of thought. He felt 
 himself under a sort of necessity to begin with a clear- and tair state of the case and 
 of the question. 
 
 He had then, in the first place, to inform the Committee, that there is assessed, of 
 land tax, upon the twenty-nine counties lying below the Blue Pddge and above tide 
 water, containing about 196,500 tax-paying inhabitants (average vex head) 34 cents ; 
 ■upon the thirty-six counties and four towns, lying on tide water, containing about 
 184,500 tax-paying people, 31 cents ; upon the fourteen counties between the Blue" 
 Ridge and the Alleghany, containing 124,000 tax-payers, 27 cents; and upon the twen- 
 ty-six trans-Alleghany counties, containing 134,500 tax-payers, 12 cents. Of the tax 
 on slaves, there is assessed on the people of the twenty-nuie middle counties below 
 the-Blue Ridge and above tide-water, (average per head) 2rf cents 3 on the people of 
 the thirty-six counties and four towns on tide water, 24 cents ; on the people of the 
 fourteen Valley counties, 7 cents; and on the people of the twenty-six trans-Allegha- 
 ny counties., 3 cents. The tax on horses and carriages, assessed on the tax-paying 
 people of the twenty-nine middle counties (average per head) is 9 cents ; on those of 
 the tide water country, 8 cents ; on those of the Valley country, 8 cents; ?„nd on 
 those of the trans-Alleghany country, 7 cents. The total of these direct taxes, assessed 
 on the people of the twenty-nine middle counties, is 72 cents; on those of the tide 
 water country, 64 cents ; on those of the Valley country, 42.^ cents ; and on those of 
 the trans-Alleghany country, 22^ cents. The country east -of the Blue Ridge con- 
 tains about 381,500 tax-paying inhabitants, and the taxes assessed on them, averaged 
 per head, stands, thus — land tax, 32 cents 7 mills ; slave tax, 26 cents 8 mills ; horse 
 and carriage tax, 8 cents 7 mills ; tota;l of direct taxes, 68 cents 2 mills— and the coun- 
 try west of the Blue Ridge contains about 258,500 tax^paying inhabitants, and the 
 average per head of taxes assessed on them, is 19 cents 6 mills of land tax ^ 5 cents 
 of slave tax ; 7 cents 6 mills of the tax on horses and carriages ; total 32 cents 2 
 mills. " ' 
 
 The tax assessed on the people of the Congressional district composed of the coun- 
 ties of Sussex, Southampton, Surry, Isle of Wight, Prince George, and Greensville, 
 (one of the least fertile tracts of country in the southern part of the State) is 62 cents, 
 average per head; the tax assessed on the people of the district of Brunswick, Lu- 
 nenburg, Mecklenburg and Dinwiddle, (an adjoining district of medium fertility) is 
 75 cents; that assessed on the people of the district of -Hahfax, Pittsylvania and 
 Campbell, is 71 cents ; and that assessed on the people of the district of Pow4iatan, 
 Amelia, Nottoway, Chesterfield and Petersburg, is 97 cents ; while the tax assessed 
 on the people of the northern district of Loudoun, Fairfax and Prince William, 
 amounts to an average of no more than 57 cents ; and that assessed on the people of 
 the rich and fertile Valley district of Frederick and Shenandoah, (the finest part of 
 the State) averages only 43 cents' per head. 
 
 The average per head of direct taxes assessed on the people of Frederick, is 56 
 cents ; Loudoun, 56 cents; Jefferson,. (the finest county in the State) 55 cents; Au- 
 gusta, 54 cents ; Berkeley, 38 cents ; Shenandoah, 31 cents ; Kanawha, 29 cents ; 
 Ohio, 21 cents ; Brooke, 19 cents ; Harrison, 17 cents ; and Monongalia, 15 cents — 
 while the average amount assessed mi the people of Fluvanna, is 71 cents ; Nelson, 
 79 cents ; Amherst, 81 cents; Buckingham, 82 cents ; Campbell, 84 cents ; Orange, 
 88 cents; Albemarle, 90 cents; Goochland, 92 cents; Cumberland, 92 cents'; Amelia, 
 106 cents; Nottoway, 119 cents-; Powhatan, 122 cents ; and that little despised coun- 
 ty of Warwick. 75 cents ; that is, 20 cents more than Jefferson. 
 
 In these estimates, it should be observed, free negroes were included as tax-paying 
 citizens, because they were so in the eye of the law. though it is well known they in 
 fact contribute little or notjhing to the Treasury : the tax on merchants' and other- li- 
 censes was excluded, though in truth they w^ere borne by the consumers in the im- 
 mediate neighborhood : the tax on tobacco inspected, imposed under the pretext of 
 providing a fund for insurance of tobacco burned in the public warehouses, and borne 
 wholly by the tobacco planters, was ?Jso excluded: and the gross taxes assessed were 
 estimated instead of the am^ount paid into the Treasury. The estimate, too, was 
 founded on the taxes of the year 1828, while the numbers of tax-paying citizens were 
 ascertained by the Censu.s of 1820, since which there has been a greater propcrtional 
 increase of white population in the w^estern than in the eastern part of the State. 
 
 Mr. L. said he had been furnished by his friend the honorable gentleman from Cul- 
 peper (Mr.' Green) with an estimate, in v/hich the f^ee negroes were (as they ought 
 to be) excluded from the number of tax-paying citizens, and the taxes on licenses and 
 on tobacco inspected were excluded from the amount of taxoAion, and which was 
 founded on the amount of direct-taxes actually paid into the Treasury in 1828, and 
 the estimate furnished by the Auditor of the white population in 1829. And it thence 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 153 
 
 appeared, that the twenty-nine middle counties contained a white population of about 
 197,000, and pay (average per head) of land ta:s: about 34 cents, of slave tax 2S cents, 
 and of the horse and carriage tax 9 cents : the thirty-six counties and four towns on 
 tide- water contain a white population of about 165,500. who pay an average of about 
 34 cents of land tax, 27 cents of slave tax, and 9 cents of horse and carriage tax: the 
 fourteen valley counties contain a white population of about 138,000. who pay an 
 average of about 24 cents of land tax, 6 cents of slave tax. and 7 cents of horse and 
 ca:rriage tax : and the twenty trans- Alleghany counties contain a white population of 
 about 181,300, who pay an average of about 0 cents of land tax, 2 cents of slave tax, 
 and 5 cents of the tax on horses and carriages. The white population east of the Blue 
 Ridge is about 362,500, and west of the Blue Ridge 319,300. The first pay of tl^te land 
 tax an average of 34 cents, the latter only 15 cents: the first pay of slave tax 26 cents, 
 the latter only 4 cents : the first pay of the horse and carriage tax 9 cents, the latter 
 only 6 cents. 
 
 Pursuing the comparison, Mr. L. stated, that for every dollar levied on the people 
 west of the Blue Ridge, there was levied on the people east of the Blue Ridge ,$3 16 
 per head; and for every dollar paid by the Western people, the Eastern pay S3 24 
 per head. And these proportions of tire burthens borne by the two great divisions of 
 the State, have continued^for a long series of years. 
 
 It had been supposed. Mr. L. understood, that a tax on neat cattle would prove com- 
 paratively light to the Eastern, and oppressively burdensome to the Western, people. 
 He believed, it had been his fortune to be the first person to propose or rather to sug- 
 gest that tax. when, in the session of 1812—13, he had the honor and the responsibili- 
 ty of being Chairjuan of the Committee of Finance. War was raging on our mari- 
 time frontier : the Federal Government to'd us, in plain terms, that the local authori- 
 ties must look to the local defence, and depend on their own means : it was absolute- 
 ly necessary to raise more revenue, a war revenue, by some means or other. Lands, 
 slaves, horses and carriages, had been? time out of mind, the principal, he might al- 
 most say, the only productive, subjects of taxation ; and thus the people of the east- 
 ern part of the State had ill ways borne a srreat proportion of the burden. It -(vas pro- 
 posed to increase those standi nor taxes, and. casting about for means to reconcile the 
 Eastern people to these additional burdens, by drawing a small increase of revenue 
 from the West, the tax on neat cattle occurred as the best suited to the purpose. It 
 was, therefore, suggested — but it was not then imposed. It was received with such 
 a moaning low, as if tlie animal on which it was proposed to lay the tax, had smelt 
 the blood^of a slauorhtered fellow-creature, and raised its plaintive voice for sympathy 
 from man and brute. The war continuing, and the State Treasury as well as the 
 Federal, uttering many a hollow groan, the tax on cattle was at length imposed in 
 18l5, but never lifterwards renewed, and ever since, the re-bellowing of that cow tax, 
 and the spectres of our fellow-citizens whose deaths are imputed to the pestilential 
 climate of Norfolk in the month of November (by tlie way, they were sent there by 
 the Government of the United States, not of Virginia, and were not drafted from the 
 tramontane militia alone, but from every part of the State) have been raised, again 
 and again, on all occasir.ns, to prove the enormity of the burdens home, and the tran- 
 scendant services rendered, for the defence of their Eastern brethren, b}' the people 
 of the West. But what was tha produce of that cow tax, and by whom was it paid.? 
 Excludinof the -counties of Jefi'erson, Accomac, Elizabeth City, Richmond, Norfolk, 
 and Norfolk borough, (of which there are no returns.) the burden of that tax was borne, 
 in almost exact equality, by tlie East and the West — the average being 3 cents 8 mills 
 per head. Such is the fact, let it be accounted for how it may. - 
 
 In 1815, in the extreme exigencies of the State, taxes were imposed on furniture, 
 mills, tanneries, professions, trades, stamps, pictures, plate (for so they called silver 
 spoons, the only article of the kind the people had) — in short, on almost every species 
 of property, as well as additional taxes on lands, slaves, horses and carriages. Of 
 these taxes, the country east of tlie Blue Ridge paid $495,589 — and the AYestern 
 country $ 141,360. For every dollar paid by the West, the East paid ^3 50, average 
 per head. 
 
 I will not affirm, said iNIr. L. that these statements are absolutely free from all in- 
 accuracy — but the inaccuracies, if any. are very trivial — the estimates have been ex- 
 amined by men more competent to the work than I pretend to be : I challenge inves- 
 tigation. And from these statements, some propositions, very material to be consider- 
 ed, flow by direct induction. 
 
 In the first place, there is one peculiar and most convenient subject of taxation, pe- 
 culiar too and most delicate subject of legislation, of which the people of the West 
 possess comparatively a mere modicum, and the farming country of the North a very 
 moderate share, while the people of the East and of the more Southern planting coun- 
 ties hold a vast mass — I mean, slaves. 
 
 It is evident, in the next place, that it is hardly possible to find any subject of tax- 
 ation, or to devise any tax, direct or indirect, of wliich the people of the East will not 
 
 20 
 
154 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pay at least as much as thiDse of the West; and as to the ordinary taxes, we pay a third 
 more than the West, of the taxes on horses and carriages, more than twice as much 
 land tax, and seven times as much of the slave tax. 
 
 And tliis may serve to account for another fact manifested by these statements, far 
 more satisfactorily than that generous disregard of their own interests, which the gen- 
 tleman from Frederick so courteously attributed to the people of the East — the ac- 
 knowledfred fact, that the existing Legislature has never abused its power as to taxa- 
 tion — of its acts of misrule in other respects, it seems, we are, in due time, to hear 
 the charges and the proof The East could not impose burdens on the West, without 
 imposing far heavier burdens on itst-lf. The West has had, all along, that very bond 
 with surety from us, wliich ray friend from Fauquier so justly demanded of the West 
 for us — the pledge of our own interest and self-love — an interest in the depositories of 
 power not to abuse it — no paper guarantee — but a hold upon the hearts of men, which 
 beat true to self-interest, if to nothing else. 
 
 This also accounts for another fact, very observable in our histoiy — that whenever 
 any grand and munificent scheme of Internal Improvement has been offered to us, 
 striking to the imagination and almost seducing the mind from the exercise of reason, 
 it has found favour in the North and the West, while the South and the East have 
 evinced a spirit, often described as niggardly — that the South and the East have 
 shewed themselves loath to vote money fbr any such purposes, or for any purpose but 
 to supply the pressing wants of tlie State. Taking the exactions of the Federal and 
 of the State Governments together, I doubt whether there is a people on earth, 
 more heavily taxed than the slave-holding planters of Virginia. We feel the weight 
 of those State taxes, which our brethren of the West and North, paying no equal 
 share, find so light and easy. 
 
 In the last place, seeing that the burdens of taxation are thus unequal now — if 
 there be any man so strong of faith, as to entertain no fears that the inequality may 
 be aggravated by transferring the balance of the power to the west — power over tax- 
 ation and property — none can be so green, or so mellow, as to hope, that the inequa- 
 lity is likely to be thereby corrected. One of the main causes of discontent, which 
 led to this Convention, that which had the strongest influence in overcoming our ve- 
 neration for the work of our fathers, which taught us to contenm the sentiments of 
 Henry and Mason and Pendleton, which weaned us from our reverence for the con- 
 stituted authorities of the State, was an overweening passion for Internal Improve- 
 ment. I say this Vv^ith perfect knowledge ;. for it has been avowed to me by gentle- 
 men from the west, over and over again. And let me tell the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle (Mr. Gordon) that it has been another principal object of those who set this 
 ball of revolution in motion, to overturn the doctrine of State Rights, of which Vir- 
 ginia has been the very pillar, and to remove the barrier she has opposed to the inter- 
 ference of the Federal Government in that same work of Internal Improvement, by 
 so re-organizing the Legislature, that Virginia too may be hitched to the Federal car. 
 This also, in substance, has been often avowed to me, and that by gentlemen for 
 whom personally I have the higliest respect. The Federal Government points a road 
 along the Valley, or along the foot of the Blue Ridge, or across the countr}^ at the 
 liead of tide-water ; and State Rights fall or trembk at the very sight of this tremen- 
 dous ordnance. It must be manifest to all men's minds, that without a vast increase ' 
 of its revenue by the State, or the aid of the Federal Government, all those splendid 
 schemes of Internal Improvement, so passionately supported by the North and West, 
 must prove futile and abortive. If, there fore j the balance of power be transferred to 
 the west, the taxes will in all likelihood be greatly augmented, and most certainly 
 they will not be reduced. 
 
 And, then, Mr. Chairman, the question is, whether, when money is to be raised for 
 any purpose — to defray the expenses of the civil list, or for the public defence, or for 
 public education, or for Internal Improvement — the people of the west may justly 
 claim power, forever hereafter, by one and the same vote, to give and grant three 
 dollars of our money, for every dollar they give and grant of their own.'' And, then, 
 to appropriate the revenue, according to their notions of justice and policy ? Whether, 
 while the people of Loudoun give and grant 56 cents of their money, those of Frede- 
 rick 56, Jefferson 55, Augusta 54, Berkeley 38, and Shenandoah 31 cents — they may 
 reasonably claim power, to give and grant, by the same vote, from the people of Flu- 
 vanna 71, of Nelson 79, of Amherst 81 , of Buckingham 82, of Campbell 84, of Orange 
 83, of Albemarle 00, and of Goochland 92 cents ? Whether, while the rich people of 
 Berkeley give and grant 38 cents, and those of Shenandoah only 31 cents, of their 
 money, they shall have power, by the same vote, to give and grant 75 cents from the 
 poor people of Warwick.' Whether, while the people of the thriving county of 
 Kanawha, give and grant 29 cents, Ohio 21, Brooke 19, Harrison 17, and Mononga- 
 lia 15 cents; they shall have power by the same vote, to give and grant 92 cents from 
 the people of Cumberland, 106 cents from those of Amelia, 119 cents from those of 
 Nottoway, and 122 cents from those of Powhatan And that, for purposes, in which 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTIOX. 
 
 155 
 
 those who pay the most, can have Httle or no interest, — and those who pay the least, 
 must have a great and direct interest ? If the taxes be uniform, (as they must be.) 
 the consequences are inevitable. 
 
 Sir, if the claim be yielded to, I know no happier illustration of the effects, than 
 that furnished by the metaphor of tlie gentleman from ^^sorfolk, the other day. He 
 told us, that representation and taxation are not twin streams, rismg in the same glen, 
 separated by accident, uniting in the vale below, and rolhng the joint tribute of their 
 waters to the same ocean : thev rose from ditrerent foimtains. they flowed in differ- 
 ent directions, and emptied into different oceans. Yes, indeed — if we adopt the prin- 
 ciple reported by the Legislative Committee — represeniation will rise in the 3Ioim- 
 tains, and overflow and drown the Lowlands ; while taxation, rising in the Lowlands, 
 and reversing the course of natmre, will flow to the Moimtains, and there spend, 
 if not waste its fertilizing steams, over every narrow valley and deep glen, and moun- 
 tain side. 
 
 Gentlemen from the west, hav« exhorted us to discard all care for local interests — 
 tliey tell us, that, if they know their own hearts, their opinions and course are not 
 influenced by any such paltry considerations. Without doubting the sincerity of these 
 professions, I doubt whether tiiey do know their own hearts — without unpiously set- 
 ting up myself for a searcher of hearts, I doubt whether tlicy have searched their 
 hearts \vith sufficient scrutiny — nay. whether any scrutiny would have been success- 
 ful. It is a divine truth, that the heart of man is treacherous to itself, and deceittul 
 above all things. This we know with certainty, that tlie opinions of the western 
 delegation, on tliis question, conform exactly with the interests of their constituents — 
 they are perfectly unanimous — no division among them — none at all. And there is 
 the great county of Loudoun — Vv^hy (as Louis XIV. said to his grand-son, when he 
 departed to mount the Throne of Spain) — why are there no lono-er any Pyrenees .' — 
 Why is the Blue Ridge levelled from the Potomac to Ashby's Gap. tliough it swells 
 again to Alpine heights, as it proceeds thence southward, to divide Fauquier from 
 Frederick This miracle has not been worked by turnpiking the roads. Look at the 
 census, and observe that the white population of Loudoun, is three-fold that of the 
 black ; look at the Auditor's reports, and mark the fact, that Loudoun pays not half as 
 much tax, as some of the poorer slave-holding planting coimties ; consider her com- 
 mon interest with all the upper Northern 2Seck in internal improvement, and their 
 common opinions concerning State Rights : and then, if I mistake not, the question 
 will be very easy of solution. The votes from tlie Orancre, the Albemarle, the Camp- 
 bell, the Pittsylvania, and the Norfolk districts, which (I know not why,) are all count- 
 ed on as securely, as if they were already given : these are, indeed, disinterested, 
 and can only be attributed to maofnanimity. I presume not to enquire into the mo- 
 tives of gentlemen, much less to censure their conduct. I admire, but I cannot imi- 
 tate their example. I have regard, especial regard, to the local interests of my con- 
 stituents. They sent me here for the very purpose, that I might watch over them, 
 guard, defend; and secure them, to the uttermost of my power. And, if I should 
 disregard them, either thi-ouo-h desiam or indolence — if I were even to profess to have 
 no regard to them — it were Tjetter for me, that I had never been born — the contempt 
 of some, and the hate of others, would pursue me through life ; and if I shoiild fly 
 for refuore to the remotest corners of the earth, conscience — Q^ids cxul p atria se quoque 
 fucrit — conscience would still follow me with her whip of'scorpions, and lash me to 
 the grave. 
 
 Sir, I affirm with the gentleman from Hanover, (j>Ir. !Morris.) that the contest we 
 are now engao-ed in. though not the same in its circmnstances, with that between our 
 ancestors and Great Britam. is similar in principle. I have heard, and wondered to 
 hear, many persons talk " of oiir having cast off the yoke of British slavery." The 
 French minister. Genet, once dared to address General Washington in that same 
 straia; and he began his answer with those memorable words, — " Born in a land of 
 freedom.'' Our fathers had no yoke of slavery-to cast off — their merit and their glory 
 consisted in resisting the very "first attempt made to impose one. None but freemen 
 would have perceived the danofer ;. none but freemen would have spurned the yoke 
 the moment they saw it prepared for them, and before they felt its weight. The hmn- 
 blest slave, the basest felon, the very beasts, will, when they can. cast off a yoke that 
 galls them. At the peace of 1763, the Colonies were warmly attached to England ; 
 nor had George III. a more loyal subject in his dominions, that George Washington. 
 The quarrel originated in the attempt of the British Parliament to tax us ; and all the 
 grievances we afterwards complained of, were but the effects of our determination 
 not to submit to the taxes it sought to impose, and of the efforts of Great Britain to 
 subdue our resistance. In the language of Lord Chatham, the Connnons of Great 
 Britain claimed a right to give and ffrant the money of the Commons of America, 
 without allowing them any representation at all. Our western fellow-citizens only 
 claim power to orive and errant three dollars of our money for every dollar they give 
 and grant of their ovni, allowing us representation indeed, but a representation not 
 
156 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 strong enough to refuse the grant. Suppose Great Britain had offered us a represen- 
 tation in F<irlia.ment, proportioned to our free jchite population exclusively — what would 
 om- fathers have said to it? Wliat I, tlieir descendant, now say to it — " It is mocke- 
 ry — you ask us to put ourselves in your power, bound hand and foot, and think be- 
 cause yo\i gild our chains with a thin leaf that shews like golden freedom, we shall 
 be so silly as to wear them." Great Britain might have ottered us a representation 
 in Parliament, proportioned to our popidation, and told us truly, that our country 
 would soon be populous, that our vast forests would soon be felled, that our vast wil- 
 dernesses would soon blossom like the rose, and that in the course of some forty years, 
 we shovild have a population of ten or twelve millions, and then be entitled to an 
 equal representation. Such language would hardly have prevailed with us. But our 
 fellow-citizens of the west, reverse tiie proposition — they tell us, that in thirty years 
 the majority will surely be found west of the Alleghany, and gravely ask us to assent 
 to a principle, which will place us, and all we have, in their power and at their 
 mercy — our slaves, our lands, our household goods, our — but I stop. Sir. The beauty 
 of it is, they tell us all the while, to quiet our apprehensions, no doubt — " Remember 
 the weight of a Back- Woods vote"— comply with all our desires, reasonable or un- 
 reasonable, or never hope more — " Remember the weight of a Back- Woods vote" — 
 that force, which moves in solid phalanx, always advancing, never relenting, never 
 breaking. 
 
 The Commons of Great Britain claimed power over our property, and we insisted 
 that the control over it belonged, of right and exclusively, to us the owners : so our 
 fellow-citizens of the west ask us to give them the absolute power of taxation over 
 us, and we insist on retainin,g that power in our own hands. The Commons of Great 
 Britain claimed to exact "a pepper-corn" from us, voting millions of their own : our 
 brethren of the west only ask power to take three dollars of our money for every dol- 
 lar they contribute of theirs. Let a fair comparison be made, and then determine 
 which claim is the more reasonable, or the more abhorrent from justice, safety and 
 liberty. Our fathers stood justified before the nations and before high Heaven too, in 
 resisting the pretensions of Great Britain, by all the means that God and nature put 
 into their hands. 
 
 And now. Sir, let me be distinctly understood. Attachment to this, my native • 
 State, to every foot of her soil, to every interest of all her citizens, has been my ru 
 ling passion from my youth—so strong, that it is now (what all attachments to be use- " 
 ful to its objects, must be) a prejudice— I hardly recollect the reasons on which it was 
 founded. None that know me, will doubt this. I foresaw, I foretold, this fearful, 
 distracting conflict. I looked to it with terror from the first, and I look to its con- 
 sequences with horror now. I have trembled — I have burned. I raised my Cassan- 
 dra voice, to warn and to deprecate — if I had the strength to make it heard, I wanted 
 weight of character to make it heeded. Never till then had I felt the want of politi- 
 cal influence, or lamented that I had disdained the ordinary methods of acquiring it 
 in my earlier years, though probably no efforts would have been successful. My feel- 
 ings, my reason, my prejudices, my principles, all assure me, that the dismemberment 
 of the State must be fraught with cruel evils to us of the east, and stiil more cruel 
 evils to our brethren of the west. Yet, Sir — and the bfood curdles in my veins while 
 I make the avowal — I shall avow, that the preservation of the Commonwealth in its 
 integrity, is only the second wish of my heart : the first is, that it may be preserved 
 entire under a fair, equal, regular, republican Government, founded in the great in- 
 terests that are common to us all, and on a just balance of those interests that are 
 conflicting. 
 
 Sir, the resolution reported by the Legislative Committee, in effect, proposes to di- 
 vorce power from property^ — to base representation on numbers alone, though num- 
 bers do not quadrate with property — though mountains rise between them — to trans- 
 fer, in the course of a very few yeai-s, the weight of power over taxation and property 
 to the west, though it be admitted, on all hands, that the far greater mass of property 
 is nov/, and must still be held in the east. Power and property may be separated for 
 a time, by force or fraud — but divorced, never. For, so soon as the pang of separation 
 is felt — if tlie-re be truth in history, if there be any certainty in the experience of ages, 
 if all pretensions to knowledge of the human heart be not vanity and folly — property 
 will purchase power, or power will take property. And either way, there must be an 
 end of free Government. If property buy power, the very process is corruption. 
 If power ravish property, the sword must be drawn— so essential is property to the 
 very being of civilized society, and so certain that civilized man will never consent to 
 return to a savage state. Corruption and violence alike terminate in military despo- 
 tism. All the Republics in the world have died this death. In the pursuit of a wild im- 
 practicable liberty, the people have first become disgusted with all regular Government, 
 then violated the security of property which regular Government alone can defend, 
 and been glad at last to find a master. License, is not liberty, but the bane of liberty. 
 There is a book — but the author was a tory, an English tory, and he wrote before the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONYEXTIOX. 
 
 157 
 
 American Pvevolution, so that I am almost afraid to refer to it — yet I will — there is an 
 Essay of Swift on the dissentions of Athens aJid Rome, in which the downfall of those 
 Republics, is clearly traced to the same fatal error of placing power over property in 
 different hands from those that held the property. The manner of doing the mischief 
 there, was the vesting of all the powers of judicature m the people ; but no matter how 
 the manner may be varied, the principle is the same. There has been no change in the 
 natural feelingfs. passions and appetites of men, any more than in their outward form, 
 from the davs of Solon to those of George Washington. Like political or moral causes 
 put in action, have ever produced, and must forever produce, every where, like effects 
 — in Athens, in Rome, in France, in America. 
 
 The resolution of the Legislative Committee, proposes to give to those who have 
 comparatively little property, power over those who have a great deal — to give to 
 those who contribute the least, the power of taxation over those who contribute the 
 most, to the public treasury — and (v.-hat seems most straftge and incongruous) to give 
 the power over property to numbers alone, in that branch of the Legislature w-Hick 
 should be the especial guardian of property— in the revenue-giving branch. To my 
 mind, Sir, the scheme is irreconcilable with the fundamental principle of representa- 
 tive Government, and mihtates against its peculiar mode of operation, in producing 
 liberty at first, and then nurturing, fostering, defending- and preserving it, for a thou- 
 sand years, ^l}- friend from Hanover, (Mr. ^lorris) has already explained to the Com- 
 mittee, how the institution of the House of Commons in England, grew out of the 
 necessities of the Crown to ask aids from the people. The free spirit of the Sajxon 
 laws, mingling with the sterner spirit of the feudal system, had decreed that property 
 was sacred. The lawful prerogative of the Crown at no time extended to taxation ; 
 and if violence was sometimes resorted to, the supphes it collected were scant and 
 temporary. Originally, the whole function of the House of Commo?is, was to give 
 money ; but the money being theirs, it belonged to them to say, when, how much, for 
 what purpose, they would give it. From the first, and invariably to this day. the 
 Commons have been the sole representative of property — the Lords never have been 
 regarded in that hght. And from this power of the Commons to give or withhold mo- 
 ney, have sprung all the liberties of England — all that has distinguished that nation 
 from the other nations of Europe. They used their pov\-er over the purse, to extort 
 freedom from the necessities of the King — and then to secure and defend it — they 
 made his ambition, his waste, his ver}'- vices, work in favor of liberty. Every spark 
 of English libc-rty was kindled at that golden lamp. I ask money" — said the Crown 
 — " money to resist or to conquer your enemies and mine " — give us privileges then'' 
 (w^as the constant answer,) acknowledge and secure our rights ; and in order to se- 
 cure them, put them into our own keeping." — Sir. I know it is the fashion to decry 
 every thing that is English, m supposed to be so ; I know that in the opinion of manv, 
 it is enough to condemn any proposition, in morals, or in politics, to denounce it as 
 English doctrine ; but that is neither my opinion nor my feeling. I know well euouo-h 
 that the sentiment is unpopular — but I laid it down as a law' to myself when I enter- 
 ed this CcAivention, to conceal no feeling and no thought I entertain, and never to 
 vary in the least from an exact exhibition of my opinions, so far as it is in the power 
 of words to paint the mind — and I have no hesitation in saying, in the face of the 
 whole world, that the English Government, is a free Government, and the Enoiish 
 people a free people. 1 pray gentlemen to cast their eyes over the habitable gfobe, 
 survey every form of civil Government, examine the condition of every society— and 
 point me out one, if they can, who has even so much as a conception, and much more 
 the enjoyment, of civil liberty, in our sense of it, save only the British nation and 
 their descendants. England Was the inventor, the founder of that representative Gov- 
 ernment we so justly and so highh- prize. I shall, therefore, still study her institu- 
 tions ; exercise my judgment in ascertaining what is vitious, or rotten, or unsuitable 
 to our condition ; and rejecting that, hold fast to all that is sound and wise and good, 
 and proved by experience to be fit and capable to secure liberty and property f pro- 
 perty, without which liberty can never exist, or if it could, would be valueless^ Give 
 me liberty in the English sense — liberty fotmded on law, and protected by law — no 
 liberty held at the will of demagogue or tyrant (for I have no choice between tliem) 
 —-no liberty for me to prey on others^no hberty for others to prey on me. I want 
 no French liberty — none a liberty which first attacked property, then the hves of its 
 foes, then those of its friends ; which prostrated all religion and'morals ; setup nature 
 and reason, as Goddesses to be worshipped; afterwards condescended to decree, that 
 there is a God : and, at last, embraced iron despotism as its heaven-destined spouse. 
 Sir, the true, the peculiar advantage of the principle of representative Government, is, 
 that it holds Government absolutely dependent on individual property — that it gives 
 the owner of property an interest to watch the Government — that it 'puts the purse- 
 strings in the hands of its owners. Leave those who are to contribute money, to deter- 
 mine the measme and the object of contribution, and none will ever knowingly give 
 their money to destroy tlieir own liberty. Give to those who are not to contrib'utej 
 
158 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the power to determine the measure and object of the contribution of others, and they 
 may give it to destroy those from whom it is thiis unjustly taken. From this false 
 principle, the scheme of representation in question, is variant only in degree — it only 
 proposes to give one portion of the people, power to take three dollars from another, 
 for every dollar they contribute of their own. I say, therefore, that the plan is at war 
 with the first principle of representative Government — and if it prevail, must destroy 
 it — how soon, depends not on the wretched finite wisdom of man, but on the provi- 
 dence of God. 
 
 The resolution of the Legislative Committee, proposes to give the west power of 
 taxation over the east, though it be apparent, that, in some respects, concerning as 
 well the objects of taxes as the subjects of appropriation, the west has not only no 
 common interest with the east, but a cofitrary or different interest. The interest of 
 the west is contrary to ours, in regard to slaves considered as a subject of taxation, 
 certainly and obviously. The unavoidable inequality of taxation upon all subjects, 
 and the unavoidable equality of benefit from the revenue, give the west an interest to 
 augment, and the east an interest to reduce, the amount of taxes. And, as to those 
 internal improvements, those roads and canals, which seem, in the opinions of many, 
 to be the only objects of Government, let any man survey the face of the country, 
 and deny, if he can, that different, more extensive, and more expensive, works of the 
 kind, are wanted, and even projected, in the west and in the north, than are wanted 
 or have ever entered into the imagination of the east and the south. They would ex- 
 pend thousands where we would expend hundreds ; that is, of our money ; for if the 
 expenditure was to be of their own, I cannot doubt they would grudge it as much as 
 we do, or more. But this has been already fully explained by the gentleman from 
 Fauquier. We are asked, gravely and importunately asked, and in a tone as if they 
 thought the request the most reasonable in the world, to give them povver to tax us 
 three times as much as themselves, when their great object can only be, to apply the 
 revenue (after providing for, perhaps stinting, the civil list) to those internal improve- 
 ments they have so much at heart. Let it be always remembered, that as the east has 
 never hitherto imposed any burdens, which have not borne more heavily on ourselves 
 than on our western brethren, so neither will it ever be possible for the east, if the 
 taxes be uniform, as uniform they must be, to levy any exactions on the west, which 
 will not be more grievous to ourselves, so long as we hold a so much larger mass of 
 taxable property : whereas the west may, by a uniform taxation, impose oppressive 
 burdens on the east, which its own population will hardly feel the weight of. I should 
 be sorry to say any thing offensive to gentlemen from any quarter — but I must follow 
 the fights of my own mind, and declare it as my opinion, that the cunning of man, 
 or of the devil, cannot devise a more vexatious and grinding tyranny for any people, 
 than to subject them to taxation by those, who have not the same interest with them, 
 much more who have interests contrary to or different from theirs. 
 
 The resolution of the Legislative Committee, proposes to give full representation to 
 the labour of the west, with an exemption from taxation, while the labour of the east 
 will be subjected to taxation deprived of representation. 
 
 The complaint seems to shock gentlemen — I shall repeat my words. (He repeated 
 them)— In every civilized country under the sun, some there must be who labour for 
 tlieir daily bread, either by contract with, or subjection to others, or for themselves. 
 Slaves, in the eastern part of this State, fill the place of the peasantry of Europe — 
 of the peasantry or day-labourers in the non-slave-holding States of this Union. The 
 denser the population, the more numerous will this class be. Even in the present 
 state of the population beyond the Alleghany, there must be some peasantry, and as 
 the country fills up, they will scarcely have more — that is, men who tend the herds 
 and dig the soil, who have neither real nor personal capital of their own, and who 
 earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow. These, by this scheme, are all to 
 be represented — but none of our slaves. And yet, in political a'conomy, the latter fill 
 exactly the same place. Slaves, indeed, are not and never will be comparable with 
 , the hardy peasantry of the mountains, in intellectual power, in moral worth, in all 
 that determines man's degree in the moral scale, and raises him above the brute — I 
 beg pardon, his Maker placed him above the brute — above the savage — above that 
 wretched state, of which the only comfort is the natural rights of man. I have as 
 sincere feelings of regard for that people, as any man who lives among them. But I 
 ask gentlemen to say, v»rhether they believe, that those who are obliged to depend on 
 their daily labour for daily subsistence, can, or do ever enter into political affairs ? 
 They never do — never will — never can. Educated myself to a profession, which in 
 this country has been supposed to fit the mind for the duties of the Statesman, I have 
 yet never had occasion to turn my mind to any general question of politics, without 
 feeling the effect of professional habits to narrow and contract the mind. If others 
 are more fortunate, I congratulate them. Now, what real share, so far a*mind is con- 
 cerned, does any man suppose the peasantry of the west— that peasantry, which it 
 must have when the country is as completely filled up with day-labourers as ours is of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 159 
 
 slaves— can or will take in affairs of State ? Gentlemen may say, their labourers are . 
 the most inteUisfent on earth — which I hope is true — that tliey will rise to political 
 intelho-ence. But, when any. rise, otliers must supply the place they rise from. What 
 then, IS the practical effect of the scheme of representation in question ? Simply, that 
 the men of property of the west, shall be allowed a representation for all their day- 
 labourers, without "contributing an additional cent of revenue, and that the men of 
 property of the east, shall contribute in proportion to all the slave-labour they employ, 
 without any additional representation. Sir, I am against all this — I am for a repre- 
 sentation of every interest in society — for poising and balancing all interests — for 
 saving each and all, from the sin of oppressing, and from the curse of being oppres- 
 sed. 
 
 Sir, the amendment offered by my honorable friend from Culpeper, is a scheme for 
 balancing the various interests of the Commonwealth with exact and equal justice — 
 not deprmng numbers of their due weight, for it allows them full representation — yet 
 allowing property also that fair, due and just share (;f representation, wliich is essen- 
 tial to its protection and security. It proposes to build up Government on the interests 
 of society, with due reo-ard to the rights both of persons and property ; and to confide 
 power to those whose self-love will forever prevent them from abusing it. If gentle- 
 men prefer the federal number as the basis of representation, I shall l^e content. If 
 they prefer a county representation, founded on any fair principle, respecting peculiar 
 interests, and balancing the powers of Government accordingly — though I am sensible 
 that this will be a more difficult operation — I shall be content. But I must forever 
 contend, that a principle, which, in a Government professedly instituted for the pro- 
 tection and security of property as well as mere personal rights, disclaims all regard to 
 the interests of property, and allows representation to numbers only, is dangerous and 
 vitious, contrary to all the dictates of prudence and justice, and incompatible with 
 the nature of representative Government, its wliolesome operation and all its ends. 
 
 To reconcile us to a scheme so revolting, gentlemen tell us, in the first place, that 
 the question has been settled by precedent — that it is res acl judicata. I said, that to 
 found Government (meaning the tcliole Government,) on nxmibers alone, without re- 
 gard whether the numbers quadrated with the interests of society or not, was a new 
 principle in Virginia, and perhaps unknown in an}' other Government. I did not say, 
 that no part or single branch of a Government had ever been laid on that foundation 
 — I did not say, that no individual had ever maintained the principle — I learned at 
 school, (from Tully, I think.) that there is nothing so absurd which some philosophers 
 have not maintained for truth ; and it might have been added, that there is nothing so 
 unjust, which some politicians have not supported as right. The precedents which 
 are supposed to have settled this question, are the vote of the Staunton Convention 
 in 1815, forsooth, insisting that representation in the Legislature ought to be equahzed 
 on the basis of white population, and the act of 1816, equahzing and arranging the 
 representation in the Senate, upon that principle, after fiill deliberation. But the^prin- 
 ciple was then applied to only one branch of the Legislatxire, and that not the tax- 
 giving branch — and I, for one, shall be content with that principle of representation 
 in the, Senate now — I voted for it yesterday, and will abide by the vote, if gentlemen, 
 on their part, will pay a just regard to the interests of property, in the tax-giving 
 branch, the House of Delegates. Is not the difference wide as the poles asunder, be- 
 tween the two questions, whether there shall be a representation for the interests of 
 property in the House of Delegates, the tax-giving House and, whether property 
 shall be represented in the Senate, which is not the tax-giving House But I do not 
 r^fer to the act of 1816, to repel its influence as a precedent, on the present question 
 — I know to whom I am talking — there is not a man here who will pay the least regard 
 to any such precedent. In another view, tliat transaction gave me a lesson, of which 
 I hope I shall never cease to profit — I remember well every fact connected with its 
 history, its origin, progress, and final consummation — and shall remember it all, to 
 the last day of my life. They demanded the call of a Convention, of those, who, ad- 
 mitting that there were some defects in the Constitution wliich time had developed, 
 (since no work of im.perfect man can be perfect,) and especially the then inequality 
 of representation in the Senate, yet thought that veneration for ancient and tried in- 
 stitutions, and loyalty founded in the lieart rather than in the speculations of reason, 
 were the best supports of Republican Government, and worthy to be preserved at any 
 expense. The demand was addressed to such men as my friend from Norfolk (Mr. 
 Tazewell) who had, like me, fallen into that fatuity of judgment, wliich deems virtu- 
 ous prejudices virtuous principles. To avoid the call of a Convention, the bill for 
 equahzing the representation in the Senate, on the basis of tlie white population, was, 
 in an evil hour, passed — I had no share in it — I thank Heaven for all its mercies, none. 
 They told us, they would be content — that that measure would satisfy all their wishes 
 — that they too, loved the Government which the wisdom of our fathers gave, and 
 with such a representation in the Senate, they would never seek to disturb it more. 
 . And the gentlemaii from Culpeper (Mr. Green) gave warning, that if the claim to 
 
IGO 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 representation in the Senate on tlie basis of white population was conceded, the con- 
 cession would only be the motive to new demands. He has lived to be acknowledged 
 for a prophet even in his own country. So, now, give them their favourite principle 
 of representation in the House of Delegates — and guard property from taxation for 
 any favourite purpose by any effectual guarantee, if such a thing be possible — or at- 
 tempt to secure property, by giving it full representation in the Senate — the moment 
 the new power of the State shall feel any check upon its action, and can no otherwise 
 overcome it, it will raise another clamor for Convention, to cut the knot that cannot 
 be untied. It is as true of the love of power as it is of the love of gold, (>iio pins ha- 
 bet, eo plus cupit. Talk of power resting content while any power remains to be ac- 
 quired — talk of it to any green, very green person — but for the love of mercy, mock 
 us no more, by reminding us of the history of that Senatorial bill. As to the bill of 
 the last session for organizing this body on the basis of the Congressional districts, it 
 is not worth while to explain the way in which it was lost — the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle is best able to do it. 
 
 The next argument for the basis of white population exclusively, is deduced from 
 the natural rights of man. I think the genius of the gentleman from Northampton 
 (Mr. Upshur) has laid a spell on that doctrine, as one fit for any practical use. We 
 are employed in forming a Government for civilized man, not for a horde of savao-es 
 just emerging from an imaginary state of nature. If the latter was our purpose, I 
 doubt whether we or they would think at all about their natural rights. Their politi- 
 cal destiny would be determined by circumstances, which political philosophy would 
 be little fitted to control. I cannot conceive any natural right of man contra-distin- 
 guished from social Conventional right — The very word right is a word of relation, 
 and implies some society. While Robinson Crusoe was alone in his Island, what 
 were his rights ? To catch the goats and tame them — to kill their kids and eat them. 
 When Friday came, how did they regulate their natural rights? He saved Friday's 
 life — he gave him bread — and Friday became his servant. And that, I believe, was 
 about as republican a Government as any men thus fortuitously brought together, 
 would ever form — the stror.ger would be master. By the way, I think Defoe's a bet- 
 ter book on the science of Government, than Cocker's Arithmetic or Pike's either. 
 But gentlemen may have just what system of natural rights they like best — provided 
 they v.'ill only grant me, that, either by natural law, or Conventional law, or munici- 
 pal law, or \he, jus gentium — aat quocunque alio nomine vocatur — every man is entitled 
 to the property he lias earned by his own labor and to that which his parents earned 
 and transmitted to him by inheritance— ^and that what is hi& property is his to give, 
 and his to dispose of. These, I hope, are reasonable postulates : and I am much mis- 
 taken if they do not lead, by fair induction, to the utter overthrow of the resolution 
 of the Legislative Committee, and to the establishment of the proposed amend- 
 ment on irrefragable grounds. 
 
 Then gentlemen urge our own Bill of Rights upon us, as perfectly conclusive — ■ 
 and to the amazement of some and the amusement of others of this Committee, gen- 
 tlemen, founding their whole argument on the Bill of Rights, deny the competency 
 of the Convention of '76 — and, by consequence, one would think, the authority of 
 the Bill of Rights. Mr. Jefferson was the first person that brought this charge of u- 
 surpation against that Convention — and (so important are great men's errors) tho' with 
 him it seemed rather matter of curious speculation only, yet ever since, when our old • 
 Constitution has been assailed for its supposed defects, this opinion of Mr. Jefferson 
 has been referred to as conclusive authority. I had implicit faith in the opinion my- 
 self when I was at College — how long after I cannot say, not being able to fix the 
 date when my mind came to maturity. At what period Mr. Jefferson discovered the 
 incompetency of the Convention of '76, it were vain to conjecture — but I apprehend, 
 it was not during the session of that bod}^ — for I know that Mr. J, himself pre- 
 pared a Constitution for Virginia, and sent it to Williamsburg that it might be pro- 
 posed to the Convention, during the session, from which the preamble and nothing 
 more, was taken and prefixed to the present Constitution. Any one may see, at a 
 glance, that that preamble was written by the author of the Declaration of Indepen- 
 dence. I have seen the projet of the Constitution, which Mr. J. offered, in the coun- 
 cil chamber, in his own hand writing, tho' it cannot now be found — and T have since 
 cursed my folly that I neglected to take a copy of it, in order to compare Mr. J's de- 
 mocracy of that day, with George Mason's practical republicanism. But, Sir, the va- 
 lidity of the Constitution, as such, has been maintained by Pendleton, Wythe, Roane, 
 by the whole Commonwealth for fifty-four years. If the Convention of '76 was in- 
 competent to that act, it was incompetent also to abolish the Colonial Government, 
 and that yet remains in force, in like manner as the Colonial form of Government of 
 Connecticut was retained for years ; and all the objections to the authority of our 
 Convention of '76, might be urged with equal force, against all the Constitutions es- 
 tablished in our sister States during the revolution. It is said the existing Constitu- 
 tion is not a lawful Government, because it was ordained by the representatives of the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 161 
 
 freeholders only, and never submitted to the great body of the people. To whom is 
 it intended, that OM/* amended or new Constitution shall be submitted? To those, I 
 presume, to whom we shall allow the right of suffrage — that is, if gentlemen succeed 
 according to their wishes in that particular, to lease-holders, house-keepers and tax- 
 payers, as well as freeholders. It is a remarkable truth, in the natural history of man 
 in this country, that the sons are invariably wiser than their fathers, such is the march 
 of mind 1 Our sons may allege, hereafter, that our acts never had the sanction of the 
 people — why did we exclude women and children ? Why minors, tho' enrolled iu 
 the militia, and bomid to bear arras Why paupers, whose^onh- sin is poverty ? Nay, 
 why the felons in the Penitentiary r All are part of the sfreat bodv of the people. 
 Sir, if we shall acknowledge, that we are at this moment in a state of nature ; that 
 men have resumed their natural rights, and are entitled to insist on them to the ut- 
 termost; we may live to see the day. when it will be claimed as matter of right, that 
 the keeper of the Penitentiary shall isring his prisoners to tli« polls. 
 
 iVow, as to the Bill of Pi,ights — The first article declares, that " all men are by na- 
 ture equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when 
 they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their 
 posterity ; namely, the enjoj'ment of hfe and liberty, with the means of acquiring 
 and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." — The ar- 
 ticle enumerates property as equally deaj and sacred with life and liberty, and as the 
 principal means of happiness and' safety — and with good reason — for, in order to live 
 free and happy it is necessary that we live, and property is necessary to sustain life, 
 and just as necessary to maintain liberty. Yet property is to be wholly disregarded 
 in our fundamental institutions 1 — But. not to repeat what has been better said by 
 others, I shall desire the committee to remember, that this article is expressed in the 
 language of Locke's theory of government, then familiarly known ; and that_ Locke,, 
 no more than the Convention of '76, understood the proposition in the broad sense 
 now ascribed to it. Locke has had a singular fate. He was a zealous advocate of 
 mixed monarch}' — liis Essay on Government was written to maintain the throne of 
 William and Mary — his notions of practical Government, are exhibited in the Con- 
 stitution he made for North Carolina, with its caciques and land-graves : 3-et, from his: 
 book, have been deduced the wildest democracy, and demented French jacobinism. 
 He exploded the rioht divine of Kings — he showed that all Government is of human 
 institution ; yet he is supposed to have established the divine right of democracy. So,, 
 he was a pious Christian of the Church of England — of the low Church, however — > 
 yet, from his chapter on innate ideas, in his Essay on the Human Understanding, infi- 
 dels have deduced the doctrines of materialism, infidelity and atheism. The truth is, 
 that there is no proposition in ethics or politics, however "true when duly measured aird 
 applied, which, if pushed to extremes, will not lead to absurdity or vice. It does not 
 follow, that, because all men are born equal, and have equal rights to hfe, liberty, and 
 the property they can acquire by honest industry, therefore, all men may rightly 
 claun, in an established society, equal political powers — especially, equal power to 
 dispose of the property of others. 
 
 It is very remarkable. Sir, that both the gentlemen from Frederick. (jNIr. Cooke and 
 Mr. Powell,) in founding the argument, they endeavoured to deduce from the third 
 article of the Bill of Rights, read to the Committee, only the first and third senten- 
 ces of it, which seem to suit their purposes, and oni'tted the intermediate sentence, so 
 material to the just understanding of the doctrine the article inculcates, and so oppo- 
 site to the conclusions at which they were aiming. I acquit them of all wilful un- 
 fairness — the respect I bear them, would not endure any suspicion of the kind — but 
 the omission is a striking instance, how prone are the minds of men, studiously bent 
 on maintaining a favorite point, to overlook, rather tlian to meet,, difficulties, however 
 obvious. The whole article reads, — That Government is. or ought to be, instituted 
 for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community. — 
 Of all the various modes and forms of Government, that is best, which is capable cf 
 producing; the greatest deoree of happiness and safety, and is most efiectualh' secured 
 against the dangers of mal-administration — and when any Government shall be found 
 inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the-Commonwealth hath an 
 indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such 
 manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal." — Frtmi the first sen- 
 tence, the gentlemen deduced the perfect equality of men in a social state — not as to 
 civil rights only, but political powers ; emd from the last, the absolute despotic right 
 of a bare majority, to change the fundamental laws, and to assume to themselves un- 
 der a new form o"f polity, the sovereign power to govern without limitation or check. 
 Read the whole article, and it will be seen, thafit means to declare, that when the 
 existing Government fails to produce happiness and safety ; fails to protect property 
 as well as liberty, which in the first article are recognized, as the means of happiness 
 and safet}- ; and appears not to be effectually secured against the dangers of mal-ad- 
 ministration : then, and not till then, the majority has the ricrht to reform, alter or 
 
 21 
 
162 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 abolish it, and to substitute another, better calculated to produce happiness and safety ; 
 better suited to secure life, liberty, a.nd property without which neither life nor liberty 
 can be enjoyed or maintained ; and more effectually secured agaisst the dangers of 
 mal-administration. But so long as the established Governmeni: answers those cardi- 
 nal purposes of its institution, the majority may, indeed, have the physical poicer, but 
 it can have no morid right, to overturn it. Now, we have the authority of the vene- 
 rable gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Monroe) that under our present Govern- 
 ment, in tlie course of fifty-four years, there has been no wrong, no oppression — 
 Again : the sentence which the gentlemen overlooked, distinctly affirms the great 
 principle for which we are so earnestly contending, that it behoves men engaged in 
 framing a Government, to establish a just and wise Government — not a Government 
 founded on theoretical principles, and squared according to the exact model of the 
 natural rights of man, which, being necessarily the same in all societies of mankind, 
 would, if followed, eventuate every where in the same form of civil polity — but a 
 just and wise Government, adapted to the peculiar circumstances of the people for 
 whom it is intended. No Government can be just, or wise, or safe, which, either 
 wholly or in any material degree, gives one portion of the people the principal power 
 of taxation, and imposes on the other, the principal duty of contribution — no Govern- 
 ment can produce the greatest degree of happiness and safety, or fail to destroy them, 
 which does not provide the most jealous security for property, which does not wed' 
 power to pro])erty, which disclaims, in the first principle of its organization, all re- 
 gard to property. No Government can be just, or, wise, or safe for Virginia, which 
 shall place the property of the East in the power and at the disposal of the West. 
 Whenever they shall take away the little earnings of my labour, or any part of them 
 — whene vex they shall seize the bread I earn for my children — for their own local pur- 
 poses — against my consent, and the consent of all those who represent my interests — 
 and I shall be bound to submit to such exaction, without means of redress; I shall be 
 obliged to them, sincerely obliged to them, to take away my life too; I shall not desire 
 to survive an hour. To return to the sentence in the Bill of Rights, which the gen- 
 tlemen from Frederick overlooked; it was only by that omission, that they made 
 George Mason's Bill of Rights pronounce sentence of condemnation upon George 
 Mason's Constitution ; condemned him out of his own mouth, of violating those 
 sacred rights of man which he acknowledged and declared. So it happened to Za- 
 dig — I allude to Voltaire's tale — a fragment of paper was found, containing these 
 verses in his hand-writing — 
 
 . ■ . . . By crimes of deepest dye, 
 
 •• . , ' He's of the throne possessed,, 
 
 , ' 'Gainst Peace and Liberty, 
 
 , ) ■ An enemy professed. ^ 
 
 And these lines were construed into a seditious and traitorous libel against the reign- 
 ing Prince ; and the unhappy author was doomed to death. But, as they were lead- 
 ing him to execution, a parrot flew to the place, with another fragment which saved 
 his life ; for it exactly fitted the former, and on it were written other words, which 
 entirely changed the complexion of the supposed libel. The whole read thus — 
 
 By crimes of deepest dye, -we've seen the earth made hell ; 
 He's of the throne possessed, who all tlieir power can quell — 
 'Gainst peace and liberty, love only wages war — 
 An enemy professed — and one we well may fear.* 
 
 The examples of our sister States, who are supposed to have framed their Govern- 
 ments upon the principle recommended by the Legislative Committee, has been as 
 earnestly pressed upon vts, as if it were true, that they have in fact set us any such ex- 
 amples, and certain, that what is suitable to their condition is also suitible to ours. Of 
 the six New England States, it will be found, on an examination of their institutions, 
 that not one of them has in fact adopted any such principle ; which is remarkable 
 enough, considering their dense and homogenious population, their com.paratively 
 small territory, and the consequent small diversity of their interests. The neto Con- 
 stitution of New York (whether it be an amended (me or no, I shall not presume to- say) 
 professes to adopt the principle now recommended to us, and yet departs from it, in 
 allowing each county, no matter how few its population, at least one vote; a very ma- 
 terial modification: and, supposing the city of New York shall continue to grow for a 
 few years longer, as it has done for a few years past, if tlie State of New York do not 
 
 * The English lines are doggrel, nor do we know where Mr. Leigh found the translation. The origi- 
 nal French verses are quite pretty : 
 
 Par les plus grand forfaits j'ai vu troubler la terre j 
 Sur la trone aftermi le roi sait tout dompter — 
 Dans la publique paix I'amour seul fait la guerre j 
 C'est le seul ennemi qui soit a redoubter. 
 
DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 163 
 
 rue the day it gave the City such excess of representation, out of mere respect to 
 theoretical, and contempt of practical equality, I shall abandon all pretensions to poli- 
 tical foresight. The Constitution of New Jersey gives each county an equal repre- 
 E-entation, so does that of Delaware. In Pennsylvania, the representation is appor- 
 tioned according to the taxable inhabitants : and every county is allowed at least one. 
 When the Constitutions of the North Western States were formed, their population 
 was small, and all free, and there was no diversity of interests : and when those of the 
 South Western States were formed, their population was small too, and they were all 
 planters and slave-holders, so that they had no diversity of interests, which it was ne- 
 cessary to balance, in order to secure. N^)rtii Carolina and Maryland are in a simi- 
 lar situation with us — and tlie Constitutions of both give to each county an equal re- 
 presentation. Suppose Maryland should be seduced, instead of being warned and 
 deterred, by our example, and should be unwise enough to call a Convention to 
 amend her Constitution, and to equalize her representation: does any man suppose 
 her people will be weak enough, in deference to the rights of man, to give Baltimore 
 a representation in proportion to its free white population, and thus, in elfect, to con- 
 stitute that city mistress of the State Baltimore wouM have one-fifth of the whole 
 representation j and, acting in mass, would almost invariably prevail over the rest, 
 since the rest would be weakened b}' division. South Carolina, finding herself in 
 circumstances similar to ours, though the diversity of interests is by no means so 
 great there as here, has adopted that very compound basis of population and taxation, 
 which the amendment of my friend from Culpeper proposes; and Georgia has adopt- 
 ed the federal number, in apportioning her representation, which comes very nearly 
 to the same tiling. It is wise to respect the institutions of our sister States — to obtain 
 light, to borrow wisdom, to take warning, from any quarter — but, surely, to follow^ tlie 
 examples of those, whose situation is dilferent from ours, and \^ ho v/ere under no ne- 
 cessity to exercise any jealousy of numbers for the safeguard of property- ; and to 
 neglect the example of those, Avhose situation is similar to ours, and who yet had less 
 occasion than we have, to pro^ade such security for the interest of property — tliia 
 would not be to profit by the examples of other States, but to despise them. 
 
 The gentleman from Norfolk (Mr. Taylor) and tlie gentleman from Augusta (Mr. 
 Baldwin) have told us, that, disguise the principle of the compound basis of wliite po- 
 pulation and taxation, as we may, or as we can, it is giving political power to the few 
 over the many — to the wealthy few — to property over persons — and it is aristocracy. 
 Now, I pray you, Sir, turn your attention to the Constitution of the United States, 
 which apportions representation, and direct taxation too, to numbers, ascertained by 
 adding to the free population, three-fitUis of the slaves. And I ask those gentlemen 
 to tell me, whether the}" are or are not zealous, devoted admirers, friends and suppor- 
 ters of the Federal Constitution.^ If they answer no. I have nothing more to say. 
 If they answer yes — as I think they will and rnust — do they consider tliat principle in 
 the Federal Constitution, aristocracy in disguise ? .Do they approve aristocracy in the 
 Federal Constitution, and only abhor and abominate it in the State Government.' Is 
 it anti-republican in the one, to give property a representation for its security, and 
 perfectly republican to give propert}- the same kind of security in the other.' What 
 reason can ingenuity assign for the adoption of such a principle in either, which ia 
 not equally applicable to botli t Sir, to charge the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Culpeper with aristocracy , is out of the question — the amendment only proposes to 
 provide effectual profecf/o7i for the interest of property, by placing the care of tliem in 
 the hands of those to whom tliey belong, nor are its friends to be deterred from de- 
 manding a just security for it, such as the Federal Constitution intended to provide, 
 by any anathemas against the principle as aristocratical. 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Norfolk, rose to explain. He said he had never uttered any anathe- 
 ma against any gentleman. He never entertained the sentiment, and for that reason 
 could not express it. He begged leave to state that he had offered his sentiments to 
 the committee on every occasion, as the gentleman from Chesterfield said he would 
 do. He would soften nothing — he would mitigate nothing, but would express the 
 sincere conviction of his heart, and would conceal nothing he had said. He would 
 not attribute improper motives to any gentleman, but he had to repeat, that the prin- 
 ciples which the gentleman sought, honestly, no doubt, to introduce, were in his judg- 
 ment inimical to all he was taught to respect — to all our free and equal institutions — = 
 and at any hazard 
 
 Mr. Leigh. Is it merely an explanation tlie gentleman is going to offer 
 
 Mr. Taylor. Yes : he disclaimed any intention of imputing improper motives to 
 gentlemen. 
 
 Mr. Leigh. I understood the gentleman correctly. He imputed aristocracy to the 
 amendment we are insisting on. not to the friends of the amendment. I did not im- 
 derstand him to impeach our motives ; and I assure him I do not question Ms, or those 
 of any other gentleman. Tliis is a vital question ; and we must aUbe indulged witlj 
 perfect freedom i:n debate. 
 
164 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Sir, we the people of the East demand of our fellow-citizens of the West, the^same 
 principle of representation for the security of our property, which the Southern States 
 demanded of the Northern, and these conceded, in framing the Federal Government. 
 Look to the experience of the Federal Government; and it will be found, that the 
 representation apportioned to the Southern States has not been more than adequate 
 to the security of their interests — no, not adequate. A gigantic system of protecting 
 duties is proposed — the Southern States in vain exclaim against its partial and op- 
 pressive operation — in vain deprecate, remonstrate, struggle — a bare majority hesitates 
 not to impose the tariff. Of the constitutionality of that system of measures — of its 
 policy considered by itself, with a view to political economy- — I shall give no opinion 
 now : all 1 have to say, is, that in a Government constituted like ours, it never can be 
 wise to persist in any system of measures, against which a large portion of the nation, 
 though it be a minority, separated from the rest by geographical and political divisions, 
 and by political interests too, so far as the proposed measures are concerned, raises its 
 united voice. In my poor opinion, every commercial operation of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, since I attained to manhood, has been detrimental to the Southern, Atlantic, 
 slave-holding, planting States. In 1800, we had a great West India and a flourishing 
 European trade — We imported for ourselves, and for a good part of iNorth Carolina, 
 perhaps of Tennessee — where is all that trade now.? annihilated. — Where is the capi- 
 tal which carried it on gone. Sir, we have not an adequate representation in the 
 Federal Government. And as to that which we have, I have heard one gentleman 
 doubt the wisdom and justice of the principle which gave it to us — the gentleman 
 from Albemarle. [Mr. Gordon explained — he thought he had said, that wise states- 
 men might doubt the wisdom of that principle of representation.] If the gentleman 
 does not doubt himself, I have only to ask his attention to another consideration. Sup- 
 pose the Legislature of this State reformed and based upon white population ; the 
 time comes for making a new apportionment of our representation in Congress j the 
 West insists, that that too shall be apportioned according to white population ; the 
 Loudoun district joins the West, as it does now; and Albemarle, in its zeal for the 
 rights of man, forgets her old love and abandons State Rights — then shall we see 
 Virginia, like Kentucky, hitched to the car of the Federal Government, for Internal 
 Improvement and protecting duties. 
 
 Mr. Leigh, being fatigued, here gave the floor to Mr. Powell. 
 
 On the motion of Mr. Powell, who expressed a wish that tlse Committee would 
 rise, in order to allow the gentleman from Chesterfield another day to conclude his re- 
 marks, the Committee rose and reported progress. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned till to-morrow at 11 o'clock. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, November 4, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by tlie Right 
 Rev. Bishop Moore of the Protestant Episcopal Church. 
 
 The. House having again resolved itself into a Committee of the; Whole, Mr. 
 Stanard in the Chair, and the question still being on the report of the Legislative 
 Committee, as proposed to be amended by Mr. Green, by substituting for white po- 
 pulation exclusively, white population and taxation combined, 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, resumed. — Mr. Chairman, I yesterday considered the 
 examples of our sister States, and of the Constitution of the United States, so far as. 
 they have any bearing on the proposition of the Legislative Committee, and on the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Culpeper, with a view to shew, that representa- 
 tion based on taxation and population combined, — and representation of persons and 
 property, and of slaves as one or the other — were not, in the general sense of Ame- 
 rica, contrary to the principles of Republican Government, or at all obnoxious to the 
 imputation of aristocracy. Gentlemen may think it strange, that I should take any 
 pains to clear our proposition of that imputation. But, I have lived long enough to 
 know, that words are things, and potent things too— and that if an odious epithet can 
 be fixed on any proposition or measure, that will suffice to enlist thousands against 
 it, and in the end, generally, to damn it forever. In truth, the question we are con- 
 sidering, is a question of State policy, unaffected by any theories, democratic, repub- 
 lican, or aristocratic — it is simply this : which scheme of representation otight we to 
 adopt for the House of Delegates — that reported by the Legislative Committee, or 
 that proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper .'' Which is the more politic, wise and 
 just, having regard to all circumstances, and to the rights and interests of each and 
 every part of the Commonwealth 
 
 The Committee must pardon me, if I recur, for a brief space, to that provision of 
 the Federal Constitution, commonly called the Federal number. Its history is some-^ 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOX, 
 
 165 
 
 what curious. Originally, under the articles of confederation, each State was to coTi" 
 tribute quotas in proportion to the assessed value of its landed property ; but that 
 principle beino- deemed inconvenient in practice, it was thought best to substitute a 
 principle of contribution, apportioned to the population of the several States. In the 
 discussion of this proposition— part of the debate has recently been pubhshed — the 
 Northern States insisted, that slaves were ■persons, and that we ought to contribute in 
 proportion to our whole population, bond and free ; and the Southern States contended, 
 that they were property, and ought not to be taken into the estimate of population, in 
 setthng the rate of contribution ; each party maintaining that side of the question, on 
 which, in that aspect of it, their interests lay. No wonder I all men do so — always 
 have done, — and ever wiU do so. It was not till 1783, that Congress agreed to pro- 
 pose an amendment, by which the States were to contribute in proportion to their 
 population, to be ascertained by adding to their free citizens three-fifths of their 
 slaves. Whether or no this amendment was ratified by the States, I do not certainly 
 know ) but this was the origin of the Federal number. I have had recourse in vain, 
 to every source of information accessible to me. to ascertain how^ that precise propor- 
 tion of the slaves, three-ffihs, came to be adopted — what mode or principle of esti- 
 mate led to it. Some reason' for it, there must have been — and it is remarkable, that 
 if the Federal number be taken as the basis of representation, any where I believe, 
 certainly in Virginia, it will give a result pretty nearly the same as the combined basis 
 of white population and taxation — in Virginia, tire difference, in a House of one 
 hundred and twenty, would not be more thari one delegate, to an}^ section (speaking 
 in modish phrase) or division of the State, divide it as you will, by lines East and 
 West, or North and South. The Federal Convention of 1787 had, for the first time, 
 to arrange a representation of the people in Congress. The Statesmen of the North 
 and South now, doubtless, changed sides with their interests: in the view of the 
 former J slaves were now property ; in the view of the latter, they were persons. 
 However, they made a compromise, and agreed on the same Federal number which 
 had been proposed in 1783. 
 
 It is contended that there is no connexion between representation and taxation 
 that representation can only be of persons ; that property has no claim to representa- 
 tion ; that slaves are mere property, for which, therefore, we are entitled to no re- 
 presentation — and it has been gravely said, that the provision of the Federal nuviber- 
 iii the Constitution of the United States does not in fact, and was not intended hy 
 its founders to oppugn any of these propositions. On what ground, then, do gentle- 
 men imagine, that the basis of the Federal number was adopted They say, it was 
 a compromise. And how far does that carry them in the argument ? The question 
 "stni recurs, what was the ground of compromise ? and what were the interests com- 
 promised .'' The Constitution provides that representation and direct taxation sheill 
 both be apportioned to the same ratio, the Federal number; that is, that representa- 
 tion and taxation shall be proportioned each to the other. And, Sir, I shall affirm,, 
 and that without fear of contradiction after the proofs I shall adduce, that tliis provi- 
 sioii was adopted and defended on the grounds, that there ought to be the same riile 
 for representation as for contribution^ — tliat slaves are persons as well as property — 
 and that whether persons or propert}^, or of a mixed character partaking of both, the . 
 South was entitled to representation for them. 
 
 Sir, I refer the Committee to the 54th number of The Federahst (I know not who 
 was the author of it*) in which this provision of the Constitution of the United States 
 is discussed, and in which after maintaining that the Southern States rightly claimed 
 a representation for their slaves as persons, the author proceeds — " It is agreed on all 
 sides, ^ that numbers,' (meaning gross numbers, bond and free) are the best scale of 
 wealth, as they are the only proper scale of representation. — Would the Convention 
 have been impartial or consistent, if they had rejected the slaves from the list of in- 
 habitants when the shares of representation were to be calculated, and inserted them 
 on the lists when the tariff of contributions was to be adjusted.' CouJd it be reason- 
 ably expected, that the Southern States would concur in a system, which considered 
 their slaves in some degree as men when burdens were to be imposed, but refused to 
 consider them in the same light when advantages were to be conferred." — In the se- 
 quel of the same letter, it is said: '-After all, may not another ground be taken, on 
 which this article of the Constitution may admit of a still more ready defence ? We 
 have liitherto proceeded on the idea, that representation related to persons only, and 
 not at all to property. But is this a just idea.-* Government is instituted, not less for 
 the protection of the property, than of the persons, of individuals. The one, there- 
 fore, as well as the other, may be considered as represented by those who are charged 
 with the Government. Upon this principle it is, that, in several of the States, and 
 particularly in the State of New-York, one branch of the Government is intended 
 more especially to be the guardian of property, and is accordingly elected by that part 
 
 * Jlr. 3Iadison afterw-ards avowed in his place, tkat he was. 
 
166 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of society, which is most interested in this object of Government. In the Federal 
 Constitution, this pohcy does not prevail. The rights of property are committed to 
 the same hands with the personal rights. Soxne attention therefore, ought to be paid 
 to property in the choice of those hands." 
 
 Again, Sir — I presume it will be agreed, that no man better understood the reasons 
 on which the various provisions of the Federal Constitution were grounded, than Gene- 
 ral Hamilton. Allow me, then, to refer the Committee to what he said, in the Con- 
 vention of New- York which ratified the Constitution, on the subject of this federal 
 number — " The first thing objected to (said he) is that clause which allows a represen- 
 tation for three-fiflhs of the negToes. — Much has been said of the impropriety of re- 
 presenting men who have no will of their own. Whether this be reasoning or decla- 
 mation, I will not presume to say. It is the unfortunate situation of the Southern 
 States, to have a great part of their population, as well as property, in blacks. The 
 regulation complained of was one result of the spirit of accommodation which govern- 
 ed the Convention; and without this indulgence no union could possibly have been 
 formed. But, Sir, considering some peculiar advantages we derive from them, it is 
 entirely just that they should be gratified. The Southern States possess certain sta- 
 ples, tobacco, rice, indigo, &c. which must be capital objects in treaties of commerce 
 with foreign nations, and the advantage which they necessarily procure in these 
 treaties, will be felt throughout all the States. But the justice of this plan will ap- 
 pear in another view — The best writers on Government have held, that representation 
 slwuld be compounded of persons and property. — This rule has been adopted as far as it 
 could be in New- York. — It will, however, by no means be admitted, that slaves are 
 considered altogether as property. They are men, though degraded to the condition 
 of slavery. They are persons known to the municipal laws of the States which they 
 inhabit, as well as to the laws of nature. But representation and taxation go together ; 
 and one uniform ride ought to apply to both. Would it be just to compute slaves 
 in the assessment of taxes, and discard them from the estimate in the apportionment 
 of representatives.'* Would it be just to impose a singular burden, without confer- 
 ring some adequate advantage.? — Another circumstance ought to be considered. The 
 rule we have been speaking of, is a general rule, and applies to all the States. Now, 
 you have a great number of j^eople in your State, which are not represented at all, and 
 nave no voice in your Government: these will be included in the enumeration^ — not 
 two-fifths — nor three-fifths — but the whole. This proves, that the advantages of the 
 plan are not confined to the Southern States, but extend to every part of the Union." 
 — You see, Sir, that General Hamilton thought, that the Southern States had as just 
 a claim to representation for their slave labour, as the Northern States for their free 
 white labour — and he said this to the people of New- York, almost all of whose day- 
 labourers were free white men. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, we have been told by several gentlemen, and particularly by the 
 gentleman from Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge,) that if the amendment proposing the com- 
 pound basis of white population and taxation prevail, which he regards as a simple 
 claim for a representation of our slaves, the effect will be, to make the people of the 
 West the slaves of the people of the East, to the end of time. If this was intended 
 to excite the angry feelings of the West, it was surely well adapted to its purpose. 
 But, if it was meant for argument, it exhibited a strange forgetfulness of the scheme re- 
 ported by the Legislative Committee itself, and that in a particular, concerning which, 
 there has been very little, if any diversity of opinion. The argument is founded, first, 
 on the fact, that, at this time, the cis-montane country not only pays a far greater 
 amount of revenue, but contains also the majority of white population, which, com- 
 bined, must give us a majority of Delegates; and then, on the supposition, that the ap- 
 portionment of the representation now to be made, is to be fixed and unchangeable. 
 And yet, the same gentleman tells us, he has no doubt, that in thirty years, the majo- 
 rity of white population will be found on the West side of the Alleghany, let alone 
 the Valley — and the Auditor's estimate informs us, that the cis-montane white popu- 
 lation, which in 1820 was greater than that on the West of the Blue Ridge by 94,000, 
 exceeds it now by only 43,000 — and the gentleman must know, that it is a part of 
 every scheme that has been suggested, and part of the report of the Legislative Com- 
 mittee, that there shall be new enumerations of the people, and new assessments of 
 taxable property, and new apportionments of the representation, in 1835, and again 
 in 1845, and afterwards once in every twenty years at least. — Now, as the white popu- 
 lation increases in the West in a much greater ratio than in the East, the proportion 
 of Western representation will increase in virtue of that element of tlie compound ba- 
 sis; and, as their population increases, their lands must be enhanced in value, all their 
 taxable property must be augmented, and the revenue they pay into the Treasury 
 must also increase, and they will gain a greater share of the representation in virtue 
 of that element of the compound basis also— unless, indeed, it be supposed that, though 
 their population increase and their wealth too, ever so much, they ought never to con- 
 tribute a greater proportional amount than they now do, and that the taxation on them 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 167 
 
 ©uo-ht to be reduced, from time to time, so as to keep their contribtations at the present 
 reduced amount. The compound ratio, therefore, will work gradually, to augment 
 their share of representation, both "vrays: and, in due time, to give them a greater 
 share of it than us. I have not calculated the time which it will take, under the ope- 
 ration of the compound ratio, to transfer the balance of power to the West, nor am I 
 very competent to the task; but if the gentleman from Brooke will ascertain the date 
 when the majority of white population will be found on the West side of the Allegha- 
 ny, I can venture to assure iiimthat the tramontane country, upon our own plan, will, 
 before that time comes, have the majority in the House of Delegates — and then. Sir, 
 I am content that they shall have it. They will acquire it gradually, and as they ac- 
 quire^ learn to use it. with justice axid moderation. They will not acquire it. till they 
 learn to feel the weight of the crown they are destined to bear — and that feeling will 
 chasten their love of power. They will not acquire it, till they shall contribute out 
 of their pockets, under any scheme of uniform taxation, such a proportion of the re- 
 venue, as will o^ive them a substantial community of interest with us in the imposition 
 of taxes, if not'in the appropriation of revenue. They can only acquire it, by giving 
 us that bond with surety, which my friend from Fauquier pir. Scott) demanded — we 
 shall have a security in their self-love, in their own interest, that they will not abuse 
 their pov,-er. Sir. I have no unreasonable jealousy or distrust of them. Indeed, I 
 have always known, that upon the principles of the existing Constitution, the balance 
 of power would in time, and in no long time, be transferred to the West. Why, then^ 
 I shall be asked, have I been so strenuous a defender of our old institutions? Because, 
 in preserving' ikem. I should have preserved a great deal, apart from this, this question 
 of the balance of power, which I dearly prize — because in preserving them, I should 
 have avoided this very contest, which, terminate, as it may, is a sore evil in itself—- 
 because I should have preserved that sentiment of veneration for constituted authori- 
 ty, which is now forever lost, which gave sufficient moral force to execute the laws, 
 and thus dispensed with the exertion of the strong arm of Government; for when- 
 ever physical force becomes necessary, the spirit of Republican Government must 
 cease to direct the system, and even the empty form must soon perish. And now let 
 me ask the gentlemen of the West, why are they so urgent for the immediate posses- 
 sion of power.' for this sudden, abrupt transfer of it to their hands ? when they sure- 
 ly ought to know,, that it is unpossible for us to make the transfer, without giving with 
 it unlimited dominion over our property — without giving them power to take from the 
 poor man of the East the fruits of his industry, and the bread from the mouths of his 
 children. It is that rage for Internal Improvement — for wherever I see that passion, 
 there I find the passion for reform, and thence I hear those scoffings at every senti- 
 ment of respect and veneration for the institutions our wise, prudent and virtuous an- 
 cestors bequeathed to us. 
 
 We have been told. Sir, that we have no dangers to apprehend from an immediate 
 transfer of power to the West over the East — power to tax our property according to 
 their ideas of justice, and to appropriate the revenue we are to pay, according to their 
 views of policy ; that we have ample security in the honesty of our western bre- 
 thren : that we are mistaken in supposing, that self-lote is the great spring of human 
 actions ; that the moral sense of mankind is sufficient to resist its promptings, and 
 subdue its influence ; that "self-love and social are the same." I know, that there 
 are individual men — few, however — who, upon some occasions — very unfrequent — 
 can disobey the dictates of self-love, and disregard their own interests, at the call of 
 sympathy for other individuals, friendship, affection and gratitude. But, in the his- 
 tory of the human kind, of all nations and of all ages, from the earhest tradition to 
 our own times and country, there has never been a single instance of any society of 
 men, of men acting in masses great or small, who forgot self-interest, or what they 
 supposed to be so, for a moment. It was not generosity, which prompted France to 
 assist us in our revolutionary struggle — it was self-love — mistaken self-love, in mj 
 opinion — ^but stiU sheer self-love. It is not generosity, which has excited our so ear- 
 nest wish for the independence of the South American States of Old Spain — it is our 
 self-love — the desire to profit by her trade — mistaken self-love again, I fear ; for we 
 shall probably lose by their rivalry more than we shall gain by tlieir custom. It is 
 self-love alone that recommends the system of protecting duties — the Americem sys- 
 tem — ^to our fellow-citizens of the Northern States ; and it is self-love which incites 
 the South to such strenuous opposition. It is self-love, which now divides this Con- 
 vention, on this very question. 
 
 The moral sense and tlie honesty of the people of the West ! I pray gentlemen to 
 Tinderstand me — they are not to suspect me of the nonsense and folly of imputing to 
 them any peculiar vice of disposition. I entertain no such opinion of the West or of 
 the North — if I did, I would give my vote for separation this moment. I have mark- 
 ed the gro^^-th of native talent, of inteUectual culture, of moral worth, in the West — 
 I have watched young merit there, in its dawning, in its rise and its meridian — with 
 hearty good will and sincere delight ; and saying^this, I think I may safely vouch any 
 
1G8 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 gentleman of the West, who knows me, for my witness. I admit, that the people of 
 the West are as honest as tiiose of the East ; and I would refuse them no confidence 
 which I would ask them to repose in us. And then T tell them, plainly, that, in Iny 
 opinion, they, nor any body of men on earth, are honest enough to be entrusted with 
 dominion over the property of others, uncontrolled by their own community of in- 
 terest in that property, and in the disposition of it. This is the very dominion, which 
 the gentlemen of the West are so importunately asking us to concede to them. Yes, 
 Sir, they ask us to put our all into common stock with tliem, and then confide in the 
 unerring dictates of their moral sense, that the}^ will carve no unjust share for them- 
 selves — they ask us to put three dollars of our money into the treasury, for every dol- 
 lar which they shall contribute of their own, and trust them to make a just, fair and 
 impartial application of it for the common weal. This is the exact state of the case. 
 The man, who, in private life, should accede to such a proposal, would be regarded 
 as a simpleton — a natural fool — and the law would appoint a guardian to take care of 
 his f><;rson and estate. Can the gentlemen of the West flatter themselves, that their 
 moral sense is, so strong, that it will always be proof against continual temptation? 
 " Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." — So our Saviour taught us to 
 pray — and, in my sense of the prayer, the delivery from evil depends on the exemption 
 from temptation. 
 
 Sir, I fear we are in the habit of counting too much upon the purity and virtue of 
 our society, as a permanent security against all political evils. I told the committee 
 yesterday, that I intended to open my whole mind without reserve — This is the last 
 scene of my political life ; before I came here I weeded all the hopes of ambition 
 from my heart ; and I now declare my conscientious belief, unpopular as the avowal 
 of it may be, that from the beginning of time, never any nation made a more rapid 
 progress in corruption, than have these United States during the last quarter of a 
 century. I beg leave to mention a few the most obvious of many symptoms. Even in 
 this Good Old Dominion, for one place-hunter that was to be seen when I first grew 
 up to manhood, there are ten now — Yes, the number is tenfold at the least. They 
 swarm in the country and in the city — they infest our public places — they invade our" 
 privacy, and disturb the quiet of their industrious neighbours Vvith their solicitations. 
 They are themselves marketable commodities ; they put up their principles, their 
 opinions, their votes, at auction to the highest bidder, setting the highest value upon 
 their services, but willing to take any price they can get. Men, hardly fit for a clerk- 
 ship, aspire to embassies; and men, who aspire to embassies, will descend to a clerk- 
 ship — Office ! — office and emolument, high or low. State or Federal ! — any sort of of- 
 fice, which will save them the pain of earning their living by honest industry. We 
 hear a great deal about the corruption of all orders of men in Great Britain — What is 
 it Does any man suppose, that when Sir Robert Walpole said, that every man has 
 Ms price, he was talking of a price to be told out in guineas No — some are to be 
 purchased with honors— some with the power to purchase others — some with the 
 emoluments of place. The case is exactly the same here. — Go to the ant, thou 
 sluggard ; study her ways, and be wise." There is a little white ant in the West In- 
 dies, the pest of the country— lay the smallest lump of sugar on a mahogany table, 
 and in fifteen minutes, there will be hundreds around it — tread upon a lizard in the 
 evening, and the next morning they will present you the cleanest and most perfect 
 skeleton imaginable. So, Sir, the greedy expectants of office are continually on the 
 look-out— let a poor Postmaster or Collector be sick, and they begin to collect their 
 volume of recommendations — let him die, and before his remains are committed to 
 his mother earth, the whole swarm is at Washington. — Then, Sir, look at the daily 
 PresSj which, in this country, is the true exemplar vitoe morumque. Why is it, that 
 upon all political questions — presidential election, or what not — ^the whole argument 
 turns on the single point, which side will get the majority ^ because that is the most 
 effectual argument to carry the majority ; for, tlie party that shall prevail, is to have 
 the disposal of honors, and offices, and emoluments, and partizans are to be excited to 
 exertion, or acquired, only by the hope of reward. There is another class of men, 
 who (I think) have sprung up in Virginia, or rather began to be distinguished as a 
 separate class, within the last fifteen years. They do not regard themselves as apart 
 of the people — they profess themselves the people's servants — the people's friends — the 
 people's men ; meaning nothing more, in plain English, than that they are the men for 
 the people's money. — They have no opinions and no will of their own — whatever the 
 people think, they think — whatever the people desire, they desire — whatever the peo- 
 ple willf ihej are content — and, therefore, whatever of honor or emolument the peo- 
 ple have to bestow, they expect to receive it at their hands. Sir, I am one of the 
 people; and I have noted the ways, and know perfectly how to appreciate the mo- 
 tives and the merits, of these our kind officious friends and servants. In Monar- 
 chies, the King is the fountain of honor and office : In Republics, the people. There 
 are courtiers of the people as well as courtiers of Kings. The motives of both are 
 exactly alike ; their ends the same 3 their conduct \^ different only in mode ; and it is 
 
DEBATES OF THE C ON'VE N'TION. 
 
 169 
 
 equally true of the courtiers of the people, as of the courtiers of Kings, that, exactly 
 in proportion to the contempt they entertain in their hearts, for the persons to -whom 
 their flitteries are addressed, is the extravagance of their adulation. Sir. the last hope 
 of the Republic rests in that class — and, thank Heaven, it yet constitutes the great body 
 of the people — who. possessing the means of subsistence, if improved by honest in- 
 dustry, placed above the temptation of poverty, and exempt from the temptations of 
 prosperity, never so much as dream of the emoluments of office — the honest, hard- 
 working yeomanry of this country, who hitherto have fed, cloathed, protected, and 
 sustained society. But, how long will these pillars of the Republic remain stable and 
 erect, under the mighty weight, with a Government, the first principle of Vv-iiich is, 
 avowedly, to be an utter disregard of the interests and security of property. • 
 
 Gentlemen who support the proposition of the Lecrislative Committee, aware that 
 our apprehensions of danger from the practical operation of the principle are real, and 
 seemingly aware too. thatlhose apprehensions axe not wholly destitute of foundation, 
 have proposed to us a guaranty atrainst any abuse of the power of taxation ; a pro- 
 mise, so solemn, so clear, so strong, so binding on the conscience of the reformed 
 Legislature, that its efficiency cannot be doubted. I have heard of such a guaranty, 
 ever since this question was "first started. It has been my misfortune. Sir, in all dis- 
 cussions concerning the necessitv of reform, and the merits of the reforms proposed in 
 our ancient institutions, not onlv never to convince the reformers on any one point, 
 but hardly ever to succeed in making myself intelligible to them, though I take al- 
 ways the utmost pains to cloathe my thoughts in the plainest words of Anglo-Saxon 
 root that I can find ; and (upon this subject of guarantv, especially) I have ever found 
 great difficulty in comprehending their meaning. What seems to them clear as the 
 noon-dav sun, has been to m}- eyes, mist and tu-ilight, and sometimes utter darkness. 
 Returning from Cumberland last spring, whither I went to present myself to the 
 people as a candidate for a seat in this body — I found at nicrht, in the lower end of 
 Powhatan, a newspaper, in which was a letter, explaining the general views of the 
 writer, on the questions most likely to engage the attention of this Convention ; a 
 gentleman, whose intelligence and virtue I have ever held in the highest respect and 
 esteem, and with whom 1 have been always willing to confer, to put mind to mind 
 fairly, and to abide the result. The letter sugo-ested what he thought a sufficient guar- 
 aatv. With a very painful exertion of the little eye-sight that remains to me — I 
 wish the printer would look to the mending of liis types, instead of mendinDr the 
 Constitution — I succeeded in making out the icords ; but then, to my surprise, I 
 could not understand the meaning of them. Well, Sir, the first reformer I met with, 
 after my return to this town, knowing my particular anxiety on this head, asked me, 
 whether I would not be satisfied vnXh such a guaranty as the letter I had read in 
 Powhatan, proposed. I told hira, I really did not understand it. He did not express 
 in icords, but he looked, a strong doubt of my sincerity. In the evening of the same 
 day, I fell in company with the printer ;. who asked me, generally, what I thought of 
 the letter ; and, the guaranty being uppermost in my mind. I told him I could not 
 understand the passaa;e that related to that knotty subject ;. and that it reminded me 
 of a piece of humour of Swift in his TaJe of a Tub — He states some misty, unintel- 
 hgible. metaphysical question, upon which, he says, he has bestowed much reflection, 
 and having with infinite pains acquired a clear conception of it, he shall proceed to 
 lay the matter open to his readers ; and then follows half a page of asterisks, con- 
 cfudino^ — And this I take to be a clear account of the whole matter." Sir,'" (said 
 rav friend, the printer.) •• I dare say you mean that for jest ; but it is literally true, 
 that there was an out of a line or two of that passage, in the manuscript copy of the 
 letter, which was furnished for the press and printed."' But. Sir, I do understand the 
 meaninor of the guaranty offered us by the gentleman fi-om Fairfax (Mr. Fitzhugh.) 
 Its meaning is very plain — There is, indeed, a fatal perspicacity in it, which leaves 
 no doubt of the utter futihty of the security it proposes to provide for us. These are 
 the words — 
 
 ••' Resolved, That the power of the Legislature to impose taxes, ought to be so limited, 
 as to prohibit the imposition on property, either real or personal, of any other than an 
 
 ad valorem'' tax ; and that in apportioning this tax, either for State or County pur- 
 poses, the whole visible property (household furniture and wearing apparel excepted) 
 of each individual in the connnunity, ought to be valued, and taxed only in proportion 
 to its value : Provided, however, that no individual, whose property (with the above 
 exception) does not exceed in value dollars, ought to be vsubject to any property 
 tax whatever : And provided, moreover, that the Legislature may impose on all pro- 
 fessions and occupations, usually resorted to as a means of support, such taxes as may 
 be deemed reasonable." 
 
 Resolved, That, to prevent an unfair distribution of the revenue of the Common- 
 wealth, the Legislature ought to be prohibited from making appropriations (except 
 by tiie votes of two-tliirds of the members of both its branches) to anyroad or canal, 
 until three-fifths of the amount necessary to complete such road or canal, shall have 
 
 22 
 
170 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 been otherwise subscribed, and either paid or secured to be paid as the law may di- 
 rect." 
 
 Now, the first resohition only proposes to provide, that taxes instead of being im- 
 posed on specific articles of property, shall be ad ralorem taxes. Of the inconveni- 
 ence, and perhaps the impracticability, of the scheme, in a financial view, I have no- 
 thing to say. Suppose it be ordained, that, henceforth, all taxation shall be ad valo- 
 rem ; still the power of laijing the taxes is to be confided to the West, and the duty 
 of j9a?/i7io- them to be imposed on the East ; still, the duty of contribution will lie on 
 us, and the right of appropriation belong to them ; still, three dollars are to be exacted 
 from the East for every dollar contributed by the West ; and still, the West will have, 
 and forever continue to have, purposes to answer in the expenditure of the public re- 
 venue, in which they have, and we have not, a direct interest, and far more expen- 
 sive than any in which we can have any direct interest. And these are the very 
 evils, against which the proposed guaranty is professedly intended to guard us. If 
 my neighbour, having ten thousand and I thirty thousand dollars, should propose to 
 me to throw the whole into common stock, and leave it to me to determine the distri- 
 bution of it between us ; I should accede to the proposal readily enough — I should 
 be sure to take back all that I put in — and I trust — though I do not Imoic — I should 
 be loath to meet the temptation — but I trvst I should restore the full amount of his 
 contribution, to him or his family. But if he should propose such a community of 
 property, and tliat lie should have the power of distribution 
 
 [ Mr. Fitzhugh explained. His proposition only contained a simple statement. It 
 did not go to making the taxe_s equal on all, but to give a security against the appre- 
 hension that the whole weiglTt would be thrown on the slave property. It was in- 
 tended to guard against that only. ] 
 
 Mr. Leigh. It is, then, admitted, that the guaranty was intended to protect us 
 against unequal and oppressive taxation on our slave property only. But, I shewed 
 yesterday, that the far greater mass of taxable property of every kind, as well as of 
 the slave property, lies on the East side of the mountain ; and what odds can it pos- 
 sibly make to us, that the unequal exaction is to be made by a tax on one kind of 
 property, rather than another And how does the regulation against the abuse of 
 the power of taxation, affect the correlative, and to us equally dangerous power of 
 appropriation ? But this is provided for, by the second branch of the gentleman's 
 guaranty. 
 
 He proposes in order to prevent an unfair distribution of the public revenue, to 
 require a majority of tiDO-tldrds of both branches of the Legislature, to make appro- 
 priations of revenue, for any road or canal; meaning, generally, I presume, any 
 work of public improvement. Does not the gentleman from Fairfax — I appeal to liis 
 good sense and candour — does he not himself perceive, that this proposal distinctly 
 implies, that the scheme of representation, of which it is intended to provide a cor- 
 rective, is in itself unfair ? If it be fair, why should a bare majority be restrained 
 from making appropriations to any conceivable object ? Is not the requisition of this 
 majority of two-thirds to appropriations of that kind, a plain admission, that the pro- 
 posed scheme of representation does not give the East a representation adequate to 
 the protection of our property and are roads and canals the only objects, for which 
 unequal distributions of public treasure can possibly be made Is it a whit more fair 
 or equitable, for example, that the East should contribute three dollars towards the 
 education of the children of the people of the West, for every dollar they contribute 
 towards the education of our children, than that we should contribute three dollars to 
 their one, for the purposes of internal improvement But, Sir, this same requisition 
 of a majority of two-tliirds of the Legislature, to appropriations of this kind, and to 
 acts for several other purposes, has been ordained hj the amended Constitution of 
 New- York of 1820. And wliat is the efficacy of the provision, in its practical opera- 
 tion ? I derive my information from an unquestionable source — from the gentleman 
 from Loudoun, (Mr. Mercer.) I have learned from him, that the provision has been 
 invariably defeated and rendered utterly nugatory, by combinations of the represen- 
 tatives of the different parts of the State, having different objects at heart, but uniting 
 to carry the schemes of all, in order to gratify the particular wishes and to subserve 
 the local projects of each. Now, can the gentleman from Fairfax devise any guaranty 
 of force sufficient to prevent Log-rolling ? (I borrow the metaphor from Kentucky, 
 and a most apt and expressive one it is.) If he can, then I may safely promise — in 
 the language addressed some years ago to tlie County Court of Giles, by the settlers 
 of a remote corner of the county, whose only mode of punishing offenders was to re- 
 fuse to Log-roll with them, in the literal sense of the phrase — then, I may safely pro- 
 mise him to come under civilized Government — for it seems to be imagined, that no 
 Government is a civilized one, unless it be founded on the natural rights of man, in a 
 savage state. 
 
 Sir, unless I be labouring under some strange delusion, it must now be apparent to 
 the Committee, that the proposed guarajities are wholly nugatory. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CO>*TENTION. , 171 
 
 But a compromise has been recommended to us. by the venerable gentleman from 
 Loudoun (Mr. Monroe) — recommended to the hearts, rather than to the reason, of 
 the Eastern delegation in this body — recommended in a tone of feehng, such as might 
 be expected from a father seeking to heal discords among liis cliildren : and it is the 
 feeling that dictated it. which alone, in my mind, gives any force to the recommen- 
 dation. He proposes, that the representation in the House of Delegates shall be ap- 
 portioned to the white population exclusively : and to guard the interest of property, 
 to guard the property of the East against unjust and oppressive taxation, that the re- 
 presentation in the Senate shall be apportioned according to the combined ratio of 
 white population and taxation. Let me ask the venerable gentleman — seeing, that 
 his object is to pro^ude a perfect security for the great mass of property held by the 
 East, against abuses of the power of taxation by the reformed Legislature, that he ac- 
 knowleciges the right of the East to such security, and that his plan of giving us the 
 security to which he admits our just claim, is, to found the representation in the two 
 branches of the Legislature upon dilFerent bases — did he never reflect, that this kind 
 of security for the interests of property, ought to be provided in the constitution of 
 the House of Delegates, the tax-giring branch, rather than in the Senate, which is not, 
 and no man intends should be, the tax-giving branch, of the Legislature? While the 
 East is complaining of the injustice of being subjected to taxation by a power, which 
 will not be restrained from abuse by anj' community of interest with them, and agi- 
 tated with the most anxious apprehensions of the danger of such abuse of power, and 
 these apprehensions are, in the opinion of the venerable gentleman, reasonable — the 
 same g-entleman, to appease our just complaints, and to allay our well-grounded ap- 
 prehensions, would give us security against the abuse of the power oT taxation in 
 the frame of the Senate wliich is to have no original power of taxation, and deny it to 
 U3 in the House of Delegates, in which the chief power of taxation is to be vested ! 
 The voice of truth and reason and justice must be silent. 
 
 But, Sir, let us suppose the proposed compromise, or a more efficient one framed on 
 like principles, acceded to, and ordained in our reformed Constitution — let us suppose 
 the representation in the House of Delegates based upon the white population ex- 
 clusivelv, and the representation in the Senate based upon taxation alone, or upon the 
 total population, bond and free, or upon the basis of white population and taxation 
 combined — we shall then have a House of Delegates of from an iiwidred and ticenty 
 to an hundred and fifty members, and a Senate of ticenty four members. Let the re- 
 lative powers of the two Houses, as to money bills, remain as at present — the power 
 of originating money bills vested exclusively in the lower House, and the Senate re- 
 stricted from amendment as to such bills, and bound wholly to reject them or take 
 them witiaout alteration. The lower House sends up a money bill — the Senate, think- 
 ing the taxation unjust or excessive, rejects it — the lower House returns the same bill, 
 an^ tlie Senate again rejects it — a conilict ensues between the two Houses: is it not 
 quite apparent, that the lower House has the power, either of compelhng the Senate 
 to take exactly such a revenue bill as they think equitable and politic, or of throwing 
 upon the Senate the awful responsibility of stopping the wheels of Government.-' 
 Follow the example of the Federal Constitution — leave the power of originatincr mo- 
 ney bills in the lower House, give the Senate the povv'er of amending them. The 
 lower House sends up its revenue bill — the Senate, constituted (upon tlie supposed 
 plan) the guardian of taxable property, finds the exactions unjust or enormous, and 
 offers amendments to correct or reduce them — the lower House rejects the amend- 
 ments : then, the same conflict nmst ensue, as in the other case, only it will now turn 
 on the amendments of the Senate instead of the original bill of the other House: and 
 the same consequences must follow. In any serious conflict between the two Houses, 
 let us see which is likely to prevail. The members of botli Houses are drawn from the 
 same order of men, and the only difference between them consists in the duration of 
 their service. The only operation of the Senate in all our State Governments (the 
 Senate of the United States is organized on peculiar principles) is to suspend for a 
 ti ne, never to defeat entirely, the actions of the other House resolutely persisted in. 
 The lower House is the more numerous body, more intimately connected with the 
 people, and every way endued with greater moral and political energy. According- 
 ly, even under tlie present organization of the Legislature the Senate has never had 
 iJie strength, for any long time, to resist any measure, in wliich the other House, ses- 
 sion after session, strenuously perseveres; and when the proposed re-organization 
 shall be made, making the lower House the representative of numbers, and the Senate 
 the representative property . the Senate will have still less relative strength. Let 
 it attempt resistance to any favorite measure of the representatives of persons, free 
 rchite persons ; such a cry "will be forthwith raised against the odious aristocracy on 
 which its Constitution is founded, the aristocracy of wealth, as will make its mem- 
 bers tremble in their seats, pause, waver, and at last yield, disheartened and impotent. 
 The lower House mav exercise another influence, if possible, of a more pernicious 
 kind. As it is a numerous body, it has in fact the whole patronage in its hands, in 
 
112 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 respect of all appointments to be made by joint vote of both branches. A Senator of 
 Virginia, nay, many Senators, may have an ambition to be a Senator of the United 
 States, or a Judge, or Governor (we may change the mode of appointment as to the 
 two last, but we cannot as to the first;) such a Senator, unless he be more than man, 
 must wish to conciliate the low.er House — and then Remember the weight of a Back 
 Woods vote ! 
 
 Sir, I insist, that the lower House is here, as it is in England, the proper represen- 
 tative of the interests of property; and it is for that very reason, and no other, that 
 its responsibility to the people, is increased by the short duration of its term of service. 
 
 Let us, however, suppose, that the guaranties proposed by the gentleman from Fair- 
 fax, (Mr. Fitzhugh,) are efficient, or tliat some other efficient guaranties can be de- 
 vised — and let us suppose too, that in addition to those guaranties, a check upon the 
 power of taxation is provided, by so constituting the Senate as to make it a represen- 
 tative of property — and that these safeguards, if preserved, are completely adequate 
 to the intended purpose: What security would they affi)rd us.-* security only so long 
 as they shall be continued. Is there, or can there be, any security that they will be 
 continued ? We may provide for future amendments, with the most jealous care to 
 prevent reckless innovation ; but we cannot destroy the inherent power of the people 
 to call another Convention ; and the moment the representative of numbers shall feel 
 the check, numbers may, and numbers will, have another Convention to abolish the 
 check. 
 
 But it is not a consideration of this vital power of taxation alone, which should im- 
 pel us of the East, to resist, to the bitter end, this transfer of power to the West. 
 There may be unjust legislation, as well as oppressive taxation. Our slave property 
 is a subject, in the management of which, the owners cannot admit any interference, 
 without the extremest danger. It seems to be supposed, in the United States and in 
 Great Britain too, that those who possess the least portion of that kind of property, 
 are better entitled, and more competent to manage it, than those who have the most; 
 and by parity of reason, those who hold none, have the very best title, and the greatest 
 degree of competency, to the management of it. Upon this principle it is, that Mr. 
 Wilberforce, and the party of the Saints in England, insist on taking the regulation 
 of the slave property in the West Indies into their hands, against the earnest remon- 
 strances of the planters to whom it belongs. So, the statesmen of the Northern States, 
 fancy themselves better acquainted with the subject, than those ot the South; and our 
 brethren of the Northern part of this State, claim greater fitness for the task, than 
 their fellow-citizens of the Southern counties. The gentleman from Hampshire, (Mr. 
 Naylor,) thinks, that slavery is one of the causes of the decline of Virginia ; and I 
 suppose he would be ready to promote her prosperity , by removing this cause of her 
 decline 
 
 [Mr. Naylor rose, and denied the inference which the gentleman had drawn, fi-om 
 any thing which he had said. He deprecated tho idea which had been suggested, as 
 to the emancipation of the slaves. And he took occasion further to state, that he con- 
 sidered it perfectly consistent with the principles of morality and justice, situated as 
 we are, to hold them as we now do.] 
 
 Mr. Leigh — The gentleman from Hampshire is advanced in years, and may not 
 change his sentiments — but, when Mr. Wilberforce proposed to abolish the ^^/are ?r«rfe, 
 he did not imagine, that he should ever find it wise to abolish slavery in the West 
 Indies : — When men's minds once take this direction, they pursue it as steadily, as 
 man pursues his course to the grave. 
 
 Sir, the venerable gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. Monroe) spoke of the impracti- 
 cability of any scheme of emancipation, without the aid of the General Government. 
 Is he, then, and if he is, are ice reconciled to the idea of the interference of the Gene- 
 ral Government in this most delicate and peculiar interest of our own .'' What right 
 can that Government have to interfere in it 
 
 [Mr. Monroe here explained. 
 
 1 consider the question of slavery as one of the most important that can come be- 
 fore this body : it is certainly one which must deeply aflfect the Commonwealth, whe- 
 ther the decision be to maintain it over those now in that state, or to attempt their 
 emancipation. The idea I meant to suggest was, that the subject had assumed a new 
 and very important character, by what had occurred in the other States, and particu- 
 larly in those in which slavery does not exist. We had seen in the early stage a strong 
 pressure for emancipation from the Eastern States, and equally so of late from the 
 States in the West ; but emancipation had thrown many of our liberated slaves upon 
 them ; in consequence of which, they have been driven back, and all interference on 
 their part has ceased. 
 
 The subject is now brought home to them, as well as to ourselves, and the question 
 to be decided by us is, whether their emancipation is practicable or not. Should the 
 decision be that it was practicable, I did not mean to convey the idea that the United 
 States should interfere, of right, as is advocated by many. I meant to suggest, that 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTIO:^. 
 
 173 
 
 if the wisdom of Virffiiiia should decide that it was practicable, and invite the aid of 
 the General Government, that it should then be afforded at her instance, and not 
 that of the United States, as having the least authority in the matter.] 
 
 Mr. Leiffh — I thank the gentleman for his explanation. And now, will he give me 
 leave to propound to Mm^one question — Whether, with his knowledge and^ experi- 
 ence of the operations of the General Government, he does not know, that if once it 
 be allowed, that that Government may constitutionally interfere at the instance of 
 the State, it will not be inferred, that it can constitutionally interfere without any in- 
 stance of the State Government .= The moment such an attempt shall be. there will, 
 there must be, an end of this L nion. 
 
 I wish, indeed, that I had been born in a land where domestic and negro slavery is 
 unknoAvn — no Sir. — I misrepresent myself — I do not wish so — I shall never wish that 
 I had been born out of Virginia — but 1 wish, that Providence had spared my country 
 this moral and pohtical evh. It is supposed, that our slave labour enables us to hve 
 in luxury and ease, without industry, without care. Sir, the evil of slavery is great- 
 er to the master, than to the slave : He is interested in all their wants, all their dis- 
 tresses; bound to provide for them, to care for them, to labour for them, wliile they 
 labour for liira, and his labour is by no means the leeist severe of the two. The rela- 
 tion between master and slave, imposes on the master a heavy and painful responsi- 
 bility — but no more on this head. 
 
 Sir, the venerable gentleman from Loudoun has told us of the awful and horrid 
 scenes he was an eye-witness of, in France, during the reign of democracy, or rather 
 of anarchy, there. I wish he had told us, (as he told the Souse of Delegates La 1810, 
 when he opposed the call of a Convention, and re-counted those same^horrors) that 
 
 he had seen liberty expiring from excess" — these were his words. France was then 
 arranged into equal departments, with equal representation, and general suffi-ao;e — in 
 short, enjoying the unalloyed blessing of tlie natural rights of man ! Have I lost my 
 senses ! Is the phantom that fiUs my breast with such horror — the lihertij of Virsinia 
 expiring icith excess — a creature of the imagination, that can never be realized ! ~The 
 venerable gentleman has described those horrors in France — has painted them to us 
 in all the Ireshness of reahty — and then told us, in the same breath, that he is pre- 
 pared to vote for the same system here. The same causes uniformlv produce the 
 same effects. — I mean to speak with freedom, yet not without the respect due to the 
 venerable gentleman, and which I should render as a willing tribute : I cannot for- 
 bear to express my astonishment, that he should be willing to adopt, for his own coun- 
 try, the principles that led to those horrors he has so feelingly described — 
 Mr. rvlonroe rose to explain : 
 
 Mr. Leigh — I request the gentleman to suspend his explanation, till I conclude what 
 little more I have to say. 
 
 I am sensible, Mr. Chairman, that some of the opinions I have advanced, and some 
 of the propositions I have maintained, are calculated to shock the principles. I mi0-ht 
 perhaps say, the prejudices, of many. I know, that the very propositions of the trtith 
 of which i am most firmly convinced, if pushed to extremes, would end in folly and 
 vice ; but it is an eternal truth, in all the moral sciences, that no principle, however 
 just, will hold good to the utmost extreme ; and there is no argument, which by that 
 process is not capable of refutation. I pray the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. 
 Cooke) to ponder well those hues, which, partly in sport, more in kindness, I handed 
 liim the other day — 
 
 £l?i modus in rebus — sunt certi denique fines, 
 Q,uos ultra citrare nequit consistere rectum. 
 
 It has pleased Heaven to ordain, that man shall enjoy no good without alloy. Its 
 choicest boiinties are not blessings, unless the enjoyment of them be tempered with 
 moderation. Liberty is only a mean : the end is happiness. It is, indeed, the wine of 
 life ; but like other -wines, it must be used with temperance, in order to be used with 
 advantage : taken to excess, it first mtoxicates. then maddens, and at last destroys. 
 
 Mr. Monroe now rose to explain. My worthy friend from Chesterfield, expresses 
 his surprise at the view 1 now talie after what 1 had seen in France. What I meant to 
 convey, in the remarks to which he alludes, was, that the commotions I had witnessed 
 inclined me in ISIO, rather to oppose the petition from Accomac, in favour of a new 
 Constitution and the extension of the Right of Suffrage, wliich was advocated in the 
 debate, but that I had so far overcome that impression, as now to be in favour of ex- 
 tending that right. I will further explain, my opinion at that time, was not made up 
 — I found cause to hesitate, but it was merely that the subject might be thoroughly 
 anahzed and investigated to the bottom in a view of the conduct of men, in such cir- 
 cumstances through all asres. When we trace the popular movements in France to 
 their causes, it wifl be seen that these causes do not exist here. The people of France 
 had been ruled by despotism, and held in an abject and deplorable situation for ages. 
 They were educated and reared under despotism. The idea of hberty was cherished 
 
174 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 among them. They were devoted to it— but rising out of slavery they were incom- 
 petent to govern themselves. The effect which despotic Government has on the in- 
 telligence and manners of the people under it, is supported by all history. The great 
 mass are ignorant and trained to obedience. Those of France, had caught the spirit 
 of liberty, and would no longer submit to the power of the crown and nobility. They 
 rose in a body suddenly, and with violence, and overwhelming the existing Govern- 
 ment, they took the whole power into their own hands, but were incompetent to a 
 proper use of it. These remarks on the condition of France will apply to all Europe, 
 but less to England than to other European nations. It was the effort of the people 
 of England which repelled the despotism with which they were menaced, and laid 
 the basis of that Constitution, from which, as it has been stated by my friend from 
 Chesterfield, all our institutions have taken their origin. But there is no part of Eu- 
 rope, not England itself, I fear, that could support such a Government as we enjoy 
 here. The power was vested essentially in the popular branch, during our Colonial 
 State, in all the Colonies. There was little to oppose it, but the veto of the Crown. 
 All America was arrayed against the Crown. We assembled in our revolution, and 
 crushed it, and the power of the Crown then passed to the body of the people. The 
 people of these Colonies never were slaves : they were an enlightened people who 
 had fled from oppression in England, and came here in search of liberty. The love 
 of it characterized us in our Colonial state, and continued to do so up to the period of 
 our Independence. Look at Asia, at Africa, and even at Europe, and what is their 
 condition ? If there is a portion of the earth where self-government can be maintain- 
 ed, it is in these United States : and I say again, that Virginia is as competent to it, 
 as any other part of the Union. 
 
 As to the slave population, it exists here, and whether we shall get rid of it or not 
 is for those who own it to decide for themselves. The States where it does not exist, 
 must never interfere unless authorized and invited to do it. But if the decision shall 
 be, that they cannot be emancipated, (and I could never consent that they should be, 
 unless you send them away,) it is equally the interest of the non-slave-holding as of 
 the slave-holding States, to support the latter in their authority over their slaves. 
 Where they are, they never can enjoy equal rights with the white population ; and if 
 emancipated, interminable war would ensue. If I say it shall be the sentiment of the 
 Southern States, that slavery must continue forever, then what has passed will induce 
 the other States to support us. 
 
 I would never, by any act of imprudence, raise up the non-slave-holding States into 
 hostility against the others. If you marshal them against each other, what then must 
 be the consequence ? Dismemberment will be inevitable. The European powers all 
 fight against each other, and we should go on the same way. The non-slave-holding 
 States would incite insurrections among our slave population, as was done by the re 
 publics of ancient Greece, and desolate the country. I am for moving with great 
 caution and circumspection in this matter. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then addressed the Committee : 
 
 In casting himself on the indulgence of the committee, in the present stage of the 
 interesting debate by which its attention had been so long occupied, Mr. Mercer 
 said, he laboured under the influence of feelings which he had not language to convey, 
 and the expression of which he feared would disqualify him for the arduous task which 
 he had undertaken to perform. The sentiment first at his heart was, that the depend- 
 ing question might terminate in a result, propitious to the union, and happiness to the 
 whole Commonwealth. While desirous of extending to the people of the West a 
 just participation in the political power of the Government ; a power proportioned to 
 their relative numbers, he entered upon the present discussion with no unfriendly 
 feeling towards the East. Such a feeling would be equally at war with all his recol- 
 lections and all his hopes. His cradle was rocked by the margin of the placid tide, 
 though Providence had placed his dwelling by the side of the mountain torrent. He 
 had not a drop of kindred blood flowing in the veins of any living being that did not 
 warm the heart of some lov\^land man, or lowland woman. He came into this Con- 
 vention not to assert the power of one portion of the State to control the other, but 
 with a fixed determination to uphold the rights and interests of all, on the broad and 
 solid basis of those great principles of political liberty which our forefathers had at all 
 times struggled to maintain. Emphatically might he say this, and vouch this Assem- 
 bly itself for his proof. Through what channel, he asked, did the resolution of the 
 Legislative Committee, now in discussion, reach this Convention ? By what hand was 
 the report of that committee presented in this Hall? By that hand, which, more than 
 any other now in being, had contributed to trace the outline and lay the foundation of 
 the great structure of our free institutions. By whom had the principles of this report 
 been just sustained ? By his illustrious co-patriot, who, alone, of this Assembly, had 
 enjoyed the high honor of consecrating those principles by his blood. 
 
 We are charged with asserting new and impracticable doctrines. Behold the proof 
 of this allegation. Are they not founded on the principles, if the terra may now be 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 175 
 
 allowed him, of every Bill or Declaration of Rights of every State in this Union, which 
 has framed a Constitution since our glorious revolution ? Are they not sanctioned by 
 the concurrent voice of the v/isest statesmen, and the purest patriots, on both sides of 
 the Atlantic ? Are they not the principles of the father of English metaphysics, and 
 champion of British liberty — the immortal Locke ? Are they not the principles for 
 which Milton successfully contended against the united power of political and eccle- 
 siastical tyranny ; and for which, in a still earlier age, the noble Sydney bled ? 
 
 Could this question be tried, without prejudice, its issue would not long be doubtful. 
 The very process, by which our assailants seek to over-power us, affords sufficient 
 evidence of the strength of our cause. Principles must be true, which can be suc- 
 cessfully controverted only by such arguments — arguments invented and most ably 
 enforced, by gentlemen inured to the habits of a profession, which, above all others, 
 teaches its professors how to discover, to touch, and to move all the secret springs of 
 the human heart. What are the prejudices which seek to obstruct our better judg- 
 ment on the present occasion ? Some are too obvious to elude our perception, and 
 must be dissipated when approached. The eloquent member from Chesterfield, pro- 
 claims with seeming regret, that, between the district, which I have the honor, in 
 part, to represent, and the western counties of Virginia, there are no longer any Py- - 
 rennees. From Ashby's Gap to the Potor/iac, the Blue Ridge, he tells us, has disap- 
 peared. This illusion of his own imagination, the honorable member infers, from the 
 sympathy subsisting in the present contest, betweeji the people of Loudoun, and their 
 fellow citizens of the West. To the other districts, on the Eastern face of the Blue 
 Ridge, which espouse the same side of this cause with my constituents, and obviously 
 for the same reason, he liberally awards the praise of magnanimity, which he denies 
 to them. 
 
 Might he not have more impartially accounted for the zeal of Loudoun for a Con 
 vention, from the notorious fact that while she pays into the Public Treasury twenty 
 times the amount of taxes paid by the county of Warwick, and has more than six- 
 and-twenty times the free white population of Warwick — she has but the same poli- 
 tical weight in the House of Delegates, under the Constitution of Government which 
 tliis Convention has been deputed to amend. That twenty-six freemen of Loudoun 
 have, in this branch of the Legislature, the weight of but one freeman of Warwick. 
 
 But the honorable member, disregarding this inequality, has found the origin of the 
 present Convention in splendid schemes of internal improvement, to which the Con- 
 stitutional scruples, manifested, by Virginia, in the councils of the Union, oppose a 
 barrier, that the new distribution of political power sought to be effected by the reso- 
 lution in debate, will enable the W^est to prostrate. In that ardent zeal, which had 
 prompted so many other gentlemen, as well as the member from Chesterfield, to im- 
 pute to the friends of a Convention, local, selfish and sordid motives for their present 
 union of council, they have forgotten much, and in part, the history of our Legisla- 
 tion on this subject. 
 
 Internal Improvement — the cause of this Convention ! Who, until the second day 
 of March, 1817, had ever heard an objection started to the Constitutional power of 
 the Federal Government to aid, by the resources of the Union, the efforts of the 
 States, to construct roads, or canals of general interest. A few days only, prior to 
 this period, a resolution, recommended by the unanimous report of the Board of Pub- 
 lic Works, passed both branches of the General Assembly, with like unanimity, to 
 request of the Government of the United States, pecuniary aid in promoting the then 
 contemplated junction of the eastern and western waters of Virginia by the James 
 and Kanawha rivers. A similar resolution had passed the House of Delegates with- 
 out opposition at the preceding session of 1815. It was, however, near the close of 
 that session, on the 8th February, 1816, that a bill, to take the sense of the people on 
 the propriety of calling a Convention, first received the sanction of a majority of 
 the House of Delegates, and that majority embraced both the delegates from Lou- 
 doun. 
 
 This bill was afterwards lost at its third reading : but a similar one finally passed 
 the House of Delegates with the co-operation of the Loudoun delegation during the 
 succeeding winter, and more than a month before the President's message, of the 2d 
 March, 1817, had excited a doubt in the public mind, of the Constitutional authority 
 of Congress to aid the several States in the construction of works of internal improve- 
 ment. A State fund, for roads and canals, had been already created, and was in suc- 
 cessful operation. How, then, can it be candidly maintained, that the efforts so stea- 
 dily prosecuted, to amend tJie Constitution of Virginia, by a Convention, sprung from 
 those impediments which this Commonwealth has since thrown in the path of internal 
 improvement, whether by withholding from that object, her own resources, or restrain 
 ing the application of those of the Union 
 
 He would, eaid Mr. Mercer, proceed one step farther : and to refute this charge, 
 very briefly state a few of the reasons which prompted the fruitless effort to obtain a 
 Convention in 1815, and which have since been more successfully urged. Among 
 
176 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the most prominent of those reasons, was that very inequahty of representation, which 
 has given rise to this debate, and which so shocks every feehng of political justice, 
 that no argument has yet been heard in its vindication. Another grievance, then, 
 also, pressing on the public consideration, was the overgrown and disproportionate 
 numbers of the House of Delegates. 
 
 When our forefathers penned the present Constitution, there were about 140 mem- 
 bers in that House ; and they chose tvventy-fbur, as a suitable proportion, for the num- 
 ber of the Senate ; a body designed not only to revise the acts ol the popular branch 
 of the Legislature, but to constitute a check on the possible ambition of its leaders. 
 But while the Senate, by the Constitutional limitation of its numbers, has been sta- 
 tionary, the House of Delegates has been extended, from time to time, by the multi- 
 plication of counties, to 214. More than seventy members have been thus added to 
 the numbers of the Legislature, during a period in which the territory of the Com- 
 monwealth has been greatly reduced. For, from the county of Illinois, wrested from 
 Great Britain in 1779, by the forces of the Commonwealth under the command of the 
 gallant Clarke, and ceded in 1784, to the United States, no less than three States to 
 the east, aud one to the west of the Mississippi, have arisen. The county of Yough- 
 iogania, once represented on this floor, now supplies no less than eight counties to 
 Western Pennsylvania : Kentucky has been erected into a separate State ; and, along 
 our southern border. North Carolina has a slip of our former territory, beginning 
 at a point on the Atlantic, and gradually widening towards the Cumberland moun- 
 tain. 
 
 While a reduction of the sphere of Legislation recommended a correspondent limi- 
 tation of the numbers of the Legislative body, the progressive augmentation of its 
 annual expenditure merited regard. In 18M), the entire cost of this Department of 
 the Government did not exceed 50,000 dollars a year. It has, since, mounted up to 
 more than twice that sum. 
 
 To restore the original proportion between the two branches of the General Assem- 
 bly, and to prevent a still farther augmentation of the number of the House of Dele- 
 gates, a measure required by no State necessity, and forbid by a due regard to econo- 
 my, was always in the scope of that Constitutional reform contemplated by the friends 
 of a Convention. 
 
 The abolition of the Council of State was another of their objects. Economy con- 
 demned this worse than useless appendage to the Executive, which, in desiroying its 
 unity, impaired both its vigor and responsibility. A feeble Chief Magistrate is but 
 the tool of his Council, while to an able and unprincipled Governor, they serve as a 
 cloak. 
 
 The friends of a Convention, with but few if any exceptions, had another and more 
 aggravated cause of complaint. Is there a member of this body, who thinks that the 
 right of suffrage now rests on a proper basis? Who would not, if disposed to restrict 
 its exercise to a freehold qualification, substitute for quantity, a valuation- of the land 
 required to confer a vote. Should a freeholder be allowed to exercise the right of 
 suffrage on fifty acres of land situated upon the summit of a barren mountain, where 
 the crow would not build her nest, while this right is withheld from the proprietor of 
 a farm of twenty-four acres in some fertile valley, which with its improvements may 
 be worth as many thousand dollars ? In one of the most flourishing townships of 
 Connecticut, a territory of more than twenty square miles, there is not a farm ex- 
 ceeding twenty-five acres in dimensions, the minimum estate which the present Con- 
 stitution annexes to the right of sufirage, without regard to its value. 
 
 Are we then, Mr. Chairman, with these apologies, to be regarded as coming here in 
 the prosecution of schemes of narrow and sordid speculation ? May I not pronounce 
 such a charge to be the offspring of prejudice, and say that it is repelled by the his- 
 tory of the proceedings which have led to this Convention ? 
 
 There is yet another of analogous birth which remains to be refuted before I pro- 
 ceed with my enquiry into the expediency of the proposed amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Culpeper. 
 
 It has been more than insinuated, that by the transfer of political power from the 
 Eastern to the Western portion of the Commonwealth, the friends of a Convention 
 design to shake the ascendancy of certain political doctrines, supposed to be essential 
 to the rights of this Commonwealth, as a member of the Union. 
 
 If this transfer is required by political justice, how poor a comphment does this in- 
 sinuation pay to the rights which it thus seeks to defend ! 
 
 But of the members of the Virginia Delegation in Congress residing to the West 
 of the Blue Ridge, how few are there who differ from a majority of the people of the 
 State, in construing the Constitution of the United States, to say nothing of the gen- 
 tlemen on this floor, from the counties below the mountain, who are alike advocates 
 for the strictest construction of that instrument, and for a thorough amendment of 
 our Constitution of State Government ? 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 177 
 
 His venerable colleague, said Mr. M. had successfully repelled other prejudices 
 which, if not utterly unfounded, might prove of fatal influence to the object of the 
 Convention, and he now came to the consideration of the real proposition before the 
 Committee, 
 
 The resolution of the Legislative Committee proposes to make the v/hite popula- 
 tion of the Commonwealth exclusively the basis of the apportionment of representa- 
 tion in the House of Delegates. It is moved by the member from Culpeper, to rest 
 such apportionment on white population and taxation combined. After the most la- 
 borious attention to all the arguments as well of the mover of this amendment, as of 
 the gentlemen who had sustained him, Mr. M. said he was at a loss to know how this 
 combination was to be effected — in v\'hat proportions population and taxation were to 
 be combined. If that of perfect equality, then what description of taxes were to be 
 balanced against the rights of the freemen of Virginia.'' Shall one of the compounds 
 be determined by taxing all the property of every citizen, visible and invisible.? To 
 this, almost insuperable objections might be urged ; some of which had been forcibly 
 pointed out, by the member from jNorthampton, (Mr. Upshur.) If visible property, 
 only, shall be taxed, is all that a man possesses to be comprehen-ded, moveable and 
 immoveable ? If one description only, or a portion only of each, which, or what part, 
 and by what rule or ratio of numbers, quality or of value ? Is it practicable to form 
 this combined basis, and to impart to it, the simplicity, the stability, to say nothing of 
 its intrinsic justice or propriety/, which should, in a Constitution of Government, de- 
 signed to be perpetual, form the ground-work of the representation of the people 
 
 The author of the proposed amendment, since he designed to give to proptrty, a 
 certain practicable weight in the Government, would more readily acconqjlish his 
 purpose by constituting as its measure, wealth for taxation ; the thing taxed for the 
 tax itself. This change of the basis of representation, in terms, would not alter the 
 principles on which its justice and propriety rest, and both parties would by such con- 
 version, be enabled betts-r to comprehend the precise end, as well as the practicability 
 of the proposed amendment. 
 
 For the sake of my own argument at least, I purpose making this substitution of 
 wealth itself, for that which is its measure, in any equal system of taxation. Wealth! 
 the basis of representation ! It is proposed, indeed, to combine it with numbers, but 
 the quality of the subject, must folio Vv^ it through every possible combination, and 
 what is true of it as a simple, may be affirmed of it as an ingredient, of any compound 
 basis of representation, of which it may become an el-ement. 
 
 Was wealth, then, ever before proposed in America, except in South Carolina, to 
 be made the foundation of political power in the popular branch of a Government, 
 professing to be free An oligarchy this may be, open to all bidders for power; but 
 if not an oligarchy, I have no conception of the import of the term. 
 
 And why prefer wealth, if equality of right be disregarded among the freemen of 
 Virginia 
 
 In savage life, mere personal qualities, as strength, courage, confer distinction, and 
 not without reason. The term in our language, which denotes the perfection of moral 
 worth, is borrowed from latin virtus, which originally signified strength, that quality 
 of man, which barbarians esteem tlie first of virtues, because among them, the most 
 useful. In the rudest as the wisest nations, age has its claims to veneration, of which 
 my feelings, ir. tbis assembly, hourly remind me. To wisdom, all men yield respect : 
 and as society grows older, birth asserts its more questionable claims to cur homage, 
 and learns at last, to back them by authority. Wealth, comes, last of all, to buy 
 power and distinction, and if I must cease to be a iTeeman, 'tis the very last domi- 
 nion, to which I will ever bow my neck. If I must choose between the aristocracy 
 of birth or fortune, I do not hesitate a moment which to prefer. Had I not better 
 trust my liberty, if I must have a master, to the descendant of honest parents, who 
 may be presumed to have reared and educated their ofFsj)rirtg with care and tender- 
 ness, than a man, I do not knov.% for his mere riches ? If the latbep be obtained, by 
 sudden acquisition, or by secret or unknown means, I should think it incumbent on 
 their possessor, if he claimed my confidence, and much more, if my obedience, to 
 shew that he himself had honestly acquired his title. 
 
 To the argument of my friend from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke) that wealtli would pro- 
 tect itself, the gentleman from Northampton. (iMr. Upshur) had replied, that it could 
 do so, only by corruption, by the employment only, of the basest means. And shall 
 representation be based on wealth.? (Here Mr. Upshur explained.) Mr. M. said he 
 had not misunderstood the eloquent member from Northampton, though he could not 
 do justice to his former lanq-uage, nor had the gentleman himself done so, in his ex- 
 planation. If unexceptionable in all other respects, wealth (Mr. M. said) would be 
 found in all countries, too fickle a basis of representation for a distribution of politi- 
 cal power, designed to balance the interest of individuals, or of distinct portions even 
 of the same community. Individual wealth ! Who can fix it? He, who can stop the 
 ever-revolving wheel of fortune. National wealth is subject, though not in the same 
 
 23 
 
178 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 degree, to like uncertainty. Of what does that of Virginia consist ? Chiefly of lands 
 and slaves. No estimate of the value of the 450,000 slaves of Virginia accompanies 
 the Auditor's Report. The lands of the Commonwealth were valued in 1617, at 
 206,000,000 of dollars. What are they now worth ? Half that sum ? He had care- 
 fully sought, throughout the Convention, for information to correct the results of his 
 own observation, within late years, as to the change of the value of lands in Virginia. 
 After all his enquiries, he believed they had fallen to two-fifths, of their former esti- 
 mated value ; and could not, now, be computed, at more than 80, or at most, than 90 
 millions. Next, as to slaves. 
 
 A gentleman sitting near him, had, at the period to which he had just referred, of 
 the passage of the equalizing land law, sold 85 slaves in families, at 300 dollars round : 
 He had been assured by him, and by other gentlemen, equally well-informed, from 
 other portions of the Commonwealth, that 150 dollars for each slave, taking them in 
 families, would be a fair price at the present moment. This description of labour, 
 then, has fallen one half, and lands more than a. half, in very little more than ten 
 years. In the estimate of the last, the tables supplied by the Auditor, comprehend- 
 ed $26,500,000 for city and town lots; chiefly, for the value of those at Richmond, 
 Petersburg, Norfolk, and Fredericksburg : A value dependent on the fluctuations of 
 domestic and foreign trade. What was once its extent in this city, the metropolis of 
 the Commonwealth, we all remember. What it is now, I know not; since commerce, 
 that inconstant handmaid of fortune, has turned her helm from our ports to the fa- 
 voured harbor of New-York. Wealth attracts wealth. Fortune not only withdraws 
 her gifts from those who abuse, but from those who fail to use them : 'taking from 
 those who have little, that which they cannot spare, to pour it into the lap of abun- 
 dance. While we have been quarrelling about Internal Improvement, New-York has 
 swallowed up the commerce of America. Driven from us by our unkindness, it has 
 gone where it was invited by wiser councils. 
 
 There are fluctuations of the value of property, however, which no wisdom can 
 elude or avert. The value of our land and labor depends on the value of the staple 
 commodities which they produce ; this on the demand for them at home, and abroad, 
 and that again on physical and moral causes v/hich no Constitution of Government, 
 which man himself, cannot controul ; on the seasons, in other countries, as well as 
 our own, on the policy of other nations, on peace, on the varying events of foreign 
 war. The act of Congress reducing the minimum price of the national lands, struck 
 down, at a blow, the value of every landed estate in Virginia. The tide of wealth 
 which set in from Europe to America during the wars of the French revolution, roll- 
 ed back at the general peace which succeeded our last contest with Great Britain. 
 
 If this uncertainty of wealth operated uniformly, on all the interests of our Com- 
 monwealth, their relative proportion would not be sensibly disturbed by it. Such, 
 however, is not its effect. The cotton, the tobacco, the grain, and even the grazing 
 interest, are affected, in different degrees, by the same agents : and, although the 
 natural tendency of the profits of stock, the rent of land and the wages of labour, in 
 the same country, is to one level, it requires time to still the successive agitations of 
 their varying values. In the interim, new causes are continually arising to delay 
 their subsidence to one common level; and this principle, the truth of which is un- 
 questioned, though constantly operating, may never accomplish its end. 
 
 But had wealth the necessary stability to serve the purpose of the proposed amend- 
 ment, is taxation in any known system, a just measure of that wealth ? 
 
 Taxation is the instrument, by which legislation draws from the private revenue of 
 each citizen, his fair proportion of the public expenditure. It should be proportioned 
 to his abilitj' to pay it. It should, therefore, be drawn from his income, and not from 
 his capital, except with a view that his income shall supply the call. His income 
 cannot be reached, if at all, by expedient means ; and wisdom suggests the propriety 
 of taxing his expenditure, which usuall}^ bears a certain proportion to his income. 
 
 The constitutional power of another Government restrains the application of these 
 principles to taxation ni Virginia, under the authority of the State; and, in other re- 
 spects, diversifies the action of our local system of public revenue. 
 
 The gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. Green) has not told us how he means to com- 
 bine the taxes of the people, with their numbers, in his compound basis of represen- 
 tation. Will he add the annual sum of the present taxes, to the numbers of the peo- 
 ple, and dividing the aggregate of men and dollars, settle the value, at which a legal 
 voter in any district may be computed ? A friend has informed me that such is to 
 constitute a part of the details of the proposed compound basis, and that the value of 
 each vote in the Commonwealth, will be rated at about fifty-eight cents ! Or if this 
 shall shock the ears of the Convention, or the sense of the people, who may set a 
 higher estimate on their rights, will gentlemen adopt what in practice, will lead to a 
 similar result, the plan of South Carolina; and distribute the territory of this Com- 
 monwealth into two descriptions of election districts^ one in reference to free white 
 population, the otherj to taxation as it now exists 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 179 
 
 [Mr. Green explained, but in so low a tone of voice, that the reporter could not 
 catch his language.] 
 
 Mr. Mercer regretted that he had been unable to hear distinctly the explanation of 
 the gentleman from Culpeper, but from the few words wliich had reached him, he 
 inferred it to be his intention to adopt the system of South Carolina, and to divide the 
 State into two sorts of election districts. 
 
 [Mr. Green having changed his seat in the Hall, again rose for explanation. He ex- 
 plained it to be his plan to take the white population of the State and the population 
 of each county. Apply the rule. Population gives to representation, in proportion 
 to numbers. See the number of representatives required. In lilve manner, take the 
 whole taxes of the State, and those of each county, if the taxes give the like rule for 
 the county, add them together, and that is the rule.] 
 
 Mr. M. thought this plan would only serve to increase the difficulty. To what 
 portion of a representative will Warwick with her annual taxes at $ 500, and her 
 white population of 620 persons, be entitled ? The objection still applies, notwith- 
 standing the explanation that a freeholder, or lawful voter of the Commonwealth, 
 will be weighed in the same scales, with the taxes, he may chance to contribute to 
 the wants or the caprice of the Legislature, and find himself balanced against the 
 fraction of a single dollar. 
 
 Were a submission to such degradation, all that was required by this in - enious po- 
 litical composition of men and money, it would be possible, though it might be diffi- 
 cult to endure it patiently. But, is it possible to derive, from such materials, any equi- 
 table or stable proportion, or balance of political power, between the different sections, 
 or interests, as they are called, of this Commonwealth, or, indeed, of any other, with 
 which we are acquainted I know its operation in South Carolina, said Mr. M. only 
 so far as its details are disclosed in her Constitution. Let us turn to it. By this, it is 
 provided, that sixty-two members of the more numerous, I will call it ])o]mlar branch 
 of her Legislature, shall be distributed among her pre-existing election districts, in 
 number forty-four, from reference to their white inhabitants; and sixty-two among 
 the same districts, from leference to the amount of all taxes raised by the Legislature, 
 ichether direct ar indirect, or of whatever species, paid in each, deducting therefrom, all 
 taxes paid on account of property, held in any other district, and adding thereto, all 
 taxes, elsewhere paid, on account of property held in such district." To give effect to 
 this principle of representation, it is farther provided, that there shall be an enumera- 
 tion of the people once in every ten years, and that, in every apportionment of repre- 
 sentation, which shall take place, after the first, " the amount of taxes shall be esti- 
 mated from the average of the ten preceding years:" '• and the first apportionment 
 shall be founded on the tax of the preceding year, excluding from the amount there- 
 of, the whole produce of the tax on sales at public auction." 
 
 He had attended, Mr. M. said, the more closely, to these provisions, in order to as- 
 certain, what portion to a House of one hundred and twenty-four members, would 
 fall to the share of the city of Charleston. This city had, of the former House of 
 Representatives of the State, including the parishes of St. Philips' and St. Michael's, 
 fifteen members out of one hundred and twenty-four. The a,uction duties of South 
 Carolina, tliere can be but little doubt, are paid chiefly, if not solety, in Charleston. 
 They were not to be computed at all, in the first apportionment of representation, 
 that of 1810 ; but the very exception, as well as the antecedent language of her Con- 
 stitution, shews that they were to be reckoned, in every subsequent apportionment, 
 founded on the taxes of the preceding ten years. They must have been computed, 
 therefore, in 1820. The present representation of this city, in the House of Repre- 
 sentatives of South Carolina , I have yet to learn ; but if any part of it is founded on 
 these auction duties, since her example is invoked to the aid of the amendment, in 
 discussion, I ask if she is entitled to it on any principle which would not give to the 
 citizens of Philadelphia, or New York, a like claim to representation, over and above 
 their fair proportion to members in the Legislatures of their respective States.^ The 
 extent of the auction duties annually collected in Charleston, is unknoAvn to me : but 
 the auction duties of Philadelphia, I believe, constitute a third of the entire revenue 
 of Pennsylvania, whose State Government is sustained without any other tax what- 
 ever, except upon the dividends of her banks, and on collateral inheritances, devises 
 and bequests. These taxes, together with her share of the annual dividends, accruing 
 on her several road, bridge, canal, and bank stocks, make up the sum total of the 
 public income, applied to the disbursements of a State Government, where neither a 
 land nor a poll tax exists. More than a moiety of it arises in Philadelphia. 
 
 Similar views apply to New York. The auction duties levied in her great empo- 
 rimir, largely exceed a moiety of our State revenue, and are established and set apart 
 for a special purpose, by an express provision of her Constitution. 
 
 The only tax we have in Virginia, analogous to this, is one on merchants' licenses; 
 and both have a close affinity, in their principles and operation, to the impost duties 
 of the United States. They are all levied at the marts of commerce, — all chargeable 
 
180 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 upon the commodities which enter into that commerce. They are, consequently, all 
 p.-iid, neither by the importer nor the vender, — neither by the auctioneer nor the mer- 
 chant, — who are but the collectors of the tax, and charge a profit on their labour. 
 They are all paid, in fine, by the consumer, who, for the opportunity of paying 
 them, this amendment would require of him to surrender, not only the price in mo- 
 ney of the articles which he purchased, but a most undue and enormous advance of 
 political power, to his superiors, the tax-paying merchant and auctioneer. Apply this 
 amendment to the condition of Pennsylvania and New York, and their chief cities 
 would govern those States. These new heads of a monied aristocrac}^, the auctioneers, 
 who pay, by far, the largest share of the taxes to the State, would, in the several State 
 Governments, flir out-rank the regular merchant, whose principal dues pass through 
 the Collectors of the Customs, to the Treasury of the Federal Government; and, 
 consequently, neither augment his own political power, nor that of his neighbours, 
 however large they may be, and actually are. 
 
 If tlie payment of a tax, gives a right to a proportionate share of the power which 
 levies it, my constituents have a fair claim to representation in the Legislatures of 
 New York and Pennsj'^lvania, since they pay no sm.all share of these auction duties. 
 
 Sir, said Mr. M. the salt tax of New York, a State excise, is also set apart, by her 
 Constitution, for a special purpose. Being twelve and a half cents on the bushel, and 
 the quantity made, about 1,200,000 bushels, it does not fall short of $ 120,000 per an- 
 num, and being levied and collected on Lake Onondaga, near the town of Salina, it 
 should entitle the inhabitants of that vicinity, to a very large portion 'of the political 
 power of that great and flourishing State. 
 
 During the last war, we endeavoured to levy a similar tax in the counties of Wash- 
 ington and Kanawha; but with less success. Should the political weight of our 
 several counties, be hereafter dependent on the amount of taxes they may severally 
 pay, as the gentleman from Culpeper proposes, whatever the salt-makers may think 
 of the renewal of that tax, the politicians and the people of those counties, might 
 over-rule these objections, for the sake of governing the rest of the Commonwealth, 
 by this newly-invented political power. 
 
 It must now be apparent, Mr. Chairman, that the district in which a particular tax 
 is collected, may not be the district of the people by whom it is paid, and consequently 
 that nothing would be more absurd than to rest the apportionment of political power 
 on any such basis. 
 
 Indeed, the tax which is paid on a particular subject will have its locality, if I may 
 be allowed the expression, determined, altogether, by the mode in which it is levied. 
 The Supreme Court of the United States has defined a tax upon carriages, to be a tax 
 on expenditure, and therefore an indirect tax, and to be the same in character, whe- 
 ther paid by the maker or the user of the carriage. Now, the maker and the user 
 may live in the same Commonwealth many miles apart. If, hov\^ever, tlie tax be paid 
 by the maker, he vv^ould have credit for it; if by the user, it would inure to his bene- 
 fit. To whom should the right of suffrage attach If it attach to neither, it would 
 seem to vest in the vehicle itself, and to suggest a similar difficulty to that propounded 
 by Dr. Franklin, who, commenting on the case of a man, whose right to vote depend- 
 ed on the tax which he had paid on his ass, inquired after the death of the animal, 
 and the consequent loss of the vote of his owner, whether the vote had been in the 
 ass or the man. 
 
 It is impossible, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. M. to judge how far the rule of appor- 
 tionment, adopted by Soutli Carolina, would suit our condition, without knowing how 
 it operates on her own. What is the character and operation of her system of taxa- 
 tion 
 
 A similar rule is said to prevail in the apportionment of the Senators of Massachu- 
 setts and New Hampshire, under their respective State Constitutions. He had been 
 informed, that no State tax had been levied in Massachusetts for seven years past, 
 and he tliought it highly probable that the same state "of affairs, in the frugal Com- 
 monwealth of New Hampshire, would prevent a rule of apportionment, however of- 
 fensive in theory, from exciting the public indignation. A rule, wholly inoperative, 
 would be obnoxious to no one. 
 
 It can be readily perceived, that if applied to Pennsylvania, or New York, or even 
 to Maryland, it would so far from restraining the political influence of the chief cities 
 of tiiese States, to a measure short of the just proportion of the number of their citi- 
 zens in the scale of the population of their respective States, it would enable those 
 cities by a combination of numbers and wealth to govern, without any control, beyond 
 their corporation limits. And yet, this is one of the very evils against which the 
 member from Chesterfield, the eloquent advocate of the amendment, is desirous to 
 guard this Commonwealth : A Commonwealth, whose territory is so intersected by 
 numerous rivers, that an overgrown market is not likely to spring up in its bosom. 
 
 Mr. M. said, he had considered these imperfections of the basis of representation, 
 submitted by the amendment, arising from the nature of taxation, considered as an 
 
pebates of the coxvention. 
 
 181 
 
 instrument for raising anv given revenue required by the exigencies of tlie Common- 
 wealth. 
 
 But if these exigencies shall vary between different periods of time, how unstable 
 is this basis, and especially if tlie pressm-e of the pubhc burthens shall grow more and 
 more unequal, as they grow or decline in weight. 
 
 In -tiarvland there is no State tax : the expenses of her Government are defrayed 
 out of the income of a pubhc capital already acquired. The revenue of the two 
 great canals of New York, the work of but a few ^-ears, reaches already near a mil- 
 lion of dollars, and will shortlv release that Commonwealth, which has now neither 
 a land nor a poU tax, from the necessity of imposing any tax whatever on her 
 citizens. 
 
 Such a principle of representation, as that, for which our opponents contend, would 
 induce, under such circumstances, the imposition and distribution of taxes for the 
 sake of power merely. On the plan of Carolina, half the pohtical power of tlie State 
 might be secured by 'the exercise of very httie ingenuity, to a mmority of the election 
 districts, and with it the means of preserving it iorever in the same hands. 
 
 We have sought as yet in vain to secure fr'om misapphcation, and to prescribe the 
 use of the two great funds of the Commonwealth. If the new Consti'.ution shall be 
 silent on this subject, what will prevent a majority of a future Legislature from appl}'- 
 ing them to reduce the pressure of the taxes on one portion of the Commonwealth, 
 with a view to its Government in all other respects, by a minority of tlie people, or 
 those who lead such minority P Those funds are abundantly sufficient for deny such 
 purpose, and the amendment, if adopted, will furnish the opportunity so to abuse 
 them, 
 
 Not only would every reduction of the taxes which affected their relative pressure 
 affect the proposed apportionment of representation, but every augmentation of 
 them. 
 
 In this view of the subject a new principle requires to be developed. A consider- 
 able augmentation of revenue cannot often be effected without increasing particular 
 taxes on those subjects already taxed, which will bear augmentation, nor sometimes, 
 without adding new subjects to the existing hst of taxes. 
 
 War inevitably gives rise to both these necessities, by reducing or suspending some 
 branches of private revenue, and supplying others, before unused or unknown. 
 
 The burthen of sustaining a foreign war, it is true, has been cast by the Federal 
 Constitution upon another Government ; but it cannot be forgotten, by any member 
 of this Convention, that it had been found necessar}' to double the revenue, of the 
 Commonwealth during the late war, and to incur a considerable debt for its defence, 
 part of which remains yet unpaid Can any man venture to predict, that a similar 
 necessity will not again arise .' Should he do so, would this Committee confide in the 
 prediction : and found a provision in om- Constitution upon it ? No practical States- 
 man wiU believe that to be impossible which has actually happened, or reject the 
 council which would provide for its recurrence. 
 
 Should an attempt be made to remedy the inequalitv of taxation, arisiiio- from war, 
 or national distress, by averaging with a view to future representation, the taxes of a 
 given period, according to the scheme of South Carolina : the effect of any war 
 which varies the proportions of the public burthens, borne by the citizens of tlie same 
 Commonwealth, will subsist in their representation, long alter peace shall have been 
 restored, and the inequality shall have ceased. 
 
 A review of our own system of taxation, both before and since the formation of our 
 present Constitution, would supply all the facts necessary to sustain the positions I 
 have assumed. 
 
 Prior to the vrax of 1758, called in Europe the Silesian war, from its object, and the 
 seven years war, from its duration, and in America, tlie French war, from the foe 
 whom it brought upon the western frontier of this Commonwealth, the only revenue 
 of Virginia had been derived from a poll tax. The first land tax was laid in 1777, and 
 was an ad valorem tax, the same in amount with that upon slaves — and these were 
 then the only subjects of taxation. To these, before the last war, had been added taxes 
 on horses, ordinaries, merchants' licenses, and law process. 
 
 ' The la^t war not only required a large augmentation of the taxes, on all these sub- 
 jects, but the addition of a number which I Vv-iil not fatigue the Committee by enume- 
 rating. Since the war the extraordinary subjects of taxation, have been released, but 
 the pre-existing proportions of tax on the old subjects has not been restored. Allow 
 me briefly to run over these changes with the date of their occurrence. In 1S09 the 
 land tcLX was 48 cents on the hundred dollars, or supposed value, according to the 
 act of 1737. From 1816 to 1S19 the land tax was 75 cents on the hundred dollars. In 
 18.20 it was reduced by the new equalizing land law, the price paid by the "West, for 
 equahzing the representation of the Senate, to 12h cents for every hundred dollars of 
 actually assessed value. In 1821 it was brought down to 9 cents upon the same esti- 
 mate at which it remained tiU the last year, when it was again reduced to 8 cents, 
 
182 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 more than fifty per cent of the tax of 1820, having been struck off in eight years, and 
 the land tax of 1829 made to bear to the land tax prior to the last equahzing land law 
 an apparent ratio of one only, to more than 9. 
 
 In 1809, before the war, the tax on slaves above twelve years of age was 44 cents ; 
 in 1815 it was raised by the war to 80 cents, in 1819 reduced to 70 cents, in 1821 to 
 53 cents, in 1828 to 47 cents, and the last reduction brought it down to 40 cents, or 4 
 cents less than its amount prior to the war. 
 
 The tax on horses for several years prior to the last war was 8 cents. In 1815 it 
 mounted up to 20 cents. In 1819 it was 18 cents ; in 1821, 13^ cents ; in 1823, 12 cents, 
 and it is now 10 cents, or twenty-five per cent, more than it was prior to the war. 
 
 The war besides adding more than forty specific taxes to the three I have enume- 
 rated, raised essentially the proportions between those of ordinary use. 
 
 It greatly increased the ratio of the land and horse tax to the slave tax. The rela- 
 tive product of the taxes on lands, slaves and horses in 1809, was 141,000; 90,000, and 
 38,000 respectively. In 1816, 238,000; 161,000, and 40,000. In 1829, 175,000; 97,000, 
 and 33,000 respectively. When the revenue from these three subjects stood highest, 
 that is, after the equalizing law took effect in 1819, their proportions were 274,000 ; 
 163,000, and $ 52,000. Their proportions in the last year were 175,000; 97,000, and 
 $33,000. 
 
 The land tax, it will be seen, has been gaining on the amount of the slave tax since 
 1809. Since when $ 34,000 has been added to the gross amount of the land tax, and 
 $7,000 to the amount of the slave tax. 
 
 While these variations in the total amount of the' taxes levied on the old subjects of 
 taxation, have not been strongly marked, except during the continuance of war, the 
 proportion paid by the several counties of the State have been more diversified. 
 
 The taxes of Loudoun paid into the State Treasurjr, in 1815, amounted to the sum 
 of $ 12,885, Those of the county of Warwick to <| 1,285, or very near a tenth part 
 of that amount. In each of the years of 1823 and 1824, Warwick paid only $500 
 and Loiidoun $9,500. In the last year, V/arwick paid $ 526, and Loudoun .$ 10,507. 
 Thus the proportion of taxes actually paid into the Treasury, by these counties which 
 have, notwithstanding, an equal representation in the House of Delegates, was, in 
 1815, ten to one ; and is, now, very near twenty to one. The proportion having vari- 
 ed in the ratio of very near two to one. 
 
 During the last war, nearly fifty specific taxes were added to three subjects of ordi- 
 nary State revenue. Among the former were excises on salt, iron, lead and manu- 
 factured tobacco, objects all of limited production, and while consumed every where, 
 taxed only where made. 
 
 They suggest one view of this subject which ought not to be omitted. It is that by 
 resting the representation of the people of this Commonwealth on the basis of taxa 
 tion and numbers, we place their relative political power over the operations of their 
 own State Government, under the control of the Congress of the United States. 
 
 To develope this argument, it is necessary to refer to the Federal Constitution which 
 gives to the National Legislature exclusively, the power of imposing duties on foreign 
 imports, and a concurrent authority with the several States to tax every thing else 
 within their limits. 
 
 Should Congress prohibit public auctions of foreign goods, as they have been earnest- 
 ly entreated to do by the resident merchants of all our great cities, what would become 
 of the revenue of New- York, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina, from this source.'' 
 And should the revenue disappear, what of that portion of the representation of 
 Charleston derived from the auction tax ? May it not be said that those States who 
 tax a particular mode of selling fox-eign commodities immediately after they are land- 
 ed, while they are expressly debarred from taxing their importation, trench more di- 
 rectly on the powers of the Federal Government than that Government has done, 
 upon the natural distribution of labour and capital v/ithin the several States by the 
 imposition of a tariff for the encouragement of domestic manufactures? 
 
 Nor is it the direct action of the fiscal regulations of the United States, in particu- 
 lar branches of State revenue, to which 1 singly allude: the whole system of federal 
 taxation exerts an indirect but constant control overall the subjects which a State can 
 tax. Were the United States, for example, to repeal the 20 cent duty on salt, what 
 would become of New- York excise on that commodity, an excise which enhances its 
 price, not only to the people of that State, but of the Western counties of Pennsylva- 
 nia and Virginia ? 
 
 I trust, said Mr. M. that I need not adjure the Committee to exclude, if practica- 
 ble, the action of the General Government, whether direct or indirect, on the repre- 
 sentation of the people of Virginia in the Legislative Department of their State Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Had such a basis of representation obtained in the Federal Legislature, in lieu of 
 federal numbers, what now would be the relative power of New- York, to the rest of 
 the Union; and of the city of New- York to the rest of that great commercial State. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 183 
 
 The duties there paid would overturn every just balance of political power, and over- 
 whelm, in the vortex of a monied aristocracy, the liberty and happiness, not of that 
 city only, but of the whole Union. 
 
 Before Mr. M. concluded his remarks, the Committee rose, and the House adjourn- 
 ed to meet to-morrow, at 11 o'clock. 
 
 THURSDAY, November 5, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Lee of the Episcopal Church. 
 Mr. Mercer resumed: 
 
 Having endeavoured, with what success it is for the Committee to determine, to 
 shew that the basis of representation proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. 
 Green,) if practicable, is unstable, unjust, and inexpedient, 1 beg leave to recur to the 
 original resolution of the Legislative Committee, in order to demonstrate that it founds 
 the representation of the people, on its only proper basis. 
 
 This course I deem the more necessary, since the friends of the amendment have 
 sought to sustain it, rather by opposing the basis contained in the resolution, than by' 
 enforcing the justice, or expediency of the amendment itself. Their reasoning has 
 shewn, if it has proved any thing, that the entire slave population of the State, or 
 three-fifths of it at least, should be computed in any new apportionment of represen- 
 tation which shall be made. 
 
 The resolution asserts, that this apportionment should have reference exclusively to 
 the numbers of the free white population of the Commonwealth.* 
 
 Referring to free white population, alone, the Legislative Committee have design- 
 ed to reject any computation whatever of slaves. Although no gentleman has so far 
 offended the public sentiment'-in terms, as absolutely to confound slaves with freemen,, 
 yet in their arguments, in favour of a compound basis, they have laid great stress 
 on the protection wliich a representation of slaves would afford to this species of pro- 
 perty. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) has gone so far as to urge the com- 
 putation of the slave population, in whole or in part, on grounds of authority, of jus- 
 tice, and of expediency. 
 
 His leading authority is deduced from the articles of " Confederation and perpetual 
 Union" among the States, which gave place to the present Constitution of the United 
 States, wherein, three-fifths of the slave population are added to the white, to compose 
 a standard of direct taxation and representation. 
 
 One of my purposes is to shew that these authorities are inconclusive in themselves, 
 or inapplicable to the present question. 
 
 The honourable member insisted on a former occasion, that the articles of Confed- 
 eration did actually authorise a computation of three-fifths of the slave population of 
 the South. Had this been true, it would not have warranted the use of the fact as an 
 authority in fixing the basis of representation in the Constitution of Virginia. The 
 articles of Confederation formed a compact, not between individuals, but sovereign 
 States, who regarded themselves as mutually independent of each other. This com- 
 pact, like a treaty, could be ratified, only by the express assent of all the parties to it; 
 which was not obtained, until the accession of Maryland, in March, 1781. In the 
 Congress, which that compact provided, for the exercise of the authority of the Uni- 
 ted States, perfect equality of power subsisted among the States. The sense of a part 
 indeed, was to govern the whole body, but this sense was taken by the votes, not of 
 individuals, (any one, or several of whom, might represent a State) but of States, 
 each State having one vote and one only. As the articles of Confederation could be 
 ratified, so, they could be altered, or amended, only by the concurrent assent of all 
 the States who were parties to them. 
 
 No rule of pecuniary contribution, in such a Government, for the power to tax did 
 not exist, could therefore, have the remotest relation to any basis of representation 
 whatever. The States were expected to contribute to the common expenditure ac- 
 cording to their respective ability. Their representation was equal. The 8th of 
 those articles, provided a common treasury, and required it to be supplied, by the 
 several States, in proportion to the estimated value of all the lands granted in each 
 State, with the buildings and improvements upon them. Until 1781, however, this 
 like all the other articles of Confederation, had no validity whatever. 
 
 In the interim, the revolutionary Government sustained itself, by loans, and by the 
 issue of paper money, till from the excessive issue of tliis paper, it lost all value, and 
 ceased at length to circulate. 
 
184 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The authors of the Confederation discovered, that they had not the means of as- 
 certaining the vahae of all the real property of the several States. Adam Smith, 
 had informed them, that it took the Emperor of Germany, moue than half a century, 
 to complete a survey, of one only of the States of his dominions. The' present 
 day Avould add to this information the vast time consumed in the late triangular 
 surveys of France and England. In Virginia, alone, it would then have taken seve- 
 ral years, to have gone, with tolerable accuracy, through such an assessment as the 
 8th article of Confederation demanded. Amidst these embarrassments, and the 
 alarm of national bankruptcy, it was proposed to substitute, as the standard of fis- 
 cal contribution by the States, a computation of the numbers of the people, for the 
 actual valuation of all their estates. A new difficulty here arose, as to the proper 
 subjects of such an enumeration. Whether it should be restricted to the free w^hite 
 population alone, of the several States, or comprehend the slaves also.'' The object 
 being to measure the ability to pay, the South, naturally enough contended, and with 
 truth, that their slaves were not regarded in their institutions of civil polity, as per- 
 sons, but as property ; and ought not to be enumerated. The North insisted on the 
 other hand, that whether persons, or property , they subserved the end of other labour, 
 and adding to the wealth of the community, should be counted in that estimate of the 
 relative ability of the States, to contribute to the common treasury, of which it was 
 proposed to make numbers the common measure. The discussion of this subject, in 
 the Conoress of the Confederacy, terminated in a vote to recommend it to the seve- 
 ral States, to amend the articles of Confederation, by substituting, for the rule of ap- 
 portionment, therein provided for revenue only, a triennial enumeration of the whole 
 number of white, and other free citizens, with three-fifths of ail other persons, ex- 
 cept Indians, not taxed. 
 
 In the decision on this recommendation, in April, 1783, it was carried by ten votes 
 out of twelve : Tilhode Island being opposed to it ; New York equally divided, Mr. 
 Floyd voting for it, and Mr. Hamilton against it ; and Georgia being absent. I am 
 thus particular in relation to this vote, for reasons which I will, hereafter ex- 
 plain. The Legislature of Rhode Island persevered in the opposition begun by 
 her delegates in Congress ; and Virginia, after giving, retracted her assent ; so 
 that the recommendation totally failed. Tliis state of things continued till the Con- 
 vention assembled which framed the present Constitution of the United States, when 
 the same topic of discussion and of disagreement was renewed. Nor was it easily 
 adjusted in this body, as intimoled by the member from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh.) No 
 proposition which agitated the Convention, consumed so much of its time. As early 
 in its deliberations as the 20th of May, 1787, it appears on the Journal of the proceed- 
 ings of that Assembly, among the resolutions submitted by Governor Randolph of 
 Virginia, in this form, "that the right of suifrage in the National Legislature, ought 
 to be proportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number of free inhaljitants, 
 as the one or the other may seem best in different cases." 
 
 The following day Mr. Hamilton moved to alter this resolution, so as to cause it to 
 read, that the right of suffrage in the National Legislature, ought to be proportioned 
 to the number of free inhabitants." 
 
 On the 11th day of June, it was moved by Mr. King of Massachusetts, and seconded 
 by Mr. Rutledge of South Carolina, " That the right of suffrage in the first branch of 
 the National Legislature, ought not to be according to the rule established in the arti- 
 cles of Confederation ;" [the rule of equalit}'- among the States, as we have seen,] but 
 according to some equitable ratio of representation." 
 
 The same day, along v/ith several other amendments of this resolution, it was 
 moved by Mr. Wilson of Pennsylvania, and seconded by Mr. C. Pinckney of South 
 Carolina, to add after the w^ords equitable ratio of representation," in proportion to 
 the whole number of inhabitants of every age, sex, and condition, including those 
 bound to servitude for a term of ye?^rs, and tiiree-fifths of all other persons not com- 
 prehended in the foregoing description, except Indians, not paying taxes, in each 
 State." 
 
 I will not weary the attention of the Committee, by reading all the references I have 
 made to this volume, the Journal of the Federal Convention, with a viev/ to the de- 
 velopment of its course,_in relation to these resolutions. 
 
 After passing and repassing through various Select Committees, and being fre- 
 quently debated in Committee of the Whole, the proposition having assumed the 
 shape in which it now stands in the Federal Constitution, was apparently settled 
 on the 11th and 12th of July, by a vote of seven States to three, against striking out 
 the " three-fifths " of the slave population. Had this motion prevailed, it would have 
 caused all the slave population to be counted, as Delaware at first, and South Caro- 
 lina and Georgia to the last, perseveringly insisted. By a motion on the second of 
 those days, the attempt was renewed to produce this result, vv^hen Maryland, Vir- 
 ginia, and North Carolina, voted once more against, and South Carolina and Georgia, 
 for computing the entire slave population. 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 
 
 185 
 
 What now becomes of so much of the authoritr relied upon by the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield, as vras derived from the suppos tion that the principle of compn*ir,or 
 three-fifl.is of the s ave populati.m, made part of the articles of Confederation ; th it^ 
 the slave-holding States were united in its support in tlie Federal Convention ; and 
 that it carried such conviction, to every mind, that it was interpolated in tlie new 
 Constituti>-a without resistance r The pages of this volume, [the Journals of tlie 
 the Convention.] from the Toth to the 161st, manifest the contrary. The love of power 
 did not, then, tempt Virginia to consider her slaves as parties to her social compact — 
 as persons and not property. And is she, now, prepared to go to Washington, or to 
 Boston, to learn the civil and political condition of the population, within her own 
 limits .- Whether it shall be regarded in her own councils, as property, or as a pea- 
 santry," fitted to rank with '-the free people of the West: to use the language of 
 the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh.) 
 
 Sir, said Mr. Mercer, is not the slave under our laws, as much an instrument in the 
 hands of his master, as the wagon and team of the mountaineer True, his life is 
 protected from violence and his person from cruelty. So does the common law of 
 England, which is ours, protect the horse and the ox from wanton injury. But the 
 slave, hke either, is by our law, mere property : and. as such, may be to-morrow 
 shipped by liis master to Cuba, or to Brazil. He may be smuggled into the United 
 States from Africa, in violation of law, and exported again as an article of merchan- 
 dize having a known value in the market, and beiag the subject of frequent and pro- 
 fitable speculation. I speak not of the reason of the law, but of the legal fact. 
 
 Do not those who apprehend most danger to this species of property, from innova- 
 tion, consider the_ slave as property, the svJ.jcct of our social compact, not a. jcarty to 
 it ? What said Xew Jersey, to the Confederation, in tlie war of the revolution ? 
 •' That slaves should be brought into the account," in the requisition for land forces'' 
 to be supplied by the States, to the defence of the L uion. She sustained this demand, 
 by reasons, at least, as specious as those which we have just heard, for making this 
 particular property the basis of representation. " Should it be improper, for special, 
 local reasons, to admit them in arms for the defence of the nation, yet we conceive," 
 says their memorial, ••' that the proportion of forces to be embodied ought to be fixed 
 according to the whole number of inhabitants in the State, from whatever class they 
 may be raised. If the whole number of inhabitants in a State, whose inhabitants 
 are all ichites, both those who are called into the field, and those who rema'n to till the 
 ground and labor in mechanical arts, are estimated in striking the proportion of forces 
 to be famished by that State, ought even a part of the latter description to be left out 
 in another .= As it is of indispensable necessity in every war, that a p;irt of the inha- 
 bitants be employed for the uses of husbandry and otherwise at home, while others 
 are called into the field, there must be the same propriety that persons of a different 
 colour, who are employed for this purpose in one State, while whites are emploved 
 for the same purpose in another, be reckoned in the accoimt of tlie inliabitants." The 
 prayer of this memorial received, in 177S, the sanction of three States, while one was 
 divided, and six voted against it. 
 
 The argument of 2Sew Jersey in favor of a computation of slaves in distributing 
 the personal burthens of a common war, bears a striking resemblance to that vrhich 
 the member firom Chesterfield has so forcibly m-ged on the present occasion, and sus- 
 tained by a comparison of the peasantry" of the West, with the slaves of the 
 Eait. 
 
 Toe answer to both arguments is the same. That, however regarded elseichere, 
 slaves, in Virg'inia, are considered as property, and property only. But If, as property, 
 they are exempted, at the expense of the community, from obligations which would 
 be onerous, not upon themselves, but their master : so as property merely, should they 
 ^\not add to the weight of a political power, of which they cannot and should not directly 
 partake ;. and which is claimed for his benefit alone, to the pubhc injm-y. 
 
 If. therefore, the Constitution of the United States has supplied a different ru''e, 
 it should be remembered that it was founded in a compromise of principles, for the 
 sake of uniting States, otherwise sovereign and independent, by a 2Sational Govern- 
 ment of limited power. Its introduction, even there, as a principle of represen- 
 tation, was evidentlv founded on its prior assumption, by a majority of the Congress 
 of the Confederation, as a principle of pecimian," contribution among the States. It is 
 a price paid, by the small States, for their equality of power, in the Senate : and has 
 long ceased, as was early anticipated, to be any security to the property it is supposed 
 to have been originallv desisrned to protect from unequal taxation. In the last House 
 of Representatives, the proportion of the members from the slave-holdhig, to those 
 from the non-slave-holding: States, was 91 to How that ratio will be augmented 
 
 by the approacliing Census, I need not intimate to the Committee. 
 
 At this point of mv ctrgument. it is proper, to allay the apprehension which has 
 so often been expressed in~this debate, that, to adopt the basis of representation recom- 
 mended bv the Lecfislative Committee for our State Government, would put to hazard 
 
 24 
 
186 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 that portion of representation, in the Federal Legislature, derived from a computation 
 of three-fifths of the slaves of the Commonwealth. 
 
 Tnis attempt upon our fears would seem to imply, that representation, under our 
 present State Government, is founded, in part, on a computation of slaves. That of 
 the Senate we know to have been apportioned in ,1817, as nearly as practicable, to the 
 free v^^hite population of the State ; a concession, compatible with the existing Con- 
 stitution, because made under it, and paid for, by doubling the land-tax of one portion 
 of tha State, and proportionably reducing that of another. 
 
 The origin of the House of Delegates was ably developed in an early stage of this 
 debate, by my learned friend from Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge.) In the work of a vene- 
 rable member of this Convention, " Marshall on the Colonies," it will be seen that 
 the first representation of tlie people of.this Commonwealth was of " settlements," 
 then seven in number. The Assembly v.^liich tlieir delegates formed was called the 
 House of Burgesses," from tlie names of those settlements, as Elizabeth City, James 
 City, Charles City, which names, by a singular adherence to usage, they retained, as 
 they now do, after those settlements were, for judicial purposes, erected into counties. 
 
 Representation in the House of Burgesses, therefore, preceded the existence of 
 counties, as tiie counties did the existence of slavery ; for that calamity was intro- 
 duced among us by the Dutch, after the origin of countv representation ) that repre- 
 sentation which has ever since existed in the House of Delegates. 
 
 In the Constitution of this branch of the General Assembly, therefore, slavery 
 forms no original feature, and to change its foundation by an amendment, which shall 
 derive its etfect from periodical enumerations of the people, could expose the State 
 to no loss of power in the councils of the Union. 
 
 If otherwise, what may be said of that very amendment for which these gentlemen 
 have so zealously contended, and which proposes the mixed basis of white population 
 and taxation Wovild not this basis, unless explained by their arguments, be obnox- 
 ious to the very same fears which they labour to awaken ? Unless mdeed, if it prevail, 
 their argument shall go abroad as a part of tJie Constitution itself. 
 
 But if our examples shall endanger a political influence, which some gentleman 
 compute at 2-irchs of our present weight in Congress, and others, more correctly, at 
 seven out of the twenty-two members, we have at present in the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, what shall be said of that, which is supplied, by so many other States, 
 interested like us, and some of them more deeply, in retaining this feature of our 
 Federal Representation.'' Why has no slave-holding State, save Georgia alone, en- 
 grafted this principle on her Constitution of Government.'' Neither Louisiana, whose 
 climate and productions approach so near the tropical sun, which has stained the com- 
 plexion of Africa, nor Missouri, who formed her Constitution, amidst a moral and poli- 
 tical excitement which might have excused such alarm, have felt its influence. 
 
 And if there is any truth in the origin of it, on the present occasion, why let me 
 ask, did not the Hartford Convention, when it sought to exact a surrender of this 
 power, from our fear of disunion, appeal to the example of every slave-holding State, 
 except Georgia, to enforce their pretensions 
 
 We have, Mr. Chairman, in truth, a substantial, and trusting as I do, to the obliga- 
 tion of solemn comp icts, though recorded on mere parchment, a permanent safe-guard, 
 for this portion of our political weight, which, though I deplore its origin, I neither de- 
 precate, nor am prepared to yield, to any claims, whatever. This safe- guard is to be 
 found , in that provision of the Constitution which , without naming expressly , confers this 
 power, and in another clause of the same instrument, which pro^ides that no altera- 
 tion or amendment of it, shall take effect, unless w^ith the sanction of three-fourths of 
 the States-. 
 
 To propose an amendment, whicli sliall deprive Virginia of this power through the 
 National Legislature, will require, by this clause, the concurrence of two-thirds of both 
 branches of that body : and in one of them the slave-holding States have, now, in- 
 clusive of Delaware, twenty-four out of forty-eight members. 
 
 But it is, to the sanction, required of the States themselves, to any change of the 
 Constitution, that I look, with absolute confidence for the preservation of this power. 
 
 At present any seven of the twelve slave-holding States could defeat any amend- 
 ment which threatened its existence. 
 
 Looking forward to the admission of the territories of Florida, Arkansas and Michi- 
 gan into the Union, I see this security confirmed by the addition of two slave-holding 
 States, making the total number fourteen, exclusive of Delaware, which I do not 
 count, because she is not likely long to continue of that number. Glancing to 
 a futurity much more remote, and allowing for two additional States to the North of 
 Illinois and Missouri, still the ratio between the number of the slave-holding and non- 
 slave-holding States will be as for.rteen to fifteen. If, in the madness of future con- 
 quest, for I never desired the annexation of Canada, to this Union, the whole North 
 American provinces of the British Empire shall fall to our lot, and Upper and Lower 
 Canada supply two States, in addition to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, tlie pro- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 187 
 
 portion will be not less than fourteen to nineteen, and nine States of the fourteen, 
 may prevent any change of the Constitut'on prejudicial to the rights and interests of 
 the holders of this property. Let the Union, therefore, be extended, from Florida, to 
 the northernmost hmits of our continent — Let the States who compose it, be animated 
 by what policy they may, a combination among them, to the prejudice of the political 
 power of the South, so far as it rests on the principles of the present Constitution, 
 can never be availing while that Constitution remains inviolate. The resources of the 
 common Government may be applied to mitigate the evils of slavery by the aid of 
 colonization, but its power can never be applied to endanger the peace of those who 
 suffer from its existence. While the number of slaves, to the South, forbids their 
 emancipation, without their consequent removal from the Commonwealth, no wise 
 man can desire its augmentation. Whether it can be reduced in a mode consistent 
 with the claims of justice and humanity, we are not now called upon to decide. I am 
 on tills subject no enthusiast ; I look ever to the attainment of just ends by expedient 
 means. These I am ready to discuss on ?aiy suitable occasion, in a temper to make 
 every allowance for the rights of private judgment in others, and with a solicitude, 
 which no consideration can sway, for the peace and happiness of the Commonwealtli. 
 
 The eloquent member from Hanover, (Mr. Morris) in his fervid address to the Com- 
 mittee, acknowledged that he entertained no apprehension of sudden emancipation 
 from any change of the present Constitution. Let my honorable friend then, and I 
 apply this language to him, in the sincerity of a heart that never forgot a benefit, re- 
 turn to its scabbard the bloody sword which his fancy drew in the close of his anima- 
 ted and able speech. Having no terrors for him, it has none for me — The property of 
 the master will be secured by the sad necessity from which it derives its existence. 
 No gentleman has proposed that slaves shall be numerically represented. As pro- 
 perty, is it better entitled to representation than any other estate in the Common- 
 wealth If so, on what is that title founded? Their value .' Why not compute lands or 
 horses This argument I have already considered in relation to the amendment, by 
 which it was proposed to combine taxation with population as a basis of representa- 
 tion. Were values to be regarded as a basis of representation, should we not compute 
 the mineral treasures of the mountains of Virginia, which though latent, await but 
 the hand of enterprise, to develope their extent, and to fit them for human use.? As 
 well might a British statesman propose to augment in the Parliament of that country, 
 the representation of South Wales, whose naked mountains, barren in surface, as the 
 Highlands of Scotland, have beo-un since the commencement of the present century 
 to contribute to the wealth of Great Britain, as ample stores as the richest counties of 
 England. 
 
 Bef re I leave the inquiry, whether slaves should be admitted to representation, re- 
 garded either as persons or property, an authority confidently uro-ed by the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, remains to be considered — the fifty-fourth number of the Federalist, 
 or the letters of Publius. addressed to the American people after the formation, and 
 prior to the adoption of the Constitution. 
 
 While he should ever entertain not only the most profound, but the most grateful 
 respect for the very eminent authors of that work, and regard the work itself, as a 
 rich depository of political science, and an honor to American literature, it is proper 
 to remark, that it was, in its character, controversial. 
 
 He who studies it with attention, v>n]l perceive that it is not only argumentative, 
 but that it addresses different arguments to different classes of the American public, 
 in the spirit of an able and skilful disputant before a mixed assembly. Thus, from 
 different numbers of this work, and so.netlmes from the same number, may be derived 
 authorities for opposite principles and opinions. For example, nothing is easier than 
 to demonstrate by the numbers of Publius, that the Government, which it was writ- 
 ten not to expound merely, but to recommend to the people, is, or is not a National 
 Government ; that the several State Legislatures may arraign at their respective bars, 
 the conduct of the Federal Government, or that no State has any such power. I have 
 in debate used this work for some one of these and other purposes, vrhile my adver- 
 sary has met me with passaores from it alike genuine, which overturned my positions. 
 
 The authors underto^ok to"defend ever}^ part of a Constitution, to which two of them 
 at least, had in the Convention offered amendments that were rejected, and the whole 
 of the numerous articles, of wliich, no man in America, of independent judgment, 
 then approved. It was tire offspring of mutual concessions, of 'compromise. 
 
 With these preliminary reflections on this very able work, which I trust -will be re- 
 garded as compatible with the veneration and gratitude I cherish for its authors, I beg 
 leave to turn the attention of the Committee to the particular number, quoted as au- 
 thority by the member from Chesterfield, to prove not that three-fifths of the slaves of 
 the several States are computed as a part of the basis of representation in the House 
 of Representatives, but that, of right they should be so computed. 
 
 "The next view," says the author of this number, who appears in the volume I 
 have, to have been ]Mr. 'Hamilton, which I shall take of the House of Representa= 
 
188 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tives, relates to the apportionment of its members among the several States, which is 
 to be determined by the same rule with that direct taxes." In the succeedinor clause, 
 the author, who had both in the Old Congress voted agamst this rule, and in the Con- 
 vention submitted a different one, qualifies the approbation of the rule which his pre- 
 sent purpose requires him to sustain, by a peculiar form of expression. " It is not 
 contended," he says, " that the number of people in each State ought not to he the 
 standard for regulating the proportion of those who are to re])rese7it the people of each 
 State." He does not, therefore, impugn the identical principle for which we at present 
 contend ; and which, on another occasion, he had maintained. He proceeds as fol- 
 lows : " The establishment of the same rule," that of the Constitution, " for the ap- 
 portionment of taxes," will be as little " contested ; though the rule itself in this case," 
 that is as to taxes, " is by no means, founded on the same jjrinciples. In the former case, 
 the rule is understood to refer to the personal rights of the people, with which it has a 
 naf.ural and universal connexion. In the latter, it has reference to the proportion of 
 wealth, of which it is, in no case, a precise measure, and in ordinary cases a very uvfit 
 one. But notwithstanding the imperfection of the rule, as applied to the relative 
 wealth and contributions of the States, it is evidently the least exceptionable among 
 those that are practicable;'' and he adds, what the Journals of the Convention, now 
 published, as well as the antecedent conduct of Rhode Island, New York, and Vir- 
 ginia, must be allowed at least to qualify to some extent, " that it had too recently ob- 
 tained the general sanction of America, not to have found a ready preference with the 
 Convention." 
 
 In another part of the same essay — " It is agreed," saj's the author, on all sides, 
 that numbers are the best scale of wealth and taxation, as they are the only proper 
 scale of representation." The last is the doctrine for which the advocates of the reso- 
 lution contend, against the doctrine of the amendment, which would found represen- 
 tation on numbers and taration combined. 
 
 [Mr. Leigh rose and said, the gentleman would much oblige him by stating who 
 was the author.] 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, the paper which he had read, had prefixed to it the name of Mr. 
 Hamilton. 
 
 [Mr. Doddridge rose and said, that the paper from which the extract had been read, 
 was attributed in some of the editions of the Federalist, to Mr. Jay.] 
 
 [Mr. M.idison then rose and said, that although he was not desirous to take part in 
 this discussion, yet under all the circumstances he was, perhaps, called on to state, 
 that the paper in question was not written by Mr. Hamilton or Mr. Jay, but by the 
 third person connected with that work.] 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, this volume, the third of an edition of " Hamilton's Works," the 
 editor of which he supposed Jiad derived his key to the names of the authors of Pub- 
 lius from a manuscript of Mr. Hamilton which he saw many years ago, in the pos- 
 session of the late Richard Stocktm, an eminent statesman of JNew-Jersey, would 
 constitute, he hoped, an apology for the error into which, in common Avith many edi- 
 tors of this work, he had been betrayed ; as he now perceived that the number of 
 Publius, which he had quoted, was the work of a distinguished member of this Con- 
 vention. 
 
 Although not able to avail himself of this paper, for the precise purpose which he 
 had proposed, he was glad it came from such a source ; firom the venerable Chair- 
 man of the Legislative Committee, who had already yielded his support to the reso- 
 lution in debate. 
 
 For the opinions expressed by Mr. Hamilton, the author of more than a moiety of 
 these very able essays, in relation to the present topic of inquiry, Mr. M. said he 
 would refer this Committee, not only to his votes in the Congress which preceded, as 
 w^ell as the Convention which made the Constitution, but to a prior number of those 
 admirable essays written in favour of its adoption, and which bears his name. 
 
 The right of equal suffrage among the States," Mr. Hamilton says in the 22d 
 number, " is another exceptionable part of the Confederation. Every idea of propor- 
 tion, and every rule of fair representation, conspire to condemn a principle, which 
 gives to Rhode Island an equal weight in the scale of power with Massachusetts, or 
 Connecticut, or New- York ; and to Delaware an equal voice in the national delibe- 
 rations, with Pennsylvania, or Virginia, or North Carolina. Its operation contradicts 
 the fundamental maxim of Republican Government, wliich requires that tlie sense of a 
 majority should prevail." The conformity of this language to that of the friends of 
 equal representation in this Convention, is too apparent to need any other proof of it, 
 than would arise from substituting the county of Warwick for " Delaware," and 
 Frederick, or Lnudoun, for Pennsylvania," or " New- York." How far the answer 
 to this reasoning, which Mr. Ham Iton puts in the mouths of h^s adversaries, speaks 
 the language of'our opponents, I h ave it to the Committee to judge. 
 
 "Sophistry," says Mr. Hamilton, " may reply that sovereigns are equal, and that 
 a majority of the votes of the States, will be a majority of confederated America." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tm 
 
 For the words " sovereigns,'' and " State," I have only to insert the word ''counties," 
 in behalf of those who "^desire no change of the present Constitution, and for " con- 
 federated America," the people of Virginia. 
 
 I close this quotation witii"Mr. Hamilton's rejoinder, which needs no commentary. 
 "But this kind of loffical legerdemain," he adds, will never counteract the plain 
 suggestions of justice^ and common sense. It may happen that a majority of States 
 is a small minority of the people of America, and two-thirds of the people of America 
 could not lonff be persuaded upon the credit of artificial distinctions and syllogistic 
 suUleties,~to submit their interests to the management and disposal of one-third. The 
 larger States would, after a while, revolt from receiving the law, from the smaller. 
 To acquiesce in such a privation of their due importance in the political scale, would 
 be, not merely to be insensible to the love of powder, but even to sacrifice the desire of 
 equality. It is neither rational to expect the first, nor just to require the last. Con- 
 sidering ho'W peculiarly the safety and welfare of the smaller States depend on union, 
 they ought readily to renounce a pretension, which, if not relinquished, would prove 
 fatal to its duration." 
 
 The Committee will readily excuse my substitution of the words of this able and 
 eloquent writer, for any language that I could invent to express the same ideas. Such 
 a course is the more expedient for my purpose, since it affirms all the truths which I 
 labour to sustain, by the appeal of a statesman and patriot of the revolution to the 
 people of America, in support of the principles, for which he had contended, as well 
 in arms, as in council. 
 
 That he did not, any more than his equally patriotic associates, confound taxation 
 with representation, as has been so often done in the course of thus debate, a passage, 
 which I beg leave to offer to the Committee from the preceding number of this able 
 W'ork, sufficiently manifests. 
 
 The principle," says he, " of regulating the contributions of the States, to the com- 
 mon treasury, by quotas, is another fundamental error of the Confederacy." " I speak 
 of it now, solely with a view to equality among the States." By eqiuility, it will be 
 seen, that he does not mean the payment of equal sums, by equal numbers, but in 
 cqua^, or just proportion to the respective abilities of those who are required to pay 
 them for the common benefit of all. ■'• Those who have been accustomed to contem- 
 plate the circumstances, which produce and constitute national wealth, must be satis- 
 fied that there is no common standard, or barometer, by which, the degrees of it can 
 be ascertained. — Neither the value of the lands nor the numbers of the people, which 
 have been successively proposed, as the rule of State contributions, has any p7-etcnsion 
 to being a just representative." Let Virginia be contrasted with North Carolina, or 
 Maryland with New-Jersey, and we shall be convinced that the respective abilities of 
 those States, in relation to revenue, bear little or no analogy to their comparative stock 
 in lands, or to their comparative population. The position may be equally illustrated, 
 by a similar process between the counties of the same State. No man acquainted with 
 the State of New-York, Vvull doubt, that the active wealth of King's county bears a 
 much greater proport-Ion to that of Montgi-)mery, than it would appear to do, if we 
 should take either the total value of the lands or the total numbers of the people as a 
 criterion. 
 
 The wealth of nations depends upon an infinite variety of causes. Situation, 
 soil, climate ; the nature of the productions ; the nature of the Government ; the ge- 
 nius of the citizens; the deg-ree of information they possess; the state of commerce, 
 of arts, of industry ; these circumstances, and many more too complex, minute, or 
 adventitious, to admit of a particular specification, occasion differences hardly con- 
 ceivable in the relative opulence and riches of different counties. The consequence 
 is, that there can be no common measure of national wealth ; and, of course, no gene- 
 ral or stationary rule by which the ahility of a State to pay taxes can be determined. 
 The attempt, therefore, to regulate the contributions of the members of a Confederacy, 
 by any such rule, cannot fail to he Y'^o6.\xci\Ye o? glaring iriequality and extreme op- 
 pression. 
 
 There is no method of steering clear of this inconvenience, but by authorising 
 the National Government to raise its own revenues in its own way. 
 
 " It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in 
 their own nature a security acrainst excess. They prescribe their ovm limit ; which 
 cannot be exceeded v/ithout defeating the end proposed — that is, an extension of the 
 revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that ' in 
 political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four.' " 
 
 May I not now affirm, ^vithout a presumptuous impeachm.ent of the authority of 
 the able authors of this vindication of the Federal Constitution, that whatever con- 
 cessions it may contain of expediency or justice, to the Union of the States, they have 
 not sanctioned the doctrines of our adversaries : that slaves are regarded as property 
 by our laws, and as such have no other title to representation, than any other descrip- 
 tion of property in the Common vv'ealth. 
 
190 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The resolution, which I have undertaken to sustain, alike excludes a representa- 
 tion of counties. Such is the present representation in the House of Delegates, and 
 its glaring inequality is one of the leading causes of this Convention. Although no 
 voice has been heard in this Committee to vindicate this inequality, and the proposed 
 amendment is as much at war with its continuance as the resolution itself, yet those 
 who are opposed to any change of the present Constitution must be regarded as dis- 
 posed to tolerate, and bound to defend it. It is equally incumbent on the advocates 
 of the resolution to advert to its extent, and its operation on the principles for which 
 the friends of a Convention have contended. 
 
 There are at present in this Commonwealth, 105 counties, entitled each to two De- 
 legates, and four boroughs, having *by law separate representation, entitled each to 
 one Delegate. The House of Delegates consists, at present, therelore, of 214 mem- 
 bers, of which 108 are a majority. Fifty-four of the counties of Virginia may, there- 
 fore, return such a majority. Omitting with all the boroughs, Wilhamsburg having 
 a population of only 53(> wiiite inhabitants, and the small counties of Logan, Allegha- 
 ny, and Pocahontas, which have been created since the last Census, this majority may 
 be supplied by 160,000 of the 603,000 white inhabitants of the Commonwealth. It 
 follows, therefore, that a minority of much less than a third of the people of Virginia, 
 may govern the other two-thirds. 
 
 Of the thirty-nine counties below the Blue Ridge, selected to make this proportion, 
 five have fev/er than 2,000 white inhabitants, each; one has but t)20, and another but 
 1,017. 
 
 Of the fifteen beyond that mountain, which I have added to the former, the smallest 
 has a \yhite population of very near 1,800, and that is the only one which has a white 
 population below 2,000 in number. 
 
 In addition to the six counties having each less than 2,000 white inhabitants, there 
 are eleven counties, whose population is known, which have between 2 and 3,000 
 only, and of these, there are but two West of the Blue Ridge. 
 
 On the other hand, there are thirteen counties, which have each more than 10,000 
 white inhabitants, of which, all but one, lie either West, or on the Eastern face of that 
 mountain; and, of those, three, having each more than 16,000, lie connected together. 
 
 Similar inequalities, it has been urged by some of our opponents, exist without com- 
 plaint, in the neighbouring States of Maryland and North Carolina, which have,hke 
 Virginia, equal county representation. 
 
 IN either position is true. Complaints of unequal representation, have been made 
 in both these States, without effect, because the foundation of them, bears no propor- 
 tion to the inequality for which we are assembled to provide. 
 
 Maryland has nineteen counties, the largest of which, Frederick, contains a few 
 more tlaan 40,000 inhabitants, of every description; and the smallest, Calvert, a few 
 more than 8,000. The proportion being of five to one, on the whole population^ and 
 rather more than eight to one, if their white population alone, be computed. 
 
 North Carolina has sixty-two counties. Rowan, the largest, has 26,000 inhabitants, 
 and Washington, the least, very near 4,000 : The proportion being about six and a half 
 to one, and if the white population be separately computed, 21,000 to 2.300, or about 
 nine to one. While we have seen that the total population of the largest county of 
 Virginia, was, to the least, as far back as 1820, in the ratio exceeding fifteen to one, 
 and computing the white population alone, of twenty-six to one. 
 
 There is not a man within the sound of my voice, said Mr. M. nor would there be 
 • one who merited the appellation, could I be heard by the people of America, who 
 would consent to be degraded by the application of such a scale of political power, to 
 his own rights in comparison with those of his neighbour. 
 
 In one branch of the Legislature, a similar inequality was redressed in 1817, by a 
 new arrangement of the Senatorial districts, on the basis of white population. At that 
 time, four members, of a body consisting of twenty-four, represented two-fifths of the 
 entire population of the State, and might have been outvoted by the representation 
 of a twelfth. The evil called aloud for redress, and it was redressed in the manner, 
 in which we now ask to have remedied a similar inequality in the other branch of the 
 General Assembly. I was one of those who retired from this Hall in 1817, prepared 
 to await the developement of the new distribution of the Senate, and acquiescing in 
 the existing state of affairs. The arrival of a period of profound tranquillity among 
 the parties which had divided, not Virginia, but the Union, (for a mere contest for 
 the Presidency, could give rise to but transient excitement,) — a contest, in which for 
 several years, he had felt scarcely interest enough to carry him to the polls, had 
 prompted him to unite with his fellow-citizens, in endeavouring to amend the defects 
 of their common Government. 
 
 Having disposed of the mixed basis of taxation and white population, of slave and 
 free population, regarding, as he proceeded, the claim of the former to consideration, 
 both as persons and as property; and exposed the inequality of county representation, 
 he came now to an examination of the only remaining basis, or that which had been 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 191 
 
 adopted and recommended to the Convention by the Legislative Committee — the 
 numberi of the free white population exclusively, and that, with a view to give to equal 
 numbers, equal portions of political power in the constitution of the popular branch of 
 the Government. 
 
 A proposition had. indeed, been submitted to the Convention, by his eloquent friend 
 from rsorfolk, in the form of an amendment of the Bill of Pdghts, which asserted that 
 equal numbers of legal voters throughout the Conuuonwealth, should have equal po- 
 litical power, vnthout regard to the distinction of fortune. As such a proposition 
 might be regarded as of a different character from that contained in the resolution of 
 the Legislative Committee, Mr. M. said he would, as the incipient step towards the 
 conclusion he was desirous to reach, undertake to shew their practical if not theoreti- 
 cal conformity. Yvhatever extent may be given to the right of suffrage, the only im- 
 portant distinction between these propositions will be found to consist in the supe- 
 rior facility of executing that which requires, simply, a periodical enumeration of the 
 white population of the Commonwealth. To compute all the legal voters of the Com- 
 monwealth, supposing the extension of suffrage to be built upon the present freehold 
 qualification, enlarged by the admission of other classes of citizens, not freeholders, to 
 the same pivilege, would require the enumeration of all classes. If that labour be 
 regarded in relation to the freeholders alone, it is not difficult to conceive its magni- 
 tude and the delays which must attend its execution. 
 
 In a computation of legal voters, instead of active agents, competent, at little cost, 
 to take a Census of the people, learned Justices in Eyre must be provided in suffici- 
 ent number to traverse every county, city, borough, or election district in the Com- 
 monwe -lth, in order to enquire who have freehold estates, and have been so seized 
 for the period required by law. If to these, be added, the cases of constructive free- 
 holds, and of tenants in common, whose names may not, and often do not, appear on 
 the Commissioners" lists, and should claimants in reversion and remainder, of vested 
 or contingent freeholds be empowered to vote, as some gentlemen propose, many years 
 would elapse in making the necesssary enumeration and lists for the apportionment 
 of Delegates. Nor would this painful and costly, if not impracticable labomr, lead to 
 a different result from that of the Census of the free white population, as we have 
 good grounds to infer under any extension of suffrage. The more enlarged it may 
 be, the more nearly will the numbers of those who are legal voters, approach the nmn- 
 ber of that population. But if restricted to landed qualification, or extended to all 
 who pay taxes on moveable property, still the apportionment to white population will 
 very nearly, if not exactly, conform to that which might be founded on a computation 
 of the numljer of votes. 
 
 As evidence of this, Mr. M. referred to tlnree of the tables lately suppHed by the 
 Auditor of Public Accounts. 
 
 To the first of these, that which professed to deduce white population of 1629, in 
 the several counties, from the number of titheables voluntarily returned to that officer, 
 at his request, Mr. M. could not yield implicit confidence. Indefatigable, faithful and 
 intelligent as he knew that officer to be, lie could not do more than use the materials 
 supplied him. Mr. M. had seen that, in the district which he in part represented, one 
 immediately below the Blue Ridge, intersected by three of the most extensive turn- 
 pikes in the Commonwealth, and having more of that description of improvement 
 within it, constructed by individual enterprise, than is to be found in all the rest of 
 the Commonwealth put together ; this table manifested a reduction in nine years of 
 the entire population of 1620, by 5.384 souls: a fact which he most confidently be- 
 lieved to be untrue. He would undertake to say that the county of Loudoun had, in 
 that period, sustained no loss of white population, and Fairfax very little, if any. 
 Another error, of almost equal extent, had occurred in the same statement, in adding 
 to the population of Augusta a number equal to that which had been taken from Lou- 
 doun. Abandoning the conclusions to be drawn from a table, so inaccurate. Mr. Mer- 
 cer said he would go back to the Census of 1820, in which he discovered that the 
 white population West of the Blue Ridge bore very nearly the same ratio to the white 
 population below that mountain, that the number of persons in the one territory charged 
 on the land-books of 1826 with taxes on a quantity of land not less than twenty-five 
 acres, or on a lot or part of a lot in a town estabhshed by law, bore to the same de- 
 scription of persons in the other? The first ratio being nearly that of 2-5 to 35, and 
 the second that of 37 to .5.3 : While the third table reported the number of persons, 
 West of the same mountain, who are charged with a State tax on moveable property 
 for the year 1828, to be 40,079: and the number of persons, East of it, charged in the 
 same year, with the same tax, to be 55.514. 
 
 This ratio may be expressed with sufficient accuracy, by 40 to 55, and corresponds 
 so nearly with that of 37 to 53. the ratio of the proprietors of lands and lots, in these 
 tico districts, and of 25 to 35, that of the white population of the same districts, that 
 with little error, a common measure may be assumed for these three proportions. 
 That measure would express both the relative proportion of the white population 
 
192 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 above and below tlais natural division of the Commonwealth, and of the legal voters 
 of the same districts. Inferring from the identity of these three proportions, be- 
 tween the free inhabitants and the proprietors of real and moveable property in 
 these extensive territories of the Commonwealth, the like identity throughout their 
 minute sub-divisions, I shall consider myself, in the sequel of my argument, as sus- 
 taining, at the same time, the position of my friend from Norfolk, and that of the 
 Legislative Committee. 
 
 In entering upon the last which I propose to consider, but by far, the most impor- 
 tant enquiry, of the many, which have arisen in the progress of this debate, into 
 *^ the right of the majority of any society to govern it," I find myself embarrassed, 
 by tiie very simplicity of the truth, I have to maintain. What is obscure, maybe ex- 
 plained ; what is perplexed, disentangled : error may be detected, and falsehood ex- 
 posed. But the mind is surprised, by the denial of a principle universally admitted, 
 and at a loss to prove, what, for ages, no one has had the singularity, or the temerity, 
 to question. 
 
 We are, hov/ever told, that there are no principles to be admitted any longer ; that 
 none in fact exist; and that whatever proposition w^e advance, as the basis of our 
 reasoning, must be proved. 
 
 The natural equality of man is written on his heart and stamped upon his visage 
 by the author of his being, after v/hose " express image" he vvas made. 
 
 While other animals look to the earth ; 
 
 homini sxihlime dedit ad sidera tollere vidtxis, — 
 
 His rights spring from his affections and his wants, and these he derived from God, 
 the author of his nature. He cannot exist out of society, because society is essen- 
 tial to his existence. His first relations are those of husband and father. That period, 
 which in other animals is ^hort, of dependence on a parent's care, is in man protract- 
 ed for purposes the most beneficent. The infant gathers his first instruction in his 
 mother's lap. His best virtues he imbibes from a father's care, a mother's tender- 
 ness. When age overcomes the parent, the son re-pays with kindness, the kindness 
 he has received. If the crutch drops from the feeble grasp of his sire, he picks it up 
 and restores it to his trembling hand. Patriotism is but filial love enlarged. When 
 we think of our country, we dwell on the memory of our early years, on the forms 
 of those who gave us our being and watclied over its imbecility. When they are 
 gone, we visit their remains, and from the unconscious dead imbibe anew the inspi- 
 ration of their virtues. Does not the savage cherish these affections The Tartar 
 wanders over the interminable plains of Asia from climate to climate, accompanied 
 by his flocks and herds; the Indian of America roams through forests, yet more wild. 
 But they re-visit the tombs of their progenitors, and recount to their children the story 
 of their deeds. 
 
 Are not these natural affections at the foundation of all the moral rights and du- 
 ties of man 
 
 Sympathy, is it not as natural to man as to the gregarioiis animals whom he gathers 
 around him ? Oat of these feelings, spring the elements of societj?'. 
 
 Is there no property known to savage life.? Even the bird defends her nest, as the 
 lion does his den, the former with less vigor, but with equal zeal. The hunter deco- 
 rates his cave with the fur of the animals he has killed ; and stores away, in time of 
 plenty, the provisions which a season of want may require. He has bis bow and ar- 
 rows for the mountain deer, and when he approaches the water side, his canoe and 
 spear for the finny tribe. In contem.pt of danger, he traverses the land and the wa- 
 ter under the influence of the same feelings which prompt the civilized man to build 
 permanent habitations, to till the land, and to lay up the fruits of autumn for the ne- 
 cessities of winter. How can labour and property be separated ? Property is at once 
 the fruit and the spring of labour. The author of the Essay on the Human Under- 
 standing, in his treatise on Civil Government, tells us emphatically, that he means, 
 " hij jyropertij" to denote " the life, liberty, and all the possessions of man." 
 
 I own that I was shocked, said Mr. M. when on opening the grammar of the law, 
 I first met the phrase Rights of things." Of Rights to things, I could readily con- 
 ceive. Though things are external to man, and may be detached from him, yet the 
 right to them is inseparably connected with his natural as well as social condition, 
 and is, as personal, as his right to locomotion, the exercise of which, supposes a con- 
 trol over the objects around, and consequently without himself. 
 
 If it be contended that this early condition of man is not a state of nature, but of 
 society, I am content, since it is one in which he is not bound to acknowledge a su- 
 perior right, in another, to control his conduct. 
 
 The existence of the rights which he enjoys, supposes a correspondent obhgation, 
 on his part, to respect the similar rights of others ; and hence the equality of right 
 common to all. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 193 
 
 The insecurity and inconvenience attendant on such a state of existence, would 
 render it of transient duration ; and nature who has given faculties to man which are 
 susceptible of improvement, and made their exercise conducive to his happiness, can- 
 not be supposed to have designed his continuance in a state unfitted for their culti- 
 vation. 
 
 It is a condition, however, in which, not Locke only, but all moral, and nearly all 
 political writers, have supposed mafi to exist, for the sake of establishing, by the light 
 of reason, his moral as well as his political rights and obligations. Upon the same 
 basis rest the treatises that have been made upon the law of nature and of nations, 
 which is but the just practical application, to sovereign States, of those rules which 
 appertain to the relations of man in a state of nature. Vattel founds his code of in- 
 ternational law, on the philosophy of Wolfius ; and deduces the equahty of States, 
 from the same source from wiiich Locke inferred the natural freedom and indepen- 
 dence of man. 
 
 I trust I shall be pardoned for saying, that I have been alarmed, as well as shocked, 
 at the levity with which the great apostle of English liberty and his doctrines have 
 been treated by the greater part of our adversaries in this debate. 
 
 They reproach us with deriding the wisdom of past ages, in the pursuit of novel 
 doctrines, wliile they claim, for themselves, to be wiser than their fathers who studied 
 with veneration the political philosophy of Locke, and embodied its maxims in their 
 Constitutions of Governmtait. 
 
 He wrote, it seems, a Comstitution for Carolina, and borrowed for his titular dis- 
 tinctions, terms of American and German origin — " Caciques and Landgraves." 
 Names then are things ; and the queen of flovv'ers is less sweet, if not called, the rose. 
 Locke cherished and sustained the great principles of liberty, by defending, as Milton, 
 against the same foe, the infamous house of Stuart, the liberty of his countrymen, to 
 frame what Government they pleased. That his enemies in England, as well as Scot- 
 land, were at that time neither few nor impotent, was manifested in the succeeding 
 century by two rebellions. It is remarkable that his cotemporary and antagonist. Sir 
 Robert Fihner, assailed the foundation of all his reasoning — the maxim, that all men 
 are by nature and by birth equally free, with the same argument in behalf of the divine 
 right of kings, that we have just heard used, not indeed for the same purpose, but in 
 opposition to the same doctrine of natural liberty, which we infer from the Bill of 
 Rights prefixed to our State Constitution. The ingenious member from Northamp- 
 ton (Mr. Upshur) used for this purpose one of Filmer's cases. Ascending to the cre- 
 ation of man, he historically proved, that our first parents formed the earliest human 
 society of which there is any record, and lie asked emphatically, if the doctrine of the 
 natural equality of man be true, icken Cain became equal to Adam, his father ? If 
 it was at 10, at 15, or 30 years of age." I use the very words of the interrogation. In 
 the language of Locke, I reply to it; when Cain, having arrived at maturity, no lon- 
 ger depended on his father for subsistence and protection; and the children, also, 
 of Abel, when they sustained the wants and soothed the infirmity of their aged 
 grandsire. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield; following the example of the gentleman from 
 Northampton, whose argument he applauded, has cast away Cocker, as well as Locke, 
 and taken up with Robinson Crusoe and De Foe, as his authorities. " Robinson 
 Crusoe,"' it seems, saved Friday's life, and bound Ins heart to him :" he gave Friday 
 bread, and bound to him his body." I have heard of slavery, arising from the rights 
 of conquest, and if my memory does not err, Grotius, I think, infers its legality Irom 
 the power of the victor, to slay his enemy. But I never before heard tliis doctrine 
 deduced from the rights of humanity and the obligation of gratitude. 
 
 " Robinson Crusoe gave Friday bread." They lived alone, but had commerce, 
 introduced arts and money on their island, Friday might justly have claimed, for his 
 labor, more than his bread : and if he preferred any other master, or to cease from 
 labor, I know not the law, human or divine, which would have held him in subjection. 
 
 If, along with these two islanders, ninety-nine other men had settled and formed 
 one society, Friday would have been as free as Robinson Crusoe himself. 
 
 Not one of these settlers would have been bound, by any will but his own, to form, 
 or when formed by others, to remain in this societ}; ; but having made it, the majority 
 of its members, until some other rule were provided, would of necessity govern it, as 
 our majority does the proceedings of this body. So is governed every other body con- 
 stituted like it, that is, without having a different rule prescribed for its government, 
 by higher authority. We know none, except that of God, higher than the power of 
 a Convention of the people, which is the power of the people themselves. 
 
 We have adopted the rules of the House of Delegates to regulate our proceedings j 
 but we were not bound to choose these, any more than the rules of the House of Re- 
 presentatives of the United States, or of the Legislature of any of the individual 
 States. We might have taken those of Massachusetts, or of Georgia. We might 
 have required a majority of two-thirds to the decision of any question ; for the elec- 
 
 25 
 
194 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tion of a President, or of a Select Committee. But even the rule of two-thirds, ab- 
 surd as it would be regarded, would derive its sanction from the will of a majority of 
 this body. This doctrine is so interwoven in all our thoughts, habits of political action, 
 and modes of judging, that to deny it, is to wound the common sense of every portion 
 of the American people. Let us return, for a moment to the island of De Foe, and 
 the newly formed society we left there. Suppose they desire to establish a political 
 Government. To organize its Legislative, Judicial, and Executive Departments. 
 Would they adopt any other rule of proceeding than by a majority ? It has been con- 
 tended that, in our Bill of Rights, the power of a majority to change the Constitution 
 is limited to cases wherein the public good requires such change. But, who is to 
 judge when the case occurs ? The public good is made up of the good of all the indi- 
 viduals who compose the public. Each man judges for himself and the community, 
 what is best, and the majority must consequently prevail, it being the majority of all 
 the judgments so formed, and having the sanction of a majority for its execution. 
 This sanction is, therefore, moral as well as physical. Suppose the %ettlers on the 
 island of De Foe, to have brought their respective families with them, consisting of 
 women and children. Count these or not, in the division by which the majority is 
 ascertained, and the ratio is unchanged. For if, from any two numbers having a given 
 proportion to each other, there be taken other numbers bearing to each other the same 
 ratio, the former remains unaltered. And so will it be, if, in hke proportion you aug- 
 ment those numbers. Women undoubtedly add to the physical force of society, and 
 so do infants. I have voted in New Jersey, under a Constitution of Government, 
 which does not exclude females from the right of suffrage. The Constitution has 
 undergone no change in this "State, but the society has. No woman votes, at present, 
 because no lady will go to the polls. 
 
 Casuistry and sophistry may perplex the doctrine of the natural freedom and equa- 
 lity of man, and of the consequent right of the iriajority of society, already formed, to 
 govern it, where no positive agreement has otlierwise ordered } but the common sense 
 of mankind will indicate their essential and natural rigiits. 
 
 The disorders of that Parisian mob, which overawed the deliberations of the con- 
 stituted authorities of France, in the early stage of her late revolution, were the abuses 
 of liberty, by mere brutal force, exerted against the principles by which its leaders 
 professed to iDe guided. 
 
 The abuse of truth is no argument against its existence. What has not been abused ? 
 A cloud is now passing over the sun ; but is that glorious luminary extinguished 
 The gospel of peace has been buried in superstition, after being shrouded m blood ; 
 but is our religion false ? The most pj-ecions things are abused, and for the very rea- 
 son that they are so. They interest the passions of man in the same degree that they 
 are essential to his happiness. 
 
 Rejecting the autliorities relied upon by the members from Northampton and from 
 Chesterfield, I turn to others in favor of human liberty, which I deem more pertinent 
 to my subject. Since the Bill of Rights prefixed to our own Constitution is deemed 
 equivocal, in its language, by some of our opponents, and denied the validity of law, by 
 others, I ask the indulgence of the Committee, while I look for authorities, less ques- 
 tionable, in the Constitutions of our sister States, to sustain the natural equality of 
 man and the rights of a majority, or, in the language of my friend from Frederick, 
 (Mr. Cooke,) who opened this debate, the jus rnajoris. 
 
 Before I consult the Constitutions of the New England States, I must be allowed 
 to express to the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. P. P. Barbour) to whose lucid style of 
 reasoning I always attend with pleasure, my surprise as well as regret, that he should 
 have so highly complimented the political institutions of Massachusetts, and have, at 
 the same time, denounced so unsparingly, those which have been planted " in the 
 wilds of the west" by the emigrant decendants of this hardy race of freemen. 
 
 Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, are but vS,ivarms from the fruitful northern hive, as Ken- 
 tucky, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi, are descended from our own southern 
 stock. As they have receded farther from our royal charters, and framed their insti- 
 tutions at greater leisure, with the advantages of the same experience and untram- 
 melled by pre-existing disabilities, so they have carried out our principles with equal 
 trutii and greater simplicity. 
 
 But I will not offend the taste of any gentleman who may, however fastidiously, 
 prefer the institutions of New England to those of the west. 
 
 Massachusetts formed her Constitution as our fathers did ours, in a period of war; 
 but after expelhng the enemy from her bosom: and the leisure with which she pro- 
 ceeded, is manifested by tlie time which she consumed in completing her labor, which 
 was begun in September, 1779, and ended in March, 1780. 
 
 Her Declaration of Rights is expressly made a constituent part of her Constitution 
 — and the first article of it affirms tliat 
 
 All men are born free and equal, 'and have certain natural, essential, and unali- 
 enable rights/ among which, is that of seeking and obtaining their happiness." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 195 
 
 The preamble sets forth The end of the institution. mainteBance and administra- 
 tion of Government to be — to secure the existence of the bod}- pohtic. to protect it, 
 and to furnish the individuals who compose it, with the power of eiij eying in safety 
 and tranquillity, their natural rights." 
 
 It asserts, that The bod}^ is formed by a voluntary association of individuals. It 
 is a social compact." And in the seventh article of the Declaration of Rights, 
 these doctrines are repeated and fortified after a solemn assertion," that " Govern- 
 ment is instituted for the protection, safety, prosperit}' and happiness of the people," 
 by declaring that the people alone have an incontestible, unalienable and indefeasi- 
 ble right to institute Government, and to reform, alter, or totally change the same" — 
 and farther, that 
 
 All elections ought to be free ; and all the inhabitants of this Commonwealth, 
 having such qualifications as they shall establish by their frame of Government, have 
 an equal right to elect ofiacers. and to be elected for public empioj-ments." 
 
 Article 10 asserts that, Each individual of the society has a right to be protected 
 by it, in the enjoyment of his life, liberty and propertv, according to the standing 
 laws. He is obliged, consequently, to contribute his share to the expense of their 
 protection, to give his personal ser'^nce or an equivalent, when necessary." Here we 
 see the origin of taxation. Its qualification comes next. But no part of the pro- 
 perty of an individual can with justice be taken from him. or applied to the pubhc 
 use, without liis own consent, or that of the representative body of the people." 
 
 Again, we read — ^' The people have a right, in an orderly and peaceable manner, to 
 assemble to consult upon the common good : give instructions to their representa- 
 tives." How is such instruction to be given By a representation of property.-* 
 On the principles of a mixed basis, or by a majority of those authorised to give it? 
 And if the majority of the voters may overrvde tlie representative by instructions, 
 what becomes of the supposed majority of interests, or of propertij in Legislation.' 
 
 The Constitution of New Hampshire, as altered and amended by a Convention of 
 Delegates in February, 17.Q2. affirms in the first part of the first article, nearly in the 
 languaofe of Massachusetts, that all men are born equally free and independent: 
 Therefore, all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded in mnsent 
 and instituted for the general good." 
 
 Art. 2. All men have certain, natural, essential and inherent rights— among 
 which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty : acquiring, possessing and pro- 
 tecting property : and in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. 
 
 " Art. 3. When men enter into a state of society, they surrender up some of their 
 natural rigJits, to that society, in order to ensure the protection of others ; and without 
 such an equivalent, the surrender is void. 
 
 Art 4= Among the natural riofhts, some are, in their very nature, unahenable, be- 
 cause no equivalent can be given or received for them. Of this kind are the rights 
 of conscience. 
 
 " Art. 11. All elections ought to be free, and every inhabitant of the State, having 
 the proper qualifications, has an equal right to elect and be elected into office." 
 
 The Constitution of Vermont was adopted Jul}' 4th, 1793. 
 
 The first chapter of the first article, declares : 
 That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain nattiral, in- 
 herent and unalienable rights, among which are the enjoying and defending life and 
 liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining 
 happiness and safety." 
 
 The Charter of Rhode Island was granted b}- King Charles II. in the fourteenth 
 year of his reign. 
 
 The inhabitants of this State are now, according to the argument of the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, in reply to that of my friend from -Brooke, the subjects of George 
 IV. since he contended, that if the Constitution of Viro-inia. be void, the people of 
 Virginia are so ; having, as he supposes, no other form of Government than that of 
 tlieir Royal Charter. 
 
 From this dilemma, however, if the Declaration of Independence did not relieve 
 them, I presume the treaty of peace did, which ended the war of the revolution with 
 the admission of that Independence, by the only nation that had an interest in deny- 
 ing it. 
 
 The Constitution of Connecticut also contains one of those silly instruments, called 
 a Declaration of Rights. It begins, too, in a most exceptionable manner, for it uses 
 in contradiction of all the arguments we have heard, to prove that there are no prin- 
 ciples of Government, the following language as a preamble to its very first article : 
 
 ■'• That the great and essential principles of liberty and free Government may be re- 
 cognized and established — we (the people of Connecticut) declare — That all men, when 
 they form a social compact, are equal in rights." What rights ? Rights antecedent to 
 the compact, I presume. " And that no nian, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive 
 public emoluments or privileges from the community." The following section of tliis 
 
196 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 article affirms, in the language of the Constitutions I have already noticed — That all 
 political power is inherent in the people, and all free Governments are founded on 
 their authority, and instituted for their benefit: and that they have, at all times, an 
 undeniable and indefeasible right to alter their form of Government, in such manner, 
 as they may think expedient." 
 
 Both branches of the Legislature of this State, consist of members chosen annu- 
 ally, by the electors, who may be any white male citizen of the United States, above 
 twenty-one years of age, having gained a settlement in the State, resided six months 
 before the election at which he offers to vote in the town, in which such election is 
 held, and shall have paid, if liable thereto, a State tax within the past year. 
 
 The Senate consists of twelve members, elected by the greatest number of votes 
 of the whole people, or by a general ticket. 
 
 The Constitution of New York contains no Bill or Declaration of Rights ; but it af- 
 fords a practical exem.phfication of all the great maxims of natural liberty asserted, 
 by the States of New-England, from which the far greater part of her own population 
 has been derived. 
 
 It establishes and appropriates certain taxes on salt, and certain auction duties, that 
 then yielded the State more than half the annual revenue, but it allows no represen- 
 tation for either. 
 
 It establishes the right of suffrage on a very broad basis, requiring a freehold quali- 
 fication only in persons of colour. The Senate which it creates, consists of thirty-two 
 members, for the election of whom it divides the territory of the State into eight dis- 
 tricts, with reference exclusively to the number of their inhabitants, to be ascertained 
 by an enumeration to be made once in every ten years. 
 
 The Assembly consists of one hundred and twenty-eight members to be apportioned 
 among the several counties of the State., according to the number of their respective 
 inhaJjitants. It moreover provides, that every county heretofore established and sepa- 
 rately organized, shall always be entitled to one member of the Assembly ; but no new 
 county shall hereafter be erected, unless its population shall entitle it to a member. 
 This is rather an apparent than real, and at most but a transient qualification of equal 
 representation as will be seen, by recurring to the actual population of the smallest 
 county in this State, and comparing the extent of its fast peopling territory, with that 
 of the oldest and most populous counties. 
 
 The Constitution of New Jersey was made while she recognized her Colonial de- 
 pendence on Great Britain ; and the only subsequent alteration of it has been effected 
 by a law, substituting in its language, where the word " Colony' occurs, the word 
 " State." 
 
 It is very nearly as ancient, as that of Virginia. But although ratified two days 
 only, before the Declaration of Independence by Congress, it expressly provides that 
 it shall be void in the event of a reconciliation with Great Britain. By her persever- 
 ing struggle, through the calamities of the common war, waged in support of the 
 principles, for which we now contend in debate — this gallant State, manifested the 
 value, which she set on those principles, by her deeds, if not by the terms of her Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 The Constitution of Pennsylvania made in 1790, is obnoxious both in its principles, 
 and its details, to the criticism of all the gentlemen who have advocated the basis of 
 taxation, and numbers, as the proper ground of representation. The 9th article, has 
 the following remarkable preamble, " That the general, great and essential principles 
 of liberty and free Government, may be recognized and unalterably established, we 
 declare : 
 
 I. " That all men are horn equally free and independent, and have certain iriherevt 
 and indefeasible rights, among which, are those of enjoying and defending life and 
 liberty ; of acquiring and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their 
 own happiness. 
 
 II. " That all power is inherent in the people, and all free Governments are founded 
 on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the ad- 
 vancement of those ends, they have, at all times, . an unalienable, and indefeasible right, 
 to alter, reform, or abolish their Government, in such manner as they may think 
 proper." 
 
 In giving effect to these principles, the Constitution of this State, provides that the 
 number of representatives of the popular branch of her Legislature shall be appoi-- 
 tioned according to the number of taxable inhabitants, without respect to the sum of 
 tax paid by each, among the city of Philadelphia, and the several counties of the 
 Commonwealth, in conformity with an examination to be made once in seven years. 
 _ The Senate consists of members to be chosen in districts, after a periodical appor- 
 tionment to the number of taxable inhabitants in each district. 
 
 While the population of Philadelphia, is not denied its proportional weight in the 
 Councils of Pennsylvania, no respect is paid to the superior wealth of that city, 
 which yields a full moiety of the revenue of the State, in the shape of taxes. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 197 
 
 To this State, belongs, moreover, the glory of having preceded Virginia, more than 
 a century, in asserting" the great principles of religious freedom. 
 
 The people of Delaware, the least State in the Union, fall not behind their more 
 powerful fellow-citizens, in asserting the natural rights of man, both civil, and religious. 
 
 In their Constitution made in 17'j2— " We," say tlie people of this Commonwealth, 
 " hereby ordain and establish this Constitution of Government for the State of De- 
 laware. , . , 1 • • J 
 
 " Through divine goodness, all men have by nature the rights of worshippmg and 
 serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences, of enjoying and 
 defending life and liberty, of acquiring and protecting reputation and property, and, in 
 general, of attaining objects suitable to their condition, without injury by one to 
 another ; and as thele rights are essential to their welfare, for the due exercise there- 
 of, power is inherent inlhem ; and, therefore, all just authority in the institutions of 
 political society, is derived from the people, and established with their consent, to ad- 
 vance their happiness : and they may, for this end, as circumstances require, from 
 time to time, alter their Constitution of Government." 
 
 The Constitution of Maryland dates its existence from 1776, the most memorable 
 year of the war of ihe revolution, and maintains, the principles which gave rise to it, 
 in the following declaration : " We, the Delegates of jMaryland in free and full Con- 
 vention assembled" — declare, That all Government of right, originates from the 
 people, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of the icliole 
 
 " That all persons invested with the Legislative or Executive powers of Govern- 
 ment, are the trustees of the public, and as such, accountable for their conduct; 
 wherefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and the public liberty ^ 
 manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people 
 may, and of rigiit ought to, reform the old, or establish a new Government. The 
 doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression, is absurd, slavish, 
 and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind. 
 
 That the right, in the people, to participate in the Legislature, is the best securi- 
 ty of liberty, and the foundation of all free Government; for this purpose, elections 
 ouo-ht to be free and frequent, and every man having property in, a common interest 
 with, and attachment to, the community, ought to have a Right of Suffrage." 
 
 I fear, said ^Ir. M. that I have w^earied the attention of llie Committee, before I 
 have reached the Bill of Rights of our own Constitution, if a Bill of Rights and Consti- 
 tution we have, as I myself do not doubt, whatever may have been the defect of their 
 origin. That Bill of Rights is so engraven on the memory of every member of this 
 Committee, and has been so often referred to in this debate, that I will not read it. 
 But I protest against that construction of the sacred truths which it contains, which 
 seeks to impair their force, by combining them with the actual details of the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 The causes of the imperfections of the machine of Government, were truly and elo- 
 quently unfolded, by my friend from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke.) But the presence of 
 danger, which may obstruct the labour of the most skilful artist in the fabrication of a 
 complicated engine, need not impair his judgment of the plan by which he works. 
 A re-organization of the counties of Virginia, or a Census of her population, at a time 
 when no Census had ever been taken, of any people in modern Europe, or, for aught 
 I know, in modern times; and at such a time — when a threatened invasion, by a fo- 
 reign and most formidable enemy , was hourly expected to drive the people from their 
 homes, and to waste their estates, was not within the compass of possible events. But, 
 did it follow, that the great principles of freedom, for which the framers of the Con- 
 stitution contended, in battle as well as in debate, should not be profoundly understood 
 and ably elucidated? Was not the occasion calculated to quicken and invigorate all 
 the operations of the human intellect; and although it might embarrass the movements 
 of the principal actors, to enlighten, strengthen, and confirm their purpose 1 
 
 Were the framers of our Constitution but half educated, as it is contended, all their 
 descendants are? In such an age, truth flashes from mind to mind, with electric ac- 
 tivity, and a force irresistible. Hence, we perceive not merel}^ a conformit}' of opi- 
 nion, but an identity of language, in all the State Constitutions of that period, from 
 Massachusetts to Georgia, in relation to the foundation of my present argument, the 
 natural equality in which men enter society, and the right of a majority of numbers 
 to govern. 
 
 The direct tendency, the obvious as well as declared purpose of the basis of repre- 
 sentation, adopted by the Legislative Committee, is to enable such a majority of the 
 people of Virginia to govern this Commonwealth, as, of right, they should. 
 
 The member from Chesterfield, recurring to the same period with myself, and rea- 
 soning from a supposed inequality in the present taxes of this Commonwealth, invokes 
 the principles of the Revolution to his aid. Our quarrel with the mother country, he, 
 along with several of his predecessors, earnestly tells us, grew out of the violation of 
 
198 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the principle, for which he and they are now contending, " of not being taxed with- 
 out their consent," which they so define as to require a certain proportion between 
 taxation and representation. On the other hand, it has been insisted by my friend 
 from Brooke, that the Revolution sprung from a total denial, on the part of the Colo- 
 nies, of the right of the British Parhament, to bind them to an obedience of any laws 
 whatever, to which they had not given their assent, by their Colonial Legislatures. 
 
 No two gentlemen have precisely agreed on this topic ; and yet, it seems to me, that 
 none have erred in their statements so tar as they have severally gone. Their disagree- 
 ments have arisen from their severally referring to different periods of a contest of long 
 duration. It began with the memorable Stamp Act, which imposed a tax to operate in 
 the interior of each Colony, mingling with all the transactions of life. The tax was 
 resisted, in argument, on both sides of the Atlantic, on the ground, that the Colonies 
 were not represented in the Parliament of England; and, therefore, should not be tax- 
 ed. The stamps were sent to America — a mob at Williamsburg threatened their de- 
 struction. The stamp-master resigned his station almost as soon as he landed; the 
 city of Williamsburg was illuminated; the stamps re-shipped, and the act imposing 
 them, shortly after rescinded. 
 
 The elder Pitt, and his eloquent co-adjutors, in opposition to the British ministry, 
 of that day, contended, that the mother country had a right to bind the Colonies in 
 all cases whatever of legislation, but that taxation was not legislation. That taxes 
 were a free grant of money, by the Commons, to the Crown; and that, being so, the 
 Commons of England could not grant away the money of the people of America. 
 
 Fortunately, as the event proved for us, but unluckily for Great Britain, Charles 
 Townsend discovered a mode of obviating the objection to the Stamp Act, by the ex- 
 ercise of what, he considered, the unquestioned right of Parliament to regulate the 
 trade between the Colonies and the mother country, which he deemed an olfice of or- 
 dinary legislation. Eience the imposition of a duty on tea, payable on being landed 
 at the place of importation. 
 
 The Colonies found that they had nothing to gain by this distinction, since money 
 could as well be drawn from their pockets, by commercial regulations, which were 
 laws, as by taxation considered as, what few taxes ever are, tiie free grants of those 
 by whom they are paid. They discovered, in fact, what their friends, for some time, 
 appeared not to have contemplated, on the other side of the Atlantic, that to avoid 
 taxation in some shape or other, they must maintain the doctrine that the British Par- 
 liament had a right to bind them, in no shape whatever, without their consent: That 
 the Union of the Empire on both sides of the Atlantic, was, as that of Scotland with 
 England, in the Crown, and, not in the Parliament. My friend from Brooke had, in 
 his able argument, very truly described this stage of the controversy, at which, and 
 not before, the tender of a representation in Parliament was made, to America, by 
 England, and scornfully, as well as wisely rejected. Had a similar effort, at reconci- 
 liation, been made, at the period of the repeal of the Stamp Act, a different result might 
 have happened, and the subsequent controversy delayed, if not prevented. To this 
 early stage of the contest, between England and her Colonies, the gentlemen from 
 Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) from Hanover, (Mr. Morris,) and from Chesterfield, (Mr. 
 Leigh,) had adverted in aid of their common opposition to the resolution in debate. 
 
 The last of these gentlemen has pushed the inference, which he deduced from the 
 doctrine of the former opposition in England, relative to the nature of taxation, to a 
 length as extravagant in some of its consequences, as inconsistent with the modern 
 notion of taxation, on both sides of the Atlantic. 
 
 Are we to go back to the declension of the Feudal system, imported from Norman- 
 dy, or yet farther, to the Saxon Wittenagemote, to learn from the antiquities of the 
 English Government the nature of taxation in America.? That taxes, are not the free 
 grants of those who pay them, in a country where every thing is taxed from the cra- 
 dle to the coffin ? Where the exciseman seals up the key-hole of the door of the ware- 
 house of the manufacturer, and carries away the key in his pocket ! 
 
 That the House of Commons, gradually acquired the rank of a co-ordinate branch 
 of the English Parliament, by firmly uniting to their grants of money to the Crown, 
 the petitions of their constituents, for a redress of grievances, is an historical fact, 
 which can reflect no light on the path of our present enquiry. 
 
 The legislative pov/er of the Commons, is established in England, on the principles 
 of the revolution of 1688. Taxation is a branch of legislative power, and was the in- 
 strument of its acquisition. In the last relation, it bears, however, no necessary afl5- 
 nity to the end which it accomplished. Who would trace to Syria or Spain, the ori- 
 gin of Magna Charta, because the sword blades of the Barons, who assembled at Run- 
 nimeads under the frowning turrets of Windsor, may have been forged at Damascus or 
 Toledo ? Shall we, at this day, repair to the British House of Commons to learn ihe 
 true character of Legislative power in America ? An instructive lesson it might teach 
 us, against the inequality of representation of which we so justly complain. The cor- 
 ruption to which it has given rise, is no longer confined to the rotten boroughs in the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 199 
 
 ffift of the nobility, but extends to the vitals of the people Turn to the life of Shen- 
 dan hv More, and you may read this truth, in the reproaches which he makes to his 
 friends, that they will not supply him with funds to purchase a seat m Parliament. 
 There, indeed, a representative has to buy his constituents, bometimes to travel 
 throucrh the kingdom to find them. 
 
 In attemptina- to assimilate the present controversy for pohtical power between dif- 
 ferent parts of diis Commonwealth, to that which sul^sisted between England and 
 her Colonies in the war of the revolution, the member from Chesterfield rehes on a 
 supposed inequality in the distribution of the taxes of the Commonwealth. He would 
 iustifv the lowland country, which is over-represented, m mamtammg a political 
 power disproportionate to the numbers of its wliite population, on the ground that it 
 is at present over-taxed. r ■ ^ 
 
 To sustain his position, he should show that the pubhc taxes are not tairly propor- 
 tioned to the abihty of those by whom they are paid— and could he show this, the 
 responsibility, for such injustice", would rest, not with those who claim a new appor- 
 tionment of the legislative power of the Government, but with those who have so 
 long ruled the Commonwealth. 
 
 It may not be amiss to examine the facts from which this supposed inequality ot 
 taxation is deduced. With this view, I beg leave to recall the attention of the Com- 
 mittee to some of those which I adduced, for another purpose, in an early stage of 
 my argument. The revenue of this Commonwealth, except the income of the funds 
 for Infernal Improvement and Education, was before the last war, as it has been ever 
 since the peace, principally drawn from three sources : taxes on land, slaves and 
 horses. 
 
 If the actual value of the lands and lots assessed for taxation, be now assumed to be 
 $90,000,000; of the slaves, amounting in number to 450,000, to be fG7,500,000; 
 and of 273,000 horses, at 50 dollars each, to be $13,650,000; then a comparison of 
 the revenue derived from each of these sources in the last year, will by no means 
 prove that the pubhc burthens are unequally distributed, to the prejudice of the slave- 
 holder. 
 
 The revenue charged upon this peculiar capital will be found to be less than that 
 charged upon horses, and still less than that charged upon lands, estimating each sub- 
 ject of taxation at its fair value. For evidence of this, I refer to a table of the com- 
 parative revenue on each of these subjects since the equalizing land-tax and Sena- 
 torial district act of 1817, which went into complete operation in 1820. 
 
 For the first four years of the succeeding period, the average product of the land- 
 tax, was $ 181,000, of the slave-tax $ 159,000, and of the horse-tax $ 38,000. 
 
 The revenue from these sources, for the current year, in round numbers, is, by the 
 table supplied me, 175,000 dollars on lands, 97,000 on slaves, and 33,000 on horses. 
 Notwithstanding all that has been said in the debate, these facts bear me out in the 
 position, that in the current year, the capital in slaves is taxed less than that in land. 
 
 An error pervades all the reasoning of our adversaries on this subject, in consider- 
 ing the slave-tax as a tax on a certain territory rather than on a productive property ; 
 of the tax upon which, no complaint would be made, were it dispersed over the sur- 
 face of the Commonwealth. For it is not easy to conceive an objection to a tax on 
 this property that might not be made with equal propriety to any other tax whatever. 
 It is founded as all taxes should be, on the ability of the persons taxed ; and that 
 ability is derived from the productiveness of this species of stock. The tables of the 
 natural growth of this population demonstrate, when compared with the increase of 
 its numbers in the Commonwealth, for twenty years past, that an annual revenue of 
 not less than a million and a half of dollars is derived from the exportation of a part 
 of that increase : While llie proprietors of the lands of. the Commonwealth, contri- 
 buting a greater tax in proportion to the actual value of those lands, liave derived no 
 correspondent profit from the gradual augmentation of that value. The revenue of 
 every country consists of the income of its land, its labour, and its stock. Taxation 
 can "draw from that income without oppression, only part of what remains, after sus- 
 taining the capital of every description which produces it, and the labour engaged in 
 its production. If the numbers of the labourers were an exact measure of this in- 
 come, taxation to be equal, should be proportioned to the aggregate number of all the 
 slaves and free labourers of a country. But, the surplus which the former are able to 
 supply after sustaining themselves, is, in fact, greater in proportion as their wants are 
 less costly, and their natural increase conspires with the produce of their labour to 
 swell the income of the proprietor who is chargeable with the tax they pay. 
 
 But while I du not admit, but on the contrary, am prepared to disprove that injustice 
 has hitherto been practised" towards the proprietors of this description of property, 1 
 am not only desirous, but deem it practicable to afford to them a protection from the 
 oppression which they apprehend. 
 
 I am aware, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. M. of the extreme sensibility, with which 
 the members of this body, who are opposed to the resolution on your table, receive 
 
200 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 every suggestion of a readiness on our part, to provide, by the Constitution itself, a 
 security against the danger of unequal taxation. In whatever spirit it may be ac- 
 cepted, I am however prepared to submit a guarantee, which, to my poor judgment, 
 will be both just in itself and adequate to its end. It will consist in a Constitutional 
 provision, that no tax on slaves shall ever be imposed, without a general tax on lands 
 and horses : and that every tax which may be levied on those subjects, shall be found- 
 ed on a fair assessment of their value, and bear to that value an uniform proportion. 
 
 Compare the security which such a provision, would aftbrd, with that supplied by the 
 Constitution ©f the United States, to the same property, in the apportionment of all 
 direct taxes ; and will any question be made of the superiority of the former ? How 
 are direct taxes, which are to be apportioned among the States, according to their 
 respective representation, distinguishable from indirect taxes, which are required to 
 be uniform In the judgment of the Supreme Court, in the case of the United 
 States and Hilton, the boundaries of these two species of taxation, are designated 
 mainly by reference to a single paragraph from the author of the Wealth of INations. 
 This was the case of the carriage tax, which the court regarded as a tax, not on capi- 
 tal, but expenditure, or income, which is commonly its measure. Some of the judges 
 doubt their own ability to lay down characteristic distinctions which shall invariably 
 serve to denote the appropriate subjects of these different taxes, required by the Con- 
 stitution to be differently levied. The clause, on the other hand, which I propose as 
 a security to the proprietor of slaves, against unequal taxation, if admitted into the 
 Constitution, could receive but one construction, which there is not a magistrate in 
 Virginia who would hesitate to pronounce, and by which, any law passed, in viola- 
 tion of it, would be promptly arrested. A similar security, T would leave it to those, 
 who may deem it essential to dictate, for the protection of the tenure of this propert}'-. 
 It will be repeated, that these are but paper guarantees" — " mere parchment." And 
 what else have we for our lives and our liberty ? The trial by jury, the writ of ha- 
 beas corpus, the freedom of speech, the liberty of the press, the rights of conscience, 
 do they not all rest for their safety on the solemn compact of the people with each 
 other, contained in the Constitution of the State, and of the United States ? 
 
 When corruption and licentiousness shall have destroyed all the security which we 
 derive from the Constitution, there will remain nothing else to preserve, or worthy of 
 preservation. The proposed basis of free white population is represented, by our op- 
 ponents, as an attempt to divorce property, from power. They speak, as if the whole 
 property of the Commonwealth belonged exclusively to their constituents, and was 
 about to be wrested from them by violence. The member from Chesterfield emphati- 
 cally asserts, that what is his, is his. It is his, Sir, truly, but subject to the lawful 
 claims of the Government, by which it is protected. Those claims are commensurate 
 with the necessities of the Commonwealth, and the ability of its citizens to comply 
 with them under a just and equal system of contribution. 
 
 Gentlemen imagine that a just and equal distribution of political power will expose 
 all property to destruction. They have drawn lines across the Commonwealth, and 
 exclaim, there, all is danger ; here, all is security ; as if they apprehended, from the 
 West, an irruption of barbarians, as soon as a new basis of political power may be 
 
 Sir, no basis of representation can be formed, which v/ill transfer the power of this 
 Government from the hands of the slave-holding population, m less than twenty 
 years from the first Census, which may be taken under a new Constitution. 
 
 L have pointed out some striking defects, in the table returned, upon conjecture, of 
 the present white population of the various counties and corporations of the Common- 
 wealth. It is safe to reason from our past, to our future growth. After adopting a 
 course sanctioned by experience, and deriving its facts from the actual enumerations 
 of the population of the Commonwealth— I have arrived at this result ; and I appeal 
 to the gentlemen who have expressed so much alarm, to disprove it if they can. 
 
 They conjure up imaginary dangers and reason from them, as if, instead of being 
 the creatures of their own fancy, they were solemn realities. 
 
 All the foundations of property are to be uprooted ! By whom By men of fru- 
 gal habits ; who are laboring incessantly for its acquisition. Who can hope to acquire 
 It, only, by the exertions of a hardy industry, from a stubborn soil, upon an uneven 
 country, and who can hold and enjoy it, when acquired, but under the same protect- 
 inff power of the laws .? The tables I have already quoted, show that property is 
 diffused as widely to the West as to the East ; and, consequently, the interest which 
 guards its existence. , . , , j j • * 
 
 Do not our opponents perceive that the argument which they deduce against the 
 augmentation of the power of the West, that it will be exerted to the prejudice of 
 th? East, may be retorted upon them, and with the greater force ; since they desire 
 to keep that, to which they have, in truth, no title ; and which must consequently be 
 maintained by that jealousy which ever accompanies injustice 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 201 
 
 Wlaat, our opponents? ask, has the majority to apprehend from the minority ; the 
 West, from the East ? For if the proportions of the people be not thus, truly expressed, 
 the East, has, itself, nothing to fear from the proposed apportionment of power. 
 What, then, has the West to apprehend ? I answer every thing, from the very alarm 
 expressed by the gentlemen, who make the enquiry, in dread of the approaching as- 
 cendancy of the West? Laws, to discourage the improvement of a country, whose 
 inhabitants are daily prompted to forsake it, by the temptations offered them, in 
 cheaper lands abroad", and more liberal institutions, than they find at home. 
 
 Do you inquire what shall be the provisions of such laws ? Some of them, I will 
 borrow from our past ; others from our existing code of Legislation. 
 
 I will not speak of the limitation of suffrage, in the Constitution itself, which de- 
 grades the non-freeholder to the level of the slave : but I will refer you to one of its 
 consequences, the act of 1754, for Colonial defence. When threatened with a French 
 and Indian war, the draft for compulsory enlistments, for military service, was extended 
 by the General Assembly, to all persons, except such as were under twenty-one and 
 above fifty years of age, and all freeholders or voters, and all indented or bought 
 servants. 
 
 Need I go so far back ? What is our present body of road laws, but one system of 
 oppression upon the laboring poor, who are taxed in personal service as well as by a 
 levy in money, equally with tlie rich, to keep that highway in repair, which they have 
 not the power to injure, unless by their footsteps. Nay. to work on the roads is a 
 duty from which any proprietor of tico slaves is exempted, notwithstanding his use of 
 the road is nearly in the direct proportion of his wealth ? 
 
 What may I not say, of that system of poor laws, which extorts the resources of 
 public charity, by an equal tax, from all men, without distinction of fortune, except 
 ■what may arise from the application of a poll tax, to a country having slaves 
 
 Such are some of the features of the old code. For the new, let us suppose every 
 other branch of revenue lopped off from our present sj^stem, and a poll tax to be 
 levied on the free white inhabitants of the Commonwealth, without reference to the 
 distinction of wealth 
 
 If, instead of cherishing, it be desired to keep down the West, such are the present 
 facilities for descending the river Ohio, and many of its tributaries, that, but a little 
 ingenuity would make the trans-Alleghany country a wilderness again, fit only for 
 the habitation of beasts of prey. 
 
 Gentlemen reason, as if the only power in Government was taxation ; as they have 
 represented the protection of property to be almost the sole end of Legislation. They 
 forget the numerous laws, which protect the rights of persons, in peace, as well as the 
 more important shield, which they cast around him in war. 
 
 It cannot have been forgotten, that during the last war, it was proposed, and not 
 without apparent reason, to exempt a part of the militia on the sea board, from mili- 
 tary service, beyond the limits of their respective counties ; a regulation which might 
 have been extended, so far, as greatly to auofment the pressure of military duty on the 
 West. 
 
 What are all the laws which limit, or extend the period of military service r That 
 exempt apprentices and slaves from the obligation to perform it : but laws, the burthen 
 of which, the wealthy can escape, by hiring substitutes ; and, to which, the poor man 
 must yield obedience, however reluctantly" he may leeve his Jiome without a master; 
 his wife, without a husband; or his children without a parent to protect them. 
 
 How many laws are there, witli respect even to property, which operate, also, upon 
 the very body, manners and character of society ; disappointing labour of its fruits, 
 and brinofing discredit upon the country, which is obliged to acknowledge their sway.? 
 Such are^those laws which withhold the payment, or suspend the legal remedies for 
 the recovery of just debts : which in fine, drive commerce from a land, designed by 
 nature to be her favoured abode, and turn her choicest blessings into absolute curses. 
 
 Society owes other obligations, to itse'f, or to its members. Protection from foreign 
 violence and the administration of justice, are of indispensable necessity. But the 
 intercourse and education of its citizens, have, also, claims upon its attention, that no 
 wise Government has, hitherto disregarded. 
 
 These subjects are among those, however, that fill our opponents with the greatest 
 alarm. They have denounced all attempts to improve the natural advantages of the 
 State, at public cost, whether by roads or canals ; and this, because of a single experi- 
 ment which has, it seems, been badly conducted. 
 
 The people of James river, have been disappointed in the result of a favorite im- 
 provement — As the member from Albemarle demonstrated, they owe that disappoint- 
 ment to themselves alone. They bought a whistle, found it discoursed not such music 
 as they expected ; and like a spoilt cliild, they have broken it in two, and thrown it 
 away. . If I may presume to advise them, and I "am at least sincere in what I say, I 
 will tell them to finish tlieir canal to Lynchburg ; then quadruple, as they well may, 
 the load of their boats : substitute a single horse, an old man, and a boy, for their im-^ 
 
 26 
 
202 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pellin^ power, instead of a half a dozen able bodied hands, and they will no longer, 
 find cause to complain of the money they have expended. 
 
 But what has this failure to do with the question before us ? Did not the first vote 
 in this Hall, in favor of a Convention, precede this James river scheme of improve- 
 ment, and did that not spring up in this city ? 
 
 As for.jthe late Charlottesville Convention, it had any other than a western origin. 
 
 I will leave its vindication, to my venerable, learned and patriotic friend, (Chief 
 Justice Marshall,) now sitting before me, who I fear, will not give his support, to our 
 basis of representation, though certainly, from no prejudice against the improvement 
 of the roads and rivers of the Commonwealth. 
 
 The education of the people is, also, an object of dread; and the bill of 1817, 
 which passed the House of Delegates, by a very large majority, notwithstanding its 
 present unequal basis of representation, has been the topic of special denunciation and 
 complaint. 
 
 We are told that we wish to acquire the power of educating the poor man's child, 
 at the expense of the rich. 1 confess, I am ashamed to hear such suggestions, at this 
 day, and in the Capitol of Virginia. Although, I perceive no connexion between 
 them, and the purpose of our present dehberations, yet they spring from a source so 
 respectable, (Mr. Green,) that I must believe, being worthy of the gentleman from 
 Culpeper. (Mr. Green,) they merit my notice. Such a cause ought not to suffer, for 
 want of an advocate. The bill referred to, with all its imperfections, I am willing to 
 let rest upon my head. But one word of defence. 
 
 Since 1819, we have applied $ 45,000 a year to the education of our poor, and 10,000 
 children are imperfectly taught for about six months in the year, by its application. 
 
 New York has, at present, in her free schools, open at all times, equally to the rich 
 and the poor, more than 450,000 children ; and to the State Treasury, the annual cost 
 of their instruction is $ 100,000. By the judicious application of this sum, she has 
 elicited individual zeal and wealth sufficient to do the rest of this beneficent labor. 
 
 Connecticut, whose school system is an improvement upon that of Massachusetts, 
 and nearly as ancient, as its importation from Scotland in 1G47, employs in its support 
 a revenue of $ 80,000. She finds that sum sufficient to educate all her children, in 
 number more than as many thousand. I once visited a gentleman in that State, the 
 purest, if not the most perfect Commonwealth, in existence, who was worth several 
 hundred thousand dollars, though with but four and twenty acres of land near his 
 dwelling. He kept several carriages — and the son of his coachman went to the same 
 school with his own grand-child. Both vv^ere well taught. 
 
 Except in the county of Brooke, where about five dollars a year suffices for the 
 education of her poor children, the annual charge upon the Literary Fund, for every 
 pupil whom it instructs, is no where less than eight dollars; while in Connecticut, 
 this expense, as we see, is very little more than a fourth of that amount, corresponding,, 
 as it does, with the cost of instruction in the parochial schools of Scotland. 
 
 Will the ricli any where complain of a system which, while the children of the 
 poor are instructed enables them to educate their own, at a cost so reduced.'' And is 
 the education of the people, who are every where in America, the acknowledged 
 guardians of their own rights, the source of all political power, a subject of mere 
 Eastern or Western interest, in Virginia ? 
 
 Who are the people of the West ? Are they not our fellow-citizens, our friends and 
 brothers.'' Whence did they spring? From the East.? Have they forgot their common 
 origin ? It was with extreme concern, that I heard the gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. 
 J. S. Barbour,) declare, a few days ago, that the West had not a proper sympathy 
 with the East, and urge in proof of this charge, that during the invasion of the Com- 
 monwealth, in the last war, their representatives on this floor, voted against the De- 
 fence Bill of 1815. They did not hear, he emphatically said, the " sound of the can- 
 non of the enemy, nor behold the distress of the East:" and, therefore, felt it not. 
 He would not trust them with political power. Sir, said Mr. M. this very " Defence 
 Bill," was the offspring of the joint labour of a delegate from Loudoun, and a gen- 
 tleman from Augusta, now sitting in my view. I call upon my patriotic and liberal 
 friend, to repel a charge, for which, there is not, in truth, the slightest foundation. If 
 many Western delegates voted against this bill, so did many East of the mountains 
 which divide us, as well they might. It became a law, as my honorable friend (Mr. 
 Johnson,) can testify, who must well remember also the numerous imperfections 
 which remained in it, and the complicated basis of taxation and enumeration, on 
 which its most efficient provisions depended for their execution. 
 
 We trusted, in truth, to the moral feeling of the country, to supply those admitted 
 defects. Nor, had the war continued, would that trust have been in vain — But while 
 the war lasted, did it furnish no evidence of the common sympathy, which binds the 
 West to the East.? The gentleman flom Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh,) himself, can attest 
 the contrary. He had an official station, near the person of the commander of the army, 
 which asseml)led for the defence of this Capitol; and if he was, as I then understood, the 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTION. 
 
 203 
 
 author of the proclaaiation which brought that army together, he must remember its ef- 
 fect. [Mr. Leigh shook his head.] There was not a mountain, a river, a valley of the 
 West, that did not respond with animation, to this appeal to the patriotism of Virginia. 
 At the cry of invasion and danger from the East, every man of the West, from the 
 summit of the Blue Ridge, to the shores of the Ohio, capable of bearing arms, mount- 
 ed his knapsack, and turned his face from home — there was no distinction of the rich, 
 from the poor. Gentlemen who had occupied conspicuous places in our halls of le- 
 gislation — the ploughman from the fresh fallow field — officers, soldiers and citizens — 
 all moved on witli one accord. In a fortnight, 15,000 men were mustered in sight of 
 the Capitol ; among them the largest body of cavalrj^ that ever was reviewed in our 
 portion of this continent. In one morning, a thousand of them were discharged as 
 supernumeraries. On their return home, they met the eagles of the West, still sweep- 
 ing their flight to the East. Their course was turned to their mountains, only when 
 danger had ceased. 
 
 Nor was this, the only proof, during that war, which the West afforded, of devotion 
 to the East. 
 
 Shall I be told, by the gentlejnan from Chesterfield, while I labor to bind closer 
 around my countrymen, the cords of union, that I haunt his imagination with the 
 spectres of the men who died at Norfolk.' I purposely omit the offensive association 
 which accompanied the allusion. I will bear his reproaches. 
 
 It is full well known that, in the progress of that war, Virginia was thrown, in a 
 great degree, upon her own resources, for defence. Her noble bay. was locked up by 
 a British Admiral. Her State taxes doubled — Private income was nearly at an end. 
 Her Banks had, by forced loans, been compelled to suspend the issue of specie. A 
 currency of depreciated paper flooded the markets of the country, where there were- 
 any. The system of common defence by the forces of the Union, had so far failed, 
 that the several States had begun to raise separate armies for their peculiar safety. It 
 was a time to try men's hearts. And what did the West JMarch, without a murmur, 
 from their health-inspiring mountains, to the marshes of Princess Anne. They de- 
 scended from the remotest boundaries of the Commonwealth, traversing it for four 
 hundred miles, from Washington and Brooke, to the sea-board. I witiiessed their 
 conduct, their sufferings, and the fortitude with which they bore them. No man of 
 Princess Anne ever complained of the deportment of those men ; that any soldier ever 
 molested his person, disturbed his quiet, or wasted his property; that he had trodden 
 down the grass of his fields, or traversed them, but by the paths, which he himself 
 had made. The corn ripened around the tents of these soldiers untouched, in the 
 midst of no ordinary privations, and a life of suffering, to which most of them were 
 unused. 
 
 Disease made its way into their camps in various forms, and thousands ingloriously 
 perished, of v/hose names no vestiges remain, but in the remembrance of their chil- 
 dren. I have searched for their graves, but could find no trace of them except a few 
 scattered stones, on the commons of Norfolk. 
 
 In the month of November next preceding the peace, which terminated this war, 
 one hundred and sixty were buried, eight hundred discharged, because incapable of 
 further service, and .2,300 returned on the sick list. These facts, Mr. Chairman, de- 
 rived from an official source, were, you must well recollect, handed over to you, to 
 serve as the basis of your argument in support of that very Defence Bill, of which, 
 the member from Culpeper has reminded us. It was not till the close of this perilous 
 season, or immediately before the return of peace, that any aid was ordered to our re- 
 lief, from North Carolina, though Norfolk, is as much her sea-port, as ours : and her 
 boundary crosses the canal in its vicinity. 
 
 Sir, the part which my friend from Norfolk (Gen. Taylor) who gave discipline, and 
 character, and confidence to the militia army, I have described, has taken in this ques- 
 tion, does equal credit to his heart and his head. It is worthy of the Baj'ard of Vir- 
 ginia, a man sans jyeur et sans reproche.'' And should he fall a martyr in the cause 
 he has thus nobly espoused, I shall envy him liis martyrdom. It will be the only un- 
 kind feeling I ever felt towards him. 
 
 And why. Sir, did we defend Norfolk, at so vast a sacrifice of life and money ? We 
 could have twice burnt it down and built it up again, with the sums spent in its de- 
 fence ; to say nothing of the mere labor of the men whose. lives it cost us. 
 
 Was it not to protect the sea-board.' Those very proprietors, who now deny our 
 equal rights, with themselves, to political power in this Commonwealth, and that too, 
 on the very ground, which then constituted their own insecurity and danger ? Was it 
 not, that the lowland gentleman might lie down in safety, or leave his dwelling, with- 
 out fear, that, in his absence, the incendiary torch might fire it, and turn his wife and 
 children out upon the world, if the mid-night dagger chanced to spare their lives.' It 
 was not the value of Norfolk, but its position, that we maintained, for tlie peace of the 
 lowlands.^ 
 
204 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 If the present were a mere question about taxation we should inquire into the 
 ability of the taxed, to pay. As it is a question of representation, we inquire into the 
 numbers of those, who are to be represented. 
 
 My friend from Norfolk, (Mr. Taylor,) had properly illustrated the difference of 
 these two principles of taxation and representation, by comparing them to two foun- 
 tains which rise in the same glen, but pursue their way to the ocean, by different 
 channels. 
 
 The member from Chesterfield has told us, that the figure is inaptly applied, since 
 they both spring from the same source : and with an infelicity, which rarely occurs 
 in iris figurative language, he has spoken of a torrent of representation rolling from, 
 and another stream of taxation, ascending to, the West. If in the operations of peace, 
 the balance be in favor of the West, it is evidently reversed, in war, for a heavier 
 charge than a war on our sea-boai'd, must ever bring upon the people who live remote 
 from the actual theatre of its dangers, cannot well be conceived. 
 
 But why disfigure a Commonwealth so fitted for union by odious lines of discrimi- 
 nation founded on imaginary diversities of interests ? If the " Pyrennees"' have 
 disappeared, at one end of their chain, why may they not do so, along its whole 
 extent ? 
 
 Were they, however, higher than tlie Alps, the new distribution of political power 
 would not transfer the majority of the House of Delegates to the West of this natural 
 division of the territory of the Commonwealth. In a House of 120 members, 70 would 
 remain below the Blue Ridge : and, as I have said, a majority must continue there for 
 years to come. The lenient agency of that very time, which the gentleman from Ches- 
 terfield would invoke, to mitigate all revolutions of power, is thus assured to those 
 feelings which neither he nor I would revolt by sudden change. 
 
 If mere difference of local interests should sever States and people, 'tis not a divi- 
 sion of Virginia by a single mountain which would suffice. 
 
 The member from Albemarle (Mr. Gordon) has illustrated this truth, in one of the 
 histories which he gave us of the causes of discontent on James River. Even the 
 slave-holding country has its tobacco and its cotton staples, below the line which 
 divides us on the present questi-on. 
 
 It is true with all local interests, that as you enlarge their sphere of action, you 
 Widuce their force. By circumscribing their limits, you only increase their vigor. 
 To give each interest within this Commonwealth, power to regulate itself, not four 
 divisions — but forty, must be made. Shall we, for such reasons, sunder the land of 
 our birtlr 
 
 Mr. Chairman, said Mr. M., as I decended the Chesapeake the other day, on my 
 way to this city, impelled by a favoring west wind, which, co-operating with the new 
 element applied by the genius of Fulton to navigation, made the vessel on which I stood 
 literally fly through the wave before me, I thought of tlie early descriptions of Virgi- 
 nia, by the followers of Rawleigh, and the companions of Smith. I endeavored to 
 scent the fragrance of the gale which reached me from the shore of the capacious bay 
 along which we steered, and I should have thought the pictures of Virginia, which 
 rose in my fancy, not too highly coloured, had I not often traversed our lowland 
 country, the land not only of my nativity, but of my fathers — and I said to myself, 
 how much has it lost of its primitive loveliness. Does the eye dwell with most plea- 
 sure on its wasted fields, or its stunted forests of secondary growth of pine and cedar 
 Can we dwell, but with mournful regret, on the temples of religion, sinking in ruin; 
 and those spacious dwellings, whose doors once opened by the hand of liberal hospi- 
 tality, are now fallen upon their portals or closed in tenantless silence ? Except on 
 the banks of its rivers, the march of desolation saddens this once beautiful country. 
 The cheerful notes of population have ceased, and the wolf and wild deer, no longer 
 scared from their ancient haunts, have decended from the mountains to the plains. 
 They look on the graves of our ancestors, and traverse their former paths. And shall 
 we do nothing to restore this once lovely land ? There was a time when the sun in 
 his course shone on none so fair. 
 
 Let us elevate the condition of that population in Virginia, which constitutes the 
 bone and sinew and strength of every nation. Let us lift it up to a condition above 
 our slaves, diffuse throughout it, knowledge, which is power ; and, instead of driving 
 it, by political proscription, from our bosom, invite it from abroad. 
 
 The gentleman fi-om Chesterfield, bound by ties that do not connect me with the 
 world, tells us that the integrity of the Commonwealth is but the second wish of his 
 heart — Sir, unlike him, the aflections of mine centre on my country. My last wish 
 will be like my first, for her liberty, her peace, her happiness, and as the firmest bund 
 of all these blessings, her Union. In life, and in death as in life, such will be my 
 prayer. Oh America ! patria op ima ; Virginia, mater amatissima, esto perpetua ! 
 
 Mr. J. S. Barbour here rose to explain : 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun has referred, I presume, to myself, in some of the 
 remarks which had fallen from hLm, in relation to the people of the West. His fervid 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 205 
 
 defence of their conduct during the last Trar, was wholly unnecessary. Believe me, 
 Sir, I know too well what is due to their patriotism and bravery, ever to have enter- 
 tained or expressed tlie sUghtest distrust of either. All I was endeavomring to shew, 
 was. that there exists a diversity of interests between different parts of the State, 
 which could not but exert its influence on their views and course of action. The 
 West had one set of interests, the East another. The gentleman from Loudoun knows 
 that I went with him in support of the Defence Bill. I never felt or thought that 
 there was any deficiency manifested by the people of the West, in tliis season of pub- 
 lic danger. 
 
 Mr. fiercer said he was happy to hear the gentleman express the opinion he had 
 jvst uttered: but the gentleman from Culpeper must forget the tenor of his own re- 
 marks, which certainly" went to convey the idea, that the people beyond the mountain 
 not havino- heard the sound of hostile cannon, nor witnessed the scenes of distress 
 occasioned by the presence of an invading enemy, did Bot sympathize with their 
 brethren in the lower part of the State. He was very happy to find that the gentle- 
 man now harboured no suspicion in his breast toward his brethren in the "S'S estern 
 part of the State. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said he had been repeatedly alluded to in the course of this debate, 
 as if he had contended that the Constitution was not legal and obhgatory. He had 
 made no argument nor expressed any opinion to that effect. When alluding to the 
 circumstances under which the Constitution had been formed, he was replying to the 
 argument of the gentleman from Northampton, who had contended that the existing 
 Constitution, had been made by all and for the benefit of all :" and his object was 
 to shew, that so far firom having been made by all. for the benefit of all. it had been 
 made by a particular description of freeholders only, and for the benefit of freeholders 
 of the same description with themselves, perpetuating the power which they them- 
 selves possessed. Mr. D. had made the statement more particularly with reference to 
 the right of suffrage, (should the Convention ever reach that subject, of which he 
 began to entertain some fear :) he had done it to shew that there was a numerous 
 clcLSs of citizens who had never been consulted at all in the formation of the Con- 
 stitution, and Ms inference from that fact was. that they had a right to be consulted 
 now. 
 
 Mr. JovvES next addressed the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Chairman: The subject now under the consideration of the Committee, is one 
 of great importance to the future happiness and prosperity of Virginia; and I have 
 to ask the attention of the Committee, for a short time, while 1 present to the Com- 
 mittee the views I have taken of this subject. In doing this, I shall not indulge the ex- 
 pectation that any thing that I can say will change the vote of any member of this Com- 
 mittee. Every gentleman in this Convention has. no doubt, maturely considered the 
 subject, and honestly made up his opinion ; — and. if the able and eloquent arguments 
 which have already been addressed to the Committee, have been insufficient to change 
 the opinions of gentlemen. I have not the vanity to suppose that any thing which I 
 may say, would have that effect. This subject is interesting to the whole State, and 
 particularly to tliat portion of it in wliich I live ; and if I were to permit tiiis question 
 to be decided without expressing tJie opinions I entertain, and the reasons on which 
 these opinions are founded, I should be wanting in duty to myself and to those who 
 sent me here. 
 
 When 1 was elected a member of this Convention, Mr. Chairman, I endeavoured 
 to persuade myself, that while it was my duty, in concert with my colleagues to watch 
 over and protect, so far as I could, the particular interests of my constituents, yet that 
 I was a representative, in some degree, of the whole people of Virginia, and bound 
 to consult the interests of the whole comnmnity. I came here. Sir. actuated by a spi- 
 rit of compromise toward other members of this Convention. I came here, prepared 
 to reconcile, as far as was practicable, by mutual concessions, all sectional and conflict- 
 ing interests, and to agree in the adoption of such a Constitution as we might reason- 
 ably hope woiild permanently promote the interest and happiness of Virginia. It 
 was idle for any man to calculate that every measure was to be adopted precisely ac- 
 cording to his wishes. It is by mutual concessions alone, that any beneficial results 
 can be expected to arise from our labours. There was no subject which it was pro- 
 bable Cvould come before the Convention, on which I felt more strongly actuated bv a 
 wish for mutual concession tiian on that now \mder the consideration of the Commit- 
 tee;. — and I was gratified the other day, when my friend from Fauquier (Mr. Scott), 
 proposed an amendment to the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper 
 (Mr. Green), which would afford me an opportunity of manifesting, by my vote, that 
 I was really disposed to compromise this interesting subject ; and I regret that a ma- 
 jority of the Committee entertained different views from me relative fo that amend- 
 ment. 
 
 We have been told in the course of this debate by the gentleman from Albemarle 
 (Mr, Gordon), that the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper (Mr. 
 
206 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Green), was incompatible with the extension of the right of suffrage. The right of 
 suffrage, Mr. Chairman, is not by any means involved in this question, nor have they 
 any necessary connexion. The question here is not, to whom the right of suffrage 
 shall be granted, but in what proportions shall the political power of the Common- 
 wealth be distributed amongst the different sections of the State : whether it shall be 
 distributed, having reference to white population alone, by which those portions of the 
 State which pay less than one-fourth of the whole revenue of the Commonwealth, 
 shall have the entire control of the legislative power ; or shall it be so distributed, that 
 those who are compelled to pay more than three-fourths of the revenue, shall have it 
 in their power to protect themselves from improper taxation. I am in favour of the 
 extension of the right of suffrage as far, perhaps, as any man in this Convention; and 
 much farther, I dare say, than I shall be sustained by the votes of a majority of the 
 Convention. I am willing to extend it to all free white male citizens of this State up- 
 wards of twenty-one years of age who have committed no crimes against the State, 
 and who actually j^ay taxes to the State or county — whether they be freeholders or 
 not. And, I would allow to the poorest man who went to the polls, precisely the 
 same vote, that I would allow to his wealthy neighbour who might be the master of 
 five hundred slaves. 
 
 I shall not pretend to question the correctness of the general rule, that the majori- 
 ty should govern ; and a majority of persons in general furnishes the best evidence of 
 a majority of interests. Since the eloquent argument of my colleague from North- 
 ampton (Judge Upshur), most of the gentlemen who have engaged in this debate on 
 the other side, have placed this question on the ground of expediency alone. One of 
 the greatest errors which can be committed in tlie science of Government, it appears 
 to me is, to lay down certain general fundamental principles, and, like the bed of Pro- 
 crustes, compel every community to conform to them, without regard to circumstances. 
 A Constitution, to be of any value, must be adapted to the particular circumstances 
 and situation of the country for which it is intended. That Government which would 
 be best for one country might be worst for another. Every man in this Convention ; 
 nay, every man, I am sure, in America, would unite in saying, that a Republican form 
 of Government was best adapted to the situation of the people of the United States 
 and to the individual States : but lie would be an unwise politician indeed, who would 
 attempt at this day to establish a Republic in Russia or Turkey ; and humanity has 
 had to mourn over the unsuccessful efforts to establish a Republic in France ; and, from 
 recent indications, we have too nmch reason to apprehend that Republican Govern- 
 ment is not suited to the late Spanish possessions on this Continent. The only ques- 
 tion that a wise Statesman should ask is, whether the measure proposed, is best calcu- 
 lated to promote the liberty, interests and happiness of the people on whom it is in- 
 tended to operate as they really are ; and not, whether the measure conforms to cer- 
 tain rules of theoretical perfection, and would be best adapted to a people such as he 
 would have them to he. If this were a question between the protection of personal 
 rights on the one hand, and property on the other, and it was impossible to reconcile 
 the two, I should not hesitate in giving the preference to the protection of personal 
 rights ; but I humbly conceive, that there is no incompatibility in the protection of 
 the two. Property asks not for a sword to enable it to do injury to others : it only asks 
 for a shield to protect it from injury. 
 
 This question has been discussed, Mr Chairman, by most of the gentlemen on one 
 side, and by all on the other, as if the only object was the protection of the slave pro- 
 perty of Eastern Virginia from oppressive taxation. And the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle (Mr. Gordon), has said, that no gentleman on the other side has advocated the 
 amendment to the report of the Legislative Committee on any other ground. For 
 myself, Sir, I have no hesitation in srying, that if there were not a slave in Virginia," 
 or if, by the unanimous consent of the Convention, a clause were inserted in the Con- 
 stitution exempting them forever from taxation, 1 should still think the amendment 
 ought to prevail. The power of imposing taxes upon a community, whereby the Gov- 
 ernment can at pleasure withdraw from every individual any portion of his hard earn- 
 ed property, is one of the most important powers which can be conferred by the peo- 
 ple, in their sovereign character, upon their Government. And, it is of the utmost 
 importance, that that responsibility of public functionaries to the people for the faith- 
 ful discharge of their duties, which is the life and security of representative Govern- 
 ment, should be preserved in the fullest and most perfect degree, with respect to the 
 power of laying taxes, — and tliis responsibility never can exist in a proper degree, 
 unless those who have the power of laying the taxes are directly responsible to those 
 who are compelled to pay them. If the report of the Legislative Committee be adopt- 
 ed by the Convention, then those who pay less than one-fourth of the taxes of the 
 State would have the power of imposing taxes on the residue of the State ; and the 
 majority, who imposed the taxes, would be subject to no kind of responsibility to 
 those who were compelled to pay the greater part of the taxes. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 207 
 
 The wealth of a country, Mr. Chairman, depends upon the productive industry of 
 that country; and whether these productions arise from the labour of freemen, or of 
 slaves, they add equally to the wealth of the community at large. The tobacco of 
 Virginia, the cotton and rice of the Carolinas and Georgia, and the sugar of Louisi- 
 ana, add as much to the wealth of the nation as if they v/ere the produce of the labour 
 of free wliite men. Yet, I am still unwilling to place the slave labourer, on an equali- 
 ty with the white man: There are prejudices on this subject, arising from a difference 
 in colour, and various other considerations, which are insuperable: These prejudices 
 I feel as strongly as any man in the West ;. and, if the question now under considera- 
 tion was, whether, in an apportionment of representation having reference to num- 
 bers, and to no other consideration, slaves should be included, I should feel no hesita- 
 tion 'in saying; that I would not include slaves in the enumeration. 
 
 Althouo-h the protection of slave property from the danger of unjust and oppres- 
 sive taxation, be not the only object of the proposed amendment to the report of the 
 Leo-islative Committee, yet the large portion of slaves held in Eastern Virginia, and 
 the°comparatively small number held in the Western part of the State, deserves se- 
 rious consideration in deciding upon the subject. The slave tax is about 30 per cent, 
 of the whole revenue of the State : they constitute one-third 8f the whole property 
 of the State, and more than one-half of the property of that part of Virginia lying to 
 the East of the Blue Ridge of mountains. We have been told by the two gentle- 
 men from Frederick (Mr. Cooke and Mr. Powell) ; by the gentleman from Brooke 
 (Mr. Campbell) ; by the gentleman from Albemarle (Mr. Gordon) ; and by the gen- 
 tleman from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer), that if the white basis of representation be adopt- 
 ed, still the slave-holding interest would be protected — because, they say, there are a 
 great many slaves in the Valley, where they are generally distributed amongst the 
 people : and several of these gentlemen referred particularly to four counties in the 
 Valley, which they say contain great numbers of slaves, and that the white popula- 
 tion of these four counties added to the white population of the country East of the 
 Blue Ridge, would make a white population of 400,000, who have peculiarly a slave 
 interest; and the balance of the white population being only 280,000, the slave-hold- 
 ino- interest would have a large majority, and would always have a majority. The 
 respectability of these gentlemen repudiates the idea that the}^ intended to deceive 
 the Convention ; and their splendid talefits added to their weight of character, gives 
 an imposing authority to every statement they make ; but I think, Sir, it can be very 
 easily shown, that these gentlemen are intirely mistaken in their calculations. 
 The slaves constitute 38 per cent, of the whole population of the State ; — and no 
 county having less than 38 per cent, of slave population, can have such a controlling 
 slave interest, as would induce it to unite with the slave-holding interest in other 
 parts of the State, in resisting attempts to burthen that species of property with ex- 
 cessive taxes, for the rehef of other property from taxation. To illustrate my idea, 
 I will suppose that the taxes of the State are so arranged that, one half arises from 
 land, and the other half from slaves : If these slaves be distributed in equal propor- 
 tions, according to wliite population, amongst the several counties of the State, and 
 it should become necessary to increase the taxes of the State, it would be immaterial, 
 so far as intire counties were concerned, whether tlie increased taxation be imposed 
 on land or slaves : But if the slaves, instead of being distributed equally amongst all 
 the counties, should be so distributed, that one half of the counties contained three 
 fourths of the slaves, and the remaining h ill" contained only one fourth ; and it should 
 become necessary to increase the taxes, is it not perfectly manifest, that those coun- 
 ties containing only one fourth of the slaves would be interested to impose all the 
 taxes on slaves, to the exclusion of land? There cannot be a doubt on the subject. 
 The slaves West of the Alleghany are 8 2-3 per cent, of the whole population West 
 of those mountains ; in the Valley the slaves are 17 per cent, of the whole popula- 
 tion ; and in the country East of the Blue Ridge, the slaves exceed the whites. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, we have been told that four counties of the Valley, particu- 
 larly, have a slave interest, which will induce them to unite with the slave-holders of 
 the East in the protection of that kind of property. Let us examine whether these 
 four Valley counties to which the people of the East have been asked to commit the 
 guardianship of their slave property, have such a common interest in the subject as 
 will render it prudent for the slave-holders of the East to choose them as guardians of 
 that kind of property. If they have not such interest. INIr. Speaker, prudence would 
 forbid their being selected as guardians. Let us say what we will of the virtue and 
 integrity of man, the best security that can be had for another man's honesty is, to 
 place him in a situation where it is his own interest to be honest. Lead us not into 
 temptation," are the words of the Saviour himself. 
 
 The four Valley counties to which gentlemen allude, are, no doubt, Frederick, Au- 
 gusta. Botetourt and Jefferson. These counties contain together 20,534 slaves, and 
 50,241 free whites ; the slaves being 27 per cent, of the whole population. These 
 counties pay $ 16,630 55 cts. of the land tax, which is equal to 9 47-100 X per cent. 
 
208 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of the whole land tax, and they pay $4,935 of the slave tax, which is equal to 
 4 3-10 X per cent, of the whole slave tax. Suppose there was a proposition before 
 the Legislature, to raise for the exigencies of the State, an additional sum of $ 100,000 
 by taxation, and a member from the West should propose to raise this additional sum 
 by a tax exclusively upon slaves : and a member from the East proposed to raise it 
 intirely by a tax on land, how would these four guardian counties vote.? If the ad- 
 ditional tax be raised on land, these four counties would pay $ 9,474 : and if it be 
 raised on slaves, they would pay only $4,305. If they were actuated by that great 
 spring of human action — self-interest, they are interested more than two to one, to 
 impose the additional tax intirely upon slaves. If they were governed by interest 
 alone, they would make bad guardians, and I fear the East would share the fate of 
 too many wards. 
 
 The gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Campbell), and the gentleman from Albemarle 
 (Mr. Gordon), have told us, no doubt to allay the apprehensions of the East, that if 
 representation be apportioned according to white population alone, the West would 
 lose representation in comparison with the present apportionment, and the gain would 
 be in the slave districts. In order to prove this, they disregard the calculations of 
 the Auditor as to the supposed population of 1829, and rely upon the Census of 1820. 
 And the gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Mercer), has also told us, that the Auditor 
 has committed a great mistake in the supposed population of 1829, as to that county ; 
 and he, therefore, has no confidence in the Auditor's calculations, but prefers to rely 
 on the Census of 1820. The gentlemen who advocate the white basis, do not agree 
 in the value they are disposed to place upon the Auditor's estimate of the population 
 of 1829. A gentleman from beyond the Alleghany, whose opinions are intitled to 
 great weight upon this and all other subjects, (Mr. Doddridge) told us, that the Au- 
 ditor's calculations did not give to the country beyond the Alleghany, a greater in- 
 crease of white population than it was really intitled to ; and I know that other gen- 
 tlemen entertained the same opinion. In fact, the gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Dod- 
 dridge), in his speech the other day, rather vauntingly, said, that in thirty years the 
 majority of the white population of the whole State would be West of the Alleghany 
 Mountains: And he referred to the Auditor's estimate of the population of 1829, in 
 support of that assertion. And he told us, too, that the white population beyond the 
 Blue Ridge, would continue to increase until (to use his own language) " the white 
 population East of the Blue Ridge would be but a drop in the bucket^ to that of the 
 West." The Auditor's estimate of the population of 1829, although called for on my 
 motion, was called for on the suggestion of another gentleman from the West of the 
 Alleghany, who was a good Judge of the subject, and after the Auditor had satisfied 
 that gentleman and myself that, from the documents in his office, he could be enabled 
 with tolerable accuracy, to estimate the population of 1829. I cannot consent to al- 
 low gentlemen the advantage in argument of relying on the correctness of the Audi- 
 tor's statement one day, and then, when it suits their argument on another day, to 
 tell us that no confidence should be placed in that estimate, and that the Census of 
 1820 should alone be relied on. If we were now about fixing the representation ac- 
 cording to the white population, and which was to remain unchanged for ten years to 
 come, would gentlemen then be content to rely on the Census of 1820.? I presume 
 we should then be told again that the Auditor's estimate was correct and ought to be 
 relied on. I have but little doubt that the Auditor's estimate of the population of 
 1829, is very nearly correct, and I shall not hesitate to assume it as the basis of my 
 calculations, — and let us see upon that estimate how the representation would stand 
 in comparison with the present apportionment of representation. According to the 
 Auditor's estimate, the whole white population of the State in 1829, is 682,261. If 
 this number be divided by 120 (which is the number of delegates recommended by 
 the Legislative Committee), we shall find that 5,685 are the number of free whites 
 necessary to furnish one delegate. On this estimate, the country West of the Alle- 
 ghany (containing twenty-six counties) would be entitled to thirty-two delegates, — 
 the Valley (containing fourteen counties) to 24 1-3, — the country from the Blue Ridge 
 to the head of Tide (containing twenty-nine counties) to 34 2-3: and from the head 
 of Tide to the Sea Coast (containing thirty-six counties and four towns intitled to 
 representation) to 29 delegates. If the number of delegates were reduced to 120, and 
 distributed in proportion to the present distribution, the result would be that the first 
 District would be intitled to 29 delegates,— the second District to 16,— the third Dis- 
 trict to 32 1-2,— and the fourth to 42 1-2 delegates. So that, on the basis of white 
 population, in comparison with the present apportionment, the different Districts would 
 stand thus : 
 
 The 1st District would gain 3 members. 
 
 The 2d District would gain 8 1-3 members. 
 
 The 3d District would gain . , 2 members. 
 
 The 4th District would lose 13 1-3 members. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 209 
 
 So that the 3d and 4th Districts, which are slave-holding Districts, -would lose 11 
 1-3 members ; and the two Western Districts would gain 11 1-3 members. 
 
 The o-entleman from Albemarle (jNIr. Gordon) has told us, that the Valley and the 
 middle "countr}', which he calls the "'heart of the State," have a majority of white 
 population and pay a majorit}- of taxes, and ought to have a majorit}- of- Delegates ; 
 whereas, at present they have only 86 Delegates out of 214. I agree that these two 
 Districts ouorht to have a majority: and let us see how they will stand on the white 
 basis and on the compound basis of representation. That gentleman', to insure the 
 majority of Delegates to the ••' heart of the State," again refers to the Census of lc20 ; 
 whereas, by the Census of 1829, which I have endeavoured to show ought to be re- 
 lied upon, on the basis of white population, they would have only 59, out of 120 Dele- 
 gates; and these two Districts, on the white basis, never can have a majority, be- 
 cause the white population \Vest of the Alleghany, increases much faster than in the 
 Valley ; and in the other two Districts there is verf little increase. The present 
 white population of the second and third Districts together is 335,354, and the first 
 and fourth Districts together have a white population of 346,107. It is only on tiie 
 combined basis of population and taxation, that the second aijd third Districts can 
 have that majority which the gentleman from Albemarle, so ardently desires they 
 should have. On the combined basis, the first District would have 21 Delegates : the 
 second District 21 : the third District 41 : and the fourth District 37 ; and the second 
 and third Districts, the heart of the State," would have, together, G2 Delegates 5 
 instead of 59 on the white basis. 
 
 The gentleman fi-om Albemarle (INIr. Gordon), and tlie gentleman from Loudoun 
 (Mr. Mercer) have also told the Committee, that if representation be apportioned ac- 
 cording to white population alone, there would still be a considerable majority of 
 Delegates East of the Blue Ridge. The first gentleman says the majority would be 
 19, and the other says it would be 20. Here again the gentlemen are compelled to 
 resort to the Census of 1820, to sustain their positions. If, in argument, you will 
 grant gentlemen their premises, it is very easy to prove any thing they wish : but I 
 must acrain insist on holding gentlemen to the Auditor's estimate of the population of 
 1829. I cannot consent that they should adopt it when it suits them, and abandon it 
 when it makes against them. Why, Mr. Chairman, should we talk about the Census 
 of 1820, when it is manifest that no apportionment of representation under the new 
 Constitution which may be recoimnended by this Convention to the people, ever can 
 be made under that Census : The Delegates in 1830 are to be elected under the old 
 Constitution, and in 1830 a new Census will be taken under the authority of the Gene- 
 ral Government, and the first apportionment of Delegates that can ever take place 
 under the new Constitution, will be conformable to the Census of 1830. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer) has told the Committee, that there 
 would not be a majority of white population West of the Blue Rido-e before 1850 ; 
 and that the transfer of political power to the West would be gradual. This infor- 
 mation is no doubt kindly intended by that gentleman, to allay the apprehensions of 
 the Ecist. While I may be disposed to admire the philanthropy which prompts the 
 information, I cannot admit the premises necessary to enable the gentleman to prove 
 his position. Here again, he refers to the Census of 1820. According to the Audi- 
 tor's Census^' the white population West of the Blue Ridge, is now 319,516 ; and 
 on the East of the R,idge 362.7-45. If the wliite population continue to increase in the 
 same ratio as it has increased since 1820. then in 18:35, the white population West of 
 the Blue Rid^e will be 375,310 ; and East of the Blue Ridge 372,293, being a majority 
 of 3,017 West of the Blue Ridge. I acknowledge, Mr. Chairman, that on this sub- 
 ject I have heretofore been mistaken, and, possibly, I may have induced some others 
 to adopt my errors. I did not suppose, until I saw the Auditor's estimate, that the 
 majority oJf white population would be West of the Blue Ridge so early as 1S35. 
 
 1 have said. Mr. Ciiairman, that if there were no slaves in the State, or if by unani- 
 mous consent they were to be forever exempted from taxation. I should still vote for 
 the amendment under consideration. Those who have the power of laying the taxes, 
 ought to be directly responsible to those who are compelled to pa}- them — not merely 
 • in name, but in fact. If the report of the Legislative Committee be adopted, then 
 taxes to any amount may be imposed, contrary to the unanimous wishes of those 
 who pay three-fourths of the taxes, and imposed by agents who owe no responsibili- 
 ty, express or implied, to those who are compelled to pay the greater portion of these 
 taxes. Like the gentleman from Hanover (Mr. Morris), I can imagine no despotism 
 more oppressive than that which gives to one man the power of laying taxes, and im- 
 poses the duty of paying the taxes on those who have no control over laving them. 
 Why is it, Sir, that the Constitution of the United States, and of all the several 
 States, give the power of originatintj laws imposing taxes, to the most numerous 
 branch of the respective Legislatures ? It is because the most numerous branches of 
 the Legislature are more innnediately the representatives of the people ; they are 
 elected for shorter periods, and are compelled more speedily to return to the people 
 
 21 
 
2i0 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and give an account of their stewardship. Those who pay the taxes ought to have 
 complete control over those who have the power of laying the taxes ; otherwise the 
 taxes, which in a free Government should be considered as the voluntary contribu- 
 tions of the citizen for the sei'vices of the State, would be, in fact, arbitrary exactions 
 made by irresponsible agents. If the amendment to the report of the Legislative 
 Committee be adopted, this salutary and necessary control will be preserved; but if 
 the amendment be rejected, then taxes may be laid by those who are not responsible 
 to those who are compelled to pay them. 
 
 Let us see, Mr. Chairman, what has been done by other States in this Union, in 
 fixing the basis of representation in their respective Legislatures. We have been 
 told in the progress of this debate, that fifteen States of this Union have adopted the 
 white basis, without regard to any other consideration ; and we have been urged to 
 follow their example. Here again, I am sure that the honourable gentlemen who 
 have made this assertion had no intention to deceive the Committee ; but I am equal- 
 ly certain that they have reckoned without their hosts. Instead of fifteen States hav- 
 ing adopted the white basis, unqualified, there ;ire but six who have adopted that basis 
 without modification. And of these six, neither of them are of the Old Thirteen 
 States of this Union — and four of them are States created within the last few years. 
 The only States which have adopted this basis, itnqua'ijicd, are Kentucky, Ohio, In- 
 diana, Illinois, Mississippi and Alabama. I must beg the indulgence of the Commit- 
 tee while I refer to the Constitutions of the other States, particularly on this subject. 
 
 In Massachusetts, where they have no slaves, the representation in the Senate is 
 based intirely on taxation ; and in the House of Representatives every town having 
 150 rateable polls is intltled to one representative ; and every town having 375. is in- 
 titled to two representatives. 
 
 In Maine, every town containing 1,500 inhabitants, is intitled to one representative ; 
 and so on, increasing until a town has 2G,250 inhabitants, when it shall be intitled to 
 seven representatives ; and no toicn slialL ever have more than seven representatives. 
 
 In New-Hampshire, the representation in the Senate is based on taxation alone. 
 In the House of Representatives, a town having 150 rateable polls is intitled to one 
 representative, and a town having 450 is intitled to two. 
 
 In Vermont, towns containing 80 taxable inhabitants are intitled to two representa- 
 tives ; and ail others, without regard to population, are intitled to one. 
 
 In Connecticut, (that land of steady habits, to which the gentleman from Loudoun 
 wished he could transport all the members of this Convention, to witness the bene- 
 ficial results of her v^^ise institutions) each new town, zvithout regard to pojmlation, is 
 intitled to one representative. 
 
 In New York and Pennsylvania (so often referred to in a commendatory manner in 
 this debate,) each county, however small the population, is intitled to one representa- 
 tive, and the larger counties to more than one — according to population in the one 
 and taxable inhabitants in the other State. When the gentleman from Loudoun to- 
 day was reading parts of the Constitutions of ditferent States, he read that part of 
 the Constitution of Pennsylvania which directed that representaticm she uld be ap- 
 portioned according to taxable inhabitants ; and the very next sentence after that 
 read by the gentleman, commenced with these words. " Every county shall have at 
 least one representative," &c. I am sure the omission of the gentleman to read that 
 clause was intirely accidental : I know him to be too honcrable to w iirh to impose 
 upon the Committee. In New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and North Carolina, the 
 representation in both Houses is apportioned by counties, without regard to numbers; 
 and in Virginia, the House of Delegates is apportioned by counties, and the Senate 
 according to white population. In South Carolina, the re})rest ntation in both Houses 
 is apportioned according to population and taxation combined ; but every district shall 
 have one, whatever may be tlie population and taxatifsn. In Georgia, the Senate is 
 equally apportioned amongst the counties, without regard to population ; and the 
 House of Representatives is apportioned according to lederal rium.bers, but subject to 
 this modification, that each county shall have at lenst one and not more than four 
 members ; and counties having 3,000. to have two delegates ; 7,000 three; and 12,000 
 and upwards, four delegates. In Tennessee, both H luses are apportioned according • 
 to taxable inhabitants, including slaves. In Louisiau'i. the Senatorial districts are to 
 remain forever unchanged, without regard to the increase of population. And in 
 Missouri, each county is to have one representative at least, and the larger counties 
 more than one, according to population. If, Sir, we are to be influenced by the ex- , 
 ample of other States, by which ought we to be influenced ; by the example of 
 seventeen States, twelve of which are old States, some of whose Constitutions have 
 have been tested by the experience of near half a century ? Or, shall we follow the 
 example of our younger sisters, some of whom are so young that they have not yet 
 had a sufficient opportunity of testing the wisdom of their measures ? The gentleman 
 from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer) read to the Committee extracts from the Bills of Rights, 
 prefixed to the Constitutions of a number of the States, to prove the equality of all 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVE^'TIO^^. 
 
 211 
 
 men, and to convince the House that the white basis, without regard to any other 
 consideration, ought to be adopted. It is true, that seven of the States have Bills of 
 Rights declarinor°the equality of all men ; and that the majority have a right to alter 
 and modify the Government as they please. Notwithstanding all these Bills of Pvights 
 we find the wise men who made these Constitutions, like George Mason and his 
 compatriots of 1776 who made the Constitution of Virginia, wisely modifying general 
 principles, so as to adapt them to the particular situation and circumstances of their 
 several States ; thev made the coat to fit the man who was to wear it, rather than to 
 make the coat without regard to the dimensions of the man, and compel him to wear 
 it whether it fits him or not. Thus, Mr. Chairman, will all wise lawgivers act. A 
 Constitution, although it may be made according to the most approved ideas of theo- 
 retical perfection, is of but little value, unless it be adapted to the circumstances of 
 the country for which it is intended. And, cotemprrary expositions of the meaning 
 of an instrument made by the authors of the instrument themselves, are intitled to 
 more respect thin the most elaborate and ingenious essays of subsequent commen- 
 tators. 
 
 We were told j^esterday by the gentleman from Loudoun, that for the last seven 
 years, there had been no State tax in jNlassachusetts and 2ie\Y Hampshire ; and there- 
 fore, although the}' had a provision in their Constitutions for basing representation in 
 the Senate according to taxation, it had ceased to operate in practice, and white popu- 
 lation was n-nv aJune regarded. I am willing to follow precisely in the footsteps of 
 New Hampshire and Massachusetts on this subject. Let us have the power of protect- 
 ing ourselves from unjust taxes as long as it is necessarj^ and the moment those, into 
 whose hands the political power of V irginia seems destined shortly to pass, can so 
 wisely manage our concerns as to exempt us from taxation, 1 for one, am ready to 
 adopt the basis of white population alone. Yes, Sir, 1 am prepared this day to agree 
 to it on these conditions ; and on our own principles, if the amendment prevails, as 
 soon as we have no taxes to pay, white population alone will be regarded. 
 
 In order to show the inequality of taxation, and the necessity that should induce 
 those sections of the. State pay uig the greater part of the taxes, to adopt the proposed 
 amendment, I beg leave to refer to some statements and calculations I have made on 
 this subject, founded f)n the Auditor's report. The whole revenue of the Sidle paid 
 into the public treasury in the year 1;S2S, and arising from taxes on land, slaves, horses, 
 carriages and licenses, amounted to ^335,4"29 50. If this sum be divided by 082,261, 
 wh'ch is the wh')le number of white inhabit mts, according to the Auditor's calcula- 
 tion, it will give 58 cents 5 mills as the average taxes paid by each white person in the 
 State. In making this calculation, I have excluded tree negroes from the estimate of 
 persons paying taxes to the State, because I have no doubt of the fact, that through- 
 out the State, free negro-^s contribute very little indeed to the public revenue ; so little 
 as not to affect the accuracy of my calculations. The county in vv^iich I reside, con- 
 tains, unfortunately for us, the one-twentieth part of the whole free negroes of the 
 State, and the free negroes of that count}' do not pay ^30 of revenue to the Com- 
 monwealth ; and, from the information of other gentlemen, I believe it will be found 
 that free negroes are equally worthless throughout the State. If any portions of the 
 State have a more respectable class of free negroes than we have, I congratulate them. 
 With us, instead of contributing to the wealth or revenue of the State, they are per- 
 fect nuisances. 
 
 While the average taxation for each white person iia the State is 56 cents 5 mills, 
 the average paid in the different districts is as follows : 
 
 In the^first district, (West of the Alleghany) IS cents 6 mills; in the second dis- 
 trict, (the Valley) 41 cents 2 mills. The whole country West of the Blue Ridge, 
 averages 28 cents 4 mills. 
 
 In \h.e third district, (from the Blue K-idge to tide) 76 cents 2 mills ; in the fourth 
 district, (from the head of tide to the sea) 87 cents 2 mills. The average of the whole 
 country East of the Blue Ridge is 81 cents 2 mills. 
 
 There is no subject of taxation on which the West pays as much tax per head, ac- 
 cording to white population as the East. To show this, I must beg the indulgence 
 of tlie Committee, while I refer to another calculation I have made : 
 
 The wh ile land tax assessed in the State (but not at paid n ) amounts, for each white 
 person, to 25 cents 7 mills. 
 
 In the first district, for each white person, it amounts to 9 cents 2 mills ; in the 
 second district, for each white person, it amounts to 24 cents 6 mills. West of the 
 Blue Ridge, the average is 15 cents 8 mills. 
 
 In the third district, for each white person, it amounts to 33 cents 8 mills; in the 
 fourth district, for each white person, it amounts to 34 cents 7 mills. East of the 
 Blue Ridge, the average is 34 cents 4 mills. 
 
 So that for every dollar of the land tax for each white person paid by tl)e people 
 West of the Blue Ridge^. those on the East side pay $ 2 13 cents for each wiiite 
 person. 
 
212 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The slave tax assessed amounts, for each white person in the State, to 16 cents 
 8 mills. 
 
 In the first district, it amounts to 2 cents 3 mills ; in the second district, it amounts 
 to 6 cents 2 mills. West of the Blue Ridge, it averages 4 cents. 
 
 In the third district, it amounts to 28 cents 5 mills ; in the fourth district it amounts 
 to 27 cents 6 mills. East of the Ridge, it averages 28 cents 1 mill. 
 
 So that the whole country East of the Blue Ridge pays, on an average, for each 
 white person, a slave tax amounting to more than seven times as much as is paid by 
 the whole country West of the Blue Ridge — and more than twelve times as much as 
 the country West of the Alleghany. 
 
 The taxes assessed on horses and carriages amount, for each white person in the 
 State, to 7 cents 7 mills. 
 
 In the first district, it amounts to 5 cents 1 mill ; in the second district^ it amounts 
 to 7 cents 4 mills. West of the Ridge it averages G cents 2 mills. 
 
 In the third district, it amounts to 9 cents 2 mills ; in the fourth district, it amounts 
 to y cents. East of the Ridge, it averages 9 cents 1 mill. Which is fifty per cent, 
 more than the average to the West of the R.idge. 
 
 Taxes on licenses average throughout the State, for each white person 11 cents 8 
 mills. 
 
 In the first district, the average is 4 cents 7 mills ; in the second district, tlie ave- 
 rage is 7 cents. West of the Blue Ridge, the average is 5 cents 7 mills. 
 
 In the third district, the average is 11 cents 2 mills ; in the fourth district, the ave- 
 rage is 24 cents. East of the Ridge, the average is 17 cents. Which is more than 
 three times as much as the average to the West. 
 
 It thus appears, that on every subject of taxation, the country East of the Ridge 
 pays a great deal more for each white person, than is paid to the West. Even of the 
 land tax, the poor and worn out country from the head of tide to the sea coast — a coun- 
 try which has been settled for two hundred years, and has been suffering under a 
 most injudicious and ruinous system of agriculture, for each white man, the land pays 
 near fifty per cent, more than is paid in that Valley, which Ave have been told, and no 
 doubt correctl3^ is the finest Valley on the face of the globe. 
 
 But if the slave tax be rejected intirely from the estimate, it will be found that of 
 the other taxes assessed, the different districts will stand for each white person thus : 
 The first district, 19 ceats ; the second district, 39 cents ; the tliird district, 54 cents 2 
 mills ; the fourth district, G7 cents 7 mills. The average West of the Ridge, 27 cents 
 7 mills ; and the average East of the Ridge, 60 cents 5 mills. It thus appears, that 
 for every dollar of taxes (exclusive of slave tax) assessed for each white person West of 
 the Alleghany, there are about $ 3 50 cents assessed on each white person in the tide 
 water district — and for every dollar for each white person (exclusive of slave tax) 
 assessed on the whole country West of the Blue Ridge, there are $ 2 18 cents assessed 
 on each white person East of the Ridge. And if the slave tax be included, it will be 
 found that the disparity is much greliter. If we examine the amount of taxes paid 
 into the Treasury, from some separate counties, we shall find the inequality to be still 
 more glaring. In the large counties of Monongalia and Harrison, lying to the West 
 of the Alleghany Mountains, the average taxation for each white person is 13 cents 5 
 mills. In Powhatan and Nottoway, lymg East of the Ridge, the average of the coun- 
 ties is $ 1 33 cents 2 mills.* 
 
 I will now proceed to examine, Mr. Chairman, how the representation on the white 
 basis will stand in comparison with the taxes paid in different Districts of countrj''. 
 The whole amount of ta.xes paid into the Public Treasury, per Auditor's statement, 
 amounts to $385,429 50 cents. If this sum be divided by 120 (the number of 
 Delegates recommended by the Legislative Committee) it will give ^ 3,211 91 cents 
 as the average taxation paid by the constituents of each Delegate in the State. In- 
 stead of the constituents of each Delegate paying this sum, they will pay as follows, 
 viz : 
 
 In the first District, for each Delegate will be paid $ 1,055 32 
 
 In the second District, for each Delegate will be paid 2,340 90 
 
 In the third District, for each Delegate will be paid 3,954 34 
 
 In the fourth District, for each Delegate will be paid 4,980 06 
 
 From this statement it will appear that the constituents of each Delegate in the 
 Tide Water District, pay nearly five times as much taxes, as will be paid by the con- 
 stituents of each Delegate West of the Alleghany mountains. I will now show how 
 it will stand in regard to some individual counties. In Monongalia and Harrison to- 
 gether, the white "population amounts to 26,243, and they together pay taxes to the 
 amount of $ 3,553 02. For a Delegate from these counties, therefore, their constitu- 
 
 * In Grajson county, the average taxes paid for each white person, is 10 cents. In Giles, 13 cents ; 
 in Lewis, 12| cents ; in Preston, 12 cents j in Logan, 9^ cents ; and in Nicholas, 6^ cents. 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXrEXTION. 
 
 213 
 
 ents would pay a tax of only S "68 71.* In Powhatan and Nottoway together, the 
 white population is 5.4:34, and the taxes amount to S T,-236 51. For a Delegate from 
 these counties, the constituents would pay a tax at the rate of S 7.572 85. The con- 
 stituents of a Delegate from Powhatan and Nottoway, would tlierefore be compelled 
 to pay nearly ten tunes as much as the constituents of each Delegate from Monon- 
 gaha"^and Harrison : and the average paid by the constituents of each Delegate in the 
 Tide Water District, would be near seven times as much as would be paid by the 
 constituents of each Delegate from Monongalia and Harrison. 
 
 In order to render the representative really and effectually responsible to the con- 
 stituents, in the exercise of the important power of taxation, there should not be a 
 great disparity in the burthens imposed by any proposed system of taxation on the 
 aggregate constituents of each delegate : the disparity shoiild never be greater than 
 is produced by a combination of persons and taxation. But on the white basis, as ap- 
 plied to the situation of Virginia. v.-hile a member West of the Alleghany on the prin- 
 ciples of taxation heretofore adopted (and the East cannot have any reason to calcu- 
 late on any change of that system being made beneficial to them) votes to impose a 
 tax of one dollar on his own'^constituents, he at the same time votes to impose a tax 
 of near five dollars on each of the constituents of every delegate from the tide 
 water country ; and when a delegate from ^Monongalia or Harrison votes to impose a 
 tax of one dollar on his own constituents, he at the same time votes to impose a tax 
 of near seven dollars on the people of the tide water countr}', and near ten dollars on 
 the people of Powhatan and Nottoway. Under such an inequality of taxation and 
 representation, the responsibihty of the representative to his constituents, is merely 
 nominal. The gentleman from Albemarle (Mr. Gordon,) told us the other day. Mr. 
 Chairman, that there was a district of country in the neighborhood of Richmond, 
 having twenty-nine delegates, which did not pay as much taxes, and had not as many 
 inhabitants as another district of country at the foot of the Blue Ridge, having only 
 ten deleo-ates. This, I admit, as the gentleman tells us, is a disease of the body pohtic, 
 and this the gentleman from Albemarle proposes to cure by the application of the 
 white basis, as a panacea. But. I think, from the anah'sis which I have given of the 
 remedy, it will be found that, like many quack medicines applied to the human body, 
 it only serves to make the patient worse. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, although we may talk a great deal about our disinterestedness, yet 
 if we will examine ourselves, and the suggestions of our own hearts, we shall be very 
 apt to find, that self-interest in some degree actuates us even when we appear to be 
 the most disinterested and patriotic — and we are very apt to calculate how particular 
 measures would operate at home. I confess, Mr. Chairman, I have examined, 
 what would be the effect of the white basis upon the district in which I live : and 
 I dare say, other gentlemen have made similar calculations as to their respective 
 districts. I think it not improbable that my friends from the West, who I have no 
 doubt are as honest and disinterested as any men upon earth, have calculated the re- 
 lative operation of the white basis and compound basis in their section of country — 
 and if they have not. there is a marvellous coincidence of opinion amongst them and 
 acting intuitively in the direction their own interests would point out. 
 
 If the white basis be adopted, as gentlemen contend it should be, in both branches 
 of the State Legislature, and the report of the Legislative Committee, recommend- 
 ing that the number of Senators should remain at twenty-four, be adopted, then ac- 
 cording to the supposed population of 1829, 28,425 white inhabitants will be necessary 
 to intitle a district to a Senator. The Accomack Senatorial district would require a 
 considerable addition to give it a sufficiency of white population to intitle it to a Sena- 
 tor. Having regard to contiguous territory, I propose to add the counties of York, 
 Elizabeth City, War\^'ick and Essex, and the whole district would then contain only 
 247 white inhabitants more than the number required. This district, thus enlaro-ed, 
 pays a revenue of S 19.491 08, while the average which would be paid in each Sena- 
 torial district West of the Alleghany, would be only ^ 5,276 60, and in the district of 
 Harrison and Monongalia only § 3,843 55. 
 
 Although the Accomack district shows a striking inequahty in taxation and repre- 
 sentation compared with some other districts, yet there is another district in which the 
 inequality is much greater. There is a district of country, Sir, not fifty miles from 
 Richmond, in which a Senatorial district composed of contiguous counties (on the 
 basis of white population, and the number of Senators beino- retained at 24.) vrould 
 pay at the same rate of taxation paid in 1828, within lesslhan ,S 600 of as much 
 revenue on lands, slaves, horses, carriages and licenses, as the whole country W'est 
 of the Alleghany mountains, paid in 1828, on the same articles ; tliat is the Chester- 
 field district. This district is now composed of the counties of Chesterfield, Amelia, 
 Powhatan, Nottoway, Cumberland and the town of Petersburg. This district now 
 
 * In Xicholas county, the taxes are at the rate of § 466 for a delegate : in Loran, $ 540 ; and in Gray- 
 son $ 568 50. - 3 = J V > J 
 
214 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 contains 24,572 white inhabitants ; and in order to bring it up to the number, which 
 will be required on the white basis, I propose to add the adjoining county of Lunen- 
 burg. The district would then have within nine of the number of white inhabitants 
 required for a Senator ; and the revenue paid from that district in 1828, amounted to 
 $ 33,194 80, on the articles enumerated above, while the whole country West of the 
 Alleghany only paid f 3 5,770 14 on the same articles, being an exces of only $575 34. 
 
 By an examination, I have made in the Auditor's office, I have ascertained some 
 facts at the result of which I confess I was myself astonished. From the examina- 
 tion and calculations 1 have made in the Auditor's office, I think I can make it satis- 
 factorily appear to the Convention that the whole country West of the Blue Ridge, 
 from the Auditor's report of the taxes on lands, slaves, horses, carriages, and licenses, 
 does not contribute one cent to the general revenue of the State for general purposes, 
 but on the contrary is largely in arrear ; that is to say, they do not pay as much reve- 
 nue as their own citizens receive back as members of the Assembly and for claims 
 and services which may be considered of a local character. The Valley, taken by 
 itself, I admit, pays a large surplus ; but the country beyond the Alleghany does not 
 pay much more than half enough for its own purposes ; and by adding the two dis- 
 tricts together, there appears to be a considerable deficiency. 
 
 The expenses of the General Assembly — Commissioners of the Revenue and 
 Cleks for examining Commissioners' books — Criminal charges and Guards — Contin- 
 gent expenses of Courts — Militia, f )r Adjutants, Brigade Inspectors, &c. — Compar- 
 ing Polls — Salaries of General Court Judges and Chancellors, amount, rejecting 
 cents to about $ 259,573. If this sum be divided amongst the diffiirent sections of 
 the State, according to counties equally, it will be found that the country West of the 
 Blue Ridge receives $ 97,035, and the revenue paid West of the Ridge, (according to 
 the Auditor's report to the Convention, above referred to,) amounts to $90,732 — being 
 $ 6,303 less than it receives. In making the calculation of the sum received by each 
 section of the State by counties, the result is favorable to the West ; because their 
 members of the Assembly, Judges, and Guards attending convicts, receive a great 
 deal more mileage than is received by the Eastern half of the State. In making tliis 
 calculation, 1 have omitted the salaries of the Governor and Council — Judges of the 
 Court of Appeals — Attorney General — Auditor and Treasurer, and their Clerks — 
 Public Guard at Richmond and Lexington too — Contingent fund — and in fact all ex- 
 penses which can be regarded of a general character. To this deficiency of $ 6,303, 
 add for Lunatic Hospital at Staunton $ 7,500, and also add $ 8,374 for the Literary 
 Fund, (being the difi:erence between $ 18,968 of the annual appropriation of $45,000 
 for Primary Schools received by the West, according to the ratio of white population 
 by which it is distributed, and $10,594 for the amount paid by the West, on 
 the supposition that that fimd was raised from the diffijrent parts of the State in the 
 same proportion that the revenue is now paid) and we have the sum of $22,177, re- 
 ceived every year by the country West of the Blue Ridge from the Treasurj' more 
 than they contribute, according to the Auditor's report, without charging them with 
 any part of the expenses of a general character.* 
 
 If the basis of white population be adopted, the country West of the Blue Ridge, 
 which is now a charge of $ 22,000 annually, for their individual purposes on the rest 
 of the State, will have immediately nearly one half of the delegates in the State Le- 
 gislature ; and, after 1835, will have a majority of delegates ; and will have the pow- 
 er of imposing taxes at pleasure on the rest of the State. With these facts before us, 
 can it be expected that Eastern Virginia, if there was not a slave in the State, could 
 consent to give to their fellov*/^ citizens of the West the absolute and irresponsible con- 
 trol of their property. I think not. For myself, I confess that I am not willing to 
 do it. 
 
 We are told, Mr. Chairman, by our Western friends, that the people of the East 
 N^hould rely on the integrity and honesty of their brethren of the West, and that the 
 Restraints of conscience will be sufficient to prevent any oppression of their Eastern 
 Drethren. 1 have no doubt the people of the West are as honest as any people on 
 earth, and a gentleman from that country told us a few^ days ago that they were pecu- 
 liarly honest. I know them them to be honest, brave and patriotic ; but I know they 
 are also inen, and subject to the infirmities of poor fallen man — / would not trust 
 Aristides himself to tax me, unless he were responsible to me for the faithful execu- 
 tion of the trust. It was said, by one of the wisest statesmen America ever produced, ■> 
 t\\zX faith was necessary to salvation hereafter, but in this world jealousy was the best 
 
 *The tax on law process was not included in the Auditor's report 'to the Convention, and is not 
 included in this calculation. It has since been ascertained that the whole amount of the tax on law pro- 
 cess paid into the public Treasury from the country West of the Blue Ridge in the year 1898, was 
 $ 7,638 61. If this sum be deducted from % 22,177, there will still be a deficiency of $ 14,538 39, with- 
 out taking into the estimate any appropriation for Internal Improvements West of the Blue Ridge — The 
 precise amount of deficiency was not deemed important ; the principle object was to show, what is be- 
 lieved to be a fact, that the whole country West of the Blue Ridge did not pay as much into the Trea- 
 sury as it received back. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 215 
 
 security for the preservation of man. _ I hare no fears of private property being 
 endangered from individual rapine. ZSo, Sir, not the slightest; but I am unwilhng 
 to subject property to taxation by agents who are not responsible to those vrho are 
 compelled to pay the taxes. 
 
 This Hall, seems to me. Sir, to be the last place in America in vrliich this doctrine 
 of political faith ouffht to he held out. This Hall has been repeatedly made the thea- 
 tre on which the ablest men Virginia ever produced, have eloquently appealed to their 
 fellow citizens to resist the usurpations of the General Government in violation of 
 the Constitution of the United States. For thirty years, the violations of that Con- 
 stitution have been the theme of complaint by Virginians. "SVe are told that the Con- 
 stitution has been twice violated by the establishment of the Banks of the United 
 States — has been violated by the Alien and Sedition laws — and by the whole system 
 of Tariff laws for the protection of domestic manufactures. These violations, too, 
 are said to have been committed by those who were bound by tlie solemn obligation of 
 an oath, to support the Constitution. Prudence forbids my inquiring, here, whether 
 these complaints be well founded or not ; it is enough to know that they exist to pre- 
 vent Virginians from trusting to a sense of honour and the restraints of conscience 
 alone, to prevent men from pursuing their own interests when there are no Consti- 
 tutional provisions in the way, and when their own discretion is the sole measure of 
 their power. What is it that induces one part of the country to support and another 
 to oppose the Tariff laws ? Is it not probable that interest has something to do with 
 it .' There is no doubt of it. 
 
 It has been frequently said in the progress of this debate, that the object of Wes- 
 tern gentlemen in wishing the wiiite basis to be estabhshed, was to enable them to 
 obtain the passage of laws for the promotion of a system for the internal improve- 
 ment of their country. I thought the magnanimity and candor of gentlemen would 
 prevent them from denying that that was one of their primary objects. What else 
 can be their object ? Does any gentleman pretend that the security of personal 
 rights requires the adoption of this principle ? Is it mere theoretical perfection they 
 aim at.' Or is it not rather some practical advantage, which they expect to result 
 firom it.' I had like to have said, is it not self interest, that in same degree prompts 
 them 
 
 I hioic. Sir, that some of the leading politicians of the West have the promotion of 
 internal improvement greatly at heart. I mention this in no reproachful spirit — it is 
 honorable to them — and if they did not wish to improve their country, and facilitate 
 the means of intercourse by roads and canals — they would be imworthy of those salu- 
 brious hills and fertile vallies with which their delightful region abounds. I am my- 
 self a friend to internal improvement. I consider that every road and every canal, 
 connecting the East and the We<t, is a strong bond of union — a union which I hope 
 may be perpetual. If you make it the interest of men to be imited, they will be very 
 apt to remain united ; and if you make it their interest to be separated, notliing but 
 the strong arm of power can hold them long together. If I were a member of the 
 Legislatiire, I would grant pecuniary assistance to my Western fellow citizens, in no 
 fifrudging spirit, for the improvement of their country. But while I declare, with 
 <, perfect sincerity, my willingness to aid my fellow citizens of the West in this oreat 
 work of internal improvement, I want those who are to pay the expense to have the 
 power of judgincT and deciding ichen, for ichat purpose — and to ichat extent thev will 
 contribute to that object. No one is so competent to decide upon the abihty of k man 
 t© pay. as that man who is compelled to pay. And no person should have the power 
 of deciding how much shall be paid, and for what purposes, except the tax-payer him- 
 self, or his immediate and responsible representative — and least of all, should the 
 power of imposing the taxes be given to those who are directly interested to make 
 laro-e impositions. 
 
 The gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Doddridge) told us, that the masters of slaves in 
 the Easl, wished their fellow citizens of the West to bow their necks and become po- 
 htical slaves — and that if the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper 
 prevails, the West will forever be subject to the political power of the East. With 
 due respect to that gentleman, I must beg leave to difier from him. If the white po- 
 pulation of the West continues to increase as rapidly hereafter, as it has done since 
 1S20, and the taxes for each white person in the different sections of the State shall 
 be the same they now are. then, on the combined basis, in 1S56 one half of the dele- 
 gates will be West of the Ridge, and one half East ; and in lS57,the majority would 
 be West of the Ridge. When the population of the West shall so increase that the 
 majority of political power shall be West of the Blue Ridge, that country will not be 
 near so populous as the Eastern country now is. The trans-AUeghany district would 
 then have about 17 iniiabitants to the square mile, and the Valley about 26: and at 
 present the middle country has 23. and the old and impoverished tide water country 33 
 to the square mile. If other gentlemen are disposed to object to this estimate of the 
 future population of the Western sections of tins State, my friend from Brooke can- 
 
216 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 not object to it, because, it was in that same speech he told us that in thirty years the 
 majority would be West of the Alleghany, and the population of the East would be to 
 the West but as a drop in the bucket.^' 
 
 Although, Mr. Chairman, I decidedly prefer the combined basis to the white basis 
 of representation, yet I should be willing to abandon it in favor of di graduated county 
 plan of representation, if such an one can be adopted as will protect those who pay 
 the taxes from oppressive burthens. Many of the counties of Virginia have been in 
 existence for 200 years, and the people have been so long in the habit of forming 
 county associations, and having separate representation, that no plan could be accept- 
 able to the people, which broke up these ancient county boundaries. I would adopt 
 a graduated county representation, for the same reason that induced George Mason 
 and the other wise men who formed the Constitution of 177G, to depart in the Consti- 
 tution from the literal meaning of the Bill of Rights : I would do it, because it is best 
 adapted to the situation of Virginia. By this plan, the political power of the country 
 will gradually pass to the West, as the wealth and taxes of that country increase ; 
 and as the increasing population of that country shall render the formation of new 
 counties necessary in that section of the State ; while no new counties would be 
 formed to the East. 
 
 I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, that I have detained the Committee so long at this late 
 hour of the day ; I thank the Committee for their attention, and will conclude with 
 expressing the ardent wish that this important question may be so settled as will be 
 satisfactory to the whole people of Virginia, and will permanently promote their pros- 
 perity and happiness. 
 
 Mr. Joynes having resumed his seat, the Committee rose, and thereupon the House 
 adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, November 6, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by the 
 Rev. Mr. Lee of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 Mr. Townes of Pittsylvania, submitted a resolution, which, if the Convention 
 thought worthy of its attention, he hoped would be referred to the Committee of the 
 Whole. 
 
 This resolution, read by the Clerk, is as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That all propositions for laying the taxes, or appropriating the public 
 money, or for the loan of money upon the credit of the State, the votes of the mem- 
 bers of both branches of the General Assembly, representing the divisions of the 
 State hereafter mentioned, shall avail, in proportion to the amount of public revenue 
 collected in each division of the preceding year. A majority of the members from 
 each division, shall give the vote of the division ; to which end, that part of the State 
 
 which is composed of the counties of , shall be one division ; that part which 
 
 is composed of the counties of , shall be another division ; that part which is 
 
 composed of the counties of , shall be another division ; and that part which is 
 
 composed of the counties of , shall be another division." 
 
 Mr. Townes moved, that the resolution be referred to the Committee of the Whole, 
 which was agreed to. 
 
 The President then submitted a letter from the Presbyterian Synod of Virginia, 
 (which had just had its meeting in this city,) expressing their cordial concurrence in 
 the principles of toleration, which had marked the proceedings of the Convention. 
 This letter was read as follows : 
 
 " At the Sessions of the Synod of Virginia, held in the First Presbyterian Church 
 in the city of Richmond, on the 31st of October, A. D. 1829, the following resolution 
 was unanimously adopted : 
 
 Resolved unanimously, That the Synod of Virginia have observed with great 
 satisfaction, that the Convention now assembled to form a new Constitution for the 
 People of this Commonwealth, are proposing and doubtless intending to preserve and 
 perpetuate the sacred principle — Liberty of Conscience — declared in the Bill of Rights 
 and developed in the Act establishing Religious Freedom, as a part of the fundamen- 
 tal law of the land ; and they do hereby solemnly proclaim, that they continue to es- 
 teem and cherish that principle for which the Presbyterian Church in this State, and 
 throughout the United States, have ever zealously and heartily contended, as the 
 clearest right and the most precious privilege that freemen can exert. 
 
 " Resolved, That John H. Rice, D.'D. Conrad Speece, D. D. and William Maxwell, 
 be a committee to communicate a copy of the foregoing resolution to the President of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTEVTION. 
 
 217 
 
 the Convention, to be very re-':iec'::\:"^v 
 shall deem most proper and convenient, 
 
 ■• Frakci; AITARLAyx', Clerk of Synod." 
 
 submitted to thai bocv at such time as he 
 *nVAI, HILL. Mcderaior. 
 
 On Air. Savior's motion, this paper was laid on the table — Air. N. moved also to 
 have it printed, and on taking the question, the voices seemed to be ag-ainst it : on 
 Mr. Xaylor's saving, that Le vrould be content vrith the spreading of it on the Journals 
 of the Convention, no coimt vras taken. 
 
 The Convention haviiig gone into Committee of tiie "Whole. Mr. Povrell in the 
 Chair : 
 
 Mr. FiTZHUGH addressed the Committee : 
 
 1 had determined. IMr. Chairman, to take no part in this discussion, but to give a 
 silent vote on the Question before you. and to rest my justification for doing so. on 
 the character of this bodv. Circumstances, hovrever. have recently occurred, which 
 have changed mv deterinination. Mv sentiments, at all times folly., fairly, and free- 
 ly expressed, and" on no subiect more iairly or more fully expressed than on this, have, 
 it seems, become a matter of speculatiGn amongst those whom I have the honor to 
 represent. By what agency this has been ejected. I have not yet been able to learn. 
 Nor is it material. I know very well, however, the means by which an honorable 
 and high-minded people may be disabused, in relation to a faithful representative ; 
 and. if in seeking to emplov them on the present occasion. I should seem to be offer- 
 ing instruction to the venerable men around me. who axe so much better fitted by 
 their age. their wdsdom. and their experience, to give, than to receive instruction, I 
 trust I shall find a sufficient apology vrith them at least.- in the peculiarity of mj 
 situation. 
 
 I am an advocate. Sir. for the resolution of the Legislative Committee. I am so, 
 because I believe its design to be. what I am sure its effect must be. so to organize the 
 Government of the State, that its future laws shall emanate from, a majority of its re- 
 cognized voters. In declaring my preference for this principle. I hope to reheve my- 
 self from the imputations so profusely cast upon its advocates, by disclaiming all au- 
 thoritv for it. as derived rioxxx the laws of nature, and all support for it. founded on 
 metaphysical abstractions. I view it. on the contrary, as one of those plain and prac- 
 tieal principles, which the common sense and experience of mankind have sdmost 
 constituted into a political axiom. 
 
 Let me not be understood as wishing to impaix; in the smallest degree, the charac- 
 ter of the Bill of Bights. No. Sir. 1 recognize almost all its principles, when prac- 
 tieally construed, as sacred. All men. for insiance. are by nature - equally free and 
 independent." But. G-od forbid that I should so far disregard the Hghts of reason 
 and of common sense, as to infer &om hence, a pohtical equahty that must accom- 
 pany man through all the various modes and changes of pohtical society. Pohtical 
 right. Sir, or more properly, pohtical power, is the creature of Convention, and the 
 very same instrument that ascribes to all men a perfect equahty in the formation of 
 this Convention, recognizes in the commTmity of its creation, a perfect right not only 
 to establish that Government, which it deems capable of producing the greatest 
 degree of happiness and safety."' but to change it *• whenever found inadequate or 
 contrary to the purposes for which it was intended.'' 
 
 When, then, we speak of the nararal equahty of man. we mean only that no one, 
 in the original organization of Government, can claim a natural superiority to ano- 
 ther : that all may enter, or refuse to enter, into the compact proposed, as to them 
 may seem best : and that they may . in the language of the BiU of Bights , select that 
 Government, which they deem capable of producing the greatest degree of happi- 
 ness and safety." The relative power of each, is of course to be determined by ■flie 
 compact itself; and ail that can be asked on this subject, is, that it should be ref- 
 lated by reason and justice. 
 
 "VTith the gentleman iioxD. Orange. Air. Baibo'jLr. I agree in recrarding as the wisest 
 pohtical maxim ever uttered, the declaration of Solon •■ that h'e had given to the 
 Athenians, not the best Government ru cotild have nramed. but the best theitweie ca- 
 pable of receiving." This, in truth, is the fotmdation of all good Government. In 
 opposition to the gentleman from Northampton, i Mr. L'ushur.'' it admits the existence 
 of principles in pohtics. It recognizes a standard in Government, as well as in mo- 
 rals and in taste } and it recognizes also, the propriety of varying fi-om that standard, 
 as circumstances may require. 
 
 V<"::':_ = r : " . ^ - r. :r.- '■3rt. Sir. I only claim from gentlemen opposed to 
 
 rae. :;: . - ~ ^- : : ^1- forms of Government. t"ne Bepubhean form is 
 
 best ; tnr. in :..t .^r : r.s •:■ : v.-er. all other things being ecuil. t::e suureme au- 
 thority should be vested i:i the ntroritx. rather than in the minT.-.y : r-r.d that as all 
 departures from tins principle are evils, thev should so no fartxxci i:ia.n mav be ie« 
 
 2S ' ' 
 
218 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 quired by the actual necessity of the case ; and this enables me to proceed at once to 
 the practical consideration of the question before us. 
 
 The resolution of the gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. Green) proposes so to amend 
 the report of the Legislative Committee, as to base representation on population and 
 taxation combined. For the present, it is true, it embraces but one branch of the 
 Legislature ; but I feel myself justified in inferring from the arguments urged in its 
 support, both here and elsewhere, that the real design is to organize the whole Legis- 
 lative Department on this principle ; and of course to transfer to a minority of the re- 
 cognized voters of the State, the exclusive power of enacting all the laws of the 
 State. 
 
 When a proposition of this extraordinary character, totally at war with the princi- 
 ples I have heretofore sustained, is made, I must be pardoned for examining both its 
 extent and the reasons by which it is supported, before I yield it my assent. I la- 
 ment that in doing so, I shall be compelled to resort to any thing in the shape of sta- 
 tistical exhibits. 
 
 ■ _ I know very well, that in debate, statistics are always disgusting, and seldom effi- 
 cient ; but I feel, that on the present occasion, I cannot more clearly illustrate the 
 propositions I mean to sustain, than hy a few short and simple details, extracted from 
 the reports of the Auditor, 
 
 If a line be drav/n from the waters of the Chappawamsic, (a stream insignificant 
 in itself, but rendered classic by the eloquent allusions so often made to it elsewhere,) 
 to the southwestern corner of the county of Patrick, the State will be thrown into 
 two divisions ; each embracing eleven Congressional Districts. And if, as T under- 
 stand from those who have made the calculation, a representation based on Federal 
 numbers be but little different from a representation based on population and taxation 
 combined, each of these divisions will be entitled, on the principle of the amendment, 
 to an equal number of representatives in the future Legislature. But the documents 
 supplied us by the Auditor shew, that while the western division, embracing among 
 others the District I have the honor to represent, contains 349,720 white inhabitants, 
 the lower or Eastern division, contains only 253,361; leaving a balance in favour of 
 the former, of 96,369. 
 
 I think it proper to remark, in relation to this statement, that it is derived from the 
 Census of 1820, as presenting the only authentic source of information on this subject. 
 And I have felt the less difficulty in resorting to it, rather than to the uncertain cal- 
 culations of the Auditor, as to the probable population of the State in 1829, because, 
 although the use of the latter might have occasioned a little difference of result in 
 figures, it would not have affected, in the smallest degree, the principle for which I 
 am contending. 
 
 But the subject may be presented in a still stronger point of view, by a reference 
 to the relative vote of the two divisions. I find that on the Convention question, the 
 Western division gave 23,096 votes ; while the Eastern gave only 15,437 ; leaving a 
 majority in favour of the former, of 7,559. An idea, I know, at one time prevailed, 
 that a large number of bad votes had been given in the Western country, and that 
 the expression of public opinion on that occasion, furnished of course no fair test of 
 the relative strength of the different parts of the State. But it so happens, that the 
 vote of the two divisions was very nearly in proportion to their population in 1820. 
 Whereas, if the relative increase of population has been as much greater in the West, 
 as has been supposed, and a full vote had been taken^ the majority ought to have been 
 very far beyond what was actually obtained. 
 
 But taking the case as it is, it presents this obvious result : that 23,096 voters in 
 that division of the State from which I come, are, on the plan of the gentleman from 
 Culpeper, to elect no more representatives in the legislative body than 15,436 in the 
 lower division. In other words, that sixteen votes heloio tide-water, are hereafter to 
 outweigh in the political scale, twenty-three votes above tide-water; and that solely 
 on account of their superior wealth. 
 
 I will not stop for the present, to inquire whether this be reasonable and just ; but 
 I do ask, in the same spirit in which the question was propounded by the gentleman 
 from Norfolk, (Mr. Taylor,) whether such an arrangement of political power would 
 be consistent with the republican principles of our Government If it were proposed 
 to introduce it into our county elections, to graduate the influence of votes by the 
 wealth that accompanied them, to give to sixteen affluent men the power to select their 
 favorite representatives in opposition to the united voices of three and twenty of their 
 poorer neighbours, can there be a doubt of the spirit in which it would t>e met 
 Would it not encounter a tone of indignant remonstrance, in every corner and section 
 of the State, minghng itself, as well with the lowland wave, as with the mountain tor- 
 rent ? 
 
 And is the principle varied Is its enormity lessened ? Are its evils avoided by 
 the sectional character with which it is proposed to invest it ? To my mind. Sir, this 
 is its most objectionable shape. When inequalities are created amongst those who are 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVEXTIOX. 
 
 219 
 
 living in constant communion with each otlier. and whose general interests are one 
 and the same, the spirit of oppression is controlled by the influence of social inter- 
 course ; and the lust of power, if it yield not to the suggestions of patriotism; is lost 
 amid the calculations of extended and uniform interests. 
 
 But when these inequalities are sectional ;. when the few in one quarter are empow- 
 ered to control the many in another ; where, to what benignant influence are the 
 latter to look for protection to their feehngs and their interests .- 2sot to the justice 
 and magnanimity of those in power : for we have been emphatically told by gentle- 
 men, that interest is the ruhng, if not the only spring of action to man : and surely 
 they will not ask from the majority; a confidence, on which; from the beginning; they 
 have refused to rely. Xor can that majority depend for security, on the prevalence 
 of a general interest throughout the country ;. for the very concession demanded of 
 them rests for its justification on the existence of separate and distinct interests. 
 
 But. again. Sir; if sixteen voters are. by the instrmnentahty of wealth alone, to be 
 made superior to twenty-three, where are you to stop .- Where are you to draw the 
 precise hne of demarcation to kepubhcan Government ? .Must not the same princi- 
 ple, under a change of circumstances, concentrate power in yet fewer hands.' If, 
 as the gentleman from Northampton (Mr. Upshur) supposes, a majority of interests must 
 always prevail; may not that majority, which is now confined to sixteen in thirty-nine, 
 attach itseh", in the progress of individual accumulation, to nine, to three, or even to one r 
 And when, under the influence of their faj^ite principle; power shall be thus concen- 
 trated; shall I be told that we are yet a Repubhcan people ? 1 will not say. that in the 
 proorress of events, such a change in our Government mav not become necessarv- I 
 will not saV; that a state of things might not be imaofined. in which I mvself should 
 be constrained to vote for it. But the same page that would contain the record of my 
 vote, would present in connection witli it. the declaration that Virginia was no lono;er 
 fitted for a Republican Government. But suppose that in all this I am mistaken, and 
 that our Republican principles are not endangered by the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Culpeper. We are certainly about to depart; and in no measured deoree. from 
 that plain and simple rule of Government; sustained by expediency, no less than by 
 reason and justice; which confides the power of legislation to a majority rather than 
 a minority. Is there any reason for this departure r And if there be, is it not now 
 proposed to go far beyond what the necessity of the case requires .- The lower divi- 
 sion, to which I have referred, it is acknowledged; contains a larger amount of pro- 
 perty and pays a greater proportion of taxes tlian the upper, (the excess about 854.000.) 
 and hence it is inferred, that unless the power contended for; be obtained, property 
 will be without an adequate protection. If this can be made manifest; I pledge my- 
 self to abandon the principles I have brought with me to this discussion, and to go 
 alonop with, and iinder the guidance of, the gentlemen from below. 
 
 Security to property. Sir : who does not feel its necessity Who of the numbers 
 that are present, does not concur with the gentleman from Xorthampton. in thinking 
 that security to property is the most efiicient. if not the only security to personj3 
 risrhts .' Is it of any consequence to me to be able to keep my body beyond the hmits 
 of a jail, to roam where I pleasC; to do what I please, or even to contribute by my, 
 vote to organize the Government under which I am to live, if that very Government 
 is to be empowered, whenever it shall think proper; to wrest from me the means of 
 my subsistence, and to throw me poor and penny less on a heartless world 1 
 
 No; Sir, the property of the country ought to be. and must be protected; at aU 
 hazards ; but let gentlemen beware, lest in providing for its security, they expose it 
 to dangers tliat do not naturally surround it : lest in attempting to throw aroimd it 
 the robes of protection, they incautiously invest it with the shirt of Xessus. To a 
 certain extent, property carries witiiin itself the means of its own protection. 2\ot 
 in its corrupting influence, as referred to by the gentleman from Northampton : but 
 in the facihties it aflbrds for acquiring knowledge and diilusing benefits. It ought to 
 be the aim , as it is witMn the scope of political institutions, to fortify and strengthen 
 this power of self- protection. Let them guard it by just regulations against improper 
 invasions. Let them increase its facilities for action, in all cases where its aim is to 
 procure legitimate advantages to its owner, or gratuitous benefits to the commimity 
 in which it exists. And let it be limited in its power of corruptuag and oppressing, 
 not by giving to it political power, but by rendering it amenable to the majesty of the 
 laws it would violate; and to the indignant justice of the people, whose honesty it 
 would corrupt. 
 
 But this is not all. I would not stop here, even though in proceeding farther; I 
 may stray from the ranks in which I have hitherto been fighting. I would provide 
 for the protection of property in the verv foundations of Government. I would fur- 
 nish to it; that verv securitv, modified in form onlv, to wliich the gentleman from 
 Hanover appealed.' as an evidence of the sentiments of our forefathers. With them, 
 I would commit the right of suffrage to such onlv as could give evidence of perma- 
 nent connuon interest in the community." I would allow no man to participate in 
 
220 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 laying the taxes, who did not also participate in paying them. This I hold to be the 
 best security for property ; a security which gives to it the only political power to 
 which it is entitled, or with which it can be safely entrusted. Here then, let gentle- 
 men plant their standard ; here unfurl their banner ; and they will draw around 
 them, if not all, a very large proportion of the intelligence as well as the property of 
 the State. 
 
 But this general security to property, I am told, is not the object aimed at ; and 
 that nothing is accomplished while the many are authorized to levy on the few, a hea- 
 vier tax than they themselves are required or have it in their power to pay. The gentle- 
 man from Hanover, indeed, has gone so far as to declare, that this is the very princi- 
 ple, against which, our ancestors so gallantly and so successfully contended; and 
 that it constitutes in fact the very consummation of tyranny. And does the gentle- 
 man really think, that if the Government be organized as we propose, the people of 
 th^ lower country will stand to their Western brethren, in the same relation that our 
 forefathers occupied towards Great Britain — or to use his own words, that we now 
 occupy towards the Government of Ohio ? Will he consider himself taxed without 
 his consent, because his representative may be ranked among the minority in the 
 legislative vote — or because some particular tax may possibly bear harder on himself 
 or his county, than on other parts of his State ? If so, we have hitherto lived 
 under the rankest despotism ; for it will be found by reference to the tabular state- 
 ments of the Auditor, that the middle cou^ry lying on either side of the Blue Ridge, 
 while it possesses a large majority of the property of the State and is annually paying 
 nearly $ 30,000 more than the rest of the State, has in the House of Delegates forty- 
 two representatives less than the Western and Eastern divisions united. 
 
 Gentlemen must pardon me for saying, that on this subject, their arguments have 
 gone beyond the proposition they have intended to-support ; and that in pourtraying 
 what they deemed the incompatible interests of the East and of the West, they have 
 gone far to establish another proposition, that the Ancient Dominion is no longer fit- 
 ted for a single Government. I confess, indeed, Sir, that I was shocked and alarmed, 
 when I heard the solemnity with which the gentleman from Chesterfield, in particu- 
 lar, declared the integrity of the State to be now only the second wish of his heart ; 
 and that unless the whole powers of legislation were thrown into the hands of a mi- 
 nority, he for one, was prepared for a division of the State. 
 
 [Mr. Leigh here rose to explain. He said the gentleman from Fairfax had 
 strangely misconceived the character of his remarks. What he had said, was, that 
 the preservation of the State entire, was the second consideration with him. The 
 first was, that the entire State should have a free and regular Republican Government, 
 founded upon the mutual interests of all, with a just balance of those interests, 
 where they are conflicting.] 
 
 Mr, Fitzhugh resumed. I did not misunderstand the gentleman, I sincerely wish 
 I had done so. He did not, it is true, desire the division of the State, if the Govern- 
 ment should be organized on what he deemed fair principles ; but when he came to 
 explain himself in relation to these principles, they consisted in throwing the whole 
 power of legislation into the hands of a minority of the people. Against the doctrine 
 of disunion, I have uniformly protested, let it come from what quarter it might. I 
 would preserve the integrity of the State at all hazards. (Mr. Upshur here nodded 
 assent.) The gentleman from Northampton agrees with me. I rejoice at it. He is 
 one of the earliest of my friends, whom I have had the pleasure to meet on the pre- 
 sent occasion ; and I thought, from my recollection of his character in former days, 
 as well as from what I have seen of him here, I might rely on his zealous co-operation 
 in whatever would have a tendency to promote the harmony of our deliberations, and 
 to preserve the unity of the State. 
 
 But, Sir, to return to the subject from which I was called off by the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield. If it be really so tyrannical to vest in a majority, a power to levy 
 taxes to which they themselves are to contribute in proportion to their property, what 
 shall we say to the converse of the proposition, where the minority are to be entrusted 
 not only with the purse strings, but with the lives and liberties of those, in whom 
 they are unwilling to recognize any general community of interest with themselves ? 
 If there be tyranny in the case, it is here, where the interests and wishes of a few are 
 to be substituted for the interests and wishes of the whole. 
 
 To that argument which has been deduced from the peculiar character of the pro- 
 perty most prevalent in the Eastern section of the State, I am willing to allow its full 
 weight. Participating very largely in that description of property myself, I cannot 
 be otherwise than alive to any dangers that may seem to threaten it. And be assured, 
 Sir, that my own interest independently of a sense of justice, will at all times secure 
 my zealous co-operation, in whatever may be necessary to protect it against dangers, 
 either present or in prospective. 
 
 What then are the dangers to which it is really exposed ? None, I apprehend, and 
 ■ none, in truth, to v/hich reference has been made, but that of excessive taxation. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 221 
 
 And even this is acknowledged to be very much diminished by the diffusion of the 
 property in question over every portion of the State. Yes, Sir, slavery unfortunately 
 exists even in the remotest regions of the West, and if its subjects be less numerous 
 there, than along the shores of the Atlantic, their general distribution, in smaller 
 numbers, especially in the Valley, ensures an interest in relation to them., that will 
 not fail to unite with the more powerful interest in the East, in opposing any attempt- 
 ed injustice, in relation to them. 
 
 But I for one, am not disposed to rest on this as my only dependence. The very 
 fact, that this description of property has hitherto borne so disproportionate a part of 
 the public burdens, renders it a fit subject for constitutional protection. And it is 
 with this view, that I have already proposed so to limit the power of taxation, as to 
 distribute the impositions of Government among the different descriptions of property, 
 exactly in proportion to their relative value. The effect of this must of course be, 
 what all will acknowledge to be just, to reduce the tax on slaves to precisely the same 
 level witli all the other faxes of the State. 
 
 But I am told by the gentleman from Chesterfield, that this is a mere paper guar- 
 antee, to be executed or not, as the whim and caprice of the majority may hereafter 
 determine. 
 
 A paper guarantee ! And what, Sir, are all the limitations on the powers of the 
 Government, provided by the present Constitution ? What, that verv organization of 
 the Legislative Department you are so pertinaciousl}^ seeking to establish What, in 
 fine, is the Constitution itself.? All, all mere paper guarantees ! And when these 
 shall have become, in truth, as valueless as they are represented to be, the fact itself 
 will furnish conclusive evidence of the progress of corruption, and of the unfitness 
 of the State for the continuance of Republican Government. Until then, however, 
 I must be permitted to hope, that the provision in question, if adopted, will furnish 
 us ample security against the apprehended danger of excessive taxation. 
 
 Nor, Su-, does it seem to me more difficult to provide against another apprehended 
 evil. I mean the unjust distribution of the public revenue with a view to internal 
 improvement. The gentleman from Fauquier (Mr. Scott) has exhibited this danger 
 in all its details. He has presented to us every variety of interest. Eastern and 
 Western, Northern and Southern, upland and lowland, and has called on us of the 
 middle country especially to look to our own immediate interests on this subject. 
 Mr. Chairman, I cannot act in this spirit. I should deeply lament its introduction 
 into this body. I am an advocate for the improvement of every portion of the State, 
 and I am willing, for myself as well as my constituents, to contribute fairly and freely 
 to its accomplishment. Ail that I require, is, that the public funds shall be judiciously 
 distributed, and with a national and not a sectional spirit. 
 
 With this view, and especially to quiet any well founded fears of the East, I would 
 consecrate in the Constitution, that wise provision on which our Fund for Internal 
 Improvement so long reposed, and from which T, amongst others, was tempted, in 
 *' evil hour," to depart. Yes, Sir, the best security for a just and judicious applica- 
 tion of the public treasure, is to dispose of it only in connection with individual con- 
 tribution. Had this principle been sustained until now, we should have been grati- 
 fied by the general diffusion of our system over every part of the State ; and instead 
 of contemplating a Bankrupt Fund, buried in the waters of a single stream, we micrht 
 have prepared ourselves to enter upon a new career of internal improvement, with 
 unimpaired resources and unbroken spirit. 
 
 I beg leave to return, for a single moment, to the idea of the gentleman from North- 
 ampton, that the Legislative power of the Government should rest with a majority of 
 interests rather than of persons. Does he really think that this ever was or ever can 
 be accomplished in a Republican Government? Does he believe that the interests of 
 the majority, by which the Legislature is elected are ever predominant.' or that in any 
 county the selection of representatives can be made by those who are to contribute 
 most largely to the revenue of the State. I hold in my hand. Sir, a letter from the 
 Commissioner of the revenue in my own county, giving this important information; 
 that of 1281 male titheables, paying upwards of $3,500 taxes, 535 contribute only 
 ^35. His examination has gone no farther; but I have very little doubt that if pro- 
 secuted, it would have shewn that three-fourths of the taxes of the county are paid 
 by less than 100 of its citizens. And does the gentleman think that to these 100 in- 
 dividuals, the entire control of the county could be given consistently with the gene- 
 ral character of our Republican institutions ? To attempt it, in reference to the State, 
 would be not less impolitic, and infinitely more unjust. 
 
 To any proposition, then, Mr. Chairman, going to confide to a minority of the legi- 
 timate voters of the State, the entire control of both branches of the Legislature, I 
 cannot, under any circumstances, give my assent. Hardly less objectionable, is the 
 proposition of the gentleman from Culpeper, now under consideration, to give such 
 control, over the most popular branch. Even this goes very far beyond what gentle- 
 men profess to ask, the protection of property, and in all cases of the joint action of 
 
222 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the two Houses, whether referring- to persons or property, elevates the minority above 
 the majority. The former and not the latter are to elect your Senators, your Gov- 
 ernors and your Judges; and to proclaim, from time to time, the relation in which 
 you stand to the General Government. Sir, I cannot assent to this. To the will of 
 the community, fairly and legitimately expressed, I shall at all times bow with perfect 
 submission. But I cannot recognize as the deliberate sentiment of the whole, the will 
 of a minority, congregated in a particular section of the State, and expressing the pe- 
 culiar feelings and wishes of those, whom they more immediately represent. 
 
 Gentlemen are mistaken in the precedents on which they rely. There is not one 
 of them that goes to sustain the proposition contended for here, that the whole power 
 of legislation ought to be confided to a minority. The case of the United States is 
 hardly applicable at all. That Government was a compact amongst independent sove- 
 reignties, and regulated in almost all its Departments, on a principle of compromise. 
 If Virginia obtained in one branch of the National Legislature, a representation be- 
 yond her white population, she fully paid for it in the other, by admitting the little 
 States of Rhode Island, Delaware, &c. to an equal participation of power with her- 
 self. Nor does any State that I know of, furnisli an example of organization in both 
 Houses, with a view to the representation of property. In the States of New Hamp- 
 shire, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Georgia, and perhaps one or two others, pro- 
 perty, it is true, is avowedly provided with a check in one House ; but in a large ma- 
 jority of the States, both old and new, so far as Legislative representation has been 
 controlled by any thing beyond mere convenience, it has been fixed solely in refer- 
 ence to white population. 
 
 Whether we ought to depart at all, from this latter principle, must depend on con- 
 tingencies that cannot yet be calculated. If the legitimate claims of property to pro- 
 tection be not sufiiciently regarded in the other provisions of the Constitution, it be- 
 comes a question of expediency, how far they ought to be secured by a check on the 
 power of the majority, in the less numerous branch of the Legislature ; and this, like 
 all other questions of expediency, must be decided, in some degree, by its probable 
 effect on the object we ought all to have in view, the adoption of a Constitution that 
 will be acceptable to a majority of the people. 
 
 I lamented. Sir, that I could not follow the gentleman from Accomack, (Mr. Joynes) 
 through the statistical details vv^ith which he yesterday favoured the Committee. The 
 late period at which he rose, rendered me utterly incapable of giving to his statements, 
 the attention they no doubt deserved. I heard enough, however, to satisfy me, that 
 while he had done less than justice to that portion of the Western country denomi- 
 nated the Valley, in charging it with paying into the public Treasury, less than it re- 
 ceived from it, he had measured out rather more than justice to his own section of the 
 State, by exhibiting it in connection witli the fertile and heavily taxed country imme- 
 diately under the mountain. I learn, indeed, from the gentleman from Albemarle, that 
 if the cities of Norfolk and Richmond be excluded from the Eastern division of the 
 State, it is very doubtful, whether it may not be found in the very predicament pre- 
 scribed by the gentleman from Accomack, to the whole Western country. 
 
 I cannot concur with these gentlemen. Sir, who would resolve all our actions into 
 base and sordid interest; though it were useless to complain of the remarks of the gen- 
 tleman from Chesterfield, in relation to the district I represent; as in denying to us, 
 any other motive of action, than our own peculiar interest, he has only placed us by 
 the side of himself. But I do trust, Sir, that in spite of the growing corruption of the 
 times, he has so eloquently and so justly described, there is yet in this body at least, 
 enough of public spirit, to induce us to look to the great interest of the Common- 
 wealth, uninfluenced by either personal or sectional considerations. If there be not, 
 the sooner we adjourn the better. Let us go back to our constituents, and tell them 
 honestly and candidly, that we are not the men they had supposed us, and that we are 
 in truth, as unfit to give, as they to receive a Republican Government. 
 
 I have submitted these remarks for no other purpose, Mr. Chairman, than to explain 
 both here and elsewhere, the course I am about to pursue. It would be folly in me 
 to hope, that the Government about to be formed, will be based exclusively on the 
 principle I have advocated ; and I should hold myself unfit for the station with which 
 I have been honoured, if I did not feel myself at all times prepared to make every rea- 
 sonable concession, to insure either harmony here or tranquillity abroad. 
 
 The Chair having twice enquired, whether the Committee were ready for the ques- 
 tion, it was about to be put, when, 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Norfolk, rose, and said that he had not had the slightest suspicion 
 that the question would be taken at this time ; but as it seemed that no gentleman in- 
 tended to address the Committee, he would move that the Committee do now rise, 
 and he owed it to himself to explain why he made such a motion. 
 
 I received, said Mr. T. the honor of a seat here, with a distinct knowledge, on the 
 part of my constituents, of the sentiments I held in regard to the reforms contem- 
 plated in the Government of the State. I had given to them no pledges, express or 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEN'TION. 
 
 223 
 
 implied. I had made a distinct avowal of my opinions in respect to most of the mat- 
 ters in controYersy, and an open promulgation of them, on the last day of the elec- 
 tion. On the immediate subject novr before us. I had formed no definite opinion : nor 
 had any such opinion been formed, or expressed,, by the people of my district. If 
 there had. I was ignorant of it. 
 
 The opinions I^hold with regard to this resolution, hare already been indicated to 
 this bodr, by the resolutions I had the honor to submit to it, some days since : which 
 resolutions 'were considered in part, and now sleep on your table. When I offered 
 them, I did believe, and I do still believe, that the amendment is inconsistent ^\-ith our 
 free institutions, that it is hostile in its principle, to equal rights among quahfied voters, 
 and tends directly, in its practical effect to introduce an oligarchy, tatal to the conti- 
 nuance of free Government. If the present amendment had been rejected, it was 
 my purpose to have moved another, the object of which would have been to strike 
 out the words ''ichite population.^ and to insert in lieu thereof -"nualified voters, without 
 regard to disparity of fortune and I meant to do this, not only because I considered 
 it more philosophical to commence with presenting principles, rather than facts ; but 
 also, because I considered it important not only to myself, but to the friends who agree 
 with me in opinion, and to the interests of the whole State, that the public should 
 understand the subjects which are in discussion here, that they should understand, 
 that this Convention is debating whether a majority of the qualified voters of the 
 State, shall have the control of the State, or whether a minority shall possess that 
 control on account of their superior wealth. I am willing to stand or fall on this 
 question, when it shall be rightly understood by the people. 
 
 I do not now intend to enter into the debate. Peculiar circumstances render it im- 
 proper for me to do so at present, and it is in reference to these circumstances that I 
 am induced to ask the Committee to rise. 
 
 I ha^-e learned, recently, that although no opinion had existed among my consti- 
 tuents when I came here, on the subject of the amendment, there does now exist 
 among them a very decided opinion on that subject, insomuch that I have received di- 
 rect instructions as to the course they wish me to pursue. I have some reason to beUeve 
 that a vast majority of my people (I call them so, as they have honored me with an 
 appointment to this body,) concur in the sentiment expressed in these instructions. 
 It has been the sentiment of my life, that representation is only the means by which 
 the opinions of the constituent body are to be expressed and effectuated. No act of 
 mine shall ever impair that principle. But, Sir, there are limits to obedience. Had 
 my constituents instructed me in some matter of expediency, or asked me to do what 
 was possible to me, I should have taken pleasure in showing with what cheerful sub- 
 mission I would o'ive effect to their opinions rather than my own. But they ask what 
 is impossible. To obey them I must violate my conscience, and the sacred obhgation 
 I owe to my country. I must do that which would dishonor me as a man and cover 
 me with shame as a patriot. I cannot do it without being guilty of moral treason to 
 the free institutions of my country. If I fail, I will meet the blow with dignity and 
 firmness, and I shall only regret that the victim is not more worthy of the God. But, 
 Sir, a man of integrity knows how to reconcile all his duties : and I am constiained 
 to ask a postponement of tliis question, because it is my fixed purpose not to ofive a 
 vote upon it. but to resign my sent in this body. I have had a communication with the 
 member first chosen in tiie delegation from Norfolk, and I have asked him to consult 
 with his colleagues as to the selection of some other person who may be more fortu- 
 nate than I am, and agree in sentiment with my constituents, and to do so with as 
 much expedition as propriety will allow, in order that they may not remain unrepre- 
 sented on this question. He informed me that there was no need of acting yesterday, 
 as there was no probability whatever that the question would be taken for some 
 days to come. Under these circumstances, I throw myself on the generosity of tliis 
 body, that I may not be compelled to act against either my own conscience or the 
 will of my constituents, and that time may be given for the selection of another dele- 
 gate in my room. I shall, therefore, move that the Committee rise, hoping that before 
 it is again called to deliberate, some gentleman may occupy my seat, who shall be 
 more fortunate than myself, in harmony of opinion, though none can be more devoted 
 to what I conceive to be the best interests of my constituents. 
 
 Before I take my seat. I hope it will not be deemed criminal in me, to profess that 
 I brought to this House the sentiments so well expressed by the gentleman firom 
 Northampton. (^Nlr. Upshur.) I came here, Sir, as a Virginian ; prepared to promote 
 the interest of Virginia : fully believing that the petty and temporary interests of my 
 district are as nothinor, in comparison to the interest it has, in the general prosperity 
 of tile State. 
 
 Permit me, Sir, to state the comparative effect wliich will be produced in my Dis- 
 trict, by the adoption of the resolution and of the amendment ; in other words, by the 
 white, and by the compound basis of representation. My District consists of the 
 counties of Norfolk, Princess Anne, Nansemond, and the Borough of Norfolk. In 
 
224 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the county of Norfolk, (I state from memory,) the white population is about 
 9,000: In Princess Anne, 5,400; in Nansemond, more than 5,000; and in Norfolk 
 Borough, 4,600. Now, if the resolution reported by the Committee shall prevail, and 
 the lohite basis be adopted, what will be the result? Go by numbers, and the county 
 of Norfolk having twice the population of the Borough, will be entitled to twice the 
 number of representatives. Princess Anne will have its representation in proportion 
 to that of Norfolk 1 and 16 — 100 to 1. Nansemond also will have a larger represen- 
 tation than Norfolk Borough. I speak now of qualified voters ; and I refer to the 
 Census, only as a mean of ascertaining them. But, should the amendment prevail, 
 and the mixed basis of population and taxation be adopted, see what will be the result : 
 $ 10,280 are paid in taxes by Norfolk Borough. Add its population, and the com- 
 pound ratio for that Borough, will be within a fraction of 15,000. In the county of 
 Norfolk, the taxes amount to $ 5,528 : Add the 9,000 people, and the sum is less than 
 15,000. So that the whole county, with a double population, will have a less repre- 
 sentation than the Borough. The county of Princess Anne, which pays $ 2,716 in 
 taxes, will, on the same plan, be surpassed by the Borough of Norfolk, in the propor- 
 tion of 1 and 17 — 100 to 1. And, in like manner, the county of Nansemond will be 
 surpassed, in the proportion of 1 and 94 — 100 to 1. Thus, with greater population, 
 each of these counties will have less representation than the Norfolk Borough. 
 
 Mr. Taylor concluded, by renewing his request, that the question might be post- 
 poned, and that the Committee would rise. He did not feel at liberty to enter upon 
 its discussion ; but he afterwards consented to withdraw the motion at the request of 
 
 Mr. Moore of Rockbridge, who then took the floor in support of the resolution, and 
 spoke as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : It was my intention, until very recently, not to have troubled the 
 Committee with any remarks upon the proposition now under consideration. I had 
 supposed, that long before we assembled in this Hall, the opinion of every member of 
 this Convention, would have been unchangeably fixed, upon this question at least, if 
 upon no other ; and that consequently, every argument which might be adduced on 
 either side, would be entirely thrown away. 1 find, however, from the great zeal 
 which has been manifested by gentlemen who have advocated the opposite side of 
 the question from that which I intend to espouse, that they do not altogether despair 
 of making converts to their cause. 
 
 Confident, as I am, that in asking that the representation in the House of Delegates, 
 shall be based upon white population exclusively, I am asking nothing more than that 
 which is right in itself ; and unwilling I hat it should be supposed for a moment, that 
 I, or those whom I represent in this Convention, are demanding any thing more than 
 justice at your hands, I beg leave now to present to the Committee, my views upon 
 this highly important subject. I claim. Sir, for myself, and for my constituents, to be 
 actuated by higher considerations, and more honorable motives, than those of mere 
 sordid interest, in the course we are pursuing in relation to this matter. And I call 
 upon those gentlemen who pay so poor a compliment to themselves and to their fel- 
 low-men, as to assert that interest is the great, if not the sole motive of liuman ac- 
 tion, to turn their attention to the Senatorial District from which I come, and to in- 
 quire, what is the relative proportion of white and black population there, to what it 
 is in other parts of the State; and what has been the relative increase of the whites 
 and the blacks ; to ascertain what is the nature of our soil and products ; what is the 
 extent of our property of every description ; and if they please, what taxes we pay, 
 in proportion to other portions of this Commonwealth ; and then to say, whether or 
 not, we can reasonably expect, to gain any permanent advantage from the adoption of 
 the basis for which I contend, in preference to that which they propose. The gen- 
 tleman from Accomack, it is true, has endeavoured to shew, that the people of the 
 Valley have very little interest in common with the people on this side of the Blue 
 Ridge of mountains ; and has made a calculation, by which he endeavours to prove, 
 that the former will always find it to their interest, to impose taxes upon slaves, in 
 preference to lands. He assumes, that in all the counties in which the slaves do not 
 bear a proportion of 38 per cent, to the whole population, the people will find it to 
 their interest, to throw as much as possible of the burthens of taxation, on that spe- 
 cies of property. Perhaps, if the gentleman could have shewn, that the pro] ortion 
 of voters in the Valley counties who hold slaves, to those who hold none, was less 
 than 38 per cent, there might have been some force in the argument which he ad- 
 vanced. But the proportion of persons in those counties entitled to vote, who hold 
 slaves, to those who hold none, being something like two to one, it is apparent from: 
 his own reasoning, and upon his own principles, that they cannot be interested in 
 taxing slaves, in preference to other property. And that a majority of those at least, 
 who have the power in their hands, have a common interest with the Eastern people, 
 in protecting slave property from unjust taxation. 
 
 It is said. Sir, that all comparisons are odious ; and I confess, that none are more so 
 to me, than those which have been made in this Committee, upon the subject of taxa- 
 
DEBATES OF THII CONYENTION. 
 
 225 
 
 tion. Not because the result of these comparisons will be to the disadvantage of my 
 own particular District, (for I think I can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Com- 
 mittee, that we pay a full proportion of all the taxes paid in the State :) but because 
 they are calculated to engender the most unkind feelings, between the good people 
 of this Commonwealth. 1 did not like the manner in which the gentleman from Ac- 
 comack was pleased to divide the State, by the Blue Ridge, and then endeavoured to 
 prove, by shewing that we (the Western people) drew more money out, than we paid 
 into the Treasury, that we were all a set of paupers, dependent on the charity of the 
 East. I do not choose, that we, who pay our full proportion of the taxes, shall be 
 classed with those who pay less than their proportion, in order to make us all out pau- 
 pers. According to this mode of proceeding, I can prove his oion constituents to be 
 nothing but a set of paupers ; for if he will add his District, to the whole country 
 West of the Blue Ridge, he will find, that all taken together, we do not pay as much 
 into the Treasury as we draw out of it. And after all, there is nothing so very dis- 
 creditable in a county or district of country, paying less money into the Treasury 
 than it draws out of it ; for if you divide the State into two parts, containing equal 
 numbers of people, by any line yon please to run, unless tbey draw out of the Trea- 
 sury in exact proportion to what they pay into it, one division or the other, will draw 
 out more money than it puts into it ; and according to the gentleman's mode of rea- 
 soning, all the people of that division must be considered as dependent upon the cha- 
 rity of those of the other division. I had always supposed that the people of every 
 portion of this Commonwealth, contributed to the support of Government, both in 
 personal services, and in money, in proportion to their ability to contribute, and that 
 this was all that could reasonably be demanded of them. I am not willing to give to 
 those who pay more money than we do, a greater representation than we have ; nor 
 will I ask of those who pay lef;s, to be satisfied with a smaller one. 1 have ever be- 
 lieved, that when a man, however poor he maybe, has paid as much money into the 
 Treasury as he is able to pay, that nothing more can be required at his hands ; and 
 that his having done so, ought, like the Vv^idow's mite, to entitle him, to equal privi- 
 leges, with those, who are enabled, out of the abundance of their wealth, to pay a 
 much larger sum. 
 
 Permit me now, Sir, to call the attention of the Committee once more, to the de- 
 clarations contained in our Bill of Rights, about which there appears to be so great a 
 diversity of opinions. It is not my intention to follow those who have preceded me in 
 this debate, over all the ground which they have occupied in discussing the principles 
 asserted by these declarations ; my only purpose will be, to explain to the Committee, 
 what has been m}'- understanding of these declarations, so solemnly made by our an- 
 cestors. I have been in the constant habit, from my earliest infancy to the present 
 moment, of regarding the whole Bill of Rights as a sacred instrument, in which the 
 onl}'- true principles upon which Republican Governments can be founded, had been 
 proclaimed to the world. And I trust. Sir, I shall be pardoned, (for I assure you I 
 mean no offence to any man.) when 1 say, that although I did believe that individuals 
 might be found in foreign countries, who (misled by the prejudices of education, or 
 blinded by interest,) might be disposed to question their authenticity; yet I did not 
 believe, that in this boasted land of liberal principles, one man could be found, who 
 would refuse to acknowledge them as the foundation, upon which the whole super- 
 structure of Government should rest. Entertaining such sentiments as these, it has 
 been, as you may well imagine, Mr. Chairman, with extreme pain, that I have lis- 
 tened to the very able and ingenious arguments of gentlemen, which to my apprehen- 
 sion, are but too well calculated to sap the very foundations of this, and every other 
 Republican Government. 
 
 The first section of the Bill of Rights asserts, " that all men are by nature equally 
 free and independent," &c. Now, Sir, is there any man here who doubts that all 
 men are " by nature eajaally free and independent.''" I presume there is not one in- 
 dividual in all this A..^*embly, who is prepared to express a doubt upon the subject. 
 But, say gentlemen, our ancestors did not mean to assert that all men are in the ac- 
 tual enjoyment of equal rights and privileges ; they only meant that by nature, they 
 are entitled to equal rights and privileges ;. and in this opinion I entirely concur with 
 them. But when gentlemen undertake to pronounce this to be a mere abstract prin- 
 ciple, which can never bo applied to the actual condition of men, I differ with them 
 toto cfBfo. And I hesitate not to affirm, that it is a principle which not only cent be, 
 but which must be acted upon by all men, whatever their condition in life may have 
 been; whether they have been in the enjoyment of their natural rights, or held in 
 the most degraded state of slavery, whenever they are about to form a Constitution ; 
 otherwise, the Government which they establish, must in the very nature of things, 
 be nothing more or less than a despotism. We have been asked, if this be really a 
 correct principle, and susceptible of universal application, Avhy was it that the slaves 
 were excluded by our ancestors, and why do we not now propose to admit them as 
 parties to the social compact ? The answer to this question is so easily given, and is 
 
226 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 so obvious, that I am surprised it should ever have been asked. The answer is, that 
 we do not choose to form or enter into any such compact with them. And is not this 
 a sufficient answer ? 
 
 We exclude tlicm, for precisely the same reasons that we would exclude foreigners 
 of every description; for the same reasons that we would refuse to extend the right 
 of citizenship to the inhabitants of Texas, or of Canada, or to any race of Indians 
 who might wish to be acknowledged as a part of the community to which we belong : 
 namely, that we do not choose to grant their request. And we would not choose to 
 grant such a request, because we believe that they would not make good citizens. 
 We do not propose to admit our slaves as parties to the social compact, because we 
 believe that they would not make good citizens, or because we are prejudiced against 
 their colour ; or if you please, because we think proper to disregard their natural 
 rights, and to hold them in slavery, that we may reap the benefit of their labour. 
 And it is perfectly immaterial what the reason for excluding them may be, if it be 
 sufficient to induce us to do so. By excluding foreigners, however, or Indians, we 
 do not interfere with their natural rights ; but leave them at liberty to form any sort 
 of Government they please for themselves. The mistake is in supposing that the 
 principle, if true, is one which must, in its application, be extended, to all, to whom, 
 it can be extended : whereas, it is one, which may, or may not, be extended, so as to 
 embrace any particular race or class of people, as may seem best to those who are 
 about to establish a Government : but which must be extended to all whom it is in- 
 tended, shall become parties to the compact, or members of the community. It is 
 evident, that such was the understanding which our ancestors had of this principle, 
 and of its application, at the time when our Bill of Rights and Constitution were 
 established by them. They, excluded foreigners from the enjoyment of all the rights 
 and privileges of citizenship in this State, except upon certain conditions : they ex- 
 cluded the Indians altogether, and they excluded the negroes altogether, and the rea- 
 sons for excluding the latter, were stronger than those for excluding the former. All 
 those, however, vv^lio were admitted as members of the community, were admitted 
 upon terms of perfect equality. Let us suppose the agents of the British Govern- 
 ment, with a view to induce them to return to their allegiance to the British Crown, 
 to have addressed them in language like this : " You have declared, that all men are 
 by nature equally free and independent, and that the majority of the people have an 
 indubitable and unalienable right, to alter, reform, or abolish Government at their 
 pleasure; and we have a strong party amongst the white people in this State, who 
 are in favour of abolishing the Government which you have established, which added 
 to the whole number of Indians and negroes in the State, (who are also in our fa- 
 vour,) will make a majority ; which, according to your own principles, has a right to 
 change the Government at its pleasure. We therefore demand that you submit to 
 the will of this majority, and give up the power which you are no longer entitled to 
 hold." What are we to suppose would have been their reply to such a demand.? 
 Would they not have said, ''these Indians and negroes constitute no part of the 
 community for whose advantage this Government was formed, and consequently have 
 no right to express any opinion upon the subject; and although we admit that tlieir 
 natural rights are equal to our own, yet they not having been permitted to become 
 parties to the compact from which we derive our authority, they can have no voice 
 in changing or destroying it." And they might well have added, " these negroes 
 whom you see so totally unfitted by their habits, and want of all the moral virtues, to 
 enjoy the blessings of liberty and of a free Government, have no just cause of com- 
 plaint against any one for placing them in their present degraded condition, except it 
 is against your own King, who sent them amongst us, and compelled us to receive 
 them, contrary to our own inclinations, which is one of the grievances complained of 
 in the preamble to our Constitution." 
 
 Having expressed my belief that our slaves are by nature ewnally as free and inde- 
 pendent as ourselves, or in other words, that they are by nature, entitled to equal 
 rights and privileges, it may not be improper, that I should make one or two remarks, 
 which though they have no immediate bearing upon the question before us, may 
 serve to prevent any misapprehension of my sentiments upon a subject of such vital 
 importance to this State as that of slavery. I give it then, as my deliberate opinion, 
 that although our slaves are by nature, entitled to equal rights with the rest of the 
 human race, and although it would be both our interest and our duty to send them 
 out from amongst us, if any practicable scheme could be suggested for effecting that 
 object ; that yet, all questions as to their rights, are questions between them and our 
 selves exclusively. It is moreover my opinion, that if the necessity of the case does 
 not furnish a sufficient excuse for our retaining them in servitude, (as I hope it does,) 
 that we are answerable for our injustice towards them, only to our own consciences, 
 and to the Great God of all : and that no foreign people or power, have a right in 
 any manner, under any circumstances, or under any pretence, to interfere between 
 them and us. And so far do I carry my ideas of exclusive right, upon this subject, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 227 
 
 that if the majority of the people of Virginia, or of their representatives, were to de- 
 termine to reduce all the free negroes amongst us to a state of slavery, although the 
 proposition in itself would be most abhorrent to my feelings ; yet I should regard my- 
 self as a traitor to my country, if I did not resist by all the means in my power, any 
 attempt which might be made, on the part of any other people, to interfere. 
 
 We have been asked, why it is we exclude the women from all participation in the 
 formation of Government, if it be true that all the human race possess equal natu- 
 ral rights ? I answer, that it is not because we deny to these an equality cf natural 
 rights, or because they are inferior in intelhgence, morality, or virtue, to ourselves : 
 for 1 will be as ready to admit as any gentleman on the opposite side of the question, 
 that in all these particulars they are" our equals at least, and in most of them, our su- 
 periors. And I was not a little surprised the other day that the gentleman from 
 Orange, should have thought it necessary to go into a historical argument, to prove 
 what no one here was disposed to dispute in relation to their capacity for conducting 
 the affairs of Government. 
 
 It will be a sutficient answer to tliis question, to say, that the women have never 
 claimed the right to participate in the formation of the Government, and that until 
 they do, there can be no necessity for our discussing or deciding upon it : more espe- 
 ciallj^ as no one believes that any such claim will ever be insisted upon by them. 
 There surely can be no reason why we should attempt to impose upon them, burthens 
 which they are unwilling to bear. If I were to attempt to assign the reason why 
 they do not make any such demand, I would say that it is because their interests are 
 so completely identified with our own, that it is impossible that we can make any re- 
 gulation injuriously affecting their rights, which will not equally injure ourselves. 
 And because they have such unlimited confidence in our sex, that they cannot sus- 
 pect us of any disposition to act unjustly towards them. A confidence which I hope 
 is by no means misplaced, unless gentlemen on the other side of this question, are 
 disposed to impose some unjust restrictions upon them, of which I am sure I am very 
 far from suspecting any member of tliis body. 
 
 We have been called upon to assign a reason why infants under the a^ e of twenty- 
 one years, should be excluded from a share in the formation of the Government, if 
 the principles for which I have been contending are correct.^ I answer, that it will 
 be time enough to assign the reasons for it, when they claim the right ; and as it is 
 very certain they do not intend to make the demand at present, we need not waste 
 our time in making unprofitable enquiries, into the extent or nature of their rights. 
 The question asked by tlie gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Barbour) as to our right to 
 exclude the free negroes from the rights of citizenship, is sufficiently answered by 
 saying, that we choose to exclude them for reasons which must be obvious to him, 
 and therefore need not be assig-ned. 
 
 There has been one other question asked, which deserves o^xr most serious considera- 
 tion. It is this : What right have we. if the principles asserted by the Bill of Rights are 
 correct, to exclude paupers from takincr any part in the formation or amendment 
 of the Constitution.' It is important in~the consideration of this question, to know 
 precisely what is meant by the term paupers. If this term is intended to embrace all 
 the non-freeholders, as I presume it is, (for it is on account of their poverty, and the 
 want of common interest with and attachment to the communitv, which is supposed to 
 be consequent upon their state of poverty, that they are excluded.) there can be no 
 difficultv in making a suitable reply to the question. The reply wliich I am disposed 
 to make, is this : These paupers or non-freeholders, being admitted to belong to the 
 community, and acknowledged as parties to the compact of Government, and they 
 having demanded permission to exercise their rights, as they have done, in language 
 not to be misunderstood, or disregarded ; we have no right to exclude them from a 
 share in the alteration of the old or the formation of a new Constitution. And. Sir, 
 if I am not deceived by the language of their memorials now upon your table, they 
 are determined not to be prevented from exercising their rights. When we come to 
 consider the question, of who shall be permitted to vote in favor of the adoption or 
 rejection of the new or amended Constitution. I may perhaps endeavor to satisfy the 
 Committee, that everv free white man above tlie age of twenty-one years, will be 
 entitled to vote upon that question, inasmuch, as the people will "then be engaged, in 
 the actual exercise of those equal rights, secured to them by our Bill of Rights : And 
 to draw the distinction between these natural rights, and the right of suffrage, which 
 is a mere conventional right, and can only be claimed or exercised, by those on whom 
 it has been conferred by the majority which created the Constitution. For the pre- 
 sent, it is enough for me to deny our right to exclude them from voting, for or against 
 the new Constitution. 
 
 The second section of the Bill of Rights asserts : Tliat all power is vested in, and 
 consequenth' derived from, the people, &c. To this proposition I understand no ob- 
 jection has been made. I shall therefore pass on to the third section, which asserts : 
 That Government is, or ought to be, &c. (here the third section of the Bill of Rights was 
 
228 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONYENTION. 
 
 read.) And it has been in discussing triis proposition, that most of the questions I 
 have endeavored to answer, have been propounded : but which I have thought had 
 more immediate relation to the first principle asserted by the Bill of Rights. 
 
 A question has been raised, whether the right of the majority to govern which is 
 here asserted, is a natural or conventional right ; and we have been called upon to 
 prove that it is a natural right. For my own part, I conceive it to be wholly imma- 
 terial, as to the effect it is to have upon the decision of the question now before us, 
 whether it is considered as a natural, or as a conventional right. If it be not a na- 
 tural right, its existence must at least be acknowledged, before the social compact 
 can be formed. For unquestionably, it is essential for any body of men, who may be 
 about to form a Constitution, to determine in the first place how the questions which 
 may arise shall be determined. It would perhaps be impossible for me to furnish a 
 better illustration of my views upon this subject, than that which is afforded by a re- 
 ference to the_ course which has been pursued by the Convention itself. When we 
 assembled in this Hall as the representatives of the people, we met upon terms of 
 perfect equality, notwithstanding the great inequality which must exist among so 
 many individuals, both as to intellectual qualifications, and to physical power. A 
 motion was made to appoint a President, and the venerable gentleman from Loudoun 
 was put in nomination by the venerable gentleman from Orange. It being under- 
 stood that a majority of the members were in favor of the election of the gentleman 
 from Loudoun, he took his seat as President. And if another person had been put in 
 nomination, and had received less thun the majority, and the member from Loudoun 
 had obtained but a majority of one vote, still he would have been entitled to take his 
 seat as President : and any man v»^ho would have questioned his right to do so, v/ould 
 have been regarded as little better than a madman. 
 
 We proceeded in the next place to elect a Clerk, a Sergeant at Arms, and two Door 
 Keepers, and in every case we continued to ballot, over and over again, until it was 
 ascertained who had the majority. Thus was the right of the majority to rule, ac- 
 knowledged time after time by this Convention, without a single dissenting voice : 
 and all this took place before we had become organized as a Convention. 
 
 So soon as we were organized, we again acknowledged the right of the majority to 
 rule, by every vote which we gave upon the adoption of the rules by which our de- 
 liberations are regulated. And the only binding authority which those rules have 
 over us at this moment, is derived from the sanction given to them by the vote of the 
 majority. Is it then for us to question the right of the majority to rule, after having 
 so often acknowledged it, in a case exactly in point ? Surely it is not. It would be 
 idle after this, to go into the enquiry, as to the origin of the right of the majority to 
 rule. Nor need I go into the enquiries suggested by the gentleman from Northamp- 
 ton, as to the mode in which the majority is to be ascertained, how the votes are to be 
 given, or who would appoint the tellers. If the majority be ascertained, it is imma- 
 terial how it is ascertained ; and I presume it would be impossible to form any Gov- 
 ernment in a country where parties were so equally balanced as to require a count 
 in order to ascertain the majority. I do not imagine that our ancestors, when they 
 dissolved the old Government, and established the existing Constitution, waited to 
 take the votes, or appointed tellers for that purpose, before they began to exercise the 
 powers incident to Government. It was sufficient for them to know that they were 
 the majority. 
 
 It is not correct to suppose, as has been done by some of those who have preceded 
 me in this debate, that the acknowledgment of an unqualified right in the majority 
 to govern, is incompatible with the existence of any rights in the minority. The 
 minority still retain their natural rights unimpaired by the estabhshment of Govern- 
 ment ; but it being impossible that two separate social compacts can be formed, or 
 rather, that two independent communities, can exist in the same country at the same 
 time, the minority being the weakest party, must either submit to the will of the ma- 
 jority, or leave the country. Thus we see the Cherokee and Creek tribes of Indians 
 compelled to leave the Southern States, and the Royalists flying from Mexico at this 
 very time, and seeking an abode in countries where they may enjoy all their rights 
 unimpaired. 
 
 The gentleman from Northampton, speaking of the right of the majority to govern, 
 says : ^' TJie very advocates of this doctrine abandon it, because they cannot but per- 
 ceive, that it is impossible in practical Government, to push it to its fair results and 
 asks " if free whites alone are to give the measure of political power, upon what prin- 
 ciple is it, that any one individual is deprived of his share in that power?" The gen- 
 tleman will pardon me for saying that he has done the advocates of this principle, 
 great injustice, and that he and alfthe other gentlemen who have followed him upon 
 the same side of the question, have fallen into a very great error, by attempting to ap- 
 ply the principle or rule improperly. The rule is applicable when a Government is 
 to be formed, but can with no propriety be thought to be apphed to mere convention- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 229 
 
 al regulations. •v\-liich owe their existence to the will of the majority as expressed in 
 tlie Constitution. 
 
 If ii is provided by the Constitution, that none but persons possessing the freehold 
 quahncation, shall be entitled to tne right of suiirage, or that a plurality of votes only 
 shall be required to elect members to tii'e General Assembly ; or if tlie Legislature, in 
 pursuance of authority derived from the Constitution, declare that there must be una- 
 nimity in jury trials. &c: all these things are right and proper, because the majority 
 have "^willed th il it shall be so. And if the majority tlunk proper at any time, they 
 have full power to vary these regulations and to adopt others in their stead : there 
 can be notuing discovered tiien, incjns.stent with the unhniittd right of the majority 
 to rule, in any of these mere c 'Uventionai regulations which-have been so often, and 
 so tnumphantl}' referred to during this debate. 
 
 The gentleman from ^Northampton attempts to avoid the force and effect of this 
 principle, as applicable to the question before us, by asserting that " there are in fact 
 no oricrinal fundamental principles of Government ; that the principles of Govern- 
 ment do not apply to another : and that the same principles will not apply in the same 
 country at dlU'erent times and under different circumstances." He also asserted, that 
 " this principle (that the majority shall govern) does not prevail in England or in Tur- 
 key, and that yet there are Governments in both tliese countries." I beg leave to 
 differ with the gentlrinau in every one nf the positions he has taken. I atiirm, that 
 there are original fundamental principles of G-ivermnent, which must and do prevail 
 in all countries, at all times, and under all circumstances. And that this very princi- 
 ple of the right of the majority to govern has prevailed at all times, both in England 
 and in Turkey. Every ciiange which has been effected in the British Government, 
 from the days of King Ahred to the present moment, has been made with the consent 
 of the majority, without which it could not have been effected at all. In France, this 
 principle has been applied in the last half century, to change the Government from 
 an absolute ^Monarchy to a limited Monarchy ; from a limited Monarchy to a Repub- 
 hc ; from a Republic to a Despotism ; and from a Despotism back again to a limited 
 Monarchv. And all the dreadiul convulsions of that country, ffrew out of an attempt 
 of the minority to resist the will of the majority. The pov^-er of the majority over 
 the Government is unlimited, and they may, at any time, convert the Goverjmient 
 from a Mmarchy into a Republic, or from a Republic into a Monarchy, at their plea- 
 sure. In fine, the majority have •• an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right 
 to reform, alter, or abolish'" the existing form of Government at their pleasure. 
 
 We have been mformed by the genlleaian last alluded to, that there are two sorts 
 of majorities, viz : a majority of nuiubers and a mijority of interests. I confess. Sir, 
 I do not exactly understand what is meant by a m.ajoritv of interests, any more than 
 I should have been able to comprehend his m'eaning, if he had talked to me about a 
 majority of air. or of religion, or any thing else, in speaking of which he could 
 not, with any propriety, use tlie term majority. I understand by the word majority, 
 as used in the Bill of Rights, precisely what nine hundred and uinety-mne men out 
 of a thousand throughout the United States understand by it, that is. a majority of 
 numbers. And if the gentleman had consulted his own constituents upon the subject, 
 he would have found that the whole of them understand it as I do. 
 
 In order to sustain this doctrine of a majority of interests, the gentleman advanced 
 a proposition, which I shall endeavor to shew is utterly incorrect, that is, that pro- 
 perty is one of the elements of society. For the purpose of ascertaining the truth of 
 this proposition, we must look back to the original rights of men in a state of nature. 
 Each man had a right to that which was in his immediate possession, and to nothing 
 mire, and the moment he abandoned that possession, anv other individual could 
 ac yiTi a perfect tide to it, br s \z nj ml appropriating itt > his own use. And the title 
 which mm acquires in a state of soc:ety to property, owes its existence and its vali- 
 dity, entirely to the consent, expressed or imphed, of the other members of the society 
 to which he belongs. For example, when the Legislature, acting under authority 
 derived from the majority, have said that the possession of a deed executed with cer- 
 tain formalities, shall entitle a man to hold real estate, or that the possession of a bond, 
 sh3.ll give the holder a right to claim property in the hands of anotlier : the validity of 
 these claims depends entirely up' n Legislative enactment, and have no foundation 
 whatever in nature. And I hesitate not to affirm, that whenever individuals posses- 
 sing prs^rty have entered into, or become members of any social compact, that they 
 must have derived their title to that property from the consent of some other society 
 in wiiich they had lived. Propertv then is not an element of society, it is only one of 
 the stronjest indacements which men have, for enterincr into the social compact. It 
 was said by the learned gentleman from Northampton that we have no knowledge of 
 any people since the period when Bible hist 'ry commenced, who went into a state of 
 society without any property. I do not pretend to be so accurately acquainted with 
 Bible history as that gentleman, but I am inclined to think, the Isra'ehtes themselves, 
 must have had very little property to begin with, after passing through the wilderness ; 
 
230 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and I could name several other nations, who, in the commencement, must have been 
 as destitute of property as we can conceive of men being. 
 
 Not being entirely satisfied with this new doctrine of a majority of interests, the 
 gentleman from JNortliampton, in tiie next place endeavored to shew that tliere was 
 a large majority of numbers on this side of the Blue Ridge, if we take the slaves into 
 the estimate. I have already endeavored to prove that the slaves, not being a part of 
 the community, or belonging to the body politic, cannot be counted at all. But if 
 they are to be counted on either side, (whicli God forbid) what title has he, to count 
 them on his side? Is it because tlieir interests and his are the same.'' Surely not ; 
 for every interest they have on earth is adverse to his, and if counted at all, they must 
 be counted against hun. 
 
 But, Sir, there is another very numerous and respectable class of men in this coun- 
 try, whose claiins have as yet been but little noticed in tliis body, but who have a 
 right to be taken into the estimate ; who, as 1 have already stated are determined 
 boldly to assert their rights ; and who must be counted upon one side or the other. 
 I allude, Sir, to the non-freeholders. And if it be true, as has been so often and so 
 forcibly remarked, by gentlemen on the other side of this question, that interest is the 
 main spring of human action, I would ask what interest tkcy have, in common with 
 the slave-holders 
 
 Does the gentleman expect them to unite with him, because they find the advo- 
 cates of their rights among those who are m favor of the mixed basis If this were 
 the fact, such an expectation, would not be altogether unreasonable. But unless these 
 non-freeholders, be both blind and deaf, they cannot be ignorant of the fact, that in 
 all the struggles which have taken place in the Legislature, upon the Convention 
 question, it has been by the advocates of the white basis of representation alone, that 
 their claims have been attended to, and supp orted against the most violent opposition 
 on the part of those who are now in favor of the mixed basis. Nor can they forget 
 by whom tljey have been excluded from being represented m this very Convention. 
 The whole body of non-freeholders on this side of the mountain then, together with 
 all other non-slave-holders, must be added to the whole population on the west, and 
 a large proportion of the freeholders immediately on this side of the Blue Ridge and 
 counted against him : and then let us see, what sort of a minority we have, attempting 
 to dictate terms to the majority. 
 
 I have thus, Mr. Chairman, endeavored to express to the Committee what has been 
 my understanding of some of the declarations contained in the Bill of Rights : to 
 prove that the assertion contained in the third section, that is, "that the majority have 
 an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right, to reform, alter, or abolish it" (the 
 Government) is true ; and that there is a large majority of the community , who must 
 be fairly presumed to be in favor of making the white population the basis of repre- 
 sentation, in the General Assembly. 
 
 I shall proceed in the next place, to consider the amendment which lias been pro- 
 posed by the gentleman froin Culpeper, (Mr. Green) to the resolution rep rtfd by 
 the Legislative Comuiittee. His proposition is, that representation in the House of 
 Delegates, shall be based upon a combined ratio of white popu'.a'ion. and of taxation. 
 The first remark which I shall make upon this proposition, is, that ] cannot perceive 
 how it will be possible, if the aniendment shall prevail, ever to apply the rule which 
 it is intended to establish Do gentlemen mean to make the taxes now paid the 
 permanent basis of representation ? If they do, they will find, that in a very short 
 time, owing to the constant fluctuation in property, and the consequent change in the 
 relative proportion of taxes paid, in different sections of the State, that the represen- 
 tation will soon cease to be just, even upon their own principles. I cannot suppose 
 that gentlemen intend to mike the law now in force, imposing taxes for the support 
 of Government, a part of the Constitution ; for, if they do, they might as well dis- 
 pense with the Legisl -tive bf>dy altogetiier ; the most important part of its duty being 
 to regulate the taxes according to the ability of the people to pay, and the necessities 
 of the Government. If the amendiuent prevails, I do not see how tlie Legislature 
 are to be prevented from imposing the taxes in such a way, as to give to one portion 
 of the community, the whole amount of power or representation, which it is proposed 
 - to derive from the payment of taxes. For example, if the slave-holders, having the 
 majority in the Legislature, choose to take to themselves the whole representation 
 arising from taxation ; all they have to do, will be to collect the whole revenue of the 
 Commonwealth from a tax upon slaves But granting that the rule, if adopted, can 
 be applied, which I think more than doubtful, let us examine the principle wliich it 
 establishes, and the justice of applying it. 
 
 The principle is, that every portion of the community shall be represented in pro- 
 portion to the taxes it pays into the treasury. And those who avow this principle, at- 
 tempt to sustain it by saying, that taxation and representation must always go toge- 
 ther ; and by comparlnr thy s cial compact to a partner ^Ifip between merchants, or a 
 Bank association, in which every member is entitled to power, in proportion to the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 231 
 
 capital or stock he furnishes. In order to test the correctness of this principle, let us 
 see how it will work, wiien applied to individuals ; and this is the only way in which 
 principles of this sort can be properly tested ; lor it is always true, that a principle, 
 which cannot be justly enforced between ina.viduals belongmg- to the same commu- 
 nity, can never be justly enforced against the inhabitants of a particular district, who 
 constitute a part of that community. If this be a correct principle, then the man who 
 owns, or pays taxes on two slaves, is entitled to twice as raucJi power as he who owns, 
 or pays tases on Dut one ; and ha who owns or pays taxes on a thousand slaves, will 
 be eu'titled to five hundred times as niucii power, as he who owns but two, and one 
 thousand times as much as he who owns but one ; and he who owns no siave, or pays 
 ^ no taxes, will be entitled to no power at all. Suppose a proposition was made at this 
 time to act upon tliis principle, and give to every man power at tlie elections (that is 
 to say, a number of votes.) corresponding to the amount of taxes which he pays, is 
 there anv man here who would have the hardihood to vote for it Surely there is 
 nut one." And if such a provision were engraited in the Constitution, do you believe 
 that the people would submit to it.^ Do you believe that the non-slave-holders would 
 agree to be deprived of all share in the elections ; or that those who own but from one 
 to twenty, would agree to see the elections entirely controuled by a few, who own 
 from one hundred to a thousand It is imp issible any rnan can believe such a system 
 could be enlorced. And yet. Sir, we are gravely called upon to enforce tliis principle 
 against the people west of the Alleghany, wiiich we rlure not even propose to estab- 
 lish amongst ourselves. I say amcmgst ourse zes. Sir, because I alfirm it as my be- 
 lief, that tne people of my district have as much, or nearly as much interest in this 
 question, as tne great body of the people on the eastern side of the Blue Ridge. 
 And I shall endeavor, before I take my seat, to prove that we are much more strongly 
 connected with the people of this part of the State, by motives of interest, than the 
 people of eittier the Accomack or tiie Culpeper districts, from whose representatives 
 we iiave heard so much on the subject of imaginary separate interests. 
 
 The true r-ale as to taxntion, (and it is one which prevails every where.) is, thai 
 every man shall pay in proportion to his ability to pay, without any sort of regard be- 
 ing had to the political rights which he enjoys. This is the rule which has constantly 
 been acted upon by the Legislature of Virginia, in all times past. I have been as- 
 tonished, not to say amazed, to hear gentlemen complaining of the great inequality 
 betwixt the taxes paid b the people ot' the East, and those paid by the people of the 
 West; and especially of the taxes paid upon slaves over and above what is paid upon 
 any other species of property, as if these taxes were unjust, and had been imposed 
 upon them against their own consent. And who was it imposed these taxes.'' Was 
 it the people west of the Alleghany mountains ? No, Sir. they have never had the 
 power to impose them. Was it not the Eastern people themselves.' Nay, more, was 
 it not the slave-holders themselves who imposed them Unquestionabh' it was ; for, 
 as you were very correctly told by the gentleman from Hanover, the slave-holders are 
 the freeholders in this country. Was it to please tlie people west of the Alleghany, 
 ^ that these taxes were imposed in the manner, and on the particular species of pro- 
 perty on which they were imposed ; No, Sir, it was to please the people here that it 
 was done. The true reason why these taxes have been imposed in the manner so 
 unjustly complained of, is, that the principle, that men shall pay taxes in proportion 
 to the property they own, prevails in practice every where, and is universally con- 
 sidered among the people, to be the only correct principle. If any cfentleman doubts 
 the correctness of this position, let him propose to the Legislature to take off the tax- 
 es from the shoulders of the wealthy, and impose them upon the poor, and see how 
 the proposition will be received by the people ; or let him propose to take the tax off 
 the negroes, and impose it on other kinds of property, and see how that proposal will 
 be received by the non-slave-holders and the holders of few slaves in Eastern Vir- 
 ginia. Sir, I hesitate not to say, that if the Legislature was, at its next session to 
 ^ make either of the changes in the laws, which I have suggested, that the people of 
 Eastern Virginia would not submit to it, and that it would be impossible to enforce 
 the law; for no man, who is eitlier poor, or in moderate circumstances, will ever con- 
 sent to pay as much tax as his neiofhbour, who is worth an hundred times as much as 
 himself. W^hat is the rule which prevails in this and all other cities, in regard to tax- 
 ation .- Is it not, that every man shall pay according to his ability Does he, who is 
 the humble tenant of a hut in the suburbs of the town, pav as much towards the sup- 
 port of the corporate authorities, and keeping up the police, as the owner of those 
 splendid buildings which adorn and beautify the city .' No, Sir, and yet they all meet 
 at the polls upon terms of perfect equality. And no man could be found fool-hardy 
 enough to propose, either that all should pay alike, without regard to property, or 
 that each man should have votes in proportion to the amount which he pays into the 
 town treasury. Let us not then, I again beseech vou, attempt to act upon, and en- 
 force a principle, against the people west of the Alleghany, which we cannot, and I 
 repeat it, which we dare not attempt to enforce among ourselves.^ Let us give tliem 
 
232 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 representation according to their numbers, and tax them according to their abihty to 
 pay. 
 
 Upon the subject of guarantees, of which we have heard so much during this dis- 
 cussion, I concur entirely wiLh gentl.nien on tiie other side of the question, in the 
 opinion, that none can be given. For my own part, 1 will neitiier otfer nor accept of 
 any guarantee, in relation to the taxes wii.cii are to be imposed lor the support of 
 Government. The only guarantee wliich ougiit eitiier to be tendered, or received, 
 betwixt the parties to the social compact, is the mutual confidence which ought always 
 to subsist between them, and without which, the compact ought never to be formed. 
 This was the only guarantee, given by our ancestors to each other, when they formed 
 the old compact, which was sealed with their blood, and it is the only one I will give, 
 or take, now. And, Sir, all the argu.uents we have heard, founded upon the diver- 
 sity of interests supposed to exist, between the Eastern and Western people of this 
 State, are arguments in favor of a division of the State, and not m favor of a guar- 
 antee, or in favor of putting the Government into the hands of the minority. And 
 if gentlemen can convince me, that our interests are so distinct, or so conflicting as 
 they have represented them to be, I for one, am in favor of an immediate division of 
 the State. And no happier illustration of what I am endeavoring to impress upon 
 the Committee, could be desired, than that afforded by the eloquent gentleman irom 
 Hanover, when he called upon us to imagine, what would have been the course which 
 the Adams's, Franklin, Washington, Lee, and the Pv-utledge"s, would have recom- 
 mended their countrymen to pursue, had this country been equally represented in 
 Parliament according to numbers, at the time the tax was imposed upcn tlie tea con- 
 sumed in this country. And had the taxes been imposed by the majority in Parlia- 
 ment, against all their united votes, and remonstrances, for purposes which could in 
 no way benefit or interest the people of this country, according to the principles 
 now contended for by that gentleman, and all those who have spoken on the same 
 side, they should have recommended to the people to ask for more power, that beina- 
 the only guarantee which, in their opinion, can be received, as sufficient for the pro- 
 tection of property. And they should, upon this principle, now so strenuously conten- 
 ded for, (that is, that representation should be in proportion to population and taxation 
 combined,) have asked, tliat an estimate should be made of the value of all the pro- 
 perty in the two countries, or of all the taxes paid in each, that the representation 
 might be equalized according to this combined ratio. But according to my ideas of 
 what would have been proper, they should have done, what they certainly would 
 have done, under such circumstances, that is, tliey should have recommended, as they 
 did recommend to their countrymen, to refuse to submit to those laws, and declare 
 themselves an independent people. That, Sir, was the only course which was left to 
 the people of this country to pursue tlien; and if the interests of the people in the 
 Eastern and Western divisions of this State, are so incompatible with each other, that 
 we cannot trust one another, without overturning the fundamental principles of our 
 Government, and putting the power into the hawds of the minority, there is no other 
 course left to us now, but to divide the State. But, Sir, I do not believe there is any 
 such diversity or clashing of interests amongst us; if there be, the gentlemen assert- 
 ing it, have entirely failed in the proof; and until it be shewn, we are bound to pre- 
 sume it does not exist. 
 
 1 promised to prove, before I took my seat, that the people of the district in which I 
 live, are more united by the ties of conunon interest with the people in this part of 
 the State, than the people of the Culpeper or Accomack districts can be. And I now 
 proceed to redeem that promise. 
 
 It is known that this City and the town of Lynchburg, and the intermediate coun- 
 try, afford our only market for our surplus produce, upon the disposal of which, we 
 depend, for all the luxuries and many of the comforts and even necessaries of life. 
 Of course we feel a deep interest in their prosperity. The people of the Culpeper 
 district, trade altogether to Fredei-icksburg and Alexandria ; and the people of Acco- *■ 
 mack, to Baltimore ; thej^^ of course, feel a deep interest in the prosperity of those 
 towns, but certainly none in that of Lynchburg or Richmond. We would be dis- 
 posed to defend tJiis City from an enemy, if it were only to secure to ourselves a 
 market hereafter : they, on the contrary, might find it to their interest that this City 
 should be burned to ashes, inasmuch as it might be the means of driving some of its 
 capitalists to live in the towns which they are in the habit of looking to for a market. 
 We have no other channel, by which we can carry on a commercial intercourse with 
 the world, except the James River ; it is therefore our interest to keep up a good un- 
 derstanding with th )se who live on its banks, and to endeavor to get it improved : 
 they, on the contrary, might be benefited by the navigation being entirely destroyed , 
 as it would keep a great many competitors out of the market Intrulh, our interests 
 are so intimately connected with those of the people along the whole course of the 
 James River, that we might as well attempt to make our streams flow in an opposite 
 direction, as to attempt to sever them. Their interests, on tlie contrary, all tend to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 233 
 
 attach them, to people living either out of this Commonwealth, or in some other part 
 of it than this. 
 
 A great deal has been said upon the subject of roads and canals, but without much 
 bearing upon the question under discussion, as far as I am capable of judging. The 
 gentleman from the Culpeper district, (Mr. Scott.) for instance, undertook to prove, 
 that all improvements cost more as you advance vrestward, by comparing the cost of 
 the Potomac canal with some little improvement on the Rapidan. He also made some 
 remarks upon the subject of the James River Canal, which it will not be improper for 
 me to notice. The gentleman seems to be of opinion, that this improvement was 
 undertaken at the instance of some Western man. I think in this he is mistaken, for 
 I have always been under the impression, that this im-provement was first suggested 
 by some person living East of the Blue Ridge. I thought it a little curious, that the 
 gentleman should have changed his original ground, which was, that improvements 
 cost more as you go Westward, than they do in the East, when speaking of the 
 James River Canal, and seem disposed to a.ttribute the immense cost of this work, 
 ■not to its situation in the West, but to the fact of its having been a AVestern scheme, 
 for the benefit of the Western people. But, Sir, I deny that this improvement was 
 undertaken exclusively for the benefit of the West. It was expected greatly to benefit 
 the coal trade ; and as soon as it had reached a certain point, and ail the advantages 
 which the East expected to gain from it, had been secured, it v."as stopped short ; and 
 we are now taxed with double tolls, to pay the expense of a work, which has never 
 been of the least benefit to us. And the great cost of this, and other works of the 
 kind, is now to be made the pretext for depriving us of our just share of power in the 
 Legislature, it being apprehended, that we will impose unjust taxes upon our 
 Eastern brethren, to make improvements in the West. I conscientiously believe, 
 that the suspicion is not well founded, and that the whole argum_ent, which has been 
 attempted to be deduced from the supposed disposition of the Western people, to im- 
 prove their country, at the expense of the East, is unsound, and onl}' calculated to 
 deceive and mislead the members of this Convention. 
 
 It has been very often repeated in this debate, that each man in the Eastern part of 
 the State, pays more than three dollars for every dollar that is paid by each Western 
 man into the Treasury. I cannot perceive any good reason why this circumstance 
 should have been so often brought to our view, for I can hardly believe that the Eastern 
 people would be so unreasonable as to expect that they should derive the principal 
 part of the benefits from the existence of the Government, and that the VVestern peo- 
 ple should pay all the expense attending its administration. I have already endea- 
 vored to prove, that each individual ought to pa}' taxes in proportion to his ability to 
 pay, upon the ground, that he who owns most property, derives the greatest benefit 
 from the existence of the Government and of the laws; and upon the same principle, 
 the Eastern people, owning three times as much property as the Western people, and 
 consequently deriving three times as much benefit from the Government, ought to 
 pay three times as much of the expenses. I am also inclined to think, that if there 
 is three times as much money paid into the Treasury by the Eastern people as is paid 
 by the West, there is a still greater proportion of the money expended in the East. 
 Nearly all the money Avhich has ever been expended in the West, has been, what has 
 been expended in improving the Kanawha river, and in making the Kanawha road ; 
 and for that, the State derives a tolerable equivalent in the tolls collected. Whilst 
 hundreds of thousands of dollars have been expended in Eastern Virginia, in building 
 and inclosing tliis very Capitol ; in erecting the other public buildings in this city ; in 
 making the James River Canal, and in establishing the University, to say nothing of 
 the immense expenditure of public money in building fortifications on the sea coast, 
 which money, although not drawn out of the State Treasury, is expended among the 
 Eastern people for their peculiar benefit, and is collected from the whole people of the 
 United States. 
 
 The Western men having been charged with voting away the public m^oney, for 
 W"estern purposes, it is proper for me to say, that in the course of several years du- 
 ring which I have been in the Legislature, I have always voted very cheerfully for all 
 appropriations which have been asked for, for improving the country, uninfluenced 
 by any local considerations v\diatever ; and that I have always voted as willingly for 
 the expenditure of the pubhc money in the East, as in the West. 
 
 There was one idea advanced by most of the gentlemen who have advocated the 
 opposite side of this question, which appeared to be very much rehed upon, as prov- 
 ing the propriety of our granting to the minority, the power they ask for, and which 
 I should have noticed before, if the gentleman from Fairfax, (Mr. Fitzbugh) had not 
 sufficiently refuted it already. I allude to the expression so often used, that those 
 who lay the taxes, ought to be responsible to those who pay the taxes. I will barely 
 remind the gentleman from Accomack, who advanced this idea last, that it isnotnov/ 
 the case, and never can be the case, to the extent which he seems to contend for, 
 that those who lay the taxes, shall be responsible to those who pay them. For that 
 
 30 
 
234 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 whilst his county has more than a thousand voters in it, the principal part of the taxes 
 are paid by about two hundred ; and yet the members of the House of Delegates will 
 always find themselves compelled to obey the wishes of the eight hundred who con- 
 stitute the majority, rather than the minority, who pay the greater part of the taxes. 
 And any member obeying the instructions of the minority, in opposition to those of 
 the majority, would be sure to lose his seat at the next election. 
 
 I have only, in conclusion, to notice the proposition for a compromise, made by the 
 venerable gentlemen from Loudoun, for the purpose of remarking, that I am opposed 
 to it; for I fear, if it prevails, there will be constant jealousies and dissentions betwixt 
 the two Houses; and I cannot willingly give my vote for a proposition, subversive of 
 the great fundamental principles of Republican Government, viz: that the majority 
 shall always govern. 
 
 Mr. Moore having concluded his remarks, he moved for the rising of the Commit- 
 tee ; when 
 
 Mr. Doddridge enquired of Mr. Taylor, whether it was probable the difficulty to 
 which he adverted, would be removed in time for the meeting of the Convention to- 
 morrow ? 
 
 Mr. Taylor answered, that he presumed it would. He had intimated his purpose 
 to the senior member of the delegation ; and he should to-morrow send in to the Pre- 
 sident, his letter of resignation. He hoped his colleagues would be able, by to-morrow^ 
 to have the vacancy supplied. 
 
 The Committee then rose, and the House adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, November 7, 1829. 
 
 The Convention was opened with prayers by the Rev. Mr. Lee of the Episcopal 
 Church, and the President took the Chair. 
 
 The President laid before the Convention a letter from Robert B. Taylor, Esq. (a 
 Delegate from the Norfolk District,) which was read as follows : 
 
 Sir, — Many of my constituents have instructed me to support the proposed plan of 
 apportioning representation, with regard to white population and taxation combined; 
 and I liave reason to believe that a large majority of the people of my District concur 
 in the desire, expressed in those instructions. 
 
 It is due to myself to prevent all misrepresentation of my official conduct. I was 
 elected to this body, with the full knowledge of my constituents, that I favored re- 
 forms in the existing Constitution. I came here untrammelled by instructions ; and 
 restrained by no pledges. I am unfortunate, indeed, in this, that my opinions do not 
 harmonize with those of my constituents ; but I have disappointed no expectation ; 
 violated no engagement ; betrayed no trust. 
 
 Having always believed, and maintained, that the value of representative Govern- 
 ment mainly depends on the principle, that representation is only a mean, whereby 
 the deliberate will of the constituent body is to be expressed and effectuated, no act 
 of mine shall ever impair the principle. Had my constituents instructed me on some 
 matter of mere expediency; or required me to perform any thing, which was possi- 
 ble ; it would have afforded me pleasure to testify with how cheerful a submission, I 
 would give effect to their opinions, rather than my own. But they ask what is im- 
 possible. They require me to violate my conscience and the sentiment of filial devo- 
 tion, which I owe to my country. 
 
 Believing, as I conscientiously do, that the measure I am instructed to support, is 
 hostile to free institutions ; destructive to equality of right among our citizens, and 
 introductive of a principle, that a minority, on account of superior wealth, shall rule 
 the majority of the qualified voters of the State, I should be guilty of moral treason 
 against the liberty of my native land, if I allowed myself to be the instrument by 
 which this mischief is effected. In this state of mind, by executing the wishes of 
 my constituents, I should justly subject myself to their reproaches, for my baseness, 
 and to the more insufferable reproaches of my own conscience. 
 
 One mode only remains to reconcile my duties to my constituents, to the higher 
 and more sacred duties I owe to myself, and my country. It is to resign the office, 
 which they conferred upon me ; and thereby to enable my colleagues to select a suc- 
 cessor, who more fortunate than I am, may give effect to their wishes, without viola- 
 ting any sentiment of private and public duty. 
 
 Allow me to ask that this letter may have a place on your Journal. Forgive the 
 feeling, which prompts this request. If any eye shall hereafter read my humble 
 name, I wish that the same page, which records my retirement from your service, 
 may also record the motives (mistaken perhaps, but not unworthy,) which occasioned it. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 235 
 
 I leave the Convention, Sir, with sentiments of profound respect, and veneration 
 for the virtue and talent, which ennoble and adorn it. My heart will still attend your 
 counsels ; and I shall not cease to supplicate the Almighty, that he may so inspire and 
 direct them, that Virginia may be regenerated, united, free and happy. 
 I have the honor to be. your obedient servant, 
 
 ROBERT B. TAYLOR. 
 
 James Moxroe, Esq. 
 
 President of the Convention. 
 
 On Mr. ^Mercer's motion, the letter of Gen. Taylor was laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. Grigsby, of the Borough of Norfolk, has been elected by the rest of the Dele- 
 gates as a Delegate to serve in the place of Roberr B. Ta3'lor, Esq. resigned. 
 
 The standing order having been read, the Convention resolved itself into a Com- 
 mittee of the AViiole on the Constitution. Mr. Powell in the Chair. 
 
 Messrs. Scott and 'Green made some explanations in relation to the remarks pre- 
 sented by Mr. Moore of Rockbridge on Friday, on the improvement of the James River. 
 
 Mr. Scott referred to the Journals of the House of Deleofates, to shew that on va- 
 rious occasions members from the region of country below the Ridge and in the Valley 
 had voted with the West for objects of internal improvement, even when their own 
 country was not specially interested. 
 
 Mr. Green detailed the circumstances of the compromise, by which the members 
 from the lower country were induced to consent to a larger appropriation for the James 
 River improvement, than they would otherwise have done, in consequence of a sti- 
 pulation in the act for that object, that the tolls should not be raised until the rate of 
 transportation was lowered. 
 
 2klr. Moore explained on the same subject ; shewing that he had voted for internal 
 improvements which were on the West or East of the mountains. He disclaimed all 
 sectional feelings, however other gentlemen miglit entertain them. 
 
 Mr. Leigh hoped that the Committee would rise, to give a gentleman on this floor 
 (Mr. Giles) an opportunity of addressing them to greater advantage hereafter; his 
 indisposition this morning was aggravated by the state of the weather. He said be- 
 sides, tliat there were at least five gentlemen absent. He said he was perfectly wilhng 
 to withdraw his motion, if any otiier o-entleman was prepared and wilhng to take the 
 floor. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge repeated the same sentiment, and hoped that some gentleman would 
 rise, if ready to address the Committee. 
 
 But no one rising for that purpose, Mr. Doddridge made a motion for the Committee 
 to rise, which was carried without opposition ; and then Mr. Powell reported that the 
 Committee had, according to order, taken into consideration the subject referred to 
 them, but had adopted no resolution thereon. 
 
 And then, on Mr, M'Coy"s motion, the Convention adjourned until Monday, eleven 
 o'clock. 
 
 MONDAY, November 9, 1529. 
 
 Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hor- 
 ner of the Catholic Church. 
 
 According to the standing order, the House went into Committee of the Whole, 
 Mr. Powell in the Chair. 
 
 The following is the substance of Mr. Giles' remarks, taken down by a stenogra- 
 pher, in his own language, and corrected by Mr. Giles himself. 
 
 Mr. Giles said : After all the subjects of this debate have been so fully elaborated, 
 and thoroughly exhausted, it may be deemed presumption in liim to attempt a further 
 elucidation of them ; repetitions too, might be deemed intrusive on the time, and even 
 wanting in respect to the intelligence of the Committee. Notwithstanding these dis- 
 couragements, he felt impelled by an irresistable sense of duty, to extend the debate 
 still further, not with a vain hope of throwing new interesting lights on the subject; 
 nor with a hope of obtaining a lean majority. A lean majority on either side would 
 be a poor triumph of friends over friends ; and still more so, on the afiirmative than 
 negative side of the proposed amendments to the Constitution, and would be better 
 calculated to attract the distrust than the confidence of our constituents. But his 
 principal inducement for continuing- the debate, was a faint glimmering hope of ap- 
 proaching nearer to unanimity in whatever measures may be adopted, than we seem 
 to be at present, from any indications now before us. Unanimity would, indeed, be 
 an eflect worthy of this great occasion, and worthy the sacrifice which he consid- 
 ered every individual member called upon to make, to obtain the objects of the Con- 
 
236 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 vention. Without some approach to unanimity, he feared all our labours here, might 
 be worse than unavailing. Why should we not approach this unanimity? All see 
 that there are sufficient inducements to make the best effort, and fortunately, not with- 
 out the authority of great example on this occasion. The existing Constitution which 
 we are called upon to examine, modify, or abolish, was produced by unanimity. Our 
 forefathers were magnanimous enough, after a laborious investigation, conducted with 
 the most ardent zeal, to agree to it by an unanimous vote. And why should not we 
 follow their noble example ? It was said that this unanimity, and this very Constitu- 
 tion were produced by a sense of danger ; and were the effects of haste and alarm. 
 He was sorry to hear this suggestion repeated, because it was unfounded. It is true 
 that our forefathers did act m imminent peril, and under full sense of that peril, but 
 it is not true, that the instrument they produced, was the effect of haste or alarm. 
 Though they were highly sensible of the danger; it never disturbed the equanimity of 
 their minds, during their whole proceedings. They went on coolly and dispassionate- 
 ly, notwithstanding the dangers tliat surrounded them, and the final result, was the 
 production of this Constitution. This danger, far from being appalling, was viewed 
 by them with sport, contempt, and even derision. He had been frequently told, that 
 nothing was more common, than that the members should sportively jeer each other, 
 with saying, we must hang all together, or be hung one by one. Is it possible, that 
 any state of mind could have produced a stronger incentive to exert their best efforts, 
 for arriving at the best results ? Did not this state of mind afford the strongest incen- 
 tives for calling into action every feeling of the heart, and every dictate of the head, 
 to the perfection of their great work, with one united voice They accordingly pre- 
 sented to us, the best Constitution that was ever presented to any people under the 
 sun ; accompanied too, with perfect unanimity. The history of their proceedings, 
 will show that although, in the commencement of their discussion, there was as much 
 difference of opinion amongst them, as amongst ourselves, and those opinions main- 
 tained with as much ardour and zeal ; yet they nobly compromised all their differ- 
 ences, and came to an unanimous result. We are in a different situation. We are 
 in a state of perfect security. No danger threatens us. We are perfectly free. Yes, 
 Sir, perfectly free to indulge the wildest speculative visions of our imaginations in 
 search of philosophical abstractions, to introduce into our fundamental laws for prac- 
 tical purposes. Whence arises this state of security Surely from the patriotic and 
 heroic labours which our venerable ancestors performed under different circumstances : 
 We are so secure from the moral tendency of those fundamental laws, with which we 
 were blessed 54 years ago, that there is no fear that we shall hang one hy one, even if 
 we should refuse to hang all together. Although we are perfectly free from the appre- 
 hensions of personal injuries, we are not without the strongest inducements, to make 
 us combine to use our best efforts in producing unanimity in our proceedings. Should 
 we fail in the objects for which we are called together, we would lose the confidence 
 of our constituents, and whatever political fame and standing we have acquired ; and 
 should disappoint the expectations of our fellow-citizens, and of the world. 
 
 He mentioned these circumstances, to show us the necessity of banishing all preju- 
 dices, passions, and prepossessions ; and, if possible, to be unanimous in our results, 
 whatever they maybe. He begged to be permitted to remark, that he had been de- 
 lighted with all the arguments presented to the Committee, not only on account of 
 their elaborate researches, and tlieir splendid display of talents, eloquence, and instruc- 
 tion ; but on account of their honorable frankness and candour. This remark was in- 
 tended to apply equally to both sides of the question. The whole debate appeared to 
 him to have afforded a new and conspicuous example of the just celebrity which Vir- 
 ginia has obtained for morals and for principles. The arguments on both sides, were 
 presented front to front, and with so little disguise, equivocation or evasion, that to 
 form a just comparison of their respective merits, it was only necessary to re-view 
 them in their state of confrontation. But, while he felt this pleasure at the progress of 
 the argument, he could not avoid expressing the deepest regret, that a difference of 
 local interests, should have interposed to interrupt this happy spirit, in conducting this 
 discussion. Such local interests, however, do exist, and they are too important 
 either to be overlooked or disregarded. To obliterate them, would seem to be 
 impossible. This difference of interests consists in the unequal position of the slave 
 property in this State, and this interest is so im^portant, that the production of the la- 
 bour of the slaves, form.s the foundation of one third of the whole taxes of the State. 
 Although confronted at the threshold by this unfortunate stumbling block, it was the 
 duty of all to meet and subdue the difficulty, or to apply such remedy as would be ac- 
 ceptable to all. 
 
 The venerable gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Monroe,) thinks emancipation im- 
 possible, without the aid of the Federal Government; and, perhaps, it would not be 
 possible even with that aid — an aid which, could it be had, surely would not be desir-. 
 able to any. He hoped the venerable gentleman would excuse him for saying, that 
 he did not see the precise applicability of his remarks to the precise subject un- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 237 
 
 der consideration, and he could not avoid saying, that his feelings were much excited 
 at the mere suggestion of calling upon the Federal Government for aid in so delicate 
 a question. What would be the effect of calling on the Federal Government, to aid us 
 in the common, ordinary, murucipal regulations of the State. Some gentlemen call 
 for the aid of the General Government in the prosecution of Internal Improvements. 
 The venerable gentleman from Loudoun, thinks it may be required for the emancipa- 
 tion of our slaves, and says, •• he even doubts if we were disposed to divide the State, 
 whether we should be permitted to do so by the General Government." What will 
 be the effects of all tliese dependencies on that Government ? The effects must be the 
 annihilation of all State rights — the destruction of the State Governments — and more, 
 the amalgamation of a great mass of power in the Federal Government. Have gen- 
 tlemen reflected on the^tendencies of a vast momentum of power, collected in any 
 hands, vv^hich are beyond their control? Is it not inevitable, that it must beat down the 
 barriers of all political powers, which may be interposed to palsy its influence by divi- 
 sion.? The best we could ho])e under such an amalgamation, would be a consolidated 
 despotism. This consummation could be desirable to none. He had merely made these 
 general remarks with a view of protesting against the interference of the General 
 Government, and of preventing their intrusion in the discussion before us, by dispos- 
 ino- of them at this early period. Were it not for this important difference of sec- 
 tional interests, he would indulge the most flattering hope that the Convention should 
 be enabled to improve the condition of man, by adding to the great political lights 
 heretofore shed on this State, and the whole world, by our venerated forefathers. He 
 considered the science of politics yet in a state of infiney. While he observed the 
 march of the human intellect, in bringing to perfection all the other arts and sciences, 
 viewing with wonder the improvements which have been made in the last century, or 
 perhaps still more in the last half century, he could not but observe, that the science 
 of politics, had not kept pace in improvements with any of the otlier arts and sciences. 
 The only effort at improvement, was the one originally adopted by the framers of our 
 Constitution. This was only fifty-four years ago ; a mere speck in the progress of 
 time; and had introduced a new and just principle in the science of politics — one in 
 direct hostility to the pre-existing basis on which all other Governments were founded. 
 It opened a new eera in the science of politics, and, he hoped, sincerely hoped, that 
 our American statesmen would abandon that system which had so long prevailed, and 
 had proved so destructive to the rights and liberties of the liuman race ; and found a 
 new science upon the great discoveries of our forefathers. We have not done so. 
 We have rather retrograded to those principles which our forefathers had abandoned. 
 We have gone back to imitate the British system, as far as regards practical, political 
 economy, after having established the most happy and beautiful fundamental systt ro 
 of our own. And this is one cause why we have not added a new science to the ex- 
 isting political economy, suited to our great dtivelopements in fundamental principles. 
 There is another cause. All other Governments were, as he conceived, founded on 
 fraud and backed b}^ force. The few who had by combinations usurped the rights of 
 the many, and possessed themselves of all the proceeds of their productive labour, 
 have employed all their means to prevent further improvements in the science of poli- 
 tics, to avoid the detection and exposure of the fraud, which was the foundation of 
 their systems. We know it was their great object to prevent an examination of these 
 subjects, and to such an extent did tliey carry their rigorous vigilance, that the first 
 patriots, Hampden and Sydney, fell victims to their patriotic enquiries into the science 
 of politics. These causes contributed to throw the science of politics back, and to 
 prevent it from making its way under the influence of that march of intellect which 
 pressed forward all the other sciences. 
 
 He should suppose it was the duty of this Convention, to turn their researches into 
 political science. A great discovery had been made, in opposition to former systems : 
 that all the rights of Government are founded in the consent of man, and that con- 
 sent is ascertained through the social compact, or, in other words, the written Consti- 
 tution. There is a difference of opinion, however, in regard to the true characteristics 
 of the social compact, and particularly in relation to the parties to it. In the origin 
 and progress of the social compact, every inember is a party to it; each representing 
 his own individual interests, as his own sovereign, uninfluenced by the majority. At 
 its completion, the parties become changed by the consent of all its members. The 
 compact is then made to consist of only two parties, the governors and the governed; 
 and whether tlie majority shall exercise the Government or not, or to what extent, 
 must depend solely on the written compact. Gentlemen had imputed to the honorable 
 gentleman from Orange, to whom he listened with great pleasure, the assertion, that 
 a minority ought to govern, as well as a majority. This imputation had been extended 
 too far, if he had rightly understood the gentleman from Orange. He did not under- 
 stand that gentleman, as declaring, that a minority ought, in any case, to exercise 
 active, affirmative legislation, but that a minority was sometimes invested with autho- 
 rity to legislate, in a negative capacity, A minority cannot rightfully govern, in any 
 
238 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 case, but it is often used, as a fit instrument to prevent a majority from doing what it 
 ought not to do. The rights of the majority depend solely upon the compact. It 
 will be seen, there, how far a majority may govern, and how far it ought to be checked. 
 Here we have a local interest, which is admitted by all to be applicable to peculiar 
 sections of the State, but not to the whole of it. This local interest must be secured 
 by provisions in the fundamental laws ; if not, upon general principles, the majority 
 would govern it. If it be improper that the majority should govern, where there is a 
 particular, local interest, the minority should have a power of controlling the majority, 
 so far as to afford protection to such particular, local interest. Such was the case in 
 the Federal Government, as was illustrated by the gentleman from Orange ; from 
 whose lucid remarks he derived both pleasure and instruction. He took it for granted, 
 that the majority had no rights but those that were vested in them by the compact. 
 
 Under our written Constitution, or social compact, the science of politicts was 
 divided into two parts. One great branch of the science, is that which relates to the 
 organization of the fundamental laws. And the other branch is, that which relates to 
 the policy to be observed by the practical government, as established by these laws. 
 No effort has been yet made to enquire into these subjects, as distinct branches of 
 political science. The American mind has been drawn from the contemplation of 
 these subjects by imitation. The love of imitation is one of the strongest passions of 
 the human mind ; and instead of elaborating a new system, suited to our own disco- 
 veries, we have been led into the imitation of British systems of practical, pohtical 
 economy. Here, then, is a new field opened before us, for the extension of pohtical 
 science. 
 
 An example of this spirit of imitation, may be seen in the organization of the Ex- 
 ecutive of the United States. There we have exhibited the anomaly of an Execu- 
 tive, attached to a republican Legislature, having more monarchical than republican 
 tendencies. We have thrown so much power and patronage into the hands of the 
 Federal Executive, that we must see the danger which threatens us from its organiza- 
 tion. Yet that Executive is now held up to us for our imitation. How this happened 
 he could not perceive, if gentlemen had the same views of the organization of the 
 Executive of the Federal Government, that he had, and the same views of the pecu- 
 liar fitness of the Executive Government of Virginia, as it is now established to a 
 republican form of Government. So far from abandoning the old system, and falling 
 into the gulph of imitation, an error, the strongest of the natural propensities 
 of man ; we should call on those who may hereafter aid in amending the Federal 
 Constitution, to follow the example of Virginia. If the Virginia system were trans- 
 ferred to the United States, it would be the best improvement that could be adopted. 
 The events of the last four years m«st be sufficient to satisfy every gentleman, that 
 instead of calling on us to imitate the Executive of the Federal Government, if that 
 Government could be brought to in)itate our system, it would be the most important 
 amendment that could be devised in the formation of its organic laws. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer) whose eloquence he had listened to 
 with great pleasure, had pointed to the Executive Department, as one of the great 
 defects in the present Constitution of Virginia. He was not so much surprised at the 
 reference,ashe was at the grounds upon which the gentleman had rested his objections. 
 They were founded on a supposed want of responsibility. That want of responsibi- 
 lity should be alleged against it, Mr. G. said, attracted his wonder. If there was any 
 responsibility in any Executive under the sun, it is in ours, as at present organized. 
 The gentleman, therefore, has taken up his notions, without a sufficiently minute ex- 
 amination ; for, in fact, the responsibility of the Virginia Executive, was the strictest 
 that human wisdom could devise. What is the responsibility of the Executive ? The 
 Executive Council are required to keep a journal of their proceedings, which is signed 
 by every member present. 
 
 The agent thus renders an account to his principal, under his own hand, which 
 can always be referred to, as evidence of the manner in which his duties are fulfilled. 
 What are the duties of the Governor ? His accountability is as strict, though not as 
 severe as that of the Council. He is at liberty to follow or refuse to follow the ad- 
 vice of the Council. He acts on his own responsibility ; he is not bound by the 
 Council. The journal shows his own acts also, and consequently his responsibility. 
 How, then, is he screened from his own responsibility? This Executive, then, is 
 wisely ordained. It is the wisest effort of the great genius of the writer of our 
 Constitution, in makmg the whole Executive responsible to their electors, as con- 
 nected with a republican Legislature. He had been struck with the remarks of the 
 gentleman from Loudoun. (Mr. Mercer) and had wondered how a gentleman of such 
 intelligence should have fallen into such an error, as it appeared to him to be. He 
 had felt it to be his duty to do away the imputation, not only from a sense of justice 
 to the Council, but to this and to all nations. This Council had been in operation 
 fifty-four years. If there had been any misrule, the gentleman could point it out. 
 He invited gentlemen to attend to the condition of the Executive, not only at the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 239 
 
 present moment, but from the commencement of its organization, and would thank 
 them for any criticisms on any of its pr ceedings, and particularly those of the pre- 
 sent day. There was no merit in the administration, but a merit of principle arising 
 from responsibility. If we have had an Executive in Virginia, which has gone on so 
 smoothly, so easily, so little known, and scarcely felt for fifty-four years, discharing all 
 its duties, why should it now be changed ? If it should have done all that was ex- 
 pected, he would ask if there was not some hazard, some boldness, in changing it for 
 something untried and unknown? As to want of power in the Executive, so far as 
 his experience had gone, although he had been often accused of an inordinate love of 
 power, lie then had as much power as he wished to have, or ought to have, or as any 
 other human being should ever have. Executive patronage and power were the sure 
 causes of all political mischiefs. The demoralizing influence which we have seen 
 throughout the whole United States, arose mainly from giving too much patronage to 
 the Federal Executive. But, gentlemen had gone further, and made some more general 
 charges against the Constitution. The gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Doddridge) to 
 whom he always listened with pleasure, had said, that the Constitution was made 
 amidst peril and alarm — that it was constructed hastily — adopted under the ex- 
 igencies of the times, and was never considered as a permanent, organic law. He 
 begged to be permitted to repeat the words of the gentleman, as taken down in the 
 newspapers, not with a view of throwing them back upon him by way of retort; he 
 was incapable of such rudeness ; but from his extreme reluctance at mis-stating the 
 words of any gentleman. The words are the following : — " The history of the State 
 would show that the present Constitution was adopted in a period of danger and 
 alarm; that it had been hastily enacted, was never considered as an organic instru- 
 ment, deliberately agreed upon with a view to its being permanent, but adopted 
 under the exigencies of the times, merely as a temporary expedient." Suppose, for 
 a moment, the Constitution was a chance-medley — a God-send. If it were a God- 
 send, it was the most blessed God-send with which man was ever favoured. So 
 happy have we been under it, we have lived so harmoniously, and enjoyed our- 
 selves so much at our ease, as almost to foi-get that there was any government. Gov- 
 ernment may be said to approacli perfection, when man does not know that he is 
 governed at all. Would gentlemen discard the Constitution merely because they 
 conceived it to be a lucky hit, and not a dictate of wisdom ; because "they deemed it 
 a special interposition of Providence rather than the production of the wisdom of 
 man We ought to cherish it and make the best possible use of it, for such is the 
 manner in which Christians ought to treat every God-send. So directly contrary was 
 the argument of the gentleman, to the views he entertained as to the manner in which 
 the Government was formed. To show the mistake into which the gentleman from 
 Brooke had fallen, with respect to the Constitution, he would read an account given 
 by the President of the Convention, the celebrated Edmund Pendleton, whose name, 
 in itself, should give to every thing he said, the most unquestionable sanction. He 
 would not fatigue the Convention with much reading, but the mistake was so serious, 
 and called so loudly for correction, that he nmst beg its attention to a single paragraph, 
 because these mistaken opinions prevailed on this subject throughout the whole State. 
 The paragraph he should read, is found in a letter from the late Mr. Jefferson to the 
 iate Judge Woodward, giving an account of the proceedings of the Convention. He 
 would read but a few sentences. 
 
 He (Mr. Pendleton) informed me (Mr. Jefferson) afterwards, by letter, that he re- 
 ceived it on the day on which the Committee of the Whole had reported to the House, 
 the plan they had agreed to; that that had been so long in hand, so disputed inch 
 by inch, and the subject of so much altercation and debate, that they were worried 
 with the contentions it had produced, and could not, from mere lassitude, have been 
 induced to open the instrument again : but that being pleased with the preamble to 
 mine, they adopted it in the House by way of amendment to the report of the Com- 
 mittee ; and thus my preaml)le became tacked to the work of George Mason." 
 
 He begged the gentleman's best attention to this historical account of the proceed- 
 ings of the Convention, and they could not avoid seeing the direct contrast between 
 it and the account given by otlaers. So far as he was enabled to do so, it would now 
 be his pleasing task to defend the Constitution from other imputations. He regretted 
 his inability to do justice to the subject. In the first place, the wisdom of our fore- 
 fathers fixed the basis of the Constitution, on land — on earth — mother earth. We are 
 taught, when we pray, to say to our Creator, " in thee we live, and move, and have 
 our being." He would extend the reflection so far, as to show that the instrument in 
 the hands of God, was land — earth — emphatically our mother earth, through which 
 we do " live, and move, and have our beino^." We look to it for our existence, and 
 we look to it for our subsistence. It gives us the coarsest food, which indigence re- 
 quires, and supplies us with all the highest luxuries which refinement can desire. It 
 yields our ordinary covering, and affords all the ornaments which decorate the fair of 
 the land. From the lowest necessity to the highest luxury, we are indebted for all to 
 
240 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 our mother earth. Are there not, then, an affinity and an association between our 
 mother earth, and the beino-s who exist oji it ? Would it not be unreasonable and un- 
 philosophical to establish a 'Government for the inhabitants of the land, without re- 
 ference to the land itself? He thought it certainly would be — he might be too much 
 enchanted with the idea, that there existed an intimate connexion and relationship 
 between the land, and its inhabitants — but it had grown out of the best reflection he 
 had been able to give to the subject. Yes, he considered land as too important an in- 
 strument in the affairs of mankind, to be entirely disregarded, in the formation of the 
 organic laws for the govermnent of its inhabitants. He would say land is the best 
 and only solid, indestructible foundation for Government, unless we re-assert the di- 
 vine right of Kings, which is notliing more than a mere human invention, founded in 
 fraud and falsehood. The wisest provision that ever was made in any Constitution, is 
 that which declares, that t!ie riglit of suffi-age should remain as it then was. It was 
 then based on the freehold right of suffi-age. But he did not mean to examine that 
 question now. He mentioned it merely to attract the reflections of other gentlemen. 
 If any other occasion should occur, and his health would permit, he Avould then go 
 into a further examination of the subject, but he was fearful that he should not be able 
 at this time to go through all the observations he had intended to make. Our forefa- 
 thers then fixed on land as the basis of our Constitution, and adopted the Republican 
 form of Government. The means for carrying the Republican system into effect, are 
 made to consist of individual and intermediate elections combined. He conceived 
 this to be the wisest combination of the elective franchise, that ever was devised. It 
 is indispensable in these United States. The necessity arises from the extent both of 
 territory and population. He knew that the popular current was running strongly 
 against the principle of intermediate elections, and that an attempt was making in 
 this country, to throw all governmental duties, in relation to elections, upon the peo- 
 ple, in their individual capacity. This is visionary and impracticable : A mere ignis 
 fatuus, and calculated to be onerous on the people, whom it is intended to benefit. He 
 was satisfied, that the people could not beneficially exercise this right, to its full ex- 
 tent, in a great, extended, populous community; and, therefore, he thought it was ' 
 proper for them, in certain cases, to delegate it to their legislative representatives. 
 Intermediate elections are a refinement in the representative system, known only in 
 the United States; and instead of extending its utility, we are throwing ourselves 
 back upon the original principle of representation, by man, solely in his individual 
 character. After this compound system of election, the Government is based, as far 
 as practicable, upon a separation of departments, as checks on each other — the Legis- 
 lative, Executive, and Judicial. These checks are introduced for the purpose of con- 
 trolling the unlimited will of the majority. Unlimited will, wherever it be found, 
 whether in the hands of a majority or a minority, is despotism. He had bestowed 
 much reflection on this subject, and it had produced the most perfect conviction, that 
 despotism is the inevitable effect of unlimited will. The utility of these checks, then, 
 is seen in controlling this unlimited will, wherever it may exist. These are the fixed 
 and stable pillars, niion which rests the useful and beautiful superstructure of our 
 Constitution. These pillars, he feared, were now about to be torn down, and their 
 'fragments scattered to the winds, although he could not help hoping for better things. 
 The merits of this Constitution were demonstrated by its beneficial results for 54 
 years ; conspicuously seen by the present moral condition of our society, over any 
 other known to him. If any other equalled it, in morals and in principles, he should 
 be glad to be informed of it. The merits of the Constitution are still further seen, in 
 the harmonious co-operation of all its parts, to produce an unity of object— one great, 
 common good. Its merits are still further seen, in the peculiar favor and protection 
 afforded to non-freeholders. 
 
 In all complicated controversies, between the poor and the rich, it is knowm that there 
 exists a very strong bias in favour of the poor. That during the short time he v/as en- 
 gaged in the practice of the law, he recollects, that he deemed it a compliment to any 
 County Court, in which justice might be had by the rich, in any complicated contro- 
 versy with the poor ; not from any disposition in the Court to do injustice to any, but 
 from the difficulty of counteracting the popular bias in favour of the poor; and he 
 believed this was a general impression. He hazarded nothing in saying, that the poor 
 are better protected against the influence of the rich, under our Constitution, than any 
 other in the United States. Whilst, therefore, he disclaimed all popular viev/s, he ^ 
 considered himself the real friend of the poor, in endeavouring to sustain our system. 
 Under its peculiar organization, justice is administered to the poor freely, without re- 
 ward ; and the whole of his contributions, of every description, do not exceed 25. 3d., 
 whereas, the costs of a single warrant, under the perquisite system, which is proposed 
 to be substituted for the ex^isting one, would cost him, perhaps, ten times as much as 
 all his present contributions put together. He begged to call the attention of the Con- 
 vention to another point. Much had been said about the order and decorum of our 
 elections, and nothing more was said than was merited. What do we hear from other 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONrENTIOX. 
 
 241 
 
 States, to which, we have been referred for precedents ; but which the gentleman from 
 Orange had truly regarded as experiments, in opposition to experience r Look at every 
 State where Sufe-age has been extended to Universal Suffirage. and you will see uni- 
 versal disorder, intoxication, and demoralization of all sorts. He had been amused for 
 a day or tvvo past, in noticing what was doing in the State of New-York. The Con- 
 vention of that State, had. a few years ago, conferred a blessing on themselves, by ex- 
 tending the Right of Suffrage to people of all colors — red, black, white and yellow. 
 It was phUosopldcally asserted, that mere difference of colour oucfht not to have any 
 influence whatever, on any question of rights. He had read with amusement, one 
 production headed, ••' confusion worse confounded." In the elections just had in Xew 
 York, he found that there were two parties. Jackson and Anti-Jackson, each nomina- 
 ting a regular ticket for their elections. Another nomination, however, unexpectedly 
 appeared, supported br what was designated Miss Fanny Wright's party. Yes, she 
 started on the principle of the Agrarian Law ; dividing property, morals, and all the 
 gifts of God equally, in coimnon. and indiscriminately amongst the whole of ■• "We the 
 people." For the two first days. Miss Fanny Wright's ticket was far ahead, and great 
 was the alarm, lest it should succeed. By great exertions of all parties in New- York, 
 and by Providential interposition, ]\Iiss Faimy Wright's ticket did not succeed. (Since 
 the delivery of this speech, it appears that one of the persons on Miss Fannv Wricrht's 
 ticket did actually succeed.) Thus that State has escaped from an Agrarian Law, 
 and an utter subversion of morals and principles for the present, but for how lonor, 
 God only knows. Gentlemen will probably reph-, tliat the population of New- York 
 is heteroo-eneous. and not like ours, homogeneous. This, however, all must admit, is 
 a slender"distinction, on which to place all the dearest rights and hberties of man : A 
 mere presumed difference between heterogeneous and homogeneous. Suppose this 
 presumption to exist in degree. All must admit that it must be a very hmited deoree. 
 ZVIay not gentlemen be mistaken in the conclusions they have drawn from it .' Under 
 similar circumstances, men are the same every where : and similar causes will always 
 produce similar effects. Its merits may still farther be inferred, fiom the honorable 
 compliments awarded it in this debate, even by its adversaries, in the frank and candid 
 admission of the honorable liberahty of the slave-holders to the non-slave-holders west 
 of the Ridge, and yet more from their total failure to show any misrule whatever un- 
 der it, although emphatically called upon to do so by his most worthy and honorable 
 colleague. (Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield.) 
 
 Under its benign influence, we have enjoyed all these great, civil and pohtical 
 blessings, in the midst of many others, for 54 years. In no one instance has the wis- 
 dom of our forefathers been more conspicuously displayed, than in the means chosen 
 to effect these great ends. These have consisted in the peculiar organization of the 
 County Courts, and in throwing a great preponderancy of power into the hands of the 
 middling class of society. He would rather have a Government dependant on the 
 middle classes, relying upon their imiform moral tendencies, without any check or 
 balance whatever, than a Government entrusted to either of the extremes of society, 
 with aU the checks which wisdom could devise. The organization of the County 
 Courts is marked with peculiar wisdom. The County Coui . magistrates, with their 
 judicial functions, are also entrusted with a portion of the Executive powers. These 
 magistrates are scattered m neighborhoods, nearly equally, throughout the whole 
 State : Each of them possessing a degree of moral influence in his own neighborhood, 
 which, with his official influence, when combined together, forms the strongest Ex- 
 ecutive in the world. 
 
 Hence, the celebrity of Virginia, for obedience to law. Hence, it has been so fre- 
 quently and emphatically said, that laic is the only despot here. Here is seen an ex- 
 ception of the common maxim of an unity of the Executive, and is exhibited at the 
 same time the most nmnerous and most efficient Executive in the world : substituting 
 for physical force, in a single hand, its moral and official influence combined: acting 
 more upon the affections, than upon the fears of the people. Another pecuharity of 
 this organization, is. that the magistrates are totally destitute of compensation or re- 
 ward, while acting in their Judicial and Executive capacities. Their only perquisite 
 is their monopoly of the Sheriffalty, and it is now proposed to deprive them of even 
 that inadequate chance of compensation. Even that compensation is never received 
 in their Judicial capacity : and this is one of the peculiar merits of the system. Jus- 
 tice being thus administered freely, without reward, tends to keep its current pure 
 and unpolluted. We received our County Court system directly from our Anglo- 
 Saxon ancestors, but it may be traced back more than 1500 years from the present 
 time, and beyond the period when the Saxon became converted into the Anglo-Saxon, 
 During that loner period of time, and auiidst all the fluctuations of human affairs, it 
 has been attended with the happiest effects. 
 
 He had tliought proper thus to present to the Committee, this mere outhne view of 
 the subject, but it was far from being exhausted, and he greatly feared that he had fallen 
 far short of its merits. He hoped, however, that he had in some deofrse rescued the 
 
 31 
 
242 
 
 DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Virginia Conatitution, from the unmerited imputations throv/n against it ; and that 
 he had proved it to be founded on the true principles of pohtical science. 
 
 He would now accept the invitations of several gentlemen, to enquire into the 
 condition of man, previous to a state ©f society," about which he found some dif- 
 ferences of opinion. He observed he was placed in a singular dilemma. He felt him- 
 self compelled to agree with gentlemen in their premises on one side of the question, 
 and to differ with them in their conclusions ; whilst he agreed with gentlemen on the 
 other side in their conclusions, and differed with them in their premises. Although 
 he was charmed with the eloquence of his worthy colleague (Mr. Leigh of Chester- 
 field,) and of the hon. gentleman from Northampton (Mr. Upshur,) he was reluctantly 
 compelled to differ with them, in the opinion, that there never existed a state of na- 
 ture ; whilst he concurred with them in the conclusion, that majorities had no right 
 to govern, but that derived from the social compact. At the same time, notwithstand- 
 ing he concurred with the hon. gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer,) who had dis- 
 played all his powers of reasoning, calling to his aid all the brilliancy of oriental ima- 
 gery on this occasion, in the opinion that man had existed in a state of nature, he 
 nevertheless felt himself constrained to dissent from the conclusion, that majorities 
 had necessarily a right to govern in such a state. Mr. G. said, he would tell a plain 
 tale, and his only effort would be to be understood. He believed there was a state of 
 nature, and that it was susceptible of proof, both from history and from the reason and 
 nature of things. A single fact and remark only, he conceived, ought to be sufficient 
 to satisfy every reflecting mind, that there must have been some condition of man 
 previous to his social condition. All admit that the social compact was made by men 
 ■ — by numbers of men. Prlan, therefore, must have preceded the social compact. If 
 so, in what state was he ? Surely in that state which has generally been designated a 
 state of nature. He believed there was an intermediate state between the two. It 
 might be called the domestic or family state of man. If so, both the natural and fa- 
 mily state of man must have preceded the social. Although the hon. gentleman from 
 Northampton, had partially denied the existence of a state of nature, and had referred 
 to Bible history on that point, he had, however, admitted that the social compact was 
 grounded on a feeling of property. This is admitted as one ground, but it is denied 
 that it is the- principal or the strongest ground. Whence was this feeling of property 
 derived ? It could only be from a right of property and a sense of that right. He in- 
 sisted that the social compact was founded more in a feeling of weakness and of want. 
 This feeling was so strong, as to amount to an absolute necessity for entering into the 
 social compact. In his reference to the Bible history, the hon. gentleman had given 
 some account of the subjection of Eve to Adam, and of the condition of that family, 
 at the early period of their creation. The hon. gentleman should have extended his 
 historical researches somewhat further, and he would have found that they abundantly 
 proved, not only the right and possession of property in a state of nature, but also the 
 existence of a domestic or family condition of m^an. He would have found, that Cain 
 and Abel both made offerings to the Lord. The one, the first fruits of his land and 
 labour — the other the firstlings of the flocks he tended. Abel's offering was most ac- 
 ceptable to the Lord, but the right of property was not denied by any one — the right 
 being derived from occupancy and labour, and sanctioned by the innate or moral sense 
 of man, ascertained by common consent. Mr. G. said, we were apt to fall into errors 
 for want of due reflections upon the longevity of the anti-deluvians, compared with 
 the little span of life permitted to the present race of man. To avoid such errors, he 
 had made enquiries as to the age of Cain, at the time he committed the bloody murder 
 upon his brother — and he had found that Cain was at that time, a mere lad approaching 
 to puberty, but had not yet once thought of matrimony, although he had reached the 
 age of one hundred and twenty-eight years, and his brother Abel one hundred and 
 twenty-seven. Here, then, is complete evidence of a state of nature — at least one 
 hundred and twenty-eight years after the creation. The right of property being un- 
 questioned in each of them, and there being no one to punish Cain for his bloody 
 crime — Adam having relinquished all parental authority over him. God, however, 
 took Cain into hand, put a mark upon him, and sent him into the land of Nod, where, 
 it is said, he married a wife and built a city. Should there be any sceptics bold enough 
 to doubt the account given by the sacred historian, from a suspicion that there were 
 other families existing at the time of Adam, of which the sacred historian was unap- 
 prised, Mr. G. would reply, that presuming that to be the case, the account given of 
 the family of Adam, would form the Natural History of any other family w^hich might 
 be in existence, previous to the social compact, (For Cain's age at the time of the 
 death of Abel, see Rees' Cyclopedia, corresponding upon this point with Lemprier's 
 Chronological table prefixed to his Classical Dictionary.) 
 
 Mr. G. said, he was of opinion, that there had been such a state, as a state of nature ; 
 and that man had been driven from that state by the wants of nature. Indeed, that all 
 creation was founded upon a principle of relative dependance ; and man rendered 
 more dependant than any other animal — clearly manifesting thereby, a Providential 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 243 
 
 intention to drive him from a solitary, to a social state. The same principle of rela- 
 tive dependance, is observable amongst nations, as well as individuals, and is the trne 
 foundation of commerce. The mischiefs arisincffrom the mistaken, barbarous notion 
 of the positive independence of nations, introduced into the practical Government, by 
 our late miserable and incompetent rulers, have been incalculable. Yes, Sir, greater 
 than could be compensated for, in all time, by the same deluded, unfortunate pohtical 
 economists, if their lives were prolonged to the age of ^Nlethusaleh, and spent in the 
 performance of good instead of evil deeds. Their miserable cabalistical false misno- 
 mers or nick-names — ••'National Industry;" "Domestic Industry;"' "Home Mar- 
 ket;" Protection of Manufa.ctures;" and above all, the •'•American System/' he verily 
 believed, had each of them cost the State of Virginia above 1,000,000 of dollars, since 
 the year 1816 ; and he was confident that every gentleman would come to the same 
 result, who would take the trouble to make the calculation from correct premises. 
 
 Whilst he admitted a state of nature, he denied that majorities had a.nj influence in 
 such state. Whence the derivation of the term Sovereign People?" Sm^ely from 
 man in a state of nature, v^-here he was his own sovereign. If he were not sovereign 
 there, he was sovereign no where. If he were sovereign there, then we have the 
 basis of his subsequent sovereignty. This seems to him to be a self-evident proposi- 
 tion. This enquiry leads to another more important one — to ascertain what are tlie 
 duties of Government; and what is the object of the social compact ? He would cor- 
 rect the expression. What is the object of the social compact, and what the objects 
 in the formation of every free, legitimate Government Exclusive of tire public safety, 
 one object is the protection of persons, the other the protection of property. Govern- 
 ment was instituted for the protection of all hmxian rights : adequate powers ouo-ht, 
 therefore, to be given to the Government, to ensure the protection both of persons, and 
 of property. A question, then, arises, how much power ought to be given ? Is it to be un- 
 limited power over all the rights of man ? If so. all his natural rights must be taken from 
 him. If only a portion of his rights are to be taken, vrhat portion How can the Gov- 
 ernment be so organized as to make a distribution of rights between the individual in his 
 native character, andthe Government in its corporate character ? Here a question arises; 
 ouffht a Governmentto be an active, or a passive machine ? If Government be an active 
 machine, you must give all the requisite powers and properties which belong to an un- 
 limited Government. If it be a passive machine, less power is necessary, and the 
 only difhculties v»-ill be found in the proper distribution of rights between the gover- 
 nors and governed. Upon this important point, differences of opinion exist. There 
 are some gentlemen who claim for the General Government, the whole proceeds of 
 the labour of the nation, as the great desideratum of its political economy. If so, in 
 vain do we sit here ; m vain are we here, if the proceeds of all labour must be given 
 up to the General Government, not leaving even a modicum for ourselves, as the 
 basis of our Constitution. Presuming, then, that Government is to be formed by a 
 distribution of the natural rights of individuals between themselves, and the Gov- 
 ernment, what portion ought to be given to the Government Surely the smallest 
 portion which will sufSce for governmental purposes. If all be given, none of course 
 can be left to the management of the individual. He had bestowed much reflection 
 upon the inquiry, as to that portion of rights, which should be surrendered to the 
 Government, and that which should be retained to the individual. Perhaps the most 
 effectual mode of ascertaining this point, would be to enquire what rig-hts of nature, 
 man, in his individual capacity, can manage better than the Government, and what 
 portion Government can manage better than the individual. From all his reflections 
 upon the subject, he had concluded that there were but two descriptions of rights, 
 which the Government can manage better than the individual. One is, the right of 
 every individual to do himself justice in his natural state ; the other, the smallest por- 
 tion of property that will suffice for governmental purposes. It will be perceived, 
 that an exact distribution of rights, according to the preceding rule, m^ust necessarily 
 approach nearly to the production of a perfect Commonwealth. Here is opened a 
 still wider field for extending the researches of all lovers of political science. He had 
 liimself concluded, that all riglits, of every description, which individual man could 
 manage at all, he could manage, and vrould manage better than the Govermnent ; and 
 the degree of liberty enjoyed by him, would depend upon the greatest portion of these 
 rights, left to his own management. The only reason wh}^ an}- rights should be given 
 to Government, arises from the incapacity of man to execute them by his own 
 means. He has not power to do justice to himself in a state of nature, because he 
 will necessarily be brought in conflict with others, and he will be compelled to aban- 
 don that power merely from his incapacity to execute it. Hence, a portion of power 
 must be given to Government to enable it to do, what the individual cannot do. 
 Hence, the necessity for any concession of povrer, and he thought that no concession 
 ought to extend beyond the right of doino- justice, and the surrender of that portion 
 of property, which is found indispensable for defi-aying the expenses of Government. 
 In that case, Government would be a passive machine, ensuring liberty and safety to 
 
244 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the people — rendering justice to all. Mr. Giles could not help expressing his surprise, 
 that several gentlemen, and amongst the rest, the gentleman from Brooke, who seemed 
 to be most desirous of great changes in the Constitution, after throwing the most se- 
 rious imputations against it, had resorted to the Bill of Rights as the consummation 
 of human wisdom, and insisted upon the observance of the rules there laid down by 
 the present Convention, particularly the first three articles; and some of them have 
 also called to their aid the 15th article, with the practical commentary upon them in 
 the Constitution itself; and the gentleman from Brooke, had gone so far as to assert 
 that in demanding a free white basis of representation, he demanded nothing new 
 under the sun. It was the slave-holding minority, who were demanding a new thing 
 under the sun. The following are the gentleman's own words : " He, (Mr. Doddridge) 
 therefore, concluded that, in demanding a free white basis of representation, he and 
 those who acted with him, were asking no new thing under the sun; but were for- 
 warding a principle already existing and recognized ; principles deeply founded in the 
 nature and necessities of society. It was the slave-holding minority who were de- 
 manding a new thing." Here the gentleman admits that he is demanding something, 
 and that thing, a change ; he yet denies that this change is a new thmg under the 
 sun, and proceeds to charge the slave-holders with demanding a new thing under the 
 sun, whilst they demand nothing at all. under the sun, neither new nor old, but are 
 perfectly content with the Constitution in that respect as it now stands. Mr. G. said, 
 he was willing to be governed by the Bill of Rights according to his interpretation of 
 it. The Bill of Rights detracted nothing from the Constitution by preceding it, and 
 he deemed it an essential part of the Constitution. Permit me, said Mr. Giles, to 
 turn to the sections to which gentlemen invited our attention. The first article is : 
 
 " That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inhe- 
 rent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any 
 compact, deprive or divest their posterity ; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, 
 with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining 
 happiness and safety." 
 
 The eloquent and learned gentleman from Loudoun, read to us a number of Con- 
 stitutions, and particularly that of Massachusetts, in the formation of which he told 
 us, the Convention sat in deliberation for months. 
 
 He (Mr. G.) had already read the first article of the Virginia Bill of Rights. Let 
 us look at the comparative merits of the Bill of Rights of Virginia and Massachu- 
 setts. The first article of the Massachusetts Bill of Rights says, that " all men are 
 born free and equal." He denied this to be true, either in law or in fact; while he 
 agreed that all men are by iiature equally free and independent." The condition of 
 man, from free to bond, or from bond to free, is changed by municipal or conventional, 
 and recognized by international law. Slaves are born slaves before us every day, 
 which directly disproves the assertion, that all men are horn free and equal." Yet 
 the Constitution of Massachusetts unequivocally asserts, that all men are born equally 
 free. Are slaves born free ? No. And if an enquiry be made as to the means, by 
 which their condition is changed, the answer is, by municipal law — by conventional 
 law — by force — or by conquest. Upon what authority do we hold Africans in bond- 
 age Surely, by the municipal laws of that country, recognized by international 
 law. Slavery was not only recognized by international law, but it was acknowledged 
 by the law of God, if the scriptures may be deemed sufficient evidence of that law. 
 As to matter of fact and of law, directly the reverse of the declaration in the 
 Massachusetts Bill of Rights, is the universal legal maxim, '■'■partus sequitur vm- 
 trem" — the offspring follows the condition of the mother. 
 
 This Constitution is presented to us as a model of excellence for our imitation, 
 which declares that the bond are not born bond, which is not true — in preference to 
 our own, which asserts the truth, that " all men are by nature free." And this strange 
 preference has been strangely attributed to a greater degree of deliberation in the one 
 case than in the other. He observed that this clause in the Bill of Rights contained 
 another important declaration, that man possesses the means of " acquiring and pos- 
 sessing property" in a state of nature, thereby clearly sanctioning the existence of 
 such a state. The second section is in the following words : 
 
 "That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people ; that 
 Magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them." 
 
 This section contains the great declaratory principle in direct hostility to the basis 
 upon which all pre-existing Governments were founded ; that " all power is derived 
 from the people" — and that Magistrates are the servants of the people — and affords the 
 first great example of reducing that principle to use in the affairs of mankind. It 
 meets my most hearty approbation, and exalted admiration. The third section is : 
 
 " That Government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection 
 and security, of the people, nation, or community : of all the various modes and 
 forms of Government, that is best, which i.s capable of producing the greatest degree 
 of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal- 
 
DEBATES OF THJl CONTENTION. 
 
 245 
 
 administration; and that , irhm nvy Go-cernment shall le fouiid inadequate or contrary 
 to these purposes, a m-ajor' oniiiianity liath an indubilahle, unuliejmble, and in- 
 
 defeasible rio-ht, to refor/n . (LboLisk it An such manner as shall be judged most 
 
 condacice to the public vccu-l. 
 
 His wort iv colleao-e, (Mr. Leigh) had so fully explained his views on one branch of 
 this subject" and particularly on'the clause, omitted by the gentleman who had intro- 
 duced tliis section, that he considered all repetition superfluous. This section clearly 
 proves that conditions are imposed upon majorities. His colleague had pointed out 
 one, he would point out another. Whilst the majority have a right to alter, reform, 
 or abolish the Government, there is no right conferred on them to do so, according to 
 their own unhmited. capricious will. An obligation is imposed upon them, to act ■• in 
 such manner as sliaU be judged most conducive to the public weal." This is the 
 verv business we are now engaged in performing — to alter, amend, or abolish the 
 Coii-tiTuti iu. in such manner, as we shall judge most conducive to the public 
 weal. ri .rely we should feel ourselves restrained by this clause from injuring, or 
 even putting at hazard, any local or particular interest, even should it be the interest 
 of the minoritv. Mr. G. called the attention of the Committee to that clause in the 
 Bill of Pvights'. which required a permanent attachment to ihe community, as a quali- 
 fication for voting, and asserted that the word - permanent' was introduced with refer- 
 ence exclusively to land, nothing being deemed permanent but land : and the provi- 
 sion in the Constitution, which requires, that the Right of SutFrage should remain as 
 it then was — being the freehold Rigiit of SsulFrage, was the practical commentary of 
 the framers of our Constitution, upon the word '■ pervianeixf in the Bill of Pvights. 
 This demonstrably proves that there is no discrepancy whatever between the two in- 
 struments. 
 
 Some orentlemen plumed themselves upon a notion that our forefathers had earnestly 
 invited us to a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles, with a view, as they 
 suppose, to chansfe those principles. This notion they had derived from the 15th sec- 
 tion, in the following words : 
 
 That no free Government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any 
 people, but bv a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and vir- 
 tue, and bj' frequent recurrence to fundamental principles." 
 
 Why recur to fundamental principles : If these principles were true at that time, 
 they are true now. Fundamental principles are eterned and unchangeable. Could 
 our forefathers invite us to recur to fundamental principles, for the purpose of chang- 
 ing unchangeable things t But, if this were not the object, what could the object be 
 for inviting a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles t Evidently for the pur- 
 pose of watchinor the proceedings of the practical Government, and to draw them 
 back from their aberrations, if any they had committed, to these great fundamental 
 principles. It was not his intention to have referred to the General Government, if 
 it had been possible to avoid it, notwithstanding its intimate connection with the State 
 Governments, and its even constituting a part of them. But he found it impossible 
 to avoid it. It would be all important, if we could prevail on that Government to 
 recur to fundamental principles. Such had been its monstrous aberrations from the 
 fundamental principles of the Federal Constitution, that they v.-ere violated every 
 day. Scarce a semblance of its most important, original features remained. After 
 he had been absent from the Government for some time, when he returned to it. he 
 was astonished at the new-fangled nomenclature, which was introduced in substitu- 
 tion of the old Governmental phraseology : one efi'ect of which was a splendid Gov- 
 ernment which the people are made to feel. How important then, would it be. C'^uld 
 we prevail on this Government to have recurrence to original, fundamental princi- 
 ples. Instead of a splendid Government, which the people are now made to feel, we 
 should then have a hippy Government which they could not feel. He feared he had 
 detained the Committee very unprofitably in presenting to their view mere general 
 propositions without any attempt at minute, logical demonstrations. Those he left 
 to the intelligence of the Committee. He would now examine some points of difier- 
 ence between himself and other gentlemen more especially, and as far as possible, 
 would avoid repetitions. He would come to consider tlie actual difierence of local 
 interests as regards the slave population. The point is, whether there shall be anv 
 special provision for this local interest. 
 
 Mr. Giles was proceeding to remark on the argument of the gentleman from Lou- 
 doun. (Mr. Mercer) with respect to the salt- works of New TorlT, and to deduce from 
 it a confirmation of the views of the gentleman from Orange, Qsh. P. P. Bar- 
 bour) with respect to those cases where a minority governs a majority ; when 
 
 Mr. Taylor (of Chesterfield) rose, and moved that the Committee rise, in order to 
 give his colleague another opportunity of presenting his views to the Committee, 
 which, as he was then considerably fatigued, he could do more to his satisfaction and 
 ease. 
 
246 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Giles expressed his willingness to proceed, although he was much exhausted, 
 rather than protract the business of the Conimitlee. He was willing to strain every 
 power, physical and mental, he possessed, to continue his remarks. 
 
 The motion that the Committee rise was then put and carried, and the Conven- 
 tion adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, November 10, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Sykes of the Methodist Church. 
 
 According to the standing order, the House went into Committee of the Whole, 
 Mr. Powell in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Giles then rose in continuation of his remarks. He said, that he had never, 
 at any period of his life, been in the habit of complaining, and as little now as ever, 
 but it was only common justice to himself to state that he had risen yesterday, under 
 a sense of debility so paralyzing, that he feared he would not be able to controul the 
 operations of his own mind, nor to command that portion of physical strength which 
 was requisite to sustain him through the task he had before him. This naturally pro- 
 duced some delay and confusion both in his manner, and in the course which he had 
 prescribed for his own government. When he tirst rose, he had intended to read se- 
 veral extracts, but soon found himself compelled to change that determination, and 
 to avoid reading as much as possible ; being aware that reading tends much more to 
 debilitate, than even the effort of speaking. He had intended to have read some of 
 those extracts in relation to the first point which he had yesterday brought into dis- 
 cussion: he alluded to the remarks which had fallen from the venerable gentleman 
 from Loudoun (Mr. Monroe) respecting the emancipation of slaves. This was a sub- 
 ject of such peculiar delicacy, that it was proper to present to the Committee the 
 character of the existing relations, in respect to jurisdiction over slaves between the 
 General and State Governments. He thought it proper now to complete what he had 
 yesterday intended. 
 
 The General Government, at all times, from the first Congress, had disclaimed all 
 sort of jurisdiction over the emancipation or the management of slaves ; and thus 
 jurisdiction, in both cases, was peremptorily denied to the General Government. He 
 intended to have introduced the Journal of the twenty-first session first Congress, but 
 as it was not before him, he would state from his recollection, what the resolution 
 contained in the Journal upon that point was. The resolution went to disclaim on 
 the part of the General Government, all jurisdiction over the emancipation or treat- 
 ment of slaves. This resolution was entered on the Journal, as declaratory at that 
 time, of the true interpretation of the Constitution ; and at that day such an excite- 
 ment existed among the Southern members against having the subject even mentioned, 
 that they voted against this declaratory resolution. The honorable and venerable 
 gentleman who is a member of this Convention, and who was then a member of 
 Congress, he meant the gentleman from Orange, voted decidedly in favor of it. 
 This was the mere declaratory act of one House ; but in consequence of it two bills 
 were passed, either at that or at some subsequent session, prohibiting the citizens of 
 the United States from interfering with the slave trade, for the purpose of supplying 
 foreign nations with slaves. 
 
 Mr. G. then referred to a memorial, which was presented to Congress by the repre- 
 sentatives of several societies of Quakers. He happened to be a member of the 
 Committee, to whom the subject was referred. He had relied on the declaratory re- 
 solution, in the negotiation which he had to carry on with the Quakers. All the 
 Committee were, in principle, in favor of the measure ; but it was his duty to satisfy 
 these persons, that Congress had no right to interfere with the subject of slavery at 
 all. He was fortunate enouo-h to satisfy the Quakers, and they agreed, that if Con- 
 gress would pass a law, to prohibit the citizens of the United States from supplying 
 foreign nations with slaves, they would pledge themselves and the respective societies 
 they represented, never again to trouble Congress on the subject. The law did pass, 
 and the Quakers adhered to their agreement. He did not know whether or not the 
 documents, on the subject of this negotiation, were still in existence ; but he believed 
 they had been filed away with other papers. 
 
 Subsequently, an Act was passed, prohibiting the introduction of slaves into the 
 United States, in which this principle was again touched, in a more specific, but a 
 different form. It was again his fortune to be on the Committee to whom that subject 
 was referred, and he drew up two provisos to a bill then pending before Congress, for 
 prohibiting the introduction of slaves into the United States after the year 1807; 
 the object of which, was to draw a distinct line of demarcation, between the powers 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 247 
 
 of CoiiD-ress, for prolubitinof the introduction of slaves in the United States, and those 
 of the indi^T-dual States and territories. It was then decided, by an unanimous vote, 
 that vrhen slaves were brougiit within the limits of any State, tlie power of Congress 
 over them ceased, and the power of the Slate began, the moment they became within 
 those limits. He would beg leave to refer to these provisos. He would read as little 
 as possible ; but recent events made it important to revive the recollection of these 
 facts, which appear strangely to have been forgotten. He had drawn up these pro- 
 visos with all imaginable care. 
 
 The first proviso, after the powers of Congress to a certain extent had been de- 
 clared, and the words therein w^ere critically examined — and, indeed, he might say, 
 not only every word, but every syllable, and even every stop, by the best talents 
 wliich Cono-ress could afford, be found — proceeded thus : " And neither the impor- 
 ter, nor any person, or persons, claiming from, or under him, shall hold any right or 
 title %vhatever, to any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, nor to tire service or labour 
 thereof, who may be imported, or brought into the United States, or territories, in 
 violation of this law : but the same shall remain subject to any regulations, not con- 
 travening the provisions of this Act. which the Legislatures of the several States or 
 territories, at anv time hereafter, may make, for disposing of an}' such negro, mulatto, 
 or person of colour.'' 
 
 This was then considered as a legislative interpretation of the Constitution, as may 
 be seen by its phraseology. It disclaimed all power over slavery, in all time to come. 
 But it did' not stop there. The power vras not only relinquished to the States, but also 
 to the territories, to wit : the unlimited jurisdiction over all the slaves brought witiiin 
 their limits respectively. 
 
 The second proviso is in the following terms : Provided, that the aforesaid for- 
 feiture, shall not extend to the seller, or purchaser, of any negro, mulatto, or person 
 of colour, who may be sold, or disposed of, in virtue of any regulation which may 
 hereafter be made, by any of the Legislatures of the several States, in that respect, 
 in pursuance of this Act, and the Constitution of the United States."' 
 
 Here, then, in these declaratory provisions of the Act, there is an explicit demar- 
 cation of the boundary line between the power of Congress, and of the Legislatures 
 of the several States and territories. The Committee would observe that the word 
 
 territories" was omitted in the last proviso. An abstract right is admitted to the 
 territories in the first proviso, but the word territories was not used in the second 
 proviso, Congress having had a revisory power over the laws of the territories, and 
 were unwilling to yield that power. The word was therefore omitted, but the right 
 in the territories was recognized to exercise exclusive power over slaves, within their 
 limits. He had understood that the Legislature of South Carolina, passed a law on 
 the subject, and the State of Georgia assumed similar jurisdiction, in consequence of 
 this law of Congress. This had led to two results — first, the admission on the part of 
 Congress, that tlie State Governments are vested with the authority to declare persons 
 within their limits, slaves ; and second, the exercise of that authority, by the State 
 Governments. 
 
 This brought him to the consideration of the proceedings which have lately taken 
 place in the State of Ohio, and wliich had been very properly referred to by several 
 gentlemen in this debate. It appears that Ohio, acting under a mistaken zeal, amoun- 
 ting to a fanatic desire, to meliorate the evils of slavery, mvited a number of those 
 unfortunate persons to take refuge in that State. Some remarks appeared in the 
 newspapers, some years since, in regard to the State of Ohio, in which was sus'gested 
 the possibility that in some future capricious mood, she might convert the coloured 
 persons, who had been induced to enter her limits, into slaves, and that this she might 
 do, because Congress had no right to prevent it. The remarks to which he referred, 
 were as follow : 
 
 Again, suppose Congress even could constitutionally exercise such power, would 
 it be wise, or desirable that it should do so when the effect would be, to place the 
 difierent States in the L'nion upon different footings, as to rights ? -N^ay, as to the 
 most important right, with which the original States are invested That is, the right 
 of jurisdiction over persons within its own limits. This inquiry may be extended 
 further. Suppose any of the free States, self-called. Ohio for instance, in some capri- 
 cious mood, should determine that all the coloured people, who have been invited to 
 take refuge in that State, against tlie slavery of otlier States, should be slaves within 
 that State ; would the Federal Government have the right to exercise any control 
 over such determination ? Certainly not— the jurisdiction over persons within the 
 limits of Ohio, being exclusively with the State authorities. Here, then, Ohio would 
 be invested with the power of jurisdiction over persons within its limits, which would 
 be denied to another State admitted to tlie Union, subject to the bargained condition. 
 Such are always the consequences of substituting bargains for principles in legis- 
 lation." 
 
248 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 What has Ohio now done ? Becoming perfectly sensible of the mischiefs which 
 have resulted from her former fanaticism, she has passed a law, which, if carried into 
 execution, must entail upon those unfortunate and deluded people, who came into her 
 State, in the belief that the}^ should find protection there, a greater evil than slavery 
 itself. The mischief has arrived at such a pitch, that the State has passed a law, re- 
 quiring that all coloured persons in the State, should give security for their good be- 
 haviour, to an amount beyond their means to obtain. And not being able to do this, 
 they must either be incarcerated, or quit the State. No asylum is provided for them, 
 but if the law should be carried into effect, they must be driven forth — find refuge 
 where they can — perhaps in Virginia ; and surely Virginia ought to be upon the alert 
 to counteract this most probable effect of the law. The next step which Ohio may 
 take, may be to declare those people slaves, and it is more likely now that she should 
 do so, than it was when the preceding remarks were made, that she should now take 
 this step, which is more onerous and disastrous to her invited guests than slavery 
 itself. It is, indeed, strange, that these coloured people should have been invited into 
 thit State, and should now be driven abroad as vagabonds, not on the face of the 
 earth, but to find their way to the clouds, if they can, or wherever else they could 
 find a refuge. He mentioned this subject to show how scrupulous the States ought 
 to be, in touching the subject of slavery, and particularly of emancipation. 
 
 There was another point, which he was compelled yesterday to omit, having then 
 been nearly exhausted. It was the difference between the rights of the majority, 
 claimed from the various misconceived sources, to which gentlemen had referred, and 
 such as were given by the Constitution or Social Compact. The specific question 
 before us, is, not what relates to the powers of the majority, nor who shall be the ma- 
 jority ; but who shall be the constituents to make that majority The question now 
 is, wlio are to be the constituents By whose votes a majority <ff the members form- 
 ing the practical Government, is to be created? And, then, what degree of jurisdic- 
 tion should this majority have ? This must depend on the Social Compact, or written 
 Constitution we are now engaged in forming ; and that brought him to the real point 
 of inquiry, as contained in the Bill of Rights. In determining who shall be the con- 
 stituents, the rule he had agreed to observe, which he still agreed to observe, and 
 which he hoped all gentlemen would observe, is, that these constituents are to be 
 made, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal." The 
 rule imposed on us, is to perfect the great work now before us, in such manner as 
 may be most conducive to the public weal. He had now arrived at the point at which 
 he left off yesterday. 
 
 He would now consider the actual, local differences, arising from the unequal, sec- 
 tional divisions of our slave property. The question which has arisen, is, whether 
 slaves ought to be counted, in forming the basis of representation, either as persons 
 or property ? It is a plain question, if we agree as to the objects of the formation of 
 Government. Why should they not be counted.? They are persons and property 
 both. Because they are property, shall we divest them of their existence — of their 
 personal character ? They are both persons and property in law and in fact. He did 
 not state this with such positiveness, because he pretended to claim any superiority 
 for his own opinions. Far from it. He would present to the Committee the lew 
 grounds on which his opinion rests, and leave them to decide. He would point out 
 some of the supposed aberrations of the gentlemen on the other side. The fact, that 
 they are property, is authorised by the federal law, the laws of the State, international 
 law, and the sanctions of all laws. Great Britain may be referred to on this subject, 
 on account of the peculiarity of her policy in that respect. She is so fastidious in 
 her ideas of the relation of master and slave, that the moment they touch British 
 ground, in that relation, such relation between them is entirely cut asunder. Where 
 then shall we look for the British sanction of slavery ? We found it first here — we 
 found the curse upon us, for a curse he must consider it. It is admitted that we can- 
 not avoid it. That very nation, which is so fastidious on the subject of slavery in 
 British land, fixed it on us against our consent. She has lately, in a treaty with this 
 country, admitted slaves to be property, and has paid for them as such, and thus she 
 has again admitted the principle of slavery. Look first at her West India possessions. 
 Slavery is there, in its essence. The condition of the slave there is miserable in com- 
 parison with what it is here. There is abundant evidence around us to prove that 
 we are making the best use of our power, to meliorate the condition of slaves. 
 
 He here begged to correct an aberration of the gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. 
 Mercer,) as he conceived it to be. That gentleman had laid it down positively, that 
 a slave in Virginia had no civil rights— that he was property— mere property. He 
 compared him even to cattle. He presumed, however, that that gentleman would ad- 
 mit the existence of laws which treat slaves as persons : protecting them as far as 
 wrongs are committed on persons in the character of persons, and consequently that 
 slaves have civil rights. All persons, whether they be bond or free, not even except- 
 ing the master himself, who commit the higher order of wrongs, such as murder, &c. 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTIOJf. 
 
 249 
 
 on slaves, are subject to the punishment of death. The distinction on \\-hich tliis 
 law is founded, is, that the offence is committed on them in the character of persons, 
 and on the cattle in the character of property. The law in minor cases, for wrongs 
 <ione to slaves, punishes through the master. As to the civil personal rights of the 
 .•slave, they are more strictly enforced here than those of the white population. The 
 protection which they receive under the law is most efficacious. The gentleman 
 from Loudoun then, was in error. If rich or p^or, wliile or black, murder a slave, 
 ^death is the punishment. Did gentlemen ever hear of punishment of death for kil- 
 ling a cow.^ No, not even if the murderer eat her afterwards ; yet these are the ana- 
 logies of the gentleman from Loudoun. 
 
 He would say, that the laws in relation to slaves are wise nnd just. The law re- 
 quires that the record of every offence charged against a slave, for which a white man 
 would be punished in the Penitentiary, shcill be laid before the Executive, for its de- 
 cision : thus submitting by mere act of law, the case of every slave, f jund guilty of 
 a criminal act, to the pardoning power. According to the humane provision of the 
 law, the slave enjoys privileges which are not allowed to any one else. Tiie best 
 counsel is provided for him by his master, or by the Court, if the master should fail, 
 and his rights are protected with the utmost vigilance and care. If we look at the 
 police records of London, we shall see that thousands are hung in tliat city with al- 
 most as little ceremony as if they were brutes. Under this view, then, as the laws re- 
 cognize the civil rights of bond as well as free, why are slaves not to be counted ? The 
 fact is, that whether persons or property, their labour produces a third of the taxes of 
 the State. He cared not in what character the siay-es produced them. The practical 
 result, whether counted as persons or property, is nearly the same. But here is a 
 case in point, of the unequal taxation of an imp ;rtant interest wliieh requires some 
 provision in the Constitution. Gentlemen admit there should be s me provision, and 
 offer a 0:uarantee against the principle which tht-y desire to insert in the ConstitutioH,. 
 What is the object in establisiiing the fundamental laws ? It is to draw from nature,, 
 certain o-reat general principles, for the government of society, producing good moral 
 tendencies, through their own intrinsic operations. According to tlie wise or unwise 
 -selection of these principles, would moral or immi;ral tenj^encies be produced in so- 
 ciety. If we selected principles conducive to the public v/eal, the effect is visible, in 
 the moral organization which the community gradually assumes. If the contraiy,, 
 the effect is disclosed in tlieir corrupt tendencies. It is then manifestly our duty, 
 select principles, which would intrinsically produce good and notesvii tendencies upon 
 •society. He would here remark, that the condition of the population of Virginia, is 
 now believed to be as sound as that of an}- other country in the world, because the 
 great principles which our forefathers selected, had continued to produce good moral 
 tendencies from that time to the present — a period of more than 54 years. Is there 
 any wonder then, in our present moral condition .-^ What are the consequences of the 
 -want of good principles in other communities, but the existence of immoral tenden- 
 cies in their fundamental laws. It is a conclusive proof that gentlemen on the other 
 side, are selecting principles, which have bad tendencies, that they are proyiding reme- 
 dies against those very tendencies. This reminded him of a silly fellow who insisted 
 upon making himself sick, merely f^r ihe purpose of ascertaining, whether phjsie 
 •would kill or cure him, when it was more likely to kill than cure him. 
 
 He had paid every attention to the pathetic complaints, which had been made by 
 •gentlemen on the other side, but more particularly to those of the gentleman from 
 Hampshire, (Mr. Naylor) to whom he had listened with peculiar delight, not only on 
 •account of the eloquence, but the philanthropy which pervaded the whole of his re- 
 marks. That gentleman had called upon us for justice to ihe people of the West.. 
 Mr. Gr. said, could be see the injustice complained of, he v^culd ohtj the call with 
 pleasure. But he could not see any anah)g3' in the cases, which it was said called foi* 
 the -exercise of this act of justice. The complaint is, that the people East of the 
 Ridge demand protection for their property, and, at the same time, refuse protection 
 to the persons of those West of the Ridge. This, in the first place, is not the case; 
 for the exclusion of persons, which is demanded for the protection of property, ap- 
 plies equally to the East and to the West. There is no analogy, hovvever, in tJie 
 two cases. The Eastern people have persons as well as propei'tj' to protect. The 
 Western, persons only, so far as the exclusion is intended to go — and the exclusion of 
 persons is the same both on the West and the East side of the Pddge. The Eastern 
 people have as much interest to protect person 85 property. The Penal laws are the 
 same and must always be the same on both sides of the jlidge. The Western peo- 
 ple, who had no property to protect, and into whose hands it was now proposed to 
 place the power of protection, v.'ere not only not interested in affording, but v^ere in- 
 terested in depriving property of that protection. Tiiay would be aided too, in doincr- 
 this without injury to themselves, by the difference in the kinds of property on this 
 and tlie other side of the Ridge — and particularly the great disproportion in the slaves - 
 
 32 ^ ■ - 
 
250 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 He asserted, that on the formation of the social compact there were two parties- — the 
 governors and the governed, and that the conditions of the compact, were formed 
 upon the principle of the quid pro quo. The governed give up a portion of their 
 rights to be compensated for, by the protection of other rights to be afforded by the • 
 Government. There was then a stipulated obhgation on the part of the Government 
 to protect property, and there was a greater diftictdty in complying with this obliga- 
 tion than in the protection of persons. The gentlemen admit both these obligations. 
 No one would deny them. Is not the Government bound therefore, on this principle 
 of quid pro quo, in return for property given up to protect the residue ? This admission 
 seemed to him to settle the question absolutely. What are we now doing ? We are 
 about to constitute an agent to protect both person and property. Here are two in- 
 terests. The great object is to protect both. Would it be wise to choose an agent 
 who had an interest in protecting both or one only.? Surely all the world would agree, 
 that he ought to have an interest in protecting both, and not one only. Here another 
 question is presented. A great deal has been said about the protection of wealth, a 
 term which seems to have been substituted for property. Property in se, is not 
 wealth. It is property, in large masses, which constitutes wealth. Propert}'^ in small 
 portions is not wealth ; and no one has ever insinuated or thought of alfording more 
 protection to large than to small portions of property. Hence, the poor man's proper- 
 ty is to be as much protected as the rich man s. It is property which is to be protect- 
 ed then — whether in large or small portions, and not wealth — the property of the 
 poor as well £is of the rich; and the property of the poor in this country is vastly more 
 extensive than that of the rich. And the protection of property indiscriminate!}'-, 
 would strip the argument of the protection of wealth, by higher sanctions never 
 thought of, of all its terrors. 
 
 Several gentlemen, and particularly the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Cooke) most 
 earnestly invites us to place the protection of our property, on the morals of the peo- 
 ple West of the Ridge, aiid not on their interests. Will the gentlemen return the 
 compliment to their brethren East of the Ridge, and place their protection on our 
 morals ? If so, we are then to act upon the principle, that we are all moral — ''all ho- 
 norable men" — disregarding altogether the selfish notions of interest. If this be re- 
 ally the case, he v>'ould respectfully ask these gentlemen what would be the use of 
 Government at all.? Government is not intended for moral, honorable men; but as a 
 protection against the vices and imperfections of man; and if man were totally ex- 
 empt from all vices and imperfections, there would be no necessity for Government 
 at all. It was strange to him that gentlemen did not see, that this was a new ema- 
 nation of the French philosophy of the perfectibility of man ; and that if adopted 
 here, would be attended with the same results which attended it in France, It failed 
 in France, and will fail in every other country in which it may be tried, simply, be- 
 cause it is founded in a false, though flattering hypothesis. The notion of the per- 
 fectibility of man affords the most flattering unction to his vanity, but unfortunately 
 for him it has no real existence, and is nothing more than a mischievous, delusive vision 
 of the mind. The gentlemen, in support of this fallacious doctrine, refer us to the 
 liberality of the slaveholders on the East side of the Ridge towards the non-slave- 
 holders on the West, as an example in point, in favor of his proposition. It is true Vir- 
 ginia v.'as thus liberal in that particiilar case, and is always liberal. She gave up 
 her western lands, sufficient to form an extended empire in themselves. She was 
 liberal to Kentucky; and she has ever been liberal, in her intercourse with her sister 
 States. Whence the causes of this celebrity of Virginia liberality ? Surely, from ^ 
 the moral tendencies of her fundamental laws for fifty-four years. They teach her 
 that it is to her interest to be liberal, and that honesty is the best policy for nations. 
 Could there be higher compliments to the wisdom of the fundamental laws of Virgi- 
 nia than are contained in these demonstrations ? He begged to call the attention of . 
 the Convention to an example, forming an awful contrast to the one presented by the 
 gentleman. It was furnished by the Federal Government. An excessive tax has 
 been imposed by that Government, as he conceived, in direct violation of morals, prin- 
 ciples, and the plainest provisions of our written Constitution. It originated in com- 
 binations of particular sections of country to tax other sections. These combinations 
 were effected by invitations given by certain political fanatics to other fanatics, to 
 meet in Convention, at Harrisburg, during the recess of Congress; excluding all 
 the sections of country intended to be made tributary from these invitations. Vir*' 
 ginia was not honored with an invitation, nor any State South or South- West of Vir- 
 ginia. This Convention, thus composed, unblushingly met at Harrisburg in open day ; 
 organized themselves into a Convention, with all the assumed honors and formalities 
 awarded to this Convention ; and there laid the foundation of the Tariff Act which 
 was subsequently sanctioned by an Act of Congress. This Act was passed in direct 
 violation of every principle of taxation heretofore held sacred, and was addressed to 
 the worst passions of the human heart. It was dictated by a spirit of electioneering 
 and of avarice, which reckless of all principle, invited the manufacturer to rely upon 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 251 
 
 the labor of others, instead of his ovrn labor, not only for support, but even for the 
 accumulation of weaitii; and actually furnished him with means, of taking the pro- 
 ceeds of the labor of another, which, if done without the sanction of this iniquitous 
 Act, would amount to a criminal offence. The elFect of tliis Act has been to demo- 
 ralize the whole country, and to impoverish the whole of the tributary parts of it. It 
 has taken from his own pocket every current dollar he possessed; and would go on 
 to prevent him from ever re-possessing another. Isor is there any hope for any rehef 
 against this unprincipled imposition, so long as this baneful, electioneering spirit shall 
 continue to direct our councils. It is the most unrelenting spirit, and, instead of our 
 hoping for relaxation, it is constantly in search of some little modicum of property 
 remaining untaxed for the tax of the next year. (See note at the end.) Such are the 
 effects of the unprincipled measures recommended by this fanatical Convention at 
 Harrisburg; wliich, after usurping all the powers of an authorised Convention, kept 
 a regular journal of their proceedings, and after their adjourninent, ofScially forward- 
 ed him a copy thereof. JNow, he would ask all men, above and belovr the moiintains 
 — all christians — all lovers of right and haters of evil, to determine whether such 
 proceedings can, or ought to be tolerated.^ If so, how deplorable is our condition be- 
 low the mountains ! The General Government nrst plunders us under a pretext of 
 protecting manufactures, of every dollar within their reach ; and then our trans- 
 mountain brethren gravely ask us to trust the residue, if there be any. to their morals. 
 The gentlemen then charge Virginia with impoverishment and degradation, and seem 
 to intimate that both have arisen from the imperfections of our organic laws. It is 
 true that Virginia is impoverished, but not degraded. Is that impoverishment con- 
 fined to Viro:inia, or does it not extend to South Carolina, and the v.'hole of the tribu- 
 tary scene of countr}' If so. then the extravagant impositions mider the Tariff Act, 
 must be the true cause of tliat impoverishment : 2\ot the sujiposed unperiections of 
 the organic laws of \''irginia. The}^ have moral tendencies wliich never could pro^ 
 duce impoverishment. I'he bankruptcj' of \'irginia; is in cash — not in morals, nor in 
 principles. Amidst all her misfortunes and impoverislin^ent, she stajids now as erect 
 and distinguished in morals and in principles, as she has ever done at any former 
 time. The true cause, then, of tire bankruptcy of Virginia in cashAs the Tariff Act, 
 This plunders all our cash, and that being taken away, impoverishment is the neces- 
 sary consequence. Here, then, is a direct and immediate cause for this deplorable 
 effect, without resorting to imputations against our fundamental laws as the cause of 
 it: The attributable cause havino- no aiiiiiity nor relationship to the effect suggested 
 to be produced b}- it. 
 
 We here have to encounter a.notlier pathetic appeal to our feelings. Several gen- 
 tlemen, and particularly the learned gentleman irom Loudoun, (Mr. JNIercer) whose 
 absence he regretted, had urged with great earnestness, claims for militaiy services, 
 rendered during the las. war, by our brethren of the West. The absent gentleman 
 drew in the most vivid colours these patriotic services — exhibited so much sensibility 
 and exhausted so much time on the occasion, as to satisfv every hearer, that he must 
 himself have been an honorable partaker in the scene. But Mr. G. hardlj^ expected 
 that he would have exhausted so much declamation in eulogiums upon the patriotism 
 and heroism of these defenders of tlieir C'^untry. because this tribunal was the last in 
 the world to whose /ce ings appeals of a.ny kind should be made. JXo. Sir; ours is the 
 severe duty to search for principles, and not to indulge our feelings. There was no 
 member of the Committee, more ready tlian himself, to do ample justice to the hero- 
 ism and patriotism of the soldiers of the ^^'est on that occasion. But he could see 
 no affinitj', whatever, between those feelings, and the claims so pathetically urged by 
 the gentleman, for extending to them the-right of suffrage, or an}' other civii ri^rht 
 whatever. To ascertain this point, it would be necessary to resort to first principles. 
 It would be observed, that from the origin of society to the present time, some of its 
 members possessed physical powers, and others possessed money. It is the duty of 
 those who possess the physical power, to defend the society by arms. It is the duty 
 of those who have mone}-, to pay their defenders full compensation for their services. 
 The militia laws are the arbiters between tlu-se who fight and those who pa}'. In the 
 present case, our brave and patriotic defenders v/ere fully paid, and when that was 
 done, there was an end of all obligatic n between the parties. If they have not yet 
 received compensation enough — in tlie name of God, give them more. Itiuustbe 
 presumed that they have received enough, because there is no grumbhng upon that 
 score. But the great objection to this principle is, the intermixture of cWA and mili- 
 tary rights. What would be the effect of placing mihtary claims for services at the 
 fountain of all power ? It would be to subvert the order of the civil and mihtary au- 
 thorities — making the civil subordinate to the military, instead of the military subor- 
 dinate to the civil authority ; and tlius, with a mere scrape of a pen, convert a free, 
 republican Government, into a military, despotic one. Pay, then, the military in 
 land, in money, in military honors, in gratitude, in love, if you please; but for God's 
 sake, never pay tliem in your civil nor religious rights. But keep forever mihtary 
 
252 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION 
 
 and civil rig^Iits separate and distinct from each otiier. Some gentlemen have most 
 gravely and seriously complained that we withhold their rights from them. He should! 
 be glad to know what rights tliey mean. He would be happy to hear what rights they 
 are. He knows of none — nor has he heard any described. The only right, which 
 he conceived the gentleman could allude to, is the right to do icrong. They call upon 
 us to surrender to them the power of taxing a species of our property without taxing 
 tiieir own. To do so would be a wrong, not a nght — certainly not aright included in 
 Ms system of ethics. They complain of our reusing them their natural right of suf- 
 frage. They say it is cruel to deprive the poor of their natural right of votmg. Yet, 
 in the next breath, they, themselves, exclude more than half the nation from the ex- 
 ercise of the same right. They must necessarily carry the right to its whole extent,, 
 or abandon it altogether ; otherwise they would be guilty of the most evident incon- 
 sistency in their own doctrines. Let a case be put including a youth of twenty-one 
 yeai-s- of age, according to their rule, and excluding one of twenty. Let the youth of 
 twenty take up the mt- niorial recently presented to us — written with great ability and 
 eloquence— and read it to the youth of twenty-one included within the rule, which 
 arbitrarily excludes himself; and then address him as follows: "I am a much 
 smarter fellow then you are. I can out-read you — out-write you, and out-cipher you. 
 I can out-run you — out-juinp you — throw you down, and whip you after you get up. 
 In the point of the fashional)le consummation of the qualifications for a voter, such 
 is the thickness of my pericranium, that I can drink a quart of whiskey to your pint, 
 and give a better vote than you can afterwards. Is it not cruel, then, that one so 
 highly gifted for a voter as myself, should be excluded by a rule of right, which in- 
 cludes such a booby as you are?" What reply could be made to so just and 
 pathetic complaint ? Certainly none, if the rule be right. This would prove incon- 
 testably, that all claims grounded on natural rights must be abandoned, and that we 
 must act upon expediency alone. That we must observe the injunction of the Bill of 
 Rights to extend tlie right of suifrage in such manner only, as we shall judge most 
 conducive to the public weal, and to tliose only, who shall possess sufficient evidence 
 of a common, pennaiieat attachment to the community. 
 
 Mr. G. said, he was now approaching a point in the debate, which filled him with 
 pain and regret ; because he could not avoid seeing in it some departure from that 
 spirit of decorum, as well as of confidence and affection, which had heretofore cha- 
 racteii&ed the debat-^. He alluded to certain observations made by the gentleman from 
 Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge) which he could not help construmg into polite threats, from 
 the infltienca of the physical power vVest of tlie llidge. The language used by the 
 gentleman, was not presented to us in the insulting terms of " war, pestilence and fa- 
 mine ;" but it was equally intelligible, and to him not less repulsive. He had no in- 
 tention of reciprocating either the spirit or language of these threats. God forbid 
 that he should infuse one drop of bitterness into tiiis debate ! The first object of his 
 heart was, to improve the spirit of conciliation and concession. Such language as 
 " war, pestilence and famine," had been heretofore banished from this Convention; 
 and he thanked God for it. But can any other interpretation be put upon the follow- 
 ing observations of the gentleman from Brooke, but polite tlireats of the physical 
 force of the West against the East : 
 
 '•How fatal, then, will be the effects, should you be guilty of misrule ! You say^ 
 to be sure, that we are a minority : of the freeholders, perhaps v/e may be : but look 
 at the votes given at the polls, where the true voice of the people of Virginia was 
 heard ; and it will appear, that while you represent 280,000 of that people, we repre- 
 sent 402,000 of them. I acknowledge that so Viist an odds proves one thing, at least 
 it proves that heroic, moril boldness which inspires the gentlemen v;ho are opposed 
 to a new Constitution. It proves that they are as daring and firm, as I well know 
 them to be upright and honorable." 
 
 What is the meaning of this language 1 What is the meaning of presenting the 
 odds between 402,000 whites on the Vfest side of the Pudge, and 280,000 on the East? 
 Why call upon us to exert heroic, moral boldness, in giving a vote upon the present 
 question, agreeably to the dictates of our own conscience.? He meant not to press 
 this argument upon the minds of others, similarly circumstanced with himself. But 
 he could not abandon the duty of stating its impressions upon his own mind. It 
 would not be possible for him to surrender the power demanded under the influence 
 of these threats, especially when the uses intended to be made of the physical power> 
 were openly avowed. Other gentlemen, similarly circumstanced, might do so ; but 
 in such case, their only reliance, so far as he could see, must be in the morals of our 
 Western brethren, for the protection of their own interests and the interests of their 
 constituents. If so, amiable may be the thought — philanthropic the intent — and gene- 
 rous the act, but deadly the mistake in his judgment to their own interests, and to the 
 interests of tlieir constituents — vain, indeed, he feared, Avould be this reliance. 
 
 If threats thus bold are to be presented to us, while the physical force of the West 
 is restrained by the Constitution and the laws, with how much more force will they 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 253 
 
 assail us, when we shall yield up the Constitution at their bidding, and they shall 
 have made tiie laws, under their own interpretation of it. In that case, instead of 
 being restrained by a sacred respect for the Constitution and the laws, they will have 
 both co-operating with the threatened physical force on their side. He should think, 
 that these circumstances woudd present a most awful question, for the consideration 
 of every member as well as of every mdividual inhabitant East of the Ridge. Whilst, 
 however, he left other gentlemen to their own reflections, he would state with frank- 
 ness, their efi^ect on his own mind. He could never, for a moment, think of voting 
 against his own conscientious convictions, under the influence of any threats what- 
 ever. So far from it, they would serve to fortify him in acting fully up to those con- 
 victions. He should vote, therefore, with more firmness, than if he had not been 
 told, that there were 402,000 whites on the West side of the Ridge, who could be ar- 
 rayed against 280,000 on the East side, at least as early as the year 1850 ; and even if 
 he had doubled before, these threats, Avith the avowals they contained, would serve to 
 dissipate those doubts, and fix more decidedly his impressions. The arguments of 
 the gentleman, may have their full force upon those, who expect to reap a beneficial 
 c-ffectfrom that inSuencej but they could only be repulsive to him, who was tlureat- 
 ened, as well as his own constituents, to be the victims of that influence. He could 
 not avoid also, suggesting to the gentleman, although he did so with great reluctance,, 
 but in a spirit of good feelings, that these threats may serve to teach him two most 
 important lessons. The fn-st; that the people below the Ridge, will always be found 
 to have as much of that " heroic, moral boldness," and to be as " daring and firm," as 
 any occasion shall require. Second ; that they will necessarily be driven, with how- 
 ever great reluctance, to the ascertainment^ to the full extent of all their energies and 
 capacities, fiscal and physical. 
 
 Mr. G. said, these reflections had naturally drawn his attention to some remarks 
 made by the venerable gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. IMonroe) in relation to a pro- 
 bable separation of this State. That gentleman had earnestly admonished us of the 
 danger of such separation, which was much enhanced b}^ our divisions and collisions 
 of opinion here. Surely, such danger must be visible to all, when they see tliis array of 
 force presented against force ; and surely all will admit that it is the first duty of the 
 Convention to guard against an impending evil of so much magnitude. The mere 
 comparisons of force against force, must be fraught with danger; particularly when a 
 geographical line of demarcation is drawn between tlie parties placed in opposition to 
 each other. He feared the danger was greater than was generally apprehended, and that 
 the best mode of subduing it, would be to command our own passions, and to bring 
 our own deliberations to harmonious results. The moment the suggestion of the se- 
 paration of Virginia was made by the gentleman from Loudoun, it entered deeply into 
 his own mind, and extended itself into a thousand ramifications, which he felt it im- 
 possible to trace in all tlieir various bearings. He verily believed that more extensive 
 consequences would result from that deplorable event, than could at once enter into 
 the contemplation of any gentleman. Can any gentleman believe that the separation 
 of Virginia would stop there ? If there be really any one who thought so, he could 
 not have devoted much refiection to the subject. The forcible separation of V^irginia, 
 must and Vv ill lea^d to a separation of the United States, come when it will. This 
 would be the probable efiect of the forcible separation of any State in the Union, but 
 particularly so of Virginia, in consequence of her relations — and especially her geo- 
 graphical relations to the United States. Have we not awful indications of the pro- 
 bable separation of Virginia, not only from what is passing in this Hall, but also out 
 of doors ? What is going on in the country at this monient, from excitements pro- 
 duced by our debates here ? An anxious and ardent spirit is seen to exist in the coun- 
 try generally ; and the excitement in one district has displayed itself, in actually send- 
 ing instructions to a distinguished member of this body. 
 
 Mr. G. said, that he saw from the newspapers, that tlie people of other districts 
 were actually taking the business of this Convention into their own hands. He saw 
 that a single vote given by two of the most venerable and distinguished members of 
 this body (Messrs. Madison and Monroe) was calling for instructions from their res- 
 pective districts. Could not ever}^ gentleman see in these extraordinary excitements 
 and actual movements of the people, great danger of a separation, particularly where 
 a geographical line of demarcation was already designated, for separating the comba- 
 tants. No human being can foresee the extent of these excitements, nor the excesses 
 to which they may be carried. We have a.lready seen one honorable member of this 
 body called upon under their influence to abandon his conscience or his seat, and 
 who had actually abandoned his seat rather than his conscience. Mr. G. said, he was 
 far from making these remarks, vnth a view of depriving the people of their unques- 
 tionable right of instructing their members on this floor. He thought it not'only 
 their, unquestionable right, but their indispensable duty to do so, if they thouglit the 
 magnitude of the occasion called for their interference ; and he begged leave here to 
 repeat an opinion wliich he had already expressed, that a division ofl,his State neces,- 
 
254 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 sarily involved a division of the United States. In regard to the force held up in ter- 
 rorem,h.e could only say, that whenever the awful occasion should arise for calling in 
 force to settle collisions and divisions amongst ourselves, the destinies of this countr}?- 
 will not be settled by tlie physical force on the West side of the Ridge, nor of the 
 whole United States alone. No gentleman could have thought much upon this alarm- 
 ing subject, who vi^ould not perceive, that the physical force of the commercial nations 
 of Europe, would settle the destinies of this country in that deprecated event. The 
 mind, in contemplating consequences, could not avoid discerning, in a crisis so awful, 
 that the great and splendid city of New York would have much more to dread than 
 the city of Richmond ; for the very existence of that great city depends upon con- 
 tingencies beyond her own control ; and, in the event of divisions and collisions 
 amongst ourselves, would have more to dread than any other spot in the United States. 
 Have gentlemen, employing these threats, ever contemplated the absolute certainty, 
 that, in the event of divisions amongst ourselves, the future destinies of the United 
 States must be determined by the physical force of foreign nations? And then ex- 
 tended their thoughts to tlie douceurs which tliey have to oifer, for the purpose of ob- 
 taining such physical force .'' If they have not done so heretofore, they surely have 
 omitted to perform a most essential and indispensable duty ; and he begged now to be 
 indulged in calling their best reflections to tJiat iniportant subject. It the people of 
 Virginia could be so wild and so foolish, as to rush forward to a separation of the 
 State, let the enquiry now be made, wliat douceurs have our transmontane brethren 
 to offer for the physical force of the commercial nations of Europe ? Nothing — lite- 
 rally nothing; whilst the people on the East side of the mountains, have tlie most at- 
 tractive and influential douceur that could possibly be ofiered — commerce — the most 
 valuable and seductive in the world. Commerce — -consisting of the most suitable 
 staples, which any part of the world can produce, for the commercial nations of Eu- 
 rope ; and which may be given in exchange for their productions equally suited to 
 our own wants. Hence our douceurs might consist of advantages, not sacrifices. 
 Notwithstanding these convictions, and although he never had been in the habit of 
 rnaking professions of patriotism, or of the motives which govern his conduct, he 
 would take this occasion to say, that he would deprecate a division of this State, or of 
 the United States, as much as any gentleman in them. But he felt it Jiis duty to 
 speak of things as they are — things so irresistibly fixed, in the relation of nations, 
 that neither himself, feeble as he was, however he might wish it, nor the whole power 
 of this Convention — nor of the United States, could alter or avoid. The venerable 
 gentleman from Loudoun, had expressed his doubts whether the Government of the 
 United States would permit a division of this State, even were she to require it. He 
 would respectfully^ ask, how could the Government of the United States prevent it 
 He knew that there was a clause in the Constitution which required the consent of 
 Congress to the separation of any State in the Union. But when force is once 
 brought into action, it puts at defiance all civil regulations whatever. ( Inter anva 
 silent leges.) Whenever this is the case, all our civil relations become changed, and 
 we must look to force alone to give the law. In that case, he would respectlullj'^ ask 
 gentlemen, how the General Government could prevent such a deprecated calamity, 
 if it would ? What means have they, which they could employ for such a purpose ? 
 Could it be prevented by degra.ding us still furtiier by more Tariffs, or by physical 
 force.'' These means would be feeble, aggravating and incompetent. He would 
 again recur to the remark v/hich he had before made, that the destinies of this 
 country would not be settled by the physical force of this country alone ; and whilst 
 he looked at that circumstance with as much awe and regret as any gentleman on this 
 floor, he could not shut his eyes to what was passing befoi-e them. Independently of 
 the separation of this State, the General Government has already produced excite- 
 ments enough in the country to hazard the Union, by the unprincipled and oppres- 
 sive measures, which he had already mentioned. He saw in the newspapers that en- 
 quiries had already commenced, into the probable effects of the Tariff", Internial Im- 
 provements, and other usurpations of the General Government upon the Union of 
 these States. Mr. G. said that he had seen some most able and eloquent dissertati- 
 ons, said to be written by one of the ablest statesmen and patriots in the United 
 States, (he alluded to the Rev. Mr .Channing of Boston,) containing inquiries, into the 
 probable separation of the Union, resulting from the various usurpations of the Gene- 
 ral Government, but particularly from the Tariff" and Internal Improvement Acts. " 
 These causes he seemed to think were at least sufficient to hazard the integrity of the 
 Union. 
 
 Mr. G. said, that he had gone into this course of reflection in the hope of attracting 
 the reflections of others, and bringing about conciliation and harmony amongst our- 
 selves, but he greatly feared that tliey would be utterly unavailing. He w-ould now 
 most respectfully ask gentlemen, seriously to reflect upon the best mode of avoiding 
 our own embarrassments, and of relieving the country from existing alarms and diflS- 
 culties. The best that had occurred to him, was, to banish as far as possible our own 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 255 
 
 dissentions, and to approach to unanimity in something — that we should banish our 
 own passions and prepossessions, and cahnly, coolly, and confidentially consult with 
 each other, as to what could be done with a nearer approach to unanimity. He would 
 Warn gentlemen against the effects of carrying any question — especially one of great 
 magnitude — by a lean majority. He thought nothing good could be gained by such 
 a proceeding. The country never could be tranquillized so long as the people see 
 that we have no confidence in our own measures — measures of so high a character as 
 imperiously to demand both our own confidence and theirs. This redeeming spirit of 
 harmony, of confidence, of conciliation and concession, should commence in this 
 Hall. It is our imperious duty to be the first in making manifestations of this saving 
 spirit here. Let us then, with a magnanimous disinterestedness and self-denial, set 
 a noble example to our constituents, and thus tranquillize their passions and relieve 
 their alarms. He would ask no more from other genilenien, than he was disposed to 
 yield himself. He sincerely wished to ascertain the propositions for amendment, 
 which would command the confidence of the greatest majorities. He would himself 
 agree to amendments, which he could not fully approve, provided gentlemen on the 
 other side would make similar relaxations on their part. For the purposes of union 
 and harmony, he was disposed to go to the utmost points which his conscience would 
 permit; but he should deeply deprecate the adoption of any measure whatever, which 
 would not command the confidence of a great majority. Less than that, he was per- 
 fectly convinced, Vv'ould never relieve our present deplorable embarrassments. 
 
 There was one impression upon his mind, which he wished to impress upon the 
 minds of others with peculiar emphasis. It was, that small changes could never pro- 
 duce a division of a State, whether produced by unanimity or not; whilst great 
 changes would at least hazard such a result, unless unanimously adopted ; or at least 
 by a majority approaching to unanimity. Great changes made by an almost equal 
 balance of opinion, are the best calculated to produce great hazards, and will neces- 
 sarily do so, unless checked by an interposing Providence. In this stage of our busi- 
 ness he had no specific propositions to offer. All he could do, v/as to throw out these 
 ideas, and solemnly to pledge himself to indulge to the utmost, a spirit of conciliation 
 and concession. He earnestly invited other gentlemen to turn their minds towards 
 making propositions of conciliation, and in that case, pledged himself to do so, in the 
 further progress of the business before the Convention. But, above all things, he 
 begged to guard the Convention against the adoption of great changes by lean ma- 
 jorities ; because, as he said at the beginning, it would only be a poor triumph of 
 friends over friends, and could not possibly eventuate in any good result. 
 
 Mr. G. expressed his regret at having detained the Committee so long, and pro- 
 mised to close his remarks, with only two or three further reflections. It must occur 
 to all, that the task of mere pulling down, is an easy one. Every booby, possessed of 
 sufficient physical power, with a trowel in his hand, can take down every brick of 
 the most solid, useful and magnificent building, erected upon the true principles of ar- 
 chitectural science. But it requires thought, care, study and science, to build up one, 
 which shall be durable, useful and ornamental, upon the same principles. Such a 
 structure is now before us, wisely and fearlessly reared up for us, by our God-like 
 forefathers, in the midst of imminent peril; and lie feared, greatly feared, that every 
 member of this Convention, with the best intentions, had brought here a trowel in 
 his hand to take down his brick. He sincerely hoped better things ; and should con- 
 tinue to do so, although hope, he feared, would be unavailing. He said, Mr. Chair- 
 man, is it possible that we can be content to become mere dilapidators, to tear down 
 the most stupendous flibrick, which has proved the greatest blessing which God, in 
 his infinite mercy, has bestowed upon us; and setup nothing better in its stead 
 And, Sir, ought we not to be scrupulously careful how we set up any thing, which 
 would bear but a poor comparison with that which v/e have torn down ? On the other 
 hand, how honorable would it be to contribute our mite to sustain the noble institu- 
 tions we have received from our forefathers : — to give them support, instead of doom- 
 ing them to destruction. Suppose we do but little. We shall have done all that 
 could be required of us — all that we conscientiously could do. We may, then, hono- 
 rably return home with satisfaction to ourselves and to our constituents. Gentlemen 
 have asked, and particularly the venerable geiatlemaii from Loudoun. (Mr. Monroe) 
 emphatically asked — what is to be the effect of doing nothing ? Wliat is to be the 
 effect of going home, without doing something Aye, Sir, permit me to reiterate the 
 question, what would be the effect of doing nothing.? It surely would be a great 
 deal better than doing mischief. But no one calculates on doing nothing. All are 
 disposed to do something — to do a great deal. Let us then unite. Sir, and do all we 
 can do with unanimity or some near approach to it. if we find nothing to do, we 
 shall do a great deal by refusing to tear dowm this noble edifice. We can then go 
 home with approving consciences, and tell our constituents, that after its having pas- 
 sed through the severest ordeal, we found our present Constitution better than we ex- 
 pected : that v/e had discovered some unthrifty scions : that we had applied the 
 
256 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTiOM. 
 
 pruning knife — cut them off — and put into their places grafts which would product 
 good fruits. He was satisfied that we could not discharge the great duties entrusted 
 to us — nor satisfy our own consciences so well in any other way . 
 
 He hoped to be indulged in making another remark. Our wise, heroic, patriotic 
 forefathers gave us this blessed Constitution. They framed it under the same feel- 
 ings of zeal, and amidst the same honest differences of opinion which now exist 
 amongst us. But tliey succeeded by compromising, and by sacrificing all their varie- 
 gated opinions and feelings upon the altar of patriotism and virtue. We are now 
 called upon to examine and improve their great work. In performing this high and 
 honourable task, let us recollect and imitate their exalted example. 
 
 Mr. G. said— Mr. Chairman, with pain and sorrow of heart, I speak it — these our 
 Goil-like forefathers are now mouldering in a state of oblivion and forgetfulness. 
 Their names are blotted out from our remembrance. Ought this, Sir, to be longer 
 pftx'initted If so, would it not be to our shame, and ingratitude But, Sir, it is 
 neither. It is merely the effect of thoughtless inattention. Virginia was never un- 
 grateful. Virginia never can be ungrateful so long as she is composed of Virginians. 
 A stain may be cast upon her for forgetfulness — for inattention — but she is incapable 
 of ingratitude. VVhy, then, should we suffer our venerated ancestors to sleep longer 
 in oblivion We have even permitted the greatest day in the political calendar, when 
 under their influence, the great light of liberty first burst forth upon a benighted 
 world, to be also lost in oblivion. Yes, Sir, that day, the 20th of June, has become 
 merged in the 4th of July, which has been permitted to usurp all its own appropriate 
 honours. Let it not, then, be longer said, that our noble forefathers rest in oblivion. 
 Instead of tearing down the splendid structure they have raised, instead of letting 
 them longer sleep in silence, let us call them from their tombs, and award them the 
 hio-hest posthumous honours. And here he begged to be permitted to renew a pro- 
 position he had once before made, to testify our sacred veneration for their memories ; 
 let us fill with their busts the vacant niches in this Hall. Let us fill with them all 
 the niches in the whole Capitol ; for there are worthies amongst them sufhciently 
 numerous to fdl the whole. Let us relieve ourselves from the sin of ingratitude, by 
 taking them from their silent incarceration, and placing them where they will be seen 
 and venerated by every true-hearted Virginian — by our posterity and by the whola 
 world, to the end of time. 
 
 Note. — (Accompanying Mr. Giles'' s Speech.) 
 
 Extract fi'om page 247, vol. 2, Raymond's Elements of Political Economy — " There 
 as no part of the Statute Book, that requires such frequent revision as the Tariff Act, 
 xilthougli we sometimes hear it said, that a tariff, should be permanent, and seldom if 
 ever changed, but this is a great error. A year does not pass, in which the tariff 
 upon some particular articles may not be raised with advantage. The most general 
 lule on this subject is, that a tariff ought not to be reduced, although it may frequently 
 require to be raised." 
 
 Again, page 248 — The reduction of a tariff is one of the harshest and most vio- 
 lent measures that a Government can possibly adopt." 
 
 Comment. 
 
 What an unblushing spirit of avarice is here displayed.? The manufacturers, 
 ■whose insatiable cupidity seems not satisfied with the extreme injustice of the present 
 tariff, are still to be upon the watch, and every year some new addition is to be made 
 to it. Every imported article is to be strictly watched, and if not already burdened 
 to its highest pitch, is to be strained up annually a little higher, whilst " the reduction 
 of a tariff is one of the harshest and most violent measures that a Government can 
 possibly adopt." What elementary logic ! What political morals ! Every occasion is 
 to be greedily seized upon, to add to the plunder of the proceeds of the labour of one 
 man, and give them to another, who did not labour for them — h\xi to cease from fur- 
 ther plundering, is " one of the harshest and most violent measures that a Govern- 
 ment can possibly adopt." Is this also the doctrine of the new political school .? Is 
 this doctrine to be honoured by the sanction of its future enactments ? On the other 
 hand, the writer contends— that the practical Government is now called upon by eve- 
 ry motive that moral honesty, and by every principle, that the general welfare " can 
 suggest to suspend this plunder, and to leave to every individual labourer, the proceeds 
 of his own honest labours." 
 
 The rule laid down in the foregoing extracts of Raymond's Political Economy, 
 has been scrupulously obseiwed since the year 1824. New subjects for liigher du- 
 ties — or new duties have been hunted up and brought forth from that time to tlie pre- 
 sent. What an encouragement of furtive propensities is this encouragement of manu- 
 factures What a general corruption of morals 1 The manufacturer is authorized and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 257 
 
 empowered by law to pick the pockets of his neighbour, and encouraged to sharpen, 
 his %vits to increase his plunder, and to stop his plunder would be the essence of cru- 
 elty.* 
 
 2ylr. Giles Iiavina- resumed liis seat, the Comiriittee rose. 
 
 3Ir. Venabie observed, that it must be eA-ident from the progress which had as yet 
 been made in the business of tlie Convention, that there was no probability that it 
 would get throuo-h its labors before the meeting of the Legislature. The present Hall 
 did not present very convenient accommodation to those who were desirous of 
 listening to the debates. They attended in numbers, not as he believed, irom a vain 
 curiosit}-, but from the deep interest very naturally felt in what was doing iiere ; he, 
 therefore, thought it was time that measures s}K>uld be taken to jjrovlde some 
 other place of meeting — with which view he offered the foUowing resolution : 
 
 llesoived, That a Committee be appointed to enquire whether a convenient room 
 can be obtained for the sitting of the Convention, should they judge it expedient to 
 retire from the Legislative Hall, and report. 
 
 The question being taken, the resolution was rejected without a coimt; and there- 
 upon, the House adjourned. 
 
 ^VEDXESDAY, Xovxmeer 11, 1529. • 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and its sitting was opened with prayer by 
 the Rev. Mr. Horner of the Cathohc Chm'ch. 
 
 On motion of INIr. P. P. Barbour, the House again went into Committee of the 
 whole, ^Ir. Powell in the Chair, when, 
 
 Mr. JoHXso-v rose and addressed the Committee as follows^ 
 
 2vlr. Chairman — Ti>e question under consideration, has occupied much time, in the 
 discussion, and no doubt much more, in the deep deliberations of the Comm-ttee. Its 
 great importance and exceeding delicac}-, entitle it surely, to all the aid, Avhich tem- 
 per, forbearance, conciliation, free, frank and full interchange of opinion, laborious 
 investigation and candid ararument, can affijrd. It has on the one hand encouraged 
 the most animated hopes, and, on the other, alarmed the most anxious fears. The 
 whole country looks to it with intense interest — convinced that on its issue depends 
 much of vreal or woe. 
 
 We are engaged. Mr. Chairman, in a contest for power — disguise it as you will — 
 call it a discussion of the rights of man, natural or social — call it an enquiry into po- 
 litical, expediency — imagine yourself, if you please, presiding over a school of philo- 
 sophers, discoursing on the doctrines of political law, for the instruction of mankind, 
 and the improvement of all human institutions — bring the quesdon to the test oi prin- 
 ciple, or of practical utility — still, Sir. ail our metaphysical reasrning and cur practi- 
 cal rules, all our scholastic learning and political wisdorii. are but the arms employed 
 in a contest, which involves the great and agitating question, whether the sceptre 
 shall pass away from Judah, or a lawgiver from between her feet. 
 
 In this contest, I feel a peculiar interest — ^because I stand towards the parties in a 
 relation of some delicacy. With the one. are mv present residence, the land of my 
 nativity, almost all the friends of my 3-outh, and most of those to whom my atfections 
 are bound, by tlie ties of aiiinity and blood — With the other, are my pro])erty and my 
 constituents — those who are endeared to me, by a residence among them of more 
 than twenty years, by many a proof of recollected kindness and fiiendsliip, by grati- 
 tude for early patronage, and for political confidence, bestowed before it had been 
 earned, and continued after every claim, T could have pretended to it, had been lest 
 by my removal from them. In this state of divided uil«_iimce I ouo-ht perhaps to 
 have taken counsel from prudence, and have chosen the part of neutrality. But I 
 had been long in the habit of considering both parties to this controversy as children 
 of the same family, constituent and inseparable parts of the same community — scme- 
 what diversified, it is true, in their possessions, their pursuits, their manners and their 
 character, having some interests, perhaps not altogether in accordance — nevertheless 
 identified in the leading characteristics of a plain agriculti:ral, republican people, 
 having the same great interests, and one common object, the integrity, freedom, hap- 
 piness, and glory of a common country. I had long, too, cherished the fond, perhaps 
 the delusive hope, that it was possible to reconcile all differences, to appease all an- 
 gry feelinofs, to remove all causes of jealousy, and to unite all parts of the communi- 
 ty in harmonious action, in common labor for the common weal ; and to realize this 
 hope. I had often exerted to the uttermost my humble power. 1 could not, tb.erefore, 
 at this most interesting crisis in public affairs, when heated, if not angry controversy 
 
 *See Appendix, for Mr, Giles^ address to the Executive Cornmittee, as prefatory to the foregoiug 
 speech. 
 
 33 
 
258 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 was expected by all ; when serious, if not fatal dissension was feared by many ; when 
 all might be lost by inattention or imprudence, or all might be saved by care and 
 pains — I could not decline the honorable call to duty, troai my old constituents. 
 I could not refuse the trust, when, well knowing my opinion, they confided their 
 great interests here in part to me, and left me at full liberty, without pledge and with- 
 out instruction, to profit by the experience and wisdom of those around me, and fol- 
 lowing the dictates of my own judgment, to shape my course, with a single view 
 to the public good. 
 
 After listenmg attentively to every thing that has been said — and much has 
 been ably and eloquently said — I aui satisfied, that by advocating the resolution 
 of the Select Committee, and resisting the proposed amendment, I shall best discharge 
 my duty to my constituents and my country. 
 
 Mr. Chairman : I am no friend to change — I have been no advocate for the call of 
 this Convention. True, I have thought the old Constitution, in some respects, im- 
 perfect in theory, and defective in practice. I have thought its principal defect that 
 very inequality in representation, which the resolution of the Select Committee pro- 
 poses in part to remedy. 
 
 I thought it also a defect in the Constitution, that it contained no provision for a 
 just apportionment of taxes, or just distribution of the burthens of the Government, 
 among the people of the Commonwealth. I had been, for some years, a member of 
 that branch of the Legislature, in which the inequality of representation was most 
 glaring. I represented in the Senate, a district composed of six counties, in the Val- 
 ley, containing then, perhaps, about one-eighth of the white population of the State, 
 and 1 with only three others, represented tlie whole country West of the Blue Ridge, 
 containing about one-third of the white population. I thought I perceived the inju- 
 rious operation of this inequality. On questions of local concern, I had often seen 
 the interests of the East arrayed against those of the West, and controversies thence 
 arising, attended with much excitement, and sometimes with great asperity, and 
 angry feeling. It had occasionally been my good fortune to interpose between the 
 contending parties, and reconcile their differences. But I was satisfied that a settled 
 discontent was arising, that jealousies were daily increasing, which threatened to fo- 
 ment discord, to alienate brother from brother, and to countenance the opinion, that 
 there were important differences of interest in the different parts of the State, which 
 the same Government would not equally protect. When the Western people com- 
 plained, that til ey had not a just participation in the power of the Government, they 
 were often reproached with their poverty, and almost always reminded, that they did 
 not contribute their just proportion of its revenue. The Act of 1782, made for equa- 
 lizing the land tax, had thrown the State into four great districts, the counties 
 into four classes, and had fixed a standard, in each class, of the average value of the 
 land per acre. The first class comprised all the tida-water counties, with several of 
 the large midland counties, and the standard value of its lands per acre, was ten 
 shillings ; — the second class comprised the other midland counties, except Pittsyl- 
 vania and Henry, and embraced the two Valley counties of Frederick and Berkeley, 
 and its standard per acre was 76-. 6d. — the third contained Pittsylvania and Henry, 
 with the Valley counties, not included in the second, and the standard value of its 
 lands was 5^. 6d. — to the fourth belonged the trans-Alleghany counties, rated at the 
 standard value of 3^. per acre. This standard, probably just and fair at the time 
 when it was adopted, had in process of time become unjust, and operated injuriously. 
 The relative value of land in the several districts had essentially changed ; those 
 of the Western districts having risen, and approached much more nearly to equality 
 with those of the Eastern. But the taxes continued to be imposed according to the 
 same standard ; in consequence whereof, the tide-water district was unduly bur- 
 thened, and the other districts, especially the third and fourth, paid less than they 
 ought. These inequalities, in the imposition of taxes, and in the representation 
 in the Senate, had been the subject of frequent discussion, and I was informed 
 that several ineffectual attempts had been made to correct them, by an ordinary act 
 of Legislation. These fruitless efforts served only to increase the general discon- 
 tent, to inflame animosities, and by giving to the discontented a solid reason for 
 objecting to the organization of the Government, enabled them with more success to 
 seize on all occasions of public distress or popular excitement, and turn them to the 
 purpose of rousing a spirit of heedless reform. Thus it happened, that in 1816, the 
 people of the large districts being disappointed in some favorite measure, and much 
 dissatisfied with the proceedings of the Legislature, were persuaded that they had 
 been grossly injured; that the cause of their wrongs was to be found in the unequal 
 distribution of the power of the Government ; and that their remedy was to be sought 
 in a general Convention to reform this, and many other fancied or real defects of the 
 Constitution, Under the excitement of this occasion, that meeting in Staunton was 
 held, which has been denominated the Staunton Convention. The county of Au- 
 gusta did not participate in the feverish excitement which then prevailed, and while 
 it was willing to seek by temperate and prudent measures, substantial rehef from ac- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 259 
 
 knowledged evils, it was unAvilling to encounter the hazard of general reform. It 
 therefore deputed to the meetincr two members, of whom I was one, and charged 
 them with the duty of endeavouring to infuse into the proceedings as much of temper 
 and prudence as possible, and to restrain them to a respectful memorial, asking of the 
 Legislature that proper measures might be adopted for organizing a Convention to 
 amend the Constitution of the State, but with powets limited to the objects of equa 
 lizing the representation and taxes, and of providing under proper cautions, for future 
 amendments. The deliberations of this meeting resulted in a memorial to the Legis- 
 lature, asking a general Convention; and in a protest by a small minority, to which 
 the Augusta deputies belonged, the object whereof was to limit the powers of the 
 Convention to the three subjects Vv^hich ] have mentioned. The memorial and pro- 
 test were laid before the Legislature at their session of 1815, and a bill passed the 
 House of Delegates, providing that the sense of the people should be taken on the 
 question, wiiether a Convention should be called, with powers iimzited to these three 
 objects and one other only, the extension of the Right of Sutlrage. This bill was 
 amended in the Senate, so as to limit the powers of the Convention to taxes and 
 representation only, and was laid on the table to await ihe coming of a bill then in 
 progress, for reforming the Senatorial Districts, and for a re-assessment of the lands. 
 This bill came to the Senate, and passed by a majority, I think, of one : the bill for 
 the Convention having been rejected by a majority of two. Both were very obnox- 
 ious to the Eastern members, and were opposed by them : both were acceptable to 
 me, and_ advocated by me. I preferred the Convention bill, because I thought it 
 would give more adequate and more permanent relief ; but when it was lost,'^I es- 
 poused the other, though its operation was inconvenient and harsh, and its relief tem- 
 porary. The Convention bill was in truth, preferred to its rival, by a large majority 
 of the Senate, and would have passed, but for one of those amusing incidents in lea-is- 
 lation, by which false calculations of majorities sometimes cheat us of our votes. 
 [Here Mr. J. related an anecdote, shewing that one of the Senators, beino- deceived 
 in his calculations, had been induced to give a vote, which secured the passage of the 
 bill, whicii he most desired to deteat.J 
 
 This bill reforming the districts upon the basis of white population as ascertained 
 by the Census of IclO, gave to the country beyond the Blue Ridge, nine Senators. 
 That country' had then aljout its due share in the representation of the House of Dele- 
 gates, upon the same basis ; and an adequate provision was made, for a just appor- 
 tionment of the taxes. 
 
 Believing that the Legislature would follow this precedent — would preserve some- 
 thing like a practical equality of representation, in both Houses, by occasional reforms 
 of the Districts, and by the division of counties, I was content to submit to the re- 
 maining imperfections in the Constitution, rather than to put to hazard every thing 
 valuable that it contained. I did think there was much in it. worth preserving. I 
 thought it suited to our genius and character, calculated to protect our rights and pro- 
 mote our interests — taking it " all in all," comparing it with every Constitution of 
 which 1 had any knowledge, and especiall}^ with those which our extensive confede- 
 racy affords, I preferred it to any of them; — and I venerated it, because it was the 
 work of our wise and virtuous ancestors ; a child of the Revolution, born with the 
 State, and consecrated by all the associations, which make us proud of our country. 
 I have, therefore, ever since the session of 1816, opposed the call of a Convention, 
 whether limited or general, and have laboured much to prevent it. Step by step have 
 I followed the march of my noble friend from Chesterfield, in the campaigns he has 
 made in defence of the Constitution, and though I have not emulated the gallantry or 
 prowess of my leader, he will bear me witness that 1 have been a faithful soldier, and 
 that I never laid down my arms, till the victory was fairly won from us. It was not 
 till a majority of the freeholders had desired the call of a Convention, that my oppo- 
 sition to it ceased. From that time, my friend from Chesterfield, and all our other 
 wise men, I believe, united in opinion, that the will of the people should be obeyed, 
 that the Convention should be organized without delay, and that all the subjects of 
 complaint should be considered, and as far as possible adjusted. 
 
 1 have detained you, Mr. Chairman, with these explanations, because I thought them 
 due to myself, if they were not strictly due to the Committee. I neither expect nor 
 desire, that the}^ should recommend to jonv favourable attention, the poor remarks I 
 have to offer, on the great question in debate. These remarks I shall submit, with a 
 consciousness, that they are but little worth; though with an humble trust, that if 
 they have any value, it wiil not be lost on the candour and intelligence of the Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 The first duty, perhaps, which I owe to the Committee, is to acknow^ledge an error, 
 into which it seems I had fallen, at an early stage of your proceedings, in not appro- 
 ving the order of debate, which was proposed by the gentleman firom Norfolk. (Mr. 
 Taylor,) who no longer holds a seat among us. 1 had been weak enough to suppose, 
 that we had already learned the rudiments of poktical science — that we had not 
 
260 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION* 
 
 come here to be taught the horn-book of politic^ — to be schooled and lectured on the 
 elements of Goveniinent; that a great ])r;>portion of this Convention, at least, had 
 been selected for their presumed knowledge of its doctrines, and their long experi- 
 ence in public aifairs. Bat, my friends tell me I was wrong, and I am compelled to 
 acknowledge it, by the course of argument, v/hich some of our adversaries have pur- 
 sued. It was the misfortune of my friend from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke.) of falling- 
 into a similar error, — to suppose that there were settled principles in gvt Govern- 
 ment; at least, that they were clearly and fully enunciated, in our Declaration of 
 Riorhts, and that he had' succeeded in proving all that was necessary, when he had 
 shewn, that the proposition which he advocated, was sustained by these principles, 
 and that they condemned that which he opposed. This opinion, and the argument 
 founded upon it, have furnished the apology for a discursive enquiry into the natural 
 rights of man. The A-ery eloquent gentleman from Northanjpton, (Mr. Upshur.) 
 condemning abstract doctrines and metaphysical reasoning, as misapplied here, has 
 indulged himself, in a very elaborate course of metaphysical reasoning, and refined 
 abs-tiraction : lias cast his eye through all time ;. appealed to all history > vainly endea- 
 vored to imagine uni;/iaginable things; conjectured a state of nature, which he sup- 
 poses never to have existed ; endeavored to ascertain its laws, and finding not evert 
 light enough res])ecting them, to guide him in a simple enumeration of whole num- 
 bers, or in counting a majority, has at last arrived at the bold conclusion — bold, he 
 himself seemed to consider it — tJiat there were no principles in Government. We 
 cannot, Mr. Chairman, understand the gentleman from Northampton, according to 
 the literal import of his phrase. His own principles are too well settled — his charac- 
 ter and talents are too well known, and too highly esteemed, to allow us for a mo- 
 ment to believe, that he would deny to the science of Government, those elemen- 
 tary truths, which constitute its principles — without which, all reasoning concerning 
 it, is destitute of foundation, and incapable of conducting us to any conclusions* 
 He was betrayed into the 1 mgunge he has used, by an over-anxiety to withdraw from 
 hi& adversaries, the aid of those settled doctrines, on which they have rested their ar- 
 gument, to persuade us, that these doctrines are mere abstractions; and to bring the 
 question in discussion, to the test of expediency. Indeed, he has told us, that every 
 question of Givernment, is a question of expediency ; tmd that every Governmjent 
 should be constructed, not with reference to original principles, but v/ith a sole view to 
 the chai'acter and circumstances of the people, for whom it is ordained. Admit this 
 doctrine of expediency — admit the propriety of conforming the Government to the 
 character and circumstances of the people — and no one admits it more readily than 
 I do — yet it does not follow, that there are no principles, by which to decide the 
 question - f expediency, none to aid in constructing the Government, so as to make 
 it suitable to the people. The plan of every building, for the use of man, presents a 
 question of expediency, on which the purposes for which it is destined, and the cir- 
 cumstances of the tenant, are to be duly considered ; but no wise man would disre- 
 gard, in its structure, those principles of architecture, Vv'hich belong to the humblest 
 cottage, as well as to the loftiest temple. Is it more v/ise, by representing the prin- 
 ciples of our Government, as metaphysical abstractions, furnishing no aid to the de- 
 liberations of the Statesman, no safe guide to his conduct, to disparage those prin- 
 ciples in our estimation, endanger disloyalty to the Government which rests upon 
 them, and confound all our political reasoning ? This has not been the wisdom of 
 ancient or of modern times. From the days of Plato, down to the period of the last 
 Southern Review, wise men have labored to establisl) the principles of Government, 
 to inculcate political truths, to recommend them to the respect of mankind, and to 
 place them in the hands of Statesmen, as guides to direct their measures, and as 
 weapons to defend tliera. The author of Publms, who hcd profoundly studied these 
 principles, and understood these truths, commences his thirty-first number with the 
 postulate, that " In disquisitions of every kind, there are certnin primary truths, or 
 first principles, on which all subsequent reasonings mmst depend." 
 
 For the primary truths, which belong to this discussion, we can look no where, 
 with so much propriety, as to that solemn act, which announces the doctrines of 
 our revolution — thnt ''Declaration of Riglits," which proclaims the principles per- 
 taining to the Government of a free people, and is made the basis and foundation" 
 of our own. This Declnration, Mr. Chairman, faithfully embodies the doctrines, 
 which gave to Algernon Sydney his crown of martyrdom, and to John Locke inipei- 
 ishable fame. TJiese distinguished men, inspired by the spirit of freedom, which the 
 history of the English Government had infused into the people, and emboldened by 
 the accessions which the rights of the people ha.d gradually gained from the power of 
 the Crown, openly assailed the slavish doctrines by which the parasites of power had 
 erideavored to defend the tyranny of the Stuarts, denounced and confuted the dogmas 
 of Sir Robert Fihner, which asserted the divine right of Kings, and trticed the origin 
 of Government to its legitimate foundation, the w^ili of the people. Guided by the 
 experience of their own Government, enlightened by the history of all otlierSj and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 261 
 
 above all, examining;, with the sagacity of wise men, the natural and unvarying re- 
 lations, between the governors and the governed, they _ maintained those doctrines, 
 which the vVhiu-s ift- England partially recognized in their Constitution at the revolu- 
 tion of 168S, and which°the American Statesmen made the basis of their Govern- 
 ments at the revolution of 1776. Ought these doctrines to be treated as vain ab- 
 stractions, metaphysical subtleties, visionary theories? Ought they not to be ac- 
 knowledged as s )lemn truths, confessed as the articles of our political faith, made 
 the standard of our political conduct ? Ought we not, as we regard the permanency 
 of our institutions, to recommend them to tlie respect and deference of the present 
 generation, to the lo^^e and veneration of posterity ? " To recall men to original max- 
 ims is generally rec dling them to virtue — this is the language of a distinguished 
 political v/riter ; and is the language of truth, which does not require the support of 
 authority. The advocates for'^liberty, the friends of good government in all time, 
 have endeavored to inculcate respect and reverence for principles, and have thought 
 it wise to ho]d up high standards of excellence for the emulation of the people. 
 Plato's Republic was not written with the vain hope that its perfection v/ould be re- 
 alized ; but with a viev/ to inspire a love of excellence, and create emulation. Cice- 
 ro's work De Republica Was written for the purpose of recalling the Roman peeple 
 to the fundamental principles of their Government, and of recommending them to 
 their affections and their reverence. But it came too late to reform the degeneracy 
 of the age, or to preserve the freedom or the glory of Rome. The celebrated Ed- 
 mund Burke, who dreaded the contagion of French principles, and the levelling hand 
 of French equality quite as much as any good republican liere can do, when with so 
 much eloquence and ability and prophetic talent, he traced the causes of the French 
 revolution, deplored its sanguinary excesses, pointed out its errors, and indicated its 
 dangerous tendencies, when he endeavored to allay the evil spirit of reform which was 
 rising in England, and to warn his country ni€n against the ruinous exam.ple which 
 they seemed disposed to imitate. What did he appeal to, as most" dear to Enirlish- 
 men.' He appealed "to the word and spirit of that immortal law," the English De- 
 claration of R-ight. It is to tlie word and spirit of our Declaration of Rights, to that 
 law, which we should desire to make immortal, tlsat in my humble judgment we 
 should at all times appeal, not only to guard us against the danger of heedless reform, 
 but to guide us in making v^^hclesome amendments. 
 
 We have been taught, Mr. Chairman, that the education of a people should always 
 be conducted with reference to the principles of then- Government, in order that sen- 
 timents of loyalty may be sown in their early affections. The same wisdom in- 
 structs us to mould the subordinate laws, in conformity to the fundamental lav/ of • 
 the country. It is in the spirit of these lessons, tliat, having adopted the Republican 
 form of Government, we have constantly inculcated the love of liberty, of virtue, 
 of simple, unostentatious manners, and tiiat, to prevent an iiijurious inequality in the 
 fortunes and conditions of men, the laws have been passed which abolish entails, and 
 the rights of primogeniture. The act abolishing entails, which is coeA-al with our 
 Government, and that prescribing the law of descents, which very quickly succeeded 
 the war of the revolution, were not founded on any supposed injustice or intrinsic - 
 impropriety, in limiting the estate of the parent to his remotest descendants, or ma- 
 king the first-born son, the exclusive heir, but were founded on reasons ])urelv politi- 
 cal ; reasons, which induced our ancestors to believe, that however v/ise, however 
 necessary in England, for the preservation of their Governm.ent it might be, to pre- 
 serve family distinctions and perpetuate family Vv^ealtli, such distinctions and such 
 wealth were unsuited to a Republican Government, and that the laws for promotino- 
 them, would be, here, not less impracticable than unwise. 
 
 It is submitted to this Committee, whether all these considerations do not recom- 
 mend to their most resi)ectful attention, tlie principles which lie at the foundation of - 
 our Government. If they think so, it is hoped they will not deem the time misspent, 
 which shall be employed in further consideration of the Bill of Rights, where these 
 principles are declared. In performing this duty, I shall not follow the example of 
 the judge who condemned Zadig to death, upon the evidence of the torn fragments 
 of his manuscript : — I shall not sunder the different parts of the same instrument, the 
 text from the contemporaneous commentary, tlie Declaration of Rights, from the 
 Constitution, based upon it at the same time, and by the same hands. 
 
 The first article declares, "that all men are by nature free and independent; and 
 have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they 
 cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity : namely, the enioyment of 
 hfe and hberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuino- 
 and obtaining happiness and safety." The first line of this article, is taken almost 
 literally from Locke, who declares, that " all men are by nature free, equal and inde- 
 pendent" — and it has given rise to the discussion here, concernino- the natural rights of 
 man. Gentlemen have endeavored to investigate those rights, in a condition of man 
 v/hich is supposed to have preceded society ; a condition, which they have termed the 
 
262 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 state of nature. Not being- able to satisfy themselves, that such a condition of man 
 ever existed, they reasonably conclude, that the rights pertaining to it, cannot be as- 
 certained, and that wliatever they may be, they cannot nitluence his rights, in a state 
 of civil society. 1 readily concur in the opinion, Mr. Chairman, that such unsocial 
 condition of man has never existed, unless under such accidental circumstances as at- 
 tended the fabled case of Robinson Crusoe, quoted by the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 except the single instance with which the Bible history counnences. That we know 
 was of short duration, conthiuing only, while " man the hermit sighed"— and termi- 
 nating, when " woman smiled" and dispelled forever the gloom of his solitude. 
 Man was created for society ; and social intercourse is as much a law of his nature, 
 as that he should support his existence by food, promote his comfort by raiment, pro- 
 cure supplies by labor, protect himself from aggression by force. In every state of 
 society — whether savage or civilized — whether patriarchal or political— laws arising 
 from the nature of man, from his weakness, his dependance, his wants, his desires, 
 his appetites, his passions, and his inlelUgence, nuist necessarily govern his social re- 
 lations — regulate his riglits and duties. These are deduced by reason, from the known 
 character and condition of man, and these are the laws of his nature. They accompa- 
 ny hhn in all conditions of life, and it is to them, that the Bill of Rights, m this first 
 article refers. This article means not to declare those political rights, which may be 
 varied by compact, but those natural rights only, which spring from the invariable re- 
 lations of man to society. It affirms to all equal freedom and equal independence, as 
 the gift of nature — not equal political power — because that arises from compact be- 
 tween those, who, having equal freedom and independence, have associated together, 
 and regulated by agreement, the political power of the society. It is reserved tor the 
 fifth article to declare the political power of the respective members of society, by in- 
 dicating the basis of the Right of Suffrage — and by referring us for guidance in this 
 behalf — not to natural,- but to conventional law. 
 
 The first article of the Bill of Rights has another function, not less important than 
 the declaration of equal freedom and independence, and certainly more practical in 
 its character — the declaration of those inherent rights, of which men do not and can- 
 not divest their posterity by any compact of society. As Government is instituted 
 for the protection of life, liberty, property, to secure happiness and safety, so no Go- 
 vernment can be legitimate to which these are sacrificed. It is happy tor us that this 
 part of the Bill of Rights has been solemnly adjudged to be constitutional law ; for, to 
 it the citizen owes the protection of his property from the power of the Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 The second article of the Bill of Rights is a further affirmance of the doctrines of 
 Locke and Sydney, in opposition to Sir Robert Filmer; recognizes the people, not the 
 Prince, as the fountain of political power, and declares magistrates to be their trustees, 
 answerable to them, not their irresponsible masters. No one here has denied these 
 to be the genuine doctrines of our Government. 
 
 The third article affirms, that Government is instituted for the common benefit — 
 that " that is the best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness 
 and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal-administration ; 
 and that when any Government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these pur- 
 poses, a majority of the people hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right 
 to reform, alter or abolish it, in such manner as shall be adjudged most conducive to 
 the public weal." Here we have plainly declared the object of Government, the 
 standard of its excellence, and the rule for its reform — its object, the common bene- 
 fit ; the test of its excellence, its capacity to attain that object, by producing the great- 
 est degree of happiness and safety, and being secured against mal-adnnnistration ; 
 and the rule for its reform, the judgment of the majority pronouncing it inadequate 
 to its purposes, and altering it, with a sole view to tiie public weal. We are saved 
 then the necessity of looking to natural law for the right of the majority to reform; 
 we have positive conventional law ; the most solemn declaration on the face of our 
 social compact, that the majority have a right, an indubitable, unalienable and inde- 
 feasible right, to reform, alter or "abolish. It"is true, that this power is to be employed 
 when the Government is found inadequate to its object, the common benefit, and must 
 be employed with a single view to the public good. 
 
 But, who is to judge whether the Government has been adequate to the object of its 
 institution ; who to judge of the manner of its reform ? Surely the people, who or^ 
 dained it, the people for'^whose happiness and safety it was instituted ; the people, to 
 a majority of whom the right of reform is declared unquestionably to belong— the peo- 
 ple are the sole, the exclusive judges. It is their duty, I admit, to hsten with all de- 
 ference and respect to the counsels of their wise men, who may tell them — " We 
 have been long and attentive observers of the operations of your Government ; we 
 have compared it with all the Governments of the world, ancient and modern ; we 
 are satisfied it is the best that ever existed ; we can demonstrate that it has fulfilled 
 all the great ends of its institution; that it has secured you all the happiness and safe- 
 
DEBATES OF TPIE CONTENTION. 
 
 263 
 
 ty, which it is the province of Government to secure, and that an attempt to 
 change it essentiallv, is a wanton experiment to make that better which is already 
 good^'bevond the coinmon lot of human institutions ; it is to sport with the blessmgs 
 of Providence, and encounter the imminent hazard of losing all tliat is valuable in 
 practice, in the vain pursuit of ail that is perfect in theory."^ After attentively and 
 impartially considering all the arguments adduced to sustain these counsels, and care- 
 fully weicrhing every'' fact on which they rest, if convinced by them, it is a solemn 
 duty to themselves, to posterity, and to all mankind, to reject aU propositions to re- 
 form, to preserve a model of so much excellence as an example to the world, and as 
 a rich inheritance to the generations that are to come. But, if they are not convinc- 
 ed ; if, on the contrary, their judgments are satisfied, tliat they have not enjoyed the 
 decree of happiness and safety, which good Government ought to assure ; that their 
 Government is not only imperfect in theory, but defective in practice : that its defects 
 may be safely remedied, and its practical g-ood much enhanced — then there is but one 
 answer which they can give to these counsels :— We acknowledge your experience, 
 joni wisdom, your virtue — the great superiority of your attainments, and tiie entire 
 sincerity of yoiar opinions — we admire the plain, candid and manly language, in 
 which you have spoken disagreeable truths — we thank you, sincerely thank you, for 
 the parental solicitude with which you have raised your warning voice ; but you must 
 allow, that we too have some experience in the operations of our own Government — 
 that we have enjoyed its blessings, suffered its evils, and have seme opportunity of 
 judCTincr, vrhether the one may be^abated, or the other increased — You must remem- 
 ber"thdt you are endeavoring to prove to us, by rhetoric and logic, that we are pros- 
 perous and happy, when our own senses, and the reflections of our own minds, have 
 conducted us to a different conclusion — ours is the stake ir. this Government — ours the 
 loss, if ill should result — ours the gain, if happiness should attend our reform — ours, 
 therefore, is the province to judge, and you must excuse us. if dissenting from your 
 opinions, we feel bound to follow the dictates of our ov.m judgments." 
 
 The people, then, 2^Ir. Chairm.an, must judge for themselves, when the casus fade- 
 ris has occurred, when the defect^; of the Government require reform: — and judging 
 that time to have arrived, the unquestionable right to reform belongs to the majority. 
 But to the majority of whom .' A majority of the communitv is the answer which 
 the Bill of Riffhts crives ; and that answer is perfectly intelligible, when we consider 
 in connexion." the "several clauses of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. The 
 community referred to in the third article, cannot mean tlie whole people, because they 
 never are, and never can be consulted, eitJier in the form.ation of the organic law, or 
 in the administration of the Government. It can mean none other tlian those to 
 whom, in the sixth article the Ricrht of Suffrage is declared to belong — those to whom 
 the Constitution itself was submitted to be carried into effect — tlie qualified voters. 
 To tliose. then, enjovino; the Right of Suffrage, it was submitted, whether they would 
 accept or reject the Constitution, by electing' or refusing to elect the members of the 
 General Assembly. To them, the Convention held in effect this lano-uage : — ''We 
 have formed a Constitution for your Gg . ernment, and have declared the rights which 
 pertain to you and your posterity as the basis on which that Constitution rests: — we 
 have declared that it is instituted for the common benefit, and that when it shall be 
 found inadequate to this purpose, a majority of you have an indubitable, unalienable, 
 and indefeasible riofht to reform, alter or abolish it, in such manner, as shall be ad- 
 judo-ed most conducive to the public weal. We believe it vrell suited to your con- 
 dition — well calculated to attain its object ; — but, if experience shall teach you that 
 we are mistaken, the corrective is in the power of a majority of you, who may alter, 
 reform or abolish, as you may judge most conducive to the public weal; — it is refer- 
 red to your wisdom to accept or reject."' Thus submitted;it was accepted by the free- 
 holders, the qualified voters, without opposition; and their act, by which they elect- 
 ed the members of the first General Assembly, was as effectual, if not as solemn an 
 adoption of the Constitution and Declaration of Rights, as if an unanimous vote of 
 approbation had been given on a formal call of the Ayes and Noes. I never enter- 
 tained any doubt of the validity of our Constitution, for the want of a formal ratifica- 
 tion ; — or, if any doubts on that subject were ever impressed on my youthful mind, 
 such as my friend from Chesterfield once felt, both he and I must have been disabused 
 of them, I think, by the lectures of the distinguished master under whom we studied 
 our professions, and whose memory we both revere. The Constitution beincr thus 
 accepted by the qualified voters, they became the parties to the social compact; they 
 shared the sovereignty, they constituted the coiumimiti/. to the majority of whom the 
 right of reform belongs. 
 
 It does not necessarily follow, from the right of the majority to reform the Consti- 
 tution, that the powers of ordinary legislation should be vested in the majority. This, 
 I agree, is a question of expediency, which it belongs to the majority to decide — and 
 in deciding it, they are bound to loik to the great object of Government, the comriioru 
 benefit, and to enquire, by what organization, it v»"ill be capable of producing the great^ 
 
264 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 test degree of Jiappiness and safety, and he most effectually secured against the danger of 
 mal-administrution. Upon the result of this ixiteresting enquiry, it depends whether 
 the majority should hold in their own hands the power of legislationj or confide it to 
 the minority. But this doctrine of expedienc}^, Mr. Chairman, not well understood, 
 is of dangerous tendency, and calculated grossly to mislead us. In adopting it as the 
 guide of ou-r deliberations here, it may become us to bestow a moment's attention on 
 its character. Enlightened and liberal expediency, which looks to consequences im- 
 mediate and remote, calculates etFects, temporary and enduring, and regards all inter- 
 ests, partial and general, which in short has the lasting public good for its object, and 
 truth and justice for its guides, lies at the foundation of moral and political lav/, and is 
 the true test of moral and political propriety : — while that blind and narrow expedi- 
 ency which regards only immediate consequences, temporary effects, and partial in- 
 terests, which has for its object the present good, disregards the precepts of justice, 
 and delivers itself up to the guidance of sophistry, is the parent of all that is false 
 and mischievous, in morals and politics, teaclies in the scliools of modern philosophy, 
 upholds the pernicious theories of Condorcet, Rousseau, and Godwin, justifies usurpa- 
 tion and tyranny, and recommends the most visionary and heedless scheme of reform. 
 
 The wise man, wlien he enjoins a rigid observance of faith, strict performance of 
 promises, when he enforces filial duty and parental love, n,nd commands you to do no 
 murder, is not miinindful, that partial evil might often be avoided, and temporary 
 good obtained, by violating your faith, disregarding your promise, failing in duty to 
 your parent, forgetting your affection for your son, and even by imbruing your hand 
 m hu:nan blood : — But looking beyond tiie narrov/ circle v/hich bounds the vision of 
 modern philosophy, he tells you that all these partial considerations must be foregone, 
 and that the lasting peace and happiness of society imperiously require that the moral 
 duties, he has taught, should be held in constant reverence. So the wise Statesman, 
 looking beyond tiie partial evils and tempora.ry benefits which guide the expedients 
 of political quackery, walking in the light of experience, and governing himself by 
 principle, will take all his measures with reference to the great and enduring interests 
 of the community. If such light and such guidance shall conduct us to the conclu- 
 sion, that the great and permanent interests of this community require that the pow- 
 er of the Government should be entrusted to the minority, it becomes the solemn 
 duty of the majority to v/ithdraw their claim, to yield the power, and with it their 
 confidence to the minority, whether that minority consists of thousands, or hundreds, 
 or tens, or even a single unit, — v/hether the Government shall continue a republic, 
 or become an oligarchy, an aristocracy, or a monarchy. All that I require is, that the 
 evidence of this duty should be clear and conclusive : — that in a Government insti- 
 tuted for the benefit of the people, and acknowledging their will to be sovereign ; in 
 a country where, under the most favorable auspices in the world, the interesting ex- 
 periment is yet in progress, wliich is to solve the problem of man's capacity for self- 
 government, — we should be very careful to consult cur judgment rather than our 
 fears — we should be quite sure, that in protecting an obvious, though subordinate in- 
 terest, we are not leaving the paramount interests of society unguarded ; that in sur- 
 rendering the power to^the minority, v.^e are not abandoning the principle, that the 
 will of tile people is sovereign, and acknowledging that the question of self-govern- 
 ment must be decided against the liberties of mankind. 
 
 With these views of the rights of the majority, and of the test of expediency to 
 which every measure of reform must be subjected, let us proceed to the question be- 
 fore the Comtnittee. The people who adopted the present Constitution, with a decla- 
 ration on its face of their right to reform it, having lived under it for more than fifty 
 years, have thought it required alteration, and have deputed us to enquire and report 
 to them, what amendments, if any, ought to be made. The Select Committee have 
 reported a resolution, declaring that m the apportionment of representation in the 
 House of Delegates, regard should be had to the white population exclusively." 
 The gentleman from CuTpeper has proposed so to amend this resolution, as to place the 
 representation on the basis, not of the white population simply, but of the white popu- 
 lation and taxation combined : — and the question is upon the adoption of the proposed 
 amendment. In considering this question, we must not be deceived by tlie literal 
 import of the two propositions, and I beg permission to explain my understanding of 
 each. 
 
 When the resolution of the Select Committee refers us to the white population 
 " exclusively,'' I do not understand that in the practical application of this rule, there 
 is to be a rigid adherence to its terms : — I do not understand that the Commonwealth 
 is to be laid off into election districts, containing a precise equality of white inhabi- 
 tants, and entitled to an equal number of Delegates. I understand this v/ord " ex- 
 clusively,'' in that sense, which would refer us to the white population, in exclusion 
 of the black population ; in exclusion of property and taxes— not in exclusion of all 
 regard to county limits — of all regard to the interests, the convenience, the ancient 
 habits and customs of the people. My object in applying the rule, would be to lay 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION". 
 
 265 
 
 off the State into a giTen number of districts, composed of contignous comities, hav- 
 ing interests as nearly identical as possible — to give to each of these districts a num- 
 her of Delegates, in proportion to its wrhite popuiatioa, and to distribute th€ Delegates, 
 in each district, amono- the several counties tii^rein. so as to give to each coimty in 
 the district, at least one member, if the number of members vrere equal to the num- 
 ber of the counties. To illustrate : — Suppose the State divided into four districts, by 
 the lines of the Alleghany , the Blue Sidge. and tlie head of tide ivater — and suppose 
 the House of Delegates to be composed of one hundred and tvrenty members. Then 
 upon the basis of tlie white population, according to the Auditor's estimate of its pre- 
 sent numbers, the trans- Alleghany district, would be entitled to ahout thirty-two mem- 
 bers — the Vallev district, to twenty-four — the 3Iiddle district to thirty-five — and the 
 Eastern to twenty-nine. The thirty-two trans-Alleghany members, would be dis- 
 tributed among its twenty-six counties, so as to give one to eadi : and assign the 
 surplus six to tne six larger counties. In like manner the twenty -four Valley members 
 would be distributed ajuong its fourteen counties, and the thirty-five meinb^rs for the 
 midland district among its twenty-nine counties. The twenty-nine members for the 
 Eastern district would not supply one to each of its thirty-six counties and fom: borougis, 
 and therefore in that district no county or borough would have more than one. and some 
 of the smaller counties, must form tog-ether, election districts for single members. By 
 such an arrangement as this, tliough each county would not have its exact proportion 
 in the representation, each large district would : and in order to give to each local 
 interest in the Common wealtli. its just weight in the Legislature, yen have only to 
 take care, that in la\ring out your large districts, you embrace in them reepectively 
 only those counties whose interests are essential!} the same. This beinw' done, the 
 spirit of a just equality would be observed, whilst the regard had to county limits 
 would soften the asperities of the r^i<3rm. and he attended with many advantages, 
 which it would be out of place here to recounL 
 
 Again, the resolution of the Committee, in referring to the white population ex- 
 clusively, literally imports, that the whole number of white persons in the several 
 d.istricts. shall give the ratio of representation — and this was intended to be the prac- 
 tical operation of the rule. But this is not in the spirit of the doctrine for which we 
 contend. We do not insist, that each white person, male and female, infant and adult, 
 whether entitled to the Right of Siifirage or no. is entitled to equal representation. 
 No I — Our doctrine is. that each person entitled to the E.ight of Sufii-age. each who 
 shares in the sovereignty, is entitled to equal political power, and tiiercfcre to equal 
 representation. We espouse the principle of the resolution ofiered by the gentlemaa 
 irom. ^sorfolk (]vlr. Taylor.) though we do not adopt its mathematical precision. We 
 have advocated the basis of white population, instead of qualified voters, because tlie 
 former gives a more certain and convenient rule, and because it was believed, that it 
 was substantially equivalent in effect. But examination and reflection lead me to be- 
 lieve that there may be. and possibly is. a material difference, in the effect of the two 
 rules ; that the number of white persons in the different districts would not be a fair 
 index of the number of qualified voters : and that the basis of qualified voters would 
 be more favourable to the Eastern pari of tlie State, than the basis of white popula- 
 tion. If there be any gentleman on this, or the other side of tlie House, who pre- 
 fers as the basis of representation, the qualified voters, rather than the white popula- 
 tion, who thinks that the superior iustice of the former, countervails tlie gr-eater con- 
 venience and certainty of the latter. I am prepared to go with^ him, send give it my 
 support. I will not press the principle for wliieh I contend beyond its reason and 
 justice. In advocating then, the basis of white population. I must be understood as 
 maintaining the right of the qualified voters to share equally the power of the Gov- 
 lernment ; and as pre.ssinj their ehiims. not to a precise mathematical equahtv, but to 
 a rational practical equality, assuring to every local interest, as far as can be, its due 
 weight and just protection. 
 
 The proposition to amend, which offers the basis of population and taxation com- 
 bined, is not very denaite in its terms, but as explained by its mover is very intelli- 
 gible. It does not propose to compound the number of dollars paid tor taxes in each 
 district. %vith the number of wliite persons therein, and tlience <ieriYe the rule for ap- 
 portionment, but it proposes to compound the ratios of taxation and numbers, thus — 
 to give one-half the Delegates, according to the ratio of taxes paid, and the other half 
 according to the ratio of white persons — or thus take for each district the mean 
 proportional between the number it would be entitled to -according to the ratio of 
 white persons, and the number it would be entitled to nccordinor to the ratio of taxes 
 paid. To illustrate: The trans-Alleghany district, would be entitled — on tlie basis 
 of wliite population to thirty-two — on the basis of taxes to eleven — on the coinp="und 
 basis to twenty-one and a half. The Valley, on whi^e p-pul ^tion twenty -four — 
 taxes ten — compound basis twenty-one and a half. 31iddle district, on white popula- 
 tion thirty-five — taxes forty-nine — compound forty-two Eastern district^ on wliite 
 population twentv-nine — taxes forrv-one — eompoimd thirtv-five. 
 
 34 
 
266 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The proposition to amend is liable to other objections for want of precision ; btit 
 candour requires us to suppose, that they will be obviated, when the proposition is 
 carried out into its details, and therefore they need not be now pointed out. 
 
 With these explanations, the question before the Committee may be thus stated : — 
 Shall the power of the Government be apportioned among- its districts, according to 
 the simple ratio of those who partake of the sovereignty, the qualified voters, in 
 each ; — or shall it be apportioned according to the combined ratio of white persofts 
 and taxes ? 
 
 Those who advocate the simple ratio, endeavour to maintain it upon principle ; it) 
 deduce it from the fundamental doctrines of our Government, and to vindicate it 
 upon considerations of sound political expediency. 
 
 The advocates of the compound ratio, not seeming directly to controvert the gene- 
 ral rule, that the niajority should govern, and some of them admitting it, insist ne- 
 vertheless that it is liable to exceptions ; that it is subject to the control of these con- 
 siderations of expediency which may prove it unfit for the good government of the 
 people to whom it is to be applied, and that the circumstances of the people of Vir- 
 ginia render it unfit for them. They contend that a primary object of Government 
 is the protection of property; that when its title is unsafe, no other rights can be se- 
 cure, and that the peculiar condition of property in Virginia is such that no adequate 
 protection can be given it, if the power of the Government is put into the hands of 
 the majority. They endeavour to prove, that power in the minority is essential to the 
 protection of their property, and that such is the singular constitution of our society, 
 that while the property of the minority is exposed to certain injury, by giving power 
 to the majority, the property and ail the personal rights of the majority, are effectu- 
 ally secured by giving the power to the minority. The evidences of this peculiarity 
 they find, in the unequal distribution of the slave property, among the different dis- 
 tricts of the State; the unequal contributions of revenue from tliose districts; the 
 variety and supposed conflict of their local interests. They show that the great body 
 of the slaves is held by the Eastern districts of the Commonwealth ; they endeavour 
 to shov/, that the taxable ini ab tants in those districts pay a nmcli greater avesage tax 
 ])er capita, than is paid by the taxable inhabitants of the Western districts ; that there 
 is no subject of taxation in the West which is not also found in the East, and on 
 which a tax would not be quite as burthensome to the Eastern as to the Western peo- 
 ple, and no subject of legislation, on which the interest of the East could be pro- 
 moted at the expense of the West : — that on the interesting subject of internal im- 
 provements, particularly, while the interests of the Eastern and Western districts are 
 variant, if not hostile, and plans might be adopted to enrich the latter, which would 
 impoverish the former, yet this East would have no adequate motive to do injustice 
 to the West; — and they thence infer the propriety of giving to Ihe East a power in 
 the Government, somewhat proportioned to their contributions of revenue, a power 
 adequate to the protection of their property; — tliey thence also infer, the perfect se- 
 curity of the West, against the power of the East, — and the alarming danger,— that, 
 if the power of the Government, were in the hands of the Western people ; — whither 
 they think the rule of the majority would probably soon carry it, — the property of the 
 Eastern people would be unjustly taxed, unwise laws affecting the value of their 
 slaves and dangerous to the peace of the community, would be enacted, and schemes 
 adopted, v/hich might apply the revenue contributed by the East, to the improvement 
 of the estates of the West. 
 
 This is believed to be a fair Outline of the principal grounds on which the friends of 
 the compound ratio rest its defence. Some subordinate considerations have been 
 called to their aid, and many ingenious, able and eloquent arguments have left it 
 wanting in nothing, but intrinsic merit, to recommend it to our affections and our 
 judgment. 
 
 I readily subscribe, Mr. Chairman, to the proposition, that an indispensible object 
 of every good Government, is the security of property, and that no Government 
 which does not afford that security, Can be a safe depository of the liberty and life of 
 the citizen ; — but I utterly deny that there is arty thing in the peculiar situation of 
 Virginia, which should induce us to look for that security, in the power of the mino- 
 rity, or which threatens the serious dangers which gentlemen apprehend, from the 
 ipower of the majority. On the contrary, I insist, that the majority have more to fear 
 from the power of the minority, than the minority has to fear from theirs: — that un- 
 der the rule of the majority, property will be more secure, legislation more just and 
 wise, the people more happy, and the country more prosperous. 
 
 Before we proceed to a more particular consideration of this question, it may be 
 well to review the statements which have been submitted to us, deduced from the ta- 
 bles furnished by the Auditor, and to make such corrections as they may be found to 
 Require 
 
 The tables of population show us that there are probably in the Commonwealth at 
 Ikis time, about 682,000 white persons, and about 448,000 slaves, thus distributed 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTiOX. 
 
 267 
 
 amongst the different districts : — In the first or Western district, about 131.000 wMtes, 
 and 17.000 slives ; more than ten whites for each slave : — in the second or Valley dis- 
 trict, about 1 J^,000 whites, and .:.3 500 slaves, little more than four v,-hites to a slave :— 
 in the third or middle district, about l.,-7.000 v\'hites. and 221.000 slaves — the slaves exr 
 ceedinz the whites b}' about 24,')U0, nearly one-eighth of the white population: and 
 in the Fourth or Eastern district, about 165.000 whites, and 176.000 slaves — the slaves 
 there, also exceeding the whites, about 10,530, about one-sixteenth of the white po- 
 pulation. Thus, it appears that the aggregate of slaves on the East of the Blue 
 Ridge is ab-jut 397,000. while the aggregate on the West is about 50,500, nearly eight 
 to one — while the aggregate of vriiite population on the East of the mountain is 
 about 362,503, and that on the V\'est 319,000— the difference only about 43,500. It 
 is, therefore, true as is stated on the other side, that the slave population is very une- 
 qually distributed at this time, and is at present essentially an Eastern interest. 
 
 From the tables of taxation, the gentleman from Chesterheld deduced, that the people 
 of the first district paid of the whole taxes on land and personal property, an average 
 per capita, of 23 cents 8 mills ; and the people of the second district 42 cents 6 mills, 
 while the people of the tliird district paid 72 cents 2 mills, and those of the fourth 
 63 cents 9 mills — making an averao;e Tor the people on the West of tke Blue Piidge 
 of 32 cents 2 mills ; and for the people on the East of .68 cents 2 mills. He selected 
 indi\ idual counties in the different districts, between which there was a still more 
 striking inequality, and shovred tiiat the average contribution of the slave tax j/er 
 capiia, m the several districts., was tlje most unequal of all. 
 
 That there are inequalities in the contributions of revenues from the different dis- 
 tricts of the State, owing to the unequal distribution of wealth, no one doubts. It is 
 jEertainly so, in our country, as it is in ail countries, and as it must be, so long as taxes 
 ate laid upon property and not on polls : so long as the abilit\' to pay shall be regard- 
 fid as furnishing any criterion of the amount of contribution. But the statements 
 ¥rhich have been exiiibited to you are calculated to deceive. They make the uupres- 
 sion that the several sums slated, show the average per capita, actually assessed on 
 the tax-paying inhabitants of the several districts — this, however, is not the case : 
 the calculations are made by distributing the whole amount of taxes assessed, in each 
 district, on the whole number of free persons in the district, on whom by law a tax 
 could be assessed, whether black or white, male or female, infant or adult. I have 
 naade an estiniate of the average per capita, actually assessed, on the tax-paying in- 
 habitants of the several districts, and the result is materially different; shov.'ing ine- 
 qualities, it is true, as must have been anticipated, but inequalities less glarino;, and 
 less calculated to excite alarm, or, to countenance the extravag£m.t claim for power 
 which has been founded upon tliem. 
 
 The Committ>e.e will remark, that I have made this estimate from the Auditor's ta- 
 bles of the taxes assessed for the year lS2i, and his fists of persons charged with taxes 
 on lands or other property, in the several counties and corporations in the Common- 
 wealth. There will be a slinrht inaccuracy in the estimate of the land tax, resulting 
 from the circumstance, that this list excludes all those charged with a tax, on parcels 
 of land in the country, less than twenty-five acres. But this inaccuracv cannot ma- 
 terially vary the result. 
 
 Calculating from these data, I find the average tax per capita as follows : — in the 
 first district, land tax 80 cents, tax on other property 59 cents, totjil § 1 39 ; in the 
 second district, land tax S 2 30, tax on other property $ 1 12, toial 8 3 42 • in the third 
 district, land tax S 2 31 , tax on other property S 2 43, total § 4 74 : and in the fourth 
 district, land tax .3 2 07, tax on other property S 2 43, total ,5- 4 50. ' We thus see that 
 the average land tax of the Valley district is equal to the average land tax of the 
 middle district within ©ne cent, and is superior to the averan:e land tas. of the Eastern 
 district, 23 cents— that its average tot?J tax is less than the average total of the mid- 
 dle district, g 1 32— that is about 23 per cent, and less than the average total of the 
 Eastern district, bv S 1 05 — that is about 22 per cent. But, the taxes on slaves have 
 been reduced 3 cents for the present year, and this reduction would cause the ave- 
 rage of the several districts to stand thus — first district S 1 36 — second district 8 3 34 
 — third district 84 43 — fourth district, ,8 4 19, bringing the Valley district withiq. 
 §1 11 of the middle district, and within 85 cents of the Eastern. It must be farther 
 remarked, that in these estimates, the towns of Richmond, Petersburg and Freder- 
 icksburg have been included within the tide-water district. ]!Sow, afthough these 
 towns are situated at the head of tide- water, they do not. for any of the purposes of 
 this argument, belong to the tide-water district. Their sympathies, their interests are 
 with the country that lies above them, which founded tliem, supphes their trade and 
 furnishes their v/ealth. Withdraw them from that district, and you diminish very 
 materially its average tax. We have not the means of estimating the taxes paid iij 
 Fredericksburg, our tables containing no separate retimi for that toi^-n. Subtracting 
 Richmond and Petersburg only, for which we have separate returns, and then the 
 average of the Eastern district will be, of land 81 84, of tax on other property. 82 12^ 
 
26S 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 total $ S 9o ; thus reducing its average land tax 46 cents below that of the Valley, 
 and leaving its total average only 53 cents above it. 
 
 In all tJiese estunates it will be observed that the contributions of the trans-Alle- 
 ghany district are very much below par. It is easy to understand why the average 
 tax on personal property, is much lower there than in the other districts, because of the 
 small number of its slaves — but why the average land tax should be so, is an enquiry, 
 the answer to which does not lie on the surface. It is probably to be found in two 
 considerations: First, very large quantities of land, in different parts of that district, 
 on which large arrears of taxes are due, have been vested in the Literary Fund, by the 
 operation of the tax law of 1814, and are now stricken from the tax books, because 
 the lands belonging to that lund pay no taxes — secondly, and chiefly, in the year 
 1817, when all the lands of the Commonwealth were assessed, it is well known that 
 the public mind was acting under a delusion, which misled its estimates of the value 
 of every thing, and perhaps of nothing more than of the value of land. The com- 
 bined influence of protracted war in Europe, which for many years had given an ex- 
 tensive market, and high prices, to the products of our soil — our own war, which 
 throvi?ing a large aniount of mercantile capital out of its regular employment, left it 
 to seek nivestment in land ; and tJie great multiplication of banks, which creating a 
 large fictitious capital, increased to an extravagant degree the speculations in real 
 property — had inflated the market price of that property beyond any reasonable rela- 
 tion to its in-rinsic value. Tiiese causes, in Virginia, had exerted their principal 
 force in the agricultural c;ounlry, of the Valley, and the Eastern side of the Moun- 
 tain, and especially the banking towns, and their immediate vicinities. They were 
 but little felt in the trans-Alleghany country, remote from the influence of the banks 
 — remote from market, and from the scenes of speculation. Its lands were the less;' 
 sought either by the emigrant or the speculaLor, because of the difficulty in their 
 titles. The land law of 177y, drawn, it is said, by the same George Mason, the author 
 of our Constitution — men are not equally wise in all things ! — the land law of '79 
 had operated to produce infinite confusion in the land titles of the West ; and this 
 cause, as well by retarding settlements as by discouraging purchasers, had depressed 
 the market value of their lands. Thus, while extraneous causes of one kind contri- 
 buted to enhance the market value of lands East of the Alleghany, extraneous causes 
 of another kind conspired to depreciate the market value of the lands West of that 
 mountain. I should liave inferred, therelbre, that the assessment of 1817, which the 
 law required to be n:tade according to the market value, would have overrated the 
 lands on the Eastern waters, and underrated those on the Western. We all know 
 that the lands on the Eastern waters were assessed too high, and I am informed that 
 those on the Western waters were, in truth, assessed too low. Looking at a state- 
 ment made from the assessors' tables, we find that while the average value of the 
 lands on the Western waters was but ^2 cents per acre, those of the Valley were 
 ,$7 33, those of the Midland district $ 8 20, and those of the Eastern district $ 8 43 
 per acre. These causes, added to tiie great increase of population in the Western dis- 
 trict since the assessment, leave no reasonable d^lubt that a new assessment would 
 reduce the average of all the lands of the three districts upon the Eastern waters, es- 
 pecially of the tide-water district — would raise the average of the lands in the Wes- 
 tern district, and would place the land-tax of that district nearly upon a ground of 
 equality with the land-tax of the other districts of the State. 
 
 It does not follow, Mr. Chairman, from the inequalities of contribution in the dif- 
 ferent districts, that there is any injustice in the measure of taxes imposed, or that 
 those who pay least can best bear the burthen imposed on them. If taxes are imposed 
 on the property of the country, in the proportion of the ability of its owners to pay, 
 those who have more property, and therefore pay more taxes, have, surely, no cause 
 to complain. V/ith equal prudence, economy, and good management, the rich will 
 be always able to pay their contributions to the Government with more ease than the 
 poor. Tlie contributions of the rich man are paid from his abundance, and if they restrain 
 his enjoyments at all, they curtail only his luxuries — while the poor man withdraws his 
 modicum from a bare competency, leaving scarcely enough behind for the necessaries 
 and the ordinary comforts of life. It has been the object of our laws to distribute the 
 taxes among the people in proportion to the value of their property , assuming that as 
 the best criterion of their ability to pay, and adopting such general rules to effect their 
 object as were found by experience to be most convenient in practice. If they have 
 failed in this object, as no doubt in some degree they have, the failure has not been 
 greater than was to have been anticipated from the intrinsic difficulty of the subject. 
 If you will measure the ability of the several districts by the amount of their labor, 
 and allow tlie whole nunlber of their inhabitants, respectively, to be a fair standard of 
 their comparative labor — you have a test by which to try this question. I do not vouch 
 for the accuracy of this test, though a better one does not now occur to me — and if 
 you will apply it, by dividing the whole amount of taxes in each district, by the whole 
 number of its inhabitants, you will find the average j?er cajnia not very unequal in 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 269 
 
 the several districts East of the AJleghany — and tmequal in the Western district; no 
 doubt, because of the accidental under value of its lands as already ezp^ined. The 
 taxes of the several districts for the year I'M;*, distributed among aii the inhabitants of 
 each, arives an average, ^yfr capita, nearly as ibllows : In the Urst district. 15 cents ; 
 in tne'second. 2t» cents : in the third; 31 cents : and in the fourth; 30 cents. 
 
 Mr. Johns -jn bein^ much exhausted, asked the indulgence that Lie Coc^mittee 
 shoald rise. 
 
 It was accorded to him on the motion of Mr. Giles, and the Committee rose ac- 
 cordincrly — and on the motion of 3Ir. Z>Iason of Southamptcn. the Ccnventicn imme- 
 diately^ adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY. Xove^ieer 12. lS-29. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and its sitting vras opened vrith prayer by 
 the Rev. Ivlr. Horner; of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Mr. JoHyso>- resumed his speech of yesterday, and continued to occupy the ficor 
 till the hour of adjournment, 
 
 I have been thus particular in examining the manner in which the taxes are distri- 
 buted amoncp the di5erent districts of the Commonvrealth, not because it was essen- 
 tial to the merits of the question now before the Committee; but because I thought it 
 •would remove from our minds the alarming spectacle of poverty making war upon 
 wealth, and would satisfr impartial men that each district pays, as nearly as the ope- 
 ration of laws always imperfect could be expected to produce, a just contribution to 
 the Government — that no district is in a stale of pauperism — none in a situation to 
 be tempted to seize unlawfully on its neighbor's property — and that in all human pro- 
 bability; when, hereafter, a \yestern man shall vote from the pocket of his Eastern 
 brother, one doHar, in fhe form of taxes, he will vote from his own pocket, at the 
 same time, nearly an equivalent sum. one at least, which he can as ill spare, and will 
 be as httle able to pay. I regretted very much to hear that part of the remarks of 
 the gentleman from Accomack. (Mr. Joynes) in which he endeavored to show that 
 the whole country West of the Blue E.idge did not pay into the treasury a smn suffi- 
 cient to defray the expenses of its delegation to the General Assembly, and of the adr- 
 ministration of justice within its own limits. Remarks tending to institute odious 
 comparisons, and to excite unpleasant sensations, coming from a gentleman who has 
 manifested so much hberahty. so much kind and good feehng; are exceedingly to be 
 regretted — and I felt them the more because they came from that part of the Stale, the 
 extreme East, from which on former occasions; I have so often heard remarks leadic^ 
 to collision and controversy; between the extreme West and extreme East; which re-- 
 quired the interposition of moderate men to compose. I have not examined the gen- 
 tleman's calculation to ascertain whether his con: lusion is right or wrong. After hav- 
 ing ascertained the precise amoimt of taxes paid by each district : al\er ascertaining 
 the average amount per capita, paid in each — what possible iiLuuence on the questioa 
 before us can it have — to know that the contributions of any district are not adequate to 
 that part of the expenses of the G-ovemment, which the calculations of gentlemen may 
 choose to assign to it ? Surely the expenses of legislation, and of the administration 
 of justice are not local in their character, pertain to no district, and can be charged to 
 none. They are, if any can be, the expenses of the whole Ccmmonv.-ealth, incurred 
 for the common weal and justly payable from the common purse. Such imputations 
 as these, if it were proper to repel them, would lead to the unpleasant and unprofita- 
 ble enquiry; into the objects to which the pubhc revenue was apphed : the districts in 
 which it was expended; the local causes which increased the expense of Govern- 
 ment, and would impose on us the invidious duty, which 1 certainly shall not per- 
 form, of indicating the various counties, in the Ea--:rtem district; which dc not contri- 
 bute their share of the expenses of Government. But we must forbear from such 
 topics, they do not become the occasion. 
 
 It will be proper, iNIr. Chairman, to disarm this question of some of its terrors to 
 one party : disrobe it of some of its charms for the other, by examining with care its 
 effects on the distribution of power, among the different districts of the Common- 
 wealth. The calculations on this subject, have been made ^"itli reference to the 
 House of Delegates, and upon the supposition that iJiat House should consist of an 
 hundred and twenty members. They are made upon the Auditor's estimates of tiie 
 population of the present year. These are supposed by some gentlemen to be inaccu- 
 rate, and the Auditor does not himseff rely with confidence^pon them; — ^but I as- 
 sume them as approximatiaor the truth sufficiently for the purposes of the present ar- 
 gument. 
 
270 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Let us, tlien, compare the power of the four great districts of the State, in such a 
 House of Delegates, as it would be on the present basis, the equal representation 
 of counties, as it would be on the coiupound basis proposed by the gentleman from 
 Culpeper, and as it would be on the basis of white population. The Committee will 
 understand my references to the districts, if they will remember, that I number them 
 from West to East, denominating the Western, the first district. 
 
 In such a House of Delegates, the relative power of the several districts would 
 jStand thus : 
 
 On the basis of equal coiinty representation. 
 
 First district, 27— 2d, IG— 3d, 32— 4th, 43. 
 
 Compound basis. 
 
 First district, 21^— 2d, 21|— 3d, 42— 4th, 35, " " - 
 
 Simple basis of lo/dtc population. 
 First, 32— 2d, 34— 3d, 35— 4th, 29. 
 
 Divided by the Blue Ridge, the East and West, would stand thus : 
 By equal county representation, W. 45 — E. 75 
 By the combined ratio, 43 " 77 - - 
 
 White population, 56 G4 
 
 In making these calculations, we disregard small fractions, and convert large ones 
 Into integers, that we may give the results in whole numbers. 
 
 By this method of calculating the effect of the two propositions, it would appear, 
 that, adopting the compound basis, the West would lose, and the East gain two mem- 
 bers out of one hundred and twenty, and tliat, adopting the simple basis, the West 
 would gain, and the East lose eleven. But if instead of taking the whole number of 
 white persons, as the basis, you take such only as are qualified to vote, there is reason 
 to believe that the result would be materially varied. We have no means of ascer- 
 taining the number of qualified voters ; there is no record of them any where, and 
 we have certainly no data Irom which we would estimate them accurately. But we 
 may approximate them perhaps suificiently near, to answer the purpose of illustra- 
 tion, by estimates from such data as we have. 
 
 Until I cams into this Convention, Mr. Chairman, I had habitually considered a 
 representation apportioned according to the whole number of white people in the dif- 
 ferent districts,, and one apportioned according to the qualified voters in each, as sub- 
 stantially equivalents. I had supposed, that the ratio of the one, would be a fair in- 
 dex of the ratio of the other. I had never carefully examined the subject, 'till my 
 duties in the Legislative Committee, called my attention to it, and induced me to 
 xloubt the correctness of my former impressions. The able argument of the gentle- 
 man from Chesterfield, rivetted my attention to it, and induced me to think, that thosp 
 impressions were probably wrong. There is much weight due to the consideration, 
 that those who perform menial services — the day-labourers, the cultivators of land 
 which they do not own, are in the Eastern districts, principally slaves — while those 
 who perform similar functions, in the Western districts, are chiefly white persons; 
 and this consideration tends to the conclusion, that the ratio of qualified voters, to 
 the whole white population, would be greater in the East than in the West. I have 
 appealed to the only documents in my power, to test this conclusion — the lists of per- 
 sons charged with taxes., furnished us by the Auditor. He has furnished two lists — 
 the one, of the number of persons in each county and corporate town, charged with 
 any tax, on a town lot, or part of a town lot, or any parcel of land, not less than twen- 
 ty-five acres — the other, of the number charged with any tax on property. Now, al- 
 though each of these lists, contains male and female, young and old, black and white, 
 without discrimination ; and, therefore, cannot inform us correctly of the actual numr 
 ber of adult white males, uporji either, yet I have thought, that, probably, they woulcl 
 not very far mislead us, if we regard them as an index of the relative number of free 
 adult white males, in the several districts, and as an index of the relative number of 
 qualified voters in each. If we take the list of those charged with taxes on land, as 
 giving the ratio of freehold voters, and the other list as giving the ratio of voters, 
 when the PJght of Suffrage shall be extended to house-keepers, who pay a revenue 
 tax, then, upon the basis of the qualified voters, the relative power of the districts 
 would stand thus : 
 
 According to the land list— 1st, 27— 2d, 20— 3d, 37— 4th, 36. 
 
 According to the property list— 1st, 29— 2d, 21— 3d, 39 — 4th, 34, . 
 Dividing by the Blue Ridge, the power would be, 
 
 According to the first — West, 47 — East, 73. 
 
 According to the second — West, 50 — East, 70. 
 
 Thus, according to the most favourable of these estimates, the West would gain, 
 and the East lose five members, in a House of an hundred and twenty, and the ma- 
 jority on the Eastern side of the Blue Ridge, would remain twenty. 
 
 These statements may serve to show, that although upon any basis of representa- 
 tion which has been yet suggested, a large portion of power will pass from the tide- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOX* 
 
 271 
 
 water district, to those above it — jet upon no basis, can the power pass now, from the 
 Eastern to the Western side of the Blue Ridge, and that upon the principle for which 
 we contend, if it pass at all, it must pass at a distant day, slowly, gradually, safely — •■ 
 unaccompanied by the dangers which have been apprehended — they may serve to 
 show to calm reflection, that the stake depending on the present contest, is not so 
 great, the prize to be won not so valuable, the loss to be sustained not so dreadful, as 
 has been pictured to our imaginations. I may have occasion again to refer to them 
 in ihustration of my views. 
 
 In taking leave, for the present, of those calculations which I have introduced as 
 correctives of the estimates made on the other sidej 1 cannot forbear remarking on the 
 seeming inconsistency of gentlemen, who losing no occasion to throw ridicule on 
 numbers, and pohtical arithmetic, have arrayed them against us, in a most formidable 
 phalanx, and have drawn trora them their strongest and most impressive arguments. 
 I have no doubt, that the tables of population and taxes, which have gone out to the 
 public, with the arithmetical calculations of gentlemen, on the other side, which have 
 accompanied them, and their inferences of change of power, and danger of oppres- 
 sive taxation, have been the principle cause of the great excitement in the public 
 mind, and of the alarm which is ielt in the Eastern districts of the Commonwealth; 
 an excitement and alarm which have already done mischief, and threaten to do more ; 
 which have already, through the instrumentality of instructions, deprived an hono- 
 rable member of his seat on this floor, and may soon confound the councils of this 
 Convention. I mean not at all to interpose between the district and its delegate : — it 
 is not for me to enquire into the causes which led to the instruction and the conse- 
 quent resignation — but as a member of this Convention, anxious for the harmony and 
 profitable issue of its labours — as a c.tizen of the Commonwealth, deeply interested 
 in its welfare, I cannot but lament the example, which, if followed generally, must de- 
 prive this Assembly of its deliberative character, and deprive it of all power to eflect 
 the purposes for which it was appointed. "While we are sitting here deliberating on 
 the great interests of the State, candidlj- comparing our opinions, endeavouring to 
 reconcile discordant views, adjust contiicting claims, secure every right, and protect 
 every interest, ambiguous words are to be scattered among the people, scraps from 
 newspapers and slueds of arguments to be circulated among them — in a moment of 
 tamultaous agitation, they are to be collected, at the hustings and muster grounds, at 
 the taverns and cross roads, to form specific instructions, lor their deleofates on the 
 most delicate and ditiicult of all the subjects of their deliberation — thus, deprivino- 
 them of the power of making or receiving concessions, and puttino- an end to all fur* 
 tlier consultation. Can any considerate man be blind to the coniusion and mischief 
 to which such measures must tend ? Do not understand me. Sir, as questioning the 
 right of the constituent to instruct his representative — this I regard as one of the set* 
 tied doctrines of our Government, to which 1 most cheerfully subscribe. But surely 
 I cannot be mistaken in supposing that there never was a more unfit occasion for ex^ 
 ercising it, than that on which the people have endeavoured to put in requisition, the 
 experience, the wisdom, and prudence of the State, not to enact laws, but to propose 
 for the consideration of the people themselves, amendments to their fundamental iaw» 
 if this example is to be followed, had we not better return home, restore to the peo* 
 pie the trust they have confided to us — tell them that all hope of amendino- their Con- 
 stitution is perfectl}^ illusorj' — that the solemn declaration of the rio-ht of tlie majority 
 to reform, is indeed a visionaiy theory, since it is utterly impracticable for the people 
 to exercise this right without the aid of representatives, and since those representa* 
 lives cannot be trusted even to confer together, and propose amendments ? I beo' par* 
 don for this digression, and Avill return to the question before the Conmiittee, "whe- 
 ther the compound or simple basis shall be preferred. 
 
 It has been urged as an objection to the report of the Select Committee, tiiat it pro- 
 poses to introduce something new into the Constitution. It certainly is not new to' 
 the American Republics, to apportion representation according to tlie ratio of white 
 population; and whether it is new to our own Constitution, it cannot be material, to 
 enquire, since the objection must equally lie against the proposed amendment. Both 
 propose a change in the Constitution, and the question is. which is preferrable. 
 
 We are cautioned, however, against all chancre, unless called for, by strono* rea- 
 sons ; — we are referred to the nearly equal divisiola of parties, which probably exists 
 here, on this question — and are emphatically warned against the improprietv of an 
 important change, by a lean majority of one or two, forcing upon a lar^e minority, a 
 Constitution that would be abhorrent to them. 1 readily ndmit, thaFno important 
 changes should be made, that are not called for by clear and strono; reasons, and no 
 one can be more sensible than I am, of the imprudence of forcins^upon a laro-e mi- 
 nority, a Government that is odious to them. But the existinirlnequalitiesm the 
 representation are so glaring, and the discontents produced by it are so strong, that 
 every one seems to concede the propriety of some reform, and both the propositions 
 under consideration will effect that reform to a considerable extent. If tlie reform 
 
272 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 proposed by the Select Committee, be objectionable, because it is unacceptable to a 
 lurge minority, would the reform proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper, be the 
 less objectionable, it being at least as disagreeable to a small majority ? Or, shall we 
 be told that the gentleman from Culpeper, and his friends, are not insisting on any 
 reform, but are content with the present Constitution ? Still, however, the objection 
 recurs : — it is with the present Constitution, that we suppose the majc^rity is discon- 
 tented, and the question again arises, shall tliey be compelled to submit to it? In 
 whatever light we view it, therefore, a nearly equal division of opinion would present 
 matter for serious consideration, and not less serious regret. In this view of the case, 
 it may be worthy of some attention, that if the majority here should be found in fa- 
 vour of the report of the Committee, and we faithfully represent the will of our con- 
 stituents, it is probable that the majority of the people who approve it, will be larger. 
 This House being composed of an equal number of members from each Senatorial 
 district, these districts having been arranged according to the Census of 181 0, so as 
 to contain as nearly as convenient, equal numbers of white population — and the popu- 
 lation of the Western districts, having since increased by a much greater ratio than 
 that of the Eastern districts, it is fair to conclude, that a proposition sustained here, 
 by a majority consisting chiefly of Western members, would be sustained by a larger 
 majority of the people. We have no warrant, however, for counting majorities, at 
 present, on either side, and it is our duty to proceed with candour, and liberality to 
 examine the merits of both propositions, and to recommend that which shall be found 
 best, to as much favour as possible. 
 
 When we have established that the people are the fountain of political power, and 
 tlieir happiness its object — that a majority of those entitled to suffrage have a right to 
 reform their Constitution, and thereby regulate the political power — it must neces- 
 sarily follow, that the majority may rightfully retain the power of ordinary legislation, 
 unless it can be shown that the object of good Government will not theretjy be ob- 
 tained. Gentlemen have, therefore, with great propriety, assumed upon themselves 
 the burthen of proving, that in Virginia, this power in the hands of tlie majority, 
 would be inconsistent with the public welfare. They insist, that as a leading object 
 of eJI Government, is the protection of property, so, there is no mode of affording that 
 protection so effectual and so proper, as giving it a direct influence in the Govern- 
 ment, by entitling it to representation. It is by thus claiming representation for pro- 
 perty, that they insist on placing power in the hands of the minority. Let us ex- 
 amine the arguments by which this claim is sustained. 
 
 Gentlemen tell us, that by our own concessions, we surrender the power of num- 
 bers, the right of the majority, and admit the propriety of giving property an influ- 
 ence in Government, when we agree to exclude many from the polls, and require a 
 qualification in property, to give the Right of Suffrage. This argument is founded 
 in mistake-, we have never advocated the power of numbers without distinction of 
 persons; all that we have endeavoured to maintain, is the equal power of those who 
 share the sovereignty and the consequent right of their majority. The qualification 
 of property which we require, to give admission into this number is, with no view to 
 give power to property, but is, like the qualification of age, and sex, an evidence only 
 of fitness for the exercise of political power. If it were intended to give power to 
 property, the richest and the poorest voter could not enjoy equal portions of power. 
 So far then, as this illustration is entitled to respect, the argument founded upon it 
 turns in favour of the equal right of every voter, without reference to property, in 
 favour of the simple basis of representation. 
 
 Experience and precedent have been appealed to, and the learned gentleman from 
 Orano-e, (Mr. P. P. Barbour,) has warned us of the very just distinction between ex- 
 perience and experiment ; and giving us wise caution against the dangers of the one, 
 has prudently commended us to the guidance of the other. It was hardly to have 
 been expected, after this salutary lesson, that the gentleman, to sustain his argument, 
 and to enlighten the path of our duty, would have looked for examples in the twilight 
 of Roman history. When we substitute for our own, the experience of other nations, 
 and other ages, we should at least require that it should come to us well attested by 
 authentic hiltory. But I am willing to allow to the argument all the aid it can de- 
 rive, and avail m.yself of all the light that can flow from the example referred to. The 
 centuries and tribes of Pi-ome are the examples to v^^hich our attention has been called 
 —the former as furnishing a precedent of the representation of property in a repub- 
 lic. The centuries, it is true, in which the richest class of society was represented, 
 furnish to my mind, so far as the dim light of my information enables me to judge, 
 a fair illustration of the representation of property ; and I ask whether this example 
 in the Roman Government is seriously recommended to our imitation ? 
 
 [ Here Mr. Barbour, in explanation, said, that he had referred to the Roman repub- 
 lic as furnishincr an example at one time of the representation of property alone, by 
 centuries, and at another time, of the representation of numbers alone, by tribes. 
 
DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONrENTIOX. 
 
 273 
 
 He had said that he did not approve either of these extremes — he vrould prefer to 
 combine them, as in the proposition of the gentleman from Culpeper.] 
 
 This explanation, Mr. Chairman, does not vary the view I have taken of the sub- 
 ject, nor can it add force to the example which has been quoted. The centuries and 
 tribes of Rome, were not extremes of aristocracy and democracy of which the Ro- 
 man people made experiment at dilFerent times and separately. The}' existed toge- 
 ther, and for ages. They vrere at the foundation of the patrician and plebeian orders 
 — originated durincr the monarchy, and were continued in the time of the republic. 
 They were the inspiring cause of the angry dissentions between the different orders 
 of the people — of the grinding oppressions of tlae poor, and the lawless inroads upon 
 the property of tlie rich. The power of the monarch was necessar}- to balance the 
 contending factions, and restrain the dangerous excesses of each — and in a few short 
 years, less than twent}^ after the expulsion of the Tarquins. and the destruction of 
 the monarchy, these excesses led to the appointment of the first Dictator, the reces- 
 sion of the people to tlie sacred mount, and the first serious petition for an agrarian 
 law. In the tribes the people were not represented, but appeared in proper person to 
 act their part in public affairs. The scheme of centuries and tribes was designed to 
 balance numbers and wealth against each other : but, the history of the republic af- 
 fords more of warning against its mischiefs than connnendation of its success. 1 will 
 not, however, claim the benefit, of tiiis example and uro-e it as a caution against the 
 danger of giving represent;itiou to property in our republic. I know that our condition 
 and that of the Roman people is so essentially unlike — our representative republic so 
 radically different from their mixture of aristocrac^v and democracy, that it is not safe 
 to reason from one to tlie other. The Roman Government, indeed, in the opinion of 
 Cicero, its greatest admirer, and ablest vindicator, owed its chief excellence to its 
 strong aristocratic character — a merit to which our Government surely has no claim. 
 
 It is utterly in vain, Mr. Chairman, that we appeal to an}- of the ancient republics 
 for information to guide us. We know them all most imperfectly, and the little we 
 do know teaches us only that they contain no instruction for us. 
 
 The modern European republics will supply as hltle aid to our deliberations. We 
 should look in vain to Venice or St. ^lanno. to Holland or Switzerland, for the ex- 
 perience of a S3^stem like ours, operating upon a people like ours — or for inlormaticn 
 to guide us to the best means of protecting the peculiar interests which arise out of 
 the peculiar population of Virginia. How would it avail us, for example, to know 
 what causes preserved so long the httie Italian repubhc, with a few thousand inhabi- 
 tants only on a mountain top. contented and happy, though poor, safe amidst surround- 
 ing nations, though without military force, and perfeoth' tranquil in the operations 
 of its Government, though without the ordinary checks and balances ! Or what 
 would it profit us to inquire, hov." it has hapjiened that in the small democratic cantons 
 the liberty of the people, with all the rights of person and property, were preserved 
 for centuries, though every male citizen, above fifteen years of age, was admitted, in 
 proper person, to share in the legislation of the country.^ 
 
 Just as little useful information or salutary warning is furnished us on this ques- 
 tion by the experience of the French repaiilic — a Government that was thrown up 
 by a convulsion from the abyss of desp ttism. floated for a few years on the waves of 
 a bloody revolution, and sank again, as they subsided, into the bottomless deep. Such 
 experience might teach us tlie utter unfitness of any people for a Government to 
 which they have been wholl}'' unused — and the great dangers which attend violent and 
 sudden transitions from one extreme to another — but, none of the examples of the 
 European republics can assist us in deciding, whether it is wisest in \'irgiriia to base 
 the representation upon numbers, or property, or a combination of both. 
 
 The British House of Commons has been referred to, for the purpose of showing 
 the intimate connexion between taxation and representation, and of proving that in 
 England, where our system of re^iresentation had its birth, its foundations were laid 
 in the power of imposinof taxes. 
 
 To the experience of England, Mr. Chairman, the American Statesman may in 
 general safely refer. We are better acquainted with her history, more familiar with 
 her institutions, than with those of any other foreign country. From her common 
 law, her jury trial, habeas corpus and magna charta. we learn the most valuable les- 
 sons of jurisprudence, and from these our ancestors imbibed their love of civil liberty, 
 their respect for the rights of persons and the rights of property. In her Govern- 
 ment we see a well-adjusted balance of power ; and with all its imperfections on its 
 head, it is probably better suited than any other to her own peculiar condition. I can 
 readily understand how its kincr, lords and commons, with all the inequalities of its 
 representation, may be well adapted to the Government of England, and yet neither 
 of them be a fit model for our imitation. A mixed monarchy, for the Government of 
 an insular people, surrounded bv powerful nations, and under the necessity of main- 
 taining espensive naval and military establishments, may find its strength and its ef» 
 
274 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ficacy in those very provisions, which, in a country like ours, would be justly regard- 
 ed as intolerable defects. We could not here tolerate either its monarchy, its aristo- 
 cracy, or the corruptions of its House of Commons. 
 
 But, the example of the House of Commons is quoted to prove that representation 
 is founded on taxation. True, Sir, that at an early period of the English history, the 
 independent spirit of that people contested with their monarch, the right of taxing 
 them without their consent, and at last succeeded in maintaining that no contribu- 
 tions should be levied upon them, but such as were freely given in Parliament through 
 their representatives. It is true, also, that the Knights and Burgesses, originally 
 summoned by the monarch to vote supplies only, availed themselves of this power to 
 extort from the throne, a participation, Avith the King and his nobles, in the legisla- 
 tion of the kingdom. But, what Monarch or noble Barons have we here, from whom 
 to purchase, with our treasure, tiie right of egislation.'' And what peculiar connec- 
 tion can there be, between taxation and representation, in a country, where it is as 
 much the settled doctrine that the people siiall be bound by no laws made without 
 their consent, as it is that they shall not be taxed without their consent? When you 
 have estaiilished that the people cannot be taxed without the consent of themselves 
 or their representatives, you have cidvanced no farther in ascertaining how represen- 
 tation is to be apportioned among the peo])le, than when the broad principle is ac- 
 knowledged that no law, affecting life, liberty, or property, is binding on the people 
 without their consent. Surely, the example of the House of Commons can give no 
 support to the proposition, that representation should be apportioned in any degree to 
 taxation. The people of England never insisted, that each man shonld vote his own 
 contribution, that the votes of their representatives should be valued according to 
 the amount of their respective contributions, or that the several interests on which 
 contributions were levied, should be represented, in the proportion of their wealth. 
 The poorest borough, and the richest city, the largest and the smallest shire, has its 
 representation, Avithout any reference to wealth, amount of taxes or population. The 
 forty counties in England, send each two members to Parliament, notwithstanding 
 their great disparity in wealth and populat on, ;md the residue of the 513 members, 
 furnished by England, are supplied by the large cities and the small boroughs without 
 the least regard to their wealth, or their contributions to the Government: the large 
 majority of them, are comparatively poor and insignificant, while some of them 
 would scarcely be able to defray the expenses of their members during a single ses- 
 sion, perh ips not able to pay for the wine drank by them at a single dinner. The 
 great county of Middlesex, and its towns of London and Westminster send eight 
 members to Parliament. If they were represented in proportion to their taxation, 
 they would probably furnish a majority of the House of Commons. A statement 
 made by Burgh, the great advocate of English reform,, referred to, probably by the 
 gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. J. S. Barbour) shews that in the latter part of the 
 seventeenth century, Middlesex and its towns paid 265 parts out of 513, of the whole 
 land tax of the kino-dom, permanent and annual ; so that a proportionate representa- 
 tion would have given them a decided majority of the v/hole number of English 
 members. 
 
 I cannot here f<^rbear to remark, that gentlemen have seriously objected to the re- 
 presentation of numbers, because of its tendency to throw the power of Government 
 into the hands of small populous districts, whose representatives, acting in concert, 
 would exert an injurious influence over the legislation of the country. They tell us 
 that Boston, or New York, or even Baltimore, represented in proportion to its num- 
 bers, would soon controul the councils of its State. And what is the remedy pro- 
 posed for that evil ? Instead of a salutary check, by limiting the representation in 
 such overgrown districts ; by anticipating the probable growth of the tide-water towns 
 in wealth and population, and limiting their representation to a prescribed number, it 
 is proposed to give them additional power in the Government, by adding their 
 wealth to their numbers. The city of Richmond, which, upon the ratio of the white 
 population, would be entitled, at this time, to one member only, would be entitled on 
 the ratio of its taxes to more than four, and on the combined ratio to nearly three. 
 
 The principles of our revolution have been appealed to ; and it has been supposed 
 that the spirit of our fathers, which refused submission to taxes imposed by a Govern- 
 ment, in which they were not represented, should inspire a just opposition to every 
 scheme of representation, which was not apportioned, in some degree, to tiie amount 
 of taxes imposed. If this, indeed, were the true principle of the revolution, is it not 
 wonderful, how little regard was paid to it by the fathers of the revolution.'' That it 
 did not find some conspicuous place in their Declarations of Rights, or have a con- 
 trolling influence in the provisions of the Constitutions which they themselves form^ 
 ed ? But do gentlemen seriously believe, that the war of the revolution originated in 
 a desire to obtain a representation in the British Parliament, proportioned to our po- 
 pulation, or, indeed, any representation at all They certainly do not; for they ask 
 us, almost in derision, what would have been the fate of a proposition from the Bri' 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 275 
 
 tish Parliament, to grant her colonies a representation in the House of Commons, 
 proportionate to their population, on condition that the}' would submit to be taxed? 
 I unite with the gentlemen in supposing, that our fathers had too niuch good sense, 
 too much prudence and foresight, to have consented to surrender their own House of 
 Burgesses, their own power of legislating for tliemselves, and taxing themselves, sub- 
 ject only to the royal negative, to have bound themselves indissolubly to a Govern- 
 ment, acting at the distance of 3000 miles from them ; to have sunk tlieir consequence 
 and their power, by becoming an integer of the British nation ; and have abandoned 
 forever, all hope of independence. I unite with them in believing that the proposi- 
 tion would have been rejected ; and not less certainly would it have been rejected, if 
 they had been offered a representation, proportioned to their population and taxes 
 combined. The principles of the revolution teach us. that no people shcu'd be taxed 
 by a Government, in which they ai-e not represented ; but they do not instruct us, 
 that representation and taxation should bear any given ratio to each other. Thej 
 would rather lead to the conclusion, that as representation is the organ, through which 
 the public will acts upon the public interest, it should be proportioned with the sole 
 view of fairly embodying that will. 
 
 Gentlemen, endeavoring to fortify themselves with authority, and seeming desirous 
 to supply force by numbers, have invoked the Constitution of the United States, and 
 of -several States of the Union. 
 
 They suppose the Constitution of the United States, to furnish an example worthy 
 of great respect; because, in apportioning representation among the several States.it 
 has abandoned the guide of white population ; has adopted the Federal number, which, 
 in effect, gives representation to propertv, and has provided, that representatives and 
 ■direct taxes, shall be apportioned, according to the same standard. iS'eed 1 remark on. 
 the inconsistencies of gentlemen, who, while they quote the example of the Federal 
 Constitution, lose no opportunity to reproach the Federal Government, with corrup- 
 tion and mal-administration — who, while they hold up the provisions of that Con- 
 stitution, as fit models for our imitation, take great pains to inform us, how utterly it 
 kas failed to attain the great ends of its adoption ; how it has been wrested from its 
 original purpose, and made the engine of injustice and oppression ZSo, Sir, I enter- 
 tain too much respect for the Constitution of the United States, to allow myself to 
 repel the argument drawn from it, by relying on the imputations which have beea 
 siade on its practical operation. I regard it as one of the happiest efforts of humais. 
 wisdom, prudence and foresight. Considering the intrinsic difficulty of the subject — 
 the delicacy and importance of the interests to be adjusted — the jealousies to be 
 soothed — the diversity of opinions to be consulted and harmonized — the opposing powd- 
 ers to be balanced — it is really wonderful how admirably the work has be^?n perform- 
 ed, with how much fitness the means have been adapted to the end. and how muck 
 practical good has been attained. The errors aiid abuses in the Government, which 
 certainly have not been fev>' or trivial, and which deserve not to be excused or pallia- 
 ted, are incident to the imperfection of human institutions, and the incurable frailty 
 of human nature, and ought not, perhaps, to be ascribed to any particular fault in the 
 Constitution. To the example of this Constitution, then, I am willing to pay great 
 deference and respect ; but we must be careful not to misapply the example. We 
 Biust recollect, that we are not the deputies of thirteen independent sovereignties, 
 endeavouring to form a confederacy, and establish a Government, charged with its 
 foreign relations, commercial and diplomatic, with the conduct of its wars, with the 
 common defence, and with the preservation of peace and harmony among its several 
 members — that we are not charo;ed with the duty of surrendering a part, and retain- 
 ing a part of the sovereignty of independent States — tliat we are the delegates of a 
 single people, members of the same political society, owino; an undivided allegiance to 
 the same Governmen! — living under a Constitution which acknowledges the right of 
 the .majority to reform — and now ehargfed with the duty of making such reforms as 
 will best assure a fair, just, and wise expression of the public will, on those measures 
 of internal domestic legislation, which are intended to secure the property, liberty, 
 and life of every citizen, and promote the prosperitv and happiness of all. 
 
 It is obvious, then, that as the districts which we represent, have no separate in- 
 dependent sovereignty, none of them can impose a veto on our measures, none pre- 
 scribe indispensible conditions of our action — while, in the Federal Convention, each 
 State, even the smallest, could dictate the terms, on which alone it v.-ould be bound 
 by the measures agreed upon. Whatever, therefore, we can fairly trace to that spirit 
 of compromise and concession, which was indispensible to the success of the Fede- 
 ral Convention, will lose its authority here, in a discussion of what is right in princi- 
 ple — what will be just and wholesome in practice — what the majority ought in pru- 
 dence to adopt. A little attention to the liistory of the Constitution of tlie United 
 States, will show, I think, that the apportionment of representation among the seyfi- 
 ral States, was the result of that spirit of compromise and concessioru 
 
276 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 When the articles of confederation were reported to the old Congress in July, 1776, 
 they proposed that contributions to the General Gcvernxnent should be apportioned 
 among- the several States, in proportion to the whole number of inhabitants in each, 
 and that each State should have an equal vote in the councils of the nation. Both 
 these propositions were strenuously debated. It was agreed by all, that contributions 
 should be in proportion to the wealth of the respective States — in proportion to their 
 ability to pay — but there was great ditference of opinion as to the measure of that 
 wealth. The Southern members seriously contended, that the most accurate measure 
 Was the number of freemen ; that slaves were property only, and no more a standard 
 of wealth than cattle or other property ; while the Northern members contended, that 
 the v^hole number of inhabitants was the better measure ; because, although slaves 
 Were property, they were productive labourers, and the labour of a country was the 
 surest measure of its wealth. A member from Virginia suggested, that the labour of 
 two slaves was not more than equivalent to the labour of one white man, and pro- 
 posed that two slaves should be counted as one, in the apportionment of taxes : — And 
 a member from Pennsylvania, Dr. Witlierspoon, was of opinion, that the best measure 
 of the wealth of a nation, was the value of its lands and houses. On the question of 
 Suffrage, the smaller States insisted, it was due to their independence, and essential 
 to their preservation, that they should each have an equal vote with the larger States, 
 while the larger contended, that the vote of each State should be proportioned to the 
 numbers represented in each, or if not, to the amount of their contributions. Mr. 
 Wilson of Pennsylvania thought " that taxation should be in proportion to wealth, 
 but that representation should accord vv'ith the number of freemen." These articles 
 of confederation having been debated from time to time for two years, were adopted 
 in July, 1778, making the value of lands and houses, the standard of contribution from 
 the several States, and giving to each State an equal vote in Congress ; the larger 
 States thus s;irrendering their claim to power, as the price of that union which was 
 indispensible to success to the common cause, in which the interests of all were em- 
 barked. 
 
 Experience soon demonstrated, that however just the standard of contribution 
 which had been adopted, it was too expensive and inconvenient for political purposes. 
 Remonstrances were presented against it, which resulted in a resolution of Congress 
 to propose as a substitute for it, the apportionment of contributions, according to the 
 federal number, in which the labour of five slaves is regarded as equal to the labour 
 of three free men. This resolution was adopted in April 1783, and a committee con- 
 sisting of Mr. Madison, Mr. Ellsworth, and Mr. Hamilton, was appointed to address 
 a communication to the several States recommending it with other amendments to 
 their adoption. In their address to the States, the Committee thus speaks of it : 
 
 This rule, although not free from objections, is liable to fewer than any other that 
 could be devised. The only material difficulty which attended it, in the deliberations 
 of Congress, was to fix t]ie jJToper difference, between the labour and industry of free in,' 
 liahitaMs and of all other inhabitants. The ratio ultimately agreed on, was the eifect 
 of mutual concession." 
 
 The substitute had been approved by eleven out of the thirteen States, but the con- 
 currence of the other two not having been signified, and unanimity being necessary, 
 it does not appear to have been adopted as an article of the confederation. 
 
 When the Federal Convention assembled in 17b7, and had agreed to transfer to 
 Congress the exclusive power over imposts and duties, almost the whole power of in- 
 direct taxation — there seems to have been no difficulty at all in regulating the propor- 
 tions in which direct taxes should be levied in the several States. The Federal num- 
 ber, as recommended by Congress, and approved by eleven States, gave the obvious 
 rule of apportionment, and I believe it Was adopted without opposition. It was, how- 
 ever, an arduous task to regulate the power of the several States, in the new Govern- 
 ment. Here arose the delicate and difficult questions, between sovereigns having 
 equal rights, claiming equal power, but possessing unequal numbers, and unequal 
 wealth : — The smaller States preferred again their claim to equal power — the larger, 
 their's to a just apportionment; and among themselves, they difiered as to the rule of 
 apportionment, whether according to the whole number of inhabitants, the number of 
 free inhabitants, or the amount of contributions. These conflicting claims, after pro- 
 tracted debate, presenting difficulties which threatened entire abortion to all the la- 
 bours of the Convention, resulted in compromise. Mr. Wilson of Pennsylvania, who," 
 in 1776, had expressed the opinion, that, while taxation should be in proportion to 
 Wealth, representation should accord with the number of freemen, proposed as the 
 basis of representation in the House of Representatives, the Federal number, and re- 
 commended it, as having been approved, by eleven of the thirteen States, as the pro- 
 per measure of contributions. It was acceded to by a majority, and submitted to 
 by all, when the small States had been conciliated, by a provision, that each should 
 have equal power in the Senate. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 277 
 
 It is manifest, from this review, that the ratio of representation in Congress, was 
 adjusted less upon considerations of what was just and right, in relation to tlie per- 
 sons represented, or of what was wise and proper, for the protection of property, than 
 Upon principles of concession and compromise' — and it follows, that the example can- 
 not be proper for our imitation, till that day shall arrive ; which, may God, in his 
 mercy, forever avert! — when the large districts of our State, having separated from 
 each other, and formed independent Governments, shall have sent deputies to form 
 for them, a Federal Constitution. 
 
 That the apportionment of representation according to Federal numbers was not 
 intended to alford protection to the slaves of the Southern States, is plainly to be in- 
 ferred from the utter inadequacy of the means to the end. It could afford no such 
 protection, because it left the five Southern States, the principal slave-holders, in a 
 decided minority, in the House of Representatives, while they were in a still smaller 
 minority in the Senate. The protection to that property, Irom the power of Con- 
 gress, is to be found, in the absence of all authority to legislate concerning it, except 
 Iby the imposition of taxes, and in the restraint upon the power to lay any capitation 
 or other direct tax, unless in the proportion of the Federal numbers. 
 
 The provisions of the Constitution of the United States do not warrant the con- 
 clusion, that it was intended to apportion representation, in the popular branch of the 
 Legislature, to the contributions of the respective States. The contributions of the 
 States are drawn essentially from imposts and duties, and there is no attempt to ap- 
 portion representation to them. It was manifest that the revenue from this source 
 would furnish the ordinary income of the Government, and that direct taxes would 
 be the subject only of occasional resort. Yet the represtntition is the same whether 
 direct taxes are levied or not. In truth, direct taxes and representation are not ap- 
 portioned to each other ; they are only referred to a common standard, tlie Federal 
 number, which is to govern the one always, whether the other exist or no, and govern 
 that other casually when called into existence. 
 
 But suppose it conceded, that it was the object of the Federal Constitution to ap- 
 portion representation and contributions, to each other; and conceded, moreover, 
 that such apportiomnent was right up.m principle ; is there nothing due to the con- 
 sideration, that while to the General Government is committed the conduct of our 
 external relations alone, the State Governments have charge of all our internal al- 
 fairs — while the Federal Government acts in the general upon great and common in- 
 terests, and upon large masses, the Stiite Governments act upon the minor sub-divi- 
 ded interests and upon each individual, in every relation which he bears to society 
 Is there no fair inference from this coiisideration, that while a representation appor- 
 tioned to taxes, might fairly embody the public will, in the Federal Councils, and 
 give sufficient protection to the various interests on which they act; a representation 
 in proportion to the number of free men, might be required in Virginia, to express 
 fairly the will of her people, to represent and protect all the various interests on 
 which her Government continually acts 
 
 The Constitutions of Massachusetts, New-Hampshire, South Carolina and Georgia, 
 are referred to, as furnishing examples of a representation of property in Republican 
 Governments; and the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. P. P. Barbour,) particularly 
 commends to our attention the experience of Massachusetts, who, after thirty or forty 
 years' trial of her Government, has approved this representation, by refusing to alter 
 it, at a late revision of her Constitution. In Massachusetts, the representation in the 
 Senate is based upon the ratio of taxes, with a provision that no district shall send 
 more than six members ; and in the House of Representatives, it is based on the 
 number of taxable polls, each election district being entitled to one for the first one 
 hundred and fifty polls, and one in addition for every two hundred and twenty-five 
 above that number. The election districts are large, and have become populous, so 
 that each is now entitled to many representatives — Boston, for example, to about se- 
 venty. But the districts are not required to elect the whole number ; each sends 
 such proportion of its whole delegation as it thinks proper — and generally they send 
 but a small proportion of them. It is this Constitution which the experience of 
 Massachusetts has not induced her to alter. Would any gentleman recommend the 
 constitution of both branches of her Legislature, as a model for our imitation.? 
 Would he give to our election districts the power of electing from one to seventy 
 members, as they thouglit fit ? If he would not be governed by the experience of 
 Massachusetts, as to one branch of her Legislature, why should he desire us to be 
 governed by it, with respect to the other ? But if we are to be governed by it, what 
 does it teach ns? Sure'y, not that a check upon the power of the people, should be 
 introduced into the populir branch of the Legislature, by giving representation to 
 property there; but that such check should be introduced into the°Senate : it teaches 
 us to reject the amendment of the gentleman from Culpeper, which it has been invoked 
 to support. 
 
278 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOK. 
 
 The Constitution of New-Hampsliire is similar to that of Massachusetts, and re- 
 quires no particular commentary. That of South Carolina has been most relied on, 
 as furnishing a more appropriate example. South Carolina, a slave-holding State, by 
 her Constitution adopted in the year 1790, had a prescribed number of Representa* 
 tives and Senators from each election district, not var3nng witli the changes of popu- 
 lation, and not apportioned thereto. In 1803, the constitution of her House of Re- 
 presentatives was changed, by introducing into it the precise compound basis, now- 
 proposed to us by the gentleman from Culpeper — the Senate was left as formerly, 
 composed of a prescribed nuinber of members from each election district. The 
 precedent, as it regards the popular branch of the Legislature, seems to be in point, 
 and how far we shall respect its authority, it is for the good sense of this Committee 
 to decide. The slave population, I learn, abounded in the lower districts of South 
 Carolina, as it does in the lower districts of Virginia; tliere, as here, the slave popu- 
 lation was small in the Western districts, the white population rapidly increasing — ^ 
 its representation very unequal — the people of those districts insisting on a more 
 equal representation — and the people of the Eastern districts fearing, that if the power 
 passed into the hands of the Western people, their property would be endangered. 
 The Eastern districts anticipating the time when they would not be able to resist the 
 demands of the growing population of the West, and availing themselves of their 
 great ascendancy in both branches of the Legislature, adopted the amendment which 
 fixed the basis of representation in the popular branch upon the compound basis of 
 taxes and white population. Their Constitution authorised amendments, by majori- 
 ties of two-thirds of both Houses of the Legislature, at two successive sessions. It 
 v/as by such a concurrent vote that this amendment was adopted, and there can be 
 iio stronger evidence of the ascendancy which at that time the Eastern districts had 
 in the Legislature. That an overwhelming majority then, should have imposed such 
 terms upon the minority, can, in my humble judgment, furnish no good reason, why 
 the minority liere should impose lilie terms upon a majority. But the subsequent 
 history of South Carolina furnishes the strongest refutation of the argument which 
 upheld the policy of this measure there, and now recommends it to us ; for, notwith- 
 standing this expedient of the compound basis, the political power, in the popular 
 branch of the Legislature, has passed from the Eastern slave-holders to the Western 
 freemen, a,nd yet the Government proceeds in perfect harmony, and I am well in- 
 formed, that danger to the property of the East, is in no wise threatened, and is no 
 longer feared. Why then "should danger be feared, from permitting the Western 
 freemen of Virginia, to acquire political power in the popular branch of the Virginia 
 Legislature ? 
 
 By the Constitution of Georgia, adopted in 1708, their Senate is composed of one 
 member from each county, and their House of Representatives has a graduated re- 
 presentation based upon the Federal number. How this operates in the practical dis- 
 tribution of power, or upon the interests of society, we are not informed. We can- 
 aot therefore appreciate the example. 
 
 But, if this question were tried by the example of our sister States, surely the 
 weight of authority would greatly preponderate against the limitation which is pro- 
 posed, upon the power of the free inhabitants. Among the slave-holding States, 
 while Maryland and North Carolina have a county representation without regard to 
 numbers, Louisiana has its House of Representatives apportioned according to the 
 -qualified voters, and a Senate with fixed numbers from prescribed districts— Kentucky, 
 its representatives apportioned to the qualified electors, and Senate to the free male 
 inhabitants above twenty-one years— Mississippi has representatives apportioned to 
 free white inhabitants, her Senators to the free white taxable inhabitants— Alabama 
 has both Houses based upon free white inhabitants— Missouri, both based upon free 
 White male inhabitants— and Tennessee upon the taxable inhabitants — that is, as I 
 am well informed, free inhabitants, on whom taxes may be imposed. Here are six 
 slave-holding States, in most, if not all of which, the slave population is very une- 
 qually distributed. In none of them has it been deemed necessary to protect their 
 slaves by restraints on the power of the free inhabitants, and in none of them do 
 we learn that there has been the least cause to apprehend any danger to this pro- 
 perty from the exercise of that power. Of these States, Kentucky and Tennessee 
 has each had between thirty and forty years' experience. j 
 
 In States where there are no slaves, and where political power is distributed aniong 
 the different districts essentially in proportion to the number of inhabitants, we have 
 the examples of Pennsylvania, New- York, Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, in which 
 there has been no attempt to guard property by giving it representation. In the old 
 Constitution of New- York, there v/as a distinction made between the qualification ot 
 voters for members of the two Houses ; a higher property quahfication being required 
 for the voter in elections to the Senate ; but this has been abandoned in the recent 
 change of their Constitution. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 279 
 
 I profess, however, Mr. Chairman , to pay hut Httle respect to any of the examples 
 from the Constitutions of our sister States, "quoted on the one side or the other. JSone 
 of tlafci can be very well understood by us ; all of them have been subjected to the 
 test of but a span of time, compared with the hfe of nations ; and all of them are ta^ 
 ken from the infancy of our institutions, where our sparse population, the facility of 
 acquiring property, and our agricultural pursuits, secure to us more virtue, and 
 more freedom from temptation, than, m future times, we can reasonably hope to 
 enjoy. 
 
 Having disposed of the precedents which are supposed to bear on the question in 
 debate, let us consider the tv/o propositions with reference to tlieir practical opera- 
 tion — and in approaching this subject, I must express my deep regret at the appeal 
 which has been made to the spirit of party politics. We are told by the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, that one of the objects of this Convention is to change the policy 
 of this State in reference to the measures of the General Government ; and he has 
 endeavored to alarm the party politician, with the apprehension that his favorite doc= 
 trine of State Rights would be endangered, by a transfer of power from the East to 
 the West. Mr. Chairman, has not the subject under consideration intrinsic difficul-. 
 ties enough r Are there not prejudices, naturally, perhaps inseparably belonging to 
 it, which present almost insuperable obstacles to candid discussion, to just and wiss 
 conclusions r-^specting it? Shall we, by invoking the demon of party spirit, multi^ 
 ply these difficulties, inflame these prejudices, bring discord into our ranks, and con-^ 
 fusion to our councils.' Has it come to this — that public opinion is to be controlled, 
 by retaining political power in the hands of the minority Do our brethren of the 
 East mean to deny us freedom of opinion respecting the affairs of the General Gcs 
 vernment ? Do they insist upon the privilege of thinking for us, as well as legislating 
 for ns? The generous feelings of my friend from Chesterfield, when the excite^ 
 ment of ardent debate has subsided, will disclaim, I am sure, all aid from blind party 
 zeal ; and I trust that this Comnaittee will not for a moment submit to its influence. 
 It has been objected to the resolution of the Select Committee, that by transferring 
 the power to the "West, it will endanger the basis of representation in the House of 
 Representatives of the United States ; that is to say, that if the basis of white popu^ 
 lation should be established for the House of Delegates, the people of the West, fols 
 lowing the precedent, ■will insist on arranging the Congressional districts in this State 
 upon the same basis, instead of the basis of Federal numbers, upon which they have 
 heretofore been arranged. I do not believe. Sir, that any such danger exists; the 
 propriety of arranging the Congressional districts upon the Federal basis is so obvi-r 
 ous, and has been so long practised, that I do not believe the change would ever be 
 attempted. But if you fea.r it, provide against it in the Constitution, by an express 
 declaration that the Federal number shall forever govern in arranging these districts. 
 But the gentleman from Fauquier tells us, he does not know that sucli a provision would 
 be regarded as obligatory ; he does not know but that the Constitution of the United 
 States would be appealed to as paramount to tlie authority of the State Constitution 
 on tliis subject. Does the gentleman from Fauquier entertain the least doubt that such 
 a provision in our Constitution would be obligatory Can he doubt that the State 
 Legislature is imperiously bound by the State Constitution, in all things not contrary 
 to the Federal Constitution.' And can he find any thing in the Constitution of the 
 United States upon which to rest a doubt, that it is Icwful to prescribe that the dis- 
 tricts for electing members to Congress, shall be formed upon tiie basis which the 
 Constitution of the United States itself has estabhshed for the vrhole representation 
 of the State, If we are to be driven from the path of duty by sucia scepticism, our 
 labours are at an end ; for, why prescribe a qualification of suffrage ? The gentleman 
 from Fauquier does not know that in this age of metaphysical abstraction, it will be 
 held obligatory upon the people. Why prescribe any basis of representation at all.? 
 The gentleman from Fauquier does not know that the Legislature will hold it cblioa-- 
 tory upon them. Let us not, Sir, deliver ourselves up to the blind guidance of what 
 we do not know ; but rather let us be governed by v,-hat we do know, or might know, 
 if we would consult our reason. We ought to know, that it is our duty to settle this 
 question of representation without influence from imaginary dangers. We ought to 
 know tliat the Legislature of Virginia would never incur the risk of losing its whole 
 representation in Congress, by electing all its members in direct violation of the 
 State Constitution ; that they would never incur the reproach of mankind by so pal- 
 pable a violation of duty. 
 
 We are tlireatened with another danger, in relation to the Federal Government, 
 from adopting the basis of white population. We are told that if "^^irginia, the Icro-est 
 Southern State, disregards her slave population, in apportioning representation in the 
 State Legislature, it will weaken the argument, by which the Southern States sup- 
 port their right to representation for that property, in the Government of the United 
 States, and may endanger the loss of power, which that representation gives us, 
 
280 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 It should be recollected, that the power which this population gives us, in the Ge- 
 neral Government, does not rest upon argument, hut upon compact — was not al- 
 lowed us upon principle, but upon compromise — and cannot be taken away frife us, 
 but by a total departure from the spirit of the compromise and an amendment of the 
 compact agreed to by three-fourths of the States, in the Union — and the gentleman 
 from Loudoun (iVIr. Mercer) has shown how utterly impracticable any such amend- 
 ment would be. But, Sir, this argument, that the slave population was not regarded 
 in the representation of those States where slavery existed, was in full force" when 
 the Constitution of the United States was adopted — it was then urged and repelled. 
 The argument is noticed, in the fifty-fourth number of Publius. The fact on which 
 it rests is admitted, and the argument ably repelled by a clear exposition of '< the 
 compromising expedient of the Constitution"' — " which regards the slave as divested 
 of two-fifths of the man." By adopting the basis of white population, then, we fur- 
 nish to our adversaries no new and fearful argument — but we leave the old refu» 
 ted argument in the quiet grave which has covered it for forty years, 
 
 We come now to consider this question, with reference to the protection of pro- 
 perty. By adopting the basis of white population, shall we expose to danger that pe- 
 culiar property, in which the Eastern districts have so deep an interest ? I am per- 
 fectly satisfied, Mr. Chairman, that you would more effectually protect this property 
 by granting us the simple ba^ls, than by imposing on us the compound basis, proposed 
 by the gentleman from Culpeper. Let us attentively and impartially examine this 
 question. 
 
 The whole danger apprehended, rests upon the supposition, that the basis of white 
 population will carry the power of the Government into the hands of those, who will 
 be, comparatively, but little interested in this property : And if it can be shown, that 
 this supposition is not correct, then it must be admitted, that the danger is unreal. 
 I do not believe that it is correct — and will submit to your candid consideration, the 
 reason of that opinion. 
 
 I have already shown you, that taking the Auditor's estimates of the present popu- 
 lation, and apportioning the representation according to the whole white population, 
 there would be a majority of eight members in the House of Delegates, on the East 
 of the Blue Ptidge ; and apportioning it according to the qualified voters, there would 
 probably be a majority of twenty. If the basis of qualified voters should be adopted, 
 there is no definite period of time, within the present century or the next, at which 
 any person could say, with confidence, that this majority of twenty would be over- 
 come, by the increasing population of the West. Indeed, it is very doubtful whether 
 the majority of qualified voters v/ill ever be West of the Blue Ridge. Any one, who 
 v^ill carefully examine this subject, in his closet, with reference to the tables of po- 
 pulation ; the number of square miles in each district ; the quantity of mountain and 
 arable land in each ; their capacity to sustain population ; their distance from mar- 
 ket; the probable growth of their towns ; the pursuits of their people, whether com» 
 mercial, manufacturing, or agricultural ; planting, farming, or grazing ; will, I think, 
 be satisfied, that if that time should ever come, it is too distant to have the least in- 
 fluence on our deliberations. 
 
 The period is not so distant v/hen the majority of the white population, will probably 
 be West of the Blue Ridge ; but when that period will arrive, is exceedingly uncer- 
 tain. The tables of population show us, that the relative increase of the different 
 districts, heretofore, has been very irregular ; and we shall find our calculations of 
 their future increase, in a great measure conjectural. The ratio of increase of the 
 white population, from the year 1790 to the present time, appears by these tableSj to 
 be as follows : 
 
 In the first district, from 1790 to 1800 83 3-4 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810 47 per cent, 
 
 1810 to 1820 27 1-2 per cent. 
 
 1820 to 1829 36 1-5 per cent. 
 In the second district, from 1790 to 1800 20 per cent. 
 
 ISOO to 1810 3-4 per cent. 
 
 1810 to 1820 11 3-4 per cent. 
 
 1820 to 1829 14 3-4 per cent. 
 In the third district, from 1790 to 1800 11 1-2 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810 1 per cent. 
 
 1810 to 1820 3-4 per cent. ... 
 
 1820 to 1829 5 3-lOper cent. ' ■ ' 
 
 In the fourth district, from 1790 to 1800 2 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810 1-4 per cent, " ' 
 
 1810 to 1820 5 1-2 per cent. 
 
 1820 to 1829 2 2-5 per cent. 
 Thus you see, that in the Western district, the ratio having decreased between the 
 years 1790, and 1820, from 83| per cent, to S7i— appears by the Auditor's estimate to 
 
DEBATES or THE COXVZ^-TIO^^ 
 
 281 
 
 hive risen in the iast nine years, to 35 1-5 per cent, vrhich is enuivalent to 40 per 
 cent, for ten years — this may be owing- to some error in the Auditor's estimate, or it 
 may perhaps be accounted lor, upon tiie supp.'jsiti<.»n that emigration from that district 
 diminished, within the iast nine years, and migration to it increased. It is certainly, 
 however; not according to the usual course of things, that tliS ratio of increase in a 
 newly settled country should rise, as the population becomes more dense. 
 
 You will observe, that the Vailey district having remained nearly stationary for ten 
 years from 18)0 to 1::;10. increased 11:| per cent, for the n«xt ten years, and 14 2-5 per 
 cent, f )r the iast nine : that tiie middle district remaining ne rly stationary for twenty 
 years, from l.:;00 to lo2 j, appears to have increased upwards of -5 per cent, for the last 
 nine ; and tiiat the tide-water district being nearly stationary for twenty years from 
 17t} ) to IdLO, increased in the next ten years 5^ per cent., and in the last nine, about 
 2^ per cent. 
 
 There can be no doubt, that these irregularities proceed in a great degree from the 
 diSerence of emigration from ail the districts in tiie State, fast diminisiiing. as the 
 Western States and territories are becoming populous, and Western lands rising in 
 price. The tiiue, therefore, is probably not distant when the increase of our popula- 
 tion will be left cliiefiy to its natural causes, and when the ratio in each district will 
 be nearly tiie same. 
 
 1 have made a calculation of the probable white population of the several districts, 
 in the year 18-50, upon the supposition, that the Auditor's estimates are correct, that 
 the Western district wUl increase 20 per cent, for the next ten years, and 10 per cent, 
 for the succeeding ten ; that tiie Valley district will increase 10 per cent, for each 
 period of ten years ; and that the two Eastern districts will increase 5 per cent, for 
 eacii period of ten years. Tiie result of th's calculation is. that in the year 18-50, the 
 wiiite population of the Western district, would be about 234,000 — that of the Valley 
 167,0 »0 — of the middle district "217.000 — and the tide-water district 178.000 — giving to 
 the West of the Blue Bridge, about 40y,0 >J, and to the East, about 305,000. This I 
 atn persuaded is a calculation more liberal to the West than they are entitled to, and 
 it results in giving them a small uiaj 'rltv of white popidati'"n in 1850. From thence- 
 forward they can liave no reason to expect that their population would increase more 
 rapidly than that of the East. Look for a moment at ihe comparative extent of the 
 two districts, and at some of the causes which would aficct'the increase of their popu- 
 lation. 
 
 The two districts West rf the Blue Pvicfre. contain '33,8S6 square miks: — tlie two 
 East of tlie Ridge, contain 26.774 snu'ire nides. Gonsideriiig the vast extent of moun- 
 tains bevond the Blue Rulge. it would be giving to the West a most liberal estimate 
 of its arable lands, to suppose tliem equal in quality to the arable lands East of the 
 mountains. Rehect, then, on the circumstance, that the whole lands of the East 
 must be alwavs employed in planting and farming, whUe a very large proportion of 
 those of the West, tiie whole extens' ve district from the North Mountain to the West- 
 ern boundary, with the exception only of those narrow valleys which he convenient 
 to the navigable waters, must for ages to co ne, be in the hands of the grazier : — re- 
 collect too, that if we should ever hive large towns and extensive manufactories, they 
 will seek the marts of foreign commerce, and probably be found about the falls of the 
 Eastern rivers — and I th'nk you will find strong reason to believe, that the Eastern 
 side of the mountain wiJl always ni i'n'cain a greater population than the West, and 
 can never be much inferior to it in white popul ition. 
 
 I have heard it said, that the Eastern districts contain already, nearly as much 
 population as thev could sustain. ZSothing can be more erroneous. The middle dis- 
 trict, countinsr ail its inhabitants, has a population of about tv.-enty-eight, and the tide- 
 water district, a population of about thirty-two, to the square mile. Compare this 
 with the population of older countries. In 1811. Scotland Ind a p:rpui?.tion of about 
 sixty-four — Wales, seventv-nine — England, one hundred and ninety-six. to the square 
 mile — France, about the be^rinning of this century, had a population of one hundred 
 and seventv-nine, to the square mile. Can any one doubt, that the country between 
 the Blue Ridge and the ocean, is capable of s istaining more population than Scotland 
 or Wale^: — and can any crood reason be assigned, w&y it may not be as poptdous as 
 Enofland or France ? 
 
 If I am right in my estimate of the future progress of white population, and we 
 can be satisfied, that in the course of. twenty years, there will be a few p-opulous coun- 
 ties bevond the mountains, essentiillv slave-holding counties, having a kindred inter- 
 est with the Ei^t, in the crood arovern neat of that property, and its exemption from 
 unjust burthens, then you have assurance tliat the basis of wliite population wiU not 
 carrv the power of the Government, into unfriendlv hands. 
 
 Referrinor afain to our tables, we find that the tide of slave population has been 
 setting strongly to the West, and that it is now swelled to its greatest height, at the 
 very base of the Blue Ridge : That in due time, it will find its level through the 
 passes of that mountain, tliere can be httle reason to doubt. 'We have seen by 
 
282 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 how much the slave population exceeds the white population, in the two Eastern dis- 
 tricts, and by how much it tails short, in the two Western. Let us now see what has 
 been the ratio of increase, from 1790, to the present time. It stands thus : 
 
 In the first district, from 1790 to 1800—138 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810—65 1-2 per cent. 
 
 1810 to 1820—46 per cent. 
 
 1820 to 1829—28 1-2 per cent. 
 In the second district, from 1790 to 1800—40 1-2 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810—31 1-4 per cent. 
 
 1810 to 1820—25 1-2 per cent. 
 
 182-0 to 1829—12 1-5 per cent. 
 In the third district, from 1790 to 1800—28 1-2 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810—20 3-4 per cent. 
 
 1810 to 1820—10 3-4 per cent. 
 
 1820 to 1829—7 7-10 per cent. 
 In the fourth district, from 1790 to 1800 — 6 1-4 per cent. 
 
 1800 to 1810—4 per cent. 
 \ 1810 to 1820—1 1-4 per cent. 
 
 1820 to 1829— loss of 13-100 of one per cent. 
 You find then, that, while in the tide- water district the slave population is rather 
 decreasing, it is increasing- in the middle district by a much smaller ratio than in the 
 Valley and the Western districts. You perceive too, until within the last nine years, 
 the increase in the Valley and Western district has been very rapid. A strong rea- 
 son why, within that time, the increase has not been so great in those districts, may 
 be found in the depressed prices of agricultural products. For the last ten or twelve 
 years, the products of the farming districts have scarcely been of value sufficient to 
 justify their transportation to distant markets. In consequence of this, farmers of 
 the Valley, and no doubt of other Western districts, have become graziers, and the 
 labour of slaves has been less in demand. The price of tobacco has been better sustain- 
 ed than the price of other agricultural products — it better bears the expense of trans- 
 portation to market ; and this has kept up the demand for the labour of slaves, in the 
 planting districts of the middle country. This too, is fostering the culture of tobacco 
 in some of the Valley counties, where it is grown of fine quality, and to much ad- 
 vantage ; and will, no doubt, extend its culture very considerably in the Western dis- 
 tricts. As the demand for slaves in the Southern States of the Union diminishes, and 
 their laws restraining the importation of them, become more rigid — as the tobacco 
 lands of the middle district decrease, and the tobacco culture in the Western districts 
 is extended; and as the products of the farming districts shall become more valuable ; 
 the demand for the labour of slaves will diminish in the middle districts, and increase 
 in the Western ; the price of tiiem v/ill become lower, the Western man will be more 
 able to purchase them, and the Western country will be sure to possess them, in large 
 numbers. In Rockbridge, where the culture of tobacco has been lately introduced, 
 the slave population has increased about 33 13 per cent, in the last nine years, and in 
 Botetourt, where the plant has been longer and more extensively cultivated, the slave 
 population has increased more than an hundred per cent, in the same time. These 
 two counties together, have a white population of 20,927, and slave population of 
 7,592. It cannot be doubted, that in twenty years, they will be essentially slave-hold- 
 ing counties ; and their white population, added to that of the East, in the year 1850, 
 will cast the balance of power decidedly in its favour. But many other counties of 
 the West, and among them, the rich and populous counties of Frederick and Jeffer- 
 son, under the influence of the causes I have referred to, must, in the course of twen- 
 ty years, have so strong an interest in the slave population, as to insure their co-ope- 
 ration in its protection. Nearly one-third of the population of these two counties is, 
 at this time, slaves. Their aggregate white population is upwards of 27,000 ; their 
 aggregate slaves, upwards of ll,U00. 
 
 These are some of the reasons which have satisfied my mind, that the power of the 
 Government, under the influence of the basis of white population, will abide with 
 the slave-holders. 
 
 But, suppose I should be mistaken ; siippose the ratio of white and slave popula- 
 tion to continue as it is, and that the basis of white population would tiansfer the 
 power of the Government to the West, would you secure protection to the interests 
 in the slave property, by rejecting this basis, and imposing on us the compound basis.'* 
 I think not. 
 
 If by conceding to the Western people, a right which has been so long, and, as 
 they think, so injuriously withheld from them, by this manifestation of' generous con- 
 fidence in them, by thus acknowledging them really as brethren, equal with you in 
 r^g'hit, you could not inspire a feeling of affection and sentiment of justice, on which 
 Bonie reliance might be placed ; if you could not trust to their general though deep 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 283 
 
 interest, in maintaining the rights of property, and the peace and good order of so- 
 ciety ; if yoa could not accept the justice of your own Government, your own for- 
 bearance to invade tlieir property for more tlian fifty years, as evidence, tliat they too 
 will govern justly, and will respect your property ; if you nmst act upon the distrust, 
 which the known frailty of human nature prompts, upon the apprehension, that large 
 masses of men, acting together, cannot resist the temptation of laro-e masses of pro- 
 perty, exposed to their power, then, there are other considerations wliich deserve 
 your most serious attention. 
 
 Let it be once openly avowed and adopted as a principle of your Constitution, that 
 the price which the Western people must pa}^ for the protection of your slaves, is the 
 surrender of their power in the Government, and you render that properlj- hateful 
 to them in the extreme, and hold out to them the strongest of all possible temptations 
 to make constant war upon it, to render it of no value to you, and to induce you to 
 part with it. A large district of your country, marked out by a geograpliicjil line, 
 containing a large minority of the freemen of the country, and expected soon to con- 
 tain the majority ; having a large representation in both branches of your Legisla- 
 ture, Vv'-here its voice can be coiistantly heard, and its complaints will be perpetually 
 poured forth ; this district is to be placed under the ban of the Empire, and its people 
 to be told, that your slaves exclude them from the pale of authority. I will not say, 
 you wiil madden them into acts of violence or disloj-alty, by such a measure — 1 be- 
 lieve it not — the people of the West, though zealous and persevering in pursuit of 
 their rights, are in general an industrious and contented people, as obedient to the 
 law, as prudent and as loyal as any people under the sun. But will you not make 
 them zealots on that subject, on which your right of propert}'' depends, and Yi hich is 
 so intimately connected with your domestic peace.'' Will you not drive them to seek 
 allies among your own people, associates in the measures, which are necessary to re- 
 move the obstacle that stands in their road to power ? 
 
 Unless I am deceived, very grossly deceived, Mr. Chairman, they would find many 
 and ardent auxiliaries, in the bosom of 3'our ov.-n society. How many are there, who 
 owning none of this propertj^, and doomed to the laborious offices of life, feel a sort 
 of degradation in being compelled to perform them in common v.-ith the slave, and a 
 sentiment of envy towards their owners.' Hovv many who professing conscientious 
 scruples, are even now continually propagating doctrines, which- tend to insubordina- 
 tion.? Remember too, Sir, that the R,ight of Suffrage will be extended. How many 
 of this class of auxiliaries, will be broiwht to the polls by this extension, remains yet 
 to be known. But I put it to the sober judgment of the Eastern Statesman to say, 
 whether he can feel security against the combined action of the whole Western coun- 
 try, and all the discontented of the East, when you shall have established the com- 
 pound basis, and materially extended the Right of Suffrage ? Sir, notiiing in my es- 
 timation can be more unwise, or threaten more serious mischief, than the united ope- 
 ration of these two causes. You cannot with safety extend the Right of Suffrage 
 materially, and force upon us the compound basis. 
 
 But, if the evil I have hinted at should not follow, what then ? Will the people ^ 
 of the West sit down tamely under the privation of even a portion of the power 
 which they now enjoy.? Will the majority of the freemen of the country, who 
 share the political power, acquiesce in the rule of the minority, under the persua- 
 sion that while the minority would have virtue and wisdom enough to protect the 
 property and secure all the rights of the majority, that majority could not be trusted 
 with power over the property^of the minority ? This is impossible, A Constitution 
 founded upon such a principle would not last ten years. There would be no rebel- 
 lion, no civil war, no blond-shed. The peaceful remedy is in the hands of the peo- 
 ple, and they will employ it. You do not mean to disavow the doctrine, that the 
 majority may reform the Constitution. You have already, by an unanimous vote, 
 sanctioned this doctrine in agreeing to the resolution, tliat the Bill of Rights required 
 no alteration. Your new Constitution then is to be sent forth, with a proscription 
 aofainst the majority, and with an invitation to the majority to alter, reform or abolish. 
 Will not this invitation be most certainly accepted ? The qualified voters, with the 
 increased povrer which the extension of the Right of Suffi-age vrill give them, will 
 make themselves heard at the polls, and heard in your halls of legislation. Do not 
 flatter yourself. Sir, that your majorities in the Legislature can resist the petitions of 
 a dreaded majority, earnestly pressed, and long persevered in. Your new voters will 
 sympathise with them and not with you — the}" will owe their pov.-er principally to the 
 people of the West, and they wiii not reo-,nrd your power as neces.sary to their pro- 
 tection. If your own constituents do not take part against you. nevertlieless, you 
 will be compelled to yield, as the Legislature has heretofore yielded to the force of 
 public opinion — and another Convention will be called to dp that which you now re- 
 fuse to do. The surrender of your power may then come too late, to allay the an"- . 
 mosities which the protracted controversy will have inflamed, heal dissention, sootlie 
 
284 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 wounded feelinor, inspire confidence, and cement the bond of union among the people 
 of the Commonweal ill. 
 
 Why then will you persist in contending for that which it is so hazardous to pos- 
 sess, so impossible to retain? Better, far better is it, in my humble opinion, to turn 
 your attention to that which is practicable, safe, enduring and effectual — to the pru- 
 dent limitation of the Right of Suffrage. This is a ground on which we could meet 
 and confer together, I should hope, with some prospect of settling at once the basis of 
 political power, and the mode of apporti<>ning it. Let the qualification-s of suffrage 
 be judiciously defined, and the basis of representation be the ratio of qualified voters. 
 I have shov/n vou how such a provision accords with the principles of our Govern- 
 ment, how mildly it would operate in the distribution of power, how perfectly secure 
 it would leave our rigiits of property. 
 
 It is to the qualifications of suffrage, Mr. Chairman, that we must look for the es- 
 sential character of our Government, for the security of all our rights, and especially 
 for the protection of our property. Hold in steady view the word and the spirit of 
 the Bill of Rights — admit to the enjoyment of political power, those, and if possible 
 those only, who " have sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and 
 attachment to, the community"' — and you have the best security that Vv'e can devise 
 for the protection of our property and our rights — you have the bond which gentle- 
 men have demanded, founded in self-interest and self-love. 1 am not so visionary 
 as to suppose, that human v/isdom can devise a rule of suffrage, v. hich would inclvde 
 all, who have, and exclude all, who have not, the requisite interest in the communily 
 and attachment to it. But there can be no doubt, by a careful attention to the cir- 
 cumstances, which indicate pcr7nanmcy of interest, cu'tnrmmity of mterest, aUachment 
 to the country, much might be done, to exclude the unworth}', and to commit the 
 political power, to the great body of the people, who must look to the good govern- 
 ment and prosperity of the country, for the prosperity and happiness of themselves 
 individually, their families and their posterity. Let your qualification of property be 
 fixed with no view to aristocratic pride and distinction ; let it be fixed so low, that the 
 industrious of all classes, professions and callings, may acquire it in a few years of 
 persevering labour ; and so high as to be out of the reach of the habitually idle, who 
 in all stations of life, are habitually worthless. Whether it be of real or personal 
 property — real I should prefer — let it be certain, simple, easy to understand, and con- 
 venient in practice. Such a safeguard for property, as this, Vv'ould be permanent; it 
 would not array the gre.tt distr cts of your State aoainst each oilier; and could not 
 produce any serious discontent. W"hat excluded class would oppose it Not our 
 slaves — their masters will keep them better employed; nor our children — tiie disci- 
 pline of the rod, will secure their allegiance; not our daughters — Heaven bless their 
 maidenly modesty! — they would not for the world be suspected of desiring power; 
 nor our wives, who would be perfectly contented, that their husbands should give 
 their votes for them ; nor yet th^se, wlio are no longer wives ; for they will have 
 been taught, in Heaven's best school, the vanity of human povv^er, and the necessity 
 of seeking happiness in devotion. No other classes, but the aliens and free coloured, 
 are excluded, and from them, nobody has any apprehension. All besides who are 
 excluded, are individuals belonging to all classes, who are for the time without the 
 requisite Qualification. The industrious ycung man, whether a cultivator of the soil, 
 a merchant or mechanic, whether lawyer, doctor or divine, who is engaged in lad ing 
 the foundations of his fortune, and who looks with confidence, as every industrious 
 man in this community may, to the time when he shall have acquired a comforta- 
 ble subsistence for himself and his family, and with it the qualification of suffrage — 
 can he now complain that he must for a few years submit to that exclusion which has 
 been deemed necessary to secure him the profits of his own labour, tiie protection of 
 the property he is endeavoring to acquire ? The sons of freeholders, who have not 
 yet come to the possession of the estates wliich their fathers have in keeping for 
 them, and have earned none of their own — they surely cannot complain, that while 
 they depend upon their fathers for property, they should depend on them also for its 
 government. Can the imprudent or the unfortunate, who have lost their property, 
 and with it their right of suffrage, complain that tiiey are not permitted to participate 
 in the management of public affairs, when they have been so unsuccessful in the 
 conduct of their private estates, as to be left without the qualification of a voter ? 
 With still less reason, could the idle man, whether young or old, who had acquired no 
 property, and was pursuing no means to acquire any, complain that he was not per- 
 mitted to share in the government f)f that society, to which he contributed nothing 
 better than the evil example of his bad habits. It is very manifest, that among all 
 these various descriptions of excluded persons, there could be no bond of sympathy, 
 no union of action — and that from their discontents, if they had no rallying point of 
 real grievance, no organized corps of dissatisfied voters to conduct their opposition, 
 society would have nothing to apprehend. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEN'TIOX. 
 
 285 
 
 There is but a sino-ie point of view iu wiiich the connexion of the basis of repre- 
 sentation witii the Rfoht of SuiTrncre, as I liare suggested. v\-ouId seem to threaten mis- 
 ciiief If the qualified voters in tlie several districts were made the standard of their 
 power, the extension of the Rifiht of SuJirage, as it would probably vary the ratio of 
 quahfied voters, might become a question of power between the different districts. _ I 
 have been fully aware of tliis consequence, and it induced me to hesitate in proposing 
 the connexion. But I have been encouraged to hope that this very expedient may 
 be made the means of settling the question of suffrage here more satisfactorily than 
 it could otherwise be settled. ° And if adjusted here to tlie satisfaction of both pai'ties, 
 I should have no fears of future consequences. No general discontent could possibly 
 be excited among the people upon tiiis subject — at least not for years to come. The 
 influence of tlie "extension of the Right of Suffrage, upon the relative power of the 
 several districts, will diminish hereafter, in the exact proportion, that the slave popu- 
 lation shall become more equally distributed through the State — and if I am riglit in 
 my calculations upon this subject, tlie extension of the Right of Suffrage, as a question 
 of relative power, will be every day losing its interest. I should hope then, Sir. that 
 this question would engage the serious attention of gentlemen on both sides. 
 
 Mr. J. proceeded to discuss the subject of internal improvements, but being much 
 fatigued, he gave wav to a motion uf '3Ir. Stanard for the Committee to rise, (iNir. J. 
 statmg that he should scarcely expect to detain the Committee more than fiiieea 
 minutes on the following day.) 
 
 The Committee rose, and rmmediately on "tlr. Leigh's mcticn, the Convention ad- 
 journed. 
 
 FRIDAY, Xovzr.iBER 13, 1S.29. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by tlie Rev. Mr. 
 Hoorner of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Having again resolved itself into a Commitcee of the hole, Mr. Powell in the 
 Chair, 
 
 Mr. JoHXsox resumed and concluded Iiis speech in favor of the resolution reported 
 by the Legislative Committee, and in opposition to the amendment of Mr. Green, 
 proposing a mixed basis of representation. He said, that 
 
 Another subject, on which gentlemen express great appreliensions of dnnger, from 
 transferrin or the power of the Government to the majority, is that of internal nnprove- 
 ments. They fear that expensive schemes of improvement will be adopted, in 
 wliich the Eastern districts have little, if any interest; and which, if successful, will 
 be principally beneficial to the West, v/hile the expense will be chiefly defrayed from 
 taxes levied in the East. 
 
 In considering this question, Mr. Chairman, I do n;',t feel myself at all called upon 
 to vindicate the Western people from any iu^putation upon their motives or character. 
 If an}' such had been made, it would have been so enta-ely gratuitous, tliat it could 
 not have required an answer. But none such has been made. Gentlemen have ex- 
 plicitly disclaimed all personal distrust of the Western people — all imputa.tion upon 
 them. They have reasoned from the known character of man. from tlie ordinary 
 motives and influences of human action. The correctness of their reasoning alone 
 I controvert ; its candor and liberality I cheerfully admit. I do not believe that the 
 danger apprehended exists, nor do I tliink that if it did, it would be avoided by the 
 means proposed. 
 
 I do not hesitate, in the outset, to avow myself a decided friend of the policy of 
 internal improvement; not. Sir. a system of internal improvement forced upon us by 
 the Government of the United States, without our consent, and without our authority — 
 a system less suited perhaps f )r making roads and canals, tiian for making Presidents 
 and Secretaries — less used for tlie purpose of facilitating transportation from one part 
 of the country to another, than for tlie purpose of transferring popularity from one 
 set of politicians to another. I advocate the policy of internal improvement conducted 
 by our ovrn internal Government, for the bojia fide purpose of lessening the expense 
 of transportation, facilitating the intercourse between distant places, increasing the 
 value of our property, and with it the wealth and resources of the State. I am no. 
 friend of any system conducted, no matter by what authority, which robs one man's 
 purse to improve another man's land. I think that no im])rovement ouo'lit ever to be 
 undertaken, unless the local districts immediately benefitted b}^ it will bear a tax, in 
 the form of tolls or otherwise, adequate at least to pay a reasonable interest upon the 
 money expended in its execution ; and that Government ouo'ht never to advance its 
 raone}^ or credit for the purpose of such improvement, without the best assurances 
 that such return can be made, and exacting an adequate toll on ti-ansportation, 
 
286 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 or tax upon the district. With these limitations, which, cautiously observed, would 
 guard every part of the State from unjust burthens, I think that the best interests of 
 the country require the patronage of the Government, in the improvement of its 
 roads and rivers. 
 
 The policy of internal improvement, Mr. Chairman, is not an invention of the 
 West for enriching themselves, and impoverishing- their neighbours. It is the policy 
 of the Statesman and the Patriot. It was reconmiended to us in Virginia, by the fa- 
 ther of his country; and has found its most zealous and distinguished advocates, in 
 the Eastern districts. When adverse circumstances had thrown it into some discredit, 
 darkened its prospects, and damped the spirits of its friends — who, I ask, were fore- 
 most in their efforts, to vindicate its character and re-animate its hopes Let the 
 rneeting at Charlottesville during the past year answer this question — a meeting in- 
 vited by a voice from the lowlands, attended by a few members from the West, and 
 many from the East of the Blue Ridge, whose presiding officer was the distinguished 
 member of this Convention from the county of Orange, once the President of the 
 United States, and among whose most active members were the President of this 
 Convention, the Chief Justice of the United States, the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 and other very distinguished Eastern men, now members of this Convention. 
 
 Let us look on the map of the State and see what part of the country is directly 
 interested in the policy of internal improvement. Its narrowest limits will be found 
 prescribed, by the Potomac on the North, the Ohio on the West, the line of North 
 Carolina on the South, and the head of tide-water on the East. Add to this exten- 
 sive district the towns of Norfolk, Petersburg, Richmond, Fredericksburg and Alex- 
 andria, with the counties adjoining them, in which the direct interest is quite as ma- 
 nifest as in any other part of the State, and you leave but a very small district, not 
 directly interested in this subject. But in truth. Sir, the interest of internal im- 
 provement pervades the whole Commonwealth. The tide-water country, which re- 
 quires no improvement in its roads and rivers, has an important interest in the im- 
 provement of its markets. Whatever will increase the population, the wealth, the 
 mercantile capital of their m.arket towns, must enhance the value of every acre of 
 their lands. And permit me to suggest, that under a prudent system of internal im- 
 provement, patronised by the Government, the benefits to the tide-water country, 
 though they might not be so great, would be more certain, and the risk of loss less, 
 than to the immediate district in which the improvement might be made. Suppose, 
 for example, the Government to borrow the money necessary for completing the 
 James river improvement, and to provide by law for a tax on the land, or a toll on 
 tile products of the James river district to meet the interest on the loan — in this 
 case, the whole risk incurred by the tide-water country is, that the means employed 
 to pay the interest on the loan may not be effectual — and this risk they encounter, 
 in common with the James river district and every other part of the State. If the 
 improvement should succeed, that would secure the means of paying the interest on 
 the loan, and lay a sure foundation fi)r the prosperity of their principal market town; 
 and thus, without paying one dollar for it, the tide-water country connected with 
 Richmond would enjoy the benefit of an improved market. 
 
 And what would the James River district enjoy ? The benefit of an improved 
 market, it is true, and of improved transportation — but subject to the tax necessa- 
 i'y to pay the interest on the loan. It would depend entirely upon the compara- 
 tive value of this tax, and of these benefits, whether the James River interest would 
 be promoted or injured, by the successful improvement. If the tax were equivalent 
 to the diminution of freight resulting from the improvement, then the James River in- 
 terest would have gained nothing ; if more than equivalent, it would be injured ; and it 
 would be benefitted only in the event, that the saving of freight would be more than 
 equivalent to the tax imposed. This interest then w^ould incur the double risk of 
 loss — first, by the failure of the improvement ; secondly, by having to pay for it more 
 than it was worth. Apply this illustration to all our navigable streams which require 
 improvement, to the towns connected with them, and the country interested in their 
 markets, and you will perceive how essentially the interest in a well-conducted system 
 of internal improvement, is an interest of the Commonwealth, and how unwise it 
 would be to regard it ar, a partial interest, and to excite local jealousies concerning it. 
 Considering it in this light too, you will acknowledge the injustice of regarding it as 
 the means of taxing one part of the Commonwealth for the benefit of the other. In- 
 deed, the very moment you adopt the principle of making the local districts pay the 
 interest upon the expenditure, and hold their lands mortgaged for the payment, you 
 secure from those districts the utmost practicable caution in all their plans of im- 
 provement ; you make them as careful in accepting loans, as the State should be in 
 granting them, and you give to the agency of the Government its true paternal cha- 
 racter, employed in assisting the prudent and solvent members of its family in laying 
 the foundations of their fortune. 
 
DEBATES OF THE 
 
 COXVEXTION. 
 
 287 
 
 But it is not to such a svstem that the objections of gentlemen on the other side 
 apnly Most of them. I douot not. would be its patrons. They fear the operations of 
 a different system, one which, whatever might be its object, would result m throwmg 
 the expenses of every great improvement upon the State at large, while its profits 
 would be partially enjoyed. Let us then examine whether this would be the proba- 
 ble consequence' of adopting the basis of white population, and whether it would be 
 avoided by the compound basis. ^ , , . . , . 
 
 When dano-er is apprehended from the prevalence of local interests against the in- 
 terests of the^ State, the most obvious inquiry is, whether any one local interest, or 
 any combination of them, can probably command the power of the Government. 
 Lookino- to the divisions of our State, with reference to the various interests m the 
 subject °of internal improvement, you will find the general interest guarded against 
 the local power, by more natural raniparts, than were ever created upon the face of any 
 country on earth, capable of half the improvement to which ours so strongly invites. 
 It is this very capacity for improvement, the numerous objects which so strongly so- 
 licit it, that constitute the real difficulty in our system— and present almost an insu- 
 perable barrier to any improvement at all. 
 
 The country East of the Alleghany, and above tide-water, is divided into three 
 great interests, the Potomac, the James "^River, and the Roanoke, and two subordinate; 
 those of the Rappahannock and Appomattox, not to mention the yet smaller interest 
 of the Paraunkey. The trans- Alleghany interest might be associated in part with 
 the three oreater interests in plans of very extensive improvement, but as to all minor 
 objects would be sub-divided, with reference to its own navigable streams. An in- 
 spection of the map and the tables of population will show you, that the whole local 
 iiaterest, Eastern and Western, attached e:ther to the Po-.om?.c, the James, or the Roan- 
 oke, upon any plan of improvement, however magnificent, will embrace less than 
 one-third of the white population of the State — and so it must be forever. Neither, 
 therefore, alone, could command the povN'er of the Government— each would guard 
 the Commonwealth against any improvident sclieme which the other should espouse. 
 It must then be from a combiuation of diflerent interests, that any danger would be 
 apprehended. Is such a combination probable ? 
 
 That which would be most natural, perhaps, aa'ouM be between the James and the 
 Roanoke, because their principal market towns, Norfolk and RicJnnond, have com- 
 mercial connexions, which might be advantageously extended. But such a combi- 
 nation is feared by nobody ; it is in no wise probable, and if formed, its local interests 
 would not embrace a majority. That which seems to be apprehended, and which is 
 least improbable, is a combination between the James and Potomac, Is not tliis ap- 
 prehension unfounded .' 
 
 It ought to be remembered, that one of the most interesting objects of an enlarged 
 plan of improvement connecting the Eastern with the Western waters, is the "West- 
 ern trade ; that, in this object, the Potomac and the James would be rivals — and there- 
 fore, that combination between them would be less probable. 
 
 The vast expense of the two improvements, which should connect the James and 
 Potomac, with the Western waters, would present another serious obstacle to the 
 combination — an obstacle, which the known reluctance of the people of Virginia, to 
 raise the taxes, or incur debt, would render almost insuperable. But suppose these 
 obstacles removed, suppose the local interests of James River and Potomac prepared 
 to lay down their rivalry and at every expense to seek the attainment of a favorite 
 object, how then will stand the question of power ? 
 
 Upon the basis of white population, the V/estern vote is estimated at fiftj'-eight. 
 But of the Western country, the counties of Grayson, jNIontgomery, Wythe, Wash- 
 ington, Scott, Lee, Russell, Tazewell, Logan, and Cabell, belong neither to the James 
 Pviver nor the Potomac interests. Their population entitles them to twelve votes, 
 which must be deducted from the fifty-six, leaving forty-four. To this add the vote of 
 those counties on this side of the mountain which have horetofore espoused either the 
 James River or the Potomac interest — Loudoun, Fairfax, Albemarle, Amherst, Nel- 
 son, Fluvanna, Goochland, Bedford, and Campbell; also the vote of the city of Rich- 
 mond, in all thirteen, and you give to the combination the power of fifty-seven 
 against sixty'three. It must then seek other alliances to be successful. Where will 
 it find tliem.^ Will the South-Western counties that I have enumerated unite with 
 them ? 
 
 That bond of sympathy originating in a common feeling of common injury, which 
 has heretofore given so much power to the Western vote, may unite them, unless you 
 dissolve it, by adopting the basis of white population and causing everv local interest 
 to sympathise only with the interests of the Commonwealth. Do this, and there 
 will be no better reason, why the South-Western counties should unite themselves 
 with the James and Potomac, than there would be for such a union of the Roanoke 
 counties, below the mountain. 
 
288 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Will the Appomattox or Rappahannock interests unite ? This could only be on 
 terms which would promise them the achievement of their objects of improvement; 
 terms, whicli would sv/ell the whole expenses still higher, and multiply the difficul- 
 ties of success. And if this object is to be obtained, only by combination of this 
 sort, it will be easy to show that the compound basis would be no security against 
 them. 
 
 The compound basis, if any thing could, would carry the whole Western vote, in 
 unbroken phalanx, upon this subject. I have elsewhere, Mr. Chairman, referred to 
 the well known influence of this vote in the Legislature of Virginia ; and this re- 
 ference has been treated here as a threat used to influence the proceedings of this 
 Convention. Never was the meaning of any one more entirely misconceived, if it 
 has been thought for a moment, that I referred to the influence of the back-woods 
 vote, with any the remotest intention of holding it in terrorem over the members of 
 this Convention. Sir, T mentioned it, with far different motives — and it is wonder- 
 ful that they should not have been understood. I mentioned it as an evil, which it 
 was desirable to remedy — as the natural eff*ect of that sense of injustice, which the 
 Western people had so long felt, as a reason for believing, that an attempt to deprive 
 them of power, by denying them their just share in the representation, would -on 
 many occasions defeat its own object, as it might give more power to their concert 
 than you had taken from their numbers. If 1 had believed that there was a single 
 memxber of the Convention, capable of being influenced by such an appeal to his 
 fears, I would have disdained to address myself to him. But, 1 repeat, Sir, that if 
 there is any thing, which could unite the whole Western vote, in favor of the com- 
 bined scheme of improveinent, whicli we are now considering, it would be your com- 
 pound basis. 
 
 Suppose tiiera tlius united — the Western vote upon the compound basis, is forty- 
 three — the vote of the nine Potomac and James River counties, on this side of the 
 mountain, would be sixteen — that of the city of Richmond, nearly three — making in 
 the whole sixty-two votes, a small majority. If the ten South-Western counties, or 
 any of them siiould not unite, ihe combination must only look for an equivalent, in an 
 alliance with the Rappahannock or Appomattox. The whole force of the ten South- 
 Western counties upon the compound basis is but eight votes — whicli subtracted, 
 would leave the strength of the James River, and Potomac interest fifty-four votes — 
 and leave them to seek seven allies from the other districts. 
 
 These views of the subject serve to show you, that upon either basis, the State is 
 perfectly safe from the domination of any one great local interest — that upon neither 
 is it safe from combinations of them, if such combinations be practicable at all — that 
 in this respect, if there be any difference between the two, it can only be, that on the 
 compound basis the cornbinHlion required may be a little ra.ore extensive, and, there- 
 fore, a little more mischievous iu its consequences. But. Sir, when we ascertain that 
 the great body of the State above and below the mountain is directly interested in 
 its internal improvement, of what great consequence is it to calculate the probability 
 of combinations The policy must and will be cherished, and whenever plans are 
 presented, which recommend themselves to public approbation, by their apparent 
 practicability and usefulness, they will be adopted. Gentlemen have supposed, that, 
 as the more expensive improvements were best suited to the Western interests — as 
 the estates of the Western people were to be most improved by them, and as they 
 coniributed the smallest proportion of the taxes, which might be necessary to defray 
 the expense — they would be less careful in counting the evils and more disposed to 
 encourage extravagant and ruinous projects. 
 
 Without stopping to enquire whether the Western people have most interest, in the 
 more expensive improvements. I am content to have shown you that the Valley peo- 
 ple at least contribute man for man, nearly as much tax as the Eastern people — that 
 the whole West, v/lien the inequalities of the last assessment shall have been correct- 
 ed, will contribute fully in proportion to their ability to pay — that a man of small pro- 
 perty, parts with a tythe of his profits, with as much caution and reluctance as the 
 man of large property, and that the local tax, in the form of tolls or otherwise, which 
 the local district must pay for every improvement will at once secure a rigid attention 
 to its economy and usefulness, and guard the public interest. My purpose in advert- 
 ing to the argument, now, is to show the consequence to which it leads. Observe, 
 the argument 1s, that the Western people v/ill advocate improvident expenditures of 
 public°money, in the improvement of their estates, because they contribute unequally 
 to the pubhc treasury— to control Vv^hich, power should be given to the Eastern people, 
 by givino- them representation in proportion to their taxes and numbers combined. 
 Now, it is obvious, that if the money is to be expended, in the improvement of West- 
 ern estates, the inequality of contributions cannot be the only or the governing mo- 
 tive with Western men, looking to their interest, for advocating the expenditure. 
 Suppose the contributions equal, suppose the Western man to pay doflar for dollar 
 with the Eastern man, and their joint contributions to be applied to the improvement 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXTENTION. 
 
 2S9 
 
 of ■western estates — would not the expenditure still be an object of desire to Western 
 cupidity .' How much dilierence would it make in the conduct of an interested man 
 whether, for the improvement of his own property, he was voting half a dollar of his 
 own money with a dollar of yours, or one dollar of each r You would have as little 
 confidence in him. in the one case as in the other. If it be true then that the "West- 
 ern people are interested in improvements that do not interest the East — and that 
 they would be teinpted by selfish considerations to expend the public money in those 
 improvements, witnout adequate indemnity, then it is manifest, that no safe-guard 
 would be found for the interests of the East, in the circumstance that the West paid 
 an equal proportion of tiie public taxes. In such a state of things some otlier argu- 
 ment must be found, and doubtless would be found, to justify the refusal of power to 
 the West. We should be told then as we are told now, that to secure the property 
 of the East from the power of the West, the Government must remain in the hands 
 of the Eastern people ; and some new basis of representation would be devised to ef- 
 fect it. Would not this lead to the conclusion, that the tide-water country, as least of 
 all interested in intern il improvements, as the most impartial arbiter between the va- 
 rious local interests, is the only proper depository of the power of this Govern- 
 ment 1 
 
 Before I take leave of the subject of internal improvements, allow me a brief ex- 
 planation relative to one, which seems to have been n:iuch misunderstood here. I al- 
 lude to the James River improvement — which has been treated in a manner calcula- 
 ted to cast imputation on its friends, and throw discredit on the system. 
 
 In the year 17S4 a private company was incorporated, for tlie improvement of the 
 naviiration of this river, and fixed tolls on transportation allowed them. They made 
 the contemplated improvement, and had been for many years in the enjoyment of 
 very large profits upon their stock. 3Iuch complaint, however, was made aofainst 
 them, for imputed neglect of duty and violation of their charter. These complaints 
 were most earnestly and perseveringly m-ged from the Soutli side of the river, and 
 the LeofislaLure was repeatedly pressed to charter another cempany with privileges 
 incompatible with those of the James River company — and to declare its charter for- 
 feited and void. These measures resulted in a resolution of the General Assembly, 
 directing a prosecution in the General Court, to ascertain whether the charter was 
 forfeited. Pending this prosecution, the Legislature, by a compact with the company, 
 assumed the whole interest, and entire control of the subject, and passed a law for 
 eifecting an improvement deejiied of great importance to the Commonwealth, by a 
 continued Canal from Richmond to the mouth of Dunlap"s Creek ; a turnpike road 
 from thence to the Great Falls of Kanawha, and removing the obstructions to the na- 
 vigation of that river, from thence to the Ohio. 
 
 This law provided for the assessment of tolls upon the transportation for the purpose 
 of indemnifying the Government for the expenses of the improvement ; and in order 
 to give assurance to the local interest that it would not be prematurely or unjustly 
 burthened, a pledge was given in the law itself, that the additional tolls imposed 
 should not exceed one-thircTof the saving in the price of transportation, effected by 
 the improvement. Great pains had been talien by repeated surveys and reports of 
 commissioners and engineers, to ascertain the probable expense and value of the im- 
 provement; and some confidence was entertained in the opinion that it was practica- 
 ble, at an expense not burthensome to the State ; that its consequences would be very 
 beneficial ; and the reduction of freight so ^reat as to justify a toll wliich would re-pay 
 the interest of the money expended, and not exceed one-third of tlie savintr in the 
 price of transportation. Nevertheless, the Legislature, with wise precaution, so laid 
 out the whole into convenient sections, as to give themselves the benefit of actual 
 experience in the progress of the work, and to enable tliem, if they thought fit. to 
 arrest it at such points, as falling far short of the v.-jiole plan, would have achieved ob- 
 jects valuable in themselves, and promising a reasonable profit upon the expenditure. 
 The first section was the canal from Richmond to a convenient point on the river, 
 beyond the limit of the rich mines of coal which he in the vicinity ; the second, tlie 
 turnpike road ; and the third, the improvement of the navigation of the Kanawha. 
 The tolls upon coal were expected to indemnify the expenses of the first; the tolls 
 upon the road, the second ; the tolls on the valuable salt trade then growing up on 
 the Kanawha, were relied on to indemnify tlie expenses of the third ; and it was be- 
 lieved, that if experience should forbid the further prosecution of the improvement, 
 these three sections would be permanently useful. They were therefore immediately 
 provided for, and in the course of a few years completed. The mountain section — 
 the canal through the Blue Ridge, was the result of subsequent leorislation. When 
 the three first sections had been finished, the expenses of tlie canal had so far ex- 
 ceeded the estimates, that the most zealous friends of the improvement, doubted the 
 propriety of prosecuting the whole plan to its completion. It was in this state of 
 things that the additional toll on tobacco was recommended to the Le£:islature bv the 
 Board of Public Works, and was advocated on two o-rounds : — first, that the interest 
 
290 
 
 DEBx\TES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of the tobacco-planters would well justify this offering, which, by increasing the reve- 
 nue of the company, would restore confidence, and might ultimately secure success 
 to the improvement in which they were deeply interested ; and secondly, that justice 
 required it, inasmuch as the toll on tobacco had been originally too low, in comparison 
 with the toll on flour and other products. A bill passed the House of Delegates, im- 
 posing this additional tax ; and in the Senate, of which I was then a member, repre- 
 senting a farming and not a planting district, I united with the most decided friends 
 of the James lliver improvement, in the tobacco districts and elsewhere, in a zealous 
 opposition to the law, insisting that it would be a breach of faith ; that it was wrong 
 in itself, and would alienate from the improvement the affections of some of its most 
 constant friends. The bill, however, was carried, by the vote of the East, combined 
 with the enemies of the improvement every where, and with a few Western mem- 
 bers, who were, or had been friendly to it. It is not just, therefore, to charge this 
 law to the bad faith of the West. 1 charge it not to bad faith or improper motives 
 any where. Gentlemen, no doubt, acted as they thought was right: — but the law is 
 unquestionably to be charged to the vote of those in general, who were unfriendly to 
 the James River improvement. I have but one v/ord more to say in relation to this 
 improvement — and that is, that notwithstanding the bad economy with which the 
 work has been done, it having cost at least one hundred percent, more than we now 
 tliink it ought to have cost, yet the income from the tolls furnishes a reasonable profit 
 upon the whole amount expended : — and that the freight upon transportation, from 
 the district at the head of the first section, which can avail itself of the full benefit of 
 tliat improvement, has been reduced one half. 
 
 I thought this explanation called for, by the remarks of the gentleman from Fau- 
 quier, (Mr. Scott) and others, and hope that it may remove some prejudices and quiet 
 some fears. 
 
 I learn, Mr. Chairman , that other fears are indulged by the gentlemen of the East, 
 from the transfer of power to the West f-' They fear not only that the estates of the 
 West are to be improved, but that the poor of the West are to be educated, at the ex- 
 pense of the East. It is most deeply to be regretted, that there is any thing in the 
 local situation of a particular property in Vir^naiia, which gives rise to so many and 
 such apprehensi;ms. Interests the most general and most important; those most in- 
 timately connected with the prosperity and happiness of the whole people ; the gene- 
 ral protection of property, the improvement of all our roads and rivers, the education 
 of our people, and the organization of our Government; all, by the malign influence 
 of this unhappy cause, are made the subject of local jealousies, and party contests. 
 What is the foundation. Sir, of this new alarm For nearly fifty years, we have had, 
 from time to. time, various plans of public education, submitted to us, and discussed 
 in the Legislature and before the p>";ople. Some of them, no doubt, have been wild 
 and visionary ; but, I believe, not one of them has ever been so extravagant, as to 
 propose a general tax for the education of the poor. The farthest that any one of 
 them has gone, has been to propose, that the school districts should be taxed, in aid 
 of the contributions from the Literary Fund, for the education of the poor of those 
 districts respectively. But, what warrant is there for supposing, that the education of 
 the poor from the public purse, is a Western interest; that their poor are more nume- 
 rous or less educated than yours There is none ; and it ought to be remembered, 
 that the most extensive schemes of public education, if not all, that ever have been 
 submitted for the adoption of this State, have proceeded from Eastern politicians. 
 
 But, suppose that the danger which has been apprehended to the security of pro- 
 perty, the danger of an unjust levy and application of the public taxes, will really at- 
 tend the unqualified transfer of pov/er ; is the appropriate remedy to be found in re- 
 taining that poAver in the hands of the minority I think not. 
 
 Appeal, if you please, to that cautionary doctrine of the gentleman from Fauquier, 
 which teaches that the greatest merit of a Constitution, is in giving to Government 
 those powers only which are essential to the general welfare, and apply the remedies 
 which it suggests. 
 
 If you think that your slaves will be unjustly taxed, prescribe in the Constitution a 
 proper limit upon the legislative power : fix the ratio between the tax on slaves and 
 real estate, according to some just standard ; declare that the tax shall be ad valorem, 
 and equal on both, and that the one shall never be taxed without the other. In this, 
 I will cheerfully co-operate with you, satisfied that such a provision would be just and 
 effectual. Any law imposing a tax in violation of it, being forbidden, by the Consti- 
 tution, would be void ; every one interested, niight resist the payment of the tax, and 
 he would be sustained by an independent judiciary. 
 
 If you think there is real danger, that the public revenue will be unjustly applied 
 to partial objects of internal improvement ; if you really think that the spirit of inter- 
 nal improvement requires rather to be checked than encouraged, limit the powers of 
 Government upon this subject also ; provide, that no law appropriating the public 
 revenue to such objects, or borrowing money for them, upon the public credit, shall 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. ' 2.91 
 
 be enacted without the concurrence of specified majorities in both Houses : majorities 
 of four-sevenths, three-fifths, or whatever else might be equivalent to the whole res- 
 training power, which your favourite basis would give you. However reluctant I 
 should be to add to the very strong shackles, which nature hasim])0£ed upon the pow- 
 er of leofislation on this subject, I could not hesitate to adopt such limitations' upon 
 the power of the majority, rather than yield it to the minority. 
 
 Jf you think that guards are necessary to restrain the improvident application of 
 public money, to the purpose of educating the poor, prescribe them at your pleasure ; 
 for myself, I give you a carte hlancJie on this subject. 
 
 If none of these expedients will impose an efiectual restraint ; if the power of the 
 majority is so great, that you fear its irresistible strength will burst all tiie bonds im- 
 posed upon it, do not claim this uncontroulable power for the minority : there is an 
 expedient, by which it may be denied to both. Apply 3^our basis to the Senate, and 
 let ours be applied to the House of Delegates. You have told us you do not ask 
 power ; you only ask for protection ; and you say that power only can resist power. 
 There is certainly no method b}' which you can use the power of the minority as a 
 check to the power of the majority, but by giving to each the power in one branch of 
 the Legislature. Do not understand me, as advocating such a distribution of power, 
 upcjp. principle, or as conceding that it is required hy the peculiar condition of Vir- 
 ginia. All I say is, that it is the utmost extent to which jonr own principles would 
 carry you. You object that such a Senate v»-ould be no suiiicient safe-guard, becausa 
 being the smaller body, and representing in some degree the property of the country, 
 it would be sticrmatized as the aristocratic branch of the Government, and would not 
 be able to resist the measures of the popular branch of the Legislature. We are told, 
 that though it may resist for a short time, it must yield to the popular voice in tha 
 course of a few years, as all experience proves. 
 
 These objections, I think, are wholly unfounded. My experience in the Senate of 
 Virginia, induces me to think that it is admirably suited to guard the legislation of 
 the country against injustice, and the influence of popular clamour. It has neverthe- 
 less been reproached as the aristocratic branch of the Legislature, wherever it op- 
 posed itself firmly to the popular branch, as it often did, to the almost unanimous vote 
 of the House of Delegates. The four years term of service, the classification, which 
 carries out one fourth of its members each year, and leaves the other three fourtlis to 
 render their account to their constituents, only when they have had one, two or three 
 years' experience of their measures and reflection upon their conduct, gives a confi- 
 dence to their opposition of injustice, and of tlie mi.schievous measures v\diich popu- 
 lar excitement dicta.tes, that is very rarelj'- subdued. It is true, Sir, that a Senate 
 constituted as ours is, cannot for a series of 3'ears, resist the settled wishes of the 
 people : Nor should they. Like all father representative bodies, they ouglit to yield, 
 and must yield, to the deliberate will of their constituents. And so ought, and so 
 must 3'^our Senate formed upon the compound basis, yield to the settled will of their 
 constituents. Nor can you desire tliat it should be otherwise. Their constituents 
 will be that very minority, that very people to v."hom you desire to give the power : 
 But, they will not yield to the will of the House of Delegates, nor to the will of the 
 constituents of the House of Delegates. The two constituent bodies will be differ- 
 ent, and as the members of each House will look to their own constituents for a re- 
 newal of the trust confided to them, and fur approbation of their conduct, so they will 
 look to the same source for instructions, and for that settled popular will, which must 
 habitually guide the representative. I cannot doubt that such a Senate would afford 
 ample protection against all the dangers to property, v^diich have been apprehended 
 from the pov,'er of the majority. 
 
 I have endeavored to show that no such protection is necessary, that no such dan- 
 ger exists. I have said in another place, and I will repeat here, that yo<jr peculiar 
 property does not require representation in order to give it influence and power in 
 the Government. You having more wealth — your lands being cultivated by slaves- 
 all the menial duties in your families being performed by slaves — your white jjeople 
 have more leisure to devote to tlie cultivation of their minds, better opportunity to 
 prepare themselves for those stations in society, which give distinction and pov»'er to 
 talent, than can possibly be enjt)3'ed b3- 3'our W^estern brethren. In answer to this, 
 it is said to be a ridiculous mocker3^ to speak of the wealth of the lovrer country, and 
 I have been asked v\'hether I know a single man in the Commovi wealth, who has 
 been more than half educated since the re^'^olution. I know not b3^ what standard 
 gentlemen would estimate wealth or education ; and I have said nothing of great 
 riches or finished educations. But the whole argument of the Eastern gentlemen, 
 and the scheme of representation they propose, are founded upon tiie suptTior wealth 
 of the East, and I can appeal to numberless witnesses, among the livincr and the 
 dead, wiio will bear ample testimony to the fact, that in the East have befen born and 
 educated, almost all our distinguished orators, jurists and Statesmen. Where do you 
 find the eminent men, v/ho in former or latter times, have ornamented your bar and 
 
292 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 your bench, have enhghtened and guided your Legislative Councils, State and Fe- 
 deral ? Whence your long list of Governors, and your race of Presidents ? It is 
 the natural, the necessary effect of your slave population to give these advantages; 
 and they must give political power. But I am asked, whether if superior wealth 
 gives superior intelligence, that intelligence does not give superior virtue — and whe- 
 ther I would withdraw the power of the Government from its intelligence and 
 virtue. 
 
 This is ingenious catechism, Mr. Chairman, but not sound reasoning. It does not 
 follow, that when superior numbers are on one side, and superior talent on the other, 
 the power of the Government will be with the superior numbers — This conclusion 
 would deny the influence that talent exerts over numbers. And much less does it 
 follow, that superior intelligence gives superior virtue in that condition of life to 
 which this argument applies. I might very safely concede, and I do concede, that in 
 the retired walks of private life, intelligence cherishes, if it does not create virtue; 
 rebukes and restrains, if it does not repel or subdue vice. But I cannot admit, that 
 the school of politics, is the school of value. I should not look for the most virtuous 
 men among that class, however enlightened, who have been long disciplined in the 
 arts of electioneering and intrigue ; who have been accustomed to the sinmlation, and 
 dissimulation practised in the management of men; who have been drilled inj;he 
 tactics of party warfare, and have become veterans in the conduct of political cam- 
 paigns. I should, with more confidence, look for them among the independent and 
 intelligent in the middle class of society ; who obey a call into the public service as a 
 matter of duty ; whose ambition is satisfied, if that duty is faithfully performed ; who 
 find their chief happiness in this life, in the bosom of their own families, and limit 
 their principal desires to the boundary of their own farms. 1 cannot allow, then, to 
 your superior intelligence any necessary superiority of virtue ; and though we are 
 willing that you should enlighten the path of our duty and persuade us to follow it, 
 we cannot consent that you should prescribe it. 
 
 While I would most cheerfully submit to the natural influence of your talents; 
 while I would most cordially co-operate with you, in any reasonable measure to guard 
 your property against all injustice from the power of the majority, I never can con- 
 sent to surrender the power into the hands of the minority — to give them the com- 
 plete dominion over the persons and property of the majority. You ask, what security 
 we can give you for the protection of your property ? We ask, what security you 
 can give us for the protection of our persons and property ? You tell us you have 
 not abused your power, you have been guilty of no injustice, no oppression for fifty 
 years. We tell you, that you admit us to be tlie same people with yourselves, enti- 
 tled to equal confidence, and that if your good conduct, for fifty years, is evidence 
 that the minority will rule justly, it is equal evidence that the majority of the same 
 people will rule justly. But you place your principal reliance on the position, that 
 the legislation which you would adopt for the promotion of 3-our own interests and 
 protection of your own rights, v/ould necessarily promote our interests and protect 
 our rights. Let us examine this. 
 
 Upon the subject of internal improvements, have you not told us, that the interests 
 of the West required one system, and the interests of the middle country another; 
 and is it not a very general opmion, in the Eastern district, that their interests require 
 none.? Consult, then, the supposed interest of the East and abandon all improve- 
 ments, or consult the views of the middle country, and adopt the system best suited 
 to them, adopt a narrow, selfish policy, and stop all your improvements at the base of 
 the Blue Ridge, take our money to make them, and what becomes of the necessary 
 connexion between your interest and ours, of the protection you were compelled to 
 give us, in protecting yourselves ? 
 
 Again; you have already told us that your slaves were too highly taxed — a position 
 which we controvert. Suppose you reduce the tax one-half, and throw the burthen 
 on lands.? — or suppose that you persuade yourselves, that retributive justice requires 
 that as your slaves have been taxed too high for the last fifty years, they should not 
 be taxed at all for the next, and act accordingly ; would this measure adopted to pro- 
 mote your interests, necessarily promote ours also.? 
 
 Is it, as you have supposed, that there are no subjects of taxation in the West, that 
 do not equally abound ia the East — none on wliich a tax could be levied, that would 
 not bear as heavily on the East as on the West ? The gentleman from Chesterfield 
 supposed that the tax on horned cattle would bear as heavily on the planting districts 
 of the East, as it would on the grazing districts of the West, and quotes the experi- 
 ment of a single year, during the late war, to sustain his conclusion. He tells us that 
 this experiment produced as much revenue from the East, as from the West. He 
 supposes that he himself, a few years before, had made the first proposition that ever 
 was submitted to the Legislature, for imposing a tax on cattle — and that this single 
 experiment, resulting so differently from what was anticipated, is good assurance that 
 the tax can never be resorted to, as the means of imposing undue burthens on the 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVE>-TION. 
 
 293 
 
 West. Without examininnr the result of the tax laid during the late ^ar, or enquiring 
 into its cause. I should be rerv sceptical in the opinion that a cattle tax could operate 
 equally, in the East and the West — equally upon a corn, a cotton, or tobacco planta- 
 tion, and upon a grain-growing or grazing fai-m ;. and I, with all otlier "\'S_estern men, 
 would be very un^-illinff to see the"question brought to the test of experience. Time 
 may come, when it wilf be. My friend from Chesterfield is mistaken in supposing 
 that he first proposed this tax. It was habitually levied during the revolutionary war, 
 and for some years afterwards ; and no doubt, there had been paid the assessed three 
 pence upon the head of that very bullock which was impressed by an ofiicer of tlie 
 revolution from John Hook, and" whose moaning low"" figured so conspicuously in 
 the eloquence of Patrick Henry. 
 
 But, Sir, it would not be dilficult to find many subjects of taxation in the West, in 
 wliich the Eastern people have comparatively no interest. Even their extensive coal 
 mines may, at a future day, be the subject of a burthensome tax. in which they would 
 find no svmpathy East of the mountains, except in the counties of Chesterfield and 
 Henrico." But look at the boundless stores of metallic ore which the Western moun- 
 tains every where contain, and their extensive salt works, to the growth of which 
 there is scarcely an assignable hmit ; and you cannot doubt that a disposition to im- 
 pose unjust burthens on the West, could readily find the means. Does any one 
 doubt how unequally an excise on distilled spirits would operate.' I must not be un- 
 derstood as imputincr to the people of the East any disposition to impose unjust taxes, 
 or injurious legislation of any kind on those of the West. I do not believe they have 
 any such disposition — but it is my duty to show tliat if they had, it might be indulged j 
 and that, therefore, we have the same reason for withholding extraordinary confidence 
 from them, which they think they have for withholding from us the ordinary confi- 
 dence which is extended to the majority of equals. 
 
 To the proposed compound basis, ^Ir. Chainnan, I have insuperable objections. 
 As its direct object and effect will be to give the power to the minority, so its natu- 
 xdl. if not necessary consequence will be to propitiate that power, even although the 
 reasons for bestowins- it should pass away. In process of time, the works of internal 
 improvement may cease to be a subject of jealousy, and tlie slave population may be- 
 come so generally difi'used, as to quiet all fears on that score — and yet the power of 
 the Government being in the hands of the minority, they might so regulate the taxes, 
 as to retain that power at pleasure. They would be the sole judges, whether they 
 would pay the purchase money. Was it to this event, Mr. Chairman, that the gen- 
 tleman firom Northampton sagaciously looked forward, when he asked the emphatic 
 and significant question, whether we were willing to pay the whole expenses of Go- 
 vernment, and take its whole power 2So, Sir, I do not beheve tliat ihat gentleman 
 had in contemplation any such abuse of the power, which he desired to l^estow on 
 the minority — I believe that his was a mere rhetorical question — and vet it could not 
 fail to remind us of the value which ambition sets upon power, and led us to enquire 
 what price the minority might be willing to pay for tliat which the majority would 
 not, or could not purchase. Looking back but a few years into the history of our 
 own Government, we are taught, by the extreme reluctance with which that minori- 
 ty parted with their povrer in the Senate, for wliich they paid the price of a double or a 
 triple land tax — how highlv it was valued by them. Considerino- the very small 
 amount of the taxes of the State, it can scarcely be deemed unreasonable to suppose, 
 that the people East of the mountain would always be willing to pay a double portion 
 of them, as tlie price of the power of the Government. Whether they would or no, 
 they ought not to be exposed to the temptation — we ought not to be exposed to tlie 
 danger. 
 
 Another, and perhaps more serious objection to the compound ratio, is the tenden- 
 cy of the principle on which it is founded. Although, in the actual condition of Vir- 
 ginia, it would establish no aristocracy or oligarchy, would leave us still a popular 
 Government, yet it is wise to examine its bearing, and consider how far it is proper 
 to admit it into our republic. The principle is, that as property must be protected, it 
 must have a representation, which would give its owners the po\ver of the Government 
 as the only effectual means of protection. Now it is manifest, that the arcrunient in 
 favor of such protection strengthens, as you increase the value of the propertv and 
 diminish the district in which it is situated — So that if the whole slave population of 
 Virginia were confined to the tide-water district, that district mioht a fortiori claim the 
 power of the Government as essential to its protection. But, would such a claim 
 be tolerated for a moment Could it be allowed, and leave any longer a popular Go- 
 vernment .= No, sir ! But, yet there is in the nature of our Government an appro- 
 priate protection for property thus situated, thus exposed to danger— and a wise ma- 
 jority would not fail to furnish it. They would not surrender the power to this small 
 minority or to any other : but they would erect constitutional barriers to the exercise of 
 their own power— and if they beheved every other in-fEcient. thev would o-ive to the 
 minority a veto upon those laws wliich might invade their riohts. It is in tliis veto that 
 
294 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the cliecks and balances of well adjusted Governments must be found, where the ob- 
 ject is to protect warring interests from the power of each other. Tlie various instan- 
 ces of the restraint upon the power of the majority, referred to by the gentleman from 
 Orange, (Mr. Barbour,) are all either restraints upon the power of the majority, for 
 the protection of the rights of the minority, or expedients to secure deliberation, and 
 protect the majority itself from the effects of inconsiderate action. None of them 
 are intended to give power to the majority. Let us not then admit into our Consti- 
 tution the principle that the property of the country, as essential to its protection, 
 must possess the power of the Government. 
 
 In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I beg the Committee carefully and impartially to com- 
 pare the two propositions v/hich are submitted to their choice — to reflect on the simpli- 
 city, the uniform character and operation of the one, its entire conformity with the great 
 principles of our Government, and on the complex and varying character of the other, 
 its proneness to abuse, and its strong tendency to discredit, if not to condemn the doc- 
 trines which we have been taught most to respect and reverence — to enquire, whether 
 the one, with a proper limitation of the Right of SulFrage, does not afford the best 
 possible assurance of protection to all interests, and security to all rights, while the 
 other endangers the very objects it seeks to secure — and, above all, to remember, that 
 the one leads to the restoration of confidence and good feeling, the establishment of 
 lasting peace and harmony, the preservation of the power, the character, the inte- 
 grity of the State — while the other sows the seeds of never-dying jealousy jand con- 
 tention, and threatens mischief which no human wisdom can calculate, and no patriot 
 can look upon without horror. 
 
 I beg the Committee's forgiveness, for having detained them so long, in a very labo- 
 rious and unprofitable effort to discharge my duty, and I have now only to ask, that 
 if any thing has escaped me, importing any manner of disrespect, or in the smallest 
 deorree wounding the feelings of any one — gentlemen will recollect that I have not 
 that happiness of phrase, which always faithfully translates my thoughts into lan- 
 guage, and be assured that I have too much real respect and kind feehng towards 
 every member of this Committee, to allow me for a moment, to entertain towards 
 one of them an offensive sentiment. 
 
 Pflr. Stanard now rose and addressed the Committee in nearly the following words : 
 
 My sincerity, I am sure, will not be doubted vv^lien I avow the reluctance 1 feel in 
 addressing the Comsnittee at this stage of the debate. Conscious that I have but little 
 title to claim attention, at any time, I cannot hope that at this any will be acknowledg- 
 ed, or that I shall be able to requite the attention which courtesy may accord, by any 
 thing that I can extract from a theme already so elaborately discussed. A jaded au- 
 dience, and an exhausted subject, are certainly very strong discouragements ; and the 
 force of these discouragements is augmented by the circumstance, that I follow the 
 able gentleman who has just closed his argument. 
 
 Powerful considerations alone could overrule these dissuasives, and by such I am 
 impelled. They arise out of the situation, (not entirely peculiar, but not common to 
 many,) which I hold in this Assembly. Though for many years separated by resi- 
 dence from those whose interests I here represent, they, disregarding this almost in- 
 superable objection, have selected me as one of the depositories of the important trust 
 with which this Assembly is charged. By so touching a proof of kindness and con- 
 fidence, they have entitled themselves to my most grateful and devoted service. The 
 question in debate involves some of their dearest interests, and the vote that I shall 
 give on it, will, as I believe, sustain those interests, while it will accord with the opin- 
 ions of a great majority of my constituents. These interests have been assailed, and 
 these opinions have been stigmatised, and I feel that the generous confidence which 
 has placed me here, requires of me the requital of an attempt to uphold those inter- 
 ests and vindicate those opinions, though I should sink under the effort. 
 
 The amendment proposed by the gentleman from Culpeper, and which it is my 
 purpose to sustain, has been characterised as anti-republican, aristocratical, oligar- 
 chical ; and these epithets, I have cause to apprehend, may be fastened by popular de- 
 lusion, to the opinions of vv^hich I am the organ, to their disparagement, and to the in- 
 jury of the interests connected with them. It is due to my constituents, that I should 
 eodeavor to redeem their opinions from these stigmas. 
 
 I yield my ready concurrence to the sentiment of gratulation, which has been re- 
 peatedly expressed on the temper of this debate. It has my entire approbation. Here 
 passion should have no voice, because here it ought not, and, as I trust, it cannot find 
 a proselyte. While I shall conform myself to the spirit which has thus far governed 
 the discussion, I have no hope to imitate those who have preceded me in the impres- 
 siveness and strength of their argument. Their eloquence I shall not attempt to 
 emulate. Did I feel myself competent to do so, I should find in the recent experi- 
 ence of this Committee a lesson of dissuasion, too impressive to be unheeded. For 
 who, Sir, has forgotten how instantaneously the spell attempted to be thrown over this 
 body by the impassioned peroration of the gentleman from Loudoun was dissolved. 
 
DEBATES OF THS CONVEXTIOX. 
 
 295 
 
 and the memory of it obliterated by the sober realities, the ponderous facts, the lumi- 
 nous statements, and the cogent 'arfiruments by which they were connected, ot the 
 gentleman from Accomac (Mr. Joynes.) The insti-iction I draw from tms lesson 
 is, that this is not a proper theatre for such displays. And here permit me to say, that 
 I would not stint to the West the euloory they merit. I would not deny the meed of 
 praise for the seryices and sacrifices so 'eloquently commemorated by the gentleman 
 from Loudoun. It would not suit my feelings or sense of justice to do so. But, tlus^ 
 claim is no novelty. It has been ur^ed on this floor, by lips as eloquent as those ot 
 the gentleman from' Loudoun. It has-been repeated, and reiterated again and again, 
 witliin these walls. The claim has been acknowledged, whenever it has been assert- 
 ed. It was heard here in 1S16, when an extensive scheme of banking was brought 
 before the Assembly, and thouofh in that instance it failed to produce the intended ef- 
 fect on that measure'; yet if evil averted, may be permitted to stand, as good conferred, 
 the West was certainly m.ore than indemnified, lor all its sacrifices, by havmg averted 
 from its borders a moral pestilence, which would have contaminated its morality, and 
 overwhelmed its property. It was heard again on this floor, when the expenses of the 
 very epoch at which the services were rendered, were returned to us by the Lnited 
 States, and Yiro-inia was indemnified for her advances, and when a destination was 
 to be ffiven to the large amount then received by the State. That sum, which, in the 
 proportion of three or four to o .e, had been advanced by the East, was, with a com- 
 mendable generosity, partitiourd, not in the proportion of three to one, nor of two 
 to one, but"of one to one, or at least three to tw-o, vvith the people of the West. How 
 often it has been heard' since, all those cannot fail to recollect, who have had any 
 share in our public councils. I say not this by vray of disparagement, nor from any 
 want of gratitude : but may I not be permitted to ask, is this service of tlie West al- 
 ways to stand without any counterpoise 1 Is it to endure for all time and for all pur- 
 poses, as an undiminished charge against the East on which to demand forever new 
 sacrifices and new concessions 3Iu5t it be considered like our obligations to our 
 Creator, a debt immense of endless gratitude, still paying — still to ovre 
 
 Is the service such that nothing can requite it, but the surrender of the power over 
 the whole property of the East ? "Xor do I mean to question the virtue or intelligence 
 of the people on which you, Mr. Chairman, so earnestly insisted, when you recently 
 addressed the Committee. I yield on this subject all that was claimed by you. But 
 may I not ask, are the means resorted to, to preserve it, judicious t Is it wise, when 
 we would guard our virtue, to separate interest from duty: to expose that virtue to 
 the strongest temptation? Ought we to do this at a time, when we propose to break 
 up the existing order of society, and to change its organic law; at a time, when the 
 minds of men are cut loose from their moorings, and all things and all principles are 
 set afloat 
 
 Nor do I mean, crentlemen of the West, one and all, (I speak with the utmost sin- 
 cerity, and that my language is not the profession of the day or for the occasion, I 
 appeal to my public course when I was a public man,) I mean not to question your 
 honor, nor to say, nor to insinuate, that you have a desire to revel in the spoil of the 
 East : I do not ground my course of ac'aon on the belief, that any spirit of rapine 
 will govern you or your sons. 2So. gentlemen, I have full faith in your sincerity. I 
 have confidence in your honor personally and politically — I question not the sincerity 
 of the gentleman from Loudoun, (in truth I do not.) Even when shedding teai-s of 
 angmsh over the desolate fields and mouldering mansions of the tide-water country, 
 and bewailing them with a pathos that almost extorted tears from others, and looking 
 with rapt vision to the consummation of his hopes of future improvement, he surren- 
 dered himself to the illusion, that verdure and fertihty could he restored to these 
 wastes, by taking from their owners a portion of their scanty products to improve the 
 highlands and torrents of the West. No, Sir. I have not attained the years which. 
 I now number, without instruction from experience, which eissures me how possible 
 it is for tlie strongest mind, and the pm'est heart, to be exposed to delusions of this 
 kind. 
 
 It is important, that before advancing in the discussion, we should have a correct 
 conception of what is the real question before us ; that we should clearly understand 
 what is the matter in issue. It is not the issue which the gentleman from Augusta 
 made up, (Mr. Johnson.) That gentleman essentially chanofed the issue presented by 
 the resolution of the Committee, and the amendment proposed to it. And here let 
 me say in passing, that if he was right in all he said, then we are disputuig about a 
 mere form of words, and nothing more. Both the resolution and the amendment are 
 only means to an end; tliat end once attained, it is a matter of little consequence 
 whether the means be preserved or not : they are from that moiuent of little value. 
 What do we learn from the statistics of the gentleman from Augusta, as applied to 
 his interpretation of what he makes the riddle of the Committee.' The first thing 
 tliat we learn, is, that the ratios furnished by the entire number of the white popula^ 
 
296 
 
 DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 tion, are different from the ratio arising from that portion of the community which 
 are Cathohc, wliich belong to tlie body pohtic, and exercise the Right of Suffrage. 
 He, in aj portioning representation, is for excluding all but those who have the 
 Catholic qualification ; and applying this rule to the data furnished by the Auditor's 
 statements, it is shown that the masses of power in the four grand divisions of the 
 State, scarce differ by units from those which will be quoted to them by the adoption 
 of the amendment, and the application of the rule it would furnish. 
 
 After this digression, (to which I have been led by the strong impression his state- 
 ment made on my mind,) let me turn back to the hne of argument I intended to 
 pursue. 
 
 The first thing it becomes us to look at, is the erroneous representation of the ques- 
 tion before the Committee, and the gratuitous assumption of the principles which 
 are to resolve it. The question has been treated, as if it were one now before the 
 sovereign power of the State, in its primary assemblies, and the people were called 
 to give their final vote upon it. It has been treated, as if the integers of this assembly 
 were to be reckoned for more or less, according to the mass of population in their 
 several districts, as if, telling over the members of the Convention, name by name, 
 and putting a value on each, the question was to be decided, not by the numbers pre- 
 sent in this body, but by the numbers of the population they represent : — and the ma- 
 jority of these latter numbers having been ascertained, those represent lUg this ma- 
 jority, should prescribe the terms of the Constitution, and the minority liave no fur- 
 ther voice. Sir, is this correct.^ Or, is not such an assumption at war with the very 
 ends of our appointment, the very nature of our trust, and derogatory to that intelli- 
 gence we are so lavish in ascribing to this Assembly ? If this be the true question, 
 instead of prudence, knowledge and virtue, the sum'total of the quahties required in 
 us, is the capacity to add, subtract, and strike a balance, and the entire argument con- 
 sists in the force of that balance, when struck. If this be the true question, and these 
 the means of solving it, then is this Convention a mere bed of justice, and its entire 
 function is to record the pretended edict of the people. The terms of that edict are 
 to be dictated by a self-selected portion of this body, and its obligation is to be found 
 by summing up the quantity of the people, young and old, children and men, male and 
 female, and thus fixing the value of the votes of those (the self-selected part of this 
 assembly) who represent them. What is the use of deliberation Why did we re- 
 solve ourselves into special Committees; into miniature Conventions.? Why" do we 
 sit here discussing questions from day to day, and from week to week ? Why did the 
 people look round to collect the patriarchs of the land, that they might bring their pru- 
 dence, and wisdom, and experience here ? Why all this, if all we have to do is only to 
 add and to subtract.'' No, Sir ; this representation of the question, which, I believe, has 
 had more effect both here and elsewhere, than all other arguments, is utterly fallacious. 
 Considerations of majority or minority do not belong to the initiatory inquiry. If 
 they did, they would annul the functions of counsel and deliberation. And what is 
 the character of this Assembly ? We were sent here to counsel and deliberate ; to take 
 a broad survey of this widely-spread nation ; to take the measure of its interests and 
 its capacities ; to weigh facts, to draw cautious and sagacious inductions ; and then to 
 submit to the people, not what they have prescribed, but that which we think a majo- 
 rity of the people ought to ratify. We are not to be forestalled by calculations : we are to 
 present the result of a wide view of the true interests of the State, taken by the con- 
 gregated wisdom of this body. We are to carry into effect the principle of our selec- 
 tion. We are to have the influence of the patriarchs of the land, to recommend the 
 result of our investigations. We are to have the inestimable value of the weight of 
 their authority. They are to stand before the people as instructors, not as the passive 
 instruments of a foregone decree. 
 
 The true question is, what in the opinion of this Committee, with all its experi- 
 ence, and all its political prudence, after all its inductions from an extended observa- 
 tion of the interests, circumstances, habits, and physical aptitudes of the State, a ma- 
 jority of the people ought to accept as their organic law. 
 
 Here we are on a foundation where we can exercise our minds ; not fettered by 
 the results of calculations, which, by pre-supposition, has the authority of a mandate, 
 takes away from us all free will and counsel, and leaves us mere instruments to as- 
 certain numbers, and to record a pretended decree. 
 
 I have remarked, that the argument, which if it be not most frequently used, is yet 
 really the most prevalent and irresistible, is the argument of epithets. 
 
 I shall address myself to that first. 
 
 Let us then enquire, whether the amendment and the principles on which it pro- 
 ceeds, merit the disparaging epithets which have been applied to them. I shall be 
 vindicated by the judgment of the Committee, in addressing myself first to this part 
 of the argument, because I am satisfied that there is not one who has looked upon re- 
 cent and passing scenes, and has anticipated others, still not developed, who will not 
 concede that the argument of epithet is a most potent one, if not the most potent 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 297 
 
 one, on all political themes. I beg pardon. I have been too hasty. I agree with 
 my friend from Chestertield, that there is one yet more potent, and. it is this : We 
 are, or shall be, the majorit3^ Yet even this is of little value, unaccompanied and 
 unaided by the other. It shall be my humble elFort to disarm my opponents of this 
 argument, by shov/ing that it has been gratuitous!}^ assumed, and most wantonly ap- 
 plied. I shall endeavor to do this, from the reason of the case, from the concessions 
 of our adversaries themselves, (adversaries 1 hope only, as they are our opponents in 
 argument.) and from the examples furnished by the political institutions of our sister 
 States, and of the United States. 
 
 As the means of fixing a stigma on an opinion held by so many, gentlemen have 
 assumed that that opinion commences with the postulate, that there are no principles 
 in Government. I am under no need of vindicating the gentleman from pNorthamp- 
 ton from this imputation. He is able much more effectually to vindicate himself. 
 Whether such a sentiment is justly ascribed to him, whether in fact it was ever ut- 
 tered by him, and if it was, whether it must not, in common charity, be received as 
 only a strong expression of the opinion, that a single principle is not a safe guide in 
 adapting political institutions to a mature people, (the opinion which I shall maintain,) 
 I leave for gentlemen to determine. 
 
 [ Here Mr. Upshur rose and declared, that he never uttered the opinion.] 
 
 Mr. Stanard resumed. 
 
 I did not hear the gentleman utter the sentiment, and his disavowal of it conforms 
 to my recollection of his argument. Sucli a position is no part of my political creed. 
 My creed instructs me in opposition to this dogma, that the principles of Government 
 are numerous and multiform ; as much so as are the interests, habitudes, moral con- 
 dition and phj^sical situation of the people to be governed. No principles in Govern- 
 ment ! Every one of these considerations is the fruitful parent of numerous princi- 
 ples, and it is the business of tlie Statesman, by wide and extended observations, and 
 searching investigations, to extract tlie principles which ought to regulate their organic 
 or municipal law. Principles multiply v/ith the diversities in situation, habits and 
 interests, of the people to be governed. They are few and simple among a new peo- 
 ple, whose population is homogeneous, whose interests are united, and among whom, 
 no great disparities or contrarieties are to be found : they become numerous, and they 
 multiply in geometrical ratio, as such a people advance to maturity, as they diversify 
 their interests, and by long continuance under one system of cro-anic law, they become 
 gradually moulded by it in all their habits and interests. These principles often take 
 their origin from different parts of the social circle — they traverse and intersect each 
 other — one principle often encounters an antagonist principle — and then it is the pro- 
 vince of wisdom to discern, and of prudence to allow the due proportion of force to 
 eacli. Under the government of reason, all of them are entitled to their own prero- 
 gatives — though not equal, (like a fancied republic of men where all are equal,) all 
 ha^e a voice — and the ear which will not hear ail, is deaf from the influence of pre- 
 judice, and averse from the policy which alone can conduct to peace and happiness. 
 No one principle is to have a despotic sway, and to hush to silence all the rest. All 
 are to be heard — and here is our point of difference. 
 
 Gentlemen have imputed to the supporters of the amendment of my friend from 
 Culpeper, the avowal or the maintenance of the sent'meiit, that there are no prin- 
 ciples in Government — and they, on the opposite hand, have given to one solitary 
 principle, despotic sway, silencing all the rest. Gentlemen have applied themselves 
 to what they were pleased to call an analvsis of the jirinciples of Government — and 
 the result has been the evolution from the concrete mass of one single principle — 
 and that they administer in its essence, utterl}' disregarding all those which modify 
 and give to it all its sanative efficacy. They treat the subject of Government as a 
 chymist would the food which sustains us, and in which, in its native, healthful 
 state, is found in combination with many others — one ingredient which gives it all its 
 flavour and much of its nourishing quality — but which, when extracted from the mass, 
 and administered in a state separated from that which assuages and dulcifies it, mad- 
 dens the brain, while it ministers no nutriment to the bod3^ 
 
 Let me tell the Reverend gentleman from Brooke, (for, among the fallacies of the 
 day, is his attempted application of analogies drawn from the exact sciences to that of 
 Government,) to whom we are indebted for the reference of the forty-seventh propo- 
 sition of Euclid's first book, that geometry, whether superficial or solid, furnishes but 
 a poor guide, when we would measure the force, ascertain the value, and fix the re- 
 lations of moral and political quantities. 
 
 Under the guidance of a fallacious analogy, the gentleman thinks it would be wise 
 to set out with certain a priori pi'inciples, certain postulata and axiomata, and then 
 to keep ourselves witliin the exact parallel lines which these guides shall prescribe 
 to us. Let me tell that gentleman, that for the construction of political and moral 
 theorems, there are no postulata, wliicli give him a straight line, that may be indefi- 
 nitely extended : no definition of a point, without length or breadth : no axiom which 
 
 38 
 
298 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 allows that a given number of integers combined, is of the same value as the like 
 number, indicated by summing up separate and detached integers. All these guides 
 will fail him, and he will find liimself betrayed into the most desperate and fatal er- 
 rors, by submitting himself to their absolute sway. Proceeding on his straight line, he 
 will go on, linking consequence to consequence, and induction to induction, to an 
 almost interminable extent ; like Jacob's ladder, which led from earth to Heaven — 
 only, that this, I fear, takes the opposite direction. 
 
 I said, that in constructing moral and political theorems, especially when providing 
 an organic law for society, aheady mature, whose interests have been growing up for 
 two centuries, numerous principles are necessarily required, in order to give form to 
 a Government, which will secure to each the enjoyment of life, liberty, property, 
 and the pursuit of happiness, and to produce the greatest sum of public good. 
 
 Let me now attempt to furnish some illustrations, and to correct some paralogisms, 
 by which gentlemen attempt to fix on us, that which we condemn in them, viz : the 
 following oat of one principle to extremes, disregarding all others. 
 
 Look to England — grown as she is to a magnitude of opulence and aggrandizement, 
 with interests distinct in their nature, enormous in their amount, and diverse as to the 
 parties possessing them. Is there a fanatic in the land, who would take up a priori 
 principles, if he were called to make a Constitution for that people, and be governed 
 by them alone ? Is there one who has so entirely surrendered his mind to certain 
 simple abstractions, as that he would undertake, at one blow, to level all these inter- 
 ests, and give a free and equal representative Government to that people Yet the 
 general principle of Republican Government is no less true, and without it, no free 
 Government does or can exist. It is found in the British Constitution — modified, 
 indeed, and maimed — and far below what it is in this country — but, still enough to 
 make that a free Government, so far as mere civil rights are concerned. 
 
 But, supposing him to get rid of the most obvious impediments to the practical 
 application of this famous political theorem, (viz: the equal rights of man, and the 
 equal enjoyment of political power;) suppose, I say, that he gets rid of the Nobility- — 
 the Clergy — the Corporations — and the Monarch — and then has only the People 
 themselves to provide for, and he is called to apply his principles; is there one here, 
 who respects the rights of man, as a means to the end of public happiness, that would 
 extend the principle, so as to give, in the language of the propositions of the gentle- 
 man from Norfolk, to every man an equal portion of political power, and m.ake the 
 sole measure of tliat equality, equal numbers, however they may be situated or com- 
 bined Sir, equal numbers are, in this matter, not always of equal value. Their value 
 depends on their localities, their circumstances, and the interests which bind them to- 
 gether. Would any give, for example, to the county of Middlesex and city of Lon- 
 don, power in proportion to the number of polls within the bills of mortality Far 
 less according to the property within those limits. The man who would do this, 
 would prove himself to be a mere driveller — a poor closet speculator, who knew 
 nothing of man, his interests, or his passions. I have selected this example, in order 
 to show the limits I set to my own principle. So firr would I be from giving to Lon- 
 don and Middlesex, an average of power according to their numbers, that I would 
 look to the lessons of experience taught us, and as the wisdom brought into practical 
 operation in our sister States of Massachusetts and New-Plainpshire. The former 
 gives a term to the number of representatives of the town of Boston, whatever may 
 be the number of inhabitants or their wealth ; and both require, as the numbers of 
 population multiply in a township, a larger and still larger number, in order to obtain 
 another integer of political representation. They could not, in consistency with the 
 preservation of the darling principle of political equality, (darling it is to me as to 
 any,) mete out to large masses of population combined in one interest and directed 
 by one will, a representation equal to that enjoyed by population of equal numbers 
 dispersed in numerous smaller townships. Let us take lessons not from theory, but 
 from practice — and that of these descendants of the pilgrims reads us a lesson which 
 we may profitably consider. 
 
 What, then, becomes of the reproach attempted to be fastened on the friends of 
 the amendment ? that their object is to give superiority to wealth ? So far from giving 
 wealth the prevailing influence, I would, in the case to which I have resorted for 
 illustration, strike it out altogether; and to counterpoise the consolidated force of 
 numbers in the city, I would look to the wealth and numbers combined in the coun- 
 try — or apply the principle that has been adopted in Massachusetts and New-Hamp- 
 shire, of requiring larger and larger numbers to entitle the growing masses of the 
 population combined by one interest, to an additional representative in the Legisla- 
 ture. 
 
 For farther illustration, let us take our position, not on foreign ground, not in a 
 country where the Government and the community are the growth of so many cen- 
 turies, but in our own land. Let us look at the State of New-York. Were I called 
 upon to frame a system of organic law which should protect all the interests of so- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 299 
 
 ciety, and preserve them in their proper orbits, I certainly would not give to their 
 great commercial emporium a representation according to its numbers ; far less 
 would I add its two hundred millions of property, still farther to enhance its over- 
 grown power. Gentlemen may not, perhaps, in our day, witness any very evil 
 effects from such a feature in the Constitution of that State — but when that great city 
 shall have extended itself over the whole island on which it is seated, and shall have 
 engulfed all the neighbouring villages, then those who shall have been misled by the 
 pragmatical idea of measuring moral qualities by rules which apply to physical quan- 
 tities only, may rue the day, when they adopted a principle whicli will have given 
 the city of New-York practical dominion over the whole State. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I am sensible that I have occupied too much time in these illustra- 
 tions : but I was anxious, at the threshold of the discussion, to withdraw from gen- 
 tlemen on the other side, the authority to turn upon us the reasoning we condemn in 
 them. I know it would be easy to show, that if the principle contained in the 
 amendment, were to be applied at all times and in all circumstances, such an appli- 
 cation of it would sacrifice the main principles to an antagonist and subordinate one. 
 
 We renounce such a course. When we are called, not to sum up figures, but to 
 ascertain the existing state of society 5 to take the measure of its various interests; 
 to collate its diversities ; to look at its physical aptitudes as a source of other diver- 
 sities in future ; 1 never will consent that I am bound to carry out one single princi- 
 ple beyond the necessity which is imposed by considerations of practical utility. 
 
 It is always useful to recur to fundamental principles, and I call back the debate to 
 the point I started from, v/hen I undertook to show, that the argument of epithet is 
 assumed gratuitously, and most wantonly applied to our opinions. 
 
 I said I should endeavor to prove, from the concessions of gentlemen directly, or 
 by clear implication, that the epithets employed by some of them were gratuitously 
 assumed. In order to do so, let us fix the expression of this paramount, and all-in- 
 all principle of theirs, and see how it works in the hands of those who attempt to 
 fetter us with it. Let us give it, if not the precision, at least the terseness of a ma- 
 thematical proposition, and throw it into a syllogistic form. All men are by nature 
 equal : ergo, all men, when in society, should enjoy equal portions of political power. 
 This is not strictly in the syllogistic form. It wants the minor proposition, and is 
 what the logicians call an enthymeme. If, as gentlemen contend, this be the sole 
 and all-sufficient principle in the construction of all just Government, then my first 
 remark is, tliat the world, from the time of Solon till now, has been under a great 
 mistake. It has been the idle prejudice of civilized man, every where, to suppose, 
 that a Statesman is constituted, not by the conception of a theme, which is within 
 the comprehension of a school-boy in his first form, but that it required the exercise 
 of the higher faculties of the human mind. It has been thought till now, that an 
 able Statesman was the product of labour; of sagacious and v^^idely extended obser- 
 vation ; of deep research ; of clear induction from the treasm-es of experience ; of 
 power to bring within its grasp the whf>le horizon of human affairs, and laborious ex- 
 ercise of that power. But this, it seems, has been a mere prejudice 5 it must have 
 been so, if the gentlemen are correct in maintaining, that the whole business of a 
 Statesman is to understand and apply their propositions ; and that, if he deviates in 
 the slightest degree from it, he sacrifices that, without which, he must lose all his 
 force — I mean the name of a republican : a cabalistic word brandished by the dema- 
 gogue at the hustings, and made to work with magic force in the columns of the 
 public prints. Without this, whatever his wisdom or his virtue, he is ostracised from 
 public trust. The channels of public service are closed against him. Sir, this is a 
 new patent mode of making a Statesman; a sort of labour-saving machinery, in 
 which they are made with a celerity that nails are struck in a factory, and requiring 
 intellect of no higher order to construct Governments, than that which computes the 
 weight of the iron or the number of nails into which it is fabricated. This is the 
 first consequence which follows from attempting; to give simplicity to political science, 
 and this alone is enough to ensure its condemnation. To attempt to provide for all 
 the diversified interests of a mature people by such a proposition, is the height of 
 political madness. 
 
 There is another value in this political theorem, by which ail Republican Govern- 
 ments are made, and without which was not made any that was made. A theorem 
 adapted to all purposes, it requires only the form of rules of arithmetic to put into 
 complete operation ; addition and subtraction, according to the pretensions of some 
 gentlemen, as we have seen suffice to fix the principles that should govern this body. 
 The other two rules, multiplication and division, suffice to reduce them to practise it. 
 
 It has another value. It is the grand catholicon, the political specific to make new, 
 and repair infirm Constitutions. It also serves as an amulet for the physicir.n to keep 
 off all harms from former political transgressions, and those who profess full faith in 
 it, shall have no reckoning to make, for acts and opinions of passed times. In these 
 remarks I must be permitted to say, that I have iio individual in view. I aim them 
 
300 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 not. They are the suggestions of the moment, without particular reference to any 
 one. 
 
 Well, Sir, with this mathematico-political theorem, your Statesman goes to work ; 
 and the moment he tries to put it in practice, the case categorical becomes a case 
 hypothetical. All men are possessed by nature of equal rights, ergo, all m.en in a 
 state of society, should have equal portions of political power; if they are not women ; 
 if they are not under twenty-one years of age ; if they are not paupers ; if they are 
 not insane ; if they are not convicted of crime ; limitations which 1 believe are con- 
 ceded by the most thorough-going supporter of this new patent for Republicanism on 
 the simple specification, before stated, though he may have no other title to that de- 
 signation. 
 
 As he advances, his case categorical becomes more hypothetical. Yes, Sir, much 
 more so. Look at the report ot the Legislative Connnittee, and look at the other hy- 
 pothesis by which it limits this grand theorem, for making a Republican Government. 
 You find they have if's in abundance ; if he owns land ; if it is so many acres; if it 
 is of such value; if he is a house-keeper; if he has paid taxes; if he resides in the 
 State ; if he has resided in the county so many years ; if he owns an estate in rever- 
 sion ; and so before he gets to work, he will have stricken from the numbers of the 
 people, a mass equal to two-thirds of the whole — and then these gentlemen bring their 
 doctrines to this ; all men in a particular predicament have equal political rights, and 
 What that predicament is, we (the patentees) are to prescribe — all beyond the line we 
 lay down, is damnable Heresy; all within the line is Catholic and orthodox. But, 
 why exclude any ? Reason, say they, instructs us, that children, who have minds not 
 matured, cannot vote undei standingly ; and the law declares that all under twenty- 
 one, are to be viewed as children ; and our feelings tell us, that the sex ought not to 
 contaminate its purity, by the pollutions of a political canvass. Very well, this is all 
 fair. But, why make your op^iuions the standard ? Wliy is Republicanism to be em- 
 blazoned on your escutclieon, notwithstanding your admission of tliese modifications, 
 and denied to others, who, on equally sound considerations, v»'ould make or admit 
 other modifications ? 
 
 The gentleman from Brooke, (the Rev'd. gentleman from Brooke,) tells us, that 
 those who do not choo.se to pass all the way on his straight line, (though they may 
 think it leads to the hell of anarchy, not to the heaven of peace,) are wholly unphi- 
 losophical, and are acting in direct opposition to all the established ])rinciples of po- 
 litical gravity. I fear this analogy from the doctrine of gravity, is more close than 
 that from his mathematics.- I fear that the downward tendency of his scheme is so 
 strong, as to put in requisition all the wisdom, prudence, and firmness here assembled 
 to arrest its career, and even that, that may be unavailing. 
 
 The other gentleman from Brooke, sets his pipe to a different key, and his tune is, 
 that the Government is oligarchical — a plain aristocracy — anti-republican, and, he 
 says, to us of the East, you are insisting on your right to make us your political slaves, 
 in order that you may keep your black slaves in subjection. 
 
 I would not take advantage of a warm expression uttered in the heat of debate, 
 and hold the gentleman dov/n to the literal meaning of the terms he employed, but I 
 will refer it to himself, whether he has not sacrificed justness of sentiment to mere 
 antithesis of expression ; whether his statement is not an exorbitant exaggeration, 
 and his charge unwarranted : Whether he is not confronted by his own doctrine, and 
 if so, whether candor and self-respect, do not demand that he shall retract his words.'' 
 Does that gentleman mean to say to paupers and minors, and the other persons he 
 proposes to exclude from suffrage, (for he, I believe, is not one of the patentees,) you 
 are slaves.'' You are bondsmen.-' And if not, will he predicate slavery of all those 
 who are not precisely equal in power, numerically divided, when he does not predi- 
 cate it of those who have none at all .'' 
 
 Let us, then, have the argument disarmed of this reproach, that our present Gov- 
 ernment is anti-republican and oligarchical. 
 
 Let us come to the issue made up by those on the other side, who have forborne to 
 press this argument of epithet ; for, most of those of the other side, have themselves 
 renounced it. The question then is, not what is the principle which every true Re- 
 publican requires in constituting a Republican Government, but first, are there no 
 principles which limit it On this point all agree — most of the gentlemen on the 
 other side admit, that with perfect consistency with R.epublican principles, the very 
 limitation proposed by the amendment may be made, and that whether it should be 
 made in this particular case, is a question of expediency to be decided by justly weigh- 
 ing all the considerations, which such a question involves. If so, then secondly, it 
 is a mere question of degree. It is not the enquiry, what are the primary principles of 
 Republicanism, but it is the enquiry, to what degree other and antagonist principles 
 ought to arrest the march of this primary one. 
 
 [Here, upon an intimation of a wish that the Committee should now rise, Mr. S. 
 stated, that he had arrived at a part of his argument where it could be interrupted 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONYEXTIOX. 
 
 301 
 
 without affecting its conclusion, and gave way for a motion. The motion was made, 
 and the Committee rose and reported progress, and tlie House thereupon adjourned.] 
 
 SATURDAY, November 14, lS-29. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. J>Ir. 
 Hoerner of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Mr. Sta>"ard, resumed his speech in support of the amendment of Mr. Green, pro- 
 posino- the mixed basis of representation in the House of Delegates : 
 
 I endeavoured yesterday to show from the reason of the case and the concessions 
 of my opponents, either directly or by fair imphcation, that their argument of epitliets 
 was unfounded, and that the epithets they have attempted to fasten to the doctrines 
 maintained by me and my coadjutors, have been gratuitously assumed, and wantonly 
 applied by them. 
 
 I thought that I satisfactorily showed from both sources, that the question, how far 
 the general principle, insisted on as the sole and esclusive rule in the construction of 
 Republican Government, ought to be carried, was a question of degree and not of 
 principle ; and that what we have to determine is, at what point that principle is to 
 be intersected, traversed, and modified by other and controlling principles, which all 
 must admit ought to be consulted in adapting a Government to the actual state of 
 society. 
 
 Permit me now to attempt a farther illustration, by showing what must be done, if 
 they shall prevail in establishing their proposition, either in the form in v>-hich it has 
 been reported by the Legislative Committee, or according to the gloss which has been 
 put upon it by the gentleman from Augusta. Their elementary proposition is this, 
 that as all men are by nature equal, all men have a right to enjoy equal portions of 
 political power ; and they insist that this must be carried out, or there is no such thing 
 as a Republic. Now, 1 will give them this principle, and let them apply it to a m.a- 
 ture condition of society, and then see how far tliey will be compelled to renounce 
 some portion of it. In the nature of things, to the obtention of the desired equality, 
 you must have given, first, the mass on which the principle is to operate, as a divi- 
 dend ; then the o;iven number of representatives as a divisor ; and applying this divi- 
 sor to this dividend, the quotient will be the number of individuals to be represented 
 by each Delegate. Then you come to the existing society — and you find dividing 
 lines all over the State, which have existed, some of them, for two hundred years, 
 and the population scattered in unequal masses witliin these hues. The number 
 which your quotient indicates for one representative is. of course, an unvarying quan- 
 tity — while the numbers to which it is to be applied, are all variable. One county 
 contains three thousand free whites — another county eight thousand — and your quo- 
 tient is five thousand — what are you to do ^ Must you break up the county lines ? 
 Must you add one county to another and sub-divide for the average Is this to be 
 your process .'' Is such a process practicable The gentleman from Augusta, I am 
 sure, does not look to such a process ; none of the gentlemen avow themselves in 
 favour of it. It would be cutting up not one, nor two, nor three of your counties; 
 but every existing partition of the State — every one — without exception. All the 
 present lines, all of them, must be obliterated. And even when you shall have been 
 reconciled to this, by any practical process to cut off and to define the several portions 
 to be taken from one and added to another, so as to produce perfect equality between 
 the counties or districts, is beyond the power of man. 
 
 If the principle cannot be thus applied, what is to be done "What must be its ef- 
 fect in practice ? Here you have one county containing tln-ee thousand inhabitants, 
 and another containing eight thousand ; while your invariable divisor is five thousand. 
 ^Vill you give the former of these counties a representative Suppose you do : and 
 what will you allow to the second Not any more : but say, you give it two — yet I 
 apprehend you would not give two to a county containing six or seven thousand. 
 And what then Why then, a county containing eight thousand, will have two re- 
 presentatives, while a county containing six er seven thousand, will have one repre- 
 sentative : and this is their exact mathematical proportion ! It turns out in practice 
 so variant and unequal, that eight gives two, and seven one, and three as many as 
 seven. 
 
 I shall not pursue this view of the subject farther : there can be no necessity of 
 pushing it to other obvious consequences before this xAiSsembly. 
 
 My next voucher for clearing away the incumbrances to our title to Republicanism, 
 is the Constitution of this State — which shows the principle embodied and in a concrete 
 form, and in that form consecrated by an authority which gentlemen invoke to their 
 aid and then disparage. They all eulogize in tlie most exalted strains, the wisdom, 
 
302 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the virtue, the patriotism of our ancestors, and yet they endeavour to make their prin- 
 ciples condemn their own work. Their patriotism, their virtue, their wisdom, their 
 intelligence, are all set forth in order the more to consecrate the principles they laid 
 down ; but all these cannot mitigate the sentence of condemnation which is pro- 
 nounced upon their labours, and on the structure which they themselves reared on 
 these very principles. 
 
 But, the gentlemen have a salvo for discrediting at one time an authority which 
 they cry up as irrefragable and infallible in every respect in which they want to make 
 use of it; and that is, that while the principles they laid down are the result of ma- 
 ture reflection, the happy inductions of sagacious minds, from an extended view of 
 past times, all these qualities were dissolved and dissipated by the hurry and alarm in 
 which they constructed their work. That assumption has been shown to be incon- 
 sistent with historical facts. 
 
 They o-o in pursuit of some pretext, on which to discredit their own authority. It 
 is catholic, as far as they choose to use it, and heretical, just as far as they wish to 
 reject it. They indulged themselves in an elaborate examination of analogous pro- 
 visions in the Constitutions of our sister States. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun, in particular, presented us with a most elaborate 
 and extensive analj^sis, on this subject — all with a view to maintain the authority of 
 the Bill of Rights, and to repudiate that of the Constitution. 
 
 To give the more emphasis to these precedents, it pleased that gentleman not only 
 to bring, before us, in detail, various Bills of R-ights, adopted in dilFerent parts of the 
 Union, but to apprize the Committee, with more than usual solemnity, that these 
 were not the work of men, intimidated by the presence of an enemy at their doors, and 
 by the roar of hostile cannon, but the mature results of profound and tranquil inves- 
 tigation, when peace was in all our borders, and their authors enjoyed the advantage 
 of the experience of the revolution, and the councils of many of the master spirits 
 of that epoch. All these things were brought in solemn array, and for what purpose ? 
 To cast discredit on the work of our progenitors. But, surely, the evil genius of 
 the gentleman from Loudoun must have been presiding, when he was allured to 
 adopt this course. 
 
 Most unfortunately, the very circumstances, he so confidently relies on, when col- 
 lated together, and not presented in detached fragments, torn from their context, but 
 compared with the work of the same men, in framing the Constitutions of the States, 
 furnish an irrefragable argument against his pretensions. 
 
 In every -one of the States, noticed by the gentleman from Loudoun, aye, in every 
 one of them, without a single exception, (unless it be that modern scheme of repre- 
 sentative Government, with which the State of New York has favored the world,) 
 the work and structure of those very sages, with all their advantages of mature ex- 
 perience, and tranquil times, and deliberate investigation, show, most convincingly, 
 the utter fallacy of the pretensions he upholds. 
 
 The Constitution of Massachusetts, of New Hampshire, of Maine, of Connecticut, 
 of Vermont — all show, that this political dogma, in its adaption to a mature society, 
 with interests far advanced, and long established — this idea of carving and cutting 
 out the mass of society, so as to assign to each man an equal portion of political pow- 
 er, has not been attempted by them : and notwithstanding all the facilities, which the 
 condition of some of these States, in respect to their locahties, municipal arrange- 
 ments, and state of society, afforded for the application of this principle of equality, 
 having regard to naked principles only, it has been disregarded in one branch of their 
 Legislature, and traversed by greater and stronger checks in the other branch, than 
 any we propose to adopt. Let me tell him too, that though the feature does not now 
 appear in the Constitution of Pennsylvania , yet if he will look into the proceedings 
 of the Convention which formed it, he will find, that even in that State, homogene- 
 ous as it is in population, and uniform as it is in almost all its interests — in that Con- 
 vention, containing some of the master-spirits of the revolution, and the standard re- 
 publicans of the day, it was proposed to introduce the same hmitation in the Senate 
 of that State, which we propose, by basing representation, not upon the number of 
 the taxable inhabitants only, but upon a ratio deduced from a combination of taxation 
 and numbers of taxable inhabitants. 
 
 But is it not a little remarkable, that the gentleman from Loudoun, after going into 
 such an elaborate investigation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, of other States 
 in this Union, should all at once have stopped, at that precise point, when he would 
 have come in contact with States, whose interest and situation, in respect to popula- 
 tion, are analogous to ours.? North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennes- 
 see, are all kept carefully out of view. They probably do not deserve enquiry, pre- 
 cisely for the very reason which, of all others, ought to recommend their example to 
 us, viz: a conformity of their interests to ours, and the claim of those interests, to 
 the modifications in their political institutions, which we propose in ours. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 303 
 
 My next voucher is the Constitution of the United States. Yes, Sir, the Consti- 
 tution of the United States. And here, it pleased the gentleman Irom Loudoun, (I 
 speak, of course, of the tendency of his remarks.) to disparage that instrument, and 
 the eminent men who recommended it to the adoption of tiie American people, by 
 holding up that series of papers, v/hich i have so oiten heard gentlemen on this floor 
 refer to as contauiing the arlicles of- their political creed, (I speak of the Federahst,) 
 as obnoxious to the criticism, that the arguments in one part of it directly traverse 
 and contradict those used in another part. It gave me some surprise, I confess, from 
 the known sagacity of that gentleman, that he had not found a solution for the appa- 
 rent contradiction to which he alluded ; that he had not discovered the means by 
 which he at once would solve it completely ; that he did not, as the authors of that 
 work had done, discard from his mind the influence of one dominant principle, aiid 
 allow the antagonist principles then proper place and effect in controlling it. 
 
 That would^have explained all the seeming contrariety. It is worthy of remark, 
 that in his zeal to sustain his proposition, not merely as a means, but with a steady 
 gaze towards the end, he added to the principles of the Bill of Ptights, the doctrine in 
 one of those papers which regards numbers as one of the elements of power, and ex- 
 ultingly referred to it — and yet the very work furnishes direct condemnation of the 
 use he proposes to make of it, that is, to show that numbers form the sole element of 
 power. 
 
 What is the character of the Government of the United States ? It is not a full 
 and plenary Government for all purposes ; but it is a complete political entity, for the 
 purposes of conducting the foreign relations of the United States, and as be: ween 
 the States of the same confederacy to settle their diiierences as memijers of that con- 
 federacy. It is shorn of all power to interfere with the municipal regulations of the 
 States j but its limitation to our foreign relations, does not change its classitication. 
 It does not cease to be republican, because it refers to external concerns onlj- ; j-et it 
 is, in effect, contended that the same Government, if applied to our internal concerns, 
 is aristocratic and oligarchical. Surely, the limitation of the uses of its power does 
 not qualify or change the designation of the Government itself 3 and if a Govern- _ 
 ment is republican, when charged v\-ith a part of our concerns, it does not cease to be 
 republican, if charged with the whole of our concerns as one people. 
 
 iVow, look at the principles which enter into the Constitution of that Government. 
 The Federal Government is a Government formed by an association of sovereigns ; 
 the Governments of the several States b}^ associations of individuals. i>cw, it hap- 
 pens in respect to States, that the principle of their equality is not admitted by us 
 only, but b}' all Christendom : all civihzed people admit equality of States. Wlie'ther 
 their Governments be republican or monarchical — whether political power be exer- 
 cised by the people in person, or by their representatives, or by the aui<x-rat Uj>on his 
 throne, none are denied equality among themselves. But the equality of individuals 
 has not the same force of authority : that is denied by all the rest of Christendom. 
 States are artificial entities — they are political corporations, and v.-ith us thej- are as- 
 sociated to form a Government, just as individual men would associate for the same 
 purpose. Their primitive equality is confessed ; none dispute it ; 3'^et how are these 
 equals dealt with in the details of the Federal Government ? Looking, indeed, to one 
 of the departments of that Government, we find their equality preserved strictlj- ; but 
 if we look to other departments of it, we shall find, that other considerations have 
 supervened; which political considerations required to be weighed, and due allow- 
 ance to be made for, in order to effect the great end of Government, viz : the protec- 
 tion of all. In other departments, these entities are treated not as integral, but as re- 
 presenting different masses of population ; and povrer is allowed them accordinjr to 
 the proportion of those masses to each other ; while, in a third branch of the Govern- 
 ment, we find a compound principle made up of both combined. The Executive 
 branch is the progeny of an union of these principles. There is an equalit37 of tlie 
 parties in one sense, and there is a difference of povver in. another ; yet is not this a 
 flepublican Government.? Will the gentleman from Loudoun. (^Ir. jMercer,) or the 
 gentleman from Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge) pronounce their anathema against it as an 
 aristocracy, or an oligarchy ? Look at the modification of the principle. In order to 
 fix the relative dimensions of entities which are equal in one sense, one part of the 
 population is allowed a value according to its numbers, and the other accordino- to a 
 certain proportion of its numbers. 
 
 Well, Sir, has this changed it into any other than a Republican Government.' It 
 is said, that tliis arrangement was the result of a compromise. Admittimr this, I de- 
 mand to know, whether all compromises are not the fruit of a modification of anta- 
 gonist principles.? Are they made by mere guess, in a manner perfectly arbitrary .? 
 Have they no principles to guide them .? Or is not the compromise to fix the precise 
 point where antagonist principles intersect each other, so as to give to both their due 
 operation ? 
 
304 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 I refer to the Constitution of the United States, not merely to vindicate our scheme 
 from the stigma which is attempted to be fixed upon it, but for another, and a more 
 important purpose. That Government has been referred to, not only as an example 
 to show tlie consideration of all population, bond and free, in the apportionment of 
 political power, bxit because of its influence on this State, as a member of the 
 confederacy, and subject to that Government ; a Government, charged with the ex- 
 ternal relations of this, and the other States. In that Government, all the inhabi- 
 tants of tiie Union are taken into account : from which arrangement, a large portion 
 of the weight of this State in it, is derived. Expel that principle from the Constitu- 
 tion, and you at once contract the State of Virginia. You bereave it of one-third of 
 its political dimensions, in its connexion with a Government, which in various forms 
 exercises a more powerful sway over all the States, than is equal in amount to all the 
 residuary power left in their possession. When the other States were called upon by 
 the Souih to make the compromise, the same arguments, now so strenuously urged, 
 were at hand to resist the claim. The arguments were heard : they were profoundly 
 considered. They were v/eighed with all the temper, deliberation and sagacity which 
 that eminent body could bestow. That body did not find the allowance of this claim 
 an insuperable obstacle ; nor did they consider it as fixing upon the Government the 
 stigma of anti-republicanism. It is found in the Constitution. The principle has 
 been questioned since. Its influence on the pending question, direct and incidental, 
 has been urged on this House, by my friend from Chesterfield, with a force and elo- 
 quence which I cannot pretend to emulate. His argument had been anticipated by 
 one gentleman, and it has been attempted to be answered by two others. In one of 
 its members, it has been evaded and it has been entirely iinnoticed in the other. The 
 argument is this : If this assembly pronounce, that the infusion of this principle con- 
 verts any Government from a republic to an aristocracy, can you consistently, 
 when that declaration shall be invoked against you, refuse to abide by your own de- 
 cree You must consent either to exhibit an open, undisguised, and glaring incon- 
 sistency, or you must surrender your rights so soon as you are confronted by your 
 own declaration. The argument goes still further, if you countenance and sustain 
 this pretension, may you not expect that that will be attempted, which has already 
 many political converts, though it has not yet been attempted in the Legislature It 
 has, I say, many warm advocates, viz : that this power is a State acquisition, and like its 
 Literary Fund, ought to be made common property, and distributed to all parts of the 
 State, according to the ratio of white population. Sir, is this a mere gratuitous sug- 
 gestion, thrown out for the purpose of alarming this Assembly .and having no foundation 
 in fact Will the gentleman from Loudoun, and the gentleman from Brooke reply? 
 Will they stand up m the face of this Assembly, and say that such a doctrine has not 
 been gravely insisted on heretofore ? I mean, urged as a matter of political specula- 
 tion among others, to show that the interests of the 'West have been sacrificed.? I 
 bear testimony to the fact, that it has been so urged. 
 
 [Mr. Mercer here rose and said, that he had never heard such an idea broached 
 either in or out of the House of Delegates.] 
 
 Sir, I did myself hear it urged on this floor at the time when the distribution of the 
 Literary Fund was discussed in the Legislature. 
 
 [Mr. Doddridge here enquired to what distribution of the Literary Fund, does the 
 gentleman allude ^1 
 
 I allude to the distribution of it, among the comities of the State, according to the 
 numbers of w^hite population in thejn respectively. 
 
 [ Mr. Doddridge then said, on tliat occasion, the member from Brooke was not pre- 
 sent. ] 
 
 If the gentleman from Brooke was not, another gentleman, who is a conspicuous 
 member of this House, was present. It was said, on that occ asion, that the people of 
 the West had been injured by the unequal distribution of this power acquh-ed in the 
 General Government, and claimed as the common property of all the white inhabi- 
 tants of the State; and one injury ought not to be made the foundation of another. 
 But, Sir, the suggestion will have at least this value. I propound the question now. 
 I desire to havelhe disavowal of the claim to an apportionment of the Congressional 
 representation according to the numbers of free white population, now under bond, 
 sealed and dehvered : Is this claim now disavowed.? Am I to understand that it is 
 disavowed by the gentlemen .? If so, I have their own authority against that doctrine 
 in future. If not, the argument is left in its full force. 
 
 I said, that the other part of the argument had been evaded. Its spirit has not 
 been met. How has it been eluded ? The gentleman from Albemarle made an ar- 
 gument, which implied that he did not approve of, or justify the provision of the 
 Constitution of the United States. I do not say, that he expressly condemned that 
 provision, or renounced the claim, to apportion our representation in Congress, on 
 what is called the Federal numbers, or that he explicitly declared what his sentiments 
 were } but he certainly did renounce it by implication. An explanation was drawn 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 305 
 
 from him, which amounted to this, that wise men had doubted the propriety of this 
 provision of the Constitution of the United States. Surely the gentleman did not 
 wish me to suppose that he did iiot thick so, because wise men did think so. I, 
 therefore, say, as the case now stands bef .re the Committee 
 
 [Here 3Ir. Gordon asked laare to explain. He said he was sorry to have opinions 
 imputed to him which he had not expressed. He had said that the propriety of tlie 
 provision had been doubted by wise men. and that he should be of the same opinion, 
 if it was to be made the basis of an aristocratic system of Government for Virginia. 
 That was still his opinion. ] 
 
 Sir, the gentleman is perfectly correct ; and I represented him to have said what in 
 explanation he avows he said. He did say that wise men had so doubted, but he did 
 not express his own opinion further, than he should be opposed to the principle when 
 made to exceed its function in the Government of the United States. We are left 
 still in uncertainty as to what the gentleman thinks of tlie direct operation of the 
 Federal Constitution in tliis part of it. How was the argument pressed by my friend 
 from Chesterfield He said to us, will you treat the principle on which rests a large 
 portion of our power in the Federal Government, as if it would, being introduced 
 into our own Government, contaminate it with aristocracy ? and will you deny that it has 
 the same influence in the other case.' If you think so, then you are prepared, when- 
 ever the claim shall be made by the iXortliern States, to have that principle in the 
 Federal Constitution abolisiied, or to own that we retain in it, this taint of aristocra- 
 cy, because it serves our interests. This was his aroument. And what answer was 
 vouchsafed by the gentleman from Loudoun, (3Ir. iMercer ?) This: Tou have the 
 power in your hands, and can keep it — it can never be surrendered but by your own 
 consent — your sic zolo. And is that an answer to the argument.^ Is that an answer 
 to the enquiry, are you prepared to follow out your own principles, when the like 
 appeal shall be made to you fro;a another quarter ? They say not one word to that. 
 Respect for the gentlemen compels me to say, that whtu the claim shall be urged, 
 they will surrender. 
 
 What, then, is the result on this branch of the argument? I wish I could express 
 it v.-ith more force and precision. It is this : We maintam in its full spirit and ex- 
 tent, and say that it ought to be so maintained — the vrhole principle in the Bill of 
 Rights — as an es-ential incrredient in all Republican Government; nav. as being so 
 sacred that a Government, where it is not paramount, ceases to merit the epithet of 
 Republican : but that that principle, (dear as it is — and it is dear to me — as giving to 
 the whole mass, its flavor, relish, and nutritive quality,) is not to be taken separately 
 and uncombined with other principles : That it is liable in its application, to be 
 checked, controlled and modified by other principles, which make it sanative and sa- 
 lutary : and that the idea of o:iving; to each and every man in the community equal 
 portions of political power, is so far from beino' effected by counting numbers only, 
 (disregarding their combinations,) that that will be the very means by v»"hich it must 
 certainly be frustrated — and that the gentlemen, who are contending so strenuously, 
 for the simple, naked, unmodified principle, will find, when it is reduced to practice, 
 that it produces the very results which it is their avowed purpose to avoid. 
 
 And now, let me ask my hiohly esteemed friend from Augusta, whether, in these 
 sentiments, he can find anv warrant for sa3'ing that the friends of the amendment 
 cast ridicule upon the Bill of R.;ghts ? and overthrow the very f< undations of Govern- 
 ment in their eager grasp for power and whether a more dispassionate consideration 
 ought not to exact from hira the avowal that these imputations were hasty, and are 
 not merited Let us not be misunderstood. It may occur to some, tliat I have been 
 anxious to make this vindication of the amendmt-nt, not only for the sake of my 
 constituents, but that regard to self has had much sway in promptino- the effort. 
 Not so. iiSot so. DifferincT as I do. irom the gentleman frr m Loudrun, in his opinions, 
 I must also dissent from some of his sentiments. And though I can truly avow that 
 self- vindication, apart from the important interests imnlicated in the question under 
 discussion, has had but little or no influence, I can assure that gentleman, that / am 
 no candidate for the iMartyr"s Crown. He, it seems, envies the distinction, and pants 
 for the glory of martyrdom. I have no such aspiration. I do not wish to expose 
 myself to trials, which well require heroic virtue to endure. I do not so certainly 
 know, whether mine would avail me in the hour of need; I am sure I should not 
 better bear bv rashly courting the trial. I wish not. therefore, to tempt myself by 
 making the experiment: nor can I consider the loss of popular favour, or the offices 
 to which it may lead, as meritinu- the distinction of martyrdom. No. Sir. Yet I do 
 not pretend to that stoical insensibility which is unr-onscious of the glow which pub- 
 lic approbation imparts to the bosom. I am not insensible to popular applause, nor 
 would I depreciate the value of popular favour. But that favour only which is spon- 
 taneous, -and which is the best test of public approbation, is the object of my ambi- 
 tion. I value not that which is gained as a charitable dole, reluctantly bestowed on 
 importunate solicitation — not that which is retained by the pliancy, which looking with « 
 
305 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CON\^EMTION. 
 
 steady eye at the signs of the political Zodiac, conforms to the horoscope it there 
 finds. I thank God I have so regulated my desires, that a very small portion of my 
 happiness depends on such popular favour, or on the acquisition of ofhce ; and if for 
 the opinions 1 on this occasion avow and maintain, I shall be stricken frorn the ranks 
 of those on whom the rays of popular favour may or is to beam, .1 shall more deplore 
 the infatuation which directs the blow, than suffer pain from its infliction. 
 
 I think I have shown that the question before us is now reduced to this : whether, 
 on a full and fair survey of the actual condition of the Commonwealth ; its past his- 
 tory ; its existing and multiform interests; its connexion with the Federal Govern- 
 ment; and primarily, and above all, the peculiar location of one peculiar and impor- 
 tant species of its property — any thing is due to those inductions, which can be fairly 
 made from this survey, that ought to control or limit the sway of the (confessedly) 
 primary principle of Republican Government ? 
 
 The right in some form to the power we claim, has not been seriously questioned. 
 The objection is, not that this power may not properly be conceded ; but that, in the 
 concession of this, we get a power beyond the necessity of the case on which we 
 found our claim : not merely enough to protect this interest, but over persons and rights 
 of a different kind. I mean not to enter at large on this argument. I could not do 
 so, witliout bringing again before the Committee, many of those very able views 
 which have already been much better presented by others. 
 
 Let me again call the attention of the Committee to the examples of other States^ 
 as being persuasive, if not irresistible, in this matter. I also call gentlemen's atten- 
 tion to the nature of the interest, and will endeavor to show what has not been dis- 
 tinctly unfolded by my coadjutors — that there is some object ulterior to that of pro- 
 tection against unjust taxation, which justifies the claim we advance. If in States, 
 homogeneous in their population, and vniiform in their condition, it has been found 
 necessary to interpose a check either in the Senate, or by an apportionment of power 
 to masses, so arranged as to control the power of mere imnibers, is not the necessity 
 enhanced incalculably, when we refer to the influence of this consideration in our 
 own State Do we claim protection for property only as such ? The property we 
 seek to protect, not mex'ely serves the uses of man, but itself supplies the place of 
 men. Its value does not consist in consumption — it is not mere brute matter, con- 
 tributing to the comfort and ornament of life, but it consists of intelligent, sentient, 
 responsible beings, that have passions to be inflamed, hearts to feel, understandings 
 to be enlightened, and who are capable of catching the flarne of enthusiasm, from the 
 eloquent effusions of agitators, if not here, at least in other parts of the State : and 
 who may not only be lost to their masters as property, but may change conditions^ 
 and become masters themselves ; so far, at least, as the ravages of a servile war shall 
 have any subject to be ruled over. These are the dangers which necessarily belong 
 to the existence of this species of property within our borders. Are these conside- 
 rations to have no weight ? Will gentlemen still consider our slaves as mere brute 
 matter ? Will they shut their eyes to the fact, that there are and will continue to be 
 political missionaries, who, with malignant purposes, or under the stimulation of a 
 misguided philanthropy, industriously spread a contagion which no power may be 
 able to arrest ? Shall we shut our eyes and ears to all experience .'' Nothing is so 
 easily propagated as such enthusiasm, when it comes with all the force of an appa- 
 rent respect for human right, and a spirit of general philanthropy. Sir, is this the 
 day when such principles will not be propagated ? Are the people of the South so 
 steady, as to be impregnably shielded against the sway of such a spirit ? Can any 
 gentleman look to the recent history of this country, and say that there are not some 
 feelings, which, under the impulse of enthusiasm, may pass with the rapidity of 
 lightning across the whole extent of this Union ? 
 
 Looking to this subject, let me be permitted to state, in the presence of this audience, 
 what I have often professed before, with a most perfect sincerity. I have told yon 
 that I entertain no distrust of the honour and sincerity of the people of the West ; 
 and further, that I did not distrust their sons, as the gentleman from Brooke consid- 
 ered the gentleman from Northampton to have done : and feeling this, 1 think it due 
 to the candour which belongs to this debate, to declare my full and entire conviction ^ 
 that if the power to the very uttermost of their claim, shall be transfeiTed to the peo- 
 ple of the West, their sense of justice will restrain them from wilfully doing the open 
 and apparent wrong of levying unequal taxes on this species of property to the ex- 
 oneration of property of a different kind. I do not believe they will do any such 
 thing. There is not to be found in this land, any body of men prepared to commit 
 gross, apparent and wanton wrong. Much less would I impute such a purpose to 
 gentlemen from the West, some of whom, I am glad to regard as personal friends, 
 and all of whom, I hope, will long continue to be brethren of the same political fami- 
 ly. But, will this honesty be any guard against such influence as I have described 
 Sir, I dread not the vices of my brethren, but opinions tliat to them have the show of 
 virtue. I fear not their meditated wrong, but their misguided philanthropy. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 307 
 
 I extend the remark to the exercise of the taxing power, for objects in which we 
 have Httle interest. Do I apprehend this from the wantonness of power and the reck- 
 lessness of rapacity ? I disclaim such a thought. No, Sir. I have no fears of their 
 wilful injustice. I3ut, is there any safe-guard against delusion on this subject ? Can 
 I shut my eyes against the light that beams from all experience, and shows the fa- 
 cility of persuading men that they are in the line of duty and patriotism, though in- 
 terest alone stimulates the effort and sways the judgment ? And on such occasions 
 the virtues of the representative stand not as our security, but as the very source of 
 our danger, when he shall think, that he is conforming to the wishes of his constitu- 
 ents, and cherishino- the interests of all. I may say, therefore, without much violence 
 ' to gentlemen's feelings, that if there are any dangers arising from the power of taxa- 
 tion, they are to be resolved into no distrust of their integrit}^, but that all the danger 
 proceeds from the different views and different interests of parts and the whole Com- 
 monwealth, and the representative virtue of cherishing those of his constituents. 
 
 There is another view of the subject. They allow that we are entitled to some se- 
 curity, but insist that the form in v>diich we ask it extends too far, and enables us to 
 inflict the very injustice on them in other respects which we profess to fear from them 
 on this. I call the attention of gentlemen to the different functions of the taxing 
 power as in one, and in the other hand. With us it is conservative and defensive 
 merely. We do not seek for its exercise by ourselves, but to prevent its exercise by 
 others. In them, the danger is from action — not from the power's being fettered, but 
 from its being left free. 
 
 I admit that the power, if given us for our protection, exists for other objects, and 
 may be used for personal oppression. But, I beg leave to call the attention of gentle- 
 men to the position on which I rest the argument — I have no distrust in the honour 
 and virtue of the West — and I claim the same confidence as due to the East. — I an^ 
 ticipate in no quarter the exercise of mere arbitrarj' power ;. and I found the argu- 
 ment on that very principle : Their security is that which is furnished by considera- 
 tions which they urge in vindication of the West. How can we oppress them in 
 their personal rights without affecting all parts of the State equally.? unless we be 
 guilty of an open, confessed, naked act of arbitrary power? How can any Constitu- 
 tion be so framed as to guard agairist violence and arbitrary power.'' I turn gentle- 
 men's argument against themselves — If any part of the Commonwealth shall have 
 made up their minds to face the opprobrium of such conduct, your Constitution and 
 all its guards cease to be of any value. No matter vvhere power is by constitutional 
 regulation, it cannot be retained. Resort must be had to an arbiter, and that arbiter 
 sweeps your Constitution and 3'our Republican Government together, from the face 
 of the land. 
 
 And here let me notice one of the arguments of the gentleman from Augusta, 
 (Mr. Johnson.) He made an ominous remark which I have not forgotten. He said, 
 that " if we of the East had no slaves, their places would be supplied by white men." 
 In what signification did he make tliis remark? Suppose their places were filled by 
 white men ? Then we are asking nnich less tl^an we are entitled to. 
 
 But. their places are not supplied by v/hite men. What then? Are you to form a 
 Constitution as if they were not here ? As if they did not belong to the Common-" 
 wealth, and foraied no part of its interests ? The observation shows, either that we 
 ask less than is our due, or it gives cause for the foreboding that the new Constitu- 
 tion is to be fashioned as if slaves were mere intruders here, to whose existence no 
 regard is to be given. 
 
 Permit me to make another observation. I told you that in looking at this irnpor' 
 tant and delicate interest, it was to be regarded not merely as a subject of taxation, 
 but that we ought to look steadily on all the dangers which surround it. Is it neces- 
 sary for me to tell this Assembly, that in regard to these interests, respect is to be 
 had to legislation which affects it even as property ? That a wise regard to interests 
 and feelings of the Eastern part of the State, present an irresistible claim on our 
 brethren of the West, not to push their theories so as to take av/ay from us tlie power 
 to govern our slaves, and make laws of police for them? By the transit of power to 
 hands not acquainted with our situation and dangers, and shielded by a barrier of 
 mountains, who have no fears to sharpen their intellect to the approach of evil, and 
 who know not how to adapt laws to tlie wants, the condition, the feelings, and the 
 passions of the slaves in regard to those who retain them in bondage, interests, not 
 of propert}^ merely, but of life itself, are implicated ; these, and all their dearest cori-^ 
 nexions. 
 
 I pass with much pleasure from such a subject, to a view more congenial to the 
 spirit in which I entered this Convention. Sir, I came here not to exasperate, but 
 to soothe the asperities of other minds : not to arrest the march of reform, (as far as 
 reform ought to be allowed to go,)- but to enter on the task of repairing the Constitu- 
 tion, in perfect good faith: with professions not upon my lips merely, but springing 
 from my heart : not made on this floor to suit the occasion, but resolved on and pro* 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 mulgated before I came here. I reject as an unworthy suggestion, the idea, that the 
 course of any member here is intended as a mere deception to beguile this Assembly, 
 and to cheat the people out of their rightful claim to reform, it must be obvious to 
 you, Sir, and to this Committee, that it is my earnest wish to avoid every topic calcu- 
 lated to disturb the tranquil, judicious, and candid consideration by this body, of every 
 subject which comes before it. In the process of the debate, it has pleased many 
 gentlemen who are in favour of adopting the report of the Legislative Committee, to 
 represent the West as having suffered for years under the most cruel neglect of its 
 rights. 
 
 They have been represented to us, as year after year, bringing their complaints to -* 
 the Legislature, and as being either rudely repelled, or treated with the most callous 
 indifference. Sir, I feel that it is in my power to show, that the principal ground of 
 this complaint, is a gross mistake of tiae nature and state of things. Even the last 
 and latest complaint ; that which gentlemen urge upon us, as a most aggravated 
 grievance ; that is, the manner in which this Convention is constituted, is utterly 
 without foundation. 1 regretted to hear the gentleman from Augusta urge this topic 
 with a view to influence this body. After enumerating other-causes of complaint, 
 he reminded us of our responsibility resulting from the gross injustice committed in 
 the apporLiomnent by whicii the representation in this body was prescribed, and that 
 a majority of this Assenjbly represented a minority of the people of the State. 
 
 I did not understand him lo complain on this subject, that the question, whether 
 there should be a Convention or not, was first propounded to the freeholders of the State.'* 
 I am sure he could not complain of this. If any such complaint is heard in any 
 quarter of this House, let it at once be silenced ; for, this limitation was prescribed by 
 the advocates of Convention theinselves. It was those who sought to have this 
 Convention a sembled, wh > voluntriered la proposing such a restriction. The quali- 
 fied voters oi' Virginia, to whom her sovereign power is confided, were those to whom 
 they made their appeal to decide the question, whether the Convention should be 
 called or no, and on the same principle they were m.ade the electors of this body. 
 Instead of claiming the utmost extent of the principle here insisted on, and giving 
 uncontrolled sway to numbers of all classes, reference was had to the voters only. 
 Now, 1 find from the result of the calculation of a friend in whom I have all confi- 
 dence, that the following is the amount of representation in this body of the difterent 
 sections of the State, having regard only to the number of voters. The whole num- 
 ber of persons cliarged, in lb2J, with a land tax, was 92,000 in round numbers. This 
 sum is to be taken as a dividend ; 36,000, out of this 92,000, are on the land books of 
 the counties beyond the Blue Pi-idge, and 5S,0G0 on those East of that Ridge. Ac- 
 cording to the ipportionment of that number, among the twenty-four Senaiorial Dis- 
 tricts, that dividend divided by twenty -four will give the quotient of 3,800 freeholders 
 to each district. Take the 3(i,000 whi( h includes every name on the land books for 
 the counties beyond the mountains, divide that by 3,600, and the quotient is nine ; 
 nine districts, therefore, beyond the Ridge is the utmost claim that can be asserted by 
 the West, and have they not nine ? But, let us look further. That number of 36,000 
 includes all the names on the Commissioners' books in all the counties West of the 
 Ridge. Now, I appeal to the candor of gentlemen of the West, and to the Sheriffs' 
 returns, when 1 say that a large number of these names — one tenth at least — are the 
 names of n )n-resideuts. Am 1 nc)t correct.? Is not much of that land ideal And 
 is not much of it owned by residents of the Eastern part of the State, for non-resi- 
 dents of the State.? 1 earnestly desire, and it would give me inexpressible plea- 
 sure, to disabuse the n.inds of our Western breth en on this subject. I ask those con- 
 versant withtlie vVe-stern counties, to take up the land book and to say if one-tenth 
 is not less than the due allowance. The consequence is, that they have nine districts, 
 when, if tie prmcip.e of the ge.itlemen from N rf «lk and Augusta, (Mr. Taylor and 
 Mr. Johnson,) v.'ere to be strictly applied, they would not have more than eight. 
 They have then a larger representation than they are entitled to, and this, though we 
 totally disregard the slave population of Eastern Virginia. 
 
 Tills view is profitable in its bearing on another object. These returns are for 
 1829, and therefore adapted to the augmented strength of the V/est at the present 
 time. Now, permit me to use their own claim of rnpid increase — and thus to show 
 how far short these estimates must have been of the number of voters in the year 
 1817, when, by a new arrangement of the Senatorial Districts, the West was then 
 allowed a larger representation in the Senate than they are now entitled to. I ask, 
 therefore, whether in the change of the Senatorial Districts, instead of being depres- 
 sed and defrauded, they have not been assigned even a larger share of political power 
 than on their own principles they were entitled to. Yet, it is said, and said again, 
 and great stress has been laid on the assertion, that they are languishing under the 
 oppressive legislation of a hard-hearted minority. Look at their representation in the 
 House of Delegates. They have eighty members out of two hundred and fourteen, 
 tliat is, more than nine to fifteen. Reduce it to the proportion of eight to sixteen, and 
 
DEBATES OY THE CONVENTION. 
 
 309 
 
 their title on the same basis is only one-third of the entire number, viz : to seventy-one. 
 During this whole time, therefore, while all these doleful complaints have been uller- 
 ed, they have been in tbe practical enjoyment of representation ten per cent, greater 
 than they can justly claim. Now, tSir, I do not bring this as a matter of reproach, 
 or an iteai of debit or credit, but my sole object is to disabuse their minds and free 
 them from the influence of imaginary grievances, and then bring them to the real 
 questions before this body with all that spirit of conciliation, harniony and good will 
 which a frank correction of errors, is calculated to produce ; cherishing, as 1 do, the 
 earnest hope that the result of the labors of the Convention niay conduce to the fu- 
 ture good feeling, confidence and affection of different parts of the State. I do this 
 that 1 may expel that festering sore, that they may be convinced that they have mis- 
 conceived their own situation, that no wrong has been done them on their own prin- 
 ciples, and that power has been meted to them by their own scales and by their own 
 weights. 
 
 In the same spirit, and swayed by similar influences, I will novv' advert to the state- 
 ment of the gentleman from Augusta, to show that on the very fbundation he laid, 
 if we disregard means and look only to resul s, the question is, in fact, reduced to a 
 mere form of words. 
 
 But before I go to that, let me bring to the notice of the gentleman from Augusta 
 the influence of the principle when reduced to practice, accordiuu; to the terms of the 
 resolution of the Legislative Committee, as ex{)Jained by his coadjutor from Loudoun 
 (Mr. Mercer,) viz : the principle of representation on the bas;s of white population. 
 The gentleman from Loudoun took t'fis process, lie did not controvert the proposi- 
 tion contained in the resolutions of the gentleman from Norfolk, but maintained the re- 
 port of the Legislative Committee, on the ground that the two were equivalents. He 
 claimed that equal amounts of population would produce equal numbers of qualified 
 electors. On this postulate, he assumed, that the ttAal numbers of white persons in 
 any region of the State was a fair exponent of the number of voters it would fur- 
 nish, and the numbers of population and of voters, having the same ratio, however 
 different their sum, the result would be the same, whici^ever should be resorted to, in 
 making the apportionment of representation. If one hundred of gross population, 
 wherever situated, gave ten voters and in that proportion, it would be just as accurate 
 to take a gross population for your computation of the amount of representation, as 
 to take the voters. 
 
 The gentleman from Augusta, does not deal with these equivalents, or go on these 
 postulates. He has tried the effect, and has not conjectured that if a given number 
 of whites, in one part of the State, furnish a certain number of voters, the same num- 
 ber of whites in any otlier part would furnish a like number of voters. Ho has found 
 the postulate of the gentleman from Loudoun to be fallacious, and the result shows 
 one of the most striking and irresistible proofs of the sagacity with which my friend 
 from Chesterfield seized the true criterion of the question in debate. Thouoh in its 
 form his proposition was supposed to be revolting to the feelings of the West" the re- 
 sult of these calculations furnishes demonstrable proof of its correctness. 
 
 I need not go into an examination of the classifications of the gentleman from Au- 
 gusta, made of the quantum of power to each portion of the State, deduced by his 
 different processes. The necessity of this is removed by the fact that we have the 
 amount in gross, and that the question is between the two sections of the State, divi- 
 ded by the Blue Pi,idge. 
 
 On the basis of qualified voters, on the Commissioners' books, the Western district 
 has nine more members than its due in the lower House, and one more in the upper. 
 The gentleman shakes his head when I designate tlie Blue Ridge as separatino- the 
 rival interests of the State. Be it so. But let me tell him, that it is a matter of some 
 little value to us, to look to any line. We can advance one step with the aid of the 
 elements of apportionment we have obtained from his estimate, by first takinrr this 
 primary division of the State. We can say these are to be the estimated amount of 
 representatives bej^ond the Blue Ridge, and leave the sub-division to them. Leave 
 that estimated for the East to us, and we vAll easily sub-divide. There will be no dif- 
 ficulty on this score. But, look to the estimated amounts for the sub-divisions of the 
 State. What are they ? 1 could not take down the results of the gentleman's cal- 
 culations, and so cannot speak with precision, as to the particular sums ; but, I receiv- 
 ed this impression from the whole, tliat taking the whole number of tliose who pay 
 land tax in the East and West, divided by the Ridge, and giving them representation 
 in proportion, and then making a re-partition between the two°sections ©f the East, 
 and the two sub-divisions of the West, 1 think the difference between the results of 
 this, and an apportionment on the ratio, that the amendment under consideration 
 supplies, will not amount to an unit. The gentleman may say, whether or not I am 
 right. That the numbers do very nearly approximate, is certain. How much the 
 difference may be, is unworthy serious deliberation. Here, then, the gentleman from 
 Augusta, and the gentleman from Loudoun, stand on a ground of apportionment, 
 
310 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 which leaves the four grand divisions of the State, ahmost as they will stand on the 
 mixed basis. 
 
 If you take the Federal number and work by that rule, it will bring you to nearly the 
 same result. Now, it deserves to be mentioned as a memorable fact, that this con- 
 currence of three different processes, all leading to the same result, shows the justice 
 and sagacity of the scheme of the gentleman from Culpeper (Mr. Green.) 
 
 He resorted to the plan of a mixed basis of taxation and representation, not 
 arbitrary — nor with a view to claim and to conquer power, but on mature delibera- 
 tion, weighing various interests as they exist— and not from mere speculation— and 
 it does happen, sucii is the intluence'of the slave property, (which is not property 
 merely, but men) on the other classes of persons and property, in the community, 
 as to render it indispensable that they should be considered in the ratio. And it is 
 another and most striking evidence of the sagacity and wisdom of those who origi- 
 nated the Federal number. It acts on the just principles of political economy. The 
 slave population acts, not only as the labormg power of society, but it takes the place 
 of men. Wherever slavery exists, and you look to the freemen of society for its go- 
 vernment, and there is any property qualification, you arrive at the same object, or 
 very nearly so, by adding three-fifths of the slave population, as by ascertaining all the 
 voters, and apportioning your representation accordaig to numbers. 
 
 This view of the subject is consohng. It presents us a point where all the pro- 
 cesses meet and coincide : and then the only question is (seemg this is the result by 
 either calculation,) not which ratio shall be employed just this moment, but what 
 shall be fixed upon as the rule of future apportionments. On that subject, every con- 
 sideration of wisdom and of convenience, requires that we discard at once, other 
 modes of calculation, and take the easy, simple, practical plan of the Federal number, 
 and make our apportionment by that. 
 
 Why are we to take this ? Not arbitrarily, but because it agrees with the other 
 processes, and because, if any other is resorted to, for the future rule, you force an 
 artificial state of things, by holding out to politicians and individuals, inducements 
 to produce it, with a view to an unequal distribution of political power. If you take 
 taxation as your rule, legislation may be moulded, not by right principles, but sinister 
 views to it ; influence on political power and taxation may be managed, so as mere- 
 ly to affect the balance of that pov/er. 
 
 If you take the rule of qualified voters only, then you encounter the difficulty of 
 accurately determining their number. The very element of calculation is wanting. 
 If you go to the Commissioners' books, you encounter the toil and expense of regis- 
 tering all the lawful voters tliroughout this land : and yoxx encounter, besides, the ac- 
 tive principle alluded to by the gentleman from Augusta, leading men to make a false 
 and fraudulent representation of the number of those votes, and give an artificial ex- 
 aggeration of it; and thus you will have on your books, a host of men of straw, who 
 disappear at tlie polls. You do more. And I wonder that the strong and mascu- 
 line mind of the gentleman from Augusta, did not see this danger, and repudiate the 
 rule. If I understood him aright, there is no one who regards, with a stronger feel- 
 ing of foreboding and solicitude, that part of our duty which consists in prescribing 
 the qualification of voters, than the gentleman. I have the authority of his whole 
 political life, (and the life of no man can be more confidently appealed to, to deter- 
 mine the future from the past,) for this assertion. And what must be the conse- 
 quences, if he adopts this principle as a future test of jDolitical power i 
 
 The very first effect of it, will be to turn the thoughts of this Convention, not to 
 the consideration of the reasons v/hich legitimately belong to the subject, but to its 
 influence on the grand question of pov/er. 
 
 The effect will be, that you interpose a barrier to a fair, candid, and judicious de- 
 cision of the questions affecting the limits of the Right of Suffrage. 1 am not sure 
 that I am exempt myself from the operation of such an influence. I fear that my 
 mind may be turned away, from considerations justly belonging to those questions, 
 by the important and decisive influence of whatever principles we adopt, to regulate 
 the Fvight of Suffrage, on the all-absorbing question now under consideration. 
 
 This is the inevitable effect of fixing upon the ratio of voters, as a principle of fu- 
 ture action. But, what will be the eftect in future ? Fraud and simulation in fixing 
 the number of voters. Insuperable difficult}^ will arise in getting at the real number 
 of voters. And allowing you to get at it first, what will be the result hereafter.? 
 We propose, by the resolution in the report of the Legislative Committee, to extend 
 the Right of Suffrage, so as to include many new classes of voters. We embrace all 
 who are house-keepers, and have been assessed for, and have paid revenue taxes. I 
 know not if it will be carried to that extent — but that has been proposed. But, as- 
 suming that that rule shall obtain, what is the number of quahfied voters when we 
 look to the numbers, not now, but in after time ? When we fix the time the Census 
 shall be taken, we cannot look to a former Census, but to that taken in the same year 
 the apportionment shall be made ; and that is to be the foundation of the allotment- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEVTIO>% 
 
 311 
 
 Well. And what is the expense at which the ascendancy of political power may be 
 purchased ? Ave. purchased — put up to auction — and you the ofterers. The delin- 
 quents in the paVment of a county levy shilhng tax will probably average one hundred 
 and fifty or two hundred for each county, and they, it may be presumed, have not 
 taxable" propertv. The number of voters at this time, taking as the criterion of sui- 
 fra^e, the paym'ent of a revenue tax, are probably about 35.000 V. est of tiie Ridge ; 
 an^ by the calculation of gentlemen on the other side, there are 15,000 or 20X-00 
 more above the age of twenty-one, who either have no property at ail, or no taxable 
 property. Tou, Sir, well know, as every member of this Convention knows, that 
 from the manner in which the assessments are made, every individual, by his own 
 mere ipse dixit, mav qualify- himself to vote, so far as that quahfication depends on 
 havinof his name on the commissioner's book, and an assessment of a tax on property. 
 Suppose the case of a contractor or manufacturer who has in his employ five hundred 
 day-labonrers, every one of tliem subject to his beck and call — though not one of 
 them mav own a dollar's worth of taxable or other property, yet every one of them 
 may at pleasure, when called on by the commissioner. afiJect to own a horse or some 
 property not subject to a higher tax than four cents, and give in that as property owned 
 b}' him and liable to a revenue tax : and this tax being paid, he ranks as a voter, and 
 more than that, he will enter into the computation when representation is to be appor- 
 tioned. By this process. '20.000 may be added to tlie number of voters, at an expense 
 of S 500. and the addition of this 20.000 may, nay. will change the entire balance of 
 political power. Tou would thus put np that balance at a wretched auction, and sell 
 it for a miserable pittance. Will o-entlemen close their eyes to this view of the sub- 
 ject ? If we are to proceed in this downward course, let us go the whole length 
 at once, and not require these petty frauds to bring upon us all the practical conse- 
 quences of the utmost extreme to which we may go in extending the Right of Suf- 
 frasre. Let us at once adopt the plan of Universal Suffrage — admit paupers and ail to 
 the'polls. Let us give full eificacy to the so much loved principle of numbers to its 
 whole extent. Let us no longer struggle with each other under vain disguises, but 
 consent like men in the face of day, that we will take L'niversal Sufirage as one of the 
 principles of the Constitution. 
 
 I appeal to the gentleman from Fairfax. Oh. Fitzhugh.) the gentleman from Au- 
 gusta, pir. Johnson,) the gentleman from Brooke. (Mr. Doddridge,) and to all the 
 gentlemen on that side the House, if tliey do not render this almost inevitable: if 
 they resort to such a principle as is now proposed, not for tlie present only, but for all 
 ftiture times, as the rule for the apportionment of representation : and tlien I solemnly 
 ask them, are they prepared witii their opinions on the subject of Suffrage, to incur 
 this consequence .- 
 
 Sir, I renounce it. I call on others, and especially the gentlemen to whom. I hare 
 appealed, to join me in renouncino" it. and to unite to furnish some ground on which 
 all can meet, and this vexed question be terminated, at least, so far as results are con- 
 cerned. Let us renounce all our processes. This I hold out to our antagonists as an 
 olive branch — I tender it as a peace-ofiering — let us renounce all our processes, and 
 take results and fix them in the Constitution, and wrangle no longer about a form of 
 words. Let us endeavor to fix on some principle to guide us in all our future changes. 
 But if we cannot do this, then let the Constitution be sdent, as to the rule to govern 
 in future, and leave to future times to provide for future exigencies. 2\ct that I pre- 
 fer or approve the omission in the Constitution of some rule applicable in such "exi- 
 gencies. I would acquiesce in it, however, rather than continue the tedious and per- 
 nicious struggle in which we are engaged. If our brethren in the West will discharare 
 from their minds imaginary injuries, and unseasonable fastidiousness, there is a prin- 
 ciple in which we all might meet, simple, practicable, aheady established, and sus- 
 taining a most important interest of the State : a principle which adapts itself to all 
 changes — and wluch, if the prospects held cut in the West, be not tlie creations of 
 fancy, but the prophetic augury of wise observation, will carry there, along with its 
 increasing prosperity and population, the power which is its due. ^ 
 
 I have already adverted to the principles on which I became a member of tliis Con- 
 vention. They vrere known to the pubhc before I became a depository of the trust 
 I hold here, and permit me to say to the gentlemen of the West — brethren of the 
 same community, if my wishes shall prevail, brethren of the same community, we 
 will remain in all time to come ; for I vrill not permit ray mind to indui2"e even in the 
 hypothetical anticipation of a state of tliinifs that would reconcile me to a separation 
 of the State, or to a disunion of the L~nited States. In that term msrxiov. are inclu- 
 ded aU the master ills that can affect a people or a State. Though we mav, and cer- 
 tainly will; suffer less by the separation than the West, how heart-sickenino- is this 
 estimate, not of blessings, but of woes I Come disunion when it may, it is due to the 
 candour of this debate, to say, that strong as we are. it wiU bring to us a measure of 
 evil, a.t least equal to that which our ISortliern neighbours will suffer. Zsay, I fear, 
 that if the extremity of suffering to which tlie several parts of tlie Union would be 
 
312 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 exposed by so disastrous an event, could be accurately guaged, the painful pre-emi- 
 nence of superior suffering would be found to belong to the Southern States. 
 
 I have not myself, been indifferent to the interests of the West. I am a friend to 
 internal improvement. I have manifested it not by professions merely, but by acts 
 in discharge of my solem.n duties as a member of the Legislature. To the gentle- 
 man from Loudoun, (Mr. Mercer,) 1 allow the meed of praise, of being the author of 
 the law which established the Board of Public Vv^orks, and munificently endowed it. 
 To his zeal and influence, its success is mainly to be ascribed — If praise it be, I may 
 claim for myself, tlaat which belongs to an humble but earnest ally in the same cause. 
 It had my support — and therein, 1 think I gave no indication of hostility to Western 
 interests. I still continue the friend of internal improvement within those limits 
 which its true friends are disposed to assign to it. I am hostile to gorgeous and vision- 
 ary schemes, calculated only to delude the public mind, to play before the imagina- 
 tion the image of a great but unattainable good, or if not unattainable, to be accom- 
 plished only at a cost more than all the benefit it can yield will counterbalance. The 
 true test of the expediency of attempting improvements of every kind, is that which 
 was laid down by my friend from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson.) Let that be always ap- 
 plied, and with caution and care. When I see presented to me a scheme for any 
 work for improving the state of the country, and I find it to be such, that those who 
 receive the aid will be able themselves to return the sum expended, or a reasonable 
 interest on it, I shall always be willing to advance for their aid the treasure and credit 
 of the State. And let me add, that this is not a singular sentiment by any means in 
 the Eastern portion of the State : and notiiing can exterminate that feeling and turn 
 all the kindly and v^^holesome affections of the people of the East, to gall and bitter- 
 ness, but a callous indifference to the mighty interests they hold, and the tremendous 
 dangers to which tliose interests are exposed, and expose those who hold them. If 
 the East shall find or have just cause to suspect that callous indifference, not to their 
 property merely, but to their happiness and their safety ; not to a matter of pence 
 and farthings, but to their existence itself; the effect will be a state of constant in- 
 quietude, of vminterrupted apprehension — a total destruction of quiet and happiness. 
 If to this indifference shall be added a grasping and intractable spirit — a resort to 
 themes of angry declamation to overbear by passion and prejudice, and delusion, in- 
 stead of weighing with candour their claims, and estimating them with the kindness 
 of fraternal feeling — then, that will be done in the East, which some gentlemen think 
 has been done in the West. There Vviil be concert and combination. Stimulated by 
 the feelings produced by that most intolerable evil, and ever-present sense of insecu- 
 rity, they will regard the inexorable authors of it, with fierce and angry hostility, and 
 every collision will heat the blood, and tend to melt into one common mass, all their 
 interests and passions, and then the two divisions of the State will stand confronted 
 with each other ; with passions aroused;, fraternal feelings exasperated into bitter- 
 ness ; and then the minority in the East, impelled by one feeling, and directed by 
 common will, will, (as the gentleman says that of the West has done,) practically 
 control the power of the majority. The tendency of the claims so inexorably urged 
 in total disregard of tlie rights and security of the East, is to break the cement which 
 has heretofore so consolidated Western feelings and interests, and to fuse all the 
 people of the East, as it v/ere, into one body having but one soul. 
 
 I invoke gentlemen to take this view — I ask them, whether they can think of act- 
 ing so as to produce this violent wrenching of all the feehngs which ought to bind 
 us as members of one political family, and plant a thorn in the wound made by the 
 violent divulsion whicii will rankle for all time to come, and as an eloquent advocate 
 of American rights said, in the British Parliament, in an analogous case, produce that 
 imvicdicahile v^dnvs, for which time has no lenitive, and no physician a cure. 
 
 Mr. Stanard having resumed his seat, the question w^as propounded from the Chair, 
 and after a pause, seemed liiiely to be taken, when 
 
 Mr. Randolph rose, and addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : It has been with great disappointment, and yet deeper regret, that 
 I have perceived an invincible repugnance on the part of gentlemen representing 
 here, a large portion of the Commonwealth, extending from Cape Henry to the 
 Mountains, along the whole length of the North Carolina line, that portion of it in 
 which my own district is situated, to take a share in this debate — a repugnance not 
 resulting — I say so from my personal knowledge of many of them — not resulting 
 from any vvant'of ability, nor from the want of a just, modest, and manly confidence 
 in the abilities they possess. I have looked to Norfolk ; I have looked to Southamp- 
 ton ; I have looked to Dinwiddle ; I have looked to Brunswick, for the display of 
 talent which I knew to exist : but, Sir, I have looked in vain. 
 
 And it is this circumstance only— I speak it with a sincerity, I have too much self- 
 respect to vouch for, which has induced me to overcome the insuperable aversion; 
 insuperable until now ; that I have felt, to attract towards myself the attention of the 
 Committee. * . ' : - ...... 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 313 
 
 As long as I have had any fixed opinions, I have been in the habit of considering 
 the Constitution of Virginia, under which I have hved for more than half a century, 
 with all Its faults and tailnigs, and with all the objections which practical men— not 
 theorists and visionary speculators, have urged or can urge against it, as the very 
 best Constitution ; not for Japan ; not ior Chma ; not for iSew England ; or for Old 
 England; but for this, our ancient Commonwealth of Virginia. 
 
 But, I am not such a bigot as to be unwilling, under any circumstances, however 
 imperious, to change the Constitution under which 1 was born ; I may say, certainly 
 under which 1 was brought up, and under wiiich, I had hoped to be carried to my 
 grave. My principles onlhat subject are these : the grievance must first be clearly 
 specified, and fully proved ; it must be vital, or rather, deadly in its eftect ; its mag- 
 nitude must be such as will justify prudent and reasonable men in taking the always 
 delicate, often dangerous step, of making innovations in their fundamental law ; and 
 the remedy proposed must be reasonable and adequate to the end in view. When 
 the grievance siiall have been thus made out, I hold him to be not a loyal subject, but 
 a political bigot, who would refuse to apply the suitable remedy. 
 
 But, I will not submit my case to a political physician ; come his diploma from 
 whence it may ; who would at once prescribe all the medicines in the Pharmacopoeia, 
 not only for ttie disease I now have, but for all the diseases of every possible kind I 
 ever might have in future. These are my principles, and 1 am willing to carry them 
 out; for, I will not hold any principles which 1 niay not fairly carry out in practice. 
 
 Judge, then, with what surprise and pain, 1 found that not one department of this 
 Government — no, not one — Legislative, Executive or Judicial — nor one branch of 
 either, was left untouched by the spirit of innovation ; (for 1 cannot call it reform.) 
 When even tiie Senate, yes, Sir, the Senate, which had so lately been swept by the 
 besom of innovation — even the Senate had not gone untouched or unscathed. Many 
 innovations are proposed to be made, without any one practical grievance having been 
 even suggested, much less shown. 
 
 Take that branch of the Government which was so thoroughly reformed in 1816, 
 and even that is not untouched. Sir, who ever heard a whisper, ab urbc condita to 
 this day, that the Senators of Virginia were too youthful ? I never heard such a senti- 
 ment in my life. And in the flouse of Delegates, what man ever heard that the 
 members — 1 speak of them, of course, in the aggregate — that the members were too 
 young ? Yet, even there — it is to be declared, tliat all men who might be elected to 
 that body between the ages of twentv-one and twenty-f jur, are to be disfranchised ; 
 and as regards the Senate, all between the ages of twenty-one and thirty. Yes, Sir, 
 not only the spring and seed-time, but the summer and harvest of life ; that delight- 
 ful season which neither you. Sir, nor I can ever recal ; the dearest and the best por- 
 tion of our lives ; during this period of nine years, the very prime of human life, 
 men are to be disfranchised. And for w^hat .' For a political megrim, a freak — no ev'l 
 is suggested. The case is certainly very rare, that a man under thirty is elected a 
 member of the Senate. It will then be said, there is no privation, and, therefore, no 
 injury. But, Sir, there is a wide difterence between a man's being not elected, and 
 a fundamental law stamping a stigma upon him by which he is excluded from the 
 noblest privilege to which no merit or exertion on his part can restore him. But, all 
 this, I suppose, is in obedience to the all-prevailing principle, that rox jwpuli vox dei ; 
 aye, Sir, the all-prevailing principle, that Numbers and Numbers alone, are to regu- 
 late all things in political society, in the very teeth of those abstract natural rio-hts of 
 man, which constitute the only sliadow of claim to exercise this monstrous tyranny. 
 
 With these general remarks, permit me to attempt — (I am afraid it will prove an 
 abortive attempt) to say something on the observations of other gentlemen, to which 
 I have given the most profound attention I am capable of. Sir, I have no other pre- 
 paration for this task, than a most patient attention to what has been said liere, and 
 in the Committee, of which I was a member, and deep, intense, and almost annihi- 
 lating thought on the subjects before us. This is all the preparation that 1 have made. 
 I cannot follow the example which has been set me. 1 cannot go into the history of 
 my past life, or defend my political consistency here or elsewhere. I will not do this 
 for this reason: I have always held it unwise to plead 'till I am arraigned, and ar- 
 raigned before a tribunal having competent and ample jurisdiction. My political con- 
 sistency requires no such defence. My claim to Republicanism rests on no patent 
 taken out yesterday, or to be taken out to-morrow. My life itself is my only vouch- 
 er, a life spent for thirty years in the service of the most grateful of constituents. 
 
 The gentleman from Augusta, who occupies so large a space, both in the time and 
 in the eye of the House, has told us that he fought gallantly by the side of his noble 
 friend from Chesterfield, so long as victory was possible, and that it was not until he 
 was coriquered, that he grounded'his arms. The gentleman farther told us that, finding 
 his native country and his early friend? on this side the mountain, on whose behalf 
 he had waged that gallant war — he found he hesitated what part to take noic, until his 
 constituents, aye, Sir — and more than that, his property, on the other side — and h^ 
 
 40 
 
314 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 has taken his course accordingly. Well, Sir, and will he not allow, on our part, 
 that some consideration is due to our constituents, although they happen to be our 
 neighbours ; or to our property, although we reside upon it ? Are either or both less 
 dear on that account ? 
 
 But, Sir, I put it to the Committee, whether the gentleman is not mistaken in point 
 of fact ? Whether the victory is indeed won ? Every one, to be sure, is the best judge 
 whether he is beateu or not. But, I put it to the gentleman himself, whether, if lie 
 were now fighting along side of his noble friend from Chesterfield, the scale might 
 not possibly turn the other way ? No man, however, is compelled to fight after he 
 feels himself vanquished. 
 
 Sir, I mean no ill-timed pleasantry, either as it regards the place where it is uttered, 
 the person to whom it refers, and least of all, as it respects him by whom the remark 
 is inade, when I say, that in this prudent resolution of the gentleman from Augus- 
 ta, he could not have been exceeded in caution and forecast by a certain renowned 
 Captain Dugate Dalgetty himself. Sir, the war being ended, he takes service on the 
 other side : — the sceptre having passed from Judali, the gentleman stretches out his 
 arm from P^ichmond, to Rockfisii Gap, to intercept and clutch it in its passage. 
 
 Among various other observations with which he favoured the Committee, he pro- 
 tested with great earnestness against opinions relating to the Federal Government or 
 its administration being introduced here. Sir, the gentleman is too great a lawyer 
 not to know, that the Federal Government is our Government : — it is the Govern- 
 ment of Virginia : — and if a man were disposed to shut his eyes to the Constitution, 
 and the administration of the Federal Government, he could not do it: they would be 
 forced open. Sir, by the interests, and feelings, aye, and by the passions too, which 
 have existed, do exist, and will continue to exist, as long as Virginia herself shall 
 have existence. 
 
 It is not the least of my regrets that one of the most inevitable consequences of 
 these changes, if they shall take effect, will be totally to change all the politics of 
 Virginia in reference to the Federal Government; (without considering the hands in 
 which it may happen to be placed.) and J do confidently believe, that the very great- 
 est cause of them is to be found in the hope of producing that all-desired change- 
 In many cases I know it to exist, of my own personal knowledge. 
 
 Sir, we can't shut our eyes to the Federal Government. 
 
 When in 1783, the Convention of Virginia adopted the Federal Government as a 
 part of her Constitution, they effected a greater change in our Constitution than the 
 wildest reformer now suggests to us : to estimate the amount of that change we must 
 have reference to her interests and power at that day : if not, we may call ourselves 
 Statesmen, but the world will apply to us a very different epithet. Among innume- 
 rable causes why I now oppose a change, is my full recollection of the change which 
 was then brought about. 1 have by experience learned that changes, even in the or- 
 dinary law of the land, do not always operate as the drawer of the bill, or the Legis- 
 lative body, may have anticipated: and of all things in the world, a Government, 
 whether ready made, to suit casual customers, or made per order, is the very last that 
 operates as its framers intended. Governments are like revolutions : you may put 
 them in motion, but I defy you to control them after they are in motion. 
 
 Sir, if there is any one thing clearer than another, it is that the Federal Constitu- 
 tion intended that the State Governments should issue no paper money ; and by giv- 
 ing the Federal Government power" to coin money,''' it was intended to insure the 
 result that this should be a hard money Government : — and what is it.' It is a paper- 
 money Government. If this be the result, in spite of all precautions to the contra- 
 ry — (Sir, this is no time, as the late illustrious President of the Court of Appeals was 
 wont to say, to mince words.) and these Governments have turned out to be two most 
 corrupt paper-money Governments, and you could not prevent it ; how can we ex- 
 pect, now, to define and limit the operation of new and untried principles.^ For new 
 and untried they are ; and if God lends me strength, I will prove it. 
 
 I have very high authority — tlie authority of the gentleman from Augusta — to say 
 that the Federal Government was intended to be charged only with the external re- 
 lations of the country : but, by a strange transformation, it has become the regulator, 
 (abandoning the Colonial trade by negligence, or incapacity, or both, and crippling 
 all our other trade,) it has become the regulator of the interior of the country ; its 
 roads; its canals; and, more than all, of its productive, or rather its unjyroductive la- 
 bour, (for they have made it so.) 
 
 Yet, with these facts staring us in the face, we are gravely told not to look at the 
 Federal Government at all. And this in the Government of Virginia, where, to 
 use a very homely phrase, but one tliat exactly suits the case, we can't take a step 
 without breaking our shins over some Federal obstacle. 
 
 Sir, I can readily see a very strong motive for wishing to do away all past distinc- 
 tions in politics, to obliterate the memory of old as well as of recent events, and once 
 more to come with something like equal chances into the political lottery. 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXYEXTION-. 
 
 Let me return to my illustration. What provision is there. Mr. Chairman, either 
 in the Constitution of Virginia or the Constitution of the United States, which es- 
 tablishes it as a principle, that the Commonwealth of Virginia should be the sole res- 
 training and regulating power on the mad and unconstitutional usurpations of the 
 Federal Gove?nment ? There is no such provision in either : — vet. in practice, and in 
 fact, the Commonwealth of Virginia has been, to -my certain knowledge, for more 
 than thirty 3'ears, the sole counterpoise and check on the usurpations of tiie Federal 
 Government — so far as they have been checked at all : I wish they had been checked 
 more effectually. 
 
 For a long time, our brethren of the South, because we were the frontier State of 
 the grp.at SDUthern division of the UnioD, were dead to considerations to which they 
 have, I fear, awaked too late. Virginia was left alone and imsupported, unless by 
 the feeble aid of her distant offspring, Kentucky. It is because I am unwilling to 
 give up tills check, or to diminish its force, that I am unwilling to pull down the edi- 
 fice of our State Government from the garret to the cellar; aye, down to the founda- 
 tion stone. I will not put in hazard this single good, for all the benefits the warm- 
 est advocate of reform can hope to derive from the results of this body. 
 
 The gentleman from Augusta told us, yesterday, I believe, or the day before, or the 
 day before that, (I really do not remember which,) that slaves have always been a 
 subject of taxation in Virginia, and that a long v\-hile ago neat cattle had also been 
 taxed. In reofard to these horned cattle, I think they have occupied full as much at- 
 tention as thev are entitled to in this debate. But, let it be remembered, that we were 
 then, not taxing tlie cattle of the West, for there was no West, but a few scattered 
 settlements beyond the mountain; and what we have been discussing- was the pro- 
 portion of taxes paid by the East and the West. No sooner vras an interest in this 
 subject established beyond the mountains, than tlie tax was laid aside. At that time, 
 Sir, the Commonwealth of Virginia was throughout, a slave-holding Commonwealth : 
 (would to God she were so now.) And is it then so wonderful that slaves should 
 have been a subject of taxation ? Yes, Sir : Virginia was then not only throughout, 
 a slave-holding, but a tobacco-planting Commonwealth. You can't open the Statute 
 Book — 1 mean one of the Oid Statute Books, not those that have been defaced by the 
 finofer of reform — and not see that tobacco v."as, in fact, tiie currency, as well as 
 staple of the State. We paid our clerks" fees in tobacco : verdicts were given in to- 
 bacco : and bonds were executed payable in tobacco. That accounts for it all. While 
 a large portion of the State has ceased to be a slave-holding, and a still larger portion 
 has ceased to be a tobacco-planting community, the burden has rested on the necks 
 of a comparatively small, unhappy, and I will say it, a proscribed caste in the com- 
 munitv. 2sot that any such elfect was intended, when all were tobacco-planters, tax- 
 es on slaves and tobacco were fair and equal. But. time, tlie greatest of innovators, 
 has silently operated to produce this great and grindmg oppression. nativity cast 
 
 my lot there. I am one of them. I participate in all their interests and fee'huofs. 
 And if I had been told, until I had the evidence of fact to prove it — tliat one of tie 
 great slave-holding and tobacco-planting districts, would lend itself to tlie support of 
 the report of the Legislative Committee, unmitigated, or, to use a term for which I 
 am indebted to the gentleman from Spottsylvania, unmoUijied. or undulcififd by any 
 thing to give it a wholesome operation. I would not have believed it. Nothing but 
 ocular and auricular demonstration, would have made me believe it possible. For my 
 part. 1 had not only, as the gentleman from Chesterfield has said, never have been 
 born, but, beinof born and grown up as I am. it were better for me that a mill-stone 
 were hanged about my neck, and I cast into the uttermost depths of the sea, than to 
 return to my constituents after having given a naked vote for the report of the Com- 
 mittee. . * 
 
 Sir, when I speak of danorer, from what quarter does it come ; from whom From 
 the corn and oat growers on the Eastern Shore, the Rappahannock and the Pamun- 
 key : From the fishermen on the Chesapeake : The pilots of EUzabeth City No, 
 Sir — from ourselves — from the great slave-h aiding and tobacco -planting districts of 
 the State. I could not have brought myself to believe it — nothing could have persua- 
 ded me to believe, that the real danger which threatens this great interest, should 
 spring from those districts themselves. And. arrogant and presumptuous as it may 
 appear in me, (these epithets have been applied to us by the gentleman from Augusta,) 
 I will risk any thing shzri of my eternal salvation on the fact, that when the people 
 of that region come to understand the real question, you will as soon force ratsbane 
 down their tln-oats, as a Constitution with such a principle in it. 
 
 The gentleman from Augusta told us, yesterday, or the day before. I cannot be cer- 
 tain as to the precise day. with some appearance as if it were a grievance, that the 
 people had interfered : and he asked if we are to be instructed out of our seats .' I 
 answer, yes. Such as cannot be instructed in their seats, must be instructed out of 
 their seats. He says tlie voices of tlie people from county meetings and cross roads 
 and taverns, will come here and interrupt the harmony of our deliberations. 
 
316 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 I trust they will. Though the people have hitherto been supine, on this side the 
 mountains, I trust they will take tlje matter into their own hands. I hope they are 
 beginning to rouse from their torpor : and I know it. I will state one fact, to show 
 that the current of public sentinient, is fast setting in on our side. I do not say whe- 
 ther it was for or against us before. I have heard, not one, not ten, not fifty, (and 
 when I say not fifty, I mean not less, but more than that number,) of intelligent men 
 declare, that if by any possibility, they could have foreseen, (poor innocents.) that 
 such were to be the results, they never would have voted for tiiis Convention. In 
 the mean while, not a single convert has been made from our cause ; if there has, 
 name the man ; I could name ten, twenty, aye, fifty; and if I were to resort to docu- 
 mentary evidence, I could name more. So far am I from being one of those, who 
 wish to precipitate the question, I am glad, I rejoice in the prospect, that our Session 
 will run into that of the Virginia Assembly. In politics, I am always for getting the 
 last advices. You can never get at the true temper of the public mind, till the occa- 
 sion presents itself for decisive action. 
 
 I have made, and shall make, no disclaimer of having intended offence to any per- 
 son or party in this body — and this for the same reason I before stated. I never will 
 plead, till I am arraigned by a competent tribunal — and the disclaimer would be mis- 
 placed. Gentlemen on all sides, have spoken of the iniention with which they are 
 demanding power, (for the gentleman from Augusta lifted the veil, and owned to us, 
 that power, and power alone, is the object he is in pursuit of.) Sir, I mean no disre- 
 spect, when I say, that however important it may be to themselves, to me it is a mat- 
 ter of perfect inditference — 1 speak in reference to the operation of their measures — 
 whether tlieir intents be wicked or charitable. I say, the demand which they make, 
 is such as ought to alarm every considerate and fore-thoughted man ; and that there 
 is notliing to mitigate that alarm, in the stern, unrelenting, inexorable, remorseless 
 cry, which they raise for power, and their determination to hsten to no compromise. 
 One gentleman, indeed, has abated somewhat, of his tone of triumph. Perhaps, the 
 prospect of speedy enjoyment, has calmed his exultation, and sobered him dowm. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, since 1 have been here, the scene has recalled many old recollec- 
 tions. At one time, I thouglit myself in the House of Representatives, listening to 
 the debate on the Tariff; at another time, I imagined myself listening to the debate 
 on the Missouri Question ; and sometimes I fancied myself listening to both questions 
 debated at once. Are we men met to consult about the affairs of men ? Or are 
 we, in truth, a Robinhood Society discussing rights in the abstract.'' Have we no 
 house over our heads? Do we forget, that we are living under a Constitution, which 
 has shielded us for more than half a century — that we are not a parcel of naked and 
 forlorn savages, on the shores of New Holland ; and that the worst that can come is, 
 that we shall live under the same Constitution that we have lived under, freely and 
 happily, for half a century ? To their monstrous claims of power, we plead this pre- 
 scription ; but then we are told, that milium temjms occurrit Rrgi — King whom King 
 Numbers. And they will not listen to a prescription of fifly-your years — a period 
 greater, by four years, than would secure a title to the best estate in the Common- 
 wealth, unsupported by any other shadow of right. Nay, Sir, in this case, prescrip- 
 tion operates against possession. They tell us, it is only a case of long-continued, 
 and, therefore, of aggravated injustice. They say to us, in words the most courteous 
 and soft, (but I am not so soft as to swallow them,) "we shall be — we will be — we 
 must be your masters, and you shall submit." To whom do they hold this langunge ? 
 To dependents.? weak, unprotected, and incapable of defence? Or is it to the great 
 tobacco-growing and slave-holding interest, and to every other interest on this side 
 the Ridge? "We are numbers, you have property." I am not so obtuse, as to re- 
 quire any further explanation on this head. " We are numbers, you have property." 
 Sir, 1 understand it perfectly. Mr. Chairman, since the days of the French Revolu- 
 tion, when the Duke of Orleans, who was the richest subject, not only in France, 
 but in all Europe, lent him.=5elf to the mountain party in the Convention, in the A^ain 
 and weak hope of grasping political power, perhaps of mounting the throne, still 
 slippery with the blood of the last incumbent — from that day to this, so great a de- 
 gree of infatuation, has not been shown by any individual, as by the tobacco-grower, 
 and slave-holder of Virginia, who shall lend his aid to rivet this yoke on the necks of 
 his brethren, and on his own. Woe betide that man ! Even the Duke of Orleans 
 himself, profligate and reprobate as he was, would have halted in his course, had he 
 foreseen in the end, his property confiscated to the v/inds, and his head in the sack of 
 the executioner. 
 
 I enter into no calculations of my own, for I have made none, nor shall I follow the 
 example which has been set me. I leave that branch of the argument, if argument 
 it can be called, of the gentleman from Augusta, to be answered by himself. 
 
 The gentleman told us, the day before yesterday, that in fifteen minutes of the suc- 
 ceeding day, he would conclude all he had to say; and he then kept us two hours, 
 not by "the Shrewsbury clock, but by as good a watch as can be made in the city of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 317 
 
 London. {Drawing out and opening his watch.) As fifteen minutes are to two hours — 
 in the proportion of one to eight — such is the approximation to truth,, in the gentleman's 
 calculations. If all the calculations and promises of the gentleman from Augusta, 
 which he held out to gall us — I speak not of his intentions, but only of the effect that 
 would have ensued — ^hall be no nearer the truth than these, where then should we 
 be who trust them ? 
 
 In the course of what I fear will be thought my very wearisome observations, I 
 spoke of the Tariff Law. When the people of the United States threw off their al- 
 legiance to Great Britain, and estabhshed E.epublican Governments here, whether 
 State or Federal, one discovery since made in politics, had not yet entered into the 
 head of any man in the Union, and which, if not arrested by the good sense and pa- 
 triotism of the country, will destroy all Republican Government, as certainly and 
 inevitably as time will one day destroy us. That discovery is this : that a bare majo- 
 rity — (the majority on the Tariff was, I believe, but two — my friend, behind me, 
 (Mr. V. P. Barbour.) tells me that I am right — aaid on one importairt branch of that 
 law, that I mean, which relates to cotton bagging, the majority was but one. and that 
 consisted of the casting vote of the Speaker.) that a bare majority may oppretb, ha- 
 rass, and plunder the minority at pleasure, but that it is their mterest to keep up the 
 minority to the highest possible point consistent with their subjugation, because, the 
 larger tliat minority shall be. in proportion to the majority, by that same proportion 
 are the profits of the majority enhanced, which they have extracted and extorted 
 from the minority. And after all our exclamations against this crying oppression ; 
 after all our memorials and remonstrances j after aU our irrefragable arguments 
 against it, (I refer not to the share I had in them, I speak of the arguments of - 
 other gentlemen, and not of my own.) shall we in Virginia, introduce tliis deadly 
 principle into our own Government ? and give power to a bare majority to tax us ad 
 Libitum, and that when the strongest temptation is at the same time Jield out to them, to 
 do it ? It is now a great while since I learned from the philosopher of Malmesbury, 
 that a state of nature is a state of war; but if we sanction this principle, we shall 
 prove that a state, not of nature, but of society, and of Constitutional Government, 
 is a state of interminable war. And it will not stop here. Instructed by this most 
 baneful, yes, and most baleful example, we shall next have one part of a county 
 conspiring to throw their share of the burden of the levy upon the other part. Sir, 
 if there is a destructive principle in politics, it is that which is maintained bv the gen- 
 tleman from Augusta. 
 
 But we are told that we are to have a stay of execution. We will give you time, 
 say the gentlemen : onl}' give us a bond binding all your estate, secured by a deed of 
 trust on all your slaves."' Why, Sir, there is not a hard-hearted Shylock in the 
 Commonwealth, who will not, on such conditions, give you time. Are'we so weak, 
 that, like the spend-thrift who runs to the usurer, we are wilhng to encounter this ca- " 
 lamit}', because it is not to come upon us till the year 1856 A period not as long as 
 some of us have been in public life r Sir, I would not consent to it, if it were not 
 to come till the year 2U5G. I am at war with the principle. Let me not be told, that 
 then I am at war with the Bill of Rights. I subscribe to every word in the Bill of 
 Rights. I need not show hov/ this can be. It has been better done alreadv by tlie 
 gentleman from Spottsylvania. (Mr. Stanard.) to whom I feel personally indebted as 
 a tobacco-planter and a slave-holder, for the speech he has made. The Bill of Rio:hts 
 contains unmodified principles. The declarations it contains are our lights and ofuides, 
 but when we come to apply these great principles, we must modifj^ them for use; 
 we must set limitations to their operation, and the enquiry then is, qiiousque? How 
 far.' It is a question not of principle, but of degree. The very moment this imma- 
 culate principle of their's is touched, it becomes what all principles are, materials in 
 the hands of men of sense, to be applied to the welfare of the Commonwealth. It 
 is not an incantation. It is no Talisman. It is not witchcraft. It is not a torpedo 
 to benumb iis. If the naked principle of numbers only is to be followed, the requi- 
 sites for the Statesman fall far below what the gentleman from Spottsylvania rated 
 them at. He needs not the four rules of arithmetic. No, Sir, a negro boy with a 
 knife and a tally-stick, is a Statesman complete in tliis school. Sir, I do not scoff, 
 jeer or flout, (I use, I think, the ver}^ words of the gentleman from Augusta ; two 
 of them certainly were employed by him.) at the principles of the Bill'^of Rights, 
 and so help me Heaven, I liave not heard of any who did. But I hold with one of 
 the greatest masters of political philosophy, that " no rational man ever did crovern 
 himself by abstractions and universals." I do not put abstract ideas wholly^out of 
 any question, because I know well that under that name I should dismiss principles; 
 and that without the guide and light of sound, well understood principles, all rea- 
 sonings in politics, as every thing else, would be only a confused jumble of particular 
 facts and details, witliout the means of drawing out any sort of theoretical or practi- 
 cal conclusion. 
 
318 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 " A Statesman differs from a Professor in an University. The latter has only the 
 general view of society ; the former, the Statesman, has a number of circumstances 
 to combine with those general ideas, and to take into his consideration. Circumstan- 
 ces are infinite, are infinitely combined, are variable and transient: he who does not 
 take them into consideration, is not erroneous, but stark mad — dat oiieram vt cum 
 ratione insanat — he is metaphysically mad. A Statesman, never losing sight of prin- 
 ciples, is to be guided by circumstances, and judging contrary to the exigencies of the 
 moment, he may ruin his country forever." 
 
 Yes, Sir — and after that ruin has been effected, what a poor consolation is derived 
 from ^^eing told, " I had not thought it." Stulti est dixisse nan putaram. " Who 
 •would have thought it ? Lord bless me ! I never thought of such a thing, or I never 
 would have voted for a Convention." 
 
 If there is any country on earth where circumstances have a more important bear- 
 ing than in another, it is here, in Virginia. Nearly half the population are in bon- 
 dage — yes, Sir, more than half in the country below the Ridge. And is this no cir- 
 cumstance Yet, let me say with the gentleman from Accomac, (Mr. Joynes,) 
 whose irresistible array of figures set all figures of speech at defiance, that if there 
 were not a negro in Virginia, I would still contend for the principle in the amend- 
 ment. And why ? Because I will put it in tiie power of no man or set of men who 
 ever lived, or who ever shall live, to tax me without my consent. It is wholly imma- 
 terial whether this is done without my having any representation at all, or, as it was 
 done in the case of the Tariff Law, by a phalanx stern and inexorable, who being the 
 majority, and having the power, prescribe to me the law that I shall obey. Sir, what 
 was it to all the Southern interest, that we came within two votes of defeating that 
 iniquitous measure? Do not our adversaries, (for adversaries they are,) know that 
 they have the power.? and that we must submit.? Yes, Sir. This whole slave-hold- 
 ing country, the whole of it, from the Potomac to Mexico, was placed under the ban 
 and anatiiema of a majority of two. And vv^ill you introduce such a principle into 
 your own State Government.? Sir, at some times during this debate, 1 doubted if I 
 were in my right mind. From the beginning of time till now, there is no case to be 
 found of a rational and moral people subverting a Constitution under which they had 
 lived for half a century — aye, for two centuries, by a majority of one. When revo- 
 lutions have happened in other countries, it was the effect of a political storm, a Le- 
 vanter, a tornado, to which all opposition was fruitless. But did any body ever hear 
 of a revolution affecting the entire condition of one half of a great State, being ef- 
 fected by a majority of one.? Did it ever enter the head of the wildest visionary, 
 from the days of Peter the Hermit, to — a day I will not name — to accomplish a revo- 
 lution by a majority of onc^ Sir, to change your Constitution by such a majority, is 
 nothing more than to sound the tocsin for a civil war. It may be at first, a war of 
 words, a weaponless war, but it is one of those cases in which, as the lawyers tell us, 
 fury supplies arms. Sir, this thing cannot be : it must not be. I was about to say, 
 it shaU not be. I tell gentlemen now, with the most perfect delibemtion and calm- 
 ness, that we cannot submit to this outrage on our rights. It surpasses that measure 
 of submission and forbearance, which is due from every member of an organized 
 Government, to that Government. And why do I so tell them .? Sir, we are not a 
 company of naked savages on the coast of New Holland, or Van Diemans Land — 
 we have a Government ; we have rights ; and do you think that we shall tamely sub- 
 mit, and let you deprive us of our vested rights, and reduce us to bondage .? Yes, 
 vested rights ! that we shall let you impose on us a yoke hardly lighter than that of 
 the villeins regardant of the manor .? We are now little better than the trustees of 
 slave-labour for the nabobs of the East, and of the North, (if there be any such per- 
 sons in our country,) and to the speculators of the West. They regulate our labour. 
 Are we to have two masters .? When every vein has been sluiced — when our whole 
 system presents nothing but one pitiful enchj'mosis — are we to be patted and tapped 
 to find yet another vein to breathe, not for the Federal Government, but for our own ? 
 Why, Sir, the richest man in Virginia, be that man who he may, would make a good 
 bargain to make you a present of his estate, provided you give him bond upon that 
 estate, allowing him to tax it as he pleases, and to spend the money as he pleases. It 
 is of the very essence of property, that none shall tax it but the owner himself, or 
 one who has a common feeling and interest with him. It does not require a plain 
 planter to tell an Assembly like this, more than half of whose members are gentlemen 
 of the law, that no man may set his foot on your land, without your permission, but 
 as a trespasser, and that he renders himself liable to an action for damages. This is 
 of the very essence of property. But he says, " thank you, for nothing — with all 
 my heart, I don't mean to set my foot on your land ; but, not owning one foot of land 
 myself, I will stand here, in the highway, which is as free to me as it is to you, and 
 I will tax your land, not to your heart's content, but to mine, and spend the proceeds 
 as I please. I cannot enter upon it myself, but I will send the Sheriff of the county, 
 and he shall enter upon it, and do what I cannot do in my own person." Sir, is 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 319 
 
 this to be endured ? It is not to be endured. And unless I am ignorant of the cha- 
 racter and the feehngs, and of what is dearer to me than all, of the prejudices of the 
 people of the lower "country, it will not be endured. You may as well adjourn sine 
 die. We are too old birds to be taken with chaff, or else we are not old enough, I 
 don't know which. We will not give up this question for the certainty, and far less 
 for the hope, that the evil will be rectified in the other branch of the Legislature. 
 We know, every body knows, that it is impossible. Why, Sir, the British House of 
 Peers, which contains four hundred members, holding a vast property, much more 
 now, it is true, than when Chatliam said, they were but as a drop m the ocean, com- 
 pared with the wealth of the Commons : If they, holding their seats for life, and re- 
 ceiving and transmitting them by hereditary descent, have never been able to resist 
 the House of Commons, in any measure on which that House chose to insist, do you 
 believe that twenty-four gentlemen up-stairs, can resist one hundred and twenty be- 
 low especially when the one hundred and twenty represent their own districts, and 
 are to go home with them to their common constituents.? Sir, the case has never 
 yet happened, I believe, when a Senator has been able to resist the united delegation 
 from his district in the lower House. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I am a practical man. I go for solid security, and I never will, 
 knowingly, take any other. But, if the security on which I have relied, is insuffici- 
 ent, and my property is in danger, it is better that I should know it in time, and I may 
 prepare to meet the consequences, while it is yet called to-day, than to rest on a se- 
 curity that is fallacious and deceptive. Sir, I would not give a button for your mix- 
 ed basis in the Senate. Give up this question, and I have nothing more to lose. This 
 is the entering wedge, and every thing else must follow. We are told, indeed, that-' 
 we must rely on a restriction of the Right of Suffrage ; but, gentlemen, know, that 
 after you shall have adopted the report of the Select Committee, you can place no 
 restriction upon it. When this principle is in Operation, the waters are out. It is as 
 if you would ask an industrious and sagacious Hollander,* that you may cut his 
 dykes, provided you make your cut only of a certain width. A rat hole will let in 
 the ocean. Sir, there is an end to the security of all property in the Commonwealth, 
 and he will be unwise, who sliall not abandon the ship to the underwriters. It is the 
 first time in my life, that I ever heard of a Government, which was to divorce pro- 
 perty from power. Yet, this is seriously and soberly proposed to us. Sir, I know it 
 is practicable, but it can be done only by a violent divulsion, as in France — but the 
 moment you have separated the two, that very moment property will go in search of 
 power, and power in search of property. " Male and female created he them and 
 the two sexes do not more certainly, nor by a more unerring law, gravitate to each 
 other, than power and property. You can only cause them to change hands. I could 
 almost v/ish, indeed, for the accommodation of the gentleman from Augusta, that 
 God had ordained it otherwise ; but so it is, and so it is obliged to be. It is of the na- 
 ture of man. INIan always has been m societ}' — we always find him in possession of 
 property, and with a certain appetite for it, which leads him to seek it. if noi per faSy 
 sometimes per tiefas ; and hence the need of laws to protect it, and to punish its in- 
 vaders. 
 
 But, I am subjecting myself, I know, to a most serious reproach. It will be said 
 that I am not a friend to the poor. Sir, the gentleman from Chesterfield and the gen- 
 tleman from Spottsylvania, have dealt with the " friimds of the people" to my eiitire' 
 satisfaction. I wish to say a word as to the " friends of the poor." Whenever I see a 
 man, especially a rich man, endeavoring to rise and to acquire consequence in socie- 
 ty, by standing out as the especial champion of the poor. I am always reminded of an 
 old acquaintance of mine, one Signor Manuel Ordonez, v/ho made a comfortable liv- 
 ing, and amassed an opulent fortune by administering the funds of the poor. Among 
 the strange notions which have been broached since I have been on the political the- 
 atre, there is one which has lately seized the minds of men, that all things must be 
 done for them by the Government, and that they are to do nothing for themselves : 
 The Government is not only to attend to the great concerns whiclTare its province, 
 but it must step in and ease individuals of their natural and moral obligations. A 
 more pernicious notion cannot prevail. Look at that ragged fellow staggering from 
 the whiskey shop, and see that slattern who has gone thereto reclaim him ; where 
 are their children ? Running about, ragged, idle, ignorant, fit candidates for the pe- 
 nitentiary. Why is all this so Ask the man and he will tell you, Oh, the Go- 
 vernment has undertaken to educate our children for us. It has given us a premium 
 for idleness, and I now spend in liquor, v/hat I should otherwise be obliged to save to 
 pay for their schooling. My neighbor there, that is so hard at work in his field yon- 
 der with his son, can't spare that boy to attend, except in the winter months, the 
 school which he is taxed to support for mine. He has to scuffle hard to make both 
 ends meet at the end of the year, and keep the wolf from the door. His cliildren 
 
 *Lookins to the Chevalier Huygens, the Dutch Minister, who was in the Hall. 
 
320 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 can't go to this school, yet he has to pay a part of the tax to maintain it." Sir, is it 
 like friends of the poor to absolve them from what Nature, what God himself has 
 made their first and most sacred duty? For the education of their children is the first 
 and most obvious duty of every parent, and one which tlie worthless alone are ever 
 known wholly to neglect. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, these will be deemed, I fear, unconnected thoughts ; but they have 
 been the aliment of my mind for years. Rumination and digestion can do no more ; 
 they are thoroughly concocted. 
 
 In the course of not a short or uneventful life, I have had correspondence with va- 
 rious persons in all parts of tlie Union, and 1 have seen gentlemen on their return 
 from the North and the East, as well as from the new States of the West ; and I ne- 
 ver heard from any of them, but one expression of opinion as it related to us in 
 Virginia. It was in the sentiment, if not in the language of Virgil ; Oh, fortunate, if 
 we knew our own blessedness. They advise us with one voice, " Stick to what you 
 have got ; stick to your Constitution ; stick to your Right of Suffrage. Don't give 
 up your freehold representation. We have seen enough of the opposite system, and 
 too much." I have received and seen letters breathing this spirit from men who dare 
 not promulgate such a sentiment at home, because it would only destroy their hopes 
 of usefulness — from North Carolina, from South Carolina, from Georgia, from Ala- 
 bama, from Pennsylvania and from New York. 
 
 Sir, the day, come when it may, which sees this old and venerable fabric of 
 ours scattered in ruins, and the mattock and the spade digging the foundation for a 
 new political edifice, will be a day of jubilee to all those who have been, and who 
 must be in conflict with those principles which have given to Virginia her weight and 
 consequence, both at home and abroad. If I understand aright the plans winch are 
 in agitation, I had sooner the day should arrive, that must close my eyes forever, than 
 witness their accomplishment. Yes, Sir, to this Constitution we owe all that we have 
 preserved, (much I know is lost and of great value,) but all that we have preserved 
 from the wreck of our political fortunes. This is the mother which has reared all our 
 great men. Well may she be called magna mater virum. She has, indeed, produced 
 men, and mighty men. 
 
 But, I am told, that so far is this from being true, we have been living for fifty-four 
 years under a Government which has no manner of authority, and is a mere usurpa- 
 tion at best. Yet, Sir, during that time, we have changed our Government; and I 
 call the attention of this body to the manner in which that change was made. The 
 Constitution of '88 was submitted to the people, and a Convention was called to ratify 
 it, and what was that Convention ^ It was the old House of Burgesses with a nick- 
 name — the old House of Delegates, Sir, with a nickname — in which the same muni- 
 cipal divisions of the State were regarded — the same qualifications required — the same 
 qualified freeholders were returned from the same districts and by the same she- 
 riffs — and yet, by tiie waving of a magic wand, they were converted into a Conven- 
 tion — in which Warwick was made equal with Calpeper, then by far the largest coun- 
 ty in the State. Do not gentlemen see where the point of their own argument leads 
 to .'' If it is a sine qua non of a legitimate Government, that it must have the assent 
 of a majority of the people told by the head, then is the Federal Government an 
 usurpation — to which the people ]jcr capita — King Numbers — has never given his as- 
 sent. 
 
 It is now thought necessary to have another Convention, and what is it.'' It is 
 nothing but the Senate of Virginia, elected from the same districts, by the same vo- 
 ters, and returned by the same sheriffs ; many of them the self-same men ; yet when 
 multiplied by four, by talismanic touch, they become a Convention. Yes, Sir. You 
 can't trust the House of Delegates and Senate with your affairs, but you can trust a 
 smaller body. You can't trust the whole, but you can trust a part. You can't trust 
 tlie Senate, but you can trust the same men, from the same districts, if multiplied by 
 four. Sir, are we men Or, are we children For my share, this is the first Con- 
 vention in which I ever had a seat ; and I trust in God, it will be the last. I never had 
 any taste for Conventions; or for new Constitutions, made per order, or kept ready 
 made, to suit casual customers. I need not tell ijoii, Sir, that I was not a member of 
 the Staunton Convention. No, Sir, nor was I a member of the Harrisburg Conven- 
 tion — nor the Charlottesville Convention. No, Sir, nor the Anti-Jackson Convention 
 — though I had the honor, in very good company, of being put to the ban and ana-" 
 thema of that august Assembly — and when, to their very great surprise and alarm, 
 we returned their fire — they scattered like a flock of wild geese. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the wisest thing this body could do, would be to return to the peo- 
 ple from whom they came, re infccta. I am very willing to lend my aid to any very 
 small and moderate reforms, which I can be made to believe that this our ancient Go- 
 vernment requires. But, far better would it be that they were never made, and that 
 our Constitution remained unchangeable like that of Lycurgus, than that we should 
 break in upon the main pillars of the edifice. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 mi 
 
 Sir, I have exhausted myself, and tired you. I am physically unable to recall or 
 to express the few thoughts I brought with me to this Assembly. Sir, that great 
 master of the human heart, who seemed to know it, as well as if he had made it, I 
 mean Shakespeare — when he brings before our eyes an old and feeble monarch, not 
 only deserted, but oppressed by his own pampered and ungrateful offspring, describes 
 him as finding solace and succour, only in his discarded and disinherited child. If 
 this, our venerable parent, must perish, deal the blow who will, it shall never be given 
 by my hand. I will avert it if I can, and if I cannot, in the sincerity of my heart, I 
 declare, I am ready to perish with it. Yet, as the gentleman from Spottsylvania says, 
 I am no candidate for martyrdom. I am too old a man to remove ; my associations, 
 my habits, and my property, nail me to the Commonwealth. But, were I a young 
 man, 1 would, in case this monstrous tyranny shall be imposed upon us, do what a 
 few years ago I should have thought parricidal. I would withdraw from your juris- 
 diction. I would not live under King Numbers. I would not be his steward — nor 
 make him my task-master. I would obey the principle of self-preservation — a prin- 
 ciple we find even in the brute creation, in flying from this mischief. 
 
 Gentlemen seem to press the question — let it, for me, be taken. It was only be- 
 cause I felt unwilling to delay the Committee to another week, that I have been in- 
 duced now to address them under every disadvantage. 
 
 It being now past four o'clock, 
 
 The question was called for on all sides; it was accordingly taken, after having 
 been distinctly announced from the Chair ; and the votes, (as counted by Mr. Fitzhugh 
 and Mr. Loyall.) stood as follows : Ayes 47, Noes 47. 
 
 Whereupon, the Chairman giving his casting vote in the negative, the amendment 
 of Mr. Green, proposing that, in the apportionment of representation in the House 
 of Delegates, regard shall be had to wliite population U7id taxation combined.)' was re- 
 jected in Committee of the Whole. 
 
 [ N. B. There must have been an error in the count, as the whole Convention, 
 consisting of ninety-six members, was present. The true vote, as since ascertained, 
 was 47 Ayes, and 49 Noes. ] 
 
 Mr. Scott of Fauquier, moved an amendment to the first resolution reported by the 
 Legislative Committee, to insert after the word " exclusively," the words and in the 
 Senate to taxation exclusively," to make the whole resolution read : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard shall be had to white population exclusively ; and m the Senate to taxation ex- 
 clusively." 
 
 Mr. Leigh now moved that the Committee rise. 
 
 It rose accordingly, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, November 16, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Armstrong of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The President laid before the Convention a letter from Elisha Bates, a preacher be- 
 longing to the Friends' Society, in the following words : 
 
 RiciiMOxVD, 11th Mo. 10th, 18.29. 
 
 Respected Friend, 
 
 James Monroe, President of the Convention : 
 
 Elisha Bates, a minister in the Religious Society of Friends, respectfully requests 
 the opportunity of a religious meeting, with the members of the Convention, this 
 evening, at five o'clock. 
 
 ELISHA BATES. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Dromgoole, the letter was laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Henderson of Loudoun, presented a memorial from the non-freeholders of that 
 county, on the subject of tlie extension of the Right of Suffrage, which, on his mo- 
 tion, was referred to the Committee of the "Whole. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Scott, the House then resolved itself into a Committee of the 
 Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair ; and the question being on the amendment offered 
 yesterday by Mr. Scott, which proposed to add to the first resolution reported by the 
 Legislative Committee, the words " and in the Senate to taxation exclusively" — so 
 as to make it read : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard shall be had to white popvlation exclusively, and in the Senate to taxation ez- 
 cliisivcly.'' 
 
 41 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOBf, 
 
 Mr. Scott asked and obtained leave to withdraw his amendment. 
 And the question recurring on the original resolution, 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield moved to amend it, by striking out all after the words 
 " Resolved that," and inserting in lieu thereof, as follows : 
 
 • " representation (in the House of Delegates) be apportioned among the se- 
 veral counties, cities and towns of the Comraonwealtli, according to their respective 
 numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, 
 including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, 
 three-fifths of all other persons." 
 
 In supporting the amendment, Mr. Leigh observed, that it had already been ex- 
 plained to the Committee, that the general result of the scheme he proposed, when 
 applied to the present circumstances of the Commonwealth, jvould be, substantially, 
 the same as that derived from the adoption of the plan of tlie compound basis, which 
 had been rejected by the Committee. My motive, said Mr. L. in presenting- this 
 amendment, is to try the sense of the Committee in reference to the adoption of the 
 Federal nnmber, as the basis of representation. The proposition varies in one parti- 
 cular from that of my friend from Culpeper, (Mr. Green.) In the debate on his 
 amendment, it was suggested, by way of objection, that the plan of a mixed basis 
 put it in the power of the delegation from the Eastern part of the State, by avoiding 
 to tax the Western districts, to keep the weight of power constantly in the East j 
 and that such was the desire of the inhabitants of that part of the State to retain the 
 power in their own hands, (manifested, as was said, by their general opposition to th© 
 call of this Convention,) that we might expect,, in future, a majority of the Legisla- 
 ture to be anxious to lay the heavier burdens on the East, and the lighter on the West. 
 This was urged as an objection, not so much against the principle of the scheme, as 
 one likely to operate in its practical details. And I am not sure but that some, per- 
 haps several, voted not against the principle of the mixed basis, but against the incon- 
 venience and abuse of power that might grow out of the applieation of the prin- 
 ciple. Without entering into that argument, I shall be content to substitute for the 
 mixed basis, against which this objection is tiiought to be, a basis on the Federal num- 
 ber. I am satisfied it is a wise provision in the Federal Constitution, and that here^ 
 its results will be as beneficial as those of any other scheme : and it is recommended 
 to my mind by the facility and certainty with which it can be applied in practice. 
 The plan has long been in operation amongst us; we are acquainted with its effect; 
 and I earnestly hope that it may be adopted by the Committee. 
 Mr. Nicholas rose in support of the amendment. 
 
 Ever since I have taken my seat, said he, in this Convention, I have felt a very 
 awful sense of my personal responsibility. I have felt it, not only as one represent- 
 ing a portion of the Commonwealth, and therefore, in reference to the whole State^ 
 but in a peculiar maimer, with regard to the particular district I have the koaor in 
 part to represent. The change now contemplated in oar institutions, is radical in its 
 nature. We are called upon to change the whole system of our civil polity : and 
 give me leave to say, that, superadded to my responsibility as a citizen of the Com- 
 m.mwealth, at present, I arn called to decide a question which must affect the peace 
 and happ'.ness of our remotest posterity. Besides, Sir, I am the representative of 
 one of thf se districts which must suffer most, should the change be adopted. On 
 the issue of our present proceeding, will, in a great measure, depend the future peace 
 and tranquillity of the State : and though i have not the vanity to believe that I can 
 bring to the Committee any thing worthy of them, and should greatly have preferred 
 to listen to the wisdom of others, than to present my own crude remarks, still, had it 
 not been for the feeble state of my health, for many days past, I should have held it 
 to be my duty to make at least a feeble effort in behalf of those, who have honored 
 me with a seat on this floor. 
 
 Sir, we have arrived at an awful period in our deliberations. It was predicted by 
 my honorable friend fiom Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph.) whose solemn appeal, so re- 
 cently addressed to us, left a deep impression on my mind, that the rejection of the 
 amendment would be effected by a majority of one, or at most, of two votes. The 
 fact has justified that prediction ; and, Mr. Chairman, I cannot conceive a more awful 
 state of any country, than that it should be about to change its fundamental law, by 
 such a majority : to change its entire Constitution, when 07ie half of the country 
 vote against the change. So meagre a majority, made up, not of Delegates coming 
 from beyond the Blue Ridge, but, in part, by the addition of members from this aide 
 the mountain, members on whom we fondly counted, as being our natural allies, (I 
 cast no censure on their conduct, I know that they act conscientioudy, and I presume 
 that they speak the wishes of their constituents ;) I say, so meagre a majority plainly 
 shows what is the sense of the country, as to a change in its Constitution. And can 
 it be wise to effect so radical a change, when half the country pronounces it to be 
 unwise ? When they loudly declare that the change will subvert the rights, prostrate 
 the interests, and destroy the happiness of one half the State ? What muat be our 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION". 
 
 323 
 
 situation, if w« adopt such a measure ? Can we ever be a liappy and tranquil com- 
 munity, while one-half its members conscientiously believe, that the change we shall 
 have made, has not only injured their interests, but destroyed all prospect of quitt 
 and happiness ? Surely we all must know, that no country e%^er can prosper under 
 such circumstances. The best, the only effectual support of any Government, is in 
 the confidence of the people ; but when the people believe themselves oppressed by 
 the Government, what prospect can there be of their yielding it a cordial and enduring 
 support ? What can we look forward to, but eternal jealousies and animosities ? Can 
 any wise man, however wedded he may be to his own theories, can any good man, 
 wish to see the Commonwealth in such a situation ? 
 
 Mr. Chairman, 1 am one of those who believed it unwise to call this Convention. 
 I do not say, and never did say, that our Government is perfect theoretically ; that it 
 is absolutely free from all defects. But everj^ wise Statesman, in judging of a system 
 of Government, will look to the ickoie of that system. He will form his estimate of 
 all the good it contains, and then he will determine whether that amount of practical 
 good does not overbalance any merely theoretical objections. It was on this ground, 
 that 1 was opposed to the call of a Convention. This business of theoretical perfec« 
 tion, may have an inviting appearance ; but all experience proves, that absolute per- 
 fection is unattainable — a mere igiiis fatuus — that must lead to disappointment, and, 
 ultimately, to misery, and public convulsions. Lycurgus and Solon, were supposed 
 to be among the wisest men of their day, and they established Governments on v/hat 
 tliey thought a system of absolute perfection; but what has become of them.? Where 
 are all the ancient Republics 1 They are gone, and in their room has come the most 
 frightful despotism. Wisdom surelj* dictates, that when we have enjoyed a practical 
 good more than half a century, we should not give it up for what theorists may re- 
 commend to us. The Government of Solon did not last even during his life ; the 
 liberties of his people were usurped b}^ Pisistratus during his own life-time. 
 
 It has been said, that the object of some gentlemen, who have attended this body, 
 is merely to prevent any thing from being done. That is not my case. I did oppose 
 the calling of the Convention ; but when the people said that it should be assembled, 
 I came here with the honest intention to stick to what was good in the Constitution, 
 and this I mean to do as long as possible. The gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. 
 Randolph) laid down a rule which, 1 think, was fall of practical wisdom. He asked, . 
 whether we will reform our Government, on mere theory.? And he said, (and so I 
 say.) no : but let us first see some practical evil : and when it is clearly proved, then 
 let us reform our Government in that particular respect and in that only." I have 
 once been an ofScer under the Government for twenty years — I v^-as Attorney Gene» 
 ral of the vState at an early period of my life, (and if I ever did, I certainly did not 
 then deserve the trust ;) but the situation afforded me a good opportunity to judcre, 
 from observation, of the practical effect of this Government. And I declare to God^ 
 that in the whole period of those twenty years, I knew of no instance of oppression, 
 or injury to any man's rights caused hj the operation of the Government. It is net 
 then wonderful that I should part from it with reluctance. 
 
 Permit me now to make a fev/ observations, on the amendment offered by the gen- 
 tleman from Chesterfield. 
 
 I was always of opinion, that the true ground of representation was that of the 
 Federal number. I voted in favour of the mixed basis, because it appeared to me 
 that it mio;ht have the effect of securing the rights of the Eastern portion of the Com- " r 
 monwealth : and not because I preferred it. The other mode had mv decided pre- 
 ference. The Federal number was adopted from considerations which operate in 
 what is now before this body. It was not adopted on grounds of compromise. Look 
 at the speeches of that day : look at the number of the Federalist on that subject : it 
 was fixed uoon not as a compromise, but as being in itself the correct basis of repre- 
 sentation. ^Here we have both property and persons protected : and here, we find, 
 the happy medium between the two extremes of universal suffrage and aristocratic 
 Government. 
 
 It was the ground taken by gentlemen from the North (all of them strongly preju- 
 diced against'slavery,) as a ground which afforded a just protection to property. The 
 principFe was viewed not only as vital to the Southern States, but as a fair principle 
 for all. Any gentleman who will look at the debates of the Federal Convention, will 
 find full evidence that it was not a compromise. The United States' Government, 
 thouo-h in many features of it, it is Federal, is, in others a JVatioiu/I Government. 
 Representation is one of those features. In its representation, it is National, and not 
 Federal. Its representation is not founded upon concessions of one State to another 
 State, but is laid as a correct basis for the whole. The mixed basis, as proposed by 
 the gentleman from Culpeper. must necessarily be fluctuating and very hard to re- 
 duce to practice. The taxes will of\en differ in the same district. The whole basis 
 must be eternally fluctuating, and will require to be re-adjusted from time to time. 
 But the ratio of three-fifths of the slaves furnishes a certain criterion, that is easily 
 
324 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 measured, and cannot change. Gentlemen represent this proposition as unjust, and 
 fit for one portion of the Commonwealth only ; but this is not true. We do not say- 
 that the Eastern part of the State only shall have the three-fifths added, but that all 
 the Commonwealth shall ; wherever there are slaves, there the principle will take 
 effect ; and if, as has been very ingeniously represented, it be, indeed, probable, that 
 the slaves will go beyond the mountain the moment they do so, the West gets the 
 power. Indeed, this argument of theirs, appeared to me at the time, to be feio de se, 
 or else, to be in opposition to the other arguments adduced by them in favour of a 
 white basis. If the slaves shall emigrate, every five slaves that pass over the moun- 
 tain, give them additional representation. The rule is general, and operates alike on 
 all. 
 
 I said, we had arrived at an awful period in our deliberations. Yes, Sir, we have 
 reached the brink of a precipice. Gentlemen must here decide for themselves ; anji 
 I put it to gentlemen of the West, whether they will consent to form an entirely 
 new Constitution for the State by a majority of one, or of two, or of five, or ten ? It 
 is an awful responsibility lor them ; and all the ills which may grow out of it, be on 
 their heads ! I say this, not in anger, but in sorrow. Some of my dearest friends and 
 nearest relatives, reside beyond the Blue Ridge. I deprecate the calamity which I 
 behold impending, for their sakes, as much as my own. 
 
 Much has been said as to the moral influence of Virginia. I believe, she has fre- 
 quently saved the Union ; and though gentlemen are pleased to say, that she is retro- 
 grading in wealth and influence, we have this proud consolation, that if we have re- 
 fused the lures and boons of the General Government, we are at least poor on princi- 
 ple. Virginia may be a victim to her honour, but I, for one, hope she may be poor 
 forever, if slie can only become rich at the sacrifice of her principles. 
 
 Gentlemen are under a great mistake, if they impute to me any wish for confusion, 
 or any desire that we may make a change that shall prove unpalatable to the people. 
 But, we, whose districts are to be sacrificed, have an important duty which we owe to 
 our constituents. I am disposed to conciliate. I wish the State to remain united. 
 I had rather be the citizen of a great Commonwealth than a petty State. But, there 
 is something yet better than union. Oppression is worse than division. I am ready 
 to go as far for conciliation as any, but I am not ready to offer up my country as the 
 sacrifice. I think it vastly better, that freedom should be preserved, even if disunion 
 must be the price. I speak, God knows, with affliction at my heart. But, how is 
 this evil to be averted ? Here we are arrayed against each other. The West ad- 
 vances its demands, and they say, there are provisions which we must have." The 
 East remonstrates, and says, ''you will destroy us." To every compromise there 
 must be two parties; but do we hear one whisper, aye, so much as one low voice, 
 that talks of compromise ? No. Gentlemen stand on their rights : they stand perfectly 
 stationary : they call to us to come up to them : but that we never can. I am willing 
 to adjust the difference. Do gentlemen ask how ? By a plan which shall give se- 
 curity to the East, for the preservation of all that is dear to them and their posterity. 
 While we shape our course towards conciliation, we must have effectual security. 
 All security from equality of taxation, is purely imaginary. What boots it to us, that 
 the taxes are made equal, if they are all to be paid by one part of the State ? It 
 would be the interest of the West, to pay even a heavy taxation, if they are to 
 have the sole distribution of the money raised. The only possible security, is to give 
 us such a share in the administration of affairs, as shall ensure a good and just Gov- 
 ernment ; as will secure to us the rights which we believe to be in jeopardy. 
 
 Let me say, in conclusion, that whatever vote I may give in the final issue, I re- 
 serve to myself the right, first to see the lahole extent of the security gentlemen pro- 
 pose to give : and, then, when they have modified their proposition into its last form, 
 then comes the awful question, is this security adequate ? If I shall judge that it is 
 not, I never will give my assent to any system which will jeopardize the rights of my 
 constituents. 
 
 Mr. Monroe, now rose and addressed the Committee, in substance, as follows : 
 Mr. Chairman : The House, I hope, will indulge me in a few remarks. I will pro- 
 mise to be very concise. My faculties of debate, always humble, have been impaired 
 by long disuse while I occupied another station in the public service, and have, of 
 late years, been yet farther weakened by bodily infirmity ; yet duty impels me to 
 make some remarks on this occasion. They shall be but few, and more a sentiment 
 than an oration. My situation is one of peculiar delicacy as it relates to my constitu- 
 ents, and my country. When I retired from the office I last held, it was with the 
 expectation that that retirement would be permanent. My age admonished me that 
 it was welcome and becoming. When I received an invitation to come here, (for the 
 seat I hold was not sought by me,) I consented with regret, for causes which must be 
 obvious to all. Yet I would not shrink from the call of my fellow-citizens, and at 
 their call I came. But it was with the disposition to look to the whole Common* 
 
DEBATES OT THE CONVENTION. 
 
 325 
 
 wealth - from the Potomac to the Roanoke, from the mountams to the ocean, from 
 Kanawha, to Monono-alia, from the Blue Ridge to the Ohio ; all was one to me. 
 
 I could have been content to reside in any part of the Commonwealth, i leit one 
 part of it, where I had spent the greater part of my hfe, for another, where i was al- 
 most unknown. Its citizens kindly manifested their confidence, and I came with a 
 disposition to look to the interests of the whole. I consider myself as their servant, 
 and I consider them, as having a right to instruct me. If they should think fit to do 
 so, I shall either obey them or withdraw from this Assembly. When I find myself 
 in that dilemma, I shall do so without a word. But I do not know that it wilUrrive. 
 In the course I shall pursue here, I shall make it my principle to look to^the Stute at 
 laro-e. I shall look also, to the divisions and to the state of acrimonious feeling which 
 exilted, long before the calhng of this Convention, and which I consider this body as 
 having a tendency to tranquilize. 
 
 My'idea has been, that it will be wise to base representation on the white popula- 
 tion in the House of Delegates, and to place an adequate check on the result of their 
 deliberations in the Senate. This is my opinion. By basing the representation on 
 the white population, we are resting on principle ; on a principle corresponding with 
 the Bill of Rights and with the Constitution ; for, our Government is in the hands of 
 the white people. We shall by this means rest on fundamental principles, and gratify 
 the feelings of the people, in every part of the community. Our Constitution rests 
 on that basis. 
 
 And by whom was it framed ? By the most enlightened of our citizens ; by men 
 who have given proof of their patriotism, wisdom, and knowledge of niankind. I 
 wish to preserve its important features and to alter it as little as may be, consider- 
 ing that it was the first of our Constitutions ever made here, and will be an example 
 throuo-hall ages. Where do we find a free Government in history, except in Greece, 
 to a certain degree in Carthage, and in Rome' Every where else we find only bar- 
 barism, and all mankind kept in a state of degradation. W' ith this example before 
 them, these men framed a Constitution better than had ever existed before. 
 
 By resting representation on the wliite population, in the House of Delegates, we 
 leave that body free from any check : but to control its hasty decision, you resort to 
 the Senate, and therefore I thought that the plan of the mixed basis, ought to be con- 
 fined to the Senate. For my part, I am ready to vote for it. But I think the Fede- 
 ral number liable to fewer objections. It makes our system correspond to that of the 
 Federal Government. It is more easy of execution, and it is not against principle. 
 
 By adopting the vrhite basis in tlie House of Delegates, we shall tranquilize the 
 people, and if we adopt the mixed basis in the Senate, I hope that the other gentle- 
 men will meet us there. 
 
 I hope, Sir, that this will be done. Wliy do men enter into society? What are 
 their objects, whether rude or civilized.^ Is it not for the protection of life, liber- 
 ty and property ? Is not this the declaration of our Constitution and of all the Con- 
 stitutions since adopted throughout the United States ? Is there any other motive 
 for society, whether rude or civiUzed .' In a rude state, the protection of life is the 
 principal motive, but even there, property also is a motive. What kind of Govern- 
 ment do we find prevailing among our native Indians They are not governed by 
 written compacts, but the principal chief or elder as he is called by them, rules over 
 the tribe, and they submit; he following the will of the tribe. 
 
 Look at civilized society : is the obligation to submission not stronger ? Can you 
 separate property from either state ? There is a diiference, however. In the rude 
 state of society there is the game — all is open and free to all — and property exists 
 only round their cabins. But, what is the case witli civilized man ? There man 
 presses on man — society presses on society : each individual must have somethina" of 
 his own or he starves. There the people are the guardians, and they must protect 
 property, as well as life and liberty, or society perishes. 
 
 This protection is in no degree incompatible with the adoption of the white basis 
 of representation in the House of Delegates ; and I hope that this body will unite in 
 some plan that may correspond to the general views of the community, and mav cor- 
 respond with our relations to the General Government, for which I have a very high 
 respect. But, I know the duty of a representative to his constituents, and, I hope, 
 we shall all draw to that end — we shall gain a grand object — and it may lead to what 
 we cannot tell. I would, myself, rather have a representation that may correspond 
 to the Federal number. 
 
 It has been suggested, that it will be best to keep the qualification of voters as it 
 exists at present, or to reduce it but in a small degree. I differ from that opinion. I 
 think we must modify and reduce it. Wlio are they who are pressino- for a new Con- 
 stitution.? Those, who suppose themselves deprived of their just Ri^-ht of Sufiran-e, 
 Reduce the requisites for this, and you carry tranquillity into the bodj^of the commu- 
 nity. Our situation in reference to tliis subject, is different from tliat of any people 
 who ever existed before us. What was the condition of the ancient republics In 
 
326 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 Greece, Carthage, and Rome ? The question there was, whether power should bo 
 held by the people en masse ? Whether it should be exercised by the people in a 
 body ? Their Governments originated with a prince or with the nobles. They had 
 always great weiglit ; and the contest was between the rich and the poor. The peo- 
 ple origmated no measure — they heard what was proposed by the prince, but they 
 proposed nothing. In Athens they had what has been called a tree Senate — and as 
 to Lacedsemon it was the same — tiie same thing applies to Rome, and in a degree to 
 Carthage ; but they only adopted or rejected wliat was submitted to them. 1 lie peo- 
 ple had no stake in the property of the State, it was all in the hands of the prince or 
 the ancient nobility. 
 
 But our Government is in the hands of the people. We have no privileged orders. 
 We have no overgrown wealthy to oppress the poor — and they cannot do it if we fix 
 the grade of representation on a moderate scale. The President of the United States, 
 the Governor of the State, the Senators, all are servants of the people. The property 
 of the country rests on the people alone. Therefore, I say, our situation is diiterent 
 from that of all who ever existed before us. 
 
 I would adopt a plan that may h rmonize the feelings of the community on the sub- 
 ject of Suffrage, and of representation in the popular branch. I would place a check 
 in the other branch. 
 
 I tliought it ray duty, though in a feeble manner, to explain these views to the 
 House — and I wish, also, that my sentiments should go to njy constituents. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell said, that when he came to the House this mornnig, he had but 
 little expectation, and certainly not the slightest inclination, to take any part in this 
 debate. He had not felt any wish to participate in the discussion of a question so 
 general and undefined in its terms, as that which the Committee would soon be called 
 upon to decide. All which he had ever seen of man, and all the inlormation 
 which he had ever been able to acquire in the science of politics, combined to teach 
 him, that no good ever had, and that no possible good ever could, result from the dis- 
 cussion of any mere general propositions, in order to elicit by such discussion an 
 agreed basis, which, by mutual consent, might be adopted, as a foundation tor some 
 unknoiDii practical, political scheme. All such schemes, when fully developed (and 
 developed they must be at some time or other,) must at last be brouglit to the test of 
 experience and utility ; and as it ought not to be considered as constituting any just 
 objection to any useful political plan, that it was not constructed according to the most 
 nice and precise rules of any art, so nor will it be any recommendation of any other 
 plan, that it is a clear syllogistic deduction from any supposed general truth. If the 
 details of any intended scheme, when fairly exhibited, should be seen to be mischie- 
 vous, they would surely be rejected, although in strict accordance with the agreed 
 basis; and if believed to be good, they would infallibly be adopted, although at war 
 with, and contrary to, all the admitted general truths announced by SKch basis. Dis- 
 cuss whatever general proposition you please, settle whatever general basis you 
 choose, and you will at last discover, when you come to fix the details of the plan, 
 that each of these must be adjusted by a regard to its own particular merits, and by 
 no special reference to any general rules. Entertaining these opinions, it was with 
 much regret he had seen at first, the course and direction intended to be given to the 
 deliberations of the Convention ; and he had then almost resolved, to say not one 
 word in relation to the matter now under consideration, until it should assume a xnore 
 certain and defined form than it yet presents. But the discussion had now proceeded 
 80 far, that it would perhaps be an economy of time, to extend it a little farther ; and 
 by endeavoring to show, not the truth or falsehood, but the tendency and effect of 
 the general proposition, so as to bring our future, if not our present labors, to a more 
 speedy termination, than they seem at present likely to reach. It was with this view 
 he would ask the attention of the Committee to a few remarks which he proposed to 
 address to them, in the course of which, he would notice some of those they had just 
 heard from the venerable gentleman from Loudoun, who had but just now taken his 
 seat. 
 
 Whatever may be the form of the question now presented to us, the general pro- 
 position included in it is; what is the proper basis whereon to erect representation in 
 the Legislative Department of a Government designed for such a State as is Virgi- 
 nia.? In examining this question, a most apt enquiry at once presents itself to our- 
 consideration. Upon what basis is such representation founded now ? When the 
 venerable member from Loudoun, and other much respected gentlemen on every side 
 of this body, unite in telling us, that the existing Constitution of Virginia is the best 
 the world has ever seen—when the experience of many here assure us, that this Go- 
 vernment has endured for more than half a century, producing as much of good as 
 could be expected to result from any Government — and when not a solitary witness 
 has appeared to testify to the existence of a single mischief as its effect— we surely 
 ought to examine carefully the foundation of such a Government, before we should 
 wi§h to change it, For his part, he was free to declare, that he would not compare 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 327 
 
 the knowledge derived from such experience, with that obtained by an examination 
 of the visions of Plato or Aristotle, the theories of Locke or Sidney, or of any other 
 mere speculative scheme whatever. 
 
 The basis of representation here, was estabhshed more than two centuries since. 
 It rests not upon a prescription of fifty odd years only, as his friend from Charlotte 
 had supposed, but it traces back its origin to a period much beyond the independence 
 of the Commonwealth, and is coeval with the very first Legislative Assembly tiiat 
 ever convened in Virginia. During the long interval that has since elapsed, repre- 
 sentation itself has undergone many changes, but the foundation wherein it rests, has 
 ever remained the same. He prayed the Commitiee. therefore, to accompany him in 
 the enquiry he was about to institute, as to the basis whereon this ancient scheme of 
 representation was erected. 
 
 In the year 1619 or 1020, the first House of Burgesses assembled at Jamestown. 
 The members of that body were elected by the different plantations as they were then 
 called, or as we should now denominate" them, the difterent settlements, then exist- 
 ing in the Colony. The early settlers had established themselves in difierent societies, 
 aloag the margin of James Kiver, from its moutn to near this spot. 
 
 These societies, separated either by wide water courses, ditficult to be passed, or 
 by thick forests dangerous to penetrate, differed widely from each otiier, in the num- 
 bers of their population, in their wealth, and in the extent of the territory occupied 
 by them : but each was entitled to representation, and each sent its Eurgess to tlie 
 Grand Assembly. Variously circumstanced, while each had a common interest in the 
 prosperity of all, each had also a particular interest peculiar to itself. With a view 
 of enabhng each to promote the good of all, in that mode whicli would be most suit- 
 able to its own convenience ; and with a view of enabling all to advance the prospe- 
 rity of each, by any means not inconsistent with the common good, representation 
 was allowed to every^ society tiien existing ; and this, without having regard to the popu- 
 lation, or the wealth of any, or even to these things combined, but merely to the pecu- 
 Har interests existing in the different societies, occupying the undefined space, then 
 termed a plantation or settlement. The basis of representation, then, was the inter- 
 ests of the different plantations : and as these interests were various and pecuhar, 
 each interest had its proper representative, whether that interest concerned many or 
 few persons, or involved much or little wealth. If the peculiar interest of the part, 
 was of sufficient importance to claim the regard of the whole, that interest was enti- 
 tled to, and was ahowed a representative, whether tlie population of the plantation 
 amounted to fifty or to five hundred persons, or whether their wealth was £ luO or 
 £1,000. 
 
 In process of time, the different settlements became extended in every direction, 
 and were so brought in contact with each other. The various interests then existing 
 in the Colony, became more assimilated and consolidated than they had been before ; 
 but still a diversity of particular interests existed. The wants and wislies of the set- 
 tlers in Accomack, must have been very different from those of the persons dwelhng 
 near the Falls of James River, and the pursuits and situation of the iniiabitants at 
 Point Comfort, must have been very unlike those of persons abiding far from them, 
 on the other side of the great water. This union of the settlements, had superceded 
 the necessity of allowing representation to each of what had been the difierent plan- 
 tations ; but the reason for allowing representation to the various interests exist- 
 ing in the Colony, still remained as before. The abode of these different interests, 
 had, indeed, been much enlarged and extended ; but the interests themselves, re- 
 mained still various. In this state of things, public convenience required a new di- 
 vision of the settled parts of the Colony^ ; and accordingly, in 1634, it was divided, 
 for the first time, into eight shires or counties, as they were afterwards called. These 
 shires, our history and laws inform us, were very different in extent of territory, in 
 the numbers of their respective inhabitants, and in the taxable property possessed by 
 these inhabitants : but still the same basis of representation was preserved. Witliin 
 eacli of these shires, a pailicular interest, peculiar to itself, was supposed to exist ; 
 and to that peculiar interest, representation was allowed, whatever might be its com- 
 parative numbers, or wealth, or extent of territory. 
 
 Pursuing the examination further, you will find, that as the frontier counties ex- 
 tended into the wilderness, new interests sprung up in each. The pioneers and ad- 
 vanced guards of the society, must have had very many wants, and wishes, and necessi- 
 ties, different from their former associates in the same count}^ The advance of the 
 one, in exposing them to new perils and difiiculties. gave peace and security to those 
 they left behind ; and the peculiar interests of the frontier inhabitants of Northamp- 
 ton, and York, and Isle of Wight, and Henrico, must have been very different from 
 those of their brethren in the oilier parts of these counties, resting, as the latter did, 
 upon the interior shires. Thus, it came to pass, that within the same county, where 
 at first, a single interest only existed, two different interests arose. If both these in- 
 terests were to be represented by those chosen by a majority of the two, it was very 
 
328 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 certain, that one of these two would be neglected ; and hence arose the necessity for di- 
 viding the frontier counties, by such lines, as might allow to each interest, its proper 
 representation. In this manner, we went on regularly dividing the frontier counties, 
 as new interests sprung up in each, until the whole territory of Virginia was thus 
 distributed. 
 
 Nor did this process of allowing representation to every peculiar interest in the 
 community stop here. Whenever an interior county became so populous, or its ter- 
 ritory was found so wide spread, as to justify a belief, either that different interests 
 had or might arise within it, such county was always divided, whensoever a division 
 of it was asked for — nay, in many cases where neither the extent of territory, nor the 
 number of inhabitants was so great, as to render it probable that different interests 
 would arise, yet if the county was found intersected by wide water-courses, or rapid 
 torrents, or rugged mountains, or if any other cause existed, calculated to interpose 
 permanent obstacles in the way of free and frequent intercourse between the inhabi- 
 tants of different parts of the same county, it was always divided upon the application 
 of either part, where particular convenience, (which must always be considered as its 
 peculiar interest,) required such a division. 
 
 Nor is this all. Our history will further inform us, that after the first division of 
 the State into shires or counties, peculiar interests arose within the bodies of some of 
 these counties, which interests were not of a character to justify or to require the 
 dismemberment of the county, in order to provide special representation of them. 
 When such interests appeared, they were, therefore, incorporated, and by their seve- 
 ral charters of incorporation, were allowed a representation different from that which 
 had always been given to the peculiar interests existing in the counties themselves — 
 such, most probably, was the origin of the representation allowed to Jamestown, and 
 afterwards to that which was certainly allov/ed to the city of Williamsburg, to the 
 borouofh of Norfolk, and to the College of William and Mary. Neither the compa- 
 rative population nor wealth, or extent of either of these corporations, at the time 
 their several charters v/ere obtained, could possibly have entitled it to representation, if 
 representation had then been erected upon either of these bases. But the interests of 
 navigation, of trade, and of science, which were beheved to exist in these corpora- 
 tions, were each important to the community, and being then peculiar to these 
 interests, were respectively allowed a representative, as all other interests had been 
 before. 
 
 Such was the basis of representation established in the Colony of Virginia at the 
 moment when a representative Legislature was first introduced here •; and upon this 
 basis was every thing of that sort afterwards founded, up to the period of the revolu- 
 tion of 177G. It rested upon the peculiar interests existing in particular districts, the 
 limits of which districts were at first accidental, but were afterwards delineated and 
 marked out by the convenience of the inhabitants within them. 
 
 When the Convention who formed the existing Constitution of Virginia assem- 
 bled, they found representation established on the basis just stated ; and being de- 
 sirous of preserving all of our ancient institutions which they could preserve, con- 
 sistently with the principles of the new Government they were about to create, they 
 continued to each county and corporation then existing, the same right of represen- 
 tation it then enjoyed. No departure from this rule occurred, except in two cases, 
 and these exceptions prove strongly the existence of the rule itself Jamestown, 
 the ancient metropolis of the Colony, had become so much reduced in its population, 
 that it was inconceivable that any peculiar interest could abide there ; and the Col- 
 lege of William and Mary was nb longer the peculiar residence of most of the sci- 
 ence in Virginia, and, therefore, no longer entitled to representation on that account. 
 Jamestown and the College, were, therefore, deprived of their particula- representa- 
 tion, while every thing else was preserved as it had before stood ; and the same pow- 
 er was given to the new Legislatures, which had always been exercised by the for- 
 mer, of dividing the existing counties, and of establishing new corporations, when- 
 ever, in its opinion, the general interest of the whole community, and the peculiar 
 irtterest of any part of it, required the exercise of such power. 
 
 Such is the basis of representation in Virginia now. This basis was probably just 
 and perfect when first established, and would yet be regarded in the same light, but 
 for a single circumstance, to which none here probably are indisposed to apply the, 
 proper corrective. That circumstance is this : In the original distribution of the coun- 
 ties, lines of demarcation were necessarily drawn, within which limits peculiar inter- 
 ests did then abide, although these limits circumscribed in some instances very nar- 
 row spaces. The Convention of 1776, acting upon the opinion, that it would be un- 
 wise to change any thing then existing, except when such change was necessary to 
 prevent practical mischief, had regard to the existing electoral precincts; and intending 
 to preserve to each precinct, the rights of representation it then had, inserted a provision 
 in their Constitution, that each county should continue to have two representatives. 
 The object was wise and just at the time. But, while they prudently provided for 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 329 
 
 the probable case of new interests thereafter to spring up in the existing counties, 
 and, therefore, gave to the Assembly the power of dividing counties and of creating 
 corporations at their will, they did not probabl}'- foresee, and therefore did not provide 
 for the event, of any county or corporation ceasing to be the abode of some interest 
 pecuhar to itself, the existence of which peculiar interest, v/as the sole cause of giv- 
 ing to such count}^ or corporation, any particular representation at first. In providing 
 for the birth of future peculiar interests, they omitted to provide for the extinction of 
 such as then existed ; and while the Legislature, by this Constitution, was authorised 
 to give representation to any new interest, b}- dividing the counties or creating new 
 corporations within which it might appear, the mandate of the Constitution, that each 
 of the existing counties should have two representatives, deprived the Legislature of 
 the power of taking from sucli counties, anj/ portion of their rights of representation, 
 even after the cause which originally gave to them such rights, had ceased to exist. 
 
 In consequence of this provision in the Constitution, it has occurred, that after some 
 of the smaller counties, ("Warwick for example) have ceased to be the abode of any 
 interest peculiar to its inhabitants, it still retains a right of representation equal to that 
 enjoyed by Shenandoah, the largest county in the State ; nor is it competent to the 
 Legislature to remedy this inequality, without producing much greater mischiefs than 
 any which ever have or ever can result from that cause. Because, if the larger coun- 
 ties should be so divided and cut up, as give to their respective parts equal to War- 
 wick in any thing, a right of representation equal to that which Warwick now enjoys, 
 the Legislative body must become much too numerous, unwieldy, and expensive, to 
 be any longer useful ; and the people of many of the sub-divisions would be most 
 grievously oppressed, by the necessary burthens of their own mere municipal police. 
 Thus it happens, Hiat while the causes for allowing equal representation to all the 
 different counties in the State, have ceased to apply in manj- instances, and while the 
 eifect of this is remed\-less under the provisions of tlie existing Constitution, the in- 
 capacity of the Legislature to provide the proper cure for this confessed evil, has be- 
 come the source of all the murmuring and complaint we have heard, and is the true 
 cause of the assembling of this Convention. It is not, that the East or the West, tire 
 cis-montane or ultra-muntane regions of the State, have too much or too little politi- 
 cal weight in the Assembly — it is, that the largest counties are put upon a par with 
 the smallest; that Warwick and LoudouM. Halifax and Allegiiany, are equalized in 
 representation. This is the inequality complained of, and this is the inequality which 
 we are sent hither by the people to reduce and reconcile, so far as we may find it 
 practicable to do so. 
 
 If we confine ourselves to this task, the work to be performed is by no means diffi- 
 cult of execution. The addition of a single line to the provisions existing in the 
 present Constitution will accomplish it ; and to such an addition, but little objection 
 will probably be urged. Give to the Legislature the discretionary power of- uniting 
 any of the present electoral districts, within which no peculiar interest is believed to 
 exist, to other contiguous districts having similar interests, and the desired object will 
 be attained. Then, under the power they now have, of dividing the larger counties ; 
 and under this new power so conferred upon them, of consolidating the smaller, eve- 
 ry desirable and practical equality will be at once accomplished. The whole scheme 
 of representation will then remain upon its ancient, unaltered basis, and can be ac- 
 commodated from time to time to every future condition of things, without changing 
 any principle, or seeking to estabhsh any new foundation. 
 
 Instead of adopting a course so simple, so easy, and which, in all probability, would 
 be so satisfactory, as this, it seems to be proposed, to apply a sponge to all the division 
 lines within the State, and to make a perfect tabula rasa of the whole Common- 
 wealth. W'hen this is done, new lines must be drawn, and new associations created, 
 in the establishment of which, no regard is to be had (according to the report of the 
 Select Committee) to any thing else but to the number of tire free white population, 
 existing within such limits. Such an idea, he believed, never entered into the mind 
 of a single man, before this Convention met, and will not now be regarded without 
 amazement and almost consternation, b}* any other than a member of this body. 
 
 For my part, said Mr. T. 1 will cordially unite with any, in consolidating the smal- 
 ler counties every where, until the very least shall assume a proper size. I will unite 
 then in dividing the larger counties, wherever it is desired, until the largest shall 
 cease to be considered as over-grov.m. In the progress of this w^ork of equalization, 
 however, I can never consent to regard numbers of any sort, exdusitehj, or taxation 
 or property of any kind excb/sivehj, or any thing else ezdusivdy. I must consider 
 what the interests and convenience of the people to be represented require; and in 
 deciding this question. I must do, what every wise Statesman ought to do: I tliink, 
 I must regard and pass in review before me, every single circumstance which exists, 
 to influence any part of the State materially. 
 
 Let me illustrate my views of this subject, by an example. If you will cast vour 
 eye over the map of Virginia, you will see on its extreme Eastern border, a httle pe- 
 
 42 
 
330 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ninsula, containing witliin its limits not a fiftieth part of the territory or population, 
 or probably of the wealth of the State. Suppose this territory, and population, and 
 wealth, reduced to any thing less you please, but still remains respectable, the situa- 
 tion of that peninsula would yet be what it now is. It would still be contiguous to 
 a neighbouring State, washed by the great Atlantic on the one side, and separated 
 from the rest of the State on the other by a great bay, wider than the English Chan- 
 nel at Dover, or than the Mediterranean at the Straits of Gibraltar. This situation, 
 you must perceive, exposes its inhabitants to mvich greater perils than those of any 
 other part of the Commonwealth ; and, at the same time, deprives it of all hope of 
 aid from any other quarter, even in the hour of its greatest need. In the Revolution, 
 and during the late war, these people defended themselves by their own means alone, 
 receiving no particle of assistance from any other portion of the State. Whatever 
 may be thought of the ingratitude of anotlier part, in not erecting monuments to 
 mark the spots where rest the bones of the brave men who fell victims to the diseases 
 of either camp or climate, no tear ought to bedew the cheek of the gentleman from 
 Loudoun (Mr. Mercer) at similar ingratitude here — no Western hero is there interred, 
 for the foot of no Western hero ever pressed that soil. The people of this little pe- 
 ninsula unaided, have maintained and defended themselves from the beginning, will 
 continue to do so to the end, and I thank God that they are able so to do. But this is 
 not all. Our history will inform us, that the people of this peninsula, are the descen- 
 dants of the earliest settlers in Virginia. Their insular situation must inform us, that 
 the ancient manners and customs of the country, are there preserved more perfectly, 
 probably, than in any other part of the State, where the frequent attrition of various 
 associations, has long since blunted and smoothed down the asperities and sharp 
 points of the habits of antiquity — a different climate, soil, and situation, has neces- 
 sarily yielded various productions, and invited to the pursuit of occupations there, 
 very different from those existing elsewhere. In short, all these diversities have 
 created an interest peculiar in that section of the countiy, the like of which is to be 
 found no where else. Now, with a full knowledge of all these facts, would any wise 
 Statesman, in adjusting a scheme of representation for the whole Commonwealth, 
 ever conceive the idea of allowing no representative to such a society as I have des- 
 cribed, merely because their numbers, or their wealth, did not rise to the exact height 
 of that arbitrary standard of number or property which he had fixed Would com- 
 mon prudence justify hiin in saying to such a people, " It is true an ocean rolls be- 
 tween us; it is true, your situation, manners, habits, pursuits, and interests, are dif- 
 ferent from ours ; it is true you are contiguous to another State, where juxta-position 
 to you may better qualify it to learn the true nature of your wants, and to extend to 
 your peculiar interests, more protection than we can ; but nevertheless I cannot regard 
 any of these things. My rule is, that in allotting representation, respect should be 
 had to the number of free white inhabitants exclusively ; and as your natural limits 
 contain not a sufhcient number of these, no representation can be allowed to you, 
 and you can, therefore, have no share in the administration of the Government de- 
 signed for tlie benefit of all." I need not state what must be tlie inevitable result of 
 such a course. Every man who hears me, must at once perceive it. 
 
 Mr. T. then adverted to the little county of Warwick, containing, as he said, not 
 more than 'about forty thousand acres of land, and but little more than six hundred 
 white inhabitants. He said, that regarding the situation of that county, or the con- 
 venience of its inhabitants, it was scarcely possible to conceive, that any interest 
 could there exist at this day, which was not common to the circumjacent contiguous 
 counties, upon the principles of the basis of representation as now established ; there- 
 fore, this county could not be considered as longer entitled to a separate representa- 
 tion. But, suppose. Sir, said he, that the river which runs through this little county, 
 precipitated itself in its course over such a cataract as that of Niagara Does not 
 every one discern in such a circumstance, a cause sufficient to convert the inhabitants 
 of that county into a body of manufacturers And then is it not obvious, that such 
 an interest would require a separate representation, notwithstanding the limits of the 
 county, its population and property might each remain not greater than they are at 
 present.'' Justice and policy would surely require this. If so, it is perfectly clear, 
 that the existing basis is the true basis of representation ; and, that in the allotment 
 of representation, regard should be had, rather to tlie interests and convenience of the 
 people, than to their actual numbers, or wealth, or territory. 
 
 But, my venerable friend from Loudoun, (I beg pardon of the gentleman for the 
 familiarity of the plirase, but he has ever been my friend) has said, that the principles 
 of all Republican Government required, that representation should be apportioned ac- 
 cording to numbers alone, and should be founded on the white population only. Yet, 
 Sir, that gentleman himself tells us, that our existing Government is the best the 
 world has ever known. Is not this Government a Republican Government ? Were 
 not the patriots who formed it, wise Republicans And is it not founded on ihe 
 purest Repubhcan principles.? If gentlemen contend that it is not a Republican 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXTENTIOy- 
 
 331 
 
 GoYernment, what are we to infer from that eulogy vrhich represents it to be the best 
 Government in the world r Here 3Ir. T. shewed the inconsistency of the argument 
 urged on the other side^ which, while it conceded that the present was not only a Re- 
 pubhcan Government, but the best of such Governments, yet denied to such a Gov- 
 ernment any one of tlie ingredients necessary to the construction of a Republic. 
 
 He next referred to tlie arguments on the subject of the natural right of a majority 
 to govern ; contending that a radical objection to all such arguments, would be found 
 in the arguments themselves. Gentlemen contend, that a majority of the people have 
 an indefeasible right to rule the minority ; and having established' this proposition, to 
 their own satisfaction, at least, they immediately undertake to define who are the peo- 
 ple ; and by tlieir own definition exclude not less than seven-eighths of the whole 
 population, from the enumeration of that society, the majority of which, derives from 
 eternal and immutable justice, a supposed right to rule the minority. Gentlemen as- 
 sert, that accordincr to an eternal rule of right, the majority must govern, and then 
 instantly exclude from the enumeration, all except free ichite persons; so making the 
 eternal rules of justice and reason, to depend, not upon the condition of the popula- 
 tion as bond or free, but upon the accidental circumstance of the colour of their skins : 
 and pray, Sir, said Mr. T. to what standard are we to refer in order to decide the 
 question of colour, which is considered as so important in deducing a natural riaht ? 
 The native inhabitants of Japan, of China, of Hindostan, of all Southern Asia, of 
 Egypt, the 3Ioors of Africa, the Natives of the Greek Islands crenerailv; together 
 with all the unmixed descendants of the original inhabitants of America, will now be 
 embraced within tliis supposed rule, that deduces the right of a majority of whites to 
 govern any society from the supposed source of naturaflaw. 
 
 If gentlemen had said, that sound pohcy required, that in Virginia, negroes and 
 mulattoes, whether bond or fi-ee, should not participate in the active exercise of any 
 political power, most vrillingly would he have assented to such a proposition. But 
 when the question is not, who shall possess and exercise political power, but upon 
 what basis ought such power to be erected, he could not comprehend the force of the 
 argument, which, while seeking to fix population merely as that basis, would never- 
 theless disregard all other thanlhe free white population. Domestic slaves of every 
 sort, whether black or white, maj- be excluded, under the idea that they ought not to 
 be considered as persons, but as property merely : but why none but a free white 
 person should be enumerated, in establishinof the number of the people as the basis 
 of representation, he could not conceive. Women, minors, even aliens, and many 
 others whom none propose to admit to the enjoyment of the Right of Suffrage, "are 
 all, nevertheless, to be counted, (provided they be white,) in forming the basis of 
 representation : but none others are to be computed, edthough they be Tree, virtuous, 
 intelligent, and rich, as any white man, in the whole State. Suppose, said Mr. T. a 
 Hong merchant was to come hither from Macao, bringing with him numerous con- 
 nexions and much wealth: or suppose some convulsion in the neighbouring Repubhcs 
 of the South, Mexico for example, should force hither many of tlie inhabitants of 
 that country, free, virtuous, intelligent, and wealthy; can any possible reason be as- 
 signed, why the unmixed descendants of such emigrants, natives of Virginia, should 
 be excluded from the computation of numbers, while every emigrant fi-om any part 
 of Europe, even before he becomes a citizen, must be estimated? Such a rule can- 
 not be traced to any principle of right, or to oxiy maxim of sound policy. The true 
 rule is, that in a representative Government, every important interest in the society 
 should have its particular representative ; and tliat in the election of such a repre- 
 sentative, the majority of persons duly qualified according to law, whose peculiar in- 
 terest he is to represent, should haA'e the privilege of electing him — and as, in defining 
 the society so to be represented, it must be measured by territorial limits, so by ap- 
 portioning representation to the different electoral precincts of the State, you attain 
 the great desideratum of all representative Government. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, said Mr. T. capital and labour are the two great elements of the 
 prosperity of every State ; each of these is necessary to the existence of the other, 
 for without labour, capital would be worthless, and witliout capital, labour would be 
 useless. But although thus essential to each other, between the two there has existed 
 a struggle from the beginning, wliich, in the very nature of things, must continue to 
 the end of time. To reconcile these jarring elements, and to confine each within its 
 proper sphere, is the business of good Government. But in the adjustm.ent of the 
 powers of Government, if too much influence be given to eitlier of these elements, 
 mischiefs must result to society. If too much weight be allowed to capital, labour 
 will surely be oppressed, and if too much influence be given to labour, capital is at 
 once endangered. Oppressed labour seizes power to redress its wrongs ; capital en- 
 dangered, must purchase power to protect its rights. Althoup-h in perpetual conflict, 
 it passes human wisdom to separate these conflicting forces. You might as well ex- 
 pect to separate the soul from the body of man, and to preserve his existence, as to 
 separate capital from labour, and to preserve society. You may subject either you 
 
332 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 please to the dominion of the other, but the experiment can only be made by that 
 sort of revolution, whicli of necessity must end in anarchy and despotism. All 
 which tlie friend of free Government can desire; all that the wisest Statesman can 
 accomplish, is so to resolve these opposing forces into a third, as to give a new direc- 
 tion to each, which may be sufficient to check, restrain and balance both. This re- 
 sulting force is Government, which, when deriving its power from both capital and 
 labour, will receive the support of both. 
 
 But how is such a Government to be constructed Certainly not in the mode sug- 
 gested by tlie venerable member from Loudoun, as that which he prefers. His plan 
 is, to divide the Legislative Department into two branches, both to be chosen by the 
 same electors ; to allow to numbers, that is to labour exclusively, representation in the 
 more numerous branch, which is to be elected annually, and to capital and numbers 
 combined, representation in the other branch, which is to be elected quadrennially ; 
 and so to check and balance these opposing forces. Now, Sir, is it not obvious at 
 once, that two bodies, each deriving their authority from the same common source, 
 can never check each other ; but that both must obey the direction given to either 
 by the power from which they both proceed ? Does not our own experience too, 
 inform us, that a Senate consisting of twenty-four members, sitting up-stairs, can 
 never restrain the power of a House of Delegates consisting of one hundred and 
 twenty members, sitting here? The Senate may sometimes prevent the hasty and 
 incorrect legislation of the House of Delegates ; they may dot the i's or cross the 
 t's, or correct the ortlivOgraphy in bills which have passed the House, (if it be allowa- 
 ble to suppose that any member of that body may not know how to spell,) but it 
 never has and never can arrest any deliberate measure which the House is disposed 
 to persist in. The reason of tliis is very obvious. The Senate is elected for four years 
 in the lai'ge divisions of our territory, while the Delegates are elected annually, by 
 the smaller sub-divisions of these large districts. The Delegates, therefore, under- 
 stand and represent more truly the opinions of their common constituents than the 
 Senators ; and whensoever a division of opinion exists between them, the Delegates 
 must therefore prevail. I do not know the fact, but I think I hazard nothing in say- 
 ing, that the case has never occurred, in which a Senator, voting differently Irom the 
 Delegates representing the different counties of his district, upon any matter of 
 much importance, has ever been re-elected. What security, then, can property find 
 in such a body as a Senate, against the attack of numbers, represented exclusivel}' in 
 the other House ! 
 
 But suppose, to avoid a result so obvious as I have stated, the plan should be some- 
 what changed, and a higher property qualification should be required of the electors 
 of the Senate, than of the electors of the Delegates, the case would not be changed 
 materially. The gentleman from Brooke would immediately proclaim this little body 
 to be a band of oligarchs — others would style it a body of aristocrats, and many would 
 be found to denounce it as the rotten part of the Government, which ought to be put 
 down. With this cry of inad-dog uttered against it, the Senate would be sent forth 
 to the people as an object of their scorn and hatred, and could furnish httle protec- 
 tion to rights, for the security of which such an anomalous institution was at first de- 
 signed. 
 
 In every society, there will always be found individuals, who, from the mere fond- 
 ness of notoriety, and popularity, will oftentimes neglect their own interests, and 
 who may, therefore, be expected to disregard the interests of their constituents. Such 
 was the Duke of Orleans formerly in France : and in the conflicts between persons 
 and property, which must take place in every election of Senators, upon this basis of 
 numbers and property combined, the result must be, that numbers will certainly se- 
 lect the first Mons'r Egalite who presents himself as the professed guardian of the 
 rights of property. In such a society as that which now exists, and I hope ever will 
 exist in Virginia, if ever a separate representation is allowed to persons and to pro- 
 perty, if ever they are so arrayed against each other by Government or in Govern- 
 ment, we may talk as we please about checks and balances, but it is a delusion to be- 
 lieve, that the smaller can ever stop tbe progress of the greater power. An Almigh- 
 ty hand may part Dives and Lazarus by an impassable gulph, but the Statesman, 
 who expects to keep them asunder, deceives himself ; the struggle for power will and 
 must bring them together again, and although Dives may remain in the place assign- 
 ed to him, Lazarus cannot. If you wish to secure both persons and property, you 
 must not add fuel to the flame which their natural collisions will always kindle. In- 
 stead of dividing them in action any where, you must resolve and combine their 
 forces every where. Your effort should be by mingling them to render it impossible 
 to distinguish the voice of the one from that of the other, and not to arrange them so 
 as that each should be separately heard and understood. You can only accomplish 
 this object by pursuing the example of our ancestors, by arranging representation 
 neither upon the basis of one or the other, but upon the basis of interests, compre- 
 hending both within the limits of some certain territory, dehneated by convenience. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 333 
 
 Let me illustrate this in anotlier ^vay. The capital and labor of every country 
 must be employed in the pursuits of either agriculture, commerce, or manufactures. 
 Here. then, are three ^reat interests existing in every community, all of which are 
 so useful and important to its prosperity, that each ought to be represented, to the 
 end that each may be preserved and promoted. JXow, from ^vhat cause do these va- 
 rious and distinct interests proceed ? It is from local circumstances merely : from the 
 peculiar situation of the spot where they exist. By allovdng representation to terri- 
 tory, therefore, you will in etiect give representation to the particular interest w^iich 
 inhabits it. Do" the trans-Allegha\v people ever expect to become commercial .' The 
 tiling is impossible. They rnay cut canals wherever they live, and call their boat- 
 men°sailors if they please, but God and nature have decreed that commerce shall ne- 
 ver find a home there. It must abide upon navigable waters, made so, net by man, 
 but by Him who made man. The interests of commerce, therefore, can never be 
 represented by those who represent that section of the countr}- . Do the people of 
 the alluvial plain, watered by the tide-water, destitute as it is of every mineral pro- 
 duction, and without a water-fall of a single foot, expect to become manufacturers ? 
 Such an expectation would be equally idle on their part : and the middle rtgion of 
 the State, must ever contain what it nov/ does, the great agricultural interest of the 
 Commonwealth. Each of these great interests ought to be represented ; and the 
 proportions of their representation will always be found well measured, by the capi- 
 tal and labor employed m each, and these again by tiie total population contained 
 within the respective territories wherein they exist. 
 
 Again, if you will examine the territories of Virginia, wherein tlie great agricul- 
 turaf interests are found, I mean on this side of the mountain, (for m}^ topographical 
 knowledge of the tra-montane region does not enable me to speak of tliat.) you will 
 discover, that taking the line of 2sorth Carolina as a base, the Blue Ridge as one of 
 its sides, and some point near the county of Culpeper as its apex, a line drawn from 
 thence to the termination of the tide-water region, will form a great triangle, within 
 which, a slave-holding, tobacco-planting interest predominates. From the termina- 
 tion of the base of the first triangle, the North Carolina line so very near tlie Atlan- 
 tic, furnishes the base of a second great triangle, w^hose apex is on the Potomac, and 
 within which is to be found a slave-holding cotton-planting interest. The residue of 
 this lower cnuntry will comprehend the grain-growing interest. Now all these three 
 great interests, although agricultural, are, nevertheless, as distinct from each other as 
 are those of agriculture, commerce, and manufactures; and like the latter, each of 
 the former interests proceeds from local circumstances, easily to be ascertained, and 
 circumscribed by v.-ell-defined geographical lines. But this is not all. The territory 
 occupied by each of these three great agricultural interests, will be found intersected 
 in all directions by wide water-courses, cutting ofi" and preventing all intercourse and 
 association between those who may chance to dwell on their opposite sides. Conve- 
 nience will, therefore, require, that in allowing representation io each of these great 
 agricultural interests, regard should be had to these local circumstances, to the end 
 that the responsibility of die representative may be secured. Having fixed represen- 
 tation upon such a basis as this, in graduating and apportioning it to the different pre- 
 cincts delineated by a due regard to the convenience of tlieir inhabitants, jon may 
 then, but not until then, resort to numbers, as furnishing the scale and measure by 
 which the different interests abiding within these precincts may be ascertained and 
 compared. But in resorting to numbers, you should not confine yourself to white 
 nmnbers exclusively, but should consider every other circumstance in any way con- 
 nected with this subject. Such was the course pursued in re-arranging the Senatorial 
 Districts in 1816 ; and if a similar course was pursued upon tills occasion, it would 
 lead to a conclusion satisfactory and agreeable to all. 
 
 3Ir. T. said, that having referred to this Act of 1816, which had been several tim.es 
 mentioned in the course of debate, and which, as he believed, was not understood 
 generally, it might be well for hiin, who had a great share in the passaofe of that law, 
 to give some account of its history, and of the principles upon vrliich it was estab- 
 lished. 
 
 During the course of tbe debate on the proposition to call a Convention in the year 
 1816, it was frequently said that the Western country was most unequally represented 
 in the Senate ; and that this inequality being created by the existincr"' Constitution 
 itself, could not be remedied by any act of the ordinary Legislature. ^Th.s idea was 
 new to him. He had never heard it suggested before, nor had he any confidence in 
 the suggestion then. These opinions were stated by him in the debate, coupled bv 
 the decfaration, that he had entertained little doubt it vras competent to the Legisla- 
 ture, to arrange the Senatorial districts, whenever, in their discretion, they saw fit to 
 do so; and, that this had been done several times already. In consequence of this 
 declaration, after the Convention Bill passed, he was applied to by one of the mem- 
 bers from the Western part of the State, to assist in an etiort to re-arrange the Sena- 
 torial districts, in a manner more equal than they were tlien arranged. To this appli- 
 
334 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 cation, he yielded a ready assent; and supported, with all his ability, the motion for 
 leave to bring in such a bill. This motion was opposed by the gentleman from 
 Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge,) and others, upon the ground, that it was a measure, not war- 
 ranted by the Constitution. But, after a warm debate, the motion was carried, and a 
 Committee was appointed, (of which he was one,) to bring in such a bill. 
 
 He said, that according to the basis of taxation, the West was found entitled to 
 seven members, and a small fraction over — according to the basis of Federal numbers, 
 they were entitled to seven members, and a large fraction over — and according to the 
 basis of white population, they were entitled to nine members, and a small traction 
 over — computing according to the Census of 1810. TJien, by adding all these results 
 together, and dividing by three, it was found, that the West would be entitled to eight 
 members, and a fraction over. Believing that the East, which would be entitled to 
 fifteen members and a fraction, could better spare the fraction than the West; and 
 being entirely averse to diifering with his Western brethren concerning a fraction of 
 a representative merely, for his part he willingly assented to give up this fraction to 
 the West, who thereupon would have nine Senators, while the East retained fifteen — 
 and upon a perfect understanding of these proportions, were all the arrangements of 
 the original bill made. 
 
 The gentleman from Brooke is mistaken when he says, that I offered an amendment 
 to this bill, the object of which was to compute slaves in the apportionment of the 
 Senators. I never made any such proposition, or wished to amend the bill in any other 
 way whatever. 
 
 [ Mr. Doddridge said, that he had not meant to refer to this bill. His reference was 
 to the bill for calling a Convention.] 
 
 Mr. Tazewell said, he was satisfied, that the gentleman from Brooke did not intend 
 to make a mis-statement, but it was certain that he had referred to the Senatorial bill, 
 not only in his speech here lately, but upon several other occasions both here and 
 elsewhere. When the Senatorial bill was to be adjusted in the Committee, it was 
 distinctly understood by every member, that the proportions between the West and 
 the East were to be nine and fifteen ; and although from what he had since heard, he 
 thotight it highly probable, that afterwards, while adjusting these proportions to the 
 diff'erent parts of the State, gentlemen might have had regard to white numbers only, 
 yet if they did so, no such idea was ever suggested to him, either in or out of the 
 House. He was content with the proportions mentioned and agreed upon, and for his 
 own part, was perfectly indifferent as to the further details of this bill. 
 
 In conversation with the friends of the measure, it was agreed, that as the West was 
 then entitled to representation in the Senate, fully proportioned to their quota of the 
 land-tax paid by them, if they wished to augment this representation, they ought to 
 have a re-assessment of the lands, and so to enlarge their quota of this tax. This sug- 
 gestion was readily accepted by the gentlemen from the West, favourable to the bill, 
 which, therefore, assumed the shape it now wears, of a bill to re-apportion the land- 
 tax, and to re-arrange the Senatorial districts. 
 
 Such was the history of this law; and he had hoped, that a perfect knowledge of 
 the benefits derived from it, and the general satisfaction with which it had been 
 adopted, would have induced the pursuit of a similar course now. The people of the 
 West were then satisfied. They confessed, that they had no cause to complain of 
 unequal representation in the lower House ; and when the inequality of representa- 
 tion in the Senate was so redressed, they expressed their entire content with the ar- 
 rangement made. Let but a similar course be again adopted, and it will terminate in 
 a similar result. Add but a single line to George Mason's Constitution, authorising 
 the Legislature, from time to time, in their discretion, to deprive counties and corpo- 
 rations which may have declined too much in population or in wealth, of the repre- 
 sentation to which they are now entitled, and every evil of unequal representation 
 which is now complained of, will be at once removed. 
 
 But the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson,) has told us, that this is a contest 
 for power merely ; that disguise it as we might, it must still present itself as a ques- 
 tion of power. If this be so, we cannot surrender the smallest fraction, without an 
 abasing degradation. The power we now possess, we are well content to share with 
 our brethren of the West, provided they can satisfy us, that it is right we should do 
 so. But if the power is demanded by them merely because it is wanted ; and if it is ^ 
 expected, that the East must yield until the West is satisfied, he for one would yield 
 nothing to such a demand. He would at once place his foot on the spot from whence 
 he would never recede, be the consequence what it might. To a spirit of just com- 
 promise he was prepared to yield much, but to a strong demand nothing. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, said Mr. T. I came here anxious to preserve so much of our long- 
 tried Constitution, as in practice had been found good, and no more. I came here 
 prepared to reform at once every part of it, from the operation of which any practical 
 mischief had been found to result. Nay, I am wilUng to go still further, and am 
 ready to provide a seasonable remedy for any probable mischief, which may be rea- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 535 
 
 sonably supposed likely to result hereafter. But I cannot consent to pull down the 
 whole venerated fabric to its foundation, merely to build up another; to change 
 every thing, to reform every thing, and to alter all. Those whom I represent have 
 no such wfsh as this, nor did they depute me to co-operate in any such undertaking. 
 They had heard complaints and murmurs at different times, proceeding from different 
 quarters, that the existing Government had produced mischievous effects. Such 
 mischiefs they have never felt themselves, but beheving it probable that they might 
 exist, although unknown to them, they sent me hither to enquire into the fact; and 
 when it should be seen to exist, to apply to the evil the proper corrective. To the at- 
 tainment of this object, I will honestly and sincerely co-operate with any. But when 
 I am told, that the question to be discussed and decided is nothing else than a mere 
 question of power; that the West want that which the East have, I can only say that 
 such a question can never be decided here. Jurists may discuss and decide questions 
 of riQ-ht; Statesmen may settle and adjust matters of political expediency; but there 
 is but one earthly forum to which an appeal can ever be made for the determination 
 of a mere question of power ; and before that forum, there is but one argument which 
 ever can produce the slightest effect. We are told, that in former times, a strong de- 
 mand was made upon the Government of ancient Sparta, accompanied by a declara- 
 tion, that if the demand was not granted, the demandant would come and take it. 
 The laconic answer to tliis demand was, ' Come and take it.' The demandant came, 
 but did not obtain that which he meant to take. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he wished to make some observations in reply to the state- 
 ments of the gentleman from Norfolk. That gentleman had said, that by the law of 
 February, 1817, reforming the Senatorial representation, reference was had, not only 
 to white population, but to interests and other circumstances, from an examination of 
 which it resulted that the West were entitled to eight Senators and a fraction, and 
 that the East yielded that fraction to the West, which gave them nine members. Mr. 
 D. said, he would not rely on his memory and oppose it to that of the gentleman from 
 Norfolk, but he would appeal to facts which could not err, whether they were tested 
 by Pike, Gough, or Dilworth. 
 
 The Senatorial bill of February, 181-5, was based on the Census of 1810. In 1810 
 the whole white population was -551,000, disregarding the fractions of a thousand — of 
 this population, 212,000 were found West of the Blue Ridge. Out of twenty-four 
 members of the Senate, this population entitled the West to nine members, and a 
 large fraction w"hich they lost; so that the Senatorial arrangement of tliat year was 
 regulated by white population, and by notliing else. By the law of 1817, it required 
 several annual elections to give the West their nine members. These members did 
 not come into the body until 1820. The Census of that year showed that at that pe- 
 riod the West had upwards of 48,000 unrepresented. Since 1810, the increase of 
 Western population has been nearly 107,000 and of the Eastern 23,000, leaving W^est 
 of the Ridge upwards of 82,000 souls now unrepresented in the Senate. 
 
 The gentleman had said that in 1817, the West had their full share in the House of 
 Delegates. How correct that statement may be, will appear from the following facts: 
 In 1817, there were ninety-nine counties and four towns represented. This produced 
 a House of two hundred and two members. There were then thirty-four counties 
 West of tlie Ridge, having sixty-eight members. The population being 551,000 in- 
 habitants, and the number of members two hundred and two — the Western popula- 
 tion being 212,000, entitled them to seventy-eight and a half members instead of six- 
 ty-eight, being a dehciency of ten and a haJf members, which bein^ added to the East 
 gave that quarter of the State an advantage on a divided vote of twenty-one. 
 
 There was as little accuracy in the otlier assertion, that the West were satisfied 
 with the Senatorial arrangement, declaring it to be one that justice and equity re- 
 quired. So far from this, most of the members from the West voted against tlie Se- 
 natorial bill in all its stages, and never agreed to accept it until the Convention bill 
 which went to the Senate was lost. 
 
 The inequality of Western representation in the House of Delegates has increased 
 since 1817. The whole white population is now 632,000 of which 319,000 are West 
 of the Ridge. Since 1817, the following counties have been erected in the West, 
 viz: Morgan, Preston, Alleghany, Pocahontas, Nicholas and Logan, maldng the 
 Western counties forty, and giving to the West eighty votes in our House of Delegates 
 of two hundred and fourteen members. By the above numbers, the West are enti- 
 tled to something more than one hundred members instead of eighty, and the defici- 
 ency of twenty being added to tlie East, gives to that quarter an advantage of forty 
 votes. 
 
 Mr. Chapman Johnson said, he Vv^as sorry there was some misrepresentation of his 
 remarks, by tlie gentleman from Norfolk," (Mr. Tazewell.) He regretted that this 
 should have been the case, as he believed that gentleman was disposed to consider 
 what he had said in a spirit of fairness and candor. He did say, that the question wa 
 were considering was a contest for power. He had said, disguise it as we wouldj 
 
336 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 view it in any aspect we could, if we come back to a candid consideration of it, it was 
 a question ot power and notlaino- else. He did not mean to be understood as intima- 
 ting that this was a Jawless controversy for power, in which each was trying to get 
 what he could, /^e?- fas aut nefas. This was far from his opinion, and his reason for 
 addressing the Committee, was to show that in the principles of either party this 
 question was not so intensely important as eitlier imagined. He did not mean that 
 either party contended for power on any principles but those which they could justi- 
 fy to their own consciences as right, but this question of representation was a ques- 
 tion of power, although certainly all the business of the Convention was not of that 
 character. Is it not the question whether you will give tlie power of representation 
 to interest, numbers or wealth.? To any or all of them.? Is it not the question whe- 
 ther you will distribute the power of the Government among the elements of the 
 Commonwealth ? No matter what is the basis, it is the same. He did think that hia 
 language would have been viewed in this way, os it ought to have been. It would 
 be found that no one was more disposed to settle the question of power, so as to meet 
 all the wishes and interests of the iState, than he was. lie knew it was impossible to 
 meet those wishes, but he would come as near as possible, for it was his sincere de- 
 sire that all things should go on harmoniously. He should vote against the proposi- 
 tion to make the Federal numbers the basis, for reasons which it would not now be 
 necessary to repeat. If what he had said was remembered, his reasons would be 
 known. He would vote against it, as much on account of its effect on the people he 
 represented, as on account of its etfect on the v/hole population. He should consider 
 as satisfactory, qualified voters for both branches. If he could not choose — if Federal 
 numbers should be preferred, as the limitation to be given to the Senate to operate as 
 a check on the House of Delegates, he should have very little to regret on account 
 of the power given over his constituents by that basis, over that which would have 
 been given by the basis he recommended. A single remark as to the power of the 
 Senate to check the power of the House of Delegates. He did not mean to refer to 
 his experience there, nor to resist the argument, that the Senate for one, two, three, 
 or four years might withstand the House, but that it must at last yield, because both 
 branches are from the same people. He would say nothing farther on that argument, 
 except, that if the Federal numbers were adopted in the Senate, and the House of 
 Delegates established on the basis of white population, we ought to suppose that 
 each should concur in two or tlu'ee years in any great question. It ought to be so. 
 He thought the responsibility of the representatives was a sufficient security for their 
 continued regard to the public interests. The members of the Senate are elected for 
 a longer period of time, and that circumstance might render that body less efficient 
 as a check — but the member of the House goes back to his own constituent body an- 
 nually ; so that when you give the white basis to this body, you establish the best of 
 all checks. He had thought it right to state this much^ he should not attempt fur- 
 ther argument. The Committee ought not to indulge him any more, as he had already 
 consumed so much of their time. He would not sit down without saying, that to the 
 bitter sarcasms, gratuitous imputations and learned jests of the gentleman from Char- 
 lotte, (Mr. Randolph,) he had no plea to enter, no answer to give. However low he 
 might stand in the opinions of others, and they could not estimate him lower than he 
 estimated himself, yet he had self-respect enough not to answer that gentleman, and 
 if he had not, respect for this Committee would impose silence upon him. 
 
 Mr. Mercer, rose to corroborate what had fallen from the gentleman from Brooke, 
 on the subject of the Senate Bill in 1816. The basis of that Bill was rested on the 
 white population, and ought there to stand. He was second on the Committee, and 
 owing to the indisposition of the Chairman, who could not attend, the duties of Chair- 
 man devolved upon him. A gentleman from Berkeley, not a member of this Conven- 
 tion, was the one who collated the counties to form the basis. He had heard no com- 
 plaints. Another word and he had done. The gentleman from Norfolk, had said, 
 that in the original formation of this Government, regard was had to the representa- 
 tion of interests, and that the old House of Burgesses was composed with reference to 
 that distribution of interests. He saw no evidence in the topographical or other cha- 
 racter of the country, to sustain the view of the gentleman from Norfolk. The gen- 
 tleman from Norfolk, had gone so far as to divide the Commonwealth into a number 
 of triangles, to shew the different interests into which the State was divided. He, 
 consider'ed these interests as forming a basis as fluctuating as any other that could be 
 determined. 
 
 Cotton was of recent cultivation. In Loudoun, where there were formerly tobac- 
 co fields and wheat-patches, there are now wheat-fields and tobacco-patches. The 
 plan, therefore, of the gentleman from Norfolk, might be applicable one day, and al- 
 together inapplicable a few years hence. Mr. M. made some other observations in 
 reply, but we did not correctly catch their import. He concluded with stating, that 
 the counties had been created for judicial, not for legislative purposes ; and all apph- 
 cations to divide counties were founded in the difficulty of going to the courts to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 337 
 
 serve either as jurors or witnesses. He had never heard any other causes assigned, 
 although he had been in this Hall on many occasions, when apjjlications of this kind 
 were made. Pie hoped tliat the new basis v,^ould not supersede that of the free whites. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, tiiat if he was correctly informed in the Constitutional History of 
 Virginia, the gentleman from Norfolk, (Air. Tazewell) had been singularly infelicitous 
 in attempting to support, by a reference to tliat history, his theory of the true princi- 
 ples of representation. For I find, said Mr. Cooke, tliat he, too, has his theories of 
 Government, as well as tlie wild democrats of ISIiddle and Western Virginia. 
 
 His theory is, that there should be a representation of interests, in the legislative 
 bodies, as contradistinguished from the representation of numbers ; and, to support 
 this theory, he has attempted to shew that it has been uniformly acted on in Virginia, 
 even from the first establishment of legislative bodies in tlie Colony. For this pur- 
 pose, he has drawn a picture of the Colony at that period of its infancy when the 
 population was dispersed in detached settlements, or plantations, separated from 
 each other by miglity waters" and impenetrable forests. He next assumes it as a 
 fact, without even attempting to prove it, that each of these settlements had some pe- 
 culiar interest of its own — I mean an interest variant from that of its neighbour set- 
 tlements. He alleges that a separate representation was given to each of these set- 
 tlements, because of the existence of these separate and A'^ariant interests : That, in pro- 
 cess of time, when the settlements were enlarged so as to come in contact with each 
 other, it became necessary to designate, by artificial boundaries, the limits of these 
 separate and distinct interests : That, to effect this purpose, the Colonial Legislature, 
 in 1G34, erected them into counties, giving to each county an equal representation in 
 the House of Burgesses. And thus he shows that his favorite theory of the repre- 
 sentation of interests, as interests, and contradistinguished from the representation of 
 numbers, was the theory of the earliest L'uv-givers of the Colony; and he asserts that 
 it has remained, to the present day, the theoiy of representation practically adhered 
 to in the Constitution of Virginia, and so is entitled to prescriptive respect. 
 
 Now, Sir, I appreliend that in taking this view of the subject, the gentleman has 
 fallen into a mistake not uncommon with theorists. Instead of conforming his theory 
 to the facts, he has made his facts conform to his theory. 
 
 I apprehend that a more accurate version of our early Constitutional History will 
 shew, that if any principle of representation has been adopted in Virginia, it is sub- 
 stantially, the principle which is recommended in the Report of the Select Commit- 
 tee — the principle, that in apportioning representation, regard should be had to the 
 free white population exclusively. 
 
 The first chapter in the Constitutional History of Virginia is, tlie ordinance of the 
 24th of July, l{)21. On that day, the Treasurer and compan}'^ of adventurers of the 
 city of London, for tlie first Colony in Virginia," passed an ordinance establishing 
 the Constitution of the Colonj'^. (1) By this ordinance, they constituted a General 
 Assembly, to consist in part, of Burgesses, or Representatives, to be chosen by the 
 
 inhabitants ' of the different plantations, or settlements. And, as there were, at 
 that time, no slaves in the Colony, the free inhabitants of the country were of course 
 the basis of representation. And though the ordinance did not direct, that the free 
 inhabitants should be equaUij represented, yet, as equal representation, where there is 
 a representation of the pcopJ/-, is the most obvious, and natural idea, it is to be presumed, 
 that the company contemplated a representation substantially equal. I see no trace, 
 in this first organic law of Virginia, of the representation of interests, and no evi- 
 dence, any where, that there were any peculiar, separate and distinct interests, ap- 
 pertaining to tlie different plantations or settlements. Their contiguity, would seem 
 to contradict the idea ; and. in fact, their interests were homogeneous, if not identi- 
 cal. 
 
 ProceedincT to the next era in the Constitutional History of the Colony, we find the 
 gentleman from Norfolk, asserting, that in 1634, when the forests, which had consti- 
 tuted, for a time, the natural barriers between, and limits of, these supposed distinct 
 interests, had disappeared, and they were in danger of being blended together, arti- 
 ficial limits were substituted, counties erected, and two Burgesses, or in other laords, 
 equal representation, given to each county. And this measure, he says, was adopted, 
 with a view to preserve the separate representation of these distinct and separate m- 
 terests. Here is, indeed, a singular adaptation of iho, facts to the theory. But, Sir, it 
 happens, unfortunately for the theory, that the facts are not historically true. It is 
 true, that the Colony was first divided into counties in 1034 ; but it is not true, that 
 the counties were created witli any, the most remote, reference to representation, at 
 all. The counties were created for tico avoiced jntrposes, and for no other. I mean 
 the organization of the military force of the Colony, for defence against the Indians, 
 and the administration of justice. (2) Not a \vord is said about the representation of 
 
 (1) See Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 1, p. TJO. 
 
 (2) See Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 1, p. 224. 
 
 43 
 
338 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 these counties, or about the representation of interests, or any representation at all. 
 And, in fact, the counties were not represented as counties, till the year 1G61 ; nor 
 does any, the smallest connexion between counties and represeiitation appear in the 
 Legislative History of the Colony, till 1G45. It is true, that in the last mentioned 
 year, an Act was passed, declaring that not more than four representatives should be 
 sent from each county, except James City county, which was allowed six — besides 
 one for the town. (3) But, it is equally true, that at the time of, and after the pas- 
 sage of tliat Act, the parishes also were allowed to send representatives to the Legis- 
 lature, whenever they thought proper. (4) 
 
 It was not until IGGl, as 1 have said, that the counties, «5 counties, were repre- 
 sented in the General Assembly. In that year an Act was passed, declaring in ef- 
 fect, that the House of Burgesses should consist of two representatives, and no more, 
 from each countij, together with one from James City, " the metropolis of the coun- 
 try." And, by the same Act, it was declared, " that every county which should lay 
 out one hundred acres of land, and people it with one hundred tithable persons," 
 should have the privilege of sending an additional Burgess. (5) 
 
 By adverting to the recital of that Act, you will find that the cause assigned for 
 the reduction and equalization of the representation of the counties, was the expense 
 of maintaining the great number of Burgesses sent from the counties and parishes. 
 *' Whereas, tiie charge of assemblies is much increased by the great number of Bur- 
 gesses," &c. 
 
 Thus you perceive, Sir, that the principle of representation in Virginia, if it de- 
 serves the name of a principle, received its final consummation, its last finish, from 
 a Colonial Legislature of unlettered tobacco-planters in 1661. The Constitution of 
 Virginia, which is gravely declared, even on this floor, to have been the work of the 
 sages and patnoisof 177G, 7oas actually formed and finished in 1661, and has never since 
 been modified, in this great and leading feature of the representation of the people. This 
 admirable regulation — the equal representation of the counties, which is recommended 
 to our love and veneration, as the work of our glorious ancestors in 1776, was, in fact, 
 a paltry Colonial regulation — a device to save money — a matter of pounds, shillings 
 and pence ! 
 
 It is true, tliat the men of '7G did not alter it. And lohy did they not alter it? 
 Simply because they could not. The infant Commonwealth was engaged, as I had oc- 
 casion to remark in a former debate, in a war, in which its very existence was at 
 stake — in a war which required the united direction of all interests, and of its whole 
 strength, against a foreign enemy. The sages and patriots who composed the Con- 
 vention of 1776, were wise and practical men. What extreme folly, what absolute 
 insanity, would it have been, when hostile squadrons were riding at anchor in Hamp- 
 ton Roads, to say to the smaller counties, exposed by their position to the full opera- 
 tion of all the seducticms and all the threats of the enemy, " you must surrender a 
 part of the poiver you have aijoycd under the Kingly Gocernmcnt for one hundred and 
 seventy years.'" Sir, the members of the Convention of '76, had too much good sense ; 
 too much practical wisdom — to attempt so mad and ill-timed a reform. They said, what 
 tliey were obliged to say, that tlie representation of the counties should remain as it 
 was. 
 
 Thus, Sir, it appears, tJiat the idea of the gentleman from Norfolk, that the repre- 
 sentation of interests, as interests, contradistinguished from the representation of 
 mimbers, has been from the first settlement of the Colony, tlie theory of our Govern- 
 ment, lias no foundation in history ; and that the statement of facts which he has made 
 to support his theory, is altogetber erroneous. That the Act of 1661, which estab- 
 lished the equal representation of the coimties, considered at this day as the highest 
 stretch of political sagacity, so far from having been intended to establish the princi- 
 ple tliat interests and not nvmibers should be thereafter represented, or any principle, 
 was a mere fiscal regulation, of which penuriousness, and not political wisdom, was 
 tlie author and source. 
 
 In fact. Sir, since the ordinance of 1621, no principle of representation, deserving 
 the name of a principle, has ever been acted on. We are assembled here to de- 
 clare what the principle of representation ought to he, and shall be, in all time to 
 come. 
 
 The question what is the true principle, is one which I have heretofore discussed, 
 and shall not now touch. The gentleman from Norfolk says, that the true principle 
 by which to regulate the apportionment of political power, is the representation of all 
 the different interests of society — as interests. The Bill of Rights declares, that the 
 true principle is the equal representation of the pcojde. I am content to rest the ques- 
 tion on the relative weight of the two authorities. 
 
 (3) See Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 1, p. 299. 
 
 (4) See Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 1, jiagcs 411,421, and passim. ' " 
 
 (5) See Ilening'a Statutes at Large, vol- 2, p. 20. - . 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 339 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that reference having been made to the Colonial Government, to 
 disprove the statement of the gentleman from Norfolk, he would read an extract from 
 the history of that Government, for the accuracy of which he would vouch, as he 
 took great pains to ascertain facts. Mr. Leigh then read a note wliich is appended to 
 the Revised Code, first volume, page 33.* It appeared, he said, tiiat Bacon, a rebel, 
 was the first who adopted the notion of Universal Suffrage in the country, and that 
 he had it from the soldiers of Crom well's army. 
 
 He stated, that the substance of the note which he had read, was confirmed in its 
 accuracy by the late Judge Roane, and said a few words as to the manner of dividing 
 the State into plantations, districts and hundreds, all founded on that principle of in- 
 terest which the gentleman from Norfolk had alluded to. If that principle was not 
 avowed, there could be no doubt that it was the principle. 
 
 Again, he stated tiiat the College of William and 2vlary was allowed a representa- 
 tive until the commencement of the revolution. It was represented in the Conven- 
 tion of 1775. Why was this, but that the principle of the interests of dilferent 
 branches was acted on in the apportioirment of representation? Here was a repre- 
 sentation of the learning of this College, which had been until lately a most useful 
 institution, and he hoped might become so again. He considered that the gentlemaa 
 from Norfolk had been fully sustained in his statements and views. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that he had not learned the constitutional history of Virginia from 
 the notes to tJie Revised Code, but from the documentary and legislative records set 
 
 * As to the form of the Colonial Goverament, for which this Constitution vrds substituted, see 1 Charts 
 ^ 7. 8, 15. 1 Hen. st. at lar, p. CO, 1, 4. Ruyid in.-triictions fur tlie gocernment of the Colony, Ibid. p. 67. 
 75. 2 CkaH. $ 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 23. Ibid. p. 89, 90, 1, 2, 5. 3 Chart. § G. 7. 8. Jbid. p. 102, 
 3. — By the 14th section of the second charter and the 8th of the third, the power of establishing a form 
 of government and magistracj' for the Colony, was vested in the council and general court of the Virginia 
 company in England which, on the 24th July, 1621, ordained a form of government accordingly ; where- 
 by the powers of the Colonial government were vested in a governor and council of state, appointed by 
 the company in England and holding during its pleasure, and a house of burgesses, two from every town, 
 hundred and particular plantation, to be respectively chosen by the inhahitaiits ; and this council of state 
 and house of burgesses formed the Colonial legislature, called the General Assembly. The Colonial 
 government was directed to conform, in legislation and jurisprudence, to the English government and 
 laws ; and it was provided, that no law or ordinance made b}- the General Assembly, should be v alid, un- 
 less ratified by the general court of the company in England, and returned so ratified under its seal. 
 See Hiis Constitution, and the commission and instructions to the first gurenwr under it, 1 Hen. st. at lar. p, 
 110. 113. 114. In 1624, the crown suppressed the Virginia company by proclamation, and resumed the 
 powers granted to the company ; but the form of government it had given the Colony, remained in sub- 
 stance unchanged. It appears, that the constitution of the Colonial government was amended b}" George 
 I. and instructions were given by George II. to the governor Lord ^llbemarle, for the regulation of the go- 
 vernment according to the amended constitution : but these papers are not to be found. "The King always 
 retained the control over the Colonial laws, and even exercised the power of suspending and repealing 
 them 5 powers, often exercised capriciously, always complained of as a grievance, sometimes disputed, 
 and at length assigned as one of the causes of the revolution ; see 5 Hen. st. at lar. 432. This royal pre^ 
 rogative had a most important influence on the legislation of tlie Coloaial government. Counties or shires 
 were first established in 1634. 1 Hen. st. at lar. p. 224. It seems trom our ancient records, that at first, 
 in practice, neither the towns, hundreds and plantations, wdiile they were represented, nor the counties, 
 after the burgesses were elected from tliem, were restricted to tico or any fi.xed number of burgesses. 
 In 1645, the number was limited to four for each county, except James City, which was allowed five, 
 besides one for Jamestown, the seat of government ; 1 Hen. stut. at lar. p. 299. Afterwards, particular 
 parishes, and then ali parishes, were allowed to send one or two burgesses Ibid. 250. 277. 421. In 1660, 
 the number of burgesses was limited to two for each county and one for Jamestown in James City coun- 
 ty, with like privilege to every county, that would lay out 100 acres of land, and people it with 100 
 titheable persons ; 2 lijid. p. 20. 106.— The 7th article of the present constitution, provides that the 
 right of suffrage for menibcy-s of boHi houses of Asscnihly, shall remain as exercised at present. By the 
 constitution of July 1621, above cited, the i-iglit of suffrage was given to the inhabitants ; afterwards, it 
 seems, only freemen were allowed to vote ; 1 Ibid. p. 333, 4. then only housekeepers; Ibid. p. 412. then 
 all freemen again. Ibid. p. 403. 475. then '■'■freclwlders and housekeepers, who only are ansicerahh for le- 
 vies -j^^ 2 Ibid. 280. then, by Bacon's laws, all freemen again ; Ibid. .356. But in 1677, the King instructed 
 the Governor, that the members of Assembly should be elected by .f/-ee/wWcro- only. Ibid. p. ■&5. In 
 16S4, it was resolved, that all tenants for life had an undoubted right cf suffrage; 3 Ibid. 26. In 1699, 
 the right of suffrage was confined to freeholders (excluding women, infants and recusants convict) resi- 
 dent in the respective counties and towns ; Ibid. p. 2:38. In 17.36, the right of suffrage was confined to 
 freeholders of an hundred acres of unsettled land or twenty-five acres of improved land, and all freehol- 
 ders in towns, but ^^^th a ri2ht to vote, only in tlio county where the land or the greater part of it lay j 
 4 Ibid. 475, 6. The city of Williamsburg and the borough of Norfolk were allowed a representiitive, 
 by their charters, hy which the right of siffragc of the citizens and burghers was regulated, but after- 
 wards somewhat narrowed by law 5 Edi. 17i>9, p. 122. 2^7. It seems, that till 17^i, free negroes, i^idiajis 
 and mulattoes, might vote at elections ; but by the acts of that year, c. 4. $ 23. Edl. 1733. p. 344, they 
 were disqualified ; and that particular section of the act was not repealed, though the rest of it was by 
 royal proclamation in 1724. Edi. 1769. p. 15. note (a.) Edi. 1762. p. 103. By the act of 1769. c. 1, 
 the quantity of unimproved land, necessary to qualifv a freeholder to vote, wjis reduced to fifty acres ; 
 but this act was suspended until the royal approbation should be signified, and such approbation wag 
 never signified. The ordinance of the convention of 1775, providing for the election of delegates to the 
 convention of 1776, extended the right of suffrage to free white men, inhabitants of Fincastle and West 
 Augusta, in possession of the requisite quantity of land, and claiming freeholds therein, though they 
 should have obtained no patents or legal titles to their lands. — Thus stood the right of suffrage when 
 the constitution was adopted. By the act of 178.5, c. 55. § 2. the qualification of the freeholder in re- 
 spect to the quantity of unimproved land M-as reduced from 100 to 50 acres ; the legislature either re- 
 garding the act of 1769, as effectual, notwitlistanding tlie want of the royal assent; or, perhaps, consi- 
 dering that wdiile the principle of freehold qualiiicaliou was preserved, a ciiango as to the quantity of 
 land was consistent with the coustitutiou. 
 
340 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 forth at length in "Hening's Statutes at Large." I am, nevertheless, tliankful, said 
 he, to the gentlexnan from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) for reading the long and elabo- ^ 
 rate note from the Revised Code, which has refreshed my recollection of sundry par- 
 ticulars which I pretermitted in the sketch that 1 gave of the history of representa- 
 tion in Virginia, because I did not consider them precisely "germane to the matter" 
 under consideration. 1 am yet to learn, however, in what point or particular I have 
 misstated the historical facts which I undertook to state. I said, and I repeat, that the 
 ordinance of 1G21 recognized the free " inhabitants" of the Colony as the basis of re- 
 presentation, and 1 have heard nothing inconsistent with that statement in the history 
 tlmt has been read by the gentleman from Chesterfield. 
 
 I thank him, however, for calling the attention of the Committee to the history of 
 Suffrage in Virginia, as I think that history replete with valuable and interesting 
 facts. The learned gentleman, Sir, has ventured to say to this Committee, that the 
 idea of Universal Suffrage was never heard in Virginia, till it was started in England 
 by those crazy enthusiasts, tiie '■'■agitators,''' in the time of Cromwell; and that it was 
 tln-ough them introduced into the Colony. I confess that I heard this statement made 
 with no small surprise. 
 
 What is the meaning. Sir, of the phi-ase " Universal Suffrage," as commonly used 
 and understood by intelligent men ? Does it mean a Right of Suffrage belonging to, 
 and exercised by, all tlie men, all the women, and all the cliildren of the communi- 
 ty.'' Such an absurdity never entered into the head, even of "a reformer,''' however 
 " hardened his heart might have become by experimenting on the rights of man, to ascer- 
 tain ho2D large a dose of French principles anight he administered without causing their 
 dcstniction." It means a Right of Suffrage exercised by all the free wen of a commu- 
 nity. And precisely to this extent v/as the right exercised in the Colony of Virginia 
 from the year 1621 till the year 1655. The ordinance of 1021 secured the Right of 
 Suffrage to all the free " inhabitants" of the Colony. And I defy the gentleman from 
 Cliesterfield, with all his constitutional lore, to show, by a reference to the legislative 
 history of the Colony, that it was taken away, or even assailed, before the passage of 
 the act of 1655. In that year an act was passed declaring, " that all house-keepers, 
 whether freeholders, leaseholders, or otherwise tenants, should only be capable to elect 
 Burgesses: Provided, that tliis word house-keepers, repeated in this act, extended no 
 further than to one p<erson in a family." (1) 
 
 And here. Sir, we have presented to us, the curious discrepancy between the state- 
 ment made by the gentleman from Chesterfield and the real facts of the case : and 
 not discrepancy only, but absolute contrariety. His statement is, that Universal Suf- 
 frage originated in England, with the military "agitators" in the time of Cromwell, 
 and was thence, and at that period, transplanted into Virginia, where it was before 
 unknown. The fact is, that it had existed in the Colony from the earliest period 
 of its legislative history, and was first assailed in the time of the "agitators" of 
 Cromwell, who, in 1655, was at the height of his power and the sovereign of Virgi- 
 nia. Thus, Sir, these crazy "agitators," these English republican enthusiasts, rfe- 
 stroycd, instead of introducing Universal Suffrage. They were the first to introduce 
 rationality into the theretofore irrational regulation of the Right of Suffrage. I say ra- 
 tionality. Sir, because I am no advocate for Universal Suffrage. God forbid that 1 ever 
 should be. 
 
 The act of 1655 was repealed, however, in the following year. The repealing act 
 declares, in the quaint language of the age, that it is conceived to " be something hard 
 and unagreeable to reason, that any persons shall pay equal taxes, and yet have no 
 votes in elections; and that so much of the act for choosing Burgesses be repealed, as 
 excludes //'cemc?! from votes." (2) 
 
 With the exception of this interval of a year, Universal Suffrage prevailed in Vir- 
 ginia, from 1621 till 1670. In the year last mentioned, an act was passed declaring 
 that " none but freeholders and house-keepers, who only are answerable to the pub- 
 lic for their levies, should thereafter liLve any voice in the election of any Bur- 
 gesses. "(3) This limitation 6f the Right of Suffrage was unpalatable to the colonists, 
 and was set forth as one of the grievances by which the popular insurrection of 1676 
 was justified. I call it a popular insurrection, because the phrase is more agreeable to 
 my republican notions than the word " rehellion,''' used by the gentleman from Ches- 
 terfield. Rebellion, Sir ! then what were the men of 1776, but rebels against the royal 
 authority ! Nathaniel Bacon was a rebel, who, perhaps, wanted only a wider theatre 
 of action and a more protracted span of existence, to be the Washington of his age. 
 He rose in arms against oppression, and a democratic Legislature, or one under his 
 control, while it redressed many real grievances, repealed the limitation of Suffrage, 
 
 (1) See Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 1, page 412 
 
 (2) See Hening's Statutes at Large,' vol. 1, page 403. The repealing act precedes the act repealed in 
 the pa o-ing of " Hening's Statutes at Large," in consequence of a mistake in the MS. " not discovered 
 in time." 
 
 (3) Sec Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 2, page 280. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 341 
 
 imposed in 1G70. His democratic code was repealed in its turn, in 1C7T. and two re- 
 giments of Britisli soldiers vrere sent by liis most gracious Majesty. Kmg Charles II. 
 whose Government the gentleman from Chesterfield calls, by way of distmction, the 
 lawful Government/" to disseminate in the Colony more correct notions concerning 
 civil and political hberty. This worthless tyrant — tlie most wortiiless that ever filled 
 the throne of England— did not condescend to ask of the trembling Burgesses, whom 
 he assembled at the very mouths of his cannon, and at the very point of his bayonets, 
 a legislative oxt est^iblishing the freehold lirn itation of the Right of Suffrage in Virginia . 
 He ordered his Governor^ in his private letter of instructions, under liis royal hand, 
 " to take care that the members of the Assembly should thereafter be elected hj free- 
 holders only'' (4) And thus, Sir, the freehold limitation of the Right of Suffrage be- 
 came the laic of Virginia; and so it has remained to the present day : 3vlodified, to 
 be sure, from time to time, by subservient Colonial Assemblies, in regard to tlie 
 quantity of land necessary to confer the right, but still the freehold liviitation. And 
 with these slight modifications, it remains the law and the Constitution of Virginia 
 to the present day. It was, in 1>377, then, and not in 1776, that tlris boasted regulation, 
 the acme of pohtical wisdom, became a part of the Constitution of Virginia. It was 
 dictated by a tyrant, and thrust down the throats of the people of V irginia at the 
 point of the bayonet. And this is the principle of our Constitution which we are 
 caUed on to venerate — to bow down and worship, as the wisest and best of all the 
 institutions /brmecZ in 1776 by the sages and jjatriots of the recolution. This is the in- 
 stitution which is the great safeguard of propert}^, and the palladium of our liberties. 
 
 Sir, I have said that the Constitution of Virginia, as it regards this great and vital 
 provision, was matured and completed in 1677. The Convention of 1776 found it 
 established and matured, and they left it untouched. And wky did they leave it un- 
 touched Were they in love with the memory of its author Or were they true 
 republicans, as they unquestionably were partial to aristocratic distinctions and privi- 
 ledged orders ? 2So, Sir; they left it untouched, because they dared not touch it. It 
 had taken deep root, and could not be torn up vrith safety, while so many elements of 
 discord were already at work, and threatened to add the horrors of a cicil to the dan- 
 gers of foreign war. 
 
 Moreover, the poisonous plant, aristocracy, had grovm up and flourished under the 
 shadow of the tree of royalty. A privileged class had been created, not only by the 
 establishment of exclusive pohtical privileges, but by extensive grants of land (o the 
 favorites of the Crown. There was. therefore, a lu7ided, as welTas a political aristo- 
 cracy. It was, like all pri-^dleged classes, tenacious of its exclusive privileges, and 
 like all wealthy aristocracies, proud of its wealth. To a class like this, the authors of 
 the Bill of Rights, genuine and bold republicans as they were, did not dare to say, in 
 the heat of a war which put in requi^tion all the wealth and all the resources of tlie 
 country, •'■ Your reign shall cease — your power and influence are at an end." 
 
 They said, with a mournful and sententious brevity, The Right of Suflracfe shall 
 remain as at present exercised." 
 
 This. Sir, is a true histery of the rise and progress, and unhappily, of the present 
 state of the Right of Suffrage in Virginia. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that the gentleman from Frederick needed not to inform him that 
 he had not learned the history of Virginia from the note to tlie Revised Cede. His 
 object had been merely to put the Committee in possession of the facts which were 
 there stated. The gentleman had not only studied out of a different system of law, 
 but also out of a different system of general history, or he would not have said that 
 Bacon's insurrection, wliich grew out of a private feud, was a stand in defence of the 
 rights of man. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion of 3Ir. Leigh, to amend the resolution, 
 which motion was decided in the negatire — Ayes 47, Noes 49. 
 
 Some difficulty occurring in the count, the names of members were called over; 
 but as the vote was taken in Committee of the Whole, the rule of order does not per- 
 mit the yeas and nays to be recorded on the Journal. We have obtained, hovrever, 
 tlie following list, which Vv'e submit to satisfy the curiosity of readers. 
 
 Ayes — Me'ssrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brod- 
 nax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason, Trez- 
 vant; Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, 
 Barbour of Orange, Stanard, Holhday, Roane, Taylor of Ca^ohne, 3Iorris. Garnett, 
 Barboyir of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae,' Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis,' Gria-sbv, 
 Mennis, Taliaferro, Bates, Neale, Rose, Joynes. Bayly, Upshur, and Perrin. — i7r 
 
 yoes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman. Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M"Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith. INIiller, Baxter, Monroe. jNIercer. Fitzhu^h, Henderson, 
 Cooke, Powell. Opie, Griggs, Naylor, Donalson, Bovd, Pendleton, George. M'Millan' 
 Campbell of Washington," Byars, Cloyd, Chapman,' Mathews,' Oglesby, Duncan^ 
 
 (4) See Hening's Statmes at Large, vol. 2, page 42o. 
 
342 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell 
 of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Tleasants, Gordon, Thompson, and 
 Massie. — 4!». 
 
 ^ So the Committee of the Whole rejected the proposition to base the representa- 
 tion in the House of Delegates, on what is called the Federal number, consisting of 
 the free whites, together with three-fifths of the slaves. 
 The Committee then rose, and the House adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, November 17, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at eleven o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Taylor of the Baptist Church. 
 
 Mr. Mercer moved tiiat when the Convention adjourn, it adjourn to meet to-mor- 
 row at ten o'clock, (instead of eleven.) The motion was opposed by Mr. Stanard, 
 and advocated by the mover and Mr. Doddridge : and the question being taken, the 
 House appeared equally divided — Ayes 40, Noes 40. The President giving his casting 
 vote in the affirmative, the motion was carried. 
 
 The House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Scott, professing his earnest desire to see the Convention come to some com- 
 promise of the opposing parties, and believing that object would be promoted by 
 passing over this subject until something should have been determined on the limits 
 of the Right of Suffrage, made a motion to take up the next resolution reported by 
 the Legislative Committee. 
 
 Mr. Mercer opposed the motion, and desired that the amendment to the first reso- 
 lution should first be finally disposed of in the Committee. He referred to other im- 
 portant questions v/hich had been decided by small majorities, and disclaimed on the 
 part of the majority any thing like an uncompromising spirit. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge rose to notice a remark of Mr. Scott, on what had fallen from Mr. 
 Johnson. He understood Mr. J. to have stated it as his understanding of the first 
 proposition, in the report of the Legislative Committee, that representation was to be 
 apportioned on the basis of qualified voters ; and he had added that he supposed this to 
 have been the intention of the mover of that resolution in the Legislative Commit- 
 tee. Now Mr. D. said, that he had himself been the mover of it, and such an inter- 
 pretation was certainly very far from his purpose. He had never intended any such 
 thing ; nor, so far as he knew, had such an interpretation entered into the mind of 
 the Legislative Committee. His doctrine, an^ his desire was, that representation 
 should be apportioned according to the entire white population. If this was settled, 
 the next question would be, to whom should the elective franchise be extended.? and 
 then a third would present itself, viz : to whom should the Constitution be finally 
 submitted for adoption or rejection The gentleman had added a word of caution, 
 to so small a majority as to their undertaking to control a minority so numerous. He 
 admitted that the majority here was numerically but little larger than the minority ; 
 but if the population which the two portions of the House represented was to be 
 taken into view, it would be found that the difference was far greater. The gentle- 
 man had said, that a majority so small ought not to expect to carry all the points it 
 might have in view ; but surely, if this was a good argument to a majority, the argu- 
 ment applied with still greater force to those who represented a comparatively small 
 minority of the free citizens of this Commonwealth. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, that the gentleman from Loudoun seemed averse to any thing like 
 compromise. The gentleman said, that he did' not possess the spirit of divination, 
 and therefore could not tell that the measure which they were pressing would finally 
 succeed. 
 
 Mr. Mercer explained. The gentleman from Fauquier had inferred, from his un- 
 willingness to postpone the subject of the basis of representation, that the majority 
 were actuated by an uncompromising spirit. 
 
 Mr. Scott sai'd, that he had brought no such charge against the majority. Mr. 
 Mercer then said, that he must have misunderstood him. 
 
 Mr. Scott resumed. The gentleman says, that he has not the spirit of divination, 
 and that therefore he cannot know that his measure will succeed ; but on that princi- 
 ple, no compromise can ever be eflJected, because no one can tell whether it will 
 succeed until it is first proposed ; and so unless its friends have the spirit of divinationj^ 
 they are not to make the experiment. 
 
 The gentleman from Brooke says, that though their majority in this House is small, 
 it represents a large majority of the people of the State. However this may be, I am 
 very sure of one thing : and that is, that the minority in this House represents a large 
 majority of the freeholders of Virginia, There are at least four freeholders East of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 343 
 
 the Blue Ridge, to three on the West of it. The proportion of tax-payers, even of 
 the smallest tax, down to a single cent, is nearly the same. There are four thousand 
 two hundred tax-payers East of the Ridge, to three thousand six hundred West of it. 
 So that the minority represented a large majority of those who owned the soil, and 
 bore all the burdens of the Commonwealth. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied. He had certainly understood the gentleman to say, that the 
 experience of the Committee manifested the fact, that the majority was actuated by 
 an uncompromising spirit : and to such a remark, it was certainly pertinent to reply, 
 that he did not know, when he voted for his own proposition, whether it would be 
 accepted or not. The gentleman from Fauquier possessed very different facts, or 
 else proceeded on a very different system of arithmetic from himself; and he averred 
 that the gentleman was totally mistaken in the statement he had made. If the gen- 
 tleman confined the majority to those beyond the Ridge, he might perhaps be right; 
 but if he added those in the large counties immediately below the Ridge, it would be 
 found, that a large majority of the tax-payers of the State, were represented by a 
 majority on this floor. In support of this statement, Mr. M. referred to two tables 
 exhibiting the number of tax-payers in the counties, and insisted that from those 
 tables, it weuld appear that the white population West of the Blue Ridge, bore to the 
 white population East of the Ridge, the same proportion, as the tax-payers West, did 
 to the tax-payers East; and that the freeholders of twenty-five acres West of the 
 R,idge, were to those East of the Ridge, in the like proportion. The persons charged 
 with land-tax in the whole State, were 93,000; of these, 39,000 were West of the 
 Ridge, and 53 East. The persons who paid tax on moveable property in the whole 
 State, were 95,000 ; of whom, 40,000 resided West of the Ridge, and 55,000 East of 
 it. Of the white population, the total number was 000,000 ; of whom, 250,000 were 
 West of the Ridge, and 350,000 East of it. Here, then, there was little difference be- 
 tween the three ratios. The gentleman from Fauquier had argued on the illusory 
 idea, that the distribution of property was different on the two sides of the R,idge. 
 Such a notion was entirely unfounded, and inconsistent with the actual state of the 
 fact. If the gentleman would add those in favour of a new Constitution, who live 
 below the Ridge, to those who live beyond it, he would find that there was a large 
 majority. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, that if it was regular to receive the statements of the gentlemen 
 on the other side of the House, as going to support one view of a subject, it must be 
 regular to receive statements from the same side, when bearing in an opposite direc- 
 tion. Now, the statements just given by the gentleman from Loudoun, were in hos- 
 tility with those of his coadjutor from Augusta. The gentleman insisted, that the 
 ratio of freeholders and of tax-payers on the two sides of the Ridge, did not differ 
 from that of the white population. He should confront this assertion, by the state- 
 ments made by the gentleman from Augusta. According to the gentleman from Au- 
 gusta, the freeholders from the West, were to those in the East, as tliirty-six to fifty- 
 six. According to the gentleman from Loudoun, they were as forty to fifty-three. 
 The gentleman asserted this, in total disregard to a consideration which all knew 
 ought to have great influence on the calculation : that a large proportion of persons 
 charged with land-tax in the West, are non-residents there, and live either in Eastern 
 Virginia, or without the bounds of the State. If due allowance v/ere made for this ' 
 circumstance, the proportion would not be thirty-six to fifty-six, but thirty -three to 
 fifty-six ; or rather thirty-three to fifty-nine, if the three taken from the West were 
 to be added to the East. In Richmond alone, there were more than one hundred 
 persons who owned freeholds to the West of the Ridge. He would now proceed to 
 confront the statement of the gentleman from Loudoun, with that of the gentleman 
 from Augusta. ^ 
 
 Mr. Doddridge enquired whether this discussion was in order. 
 
 Mr. Stanard contended that it was, as he should not go one w^ord beyond correcting 
 the mistake, the great and extravagant mistalve, of the gentleman froni Loudoun : 
 and in doing so, he should employ the statements of the gentleman from Augusta* 
 only as a means of giving more force and effect to the correction. The gentleman 
 from Loudoun had affirmed, that the ratio of the v*^hite population on the two sides of 
 the Ridge, was nearly the same with that of the tax-payers and land-holders. But 
 what said the tables of the gentleman from Augusta ? 
 
 Mr. S. after quoting them at large, stated the result to be as follows : 
 
 The ratio of white population was fifty-six on the West, to sixty-three on the 
 East : of land-holders, forty-six West to seventy-three East : and of tax-payers fifty 
 on the West to seventy on the East. ' ^ 
 
 With these statements staring him in the face, the gentleman had told the Com- 
 mittee, without reserve, and without qualification, that the ratios were nearly the 
 same. He had felt it due to the Committee, and to tlie public, that the asserUon 
 should not go unconfronted with the document. 
 
344 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, in repl^^, that he owed many obligations to the gentleman from 
 Spottsylvania ; but the correction of his facts, was not one of the number. He pro- 
 tested against this mode of collating his remarks with the calculations made by another 
 gentleman. He was responsible for his own statements and his own calculations, 
 and for them alone. The gentleman from Augusta would be the last to require his 
 support. The tables to which the gentleman had referred, went upon the estimated 
 population of 1829. He had already said, that he repudiated those tables, and rejected 
 them as utterly incorrect: he had shown how grossly erroneous they were, in refer- 
 ence to his own district, and he certainly was not bound to abide by tables which he 
 did not admit. 
 
 Mr. Stanard rephed, that the statements of the gentleman from Augusta, which he 
 had quoted, did not rest on the computations of the Auditor, to which the gentleman 
 from Loudoun now referred. The computation of the Auditor, whether accurate or 
 inaccurate, had nothing to do with the question. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied, that the gentleman's explanation was wholly unanswerable. 
 The tables referred to, were based on som.e calculation of the white population, as 
 existing in 18:29. He rejected these calculations, as uncertain, and adhered to the 
 Census of 18.20. According to that Census, the white population West of the Ridge, 
 amounted to 250,000, and that East of the Ridge, to 353,000; that is, they were in 
 the proportion of tv/enty-five to thirty-five. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then referred to the list of county taxes, which went to show, that 
 taxation on the two sides of the Ridge, was in the proportion of forty to fifty-five. 
 Of those who were taxed for freeholds of twenty-five acres and over, 39,110 resided 
 West of the Ridge, and 53,055 resided East of it. He would lay the paper contain- 
 ing these calculations on the Clerk's table, that any gentleman, wishing to examine it, 
 might have an opportunity of doing so. He did not pretend to know where all the' 
 persons resided, who v/ere charged with taxes on real estate ; nor did he know how 
 many persons residing East of the Ridge, owned land to the West of it; but he had 
 travelled over the State ten times as much as the gentleman from Spottsylvania had 
 ever done, and he claimed to know as much of the condition of its people. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh recalled the Convention to the motion of Mr. Scott, which he op- 
 posed as likely still farther to procrastinate the decision of the Convention on the 
 questions before it: he then proposed, as a measure calculated to bring the House to 
 some result in part, and hasten the disposal of the other questions, that the Commit- 
 tee should rise, and report the first resolution of the Legislative Committee to the 
 House ; announcing it to be his intention subsequently to move, that the whole of 
 the residue of the business be turned over to a small Select Committee, to be chosen 
 by the Convention from its most moderate and influential members, who should be 
 charged with the duty of reporting the draft of a Constitution. With this under- 
 standing, he moved that the Committee rise. 
 
 Mr. Leigh, opposed the object of Mr. Fitzhugh, as likely to lead to a repetition of 
 all the difticulties already felt, and in the end to produce greater delay than the pre- 
 sent course. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, concurred in these views, but was in favour of the Committee's 
 rising and reporting the first resolution, that its fate might be decided in Convention. 
 And the subject of representation being thus disposed of, it might serve as a guide to 
 the Convention in the rest of their discussions. He could not fix upon his coarse as 
 to the Right of Suffrage, till he knew what was to be done as to the basi^of repre- 
 sentation. 
 
 Mr. Leigh, opposed the motion to rise, and wished the Committee to proceed to 
 the question of Suffrage, laying the resolution now under consideration, aside for the 
 present. 
 
 Mr. Stanard, took, in substance, the same view, and earnestly opposed the motion 
 for reporting on one resolution in a series of resolutions, all intimately connected : 
 this he contended, to be wholly without precedent in Parliamentary usage. Besides, 
 the sense of the resolution to be reported was not fixed : The gentleman from Au- 
 gusta, understanding it to apply only to qualified voters — the gentleman from Brooke 
 understanding it as referring to all the white jjopulation whether voters or not. 
 
 After some explanation as to the point of order, 
 
 Mr. Johnson opposed the rising of the Committee : he thought the two great and 
 leading subjects of Representation and the Right of Suffrage, ought to be considered 
 in connexion with each other. He was therefore in favour of Mr. Scott's proposal, 
 to pass over the first for the present, and to go on till the other should be arrived at in 
 order. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Fitzhugh's motion, for the rising of the Com- 
 mittee, and decided in the negative — Ayes 40 — Noes 48. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Leigh, the Committee then passed by the first resolution re- 
 ported by the Legislative Committee, (viz. that which refers to the basis of represen- 
 tation,) and took up the second resolution, which is in the following words : 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 345* 
 
 Resolved. That a Census of the poptilation of the State, for the purpose of appar- 
 tioning the representation, should be taken m the year 1S31, the jeai 1845, and there- 
 after, at least once in every twenty years." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, moved to amend this resolution, by striking out in the third line, 
 all after the word - 3'ear.'' and inserting a clause to make the whole resolution read — 
 Resolved, That a Census of the population of the State, for the purpose of ap- 
 portioning the representation, should be taken in the year 1835, and at least every ten 
 years thereafter, if the Assembly shall deem the same expedient; and that a new ap- 
 portionment of representation shall be made after each Census, if the state of the 
 population shall have been so changed as to require it." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge explained his reasons for offering the amendment. The State Cen- 
 sus, if taken at the periods he proposed, would fall into the inter%^s of the General 
 Census of the United States, and would correct the inaccuracies of that enumeration; 
 which had, in some cases, been made in a very loose manner. 
 
 Mr. Leigh suggested, that though the amendment made it imperative that a Cen- 
 sus should be taken, as the basis of representation, it did not require an}^ assessment 
 to accompany it. It secured to the West all the benefits of increased representation, 
 but did not require a corresponding increase of taxation. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, requested Mr. Leigh to add a clause to supply this defect : which 
 he declining. 
 
 Mr. ^Mercer, moved to add the clause, and an assessment thereof made." He in- 
 sisted that the duty of taking the Census ouglit not to be left discretionary, but should 
 be made imperative on the Legislature. He dwelt upon the advantage of having the 
 Census taken frequently, and so made as to include a variet}'' of statistical informa- 
 tion : the expense would be but small. 
 
 After some fmiher conversation between ^Messrs. Leigh, Doddridge and Mercer, 
 the resolution was amended by striking out the clause which leaves it discretionary 
 with the Legislature : and, after some farther opposition, on the part of Mr. Stanard, 
 the resolution was, at the suggestion of Mr. Cooke, passed over for the present, to 
 give the gentleman from Brooke a better opportunity of digesting his proposition. 
 
 The Committee then proceeded to the consideration of the third resolution reported 
 by the Legislative Committee, in the words following : 
 
 •'• Resolved. That the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who 
 now enjoy it under the existing Constitution : Provided, that no person shall vote by 
 virtue of his freehold only, unless the same shall be assessed to the value of at least 
 dollars, for the paj-ment of taxes, if such assessment be required by law : 
 and shall be extended, first, to every free white male citizen of the Commonwealth 
 resident therein, above the age of twent^'-one years, who owns, and has possessed for 
 six months, or who has acquired by marriage, descent, or devise, a freehold estate, as- 
 sessed to the value of not less than dollars for the payment of taxes, if such 
 assessment shall be required by law : second, or who shall own a vested estate in fee, 
 in remainder, or reversion, in land, the assessed value of wliich shall be 
 dollars : third, or who shaU own and have possessed a leasehold estate with the e-\d- 
 dence of title recorded, of a term orio-inally not less than five years, and one of which 
 shall be unexpired, of the annual value, or rent of dollars : fourth, or who for 
 twelve months next precedincr, has been a house-keeper and head of a family within 
 the county, city, borough, or election district, where he may offer to vote, and who 
 shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth witliin the 
 preceding year, and actually paid the same: Provided, nevertheless, that the Right 
 of Suffrao;e shaU not be exercised b}' any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a 
 pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, soldier, sailor or marine, in the service of the 
 United States, nor bv any person convicted of any infamous offence ; nor by citizens 
 born without the Commonwealth, unless they shall have resided therein for five years 
 immediately preceding the election at which they shall offer to vote, and two years 
 preceding the said election, in the county, city, borough, or election district, where 
 they shall offer to vote, (the mode of proving such previous residence, when disputed, 
 to be prescribed by law.) and shall possess, moreover, some one or more of the quali- 
 fications above enumerated." 
 
 Mr. Leigh, pointed out an effect which he presumed was not seriously intended, 
 but which would arise from the resolution, as it now stood. According to the proviso, 
 no freeholder was allowed to vote miless his freehold was of a certain value (not yet 
 fixed upon ;) but, according to a subsequent clause, any house-keeper who has paid 
 " any part of the revenue ot the Commonwealth," is allowed to vote. Suppose the 
 value of the freehold be fixed at any given sum, say twenty dollars : and suppose a 
 freeholder owns a house worth nineteen dollars; and suppose, farther, that in that 
 house, there resides a tenant who owns a singrle horse ; the result will be, that the 
 landlord, who owns the house, is forbidden to vote, while the tenant who pays a tax 
 of four cents on his horse, is admitted to the polls. Could it be seriously intended 
 not merely to abolish the freehold qualification, but to make it a less qualification than 
 
 44 
 
346 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 the payment of the very smallest tax ? Taking it for granted, that this could not he 
 the purpose of the resolution, 
 
 Mr. Leigh, moved to amend it, so as to make the fourth qualification read, " or who, 
 for twelve months next preceding, has been a house-keeper and head of a family^ 
 within the covmty, city, borough, or election district, where he may offer to vote, and; 
 who shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth, toths 
 amount of within the preceding year, and actually paid the same." 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that he rose simply to make a suggestion to the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield, and one to the Committee. I believe, said he, that 1 shall hardly be 
 contradicted, when I state that the great moving cause, which led to this Convention^ 
 has been the regulation of the Right of Suffrage. After all the out-cry that has been 
 raised on this subject, judge my surprise, when I found that a proposition coming 
 from the Legislative Committee, and which extends the Right of Suffrage almost a5 
 indefinitum, to many entire classes of persons within the Commonwealth;, contained 
 a blow at the elective franchise of the freeholder, the present sovereign of this land. 
 We are met to extend the Right of Suffrage ; nobody can tell how far under the 
 out-cry that it is too much restricted, and the very first step we take, is to restrict it 
 still farther, quoad the freeholder. Do gentlemen suppose the freeholders will be 
 blind to this ^ What becomes of all the considerations of philanthropy of which w© 
 have heard so much.? What becomes of all the gentlemen's abstractions.? Sir, the 
 only good 1 ever knew these abstractions to do, is to abstract money out of the pock- 
 ets of one great division of the country, to put it into the pockets of another, a spe- 
 cies of abstraction the least of all others to my taste. 
 
 Sir, I demand, as a freeholder, in behalf of the freeholders, on what plea you are 
 to put them, and them only, to the ban of this Convention .? Other and large classes 
 of persons are selected to be drawn within the range of the elective privilege,^ whil® 
 the poorer classes of the freeholders are to be disfranchised. So, after all, this great 
 and illustrious Assembly are met to make war on the poorer classes of the freeholders-, 
 of the Commonwealth. You are not only to extend rights, but you are to take away 
 the rights, the vested rights, of a large and respectable, however they may be a poor,, 
 class of your fellow-citizens. Sir, I will never consent to deprive the freeholder of 
 his rights, however trivial in the view of assessors or patricians, his humble shed may 
 appear. I saw this measure in the Legislative Committee, and I thought I saw, what 
 I think I now see, (here Mr. R. pointed with his finger,) a snake in the grass. I will 
 never consent to be the agent in taking away from any man the Right of Suffrage he 
 now enjoys. 
 
 Mr. Mercer observed, that the proviso was not chargeable upon tlie advocates of 
 the Convention, having been moved in the Legislative Committee by a gentleman, 
 (Mr. Green,) who had always opposed it. Mr. M. explained the object of the mover 
 to have been the prevention of frauds, but thought it unnecessary, as by a subsequent 
 clause, paupers were excluded from the polls; and fraudulent evasions of the Con- 
 stitution must be left to be remedied by the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Leigh, consented to withdraw the amendment he had offered; but announced 
 his intention to be, after the resolution should have been made as perfect as was in 
 the power of its friends, to move to strike out the whole, and substitute another, which 
 he read in his place, (and which went, in his view, to extend the Right of Suffrage 
 to such tenants, as were in circumstances to vote independently of their landlords.) 
 
 Mr. Mercer, moved to strike out the whole proviso, fixing a value to the freehold. 
 
 Mr. Green said, the proviso had been introduced at his suggestion. It was a noto- 
 rious fact, that in the Western part of the State there were bothes of land not worth 
 a cent an acre, which had been taken up by speculators with a prospect of imposing 
 on foreigners, and that in some cases, several different patents had been issued for 
 the same land. If the freehold should be regulated by quantity alone, and no prescribed 
 value be required, it v/as manifest, that one of these large land-holders would be able 
 to create at will, as many freeholders as he pleased. Practices of that sort had, in 
 some instances, already prevailed, and would, doubtless, again be resorted to. The 
 sole purpose of the proviso, had been to exclude such as were merely nominal free- 
 holders, who paid no taxes, and were entitled to no voice in the Commmonwealth. 
 His object had been to lay down such a plain and practical rule as it would be hard to 
 evade by fraud. Gentlemen from that part of the country confirmed the existence 
 of such practices. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said he should vote against expunging the proviso. Not because he 
 thought with the gentleman from Charlotte, that it would deprive the poor freehol- 
 der of the Right of Suffrage, but for the purpose of guaranteeing and giving security 
 to his right, and with a view to make the general provision operate with some degree 
 ©f equality. It would make that which was not a real limitation in the Eastern part 
 of the State, to be a real limitation in the Western part of it. No one could cast his 
 eye over the Western part of Virginia, without being satisfied, that the physical con- 
 dition of the country was sucJij as put it in the power of any personj at an expense 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 34f 
 
 not exceeding the price of the paper on which a deed could be executed, to qualify 
 himself as a voter; and there were individuals there who could qualify voters by the 
 hundred. The quantity of land on the Assessors' books, bore, in some cases, scarce 
 any relation to the land actually in the county, yet deeds could be given for these 
 imaginarjr freeholds, which existed no where but on paper, to almost any amount. 
 
 The average valuation of all the lands, in some of the counties, was less than five 
 cents an acre, good and bad. Much of it was fit only for lairs for wild beasts. It 
 was not worth one mill per acre. In this situation of things, how would the rule ope- 
 rate on the rights of persons in different parts of the State ? The rule gives the Right 
 of Suffrage, not to value, but to quantity. In the West, a certain quantity of land, 
 not worth five cents in all, was sufficient to make a man a voter, while in tlie East, 
 the smallest quantity of land, communicating the same privilege, was worth from 
 fifty to one hundred dollars. This, surely, was great inequality, and tlie hmitationin 
 the proviso, was all that prevented it. He understood that the mountain land. West 
 of the Ridge, consisted, for the most part of rocks and shrubbery of no conceiv- 
 able value. No person who visited it, could so much as conjecture, that it ever 
 could become of any value, unless this State should become as full of people as 
 China is, or unless the mountains contained minerals which gave them a value that 
 was concealed from the eye. But, to provide for this possibility, when deeds were 
 made, the title was conveyed with a reservation for any minerals tliat the soil might 
 contain. He enquired of gentlemen, whether such a state of things was not wor- 
 thy of consideration, and whether it did not imperiously require, that some amount 
 should be fixed as the value of the freehold. The limitation he would give, would 
 be such as should not only embrace all the poor freeholders now entitled to vote, but 
 should confer that right on many who were now deprived of it. Freeholds of the 
 present size, if situated near a town, were worth more than he would require. The 
 proviso went to extend the basis of representation, yet it confined the Right of Suf- 
 frage to a landed qualification, while it excluded freeholders Avho were merely no- 
 minal. 
 
 Mr. M' Coy said, that the gentleman last up, appeared to labor under some strange 
 mistake, in relation to the lands and the soil of the West, He underrated, in a 
 surprising manner that portion of the handy w^orks of the great Creator. Between 
 the Blue Ridge and the Ohio, there lay a beautiful and fertile valley, of which the 
 gentleman seemed to have but little knov/ledge, nor did he seem to be any better ac- 
 quainted with the mountains than with the vallies of that country. The gentleman 
 had represented the land, as belonging, in great part, to individuals who lived East 
 of the Ridge, and had said that one- tenth part of the whole soil was the property of 
 owners living elsewhere. The gentleman was much mistaken. That country was 
 surveyed in 1795, in large tracts of from fifty to one hundred thousand acres. The 
 number of owners were then not very great. Where the land turned out not to be 
 valuable, the taxes upon it were not paid, and the lands had become forfeited to the 
 Literary Fund of the Commonwealth: The owners, therefore, had it not in their 
 power to make such batches of freeholders as some gentlemen seemed to suppose, 
 Mr. M. said, he happened to live where there was much of this sort of land, and as 
 to what had been represented by the gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. Green,) as so 
 very common a practice, he had known of but four freeholders having been created 
 in fourteen years, and their votes had been pronounced good for nothing, because the 
 law required six months possession. It was very true that a young man might pur- 
 chase the right to vote for forty or fifty dollars ; but not for five cents, as was sup- 
 posed, because all the lands not fit for cultivation had been forfeited to the Common- 
 wealth. The gentleman in one breath, had represented the country as being the finest 
 in the world, and had said in the next, that it was not worth one mill an acre. He 
 was astonished at the language of the resolution; he had not come to the Conven- 
 tion to take away the Right of Suffrage from any who possessed it, but to extend it, 
 though in a very limited degree. He should vote to strike out the proviso, so far as 
 taxes went as a rule for extending the Riglat of Suffrage : a small amount of tax was 
 not the best evidence of an interest in the community, or of attachment to it. A 
 mechanic, born and raised in Virginia, would scorn to go to the mountains to buy the 
 Right of Suffrage. A father having four or five sons, while he gave each of them 
 a plantation, would keep the title in his own hands. Many of the most respectable 
 farmers in Virginia, resided on land that was not yet theirs, but which tliey expected 
 to get a title for. He would limit the Right of Suffrage to ail who now possessed it, 
 and to such heads of families and house-keepers as had had a sufficient residence, 
 from which to infer their attachment to the State. He considered residence, as much 
 better proof of such attachment than the possession of property. 
 
 Here he would stop. He would cover all who lived on rented land, all mechanics 
 and mercantile men who lived in rented houses, and there he would stop. He should 
 vote to strike out the proviso. 
 
348 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose, simply to state the reason why he should not vote to strike out the 
 proviso. It was meant, only to get rid of the objection he had stated, and to render 
 the first pi'ovision of the resolution consistent with the last. To the last he was rea- 
 dy to accede. He had never yet seen a freeholder who Avas a pauper, nor had he 
 ever heard that such a freeholder existed in Virginia, until he heard it from the gen- 
 tleman from Loudoun. But he had seen many house-keepers, and heads of families, 
 who owned nothing but a single horse, with which they were hauling wood that be- 
 longed to other people. They resided by courtesy on land they did not own, and 
 who received parish aid. He remembered about thirty or forty such, who lived on 
 both sides of the river. For his part, he did not know what a house-keeper and 
 head of a family was, unless it was a man who lived in a house with a family. He 
 was sorry to see gentlemen so ready to place all persons of this description on a foot- 
 ing with the freeholders. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that the purpose which the gentleman from Spottsylvania wished 
 to accomplish, could not be attained. Suppose the proviso should be suffered to stand j 
 and the blank it contained should be filled witli one dollar. There were thousands 
 of such freeholds near the Kanawha river — or supposmg the blank to be filled with 
 fifty cents for fifty acres. The Commissioner would enter fifty acres in his book, of 
 the average value of four cents. There would be no security against fraud in such a 
 provision; but, if fraud was so strongly to be apprehended, the Legislature had am- 
 ple power to guard against it in any manner that might be necessary. 
 
 Mr. Stanard was surprised, that the gentleman from Loudoun should suppose, that 
 a sworn Commissioner would put down land in his book at any rate the owner might 
 desire. Such a means of evading the law did not apply to the case. The persons 
 who appear as the owners of freeholds, were often but the transient population of the 
 day, who are provided with a freehold for the occasion, and who would be succeeded 
 by a new swarm, whenever the sinister purposes of a canvasser should require it. 
 He desired to enquire of the gentleman from Kanawha (Mr. Summers) whether such 
 practices did not exist, and whether the known facility, with which votes might thus be 
 obtained, had not in practice, throughout a large extent of the Western country, bro- 
 ken down all limitations to the Right of Sufirage ? And such being the case, whether 
 all enquiry into the right of a voter to vote, must not be made at the hazard of losing 
 the election. He hoped the proviso would remain, and that the blank be filled with 
 twenty-five dollars. He would take the minimum of the gentleman from Loudoun. 
 He should prefer fifty dollars but would be content with twenty-five. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that it was painful to him to be obliged again to trouble the Com- 
 mittee, but when a gentleman questioned the facts he stated, it was necessary for him 
 to protect himself. None could change the value at which land was assessed, but 
 this was only law, it was not the Constitution. Every owner had a right to have his 
 land assessed. If he had a tract worth $20,000 and should sell part of the land, he 
 could not be made to pay on the residue, an average of the whole. Mr. M, insisted, 
 that a man who bought land should be charged with a tax only on its value. If he 
 bought a freehold of twenty-five acres, and should pay tax at the rate of two cents, 
 that would cover the sum in the blank. 
 
 Mr. Stanard reminded the gentleman that the assessment was made by a sworn 
 ofiicer. 
 
 Mr. Wilson of Monongalia enquired of the Chair, whether it would be in order to 
 oflTer a substitute for the proviso. 
 
 The Chair replied, that he must know first what the amendment was, and then he 
 should be able to decide whether it could be admitted as an amendment to the amend- 
 ment now pending. 
 
 Mr. Wilson thereupon read his resolution, 
 
 " Resolved, That every free white male citizen of this Commonwealth, of the age 
 of twenty-one years, and upwards, who shall have resided in the State two years, 
 and in the county where he proposes to vote, one year, next preceding the time of 
 offering such vote ; who shall have been enrolled in the militia, if subject to military 
 duty ; and who shall have paid all levies and taxes assessed upon him, or his property, 
 for the year preceding that in which he offers to vote, shall have a right to vote for 
 members of the General Assembly : Provided, That no person shall be permitted to 
 exercise the Right of Suffrage, who is a pauper; who is of unsound mind; who has 
 been convicted of any infamous crime ; or who is engaged in the land or naval ser- 
 vice of the United States ; and the Legislature shall prescribe the mode of trying and 
 determining disputes, concerning the said qualifications of voters, whenever the right 
 of a person to vote shall be questioned." 
 
 The Chair pronounced the resolution to be in order. ~ ; ' 
 
 After some discussion on the point of order, 
 
 Mr. Wilson concluded to withdraw his amendment for the present. 
 Mr. Summers said, the reference of the gentleman from Spottsylvania, (Mr. Stan- 
 ard) required from him some explanation, and in giving it, he begged to be permitted 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTION. 
 
 349 
 
 to remark, that he was not disposed to make v/ar either upon the small or the large 
 freeholder.' He not only wished to preserve the Right of Sulfrage to all who now en- 
 joy it, but to extend it to large classes who are now deprived of this important right. 
 
 The imputation of frauds upon the election laws, general and notorious in tlie "SV es- 
 tern district, is, he imaofined, the result of misrepresentation or misapprehension. 
 Called upon' by tliis charge for its verification or denial, he had subjected his memo- 
 ry to a ricrid scrutinv, without beincr able to recollect a single instance of a fraud of this 
 character, within his own observation. He tlien appealed to the rumors of the coun- 
 try, which furnished but a single instance, and that in a period of great party excite- 
 ment, of an attempt to increase the number of electors by deeds made expressly with 
 that view ; the extraordinary number of the grantees gave notoriety to the attempt, 
 and may have induced the gentleman from Spottsylvania to suppose that such occur- 
 rences were common. ?sot so. Sir. He owed it to that quarter of the State, to as- 
 sure the Committee, from information entitled to his full confidence, that many, very 
 many of those intended to be made voters by this deed, refused to exercise the right 
 on aground so objectionable; aaid that the commisioners appointed to held a very im- 
 portant election in which their political character had been consulted in their appoint- 
 ment, resisting all party consideration, decided with great firmness, and unanimity 
 against tliis fraudulent attempt to increase the freehold list, and to the entire satisfac- 
 tion of the country. 
 
 He did not mean to be understood as affirming that no other abuses of our election 
 laws have taken place. He thouo-ht it probable that occurrences of this sort happen 
 occasionall}^, both in the East andln the West, but not more frequently in the latter 
 than in the former. 
 
 To him, the limitation of tlie freehold right by the value of the land, was very ob- 
 jectionable. It adds to the misfortunes which are inseparable from the cultivation of 
 poor land, the serious evil of political disfranchisement : and aggravates the misfor- 
 tune in no slight degree. The rniniimaa value proposed by the gentleman from 
 Spottsylvania, Tessens. but does not remove the objection — the average value of the 
 land of the Western district, by the assessment of 1817, is ninety-two cents per acre, 
 and to require a freehold of twenty-five dollars value, will be to require more than 
 twenty-five acres of the average land of the country, to constitute a voter. His 
 views of political equality and justice will extend the same rights to the humblest 
 cottage of the mountain side, which are enjoyed by the most splendid mansions of tlie 
 wealthy. Permanent common interest, however small, oua-ht, in his humble judg- 
 ment, to be invested with the rights of protection, and placed on a level in the pohti- 
 cal institutions of the country, with the most elevated ranks of society. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said, that most of tliese masses of unproductive lands, which had not 
 paid the taxes, were forfeited to tlie Literary Fund, and thus could not be cut up. 
 He went into hi% own views of the Right of Suffrage, stating tliat in his country 
 there were a great many lease-holders, who had not deeds from tiieir fathers, perhaps, 
 and who ought to have the Right of Suffrage. There were also many mechanics who 
 were heads of families, and deserved to have the right. He said, lie was perfectly 
 willing to give the Right of Suffrage to all those who had it at present, and to heada 
 of families, and house-keepers. This wa^ his idea of the limitation of Suftrage. 
 
 The question was then put on striking out tlie prov.'so. and decided in the affirma- 
 tive. — Ayes 62. 
 
 So the provision which went to restrict the right of freehold election to freeholds 
 of a certain value, to be fixed in the Constitution, was stricken out of the resolution 
 reported by the Legislative Committee. 
 
 The Committee then rose, and on motion of Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, tlie Con- 
 vention adjourned. 
 
 WEDXESDAY, November IS, 1829. 
 
 Tlie Convention met at 10 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Taylor of the Baptist Church. 
 
 Mr. Massie of Nelson, presented the following memorial from the citizens of tliat 
 county, which, on his niotion, was referred to tiie Committee of the Whole on the 
 Constitution : 
 
 To the Convention of Virginia: 
 
 Tour memorialists beg leave to represent to your honorable body, that it was with 
 deep concern they received the intelligence, that a proposition to'make a change in 
 the mode of appointing Magistrates, was rejected by the Judicial Committee. Your 
 
350 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 memorialists do consider the present mode of those appointments to be aristocratic in 
 
 its features, and tending to the estabhshment of a privileged order in this Common- 
 wealth : that a body should be established in this Commonwealth, with self-creating 
 powers, appears to them an anomaly of most alarming tendency, and in practice, 
 well calculated to dethrone the supremacy of the people's will. It must be known 
 to your honorable body, as it is known to your memorialists, that the present mode of 
 appointing those officers, is well calculated to place the Judicial powers of the coun- 
 try, as well as the destinies and well-being of the counties, into the hands of a few 
 families. It is known, that the County Courts have been invested, in this State, 
 with the extraordinary powers of appointing militia officers — of supplying vacancies 
 in their own body — of the appointment of overseers of the poor — of establishing and 
 changing roads — of levying county taxes at their own discretion — and of managing 
 the whole county police, according to their. own will and pleasure, without consulting 
 the supreme will of the people ; their powers are great, and often improperly exer- 
 cised, because the Courts are in no way responsible to the people; in fact, they are 
 a power without responsibility. Your memorialists have thought proper to make this 
 very brief statement, in order to call the attention of your honorable body, particu- 
 larly to this subject. They, therefore, pray that some mode may be adopted by you, 
 which will take away a self-creating power from the County Courts — and they will 
 ever pray, &c. 
 
 ( He7-e folloio the signatures. ) 
 
 The House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair : 
 
 And the question still being on the third resolution of the Legislative Committee, 
 (which relates to the Right of Suffrage — see proceedings of yesterday,) 
 
 Mr. Wilson of Monongalia, offered the following amendment, by way of substitute 
 for that of the Legislative Committee : 
 
 " Resolved, That every free white male citizen of this Commonwealth, of the age 
 of twenty-one years, and upwards, who shall have resided in this State two years, 
 and in the county where he proposes to vote, one year, next preceding the time of 
 offering such vote ; who shall have been enrolled in the militia, if subject to military 
 duty ; and who shall have paid all levies and taxes assessed upon him, or his property, 
 for tlie year preceding that in which he offers to vote, shall have a right to vote for 
 members of the General Assembly : Provided, That no person shall be permitted to 
 exercise the Right of Suffrage, who is a pauper; who is of unsound mind; who has 
 been convicted of any infamous crime ; or who is engaged in the land or naval ser- 
 vice of the United States ; and the Legislature shall prescribe the mode of trying 
 and determining disputes, concerning the said qualifications of voters, whenever the 
 right of a person to vote shall be questioned." 
 
 Mr. Wilson addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — As there can be no difference of opinion about the propriety of 
 ray presenting at this time, the resolution which I offered yesterday, but subsequently 
 withdrew, I now submit to the consideration of the Committee the following sub- 
 stitute for the third resolution of the Legislative Committee, ( Here Mr. W. read 
 his proposed resolution on the subject of the Right of Suffrage, which being reported 
 by the Chair, he resumed, in substance, as follows :) 
 
 It must be evident. Sir, from the various objections which on yesterday came from 
 every quarter, to the resolution of the Legislative Committee, that it meets the views 
 of a very small portion of the members of this Convention. I have, therefore, 
 thought it proper to rid the Committee at once, of the labour and trouble of innume- 
 rable amendments and modifications of that resolution, by placing before it the sub- 
 ject of the Right of Suffrage on its broadest ground. I wish to march boldly up to 
 the question and meet it at once, and present it in such a shape that there will be no 
 room for the imputation of ambiguity or insincerity. The substitute I propose is 
 short, plain, simple, and easy to be understood. This proposition, at least, is not lia- 
 ble to the imputation uttered yesterday by the gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Ran- 
 dolph,) of being " a snake in the grass." 
 
 The scheme here proposed for the regulation of the Right of Suffrage, is not open 
 to the objection raised yesterday, by the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) 
 to the resolution of tlie Legislative Committee. It does not exclude from the polls 
 the owners of small freeholds, whilst it admits the payer of a four cent horse-tax, 
 who, although he might even be a lease-holder under one of those small freeholds, 
 yet would be entitled to a vote, whilst his landlord is excluded. The substitute 
 includes both these classes. Nor is it open to the objection of the gentleman from 
 Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph.) It aims no fatal blow at the rights of the freeholders, 
 for it includes them all. Nor is it liable to the objections raised by the gentleman 
 from SpoUsylvania, (Mr. Stanard,) yesterday, against the resolution for which it is 
 intended to be a substitute. He dwelt strongly and truly on the difficulties attend- 
 ing any attempt to estimate the value of a man's property per annum, for the pur- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 351 
 
 pose of measuring his right to vote. The plan now proposed, looks not to property 
 as the test of a man's attachment to the community, and, therefore, avoids the diffi- 
 culties which must ever attend any scheme of property qualification. It seems to be 
 admitted, that the arbitrary limitation of the Right of Suffrage to the ownership of 
 any fixed number of acres of land, is absurd and unjust, because of the inequality of 
 the value of land. It is, therefore, proposed, that the property of the citizen, either 
 real or personal, or both, shall be valued, and his right to vote be tested by that value. 
 This scheme would indeed be liable to great objection, arising out of the difficulty of 
 carrying it into execution, and the fraud or negligence of the valuers. 
 
 Two qualifications seemed to be required by the sixth section of the Bill of Rights, 
 in every person, before he shall be entitled to the Right of Sufirage. And, notwith- 
 standing the lacerations which this venerable instrument has undergone, in the course 
 of our past debates, I still feel disposed to take my text from it, whenever I am about 
 to discourse upon political subjects, and matters of Government. 
 
 The first qualification required by that instrument is, that the man shall furnish 
 sufficient evidence of permanent, common interest with the community — and se- 
 condly, that he shall furnish sufficient evidence of attachment to the community. 
 In other words, we should be convinced that his interests and his affections, bind him 
 to us, before we admit him to any share in the government of our State. The ques- 
 tion then arises, by what means can we ascertain where his interests and attachments 
 are centred What test shall we apply What requisites shall we demand, without 
 which, the man shall be excluded from the exercise of tiiis, the most honorable and . 
 precious of his natural rights.? And, here. Sir, permit me to observe, that, notwith- 
 standing all the ridicule which has been cast upon the natural rights of man, by cer- 
 tain gentlemen ; notwithstanding the repeated denial of their existence, except in 
 the brains of moon-struck reformers, I still bejieve.that Nature, or Nature's God rather, 
 has conferred certain original rights upon man ; and among these, none appears to me 
 more clear and undeniable, than the right of appointing our own agents. And this 
 right may exist apart fi'om, and anterior to, any regular, social compact. The fact of 
 my having authorised a certain individual to transact a piece of business for me, does 
 not necessarily imply any social compact with him, or any other individual of mj 
 race. But, although this right of appointing our agents exists in man by nature, yet^ 
 when he enters into society, that right becomes limited, and ought to be controuled^ 
 by a due regard to the interests of that society, or if the gentlemen please — by exj>e- 
 diency. Private and individual conveniency must yield to the good of the whole. 
 We must give up a portion of our natural liberty, in order to enjoy the advantages ^ 
 of social union, and be secured in the undisturbed enjoyment of those rights which 
 are not surrendered, and which the necessity of the case does not require us to sur- 
 render. 
 
 But, Sir, tliis surrender should not be required to an extent greater than is ne- 
 cessary and expedient for the good of the whole community. If you require the 
 citizen to yield up to the Government a larger portion of his natural independence 
 and free agency, than is necessary for the security of the communit}^ at large, and its 
 members, in particular, then, Sir, you take from him that, for which you render him 
 no equivalent. The moment you say to the citizen, yield to the Government more 
 of your natural liberty than is requisite for the security of the community, you pass 
 out of the field of freedom, and enter upon the domains of tyranny. This, I con- 
 ceive, to be the true rule. And the application of it will produce very different 
 results, according to the virtue, intelligence, and patriotism of the people, to whom it 
 is applied. When applied to the corrupt and ignorant Italian, the result will be ab- 
 solute moi\archy. When applied to the more virtuous and enlightened inhabitants of 
 England, the result will be, a limited monarchy. When applied to the intelligent, 
 virtuous and patriotic people of Virginia, the result will be a free representative Re- 
 public, wherein the administrators of public affairs are the agents of the people, and 
 chosen by those of the people, who have, or are supposed to have, a free will, a ma- 
 tured intellect, and an interest in, and attachment to, the community. With regard 
 to freedom of will, and maturity of intellect, I have only to observe, that if gentlemen 
 do not already perceive the propriety of excluding women, children, paupers, idiots^ 
 and slaves, from the polls, vain will "be any attempt, on my part, to convince them of 
 it. The beams of the noon-day sun will be useless to him, who wilfull}^ shuts his eyes 
 against the light. 
 
 But, I recur to the question, what is the proper test of a man's interest in, and at- 
 tachment to, the community It is answered, that property, and especially landed 
 property, is the only true and safe test. To this I cannot assent. It assumes, that a 
 man cannot love a countrj^ or take an interest in its good government, unless he 
 owns a portion of its soil. It is not my intention here, to enter into a detailed history 
 of the rise and progress of the freehold Right of Sufirage. That duty has been ably 
 and eloquently performed by my friend from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke.) He has shown^ 
 
852 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 that it originated in despotism. It is my business to show, that it is absurd and unjust 
 in its nature. 
 
 It is said, that Ihe possession of property is the only test. Now, Sir, if the security 
 of property were the only object of Government, there might be some truth in this 
 assertion. But, when we know, that the object of all good Government, is to protect 
 the citizen in the enjoyment, not only of his property, but also of his life, his personal 
 liberty, liis limbs, Ins character, the freedom of speech and action, and the pursuit of 
 happiness; and that these are all objects of equal, and some of them, of higher im- 
 portance than property, w^e see, at once, the fallacy of the test. In all these, the rich 
 and the poor, stand on a level — they are all equally valuable to both — or, rather, the 
 poor are more interested in the security of these rights, because the enjoyment of 
 them furnishes to the poor man his only defence, against the overweening influence 
 and power, which wealth confers upon the rich, and which we know, are too often 
 tyrannically exercised. Besides this, however poor a man may be, unless he be an 
 absolute paviper, (and paupers are excluded.) he yet possesses sorne property; and, 
 Sir, the poor man's pittance is just as dear to him, as the rich man's treasure, because 
 it is his all; aye, and more dear to him, because it is but a pittance,' and, therefore, 
 more liable to be exhausted. Supposing, therefore, that the rich and the poor have 
 equal virtue, (and this I imagine will not be denied.) the poor man must, and does take 
 as great an interest in the good government of the country, as the rich man. 
 
 The truth is, that permanent residence is the best evidence of attachment to the 
 community, and an interest in its welfare. The value of land is too fluctuating, and 
 its tenure too uncertain, to furnish this evidence. It may be said, that if a man loses 
 his land, and it passes into other hands, that other persons will possess this evidence, 
 and will be entitled to the vote, and so on through every mutation of property; but 
 from this it would seem, that tlie Right of Suffrage is in the land, and not in the 
 people ! Suppose a virtuous and intelligent man to-day possessed of a farm upon 
 which he resides with his wife and children, surrounded by a large circle of beloved 
 friends and relatives. Every body will say, he is entitled to the Right of Suffrage. 
 Well, suppose that by one of those sudden reverses of fortune, which in the un- 
 certainty of human affairs, are continually occurring, he should be deprived of his 
 farm the next day ; is he to be deprived of the Right of Suffrage He is yet virtu- 
 ous, intelligent, patriotic — he has yet in this State his residence, his family, his friends, 
 his all that is lett him. Do you suppose that his attachment to his native State, and 
 his interest in its welfare, is less now than before ? Certainly not. Being now de- 
 prived of tlie all-commanding influence of wealth, he is still more concerned in the 
 procurement of equal and just laws, by which he, and all that is near and dear to 
 liira, shall be protected from oppression. 
 
 Do you measure a man's right to vote by the vahic of his landed property How 
 uncertain and unjust a test will this also be, of a man's attachment and interest 1 
 Will you say that he shall own real estate of the value of twenty-five dollars, as was 
 suggested by one gentleman ? Surely, we all know that a piece of land which this 
 year may be worth twenty-five dollars, may, by some of those causes which are pro- 
 ducing continual changes in the value of land and its produce, be next year reduced 
 far below that value. And yet you will next year deprive the owner of his vote, al- 
 though he owns precisely the same land, which this year conferred upon him the 
 Right of Suffi-age. If you don't do this, you abandon your principle of regulating 
 the elective fra'iichise according to the value of a man's landed property. And if 
 you do this, a man may always hold the same tract of land ; the same portion of the 
 soil, and yet have, or not have the right to vote according to the variations of the 
 price of his land and its produce ! 
 
 Upon your own principles. Sir, this standard is unjust. You propose to measure a 
 man's right to vote, by the value of his land, and in the same breath you give to a 
 man owning twenty-five dollars worth of land, one vote, and to the man owning 
 twenty-five thousand dollars worth of land, ?io 7»ore than one vote ! Is this just on 
 your own plan But, it may be replied, that though the disparity of fortune is great, 
 yet the interest is the same ; tliat though there is not an equality of interest, yet each 
 has an interest in the welfare of the State. If this be so, then you do not nieasure a 
 man's right to vote by the quantum of his interest ; the existence of an interest is 
 sufficient. Agreed then— he who has no property in the State, but resides here, has 
 his family here, and is here pursuing some business to procure a livelihood, is interested 
 in the good government of the community. A man may own twenty-five dollars worth 
 of property in this State, and yet care little or nothing about its general interests. 
 Yet, a man who has not property valued at twenty-five dollars, but who has all his 
 relatives, friends, and associates in the country — all his affections concentrated in its 
 welfare, would be deprived of his vote, and it would be given to the other, who hap- 
 pens to own as much property as amounts to twenty-five dollars in value. Such is 
 the result of your real property qualification. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 353 
 
 If we advert to moveable property as the basis of the Right of Siiffrage, it vnll be 
 evident at first sight, that the same objections apply to it vrith accumulated force ; for 
 vre all knovr, that personal property is. if possible, more uncertain in its tenure, and 
 subject to greater and more frequent mutations in its value, than landed estate. In 
 fact, whenever you attempt to prescribe such a standard, you will always find it im- 
 perfect. I admit that no perfect rule can be prescribed on the subject : but I confess, 
 I think that general rule too imperfect for practical apphcation, the exceptions to 
 which, are more nmnerous than the cases which it includes. There can be no perfect 
 standard : but I think at the saine time, that there can be none found more worthy of 
 adoption, than residence, bearing arms, and paying taxes. The possession of pro- 
 perty furnishes not an exclusiverbut a probable evidence of attachment to the com- 
 munity; and my proposition includes all the possessors of property who reside here, 
 and I presume, gentlemen do not intend, to permit non-residents to vote, because 
 they may own a tract of land here. But, some period of residence must be fixed. 
 It will not do to let every bird of passacfe that fiits through our State, enjoy the Right 
 of Suffi-ao^e. What shall that term of residence be .' Gentlemen may differ in opin- 
 ion on this subject ; but it appears to me, that a residence in the State, of two years 
 duration, does fiirnish sufficient evidence of a man's present intention to continue a 
 resident of tlie State, so far as outward acts can fiirnish such evidence. If gentle- 
 men think this too short a period, let tliem amend tlie resolution by mserting tiiree, 
 or four or five years residence, or any other term, provided they do not consume too 
 much of the man's fife in ascertainino' his intention to spend his life amongst us ;. and 
 thus deprive him of tlie right of voting, during a considerable portion of his earthly 
 existence, in order to ascertain that he ■vvill exercise that right wisely, during the rem- 
 nant of his mortal career. All I think necessary in this case, is, "that we should be 
 satisfied of his present intention to reside with us, that he has cast in his lot with us ; 
 and for this, I deem two years residence in the State, and one in the county, suffi- 
 cient. When you have a man's person here, you will, in general, have Ins property 
 also : and this, together with every thing dear to him, will bind him to the country, 
 and deeply interest hhn in its welfare. Let me put a case, Mr. Chairman, by way of 
 illustration. Suppose two men embarked on board a ship, the one.carrying with him 
 merchandize to the value of ten thousand dollars, and the otlier goes aboard with 
 nothing but his wearing apparel. They launch into tlie ocean. Storms soon succeed 
 to fair weather. The billows threaten to swallow up the ship with its cargoes and 
 crew. I ask you, Sir, whether the poor man in this hour of peril, will not feel him- 
 self as much interested in the preservation of the ship, as the rich merchant. It is 
 true, he has not the same pecuniary interest at stake, but Ins life, and his present all, 
 is at stake ; and he wiU enter into every scheme and make every exertion for the sal- 
 vation of the ship and its contents, with as much ardour, energy, and passion, as the 
 owner of thousands. How is it possible, that the interest of Ihe poor sailor in such 
 case, can be less than that of the wealthy trader .' The one has his all embarked — the 
 other has no more. 
 
 It seems to be ofenerally admitted, Sir, that men are as much influenced by hope 
 and expectation, as by actual fiirdtion. Anticipation is said, and perhaps truh-. to be 
 superior to enjoyment. If so, the man who comes into this State poor, but with the 
 hope and expectation, that by the pursuit of some profession or avocation, learned or 
 unlearned, he shall support his family, and acquire a fortune ;. while engaged in this 
 pursuit, he has, in my opinion, an attachment to. and an interest in this community, 
 which should entitle him to the Right of Sufirage. Although he has no property, 
 yet he expects to gain it. He would, therefore, have a strong motive to promote the 
 good government of the State ;. and this arisinar from an interest, and an attacliment, 
 as strong as that of the owner of property. He would be anxious to have a protec- 
 tion for whatever property he might acquire ;. and this he would know, he could only 
 have, under a good government and equal laws. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, not only does the present limitation of the Right of Suffi-age 
 prevent the increase of population by migration fi-om other States, but it drives fi-om 
 the bosom of the Ancient Dominion, many of her most valuable sons. It may not 
 be known to the gentlemen of the East, but it is a fact well known to those fi-om the 
 Western part of tliis State, that many valuable citizens have lefi: their native State, 
 and availing themselves of the facihty of emigration, presented by that great river 
 which washes the greater part of our Western border, have departed to those splendid 
 regions of the West, where, in addition to the exuberant fertility of the soil, and 
 other physical advantages, they can enjoy the rights of fireemen. Yes, Sir, your 
 Government banishes vast numbers of our young rnen to the Western States, where 
 this odious restriction does not exist. Those States, in general, require little more 
 than residence, as evidence of attacliment and interest, so as to entitle persons to the 
 Right of Sufirage. The consequence is, that many of our citizens, virtuous, intelli- 
 gent, industrious men. forego all their attachments to their native soU. their house, 
 and the scenes of their vouthiul sports, and pass awav into some of those Western 
 
 45 
 
354 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 States, where tliey can enjoy the privileges appertaining to freemen, by right of na- 
 ture, not by purchase. Although a freehold may be cheaply bought, they disdain to 
 purchase that which is of right their own. 
 
 Sir, there is a continual, and an exterminating w^arfare, carried on throughout this 
 wide extended Commonwealth. She bleeds at every pore. And who are the par- 
 ties to this desolating war It is the Government against the people. A most un- 
 natural war ! Every member of the community driven out from us, by the opera- 
 tion of an unjust Constitution, is as much lost to us, as if the bayonet or cannon ball, 
 had done its work upon him. Yes, Sir, it is a cruel and exterminating war. I speak 
 of Western Virginia, when I say, that if the State were called upon to furnish annu- 
 ally her quota of troops to aid the General Government in resisting the attack of all 
 Europe combined, it would not consume our strength, nor retard our population more, 
 than do the restrictions imposed by her laws upon the Pught of Suffrage, Many a 
 soldier goes to the battle-field and returns again to his honie with its comforts and 
 endearments: but the voluntary exile ; he, who is compelled for conscience sake, to 
 rend asunder all the ties which bind him to his native country, and like the pilgrim 
 fathers of New-England, seek hberty in a distant land, never returns. Sir, I have 
 known respectable, intelligent, virtuous men ; men who had been honoured with seats 
 on the benches of our County Courts ; to whom their fellow-citizens cheerfully con- 
 fided the protection of their rights of property, and their personal rights, who were 
 regarded as the efficient guardians of the public peace and welfare ; I have known 
 such. Sir, prohibited by your laws from exercising the Right of Suffrage. Is there 
 not something wrong in all this.'' I have seen the respectable young men of the 
 country — the mechanic, the merchant, the farmer, of mature age, of intelligence su- 
 perior to that of one half the freeholders, and glowing with a patriotism which would 
 make them laugh at death in defence of their country : I have seen such commanded 
 to stand back from the polls, to give way to the ow^ner of a petty freehold, who presses 
 forward, oaying to him in effect, Away ! I am holier than thou — this is sacred 
 ground, upon which you have no right to tread." Ought such things to be Is it 
 for the good of our country that such things should be ? Surely not. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I shall not extend my remarks any farther. It was not my inten- 
 tion to enter into a detailed enumeration of all the evils of the present system of 
 Suffrage, or of the advantages of that which I have now the honour to submit to the 
 Committee. My present remarks were only intended to call the attention of the 
 Committee to the plan I have proposed. It is a broad one I admit. I submit this 
 project to gentlemen, as a base upon which they may build their schemes of Suffrage. 
 It is open to amendment, and I have no doubt, requires amendment. Such as it is, 
 I submit my substitute to your consideration. 
 
 Mr. Henderson of Loudoun, moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Wilson, by 
 striking out the words " who is engaged in the land or naval service of the United 
 States," and inserting in lieu thereof the following : " Who shall be a non-commis- 
 sioned officer or private soldier, seaman or marine in the regular service of the United 
 States, or of this Commonwealth." And stated his reason for it to be, that he did not 
 wish to exclude gallant officers, such as Thomas ap Catesby Jones in the naval, or 
 Roger Jones in the land service, (both from his own district,) from the Right of Suf- 
 frage ; nor would he exclude the subalterns, and soldiers, &c. could he believe them 
 capable of an independent exercise of the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 In reply to an enquiry of Mr. Claytor, Mr. Henderson said it was his intention to 
 include the militia as well when in as out of actual service. 
 
 Mr. Wilson having accepted this amendment as a modification of his own, 
 
 Mr. Henderson addressed the Committee in support of the substitute of Mr. Wil- 
 son as amended. Pie expressed the gratification he had felt on account of the manner 
 in which the interesting question, recently under the consideration of the Committee, 
 had been debated by the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) and the gen- 
 tleman from Hanover, (Mr. Morris.) He remarked, that he felt pride in making the 
 tribute of his acknowledgments to these gentlemen, distinguished alike for their 
 ability and eloquence, and for their courteous treatment of those who, with himself, 
 differed from them in opinion. He intimated an earnest wish, that the same temper 
 might mark the debate about to obtain upon the great subject now before the body. 
 
 Mr. H. said, before I proceed, Mr. Chairman, to trouble the Committee upon the 
 merits of the question under consideration, I will briefly advert to the origin and 
 history of the freehold Suffrage in Virginia. It is now. Sir, two hundred and ten 
 years since the assemblage of the first House of Burgesses. From 1619, when it 
 met, till 1677, a period of fifty-eight years, the Suffrage, with the exception of a sin- 
 gle year, v/as exercised by all the freemen of the Colony. During the excepted 
 year, it was limited to house-keepers. In the year 1677, after the death of the gallant 
 Bacon, the freehold Suffrage was first introduced, not by any Act of the Legislature, 
 of the English Parliament, or of the people of either country. It was the offspring 
 of regal interposition entirely, as has been most aptly and forcibly shown by my 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 355 
 
 friend from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke.) Yes, Sir, said Mr. H, it was the precious fruit 
 of despotism. Charles 11. one of the most odious and profligate tyrants who ever 
 wielded the British sceptre, transmitted to Sir William Berkeley, then Governor of 
 the Colony, an instruction, signed by his own royal hand, commanding him to permit 
 none except freeholders, to exercise this inestimable privilege. It is curious to ob- 
 serve the refined spirit of tyranny which reigns throughout this document. It com- 
 mands Sir William not to permit the House of Burgesses to meet more than once in 
 two years; to limit its sessions to /oMrteeTi t^ffT/^, and to reduce the moderate recom- " 
 pence for their services, which the freemen of the Colony had cheerfully accorded to 
 their representatives. It is obvious. Sir, that the policy and aim of this disgusting 
 edict was to dishearten the people ; to degrade their agents ; to make a mockery of 
 their legislation. A fortnight for the whole business of a new and rising Colony, 
 by agents who were to be humbled by subsisting upon '■^ low and coarse diet!''' I 
 ask, Mr. Chairman, if, in the face of these striking and graphic facts, gentlemen can 
 cover with the hoary mantle of antiquity, the monopoly which I assail ^ If an abuse 
 founded in a flagitious and scornful disregard of all decency and right, and fastened, at 
 the point of the bayonet, upon an indignant people, can challenge to itself the favour- 
 able notice of the freemen of Vii-ginia, in the nineteeth century.? Having thus, 
 continued Mr. H. stripped the argument of our opponents of the interest which it 
 claims from the pretended revolutionary origin of this usurpation, I respectfully invite 
 the Committee to follow me in the imperfect effort which I shall make to discuss it 
 on its merits. I lay down these principles as applicable to the subject. I deem them 
 clear as day ; postulates in the science of politics : First, that all the men of a society 
 are entitled to a voice in framing its organic law ; secondly, that a majority of these 
 men has an undoubted right to decide what that law shall be ; thirdly, that as a 
 corollary from the second proposition, this majority has a legitimate authority to pre- 
 scribe icho shall exercise the Right of Suffrage in the ordinary legislation of the society ; 
 and, fourthly, that to withhold tJie exercise of this right from any man in the society, 
 except where it is necessary for the common good, is unjust and tyrannical. I do not 
 think, said Mr. H. that the truth of these principles, or either of them, will be denied 
 in the United States, save only in Virginia. Let us proceed to apply them to the 
 subject of the present debate. I assume, that there are in the State of Virginia 
 100,000 men having attained the age of twenty-one j^ears, either natives of the State, 
 or having resided therein for a reasonable time, and who are willing to pay, rateably 
 with their fellow-citizens, its taxes in peace, and to fight, by their sides, in war. 
 The real number is no doubt greater. I assume it for convenience. I farther assume, 
 that, of the 100,000, 40,000 are freeholders, and 60,000 non-freeholders. This expo- 
 sition of the subject shows at once its importance. Yes, Sir, on the one hand, you 
 have the political power the political life and death of three-fifths of the freemen of 
 the Common wealth ; on the other, the crd?r and stability of the Commonwealth 
 itself. I am deeply sensible of my inabilit}^ to do justice to such a theme. But, im- 
 pelled by a sense of duty to my constituents, whose memorial I have had the honor - . 
 to present, and by a sacred regard to the great principles involved in the issues of 
 our deliberations, I will endeavor to prove that neither the lights of history, the 
 results of comparison, nor the inductions of reason, demand, at our hands, the trC' 
 mendous sacrifices which gentlemen desire us to make. 
 
 The history of ancient times, Sir, continued Mr. H. will give us very little aid in 
 the development of this subject, as has been justly observed by my venerable col- 
 league, (Mr. Monroe.) No gentlemxan will point us to any nation of antiquity except 
 the Grecian and Roman Republics. There man attained to greater excellence in arts, 
 in Hterature, and in arms, than under institutions less free. Greece, the mention of 
 whose name awakens so many classic associations, and the memory of whose recent 
 woes makes the heart bleed with sympathy, can aflbrd us no material aid. The sub- 
 tile, but versatile Athenian, eagerly catching the strains of that eloquence, the charm 
 of succeeding ages, and deciding by acclamation, in -proper perso7i, great questions of 
 public concern, is no example for us. Rome laid the foundations of her power in 
 violence, and completed it by incessant war. Her victorious Generals, laden with 
 the spoils of conquered nations, and dragging at their chariot- wheels the Kings of 
 the earth, aflbrd a poor illustration of the principles of representative Government, 
 And the American turns with disgust, from a half-civilized people, who sported in 
 the groans of the gladiator weltering in his blood, wliile he bent his sinking eye 
 towards his native hills. 
 
 The able and eloquent gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh.) referred us the 
 other day, in the discussion of a kindred topic, to France and England. We were 
 counselled by that gentleman, to take warning from the French Revolution ; and the 
 Government of England was extolled as resting on liberty and law. Law, Sir, is to 
 be found every where. No country in Europe exhibits the disgraceful picture of 
 property insecure. The spirit of the age forbids it. The revolutionary horrors of 
 France were set before us in bold relief ; and we are earnestly premonished not to act 
 
356 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 them over again. Let us follow out this parallel. The Kings, Nobles and Priests of 
 France, for a succession of ages, governed the people by an oppression so intolerable, 
 that they rose at length, in their strength, and shook off their detested tyrants as the 
 lion does the dew-drops from his mane. Grief and rage, drove them to excesses 
 revolting to humanity. Now, Sir, what is this but social confusion and misery, pro- 
 duced by the injustice and cruelty of the aristocrats of France Had they been 
 just and moderate, these horrors would never have occurred. We seek to confer 
 upon the body of the people their rights ; and we are gravely, and most pathetically 
 urged not to do it, because the tyranny of the fcio in France, and the suffering of 
 the many led to social convulsion. That is, as I take it, opposite causes, produce like 
 effects ; or do not relieve the people of Virginia, because the oppression of those of 
 France led to blood-shed. To this logic, I cannot subscribe. And, after all, what is 
 now the situation of that beautiful country ^ A representation of the people ; the 
 establishment of the trial by jury ; a free press, and a vastly more equal division of 
 property, proclaim that with great temporary evil, much lasting good has flowed from 
 the revolution. The Jesuit no longer tramples on the man. Happy change for this 
 gallant people ! Let not the brilliant and ravishing description which Burke gives us 
 of the unfortunate Marie Antoinette, beguile us into the belief that any argument 
 against our principles can be founded on the story of her sorrows, or of those of her 
 country. For England, said Mr. H. I have great respect. She is crowned with too 
 much glory not to awaken our admiration ; and has too much in common with us, 
 not to attract our sympathies. But is England, in truth, a land of liberty.'' Are the 
 people happy ? Is her Government a fit model for our imitation Do not those who 
 wield the power of the country, the jjrivileged fetv, lavish its resources with wanton 
 prodigality, vx^hile about two millions of the people are on the poor lists, and as many 
 more, on the confines of pauperism, eke out a bare subsistence by a degree of toil 
 which makes life itself a burden ? A single ecclesiastical character in Ireland receives 
 annually, and chiefly, too, from those who differ with him in religious behef, more 
 than five times as much as the salary of the President of the United States, while 
 hundreds of thousands of the people are huddled, like beasts, into mud-huts, half 
 naked, and subsisting on potatoes, often, too often, scantily supplied ! A man dares 
 not in England, unless he is worth £100 a year, shoot a hare on his own land. Yet 
 England, renowned and dreaded, has power beyond any nation over which the sun 
 holds his course ; a glory which Princes and Potentates may envy. But this power 
 belongs to the few ; this glory is the property of her leaders ; and she owes a debt of 
 four thousand five hundred millions of dollars. From such a union of wretched- 
 ness and splendour, of injustice and oppression, Heaven preserve the land of my 
 nativity ! 
 
 Let us, said Mr. H. turn our eyes towards our own country. Of the twenty-four 
 States that form our Federal Family, Virginia alone has the freehold Suffrage through- 
 out. In North Carolina, freeholders alone vote for Senators ; but, as if to atone for 
 this political sin, she permits free negroes to vote for members of the " House of 
 Commons." In New-York, also, there is a singular anomaly ; for the free negro 
 there, is the only man of whom the freehold qualification is required. Every other 
 citizen, without pecuniary qualification, is allowed to exercise this privilege, so dear 
 to freemen. The effect is, that, of twenty-four States spread over the wide bosom of 
 our happy country, Virginia, and Virginia alone, jJ^'oscribes and brands, with utter 
 political opprohrium, the far greater part of her sons. In Massachusetts, New-Jersey' 
 and Connecticut, a moderate pecuniary qualification is demanded; and in South 
 Carolina, a tax of three shillings is required. In the other nineteen States, no pecu- 
 niary qualification is established, although some two-thirds of them impose as a pre- 
 requisite to the exercise of Suffrage, the payment of such taxes as may be assessed. 
 I appeal to the members of this Committee ; to the American world, if property is 
 not as safe, and social order as effectually sustained, in the other States in this Union, 
 as in Virginia ? Look to South Carolina, to Louisiana, every where around you. 
 Ask Ohio, the daughter of yesterday, now an empire in herself, if property is safe 
 within her confines ? If social order be not inviolate ? Her population, I mean, 
 Mr. Chairman, her white population, is now greater than that of the renowned and 
 once pouierful Commonwealth of Virginia. 
 
 After all. Sir, what is required of the voter Simply the capacity and the 'will to 
 choose good public agents. The gentleman from Chesterfield, before alluded to, in 
 treating by anticipation, the question now under debate, denied that men who labored 
 were able to perform this duty; and intimated, that even he, acute and accomplished 
 as he is, was so engrossed with professional pursuits, as not to leave him leisure for 
 the study of political science. Surely the same remark would apply to the other 
 classes of society; for, by the fiat of an overruling Providence, we are doomed to earn 
 our bread by toiling in our several vocations. Shall we cast the Government, then, 
 into the hands of the idle and worthless Heaven forbid ! But, it does not require, 
 in order to the proper exercise of the Right of Suffrage, that the citizen be a master 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 357 
 
 of political science. Were it otherwise, how many voters would you have ? Sir, the 
 ^'-peasantri/' are competent to the performance of this duty. All who know men, and 
 are versed in their concerns, in the various walks of life, are aware that individuals 
 of limited education, observe character, with eyes at once steady and clear; unen- 
 grossed by books, wide awake to the world around them, they acquire and digest that 
 every-day knowledge, that prevailing and discriminating common sense, which ena- 
 ble them to select their public functionaries with judgment. Sir, we have a very 
 pretty antithetical line written by a sweet poet who was a very lazy fellow, Those 
 who think, must govern those who toil Nothing is so apt to delude a man and ex- 
 pose him to error in politics as poetry and metaphor. They lead him to make sense 
 yield to sound, principles to flourishes of rhetoric. There lived in the last age ano- 
 ther poet, and he will live for countless ages to come. He invigorated his under- 
 standing, and sharpened his perceptions by labor. You will recognize, in tliis 
 description, the low-born but high-souled and enchanting Burns. He was a flax- 
 breaker. His contemporary and acquaintance, Alexander Wilson, to whom the re- 
 public of science owes so much for his inimitable work on ornithology, was a.pe/2sant 
 too. Yes, Sir, I myself have seen Horn, a weaver by day, a poet at night. Benja- 
 min Franklin too, was of the peasant class. He labored hard for his daily bread. 
 Gentlemen abhor abstractions. Let them learn, then, from those illustrious peasants 
 this practiml truth, that moderate labor inspires sound sense. I ask the Committee to 
 test the correctness of my position, by inquiring how the non-freeholders in our sis- 
 ter States have chosen their representatives in the Federal Congress, as compared 
 with the wiser freeholders of our native State? Lowndes of Soutli Carolina, James 
 Lloyd of Massachusetts, Rufus King of New York, William Pinckney of Maryland, 
 cum multis aliis, were, or are the peers of the first talents that Virginia has sent forth. 
 And now, Sir, are not W^ebster and M'Duffie, and Berrien, without naming others, 
 additional living examples of the truth of my proposition ? Such facts speak volumes. 
 It were a most ungracious consumption of the valuable time of this enlicfhtened and 
 honorable body, to attempt, by any enlarged scope of argument, to prove that a man 
 loves his birth-place as he does his mother, with an ardor that no time can efface, no 
 circumstance extinguish. Sacred love of country, ineffable attachment to the natal 
 spot, art thou the offspring of a churlish interest; or can gold purchase thee ? Sir, 
 the landless peasant clings to the rocky cliffs on whose smnmit he sported in the hal- 
 cyon days of his boyhood, as the ligaments of his own heart bind it to his bosMn. 
 Away, then, with the idea of the gentleman from Spottsylvania, (Mr. Stanard) that a 
 twenty-five dollar freeholder, a whole Commonwealth of whom Stephen Girard 
 could create without impairing materially his resources, has a stronger, a more ele- 
 vated, or more enduring attachment to his country, than the man I have faintly at- 
 tempted to describe. 
 
 But, continued Mr. H. gentlemen have denied the propriety of permitting a man 
 without property to vote equally with the rich man, because the latter brings mto the 
 common stock his fortune, as well as all that class of rights strictly denominated per- 
 sonal. In the first place, how is this position to be reconciled with the concession, 
 that a man who has $25 in land shall vote ? If one man have $ 100,000 and another 
 ^25, the ratio is so very inconsiderable as to withdraw from the argument of my op- 
 ponents the greater part of its force. Examine this branch of the subject in its true 
 lights. A man without property stakes his liberty, his life, his reputation, his happi- 
 ness, and his right to acquire property. W^hile we surround property with so many 
 fences, and guard it with so much solicitude, shall we not duly appreciate the rio-ht 
 to acquire it.^ Shall we not, in the emphatic language of Napoleon, preserve for it 
 " the open theatre.?" Again, if the rich man brings in his property, does he not cre- 
 ate the necessity of an expensive Government.'' It is mainly for his property that 
 law is piled upon law in your Statute book, and that the onerous labors of your judici- 
 ary are demanded. He, too, engrosses the honors and emoluments incident to the 
 operations of Government. It is rarely that you incur expense in making or admin- 
 istering law for the citizen without property, and still more rarely doeslie share in 
 those distinguished and interesting functions. How stands the account in war? Are 
 wars waged for the interest of the poor ? Do their passions prompt or their posses- 
 sions invite them? No, Sir. The ambition of the great men of Rome raised her 
 armies to invade Britain ; after over-running the fairest portion of the Island, they re- 
 tm'ned to enjoy their spoil, leaving the highlands unconquered. The poor and hardy 
 Caledonians boasted that their gallantry had rolled back the tide of battle ; but Gibbon 
 says more truly, that the proud Eagle of Rome scorned to perch on the naked hills 
 of the land of the mountain and the flood:" Sir, the cottager is always the instru- 
 ment and oflen the victim of war, but he is never its author, and seldom shares its 
 glory. Let not wealth, then, complain that it is taxed for its own interest, and its 
 own protection and honor. But, Sir, property, as has been well said, has influence. 
 It confers knowledge, and gives facihty for improving the virtues of the heart and the 
 
358 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 graces of the manner. This is power, concentrated, legitimate, resistless power, ever 
 has been, and will continue to be, till time shall be no more. 
 
 Gentlemen intimate, that the enlarged and liberal Suffrage will engender tumult at 
 elections, and impart to the populace, habits of dissipation. Have you not now mirth 
 and irregularity and riot at your elections ? What real evil springs from this source 
 The gentry drink wine and the lower classes alcohol. This is a subject of regret, but 
 not an adequate cause for disfranchising the one or the other. A celebrated man in 
 England, remarked that it was better the Nobleman's coaches should be bespattered 
 by the mob than that the people should be made slaves. And it is better that culti- 
 vated taste be offended here, than that three-fifths of the body politic be powerless. 
 For these transient inconveniences, a perfect remedy may be found in the creation 
 of moderate election districts. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, we have one small, but conspicuous example of the correctness of 
 the doctrine which I have the honor to maintain, in Virginia itself; and gentlemen, 
 justly tenacious of the character of our ancient Commonwealth, ought to weigh it. 
 The borough of Norfolk is entitled, as we all know, to a delegate in the lower House 
 of our Legislature. In that borough, jjot-boilers and mechanics , who have served an 
 apprenticeship, are invested with the Right of Suffrage. How, Sir, have they exer- 
 cised it.'' Look at their representation on this floor. One of those who exemplified 
 their political fitness, in war the defence, in peace the ornament of the State, is here 
 no longer. It is. Sir, an indisputable fact, that the borough of JYorfolk has been re- 
 presented in the Legislature, with an ability and patriotism which do honor to the 
 city itself, while it is a living and constant proof of the capacity of the non-freehol- 
 ders of Norfolk. And are not the non-freeholders of the county of Frederick as com- 
 petent as they are ? Is there any thing in the air of a city which gives light and pu- 
 rity to its populace, when citizens of corresponding grade throughout your wide con- 
 fines are involved in darkness or steeped in impurity ? We have been taught to 
 believe that the multitude in cities was more depraved and more liable to political 
 delusion than that dispersed over the surface of the country. Allowing them to be 
 no worse than their fellovz-citizens of Norfolk, time, the best instructor, establishes 
 their claim. It is vain to contend that we are happy, and, therefore, that no amend- 
 ment would be proper. Suppose the State were governed by an absolute monarchy, 
 whose character was as benign as that of a Trajan or Antonine, and who made them 
 happy for the time, would not the citizens assert their political rights as the sole secu- 
 rity for the continuance of Iheir civil immunities ? Would they be content to hold 
 their comfort, and peace, and all that is dear to man, upon courtesy.^ If not, ought 
 the vast mass of citizens, the subject of our present debate, to remain content, be- 
 cause not actually oypressed? Ought they not to be placed in a predicament which 
 would enable them to guard themselves from possible oppression ? But, Sir, I res- 
 pectfully insist that the non-freeholders of Virginia have been politically wronged, and 
 that they are so now. Permit me, since we are boldly called upon to point out a 
 solitary instance of misrule, to name a few, simply by way of example. Some of 
 them will demonstrate the injustice done to those who do not vote; all of them mani- 
 fest the unsound policy of the representatives of those who do. 
 
 This is an invidious task. I enter upon it with no feelings other than those of re- 
 gret and pain. Professions are of little use. I will proceed with the argument. In 
 Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 6, page 439, and in the same book, page 532, maybe 
 found two Acts of Legislation, which will serve to exemplify, in a lively manner, the 
 idea which I advance. I will notice, briefly, the last. It provides, that all the people 
 of the country shall perform the arduous and perilous military duties incident to their 
 circumstances, except certain official dignitaries, and owners of four slaves. The 
 official characters were compelled to furnish arms and equipments as a substitute for 
 their personal services ; but the overseer of the opulent man was neither compelled 
 to fight nor to pay. By the Act of 1754, to be found, page 438, two justices might 
 cause to be seized any man not having a calling or support, except voters or servants 
 indented or bought, have him dragged before them, and finally decide to consign him 
 or not to all the hazards and sufferings of war. If this was right in the general, why 
 except voters, or, in other words, freeholders? Why except servants, the jjroperty of 
 these freeholders? Can any man believe so gross a discrimination would have been 
 made, if these freeholders had not held all the power, and the remainder of society- 
 been a proscribed caste.? This example is not the less apt or illustrative, because it 
 occurred under the Colonial Government. 
 
 Is not every gentleman somewhat struck with the fact, that the long denial of jus- 
 tice to thousands of citizens, is itself evidence of misrule ? 
 
 The manner of working the roads of Virginia is little short of the odious corve of 
 France. If a man has two slaves, he is exempt from the imposition, while his poor 
 neighbor, with all his sons, is liable to it. Imagine a wealthy man, often the case in 
 the county where I reside, to have a large crop to carry to market, and a family for 
 whose accommodation good roads are essential; this individual has six negro men; 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 359 
 
 his poor neighbor lias six sons, who, together with theu- father, earn their daily bread 
 bv their dailv labor. This man. with his six sons, is obhged to work upon the roads 
 along side of the six slaves of his wealthy neighbor. The poor man, in the interim, 
 never uses the road. 
 
 The entire county and parish levies are raised by a poll or capitation tax. In the 
 county where I reside, this charge, for the four years next succeeding the last Cen- 
 sus, was ?< 12.000. more than our whole contribution to the revenue of the State 
 itself 
 
 If a poor man owes 1-5 or 820, his creditor may, in one month, sell under scire 
 facias, at auction, the bed on which his sick wife lajiguishes, and the cow that affords 
 aliment to his children. ]N«othing is spared. Until within a few years, a man might 
 own larore landed estates, or valuable stocks, and unless he had personal property, his 
 creditor" might, seize his person, and the law interposed, and, imder the kindly facili- 
 ties of the prison rules, he might hve like a nabob. Even now, if he chooses to con- 
 vert his prison into a' drawing-room, he may employ his income in riot and luxury. 
 I submit it to tliis Committee, to that part of it, at least, who do not conclusively as- 
 simie that to be wise which has existed long, if these examples do not indicate too 
 forcibly the exceptionable spirit of our legislation.? I am aware, Sir. that I am now 
 addressing srentlemen elected by freeholders. I appeal to their candor and good 
 sense, and through them, to the hberal and dispassionate citizens of Virginia. 
 
 Sir, I ask if the state of the Judiciary of the country is not a reproach to the Le- 
 gislature .- Truly, we add the ••law"s delay"" to the ••' proud man"s contumely."" I will 
 not enlarge on this topic. 
 
 What Ts the general condition of the Commonwealtli .- A commerce inferior to 
 that of the little State of Rhode Island, an aoriculture languishing, the mechanic arts 
 in a state of depression and thriftlessness, and provision made for the education of 
 about one-eighth of the children annually educated by the small State of Coimecti- 
 cut. Yes, Sir. and they Eire not half so weU educated. 
 
 As for the development of the natural resources of the State, through the medium 
 of a system of improvement, the very mention of the subject is calculated to inspire 
 melancholy. What, Sir, is your great James River Canal .' Between one and two 
 miliions of dollars have been lavished on it, in the course of forty years — some tlurty 
 miles are cojhpleted ! and the people of the State, provoked with this gross absurdity 
 and waste, look on the whole enterprize with disgust. 
 
 Rut, if there be a Commonwealth on earth, where the Right of SuSrage is fairly 
 and rationally susceptible of a most liberal enlargement, it is that of Virginia. Her 
 people are habitually steady in their conduct ; the mass of them ai'e reflecting ; and, 
 libel them who may, every man who really knows tlie state of society, and is willing 
 to be just to it, will attest the truth of tlie declaration, that morality and virtue are 
 growing amono-st us. Who is not struck with the temperance and sobriety of the 
 rising generation, compared with that which is passing away.- Vice and crime, I 
 boldly afiinn, have, within ten years, rapidly diminished: individual industry and 
 energy, are increasing. Schools are multiplying, and religion is diffusing its genial 
 influence over the land. Over tliis picture, rudely but faitiifull}' sketched. I reioice 
 with filial joy ; and while I cheerfully admit the virtue and sta'bihty of the freehol- 
 ders, tlie middle classes, as they are termed, I cannot yield my judgment to tlie dic- 
 tum, which confines virtue to any description of men. The gentleman and the cot- 
 tager too, are pure. Yes, Sir, with individual exceptions, all deserve to share in the 
 government of the conimmiity, that rules the land of their birth, the theatre of their 
 joys and sorrows, tliat embosoms the ashes of their fathers, and imites tlie hopes of 
 the children of their affections. The composition and circumstances of the society 
 themselves, invite to the infrancliisement of the people. No large or populous cities 
 agitate or corrupt us ; few foreicrners are intermixed with us ; our pursuits, for the 
 most part, agricultural : an extensive territory sparsely peopled ; and a respect for 
 order, for the character of the Commonwealtli itself, animating all classes of citizens. 
 Such is Virginia : such, the material for her Statesmen and law-givers. Are we to 
 apprehend rapine, disorder, disorganization, from a paternal and generous course.-* 
 Besides, more than three-fifths of the inhabitants, comprehendinof far the crreater part 
 of those termed in European countries the rabble, are slaves. ^ Tliis single circum- 
 stance, is enough to quiet all the apprehensions of gentlemen. It cannot be success- 
 fully contended, that a community, thus characterised and composed, is not to be 
 trusted to govern itself; that its powers must be confided to the chosen few. From 
 the days of Homer, to this day, it has been conceded, that to enslave a man, was to 
 impair his worth ; and, that to clothe him with the privileges appropriate to his nature, 
 elevated his sentiments;. 
 
 If it were questionable, whether the reasoning I employ were just originally, still 
 half the' force of the conflicting argument is taken away by tlie fact, that no other 
 State in the Union retains the" odious distinction which I combat. If the freehold 
 Sufirage existed in the other Statesj tlie problem would exist in all its force and in- 
 
360 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 terest; but, when it is abandoned by twenty-three States, to retain it here, were in- 
 sufferable. The humble citizen of Virginia cannot pass the confines of Maryland, 
 Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, or Tennessee, without being taunted by his neigh- 
 bours with his vassal condition. The borderer on North Carolina beholds, amidst the 
 most perfect social order and security, the very free negro exercising that privilege 
 which is withheld from him. This is galling and most humiliating. 
 
 Let those who feel solicitude, and who does not, for the future destiny of the State, 
 inspect, with a Statesman's eye, its diversified population. There are four distinct 
 classes — the freeholder, the non-freeholder, the free negro, and the slave. Pause, 
 Mr. Chairman, and examine this interesting subject. May not occasions arise when 
 the common weal will loudly call for the united exertions of your white population ? 
 A large part of them have already poured their murmurs into your ear. Will you 
 deafen it.? I adjure you. Sir, I adjure this Committee to bind in the chords of com- 
 mon affection, the whole people, and to treat them as one family. 
 
 I cannot but think, tlmt the condition of the world is greatly improved and ra- 
 pidly improving. All virtuous men venerate their progenitors. But, how was it 
 possible, in ancient times, to diffuse through society the knowledge which now pre- 
 vails ? The art of printing, itself, was sufficient to change the face of the world, and 
 it is certainly changing it. The mariner's compass, post-offices, the application of 
 steam in facilitating intercourse amongst men, and in the mutual transmission of in- 
 formation, are, with a steady pace, pressing us on in the career of mind. These, 
 with many ancillary causes, are exalting and meliorating the species. Why shall we 
 alone, lag and faulter in the generous race ? Adopt a well-devised, wise, and econo- 
 mical system of education for all classes, and all will be capable of performing the 
 cardinal duties of the citizen,.will be worthy to become depositories of political power, 
 and all will love with filial regard, the land of their birth. 
 
 After all, we are merely commissioned to sketch, for the adoption or rejection of 
 the people, the plan of a Constitution. If they approve, they will estabhsh it ; if, on 
 the contrary, they disapprove, they will reject it — and then our work will terminate. 
 Why, then, do gentlemen attempt to alarm us Why this cry of separation, intes- 
 tine war, and all the horrors that eloquence can paint, or ingenuity conjure up ? 
 Rather, Sir, let us be calm, and endeavour to do our duty in a spirit of conciliation 
 and harmony. One gentleman, for whom I entertain great esteem, distinguished by 
 his talents and virtues, (Mr. Nicholas,) announced to us, the other day, that we were 
 in a most awful situation, that clouds and darkness hovered over us, and terrible ca- 
 lamities beset our path. Permit me to congratulate that amiable gentleman upon the 
 tranquil and serene aspect, which he exhibited to us in the midst of the storm he 
 raised or fancied. I had the pleasure to sit near him, and marvelled at the placidity 
 of his brow in a scene so appalling. Is there, Mr. Chairman, no rhetoric in those 
 horrors The same gentleman informed us that he had held an official station under 
 the Government for some twenty years, and that things had flowed on with wonder- 
 ful smoothness during the whole time. That may be. Sir, so far as the gentleman is 
 concerned. A good official station has a charming effect in smoothing the asperities 
 of life, and imparting brighter tints to the scenes around one. But, it does not follow, 
 from all this, that the people are content with their disfranchisement. I wish the 
 worthy gentleman a long continuance of the advantages he has so richly merited j 
 but my first wish is for my country. 
 
 Another honourable gentleman, in speaking of the determination of the minority 
 to retain its power, was pleased to hold to us of the West, for it seems I too am a 
 Western man, the language which Sparta held to the Persian Monarch, when he de- 
 manded the surrender of their arms, " come and take them." Sir, here are no Spar- 
 tans, no Persians. We are all Virginians. During the war of 1812, the citizens of 
 Norfolk talked to us in a different language. They then said, " come and help us." 
 And we went; and ranging ourselves under the banner of his gallant townsman, we 
 bade the enemy "come and take the city." Aye,and we are ready to repair again to 
 his succour. In fighting, there is no sectional line, no exclusion. Whenever the 
 standard of freedom of Virginia, the " Star-Spangled Banner" is unfurled, in the 
 East or the West, the North or the South, then will every true-hearted American be 
 found to face, not his brothers, but the foes of his beloved and common country. Per- 
 mit me, Mr. Chairman, humble as I am, to make a passing effort to relieve this learn- 
 ed gentleman from a distressing state of perplexity into which he has fallen. He 
 seems to apprehend, that we shall not be able to discern and define the white man, 
 with any sort of distinctness, and that the people of China and of the South Ameri- 
 can Republics, when they come hither, will puzzle our modicum of physical and po- 
 litical science to arrange them. This is a most embarrassing question, it must be ad- 
 mitted ; but if the learned gentleman will concede our principle, we will endeavour 
 to relieve him in the labour of its application ; and should we not be competent to 
 the solution of this matter ourselves, we have yet a resource which may save the Re- 
 public. We will call Dr. Mitchell into consultation, and from the acumen and erudi- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 361 
 
 tion which he displayed upon the occurrence of a similar difficulty in the celebrated case 
 of the Almshouse vs. Alexander Whisteloe, he will doubtless prescribe with effect. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, it is not a question who is white ; but how shall the wrongs of the 
 people be redressed. Sixty thousand men, in a land of liberty, ask their fellow-men to 
 admit them to an equal participation in their political rights : they ask in the spirit of 
 brotherhood, but, in the unquailing voice of conscious rectitude and firmness. Every 
 where around them they see those who have the same claims with themselves, and 
 none other, standing up and giving assurance that they are men. Shall they, they 
 alone, bear the stamp of political villinage 
 
 The Committee assenting, the resolution respecting the Right of Suffrage was, for 
 the present, laid aside, and 
 
 Mr. H. having resumed his seat, Mr. Pleasants asked as a favour of the Committee, 
 that the resolution now under consideration might be laid aside long enough to afford 
 him an opportunity of presenting to this body a proposition of his own, which he 
 offered as the basis of a compromise. 
 
 Mr, Pleasants then offered the following amendment to the fourth resolution of the 
 Committee : 
 
 The original resolution reads, 
 
 " Resolved, That the number of members in the Senate of this State ought to be 
 neither increased nor diminished, nor the classification of its members changed." 
 
 The amendment proposes to strike out all after the words " Resolved, That" and 
 to insert as follows : 
 
 " representation in the Senate shall be based on the whole number of free 
 
 persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians 
 not taxed, and adding to the aforesaid number of free persons, three-fifths of all other 
 persons ; and the Senate shall consist of a number not exceeding , and its term 
 of service and classification remain as at present." 
 
 In supporting the amendment, Mr. Pleasants spoke, in substance, as follows : 
 
 I have risen to make the motion just now intimated to the Committee — which 
 motion, I had hoped some other member would have made. I had hoped some gen- 
 tleman of standing in this body, some gentleman of standing in the community, and 
 of weight of character, would have risen to make some such motion ; but 1 have 
 been so far disappointed. I will then present the proposition, under the hope that it 
 may tend to bring about a reconciliation, and lead to those concessions, which are so 
 desirable, and which many gentlemen think absolutely necessary to the further pro- 
 gress of our proceedings. 
 
 The district I represent, has received the notice of several gentlemen, in the 
 course of this debate. It is what I fully expected, and what I am very glad to see. 
 The respectable and intelligent people whom I represent, (I hope I shall be permitted 
 to term them so, for it is no more than the truth,) have put themselves in that point 
 of view in which they are entitled to stand before this body. I have heard it fre- 
 quently insinuated here, that the people are in the dark, and are therefore not compe- 
 tent to decide on that branch of the subject which has occupied our attention so long: 
 that they want more light, more information, and that they ought to receive it. Sir, this 
 is all well : the people will receive with thankfulness, all the information which may 
 be given them. But, I have never been disappointed in the expectation that they 
 will always come to correct conclusions if left to themselves, and not misled in their 
 judgment by some who have more influence than is wholesome for this Common- 
 wealth. In saying this, I have no particular reference to the present juncture, nor do 
 I point the remark at any individuals. I have given the most profound attention to 
 the discussions which have taken place. The various subjects which have come be- 
 fore us have been most ably handled. The best talents of the State, talents which I 
 have often witnessed and long admired, have been employed upon them. The coun- 
 try has been illuminated, and I have myself been greatly profited. An intense inter- 
 est has been excited every where, but my district has not changed its position as far 
 as I am informed. The majority of the little count}^ in which I live, has, it is true, 
 been against the opinions of the majority of the district, but they ho.ve honoured me 
 with a seat here. It is an honour which I duly appreciate, and a proof of their re- 
 spect and confidence which I can never forget. I should be a villain, if I could wipe 
 the remembrance of it from my heart. No, Sir — it will be there when I die. I am 
 more singularly situated, not only as it regards the geographical position of my dis- 
 trict, but in some other respects, than many other gentlemen. I did not go through 
 my district, nor did I know the sense of the people, till the day of the election. I 
 heard that my name had been mentioned as a candidate, and I hastened to promul- 
 gate my sentiments, in the fullest and most explicit manner. Give me leave to say, 
 that the subject was fully canvassed. A gentleman who is particularly conversant 
 with the finances of the Government, and who is very thoroughly acquainted with 
 all matters relating to it, laboured with his utmost energy to produce an impression 
 
 46 
 
362 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOPT. 
 
 contrary to that which the people entertained, but without success. He exerted his 
 utmost ability, but his efforts did not succeed. 
 
 Gentlemen have made their appeal to the Albemarle district, and to its position in 
 relation to this question. I felt the fall force of their appeal, and had I thought they 
 were wrong, and could I consent to violate the known will of a majority of my dis- 
 trict, I would have yielded to that appeal. But my attachment to numbers, and to 
 the principle that the majority who are bound to fight and to pay, ought to have the 
 power to vote, was not for one second shaken. I concluded the appeal to be in part 
 directed to myself, from what an honorable member from Chesterfield said, in relation 
 to a certain letter which he had seen. My disposition was to do all 1 could for the 
 security of the slave property in consistency with my view on the great principles of 
 Republican Government. The district I represent, is deeply interested in whatever 
 touches that property, as it probably contains as many slaves in proportion to its ex- 
 tent, as any other portion of the State. And I should be the very worst of men, if 
 I could voluntarily jeopardize such an interest. It had been my opinion, that some 
 standard for taxation might be taken from the relative value of land ; and that the one 
 property should not be taxed save in a given ratio to the other ; but on this point, I 
 have found myself in a very small minority. I did believe that the thing might be 
 made practicable, and that there would be no difliculty in stopping the violation of 
 the Constitution, instanter. But, as the project was disapproved in the Legislative 
 Committee, I do not know that I shall offer it here. In the proposition I now 
 advance, I am convinced, that I go beyond the opinions of my constituents, as it was 
 at the time of the election. But what is to be done The Convention is almost 
 equally divided. Gentlemen ask us whether we will press measures with so small a 
 majority But, Mr. Chairman, what must we do ? Can they expect us to desert 
 our own principles, and to fly in the face of a majority of our constituents Must 
 we be willing to yield to a minority ? Sir, such an expectation cannot, and ought not 
 to prevail. The venerable gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Monroe,) gave us most 
 parental and conciliatory counsel, and expressed his own predilections in favour of 
 the plan embodied in my amendment ; but he did not follow it up with any specific 
 motion. I have felt it my duty to bring the plan before the Committee. I have done 
 so in the very best spirit, and with a strong hope of effecting the compromise. I have 
 proposed the Federal number, because it is most simple, best known, and the most 
 easily reduced to practice. But if gentlemen prefer introducing in the Senate, the 
 principle of a mixed basis of representation, I am perfectly ready to modify it in that 
 way. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas observed, that as he was one of those who voted for affording his 
 highly esteemed friend from Gocchland an opportunity to offer his resolution, he 
 thought it proper to state, that he was influenced in giving that vote by a spirit of 
 courtesy, and by a wish to gratify that gentleman. But, as his proposition goes ahead 
 of the discussion, and refers to a resolution which will come on hereafter, it would be 
 improper to take it up at this time. There were considerations connected with 
 the proposition, which he wished to weigh in his own mind ; he, therefore, moved that 
 the resolution offered by the gentleman from Goochland, be for the present passed 
 over. 
 
 Mr. Pleasants seconded the motion, and stated that, as his resolution was closely 
 connected with the subject of the basis of representation before the Convention, he 
 deemed it proper to submit it, whilst that subject was undisposed of. He hoped, 
 therefore, that his resolution might lie on the table, and be printed. The Chairman 
 took the question : Shall the resolution be passed over for the present which was 
 carried. 
 
 Mr. Pleasants then moved that the subject, the consideration of which had been 
 suspended, should be resumed ; which was carried. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas, after requesting the Chairman to report the amendment, spoke, in 
 substance, as follows : 
 
 My sentiments, Mr. Chairman, are so different from those just expressed by the 
 gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson.) upon this interesting subject, and my 
 district is so much opposed to the measure now under consideration, that I feel it an 
 imperious duty to submit to the Convention my views on it. The amendment has 
 certainly the merit of advancing boldly to the question, and proposes, what I con- 
 ceive, amounts essentially to Universal Suffrage. There cannot be a more fit occasion 
 to enquire, what ought to be the basis of Suffrage, than when it is proposed to extend 
 that right to almost every man in the country. I find myself, Mr. Chairman, placed 
 in a new attitude. If we are to take the sentiments of myself, and those with whom 
 I act, from the representations of the gentleman from Loudoun, we should be induced 
 to suppose, that we are not only inimical to the whole class of the poor in this coun- 
 try, but to Republican institutions in general. I do not mean to make professions of 
 my principles. But I may be permitted to say, that though in the different political 
 scenes and vicissitudes which have taken place in this country, my situation may 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 36^ 
 
 liave been humble and obscure : though I have not filled high stations, I have not 
 stood bv vdth apathy as to passing events. 1 have always taken a deep interest in 
 them, and have not been inactive. It is true that I have served as a private,^ but 
 have felt as much zeal, as others who were more elevated. I had supposed that from 
 mv boyhood, I was encraored in defending free principles, by fighting under the ban- 
 ners of the most distinguished patriots of the lajid; but novr the gentlemen on the 
 other side, endeavor to^take our weapons out of om hands, to defeat us with them. 
 This pohcy of attempting to ahenate the people from their friends, is as old as the 
 davs of ^'sop. We are'told in one of his fables, that certain shepherds had their 
 flocks protected by their watch-dosrs, who proved faithful sentinels, and resisted every 
 efibrt of the wolves to break into the fold. Baffled in thefr attempts, the wolves per- 
 suaded the shepherds that it was an useless expense and trouble to maintain these 
 faithfril sentinels, and made solenm promises, that if they would dismiss them, they 
 should sustain no'injurv. Deluded by these assurances, the shepherds comphed with 
 the request, but the consequence was, tliat the wolves broke into the fold and 
 destroyed all the flock. But such policy will not be efi'ectual in this country: the 
 people are intelhgent; they know who are their friends, and they will never abandon 
 them. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun has been pleased to say, that when on a former oc- 
 casion 1 depicted the evils which would result from an attempt to force a Constitution 
 upon a large portion of the people, which they believed to be oppressive and ruinous 
 to them, and that by a meagre majority, and stated that the consequences might be 
 awful, that I could 'not be in earnest, because my countenance, at the time, expressed 
 no strong emotion, but was placid and immoved. But that gentleman is yet to learn 
 that a placid countenance is not incompatible with firmness of purpose; and I trust 
 that in the discharofe of the duties wiiich I ovre my constituents, I shall not flinch from 
 the assertion of their rights, but be as firm and immoveable, as any gentleman, with 
 whatever fervor of manner, he may support liis opinions. 
 
 I cannot, Mr. Chairman, promise the Committee to gratify them with the great 
 variety of topics and illustrations, which the talents of the gentleman from Loudoun 
 has enabled him to lay before them. It shall be my humble endeavour to discuss the 
 question before the Committee. I shall not doubt the sincerity of the gentleman's 
 opinions, though he would appear to question mine. [Mr. Henderson here stated, 
 that he did not doubt the sincerity of the gentleman, but only whether under momen- 
 tary excitement, he might not have expressed, what in cahner moments he would 
 have repudiated.] 
 
 ]Mr. jsicholas observed, that he did not know how he could be understood to have 
 spoken under excitement, when a placidity of countenance at the moment was attri- 
 buted to him, incompatible with the feelings he expressed. He continued — I received 
 with pleasure the assurances of good will, and good feelings expressed by the gentle- 
 man from Loudoun, and cordially reciprocate them. He said he should disdain him- 
 self, if he suffered difference of senthnent on public subjects to inspire him with iU 
 will to any gentleman. It was not his habit. Every thmg which had occurred in 
 his intercourse with the gentleman from Loudoun, during their short acquaintance, 
 had impressed him withlar different feelings. 
 
 3Ir. said, he should proceed to discuss what was the real question before the 
 Committee, stripped of those extraneous considerations, which do not bear upon it, and 
 which are rather calculated to mislead, than to enlighten. This subject has received 
 from me. ]Mr. Chairman, my anxious consideration ;. not onh- since it has been agitated 
 in this Convention, but whilst during the canvass, which preceded the elections, it 
 was discussed in the public prints, in speeches to the people, and in the addresses of 
 various gentlemen who were called on to declare their sentiments. Amongst the ar- 
 guments rehed upon by tlie advocates of a very extended Suffrage, one of the most 
 fallacious, is, that which attempts to found the right upon principles of natural equa- 
 hty. This pre-supposes that Suffrage is derived from nature. Now. nothing can be 
 clearer, than that Suffrage is a conventional, and not a natural right. In a state of 
 nature, (if such state ever existed except in the imagination of the poets,) every man 
 acts for himself, and is the sole judge of what will contribute to his happiness. When 
 he enters into the social state, which he is compelled to do, to guard himself against 
 violence, and to protect him in the enjoyment of the fruits of his industry, he gives 
 up to the society the powers of Government, and surrenders to it, so much of his 
 natural rights as are essential to secure to him such portion of tliose rights which he 
 retains, or such other rights as grow out of the new relations in which he is placed. 
 
 In the rudiments of society, and whilst the people are few, the making laws and 
 the decision on the most important concerns, such, for instance, as war and peace, 
 were exercised by the body of the people in their collective capacity. Such was the 
 ancient republic of Athens, and some of the other Grecian States, and such is said to 
 be the littJe republic of St. Marino. When the community became large, it was 
 found impracticable to exercise their sovereignty in their primary Assemblies. These 
 
364 
 
 DEBATES 
 
 OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 were too numerous for deliberation, and were too much under the control of violent 
 passions, and too liable to be influenced by the seductions of artful men, who flattered 
 the people only to destroy them. It was found absolutely necessary, to entrust the 
 making- of laws and the management of the public aflairs to agents, or deputies, 
 and this gave rise to representation. The power of voting for these agents or depu- 
 ties constitutes the Pught of Suifrage. This plain exposition of the origin and for- 
 mation of society, incontestibly shows that both Representation and Suffrage are so- 
 cial institutions. It proves that it is a solecism to insist, that it is proper to refer back 
 to a state of nature, for principles to regulate rights which never existed in it — which 
 could only exist after mankind abandoned it, rather than by a correct estimate of 
 those relations, which are to be found in a state of society, of which, both Representa- 
 tion and Suffrage are the offspring. It has been attempted to sustain almost unlimited 
 suffrage, (I know not whether in the Committee, as 1 did not come in until after the 
 gentleman from Loudoun had been speaking some time, but certainly elsewhere,) by 
 reference to those general phrases in the Bill of Rights, which declare, " that all men 
 are by nature equally free and independent." But the same section of the Bill of 
 Rights plainly discriminates between the state of nature, and the social state, and ad- 
 mits the modification which natural rights may receive by entering into society. It 
 is true it speaks of inherent rights, of which men, when they enter into society 
 ^' cannot by any compact deprive or divest their posterity " namely, the enjoyment 
 of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursu- 
 ing and obtaining happiness and safety." But it is most obvious that this last clause 
 does not comprehend suffrage, or representation, or any fancied rights growing out of 
 them ; first, because these are not natural rights ; and next, if they were, as the clause 
 last referred to enumerates the riglits which a man in a social state cannot alienate, 
 and that enumeration has nothing to do with suffrage or representation, it must in 
 candour be admitted, that these subjects are surrendered (so far as the Bill of Rights 
 is concerned) to the regulation of society. These considerations, Mr. Chairman, ap- 
 pear to me clearly to prove, that in deciding upon suffrage, we are deciding a ques- 
 tion of expediency and policy, and that we ought so to regulate it, as will best pro- 
 mote the happiness and prosperity of society. Our opponents have themselves af- 
 forded unequivocal evidence of the truth of what we contend for, by advocating 
 schemes of suffrage which profess to impose restrictions on the exercise of the right, 
 though those restrictions (in my humble judgment) are totally inadequate and illusory. 
 
 I have reflected much on this subject, because every one must have anticipated, 
 that it would be, save one, the most important which could employ the deliberations 
 of this assembly, and that with the one alluded to, it had the most intimate connexion. 
 In forming my opinion, I am perfectly satisfied, that the rule laid down in our Bill of 
 Rights, is the true one on this subject. And here, Mr. Chairman, permit me to join 
 most heartily in the eulogiums which have been so repeatedly pronounced by the 
 gentlemen on the other side, on the profound wisdom, exalted patriotism, and un- 
 bounded devotion to free Governments, of the framers of our Bill of Rights. I sub- 
 scribe entirely to every part of it, and adopt it as containing the articles of my political 
 faith. It is much, however, to be deplored, that whilst these gentlemen pay such 
 adoration to the Bill of Rights, and its authors, they should in the same breath deny 
 that they understood their own principles, and assert, that in the formation of every 
 essential part of the Constitution, they were guilty of a flagrant violation of them I 
 What then, is the rule laid down by the authors of our Constitution on this subject.? 
 It is, " that all men having sufficient evidence of permanent, common interest with, 
 and attachment to, the community, have the Right of Suffrage." Every part of this 
 definition, Mr. Chairman, is highly important. First, there must be " sufficient evi- 
 dence," and next, it nmst be the evidence " of permanent, common interest with, 
 and attachment to, the community." Now, I contend that this sufficient evidence of 
 common, permanent interest, is only to be found in a lasting ownership of the soil of 
 the country. 
 
 This kind of property is durable, it is indestructible; and the man who acquires, or 
 is the proprietor of it, connects his fate by the strongest of all ties, with the destiny 
 of the country. No other species of property has the same qualities, or affords the 
 same evidence. Personal property is fluctuating — it is frequently invisible, as well as 
 intangible — it can be removed, and can be enjoyed as well in one society as another. 
 What evidence of permanent interest and attachment, is afforded by the ownership 
 of horses, cattle, or slaves? Can it retard or impede the removal from the State, in 
 times of difficulty or danger impending over it? What security is the ownership of 
 Bank or other stocks, or in the funded debt? None. A man may transfer this kind 
 of property in a few moments, take his seat in the stage, or embark in the steamboat, 
 and be out of the State in one day, carrying with him all he possesses. 
 
 The same objection applies to admitting persons who have only a temporary in- 
 terest ixi the soil : besides, that these temporary interests give a control to others, 
 over the votes of the holder, just as certainly, as that " a control over a man's subsis- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOX. 
 
 365 
 
 tence, is always a control over his mil/' In vain do gentlemen refer to the example 
 of other States. Here we have a safe rule laid down, by the wisdom of our ances- 
 tors, whom a-entlemen unite in canonizing, and tested and approved by the experience 
 of more than half a century. Sir, I always thought I was a republican, but gentle- 
 men would argue me out of my behef. I have always supposed, tliat our Right of 
 Suffrage was so constructed, as to protect both persons and property. God forbid 
 that I should wish to exclude any, who I can be convinced ought to be admitted, or 
 that I would oppress any portion of my fellow-citizens. My principles would lead 
 me to admit all I could, "'consistently with what I beheve the welfare of society re- 
 quires. I am no enemy to the non-freeholder; but I must vote for that rule, which 
 by securing the tranquillity and happiness of society . secures those inestimable blessings 
 to every inember of it. I do not deny to the advocates of greatly extended suffrage, 
 either in this House or out of it, perfect rectitude and sincerity of motive. Enthusiasm 
 is always sincere — but that truth does not at all mitigate the evils and desolations, 
 which it has often inflicted on mankind. 
 
 Sir, I know it has become fashionable to represent those who are opposed to many 
 of the innovations whiclrare contemplated, as the enemies of the people. Whether 
 I am their friend, I shall endeavor to manifest by my acts, and not by my professions. 
 No denunciations have any terror for me. They will pass by me like the idle wind 
 which 1 regard not.'" There is what I consider a very strong and decisive argument 
 in favor of the rule I lay down, for suffrage to be drawn from the act of the framers 
 of our Bill of Rights, which is contemporaneous with it. It is that part of the Con- 
 stitution, which declares that the Right of Suffrage in the election of members of 
 both Houses, shall remain as exercised at present." Now, the freehold suffrage was 
 then the established mode. The framers of your Constitution declare to you in the 
 most emphatic manner, that the rule winch they laid down in the Bill of Rights as to 
 suffrage, could only be complied v.'ith, by requiring a permanent interest in the soil. 
 Here then, is contemporaneous exposition always deemed the best. Nay, more, here 
 is a declaration of these wise men who framed the Bill of Rights, as to what they 
 intended in it. Will gentlemen contend, after their splendid eulogiums on them, 
 that they did not understand tlieir own words and intentions, but that the men of the 
 present day, are better expositors of both.' But the intelligent gentleman from Frede- 
 rick, endeavours to obviate the force of this argument, by insisting that this part of 
 the Constitution is not to have the same authorily as other parts, because the framers 
 of the Government did not, for tlae first time, establish the rule of suffrage, but merely 
 left it as they found it. This may be specious, but in my poor judgment, is not sohd. 
 The framers of our Government were employed in estalDlishing a system adapted to 
 the changes produced by the revolution. It was not incumbent on them to change 
 every thing. It was only wise and proper to abolish such parts of our former system, 
 as were irreconcileable with the republican form we were about to carry into effect. 
 Thus, we find in several parts of the Constitution, portions of the old institutions 
 were retained. But they were retained upon due consideration, and by adoption be- 
 came just as much the act of the framers of the Government, as the parts which were 
 created by them. If the framers of the Government had said the suffrage should be 
 conferred on the freeholder, it would be admitted, I presume, that in every sense, it 
 was a rule established hy them. Now, can it make any difference, except in mere 
 form, that a phraseology is used, which retains the rule of suffrage which had pre- 
 viously existed. But the same gentleman contends, that the retention of the Right 
 of Suffrage, as theretofore exercised, resulted probably either from the Constitution 
 being made in haste and amid the noise of hostile cannon, or that it was a sacrifice 
 made to propitiate, or rather to avoid the alienation of the freeholders. Both these 
 hypotheses appear to me to be incorrect. As to the Constitution being the result of 
 hasty or timid councils, the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Giles.) in a former 
 debate, has clearly shown, on the best evidence, it was not the case. And as to this 
 provision being an oblation to the freeholders. I find no trace in the Constitution 
 itself, in the iiTstory of the times, or even m any tradition which has come down to 
 us, to justify the idea. I believe that at the period spoken of, there was such a devo- 
 tion to country, such a love of hberty, and such disinterestedness, that the Convention 
 might, with perfect safety, have made any arrangement which they believed would 
 contribute to sustain free principles. But they were wise and practical statesmen, 
 and they knew and felt, that they had established a rule which was perfectly com- 
 patible with republican institutions. The force of the argument derived from their 
 authority, as well as from the experience under it, remains complete and unimpaired. 
 Gentlemen argue this question as if it was one between tlie Satraps, (the existence of 
 whom they choose to suppose) and the poor of the land. Instead of making war 
 upon the middhng or even the poorer classes, we believe we are defending their best 
 interests. We go not foi" the interests of wealth, when we say, that we are of opinion 
 that an interest in the soil is the best evidence of permanent attachment. This idea 
 of an aristocracy of freeholders, is not only incorrect but ludicrous. Are we con- 
 
366 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION* 
 
 tending for giving wealth in the distribution of suffrage, a weight in proportion to its 
 extent ? The answer is, that a freeliolder, v/hose farm is worth fifty dollars, has as 
 available a suffrage as one who has land worth two hundred thousand dollars. Are 
 we for fixing a high property qualification ? We reply, that it appears from this debate, 
 that a man can get a freehold in almost any county in the State for fifty dollars, and 
 in some (indeed many) for twenty-five dollars, or for a smaller sum. And yet we are 
 gravely told, that these freeholds, accessible as they are to the industry and exertions 
 of all, constitute an odious aristocracy. Sir, we do not even require that these free- 
 holds should be productive, (as many of them are not) of one cent of revenue. Sir, 
 the beauty of this system, its republican feature, is, that the humblest freeholder is 
 put on a footing with the richest man in the State. It was a little remarkable that 
 the report of the Legislative Committee proposed what I conceived to be a violation 
 of our Constitutional principles on this subject, by requiring that in addition to the \ 
 quantity of acres required by law, there should be a tax to a certain amount paid. I 
 voted against this restriction, and I am glad it was stricken out by a large majority, 
 I am for depriving no man of a vote, now entitled to it. I care not whether a man's 
 freehold be productive or otherwise. It is his all, and is as dear to him, as the freehold 
 of the owner of thousands of acres is to its proprietor. But it is said, that every man 
 who pays a tax ought to vote — now, wliat evidence of interest in the community, is 
 furnished by the payment of four cents upon a horse, or paying a poor rate and 
 ceunty levy Is it even the semblance of testimony, that the person paying it, in- 
 tends to remain in the Commonwealth ? It is also contended that service in the militia, 
 is a proper and valid claim to a vote. It is said the non-freeholder fights your battles — 
 but does not the freeholder do so too ? And does he not do another thing, pay for the 
 support of the non-freeholder ? War cannot be carried on by men alone : you require 
 munitions of war, provisions and every thing necessary to equip and sustain an army. 
 Without these, numbers are of no avail, indeed injurious. Your army would soon be 
 disorganized without them. In time of peace, the militia service which is common 
 to freeholder and non-freeholder, is light, if not nominal. In time of war, you draw 
 heavily on the property of the country, and then the freeholder is not only bound to 
 fight, but to pay. We have a strong example of this during the last war. During 
 that war, Virginia was thrown very much upon her own resources, and having found 
 that the keeping very large bodies of militia in the field, was very harassing to the 
 people, very expensive, and not very efficient, the Assembly determined on raising 
 ten thousand men for the defence of the State. The law provided, that the expenses 
 of these troops should be assessed on the property of the country, and it would have 
 fallen with great and oppressive weight on the land and slave-owners. Happily, the 
 intervention of peace saved the country from the severe burthens, to which the pro- 
 perty-holders would have been subjected. But it serves to show, what ever will be ' 
 the case, when we are exposed to the calamities incident to war. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun has stated, that he knows of no particular virtue at- 
 tached to the soil, that we should select the owners as the sole depositories of political 
 power. All professions are on a par in his estimation. I do not pretend that great 
 virtues may not be found in all the professions and walks of life. But I do believe, 
 if there are any chosen people of God, they are the cultivators of the soil. If there 
 be virtue to be found any where, it would be amongst the middling farmers, who con- 
 stitute the yeomanry, the bone and sinew of our country. Sir, they are men of mo- 
 derate desires, they have to labor for their subsistence, and the support of their fami- 
 lies ; their wishes are bounded by the limits of their small possessions ; they are not 
 harassed by envy, by the love of show and splendor, nor agitated by the restless and 
 insatiable passion of ambition. When they lay their heads at night upon their pillows 
 under the consciousness of having spent the day in the discharge of their duties to 
 their families, they enjoy a sweeter sleep under their humble roofs, than frequently 
 do those who repose in gilded palaces. Amid the same description of persons, I 
 should look for independence of character. It is a fact, that our voters are less ex- 
 posed to influence and intrigue, than any, I believe, in the United States. A man may 
 be popular enough to be elected himself, but he cannot dictate to the voters to elect 
 any other. A man who would attempt this would be apt to be insulted, and I have 
 known illustrious examples of some of the most popular men 5 aye. Sir, in the zenith 
 of their popularity, who could not control an election in favour of another. Do you 
 ever hear in this State of a man being called, as in some of the States, the partizan 
 of some great name.'' A Livingston man, or a Clinton man for example.? Ask one 
 of our freeholders whose man he is, he will tell you he is his own man. These men 
 know that their land is their own, that they are the lords of the soil; that according to 
 the principles of the common law, their house is their castle, and that no man dare 
 invade either, with impunity. Do you beheve, Mr. Chairman, that there is any pro- 
 perty which attaches a man so much to the country as the land ? There is none. His 
 attachment to his home, is connected with the best sympathies of the human heart. " 
 It is the place of his boyish sports, the birth place of his children ; and contains the 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXYENTIOX. 
 
 367 
 
 bones of his ancestors. He will love his couiitry which cont a ins a home so dear to 
 him, and defend that countty at the hazard of his life. 
 
 There is one consideration which shows the propriety of making land the basis of 
 pohlical power. It is. that the lajid. has always been, and will ever continue to be, 
 the principal source from which all your taxes are derived. The freeholders, if they 
 are an aristocracy, are the most lenient aristocrats who ever existed. From the foun- 
 dation of our Repubhc. and lon^ before, land-holders, who are the largest slave-hol- 
 ders too, have paid vour principal taxes. We have parted with the customs to the 
 General Government, and the only other sources of revenue of any great extent, 
 are your lands and negroes. The freeholders too, pay a large share of the other taxes, 
 such as taxes on hcenses, horses and carriages. Tou can never expect to see a capi- 
 tation tax, nor an income tax. They both are odious in their character: the first is 
 very unjust, and the second must be' attended with such inquisitorial powers to your 
 officers, and be so easily eluded by fi-aud, that it will not be attempted. They tried it 
 in England, and it was" the cause' of overturning the ministry which introduced it. 
 But the great advantaore of the freehold system is. that it keeps the Government in 
 the hands of the middling classes. So far from being aristocratic, it is the best safe- 
 guard against aristocracy. It places the power in the hands of those who are inter- 
 ested to guard both property and persons against oppression. The idea of aristocracy 
 is absurdT Did you'ever hear of an aristocracy of fifty dollar, or twenty-five dollar 
 freeholders .' In the hands of these freeholders, personal rights are just as secure as 
 the rights of property. 3Iany of the non-freeholders are the sons of freeholders. 
 Would thev support meeisures which would oppress their own sons Besides, have 
 not the great body of the freeholders such perfect identity of condition with the non- 
 freeholders, that "they could pass no law for the regulation of personal rights which 
 would not equally affect them as well as the non-freeholders. To those who take a 
 superficial view of things, it might appear that placing the power in the hands of 
 men, without regard to their condition, would advance the cause of Hberty. Many 
 will teU you, Sir, that they would do this to counteract the influence of "wealth in 
 society. 
 
 But these men, many of whom are ardent friends of liberty, are unconsciously 
 laborincr to undermine the cause of which they mean to be the 'strenuous advocates. 
 As long as pohtical power is placed as it now is in Virginia, in the hands of the mid- 
 dling classes, who, though not rich, are yet sufficiently so, to secure their indepen- 
 dence, you have nothing to fear from wealth. But place power in the hands of those 
 who have none, or a very trivial stake in the community, and you expose the poor 
 and dependent to the influence and seductions of wealth. The extreme rich, and the 
 extreme poor, if not natural alhes. will become so in fact. The rich vdll relieve the 
 necessities of the poor, and the latter will become subservient to the ambition of the 
 rich. Tou hear nothing of the bribery and corruption of freeholders. IS'o man is 
 hardy enough to attempt it. But extend the Right of Su&age to every man depen- 
 dent, as well as independent, and you immediately open the flood-gates of corruption. 
 You will undermine the public and private virtue of your people, and this your 
 boasted Repubhc, established by the wisdom of your ancestors, and defended at the 
 hazard of their fives. wiU share the fate of all those which have preceded it, whose 
 gradual decline, and final extinction, it has been the melancholy task of history to 
 record. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the revolution of France has been fi-equently invoked into this de- 
 bate, by the gentlemen on the other side ) but I cannot see to what useful purpose of 
 argument they have apphed it. I do not see that there is any thing very inviting in 
 the progress or termination of that revolution, from which we can infer "the propriety 
 of a hasty, inconsiderate and radical chansre of our institutions. The French. I be- 
 heve. had cause to be greatly dissatisfied with their ancient Government. During 
 that revolution, though young, I vras an enthusiastic admirer of what I believed to 
 be the cause of the people resisting oppression. But the excesses of that revolution, 
 have done more injury to the cause of freedom, than any thing which has happened 
 in modern times. Those excesses have served to rivet the chains of despotism in all 
 the monarchies of Europe. Those who set the revolution in motion, were many of 
 them. I have no doubt, virtuous and enlightened men. But they were more of phi- 
 losophers and theorists, than practical statesmen. They enlightened the minds of the 
 people. They pointed out tiie oppressions and tyranny under which thev suffered. 
 They raised a storm, which they had not the power to direct, and of which they be- 
 came the victims. They devised schemes of Government, which were either not 
 adapted to the state of the times, or which the people were incapable of hving under. 
 They did not know how free Governments would work : meanwhile, there arose fac- 
 tions, to which revolutions not unfrequently give birth, consisting of men who had 
 not h i n g to lose and every thing to gain — men dissolute and depraved — who, under 
 the mask of patriotism, were bent on the acquisition of wealth and power. Those 
 persons collecting round them all the men of desperate fortunes, aided by the mobs of 
 
368 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Paris, began by pushing revolutionary principles to an extreme, which those who 
 commenced the work of reformation never contemplated ; and because they would 
 not sanction the crimes which were perpetrated by the mountain and other factions, 
 they were brought to the guillotine. Every man must recollect with horror, the bloody 
 scenes, which took place in France, when no age, no sex, no virtues were safe from 
 the infuriated monsters who perpetrated crimes under the profaned name of liberty. 
 I mention not these things in derogation of the cause of freedom. I should rejoice 
 to see free institutions established in every country which willed to be free. But what 
 was the result ? After spilling oceans of blood, France flew to the arms of despotism 
 as a refuge from crimes and miseries inflicted under the abused name of liberty — and 
 where is she now.? Restored to the dominion of the same odious dynasty, to escape 
 which, she suffered so long and so cruelly. The misfortunes she has undergone, 
 have strengthened what is called the cause of legitimacy, by uniting all the despots 
 of the world, in a crusade against liberty, and rendering desperate the friends of 
 liberal principles in every part of Europe. I have dwelt too long on this subject, and 
 should not have said thus much, but that the example of France has been so often 
 quoted on us. Our lot in this Commonwealth is a happy one, if we would but be 
 content with it. Our institutions are free, no man is oppressed, and ever}^ man is se- 
 cure in the enjoyment of the fruits of honest industry. Our Government has no 
 taint of monarchy, or aristocracy, and poAver is in the hands of the great body of the 
 yeomanry of the country. What can a people want more ! 
 
 It was not my purpose to answer the gentleman from Loudoun in detail. I wished 
 to give a general view of the principles, on which I vindicate the freehold Right of 
 Suffrage, though it may be capable of some modifications. I will make a few remarks, 
 however, on the charges of oppression and misrule, which the gentleman has brought 
 against the existing Government. The gentleman must have been hard pressed for 
 facts to illustrate his opinion, when he has resorted to a period of remote antiquity, 
 the year 1656, to quote an insulated provision in the Statute Book, to shew oppression 
 in the freeholders. I allude to the exemption of voters and overseers from militia 
 services. This law remained in force only a few years — we hear of no instance of 
 complaint against it — and we do not know but it originated in sound policy, which 
 might have required, that in the then state of infancy of the Colony, surrounded as 
 they were by hostile tribes of Indians, and trembling for their existence, it might have 
 been necessary to keep a certain portion of the population employed in raising the 
 means of subsistence, whilst others were engaged in guarding the frontiers, or re- 
 pelling incursions. 
 
 The other specifications of supposed abuses, appear to me unimportant in their 
 character, and susceptible of easy answers. But I have already trespassed too long 
 on the indulgence of the Committee, and will conclude with observing, that when the 
 talented gentleman from Loudoun, after the other side have been so long called on, 
 to point out any abuses which have existed under this Government, has only been 
 able to find such as he has enumerated, it amounts to the highest eulogium, which can 
 be pronounced on our institutions. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now moved that when the Convention adjourned, it adjourn to meet at 
 eleven o'clock; which motion gave rise to a desultory debate, in which Messrs. Leigh, 
 Mercer, Stanard, Doddridge and Nicholas took part, and which resulted in the adop- 
 tion of Mr. Leigh's motion, by a large majority ; and then, on Mr, Doddridge's mo- 
 tion, the House adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, November 19, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr, 
 Taylor of the Baptist Church. 
 
 The House went again into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair : 
 
 And the question being on the following amendment of Mr. Wilson, as modified at 
 the request of Mr. Henderson : 
 
 " Resolved, That every free white male citizen of this Commonwealth, of the age 
 t)f twenty-one years, and upwards, who shall have resided in the State two years, and 
 in the county where he proposes to vote, one year next preceding the time of offering 
 such vote ; who shall have been enrolled in the militia, if subject to military duty ; and 
 who shall have paid all levies and taxes assessed upon him, or his property, for the year 
 preceding that in which he offers to vote, shall have a right to vote for members of 
 the General Assembly : Provided, That no person shall be permitted to exercise the 
 Right of Suffrage, who is a pauper; who is of unsound mind; who has been con- 
 victed of any infamous crime ; or who shall be a non-commissioned officer or private 
 soldier, seaman or marine in the regular service of the United tStates, or of this 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 369 
 
 Commonwealth ; and the Legislature shall prescribe the mode of trying and deter- 
 mining disputes concerning the said qualifications of voters, whenever the right of 
 a person to vote shall be questioned." 
 
 The Chairman rose to put the question, when 
 
 Mr. Trezvant of Southampton took the floor in opposition to its passage. 
 
 Mr. T. said, that he had not intended to have said any thing upon the subject under 
 the consideration of the Committee, nor had he expected to have said any thing upon 
 any other subject which might be discussed in the Convention; but as the proposed 
 amendment, the question under debate, notv/ithstanding its importance, was about to 
 be submitted without any other discussion than that v.diich it received yesterday, he 
 felt himself impelled to submit a few remarks — remarks of course, which could not be 
 the result of any previous preparation, and which necessarily must be desultory in 
 their character. What was the question under consideration ? The object of the 
 amendment was to abolish the present modification of the Right of Suffrage, and to 
 substitute in its place, one entirely new to us. When a people undertake to make a 
 change in their political institutions, alfecting the foundation of Government, it 
 behoves them to proceed with the utmost caution and circumspection. We should 
 recollect that we are about to introduce an experiment which is to operate upon the 
 affections, prejudices, and long-established habits of the community, and the conse- 
 quences cannot be distinctly foreseen or foretold. A numerous population, falling 
 not much short of a million, cannot at once throw off their old usages and customs, 
 and accommodate themselves to an entirely new order of things, radically different 
 from that under which they had lived in peace and tranquillity, without incurring the 
 risk of many and great evils. This Government had existed for more than fifty 
 years, and under it, the people had enjoyed happiness and contentment. There 
 were, it is true, occasional clamors arising from local causes and prejudices, and not 
 from any real defects in the form of Government ; and he hoped this amendment 
 would not be adopted to allay such complaints. In that part of the State in which 
 he resided, he had not heard of any serious complaint touching the Right of Suffrage. 
 The people there, in this respect, at least, were satisfied; why then adopt this new 
 qualification of the Right of Suffrage, which in his poor opinion, would put to hazard 
 the best interests of the country, and even endanger the liberties of the people.^ 
 We are called upon to substitute for the Freehold Suffrage, that which, if it be not 
 Universal Suffrage, falls but little short of it. It is proposed that those who are 
 twenty-one years of age, who bear arms, and have resided twelve months in the 
 county in which they propose to vote, should have this right, and the adoption of the 
 principle amounted in effect, to what he called Universal Suffrage. He was told by 
 one gentleman, (to the correctness of whose statistics he did not, however, feel him- 
 self bound to subscribe,) that tlie adoption of this measure would add to the number 
 of voters in the State more than 60,000, the present num.ber being somewhat more 
 than 40,000. Thus, the power of the Government is to be transferred from the hands 
 of the 40,000, who have the deepest interest at stake, to the 60,000, who have com- 
 paratively but little interest. It is no idle chimera of the brain, that the possession of 
 land furnishes the strongest evidence of permanent, common interest with, and 
 attachment to, the community. Much had been already said by gentlemen on both 
 sides, demonstrating the powerful influence of local attachment upon the conduct of 
 man, and he could not be made to comprehend how that passion could be more effec- 
 tually brought into action, than by a consciousness pf the fact, that he was the owner 
 of the spot which he could emphatically call his home. It was upon this foundation 
 he wished to place the Right of Suffrage. This was the best general standard which 
 could be resorted to, for the purpose of determining whether the persons to be invested 
 with the Right of Suni-age, were such persons as could be, consistently with the 
 safety and v/ell-being of the communit}'', entrusted with the exercise of that right. 
 Much had been said in the discussion yesterday, of the oppression and impolicy 
 resulting from an adirerence to the present restricted Suffrage, which he presumed 
 was intended to produce some effect upon public opinion, for he could not suppose it 
 was intended as a serious argument addressed to tliis Committee. 
 
 Among other things, we had been seriously told by one gentleman, that many of 
 the citizens of this Commonwealth, non-freeholders, labouring under a sense of the 
 great injustice done them in witliholding this Right of Suffrage, were known to 
 abandon their native State, and to emigrate to other States in the Union where Suf- 
 frage was Universal, that thereby they might enjoy that most invaluable right. This 
 was a mere figment of the fancy. It is admitted on all sides, that to obtain the qualifi- 
 cation of a voter, the expenditure of a trifle in amount, Avould be all that was neces- 
 sary. Yet, we are told that the persecuted citizens of this Commonwealth are migra- 
 ting to other parts of the Union, to avoid this odious principle, and doing this at an 
 expense too, much beyond what would be required to make them freeholders. Gen- 
 tlemen deal in fanciful suggestions. He would venture to hazard the opinion, that 
 no man that ever lived in that portion of the State from wliicli he came, was ever 
 
 47 
 
370 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 known to fly to other countries to avoid that or anj? other kind of poKtieal oppression. 
 The idea was a new one, and he hoped it had sprung from the fruitful imagination of 
 the gentleman. Let those wlio indulge in these fancies, enquire of snch Virginians 
 as miy have emigrated to other States, what their opinions are npon this subject. 
 Will they be found to revile Virginia with curses, becawse, while citizens here, they 
 enjoyed not the Riglst of Suffrage ? No. They would hold a very different lan- 
 guage, and instead of complaints of tyranny and oppression, they v^'ould speak in; 
 terms of the profoundest veneration of her pohtical institutions. Virginia had not 
 so completely fellen from her high estate, as some gentlem.en had been pleased tO' 
 represent; and if she had suffered any deterioration, it did not resnlt so much from 
 her own councils as froirf those of another Government, which in many respects 
 exercises a contrcml over her destinies. Is it because she, in common with the other 
 Southern States, is labouring under a deplorable commercial depression, that we are 
 called upon to abandon the old and established order of things, and look for an 
 improvement of our condition from the future councils of the State Government? 
 We may pull down this Government under this vain expectation, but he eiateitained 
 serious apprehensions that we could not build up another which could long endure- 
 No, Sir; the condition in which Vv^e find ourselves, has not arisen from, nor can it be 
 improved by, the policy of the State Government, in the regulation of her internal 
 and domestic concerns. It could not be effected by the introduction of Universal 
 Suffrage, as intended by tlie proposition of the gentleman from Monongalia; for since^ 
 so few would be excluded, he felt himself justified in calling it Universal. He 
 indulged a sanguine hope tlip.t the Committee was not prepared to adopt this bold 
 innovation — he would say this dangerous experiment, fraught in his opinion, with 
 mischief inconceivable. He said that he had listened with much attention to the 
 gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson,) who addressed the Committee yesterday. 
 He had expected that that gentleman would have furnished some strong and conclu- 
 sive arguments in support of tliat side of this question which he had espoused — he 
 Jiad been much disappointed, not because the gentleman did not possess the requisite 
 talents and ingenuity to sustain himself with ability in the maintenance of any 
 opinions he might advance, but he was disposed to ascribe his disappointment to the 
 fact, that the subject did not admit of more conclusive arguments. This Committee 
 no doubt would look at the facts according to that gentleman's own statement, unin- 
 fluenced by his eloquent effusions. And what are those facts ? To substitute for the 
 freeholder, a class of sixty thousand people, who are to controul the operations of a 
 Government, in the correct and judicious administration of which the forty thousand 
 freeholders, with the whole land of the Commonwealth in their hands, and of course 
 possessed of all other species of property, in an amount greatly exceeding that held 
 by the non-freeholders. In other words, the great landed interest is to be placed in 
 the keeping of a majority of twenty thousand, who have no direct and immediate 
 connection with it, and who even as it regards all other property, have an interest 
 infinitely short of that which the freeholders possess. If this principle were intro- 
 duced in a Government administered without the intervention of public agents, it 
 would be neither more nor less than a pure democracy ; and we have yet to learn 
 whether, if introduced in our Government, it will not end in ruinous consequences. 
 Gentlemen who advocate this extraordinary extension of the Right of Suffrage, are 
 compelled to admit the necessity of fixing upon some limitation. Upon their own 
 principles, they exclude three-fourths of the white population from the possession of 
 any political power. According to their own favourite theory, we do not violate any 
 existing rights by depositing this povver where it can be safely lodged, in the hands of 
 the freeholders-^he said he was willing to accede to a proposition extending the Right 
 of Suffrage, but it should rest upon, or be closely and intimately connected with, the 
 ownership of land — that interest must be considered in any extension of the Right of 
 Suffrage which would meet with his support. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun rests the claim of non-freeholders to the Right of 
 Suffrage, upon the military services which they are called upon to render to the 
 country. An apt reply has been already given to this pretension. Freeholders are 
 called upon to render like military services, and in addition thereto, are required to fur- 
 nish the sinevv's of war." They fight by the side of non-freeholders in their coun- 
 try's battles, and almost exclusively furnish the pecuniary means of sustaining the 
 Government in peace, as well as war. It v/ould be a waste of time to detain the 
 Committee longer, in discussing this subject, with a view to expose the extravagance 
 of the scheme presented by the proposition under consideration. He would not refer 
 to passing events of tiie day, in support of what he was about to say, but he would 
 remind gentlemen that history did not furnish an example of a Government founded 
 upon Universal Suffrage, that had not degenerated to a despotism. 
 
 A comparison had been made between the other States of this Union and this 
 State, much to the disparagement of Virginia. It was not his intention to have 
 passed any encomiums upon his native State. It did not become him to deal in empty 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVE^^TIOX. 
 
 or substantial compliments on her institutions or her people. It should be left to 
 others less interested, to pass judgment upon these matters — but he trusted he should 
 be excused in expressing the opinion, that in most respects she could bear a compa- 
 rison -R-itli any of her sister States. In what is she deficient : In wl.at respect is 
 she behind them? Are iier people deficient in patriotism? A • . - v anting in 
 those virtues -vrhieh ennoble man ? Is she inferior to any of tht - - . liioral cha- 
 racter r In aJl these respects, he would say she stood pre-emiuci. i.:^:;. With all 
 the supposed defects in iier character, he would be unwihing to exchange it for that 
 of any ^other country- — not even for that of the land of steady habits. Passing in 
 review the whole Union, from 3Iaine to its most Southern border, no cause of mor- 
 tification would result from the comparison. Has she not produced a long line of 
 Statesmen, and driven birth to a galaxy of warriors, whose names she can proudly 
 point to in'refatalion of tiiis charge ? Sir, in point of character, she yields nothing 
 to her sister States, and for this^ character she is mainly indebted to those pohtical 
 institutions which it'seems we are resolved sliaU give place to a new order of things; 
 so far at least, as tliat can be effected by the adoption of the proposition ofiered by the 
 gentleman from Monongalia. 
 
 We have been referi-ed to France, by the gentleman from Loudoun, and }iave been 
 told that the oppression on the part of the nobles and priesthood, had brought on tlie 
 revolution in that country. We have no nobles here, neither have we any priesthood 
 practising oppression upon the people. He v.'as sure that no oppressions of that kind 
 were practised in the Eastern part of the State. He had no personal knowledge of 
 the actual state of things beyond the Blue Ridge, but he had ahvays believed the 
 people of that recrion of the State to be an honest, virtuous, and intelligent race of 
 men, and as little disposed as any people upon earth, to submit to the sort of oppress 
 sion spoken of by that crentleman. It is true that these oppressions did exist in that 
 country, and did ofive rise to that revolution which %vas attended with sucli horrors 
 and waste of human life. But, Sir, this xery principle — this Universal Sufiirage, had its 
 fiill share in bringing upon that devoted country, the calamities to which it v^-as exposed. 
 
 He was sensible that his observations were of an extremely desultory character. 
 He had appeared before the Committee as he had before stated, ur-expectedly to him- 
 self, and his principal object was to occupy a small portion of its time, that others 
 who he knew could do greater justice to the subject, might have an opportunitv oi" 
 submitting their views. He was sorry that he had detained the Committee so Ions'-., 
 He hoped the Committee would reject the proposition under consideration. If. how-^ 
 ever, the proposition could be modified or amended, so as to accord wiui his. views, he 
 would vote for it: otherwise, he could not. He was not disposed to trust to specula- 
 tive theories. He begged leave, however, before he resumed his seat, to ask the 
 Committee to advert to the manner in which our popular elections were conducted, 
 and he would appeal to them if we were not placed in an enviable situation in that 
 respect, compared to the condition of tliose States in the Union where Sufirage was 
 more extended than in this. We hear nothing of those commotions in this State 
 which frequently occur at the elections in other parts of the United States, where 
 Universal Sufirage, or something approaching nearly to it, prevails. He had been 
 for many years familiar with the manner in which the elections in this State had been 
 conducted, as he supposed every other member of this body had been, and had no 
 doubt he should be sustained by all, when he said that Virginia in this respect would 
 bear an honorable comparison with any other part of the world. No popular elections 
 were conducted with more respect for the laws, or could be conducted with more 
 regard to decorum. If we add sb:ty thousand to the number of voters, we must 
 necessarily change tlie mode of votmo'. He was attached to the viva voce manner 
 of voting, because it was the most honest and manljr mode. Extend tlie Riffht of 
 Suffirage, and you must resort to the ballot-box : otherwise, these voters cannot act 
 independently — they must have the means of concealing their votes. That change, 
 as simple as it might appear to some, in his estimation, would let in a fiood of fraud 
 and corruption which would end in tlie destruction of every thing lilie honesty and 
 independence in our elections. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge proposed that in taking the vote, the names of the Committee 
 should be called over. 
 
 The Chair in reply, remarked, that it was not strictly in order, in Committee of the 
 Whole, to call over names. He begged to make the suorgestion, that the divisions on 
 questions in Committee were to be regarded only in the ifght of comparisons of views; 
 and when the names are announced, such is the pride of "opinion, that members might 
 be inclined afterwards to adhere to opinions, which tliey might have been disposed to 
 change, but for their premature committal before the "public eve. He merely made 
 the sugorestion. The Committee might take it for what it was "worth. 
 
 The Chairman rose to put the question, when Mr. Bayly addressed the Chair : 
 
 Mr. Cliairman, — Before you put the question on the amendment, I wish to express 
 my opinion in favor of extendmg the Pvight of Suffrao'e, wliich is no v.- under consi- 
 
372 
 
 DEBA.TES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 deration. I am not in the habit of apologizing, when I consider it to be my duty to 
 address this Committee, and I shall not do it now. I will say, that although 1 did in- 
 tend to speak on the proposition now under discussion, a,t some other time, and ex- 
 pected that other gentlemen would have occupied your attention on this day; yet, as 
 the question is about to be taken, and as my constituents are among the foremost in 
 the call for this Convention, for the express wish of having the Right of Suffrage ex- 
 tended, I owe it to myself and to them, to give the reasons why 1 shall vote lor the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Monongalia. 
 
 In the year 1807, the people of Accomack petitioned the General Assembly to call 
 a Convention, to extend the Right of Suffrage to other persons than freeholders, and 
 to redress grievances existing under the Constitution. At that time, very few free- 
 holders, in the other four counties, which I represent in part, wished for such a mea- 
 sure. But at this time, with the great change of public opinion that has taken place 
 in these counties, and the almost unanimous wish of the freeholders of the county of 
 Accomack, there can be no doubt, but a very large majority of the freeholders of the 
 district, are in favor of extending the Right of Suffrage to others than land-holders. 
 
 When I was elected to this Convention, I considered it to be my duty to inform 
 myself of the alterations and amendments to the existing Constitution, which the 
 people in every part of the State demanded, and to correct these evils in the new 
 Constitution, And when I shall frankly state to this Committee some of the great 
 amendments in the Constitution, which my constituents wish us to make, and as I 
 most cordially unite with them, in the hope, that those improvements will be made, 
 I axn not to be considered a leveller, a revolutionist, or a radical reformer : such a 
 character does not belong to me, it is far from me. A sense of duty points to me, to 
 pursue that course, which will lead to the correction of the evils complained of in every 
 part of the State ; which I hope and expect, will be so amended by the Constitution 
 we shall submit to the people, that tliey will cheerfully ratify it. 
 
 If I thought that the adoption of this amendment would endanger the safety of 
 property, or would put power in the hands of those, who would in any manner abuse 
 it, I would not vote for the amendment, but would give it my most decided disapproba- 
 tion. It may be dangerous, perhaps, v/here the non-freeholders are destitute of pro- 
 perty and j)rinciple. Such is not the character nor condition of the people among 
 whom I live, who were among the first to favor the extension of the Right of Suf- 
 frage, and are now so unanimous for it. It may be, that the peculiar situation of that 
 people ; the difficulty for all to acquire a freehold, and the denial of that right, to those 
 who have a freehold less than twenty-five acres of land, may be a great cause in 
 creating that unanimity, which at this time exists among them upon this question. 
 They have not the facilities of acquiring freeholds, that exist in other parts of the 
 State, to qualify themselves to be voters, where there is so much waste and useless 
 land. If a man could by law vote in the county where he resides, upon the requisite 
 freehold, situated in any other county in the State, he might purchase a freehold in 
 the West, where the rocks and mountains cover half their counties, for one or two 
 dollars. 
 
 Penned up in a peninsula, every one who wishes to obtain a vote, cannot realize 
 hat blessing under the present system, however much he may prize the privilege, 
 whatever may be his standing or even his means. The territory is small, and the 
 tracts of twenty-five acres, which are necessary to make the qualification, are not 
 easily to be obtained at any price ; but, although the qualification of electors are thus 
 confined to the soil, the respectability of the inhabitants is not exclusively derived 
 from that source. I have never believed, that tlie qualification ought to depend on 
 the right in the soil. No such principle is believed to be correct among the people 
 with whom I live. They do not draw their subsistence solely from the land. A great 
 proportion of them are worthy mechanics, and many earn their bread by ploughing 
 the ocean. It is not easy for such men, on their first entering into life, to lay up 2 or 
 $ 300, to purchase the requisite freehold, to qualify them to vote. However easily 
 that miglit be obtained in other parts of the State, having vast mountains of worthless 
 land, where fifty acres may be acquired by a week's labour, enterprize and industry 
 cannot always be so soon rewarded in a dense population, where land is in great de- 
 mand, and is of high value. I have never considered the possession of a freehold, as 
 the best evidence and test of permanent and common interest with, and attachment 
 to, the community. I believe, that many situations and circumstances in life furnish 
 tests as certain. 
 
 The Bill of Rights declares, " that election of members to the General Assembly 
 ought to be free, and that all men having sufficient evidence of permanent common 
 interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the Right of Suffrage." And 
 yet so much has been said on the necessity of disfranchising the soldier ! No such ne- 
 cessity applies to the Eastern Shore. There it is considered the sacred duty of all to 
 protect their country against any invading enemy. During the two wars in which 
 this country has been engaged^ there were no exempts, nor was there one example of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CON\^ENTION. 
 
 373 
 
 any man shrinking from his duty ; all rushed to the post of danger the moment the 
 alarm was given, poor and rich. The most aged was found quite as ready as the 
 .)'-oung. No man was then disqualified from the protection of the property of the free- 
 holder ; for, all showed that they had a common interest with, and attachment to, the 
 community. 
 
 It is said, that the soldier cannot be trusted — the militia-man cannot be trusted, 
 without he has a freehold. This is a doctrine which ought not to be entertained. 
 Compare these objections — a more patriotic band of men never entered the army of 
 Washington, than the 9th Virginia Continental Regiment— they fought by his side at 
 Brandywine, German town, Trenton, Princeton and Monmouth, and their valor is v/ell 
 known to the venerable President of this Convention; and I rejoice that he has not 
 forsaken the soldiers of the revolution, for they never have forsaken him. But, Sir, 
 the indejrendence of the country being obtained, they disband themselves and return 
 home in beggary: and these men who have saved the Constitution of their country, 
 by that very°Constitution, are expelled from the polls to make way for some old tory: 
 they have no right to be there, because they have sheicn no i^ermanent interest in, and 
 attachment to, the community. Sir, this scene has occurred in every old county in 
 the State, and in many is yearly witnessed. Such things roused the people to com- 
 plain, and induced them to vote for a Convention — I mean the freeholders. They 
 cannot, they will not believe, that such aged and virtuous men ought not to partici- 
 pate in the elective franchise, under the very Government that their valor established. 
 
 Is the proposition of the gentleman from Monongalia, a project of the non-free- 
 holders.^ No, Sir; it is the wish of the freeholders themselves, to restore to the non- 
 freeholders those rights which they ought always to have had. If 21,890 to 16,637, 
 gives any expression of their will, they have said that they are desirous to abandon 
 the distinction they now hold. 
 
 If this Government belongs to the freeholders, it is they who say we are willing to 
 part with this exclusive power, and share it with our brethren. The freeholders pos- 
 sessing the Government, and the sovereignt}' being in the people, and the freeholders 
 desire that the rest of their fellow-citizens shall be admitted to participate in political 
 power — what good reason can, or has been assigned for this Convention to oppose 
 that desire It is not the non-freeholders merely: it is the freeholders themselves, 
 who complain of the existing state of things. I have never heard the non-freeholders 
 half so loud to call for this Convention, as the freeholders themselves. 
 
 It was from the most thickly settled part of the county of Accomack, and from 
 those who reside near the Maryland line, that the demand to extend the Right of Suf- 
 frage was most earnest. Many of the freeholders have cut up their farms already 
 into small tenements, to give to their sons the right of voting ; so that they can lop 
 off no more, without depriving themselves of that privilege. And those who reside 
 in the north of the county, having a constant intercourse with the people of the State 
 of Maryland, trading to their town, they become acquainted vvith their institutions, 
 and they see how the extended Right of Suffrage operates there, and finding no evil 
 resulting from it, consequently they are anxious for the change in their own State. 
 
 Farms are divided and sub-divided so often, that even that cannot be further done 
 to any advantage, so as to leave a support to a family practising the greatest industry 
 and frugality. The farm being now so small that it can only be given to one son, 
 and generally the first born, he remains at home with his father — cultivates the land — 
 supports him in his old age — and at his death inherits the freehold. The other sons 
 are sent from home, generally to the towns in Marjdand and Pennsylvania, to learn 
 useful mechanical trades ; they return, they will not leave the view of the smoke of 
 their father's dwelling; the old man, perhaps, can cut ©ff an acre of land from his lit- 
 tle farm, or purchase one in the neighbourhood, on which is erected a ship yard or a 
 blacksmith shop — these young men enter with great skill and industry on their trades, 
 and very soon marry : these useful mechanics, having returned to your State, full 
 of patriotic love for this Commonwealth, and as much attached to her interests as the 
 freeholder. Yet, you are going to say to them, in the Constitution you are now 
 making, '■' Young man, you have returned to your countr}-. with a perfect knowledge 
 of your useful profession, you are raising up a family of great promise to the welfare 
 of Virginia, but you get your living by throwing the broad-axe, the sledge-hammer, 
 or the saw, you cannot be trusted, you have not that attachment to your country as 
 your oldest brother, who has remained at home, and followed the plough-handles; he 
 must be trusted to vote for himself and you." 
 
 Gentlemen say the non-freeholderr, do not wish this privilege to be extended to 
 them. I know of no such description of men ; and if there be many of that opinion 
 in this ancient Commonwealth, they are fit subjects for a King. A free man who is 
 willing to be governed by laws, and voluntarily prefers to relinquish to other men the 
 authority to elect the Lav.^giver, is a slave already, and he is not a fit member of a 
 Republic. 
 
374 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Much has been said about confusion at elections. I do not believe, if we extend 
 the Right of Suffrage as far as any of us wish, that there is danger on this score. Our 
 people are not of tiiat riotous character. I have never seen any confusion in that 
 part of the country where I live, at elections. I have never seen nor heard of any 
 confusion in any part of Virginia at elections. But reject this proposition, and let the 
 old restrictions and disqualiiications continue, and you will not be long v»ithout con- 
 fusion, and great confusion, at the polls, and from the polls. You vmst show a dis- 
 position to redress the evils of which the people complain, or you must expect that 
 their complaints will assume a louder tone. But suppose the people shall ever be- 
 come corrupt, and their own worst enemies at elections, (I entertain no fear that 
 they ever will,) and that riot and bloodshed should be the consequence. There is a 
 remedy for this, and a simple one : it is to lay off the counties into small electoral dis- 
 tricts, and you prevent all danger of riot; (and as a gentleman near me suggests,) let 
 the elections be held on the same day in ail the districts, and that v/ill prevent large 
 collections of people at one place, and consequently prevent confusion. No, Sir, there 
 is no such danger. Have your people ever shown a disposition for insurrection 
 Have you ever seen or heard of a disposition am.ong them to riot and insurrection ^ 
 Have you ever seen or heard of a disposition among them to rise in arms against the 
 General Government although at times they have been so much excited against the 
 administration of that Government. They can be trusted ; they may with the utmost 
 safety, even if you extend to them the utmost limits of the elective power, he trusted. 
 
 My worthy friend from Richmond, (Mr. Nicholas,) (and I use that expression only 
 in reference to old and tried friends,) tells us about revolutionary France, and the 
 evils which grew out of it, in that country. Much good has resulted to the people 
 from that revolution. Why, Sir, it may have happened, that the heads of one or two 
 contemptible nobles may have fallen into the sack of the executioner, brought on by 
 their own vices and treason, but nobody lamented their fate. The people were bound 
 down in chains, which the Government refused, not only to knock off, but to slacken : 
 they were broken and torn asunder ; and like the bursting of a volcano, desolated all 
 around. But, is that the state of things here.^ Is there any monarch, or rich noble- 
 man, to throw his gold among the people at our elections, to promote the utmost con- 
 fusion and riot ? Let us not take for our guide facts recorded by pensioned authors 
 during the French revolution, and pretend that what has happened to that country 
 and its institutions, will happen to our institutions, but rather take for authority the 
 Whigs of this country. Jefferson saw the scenes at the commencement of the revo- 
 lution ; he was Minister of the United States to France. Was he the enemy of Uni- 
 versal Suffrage.? No, Sir ; on the contrary, the longer he lived, the more he was at- 
 tached to it, even unto death. 
 
 Did the sight of the scenes of that revolution, even under Robespierre, cure the 
 venerable gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Monroe,) he also was Minister to France, 
 from his attachment to the rights of man.? He has told you that there is nothing to 
 fear from extending Suffrage in this country. Ours are a different kind of people, and 
 on them I place all my confidence. They will not break out in mobs of sanguinary 
 violence : they only ask their rights as freemen, and for this purpose the amendment 
 is offered. I am desirous to know wliy it is that certain parts of the Common v/ealth 
 adjacent to other States where Suffrage is enjoyed to the fullest extent, are all in favor 
 of this great change ? I mea.n the freeholders in those districts. You see the South- 
 West part of the State vWiich joins Tennessee and Kentucky; the North-West which 
 joins Ohio and Pennsylvania; and the North-East which joins Maryland, all anxious 
 for this change. Gan it be, that all the wisdom lies in the centre of the State ? The 
 people of those parts of the State to which I have referred, have witnessed and know 
 how this thing operates upon their neighbours; and are, with very few exceptions, in 
 favor of extending this right to freemen. The result of the trial is conclusive. We 
 are not making an experiment, we are following those already made. Yes, the expe- 
 riment is not to be made ; the plan has been tried by other States ; and the result is, 
 that their population and prosperity has most rapidly increased, and they prove that 
 man can govern himself. 
 
 The question of Internal Improvement in this State, has soijiehow got into this de- 
 bate — how, I do not comprehend exactly. I am in favor of Internal Improvement to 
 a limited extent, with the aid only of the fund set apart for that purpose ; and my 
 main reason for having gone with the West on the subject of their roads and division 
 of counties, has been my pride — yes. Sir, my pride as a Virginian. _ I believe it is 
 our interest and duty to hold out and to give every inducement to emigrants from the 
 Northern States and from Europe, to settle that part of tlie country, and to retain our 
 own population at home. We have seen Virginia fall from being the first State of 
 the Union, to that of the third ; and without great exertions on our part, she Vv-ill fall 
 still lower. I look to the West as my hope, to see her maintain her present station 
 in these States. Extend the elective franchise, make your system of Government 
 liberal and republican, and you will fill Western Virginia with inhabitants, and all 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 375 
 
 parts of your State with a more dense population. The Right of Suffrage has hitherto 
 been confined to freeholders exclusively. V^T'ill any one give me a reason why it 
 should be required of a voter for members of the General Assembl}'-, when the same 
 requisite is not demanded of those who fill the high departments of the State ? Your 
 Generals, your Governors, your Judges, your Treasurer, your Auditor, are not re- 
 quired to be freeholders. They are not required to possess this emblem of " perma- 
 nent, common interest with, and attachment to, the community." That evidence is 
 exacted alone from the native born citizen, the honest planter, when he goes to the 
 polls. So also in the Federal Government. The President, the Senators, the Repre- 
 sentatives, the Judges, and all others from them downward are placed in office, with- 
 out enquiring whether they are freeholders or not. Can any man give a plausible 
 reason, why a man is fit to fill all those high offices, and not fit to come to the polls.? 
 If you can trust men in all high offices without an interest in the soil, why cannot 
 you trust a voter also, without that interest in the land? I will not reply to epithets 
 that gentlemen have used on both sides — such as aristocrat, republican, &c. I may 
 be called either : those who know me best, are republicans by acts and deeds, and not 
 by words. They have confided their interest to me, and, I trust, it will not be abused. 
 Make a Constitution that the people will gladly approve — redress all the evils com- 
 plained of by the old Constitution, and you may call it aristocracy, oligarchy and 
 every thing but a Republic; yet the people will ratif}'^ it. 
 
 In Virginia, epithets have lost their power; I will vote for such a Constitution as 
 my constituents wish; nor will I concede to my friend from Richmond (Mr. Nicho- 
 las,) that he and those who are with him on this question, are the exclusive friends 
 of the people; I know of no act they have done, which entitles them to use the 
 phraseology/, " JVe the friends of the people.''' If his friend meant, that they were the 
 friends of the freeholders, he will find that a majority of the freeholders are in favor 
 of this change ; and if he meant that they were the friends of the non-freeholders, I 
 suspect that the friendship will not be accepted. 
 
 The gentleman has told you, that he was Attorney General for twenty years. Was 
 this said to give his opinions greater weight with the community ? I know the gen- 
 tleman was Attorney General, and Virginia never had a better ; and I know also, 
 that I aided to put liim there. At the age of twenty-two, I voted for the gentleman, 
 (who was then about the same age,) and I have never repented for so doing, because 
 I have never had cause for such repentance. At that time, I knew him only from 
 report, whicli was strong in his favor ; a young man of great expectations to them 
 who knew him ; but I had a stronger reason ; he was the son of that old revolutionary 
 and'genuine Whig, R-obert Carter Nicholas, Treasurer of Virginia; and a scion from 
 that pure stock, might safely be trusted in any station he desired, for he would honor 
 it. I cannot admit that he and those who act with him on this question, are the only 
 friends of the people; if so, v/hy did he cease to be the agent, the officer, the repre- 
 sentative of the people, I will not say servant, I dislike the word.? I trust my friend 
 will excuse me, if I recommend to him to strike out all that part of his speech rela- 
 ting to Bank stock, lest his friends, the people, enquire what ofice he nov^^ holds.* 
 
 Another idea the gentleman suggested — perhaps I mistake him — Ihope I do — I take 
 no notes. He told the Committee, I think, that no reliance was to be placed on men, 
 who hold Bank stock; that the man who holds Bank stock, is net to be trusted like a 
 man who stands upon the soil. Sir, in that opinion I agree. Yes, Sir, I agree with the 
 gentleman — the Bank stock-man may sell out to-day and be gone to-morrov/ ; and a man 
 who stands on his oxon land, is more entitled to confidence, than he whose estate is in 
 Bank stock ; a Bank stock-man is not a Virginia man. The Bank stock-man now. is not 
 like the Bank stock-man Avhen the old Constitution was made. The people, at that 
 time, when they v^'-ent to the Treasury, of which Robert Carter Nicholas held the key, 
 received hard money and gold, and would be content even witli cut money, bits and 
 half bits. There was then in the Treasury the old English guinea, and the Spanish 
 doubloon, half joes and pistoles. But now they are all gone, and with them, the 
 golden American Eagle, with all its brood, has taken flig-ht to a distant land. Go 
 now to the Treasury, and what do you get? To be sure the paper currency is good 
 now, but few there are who know how long it will be good. 
 
 Virginia before ]ias had a paper currency ; the old continental paper money was 
 good, when first issued ; and although it fell to nothing, the people even now keep it, 
 venerate, and revere it, and think it a great blessing that it was made, and so it was : 
 for it carried this Commonwealth triumphantly through the revolution, and thus ren- 
 dered a blessing on the country. Not so with all the Bank paper — the paper money of 
 the present day ; for, some Bank paper has become so M'orthless, as to be of no other 
 use than to be given to the children. 
 
 * Mr. Nicholas is President of the Farmers' Bank of Virginia. The money of the Treasury is kept 
 in that Bank and in the Bank of Virginia. 
 
376 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 I know the time has been when the people of the United States might be caught 
 by names, and, if my friend from Richmond will take it in good humour, I would re- 
 quest him and his associates, if ever they should happen to be put upon a Central 
 Committee, and should send printed tickets to some remote parts of the State upon 
 the supposition that the people could not write, not to head the tickets the " People's 
 Ticket," the "American System," "Internal Improvements," "Rail Roads;" for it 
 will give their friends trouble to cut such trash off. For, I can assure him, that in 
 some parts of the State, this will be absolutely necessary. Such titles are mere chaff. 
 The people are not now to be deceived by names any longer, nor prevailed on to agree 
 to a restriction of the Right of Suffrage to the freehold. You may christen the new 
 Constitution by whatever name you will ; if you do not liberally extend the PJght of 
 Suffrage, and reform other great abuses which has got into the Government under 
 the old Constitution, they will not vote for the new Constitution, but will have 
 another Convention, which will do what this Convention ought to do. 
 
 Another cause of dissatisfaction, is the personal labour exacted of the non-freehol- 
 ders, in making and repairing the roads of the Commonwealth. My constituents do 
 not of themselves complain of the labour, for it is scarcely felt in the county : the 
 roads there are kept in repair by one day's labour in the year, and are the best roads 
 in the State ; but their complaint is of the principle. You exclude them from the 
 polls, and you compel them to labour on the road, against the wish of 21,896 freehol- 
 ders, who voted for a call of this Convention, to 1G,G37, who voted to continue this 
 oppressive system ; and if you send a Constitution to the people with such oppression 
 not redressed, how long do you expect the people will suffer them to remain so ? You 
 have to insert a clause in the Constitution you are now making, providing for the 
 mode and povv^er of future amendments. After that, is it expected that this odious 
 restriction of the Right of Suffrage will remain in the Constitution three years And 
 if you do not engraft such a provision as to amendments, you will have another Con- 
 vention in less than three years. Sir, is it not wise — is it not politic — to give up some- 
 thing to the feelings and wishes of the people — and if you please so to call it, even 
 to their prejudices and ignorance And he is an unwise statesman who does not con- 
 sult even the prejudices of the people of this country. We are here for that very 
 purpose to consult their wishes and opinions, and make a Constitution accordingly. 
 It is not expected that we can make the best Constitution that can be made, but it is 
 expected that we shall make such a one as our constituents wish, and is suited to the 
 times and to them, to the end that they shall be prosperous and happy under it. We 
 have only to make the changes which are asked for by our sovereigns, the people, and 
 they will be grateful, and we shall be honoured with their approbation. Mr. Chair- 
 man, I have a very great desire that the amendment of the gentleman from Monon- 
 galia should prevail. It will be hke oil thrown on the troubled ocean. It will calm 
 the agitation of the public mind, which is now so alarming. I hope this debate will 
 be extended, I wish to hear what the people of every part of the State think and 
 wish upon this subject. There are gentlemen in this Committee, who are not accus- 
 tomed to speak, but have the strongest intellect. I think it is their duty to cast light 
 upon this question, and state particularly the Avishes of the people with whom tney 
 live. I have endeavoured to discharge this duty, although not to my satisfaction. I 
 have heard eloquence, and great eloquence in this House. But there is in this As- 
 sembly, another class of members, besides the eloquent speakers. I refer to the 
 silent members, who, I believe, know more what the people wish upon this occasion, 
 and feel more for what the people complain of, than the eloquent gentlemen who have 
 so often occupied the floor. To them I look with hope, and I trust I shall not look in 
 vain. I repeat my desire that the debate should be continued, 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said, that under the present state of things he vi^ould not vote for this 
 amendment. He would not say he would not vote for it under another state of things. 
 It would depend upon what basis of Representation would be adopted. If the white 
 population should be taken, he would be willing to restrict the Right of Suffrage ; but 
 if the basis of property be taken, then he would be wilhng to extend the right of voting 
 to more persons, for the purpose of balancing that influence of wealth which might be 
 infused into our system. He made this remark to obviate any charge of inconsistency 
 which might be hereafter brought against him. 
 
 Mr. Scott asked, what would be the condition of any who have the qualification, if 
 they have not paid their tax. If he who has the property, and is assessed, should be 
 returned on the pay books as delinquent, will he not be entitled to vote.^ If the man 
 who is not assessed in any property may vote, will not the man who is assessed, but 
 who has not paid his tax, be entitled to his vote.^ 
 
 Mr. Wilson said, it was his intention to include those who were not assessed for any 
 tax, provided they were not subject to any of the disqualifications which were speci- 
 fied. But as to the man who has property, and is fairly assessed, yet refuses to pay, 
 he evinces such a disregard for the community, that he ought to be excluded from tlie 
 privilege of giving his vote. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 377 
 
 Mr. Morgan of Monongalia, then rose and addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman; Before the question be put to the Committee, I wish to submit a 
 few remarks in favor of the adoption of the amendment now under consideration. 
 
 The subject is very properly deemed by every member of this body, one of great 
 importance. It involves the sovereign rights of the people — rights too, v/hich when 
 restrained, ought to be restrained with great care. We are told by able writers on the 
 subject, that the right of voting in the appointment of Legislators, is a sovereign right, 
 and one of the firstlmportance in free Governments. It is a sovereign right, and must 
 be so considered here. I presume then, Sir, that it can only be abridged so far as shall 
 be necessary for the pubhc safety and the public good. And our inquiry is, how far can 
 this right be safely extended.' or what is a proper restraint upon it? We all agree 
 that good Grovernment depends very much upon the determination of this question. 
 
 I believe. Sir, that the very best form of Government for the promotion of human 
 happiness and safety, is dictated by the natural love of liberty and equality, implanted 
 in every human heart; and in every act of mine upon this floor, I shall be guided by 
 this notion. I shall pursue that course which I think best calculated to secure the en- 
 joyment of the greatest possible portion of the rights of man to the people of this Com- 
 monwealth. Government is, or ought to be instituted, not for the restraint of those 
 rights, but for their security and enlargement. We are not to look for man by him- 
 self in the forest, but in society, where he can only be found. He is a social being 
 by nature — he was made to live in society, and cannot live without it. In my hum- 
 ble judgment, (which, however, I do not presume to put in competition with the 
 judgment of this body,) society may be so ordered as to enable man to enjoy all his 
 natural rights, in a much more perfect and ample manner, than he can possibly do 
 alone, in the unbroken forest. 
 
 In the few remarks which I propose submitting for the consideration of the Com- 
 mittee, I shall endeavor to argue from facts to conclusions, and not by mere declama- 
 tion, as I think was the course of the gentleman who preceded me in opposition to the 
 amendment of my colleague, (Mr. Wilson.) It is from facts we are to look for cor- 
 rect conclusions, and I know of no better course of reasoning on the affairs of Govern- 
 ment, than to look into facts and circumstances connected with other Governments, 
 similar to those in our own, and the effects, and to conclude that similar facts and cir- 
 cumstances here, would produce similar effects. 
 
 The gentleman of the city of Richmond, (Mr. Nicholas.) on yesterday, from his 
 course of declamation, came to the conclusion, that non-freeholders could not love 
 Virginia. His principal argument consisted in the fact, that the holder of Bank stock 
 in this city might go to the office, transfer his stock, and in a few hours have himself 
 conveyed to the State of Maryland. I pray you. Sir, cannot the land-holder do tlie 
 same, by going to another office, (the clerk's office,) and there transfer his land.? 
 This sovereign right never can, or ought to depend upon the ease or facility of the 
 mere alienation of property. No, Sir, it must depend upon higher considerations. 
 
 The gentleman across the way, (Mr. Trezvant.) seems alarmed at the amendment, 
 because it contains what he calls Universal Suffrage. I would call it General Suffrage. 
 It is possible, however, that his objections have been induced by an intimate acquaint- 
 ance with the improper exercise of the Right of Suffrage by free negroes in the elec- 
 tions in North Carolina. I believe the gentleman resides near that State. Or, per- 
 haps his argument is drawn from the fact, which he has given the Committee, that 
 some gentleman of his acquaintance, raised in Virginia, who removed to some of the 
 Western States, where the Suffrage may be said to be general, resided there several 
 years, again saw the gentleman, and told him that he still loved Virginia: ergo, the 
 Right of Suffrage as fixed by the Constitution of Virginia, is the very best in the 
 world ! This may be a conclusive argument with that gentleman; it is not with me. 
 Before I enter upon the argument, it will be proper to observe to the Committee, that 
 I had the honor a few days ago of laying upon the table a scheme for the regulation of 
 the Right of Suffrage, differing somewhat from the one now under consideration. It 
 requires the citizenship of every free white man, and one year's residence in his 
 county, city, or borough, and the payment of all taxes or levies, levied upon him the 
 two years next preceding the one in which he proposes to vote ; and also, that a tax of 
 twenty-five cents shall be levied on every free white man, to be collected and paid 
 into the public treasury. All such citizens, having so paid their taxes, would be en- 
 titled to vote. It also requires that a portion of the property-taxes equal to the whole 
 amount of the taxes so required to be collected and paid in, shall be set apart, and 
 these two suras annually appropriated and vested in the permanent Literary Fund, 
 for purposes of education. The amendment now under consideration requires two 
 years' residence in the State, and one in the county, city, or borough, and the pay- 
 ment of all taxes and levies, levied on all such free white men within the year next 
 preceding the time of election, as a qualification. It requires no specific tax to be le- 
 vied, but the payment of those which shall be levied. This amendment meets ray ap- 
 
 48 
 
378 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 probation as fully as my own, except as to the subject of education. It is, perhaps, as 
 great an extension as we may now expect to get. 
 
 It is possible, Mr. Chairman, that I shall not call up for consideration that part of 
 my scheme which relates to education. I have seen too much opposition already ex- 
 pressed by several gentlemen (in the discussion of another question) to the establish- 
 ment of any system of general instruction, and I presume it would be useless to urge 
 my views on the consideration of the Committee. We have heard expressed the 
 fears and objections of the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) the gentleman 
 from Spottsylvania, (Mr. Stanard,) and other gentlemen too, Sir; which fears and ob- 
 jections seem to be, that some system may be adopted to tax the people of the East, 
 for the education of the children of the West. I believe, Sir, I am not mistaken in 
 saying that at least two of these gentlemen were educated at William and Mary, an 
 institution which had authority, and did tax the buck-skins, and the pelts of the 
 beavers and otters taken by the Western hunters, through the medium of the sur- 
 veyors' fees. Yet they fear that the East vv'ill be taxed for the benefit of the West. 
 
 I will, however, state to the Committee, that it can be demonstrated by documents 
 to be relied on, that the plan which I had the honor of proposing, (if adopted,) would 
 at the end of twenty years, furnish the means of giving five years education to every 
 free white child, born in the Commonwealth of Virginia : and as well, Sir, to those of 
 the Eastern part of the Old Dominion, as to those of the West. Yes, Sir, to all ! And 
 whatever other gentlemen may think upon this subject, I think even that would ren- 
 der more substantial benefit to the people, than all we have done; (indeed, we have 
 done nothing,) I may say, more than all we can now possibly expect to do. But it 
 must be abandoned for the present. 
 
 This brings me, Mr. Chairman, to the question before us, and as I have before said, 
 I will endeavour to argue from facts to conclusions. 
 
 The proposition now under consideration, justifies an enquiry into the state of the 
 Government; and I believe, it will be found to be aristocratical in its principles. If 
 you agree that an aristocracy is properly defined to be a Government of the few over the 
 many, and that those fev/ hold their authority by virtue of their estates, I can prove 
 that our Government is an aristocracy, or at least aristocratical in its nature and prin- 
 ciples. If it shall be found, tliat the powers of the Government are in the hands of the 
 few, to the exclusion of the many, and these few are to be ascertained and known by 
 the estates they hold, surely it must be aristocratical in its nature. And I venture to 
 say, that such is the situation of the Government of Virginia, at this time. 
 
 In 1828, when the election was before the people, to determine whether they would 
 call this Convention or not, thirty-eight thousand five hundred and thirty-three votes 
 were given, and returned from the Avhole State, (20,275 East of the Blue Ridge, and 
 18,258 West.) And here, Sir, I must beg leave to correct some of the very errone- 
 ous calculations of the gentleman from Spottsylvania, made a few days ago, in the 
 discussion of the question upon the basis of Representation. The gentleman's calcu- 
 lations were taken from the axgument of the gentleman from Augusta, whose argu- 
 ment was founded upon documents furni.shed by the Auditor, known by every per- 
 son here to be inaccurate, fallacious, and not to be depended upon. These documents 
 purport to exhibit the number of freehold-estates in the Commonwealth, which will 
 authorise voters. It must be recollected, that they included all such estates, whether 
 held by men, women, children, foreigners, or even free negroes, if any such persons 
 have freeholds. But not only so, each person's freehold in every county is counted ; 
 so that the same man is counted once for his freehold, or freeholds, in each county. 
 Many m.en are counted three, four, and five times, and some, perhaps, oftener. It is 
 very common, particularly in the Eastern part of the State, for gentlemen to have free- 
 holds in many counties, but not so frequent in the West. But this is not all. In several 
 of the Western counties, a few years ago, large quantities of lands were returned delin- 
 quent for the non-payment of taxes, and sold. Most of these lands now belong to the 
 Literary Fund. They do not appear on the commissioners' books ; and, consequently, 
 were not reported by the Auditor. These documents are not to be relied on, I can 
 assure you. 
 
 I give you better proof : 1 offer you the freeholders themselves when called to the 
 polls, and not at one time, but several times, when all felt an interest, and when 
 nearly all attended. I offer you the list of votes from all the counties, cities, and bo- 
 roughs, both from the East and fr-om the West. It is known that every voter did not 
 attend, but more, I presume, were prevented from attending in the West, than in the 
 East. There were circumstances in that country to prevent their attendance, which 
 did not operate here. In some of the large counties, where there were no district 
 elections, some were prevented from attending the polls by intervening mountains 
 and water-courses; and even where there were districts, all who failed to attend on 
 the first day, were compelled afterwards to go to the court-houses; for the law only re- 
 quired the polls to be kept open after the first day, at the court-houses during court 
 days. Those difficulties were not much felt in this part of the State. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 379 
 
 I can assure you, that the votes were taken, and the polls examined with great care, 
 and I doubt whether the vote of any non-freeholder, ever reached the Executive 
 Chamber. The judges qualified to take votes and purge the polls were vigilant, and 
 performed their duty with the utmost strictness, so far as I have been informed. In- 
 deed, they were, of all men in the Commonwealth, the last to permit improper votes 
 to be counted ; for it must be recollected that these gentlemen, (the county court 
 clerks, sheriffs and commissioners of the revenue.) had but little feeling or desire for 
 the formation of a Convention. They did their duty fully and amply. 
 
 The number of freehold-voters in the State, may be estimated at 45,000, and not 
 more. I shall consider them as of that number. From the free white population of 
 1820, and the hypothetical increase since that time, there are now in the State more 
 than 140,000 free white male citizens over 21 years of age. Deduct from this number 
 the voters, and you find 95,000 free white men excluded from the polls. But, Sir, 
 deduct from this last number, 5, 10, or if you please, 15,000 for paupers and others 
 who ought to be excluded, and you still have 80,000; leaving the Government in the 
 hands of little more than one third of the people. I am then justified in saying that 
 the Government is in the hands of the few; that it is held and exercised by that few, 
 who hold it by virtue of their freehold estates. I ask you, now Sir, if our Govern- 
 ment be not to some extent aristocratical in its form ? It is so considered by some 
 men of great wisdom, and I believe generally by the people of the other States of 
 this Union. Are we to close our eyes to these facts ? or are we to consider th^m as 
 having some influence on our deliberations.'' Sir, we ought to consider them. 
 
 When I use this argument to prove the aristocratical principles of our Government, 
 I do it with due respect to the opinions of all the members of this body, and also, with 
 due respect to the freeholders wlao sent me here ; whose opinions and interests I wish 
 to represent. But, Sir, from these facts, T must contend that the Pught of Suffrage 
 ought greatly to be extended. The freehold Suffrage is contrary to the genius of our 
 people; and I may well say, contrary to the genius of the people of all these United 
 States. Is it not unwise to contend for a principle so much opposed to the will of the 
 great body of the people ? 
 
 I shall now attempt to shew that the freehold Right of Suftrage is contrary to the 
 genius of the American people. In doing this, I will introduce, for the consideration 
 of the Committee, a general analysis of the regulations on the Right of Suffrage in 
 each of the States of this Union, which will develop some curious facts, and correct 
 some improper impressions made on the public mind on this subject. And although 
 it may be tedious and uninteresting to the Committee, yet some valuable lessons and 
 correct conclusions may be drawn from a careful examination of all the provisions in 
 the several States on this subject. I know that the Constitutions of other States will 
 not be received as conclusive evidence to convince the Committee of the propriety of 
 adopting the principle for which I contend, nor, indeed, do I presume they will have 
 much weight here. But, Sir, these Constitutions are looked to by tJie people, and are 
 respected by them. They will have some weight, in shewing that the principle of 
 General Suffrage is neither new nor dangerous. 
 
 I proceed, Mr. Chairman, with the twelve slave-holding States, as they are called: 
 
 Missouri. — Every free white male citizen of the United States, 21 years of age, who 
 shall have resided one year in the State, and three months in the county or district, 
 shall be deemed a qualified voter, except soldiers, seamen or marines. 
 
 Alabama. — Every male person of the age of 21 years, being a citizen of the United 
 States, and who shall have resided in the State one year, and in the county, city or 
 town, three months, shall be deemed a qualified elector, except soldiers, seamen or 
 marines. 
 
 Mississippi. — Every free white male person of the age of 21 years, being a citizen 
 of the United States, and having resided in the State one year, and the last six months 
 in the county, city, or town, w^here he offers to vote, being enrolled in the militia, (if 
 not exempted,) or having paid a State or county tax, shall be deemed a qualified voter. 
 
 Louisiana. — Every free white male citizen of the United States, who at the time 
 being, hath attained the age of 21 j^ears, and resided in the county in which he offers 
 to vote, one year next preceding the election, and who, in the last six months, has 
 paid a State tax, shall enjoy the right of an elector; and every such citizen who shall 
 have purchased lands from the United States, shall have the right of voting, when he 
 shall have the other qualifications of age and residence. 
 
 Kentucky. — Every free male citizen, (negroes, mulattoes, and Indians, excepted,) 
 who at the time being, hath attained to the age of 21 years, and resided in the State 
 two years, and the county or town he offers to vote, one year next preceding the elec- 
 tion, shall enjoy the right of an elector. 
 
 Tennessee. — Every free man of the age of 21 years and upwards, possessing a free- 
 hold in the county wherein he may vote, and being an inhabitant of the State ; and 
 every free man being an inhabitant of any one county in the State six months, imme- 
 diately preceding the day of election, shall be entitled to vote. 
 
380 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Georgia. — The electors of members of the General Assembly shall be citizens and 
 inhabitants of the State, and shall have attained the age of 21 years, and have paid all 
 taxes which may have been required of them, and which they may have had an op- 
 portunity of paying agreeable to law for the year preceding the election, and who shall 
 have resided six months within the county. 
 
 South Carolina. — By the old Constitution, the Right of Suffrage was confined to free 
 white males 21 years of age, possessed of freeholds in 50 acres of land, or town lots, 
 and such of them as paid two shillings sterling of taxes the year before the election. 
 But by the amended Constitution : 
 
 Every free white man of the age of twenty-one years, (paupers and soldiers of the 
 United States excepted,) being a citizen of the State, and having resided therein two 
 years previous to the election, and who hath a freehold of fifty acres of land, or a 
 town lot, of which he hath been seised or possessed six months before the election ; 
 or not having such freehold or town lot, hath been a resident in the election district in 
 which he offers to vote, six months before the election, shall have a right to vote. 
 
 JVorth Carolina. — All free men of twenty-one years of age, having been possessed 
 of a freehold estate in fifty acres of land for six months, and having resided twelve 
 months in the county, may vote for Senators — and all free men of the age of twenty- 
 one, who have been inhabitants of any one county twelve months, and shall have 
 paid public taxes, shall be entitled to vote for Commons. It is nearly the same in 
 towns having separate representation. 
 
 Maryland. — By her old Constitution, all free men above twenty-one years of age, 
 having freeholds of fifty acres of land, or thirty pounds value of any property, and 
 having resided one year in any one county, were authorised to vote. But by the 
 amendment of 1802, every free white male citizen of the State (and no others) above 
 the age of twenty-one years, having resided one year in any county, or the city of 
 Baltimore, or Annapolis before the election, shall have the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 Delaioare. — Every white free man of the age of twenty-one years, having resided 
 in the State two years next before the election, and within that time paid a State or 
 county tax which shall have been assessed at least six months before the election, 
 shall enjoy the right of an elector ; and the sons of those so qualified, between the 
 ages of twenty-one and twenty-two, may vote without having paid a tax. 
 
 Virginia we know is freehold. 
 
 From the Constitutions of these twelve slave-holding States, the various facts will 
 be discovered, that six of them require fixed times of age and residence of their male 
 citizens, as the only qualifications of electors; four require the payment of some kind 
 of taxes in addition to age and residence ; and only two require a freehold qualifica- 
 tion : these two are Virginia, and North Carolina in the Senate. 
 
 I will not detain the Committee in giving a full analysis of the Constitutions of the 
 non-slave-holding States, but will merely submit this statement, shewing that six of 
 them require age and residence as qualifications, and that the other six require the 
 payment of some kind of taxes. 
 
 States which require particular terms of age and residence as qualifications of 
 electors : 
 
 Slave-holding. JVon-slave-holding. 
 Missouri, Illinois, 
 Alabama, Indiana, 
 Kentucky, Maine, 
 Tennessee, New Hampshire, 
 
 South Carolina, Vermont, 
 Maryland — 6. Rhode Island — 6. 
 
 States which require the payment of taxes in addition to age and residence : 
 Mississippi, Ohio, 
 Louisiana, Pennsylvania, 
 Georgia, Massachusetts, 
 Delaware — 4. Connecticut, 
 
 New Jersey, 
 New York— 6. 
 
 States which require freehold estates in addition to age and residence : 
 Virginia, 
 
 North Carolina— 2 
 
 T2 12 _ 
 
 Now, Sir, I have presented for your consideration twelve States of this Union, in 
 which the Right of Suffrage is extended generally, to all the firee white male citizens 
 of twenty-one years of age. Some of them , but not all, have excluded paupers, soldiers 
 and seamen; and some have not even excluded free negroes. Six of them, like Vir- 
 ginia, hold slaves, and six do not. I have also presented you with ten States, which 
 require the payment of taxes in addition to the qualifications of age and residence — 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 381 
 
 four of them slave-holding, and six not. South CaroHna, Maryland, Massachusetts 
 and New York, have changed their former Constitutions in this particular, and have 
 abandoned the freehold qualification, except as to free negroes, in New York. The 
 Constitution of that State authorises free negroes, being male citizens of that State, 
 of full age, who hold estates of freehold, of the value of $250, clear of debts and in- 
 cumbrances, and who shall have paid taxes on their estates, to vote. But, I have 
 heard that the Legislature refused to tax these freeholds, and thereby deprived the 
 owners of voting. There is an express provision in the Constitution, that no free 
 negro's real estate under the value of $250, shall be taxed; so that no man is taxed 
 in that State without representation. I believe, Mr. Chairman, from these facts, I 
 may conclude that the freehold Right of Suffrage is contrary to the genius of the peo- 
 ple of the present age, and the Republican institutions of the United States. 
 
 If any confidence can be placed in the people of the United States, (and I presume 
 there can be some) so far as example and precedent taken from them can have any 
 influence on our deliberations, that influence is in favour of an extension, even be- 
 yond the amendment of my colleague. The example of these States has a very 
 powerful influence on the people of Virginia, I am well assured. My residence is 
 near Pennsylvania and Ohio ; and I see and know the influence of those States, and 
 their institutions, over the people of the Western part of this State. They see and 
 know the benefits of General Suffrage on society — they approve, they desired a change. 
 And, Sir, look around you ; and you find members on this floor from the Tennessee 
 line, round to that of Maryland, who advocate the same principles for which I con- 
 tend. But to the South, on the North Carolina line, we meet with opposition. 
 
 The gentleman over the way, (Mr. Trezvant,) has told us that every Republican 
 Government in the world, where Universal Suffrage was instituted, has gone to ruin 
 and perdition. Now. Sir, I would like the gentleman to name the Government to 
 which he refers us, that we may know the force of his precedents. I shew him 
 twelve Republican Governments where suffrage, although not Universal, is very 
 general, which have not yet gone to ruin. 
 
 [Here Mr. Trezvant remarked that his reference was to the ancient Republics of 
 Greece and Rome, where Suffrage became Universal.] 
 
 Then, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's cases are not in point, and cannot, therefore, 
 be considered as having any influence on the question. It is not necessary to dis- 
 cuss them. They were either democratic or very imperfect Republics, and their his- 
 tory shews that they are not examples for us. Sir, we must look to our sister States, 
 whose history we know, and whose example we feel. They sustain us : and we are 
 sustained in our principles by the opinions of some of the best and wisest men of our 
 own country — men whose names will go down to posterity when many of us will be 
 forgotten. We are not contending for a wild and untried scheme. No ! It is one 
 founded on the eternal principles of hberty and equality, which must characterize 
 every good Republican Government which now is, or which ever can be. 
 
 But there is another objection. Those who pay no taxes are unworthy of the pri- 
 vilege of voting. It must be observed that taxes may be imposed in various ways, 
 and services may be required instead of the payment of money, for the support of 
 Government. Every thing contributed for the support of any branch of the afiairs 
 or concerns of Government, may be legitimately considered as part of the taxes ; and 
 it is a curious fact, that the taxes and services imposed on the people of Virginia, 
 have been so ai'ranged, that the greatest burthens have been put upon those who do 
 not vote. Yes, Sir, I say that those who do not vote, are burthened greatly beyond 
 what is right, and even more than is generally imagined. On a former occasion I 
 attempted to shew, and did shew, that such is the fact. 
 
 This scheme of taxation is effected by authorising those one hundred and nine little 
 Governments spread over the whole territory of the State, (the county, city and 
 borough court,) to levy taxes to any amount. It is true they levy on voters, as well 
 as those who are not ; but it is a capitation tax, and very frequently far exceeds the 
 whole revenue levied upon all the property of the counties. Look to all the items of 
 county taxes and county services — military duty — labour on the public roads — county 
 levies for various purposes — poor levies, (the poor supporting the poor,) and patrols 
 in the counties. Add all these httle items together, and it will be found that they 
 make large sums — that they are very important contributions to the Government, 
 and highly necessary for its good being. The voters pay in general the same ; but 
 the number of those who do not vote, so far exceeds them, that the whole contribu- 
 tion of the non-voters, is even greater than that of the voters. 
 
 A few days ago we were told that wealth and political power could not be divorced; 
 that capital and labour could not be separated ; and that labour must be represented. 
 Yet, Sir, on the present occasion, we find that labour is only to be represented by the 
 votes of freehold-labourers ; and the whole power of the Government is to be placed 
 at the control of the capital of the country, if possible. It is not forme, however, to 
 reconcile these inconsistencies in gentlemen's arguments. 1 hesitate not to say, that 
 
382 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 those sixty or eighty thousand persons, to v/hom it is proposed to extend the Right of 
 Suffrage, constitute the great mass of actual productive labourers of the State. Mr, 
 Chairman, I believe it cannot be otherwise. 
 
 We have been told that we shall have a war of the poor against the rich, and that 
 the right of property will be destroyed, if the amendment be adopted. It is not so, 
 and no man can or ought to believe it. If the people of the East, West or South, 
 have given us examples worthy of our imitation, we can fear no such thing. There 
 has been no instance of war upon property in any of our sister States. It is just as 
 secure in them as in Virginia. There is more of it in the North— greater estates, and 
 perhaps more of them than here. There is a greater distance between the rich and 
 the poor, and yet the poor is in a better condition than they are with us. Sir, we can 
 find nothing like physical rapine in any of the States where General Suffrage has been 
 adopted. All live in peace, happiness, prosperity and tranquillity, and every man is 
 secure in his own person and property, under his own roof. 
 
 It has been argued, that General Suffrage has a tendency to bring together the rich 
 and the poor, and that the one will have means, and be able to buy up the other, to 
 the prejudice of the liberty of the people. This argument always comes from those 
 who advocate the power of the few over the many. Yes, Sir, from the real aristocracy 
 of the country. It is an argument to be found in nearly all the treatises of theoretical 
 writers, who support aristocracies. The object is to alarm the people with fear that 
 the poor will be bought, and made engines of their own ruin. It is only for purposes 
 of alarm, and is not true. If the Constitution shall require of electors, the payment 
 of a small tax just before elections, there will be a possibility of an improper influence, 
 if there can be candidates corrupt enough to buy, having the means to buy, and voters 
 base enough to sell their votes. But I know of no case of corruption, in any of the 
 States, having such a qualification. Cases of mere suspicion, perhaps, have occurred. 
 If the payment of taxes be made a qualification, they ought not to be required imme- 
 diately before the election, but some one or two years preceding, at a time wlien they 
 cannot be paid with a view to any particular election. But, Sir, I would not tax a 
 man merely to qualify him to vote, although it may be proper, in this way, to require 
 a man justly and honestly to pay the public demands. All free men ought to vote, 
 because they are free men. Then they will act independently. Such men can ne- 
 ver be purchased by the cash of candidates, or the power of demagogues. No, the 
 poor will be as independent in their opinions, as the greatest land-holders of the State, 
 
 There is one other argument which ought to have some influence on this question. 
 It is one of delicacy, and I will say but little upon the subject of this argument; how- 
 ever, I will say something. We find that all the slave-holding States South of us, 
 deemed it of the utmost importance to make all the free white men as free and inde- 
 pendent, as Government could make them: and why.'' Sir, it is known that all the 
 slave-holding States are fast approaching a crisis truly alarming : a time when free- 
 men will be needed — when every man must be at his post. Do we not see the pecu- 
 liar condition of society.? Yes, all see, all feel, and all lament the approach of the 
 crisis before us. It must be in the contemplation of gentlemen, who presume to look 
 upon the progress of events, that the time is not far distant, when not only Virginia, 
 but all the Southern States, must be essentially military; and will have military Go- 
 vernments ! It will be so ! We are going to such a state of things as fast as time 
 can move. The youth will not only be taught in the arts and sciences, but they will 
 be trained to arms — they must be found at every moment in arms — they must be 
 ready to serve their country in the hour of peril and of danger. Is it not wise now, to 
 call together at least every free white human being, and unite them in the same com- 
 mon interest and Government? Surely it is. Let us give no reason for any to stand 
 back, or refuse their service in the common cause of their country. These conside- 
 rations had their influence on the Southern States, when forming their Constitutions, 
 I doubt not; and ought to have great influence with us. 
 
 I would ask, Mr. Chairman, where are the evils to be apprehended from General 
 Suffrage 1 I have been unable to find them. It is true, we have been told that it pro- 
 duces mobs, confusion, and turmoil at the polls. Turn your eyes upon all the States 
 of this Union, and let me ask for the evidence of these mobs and turmoils Look to 
 the South, and have you heard of them .? No ! Look to the West, and do you find 
 them there.? No ! Look to the North, and do you see them even there ? No! They 
 are no where to be found except in large towns and cities, where it is perfectly well 
 known, that restraint on the Right of Suffrage, has no influence over them whatever. 
 
 Where many thousands of persons are brought together upon election days, there 
 will be disputes, and sometimes turmoils. But no danger to the public safety need be 
 apprehended in mere disputes in the choice of pubhc officers. These disputes only 
 serve to show that the body politic is in a good and healthy condition ; that it has 
 energy and power. It is not like the cold calm of perfect aristocracy or despotism, 
 where few men dare express opinions on the public affairs. No, Sir ; all are at liberty, 
 and all are free to discuss the affairs of Government. I fear not mobs or turmoils in 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 383 
 
 Virginia ; and none who are at all conversant with elections in Pennsylvania and other 
 States, where Suffrage is general, can fear them. Those States are generally divided 
 in small election distxicts, so that few persons are brought together. W hy not do as 
 they have Our counties may be districted ; and even a less number of persons 
 brought to the polls at a single place, than now is, under the existing Constitution. 
 This is the best remedy against mobs or turmoils. 
 
 I must conclude my remarks, Mr. Chairman, by telling you, that from the facts 
 which I have laid before the Committee, we may safely argue that there is no danger 
 of rapine or robbery by the poor upon the rich ; nor of mobs, turmoils, ruin or despo- 
 tism; nor indeed, of the Government getting in the hands of demagogues. I have a 
 sanguine hope that the Convention will extend the Right of Suffrage generaJly ; that 
 the°people will accept it, and that if it shall at any time be found inconvenient or im- 
 proper, that they will change it. Several States, as I have said, have abandoned the 
 freeJiold Suffrage, and all are doing weh; all are happy and prosperous. Virginia can 
 do the same, and the effects will be similar. 
 
 I beg the Committee not to consider that we advocate a mere wild and untried 
 scheme. But on the contrary be assured, that we in good faith, advocate what we 
 deem to be the sacred rights of the people. We do it to promote the happiness and 
 welfare of our country. 
 
 Mr. Wilson now modified his amendment, so as to require that the taxes should 
 have been demanded of the voter before he was rejected for not having paid them. 
 
 The question w^as then taken and decided in the negative : Ayes 37, Noes 53. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison, Monroe and Marshall, voting in the negative.) 
 
 So the amendment of Mr. Wilson was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, then offered the following amendment as a substitute for 
 the 3d resolution reported by the Committee : 
 
 1. Resolved^ That all persons now by law possessed of the Right of Suffrage, have 
 sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the com- 
 munity, and have the Right of Suftrage. 
 
 2. Resolved, That all free v'hite males of twenty-two years of age, born within this 
 Commonwealth, and resident therein, have sufficient evidence of permanent common 
 interest with, and attachment to the communit}', and have the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 3. Resolved, That every free white male of twenty-one years of age, a citizen of the 
 United States, not included in the two preceding resolutions, who is now a resident, 
 or who may hereafter become a resident within this Commonwealth, who is desirous 
 of having the rights of a citizen, in this Commonwealth, shall, in open court, in the 
 county in which he resides, as may be prescribed by law, make a declaration of his 
 intentions to become a permanent resident in this State : and if such person shall, 
 twelve months after making such declaration, solemnly promise to submit to, and sup- 
 port the Government of this Commonwealth, such person, shall be considered as 
 having permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, and 
 shall have the Riglit of Suffrage. 
 
 4. Resolved, That all persons, except such as shall have rendered important services 
 to their country ; all persons of unsound mind, and all persons convicted of any high 
 crime or misdemeanor against this Commonwealth, possessing whatever qualification 
 they may, shall not be permitted to exercise the Right of Suffrage in tliis Common- 
 wealth. 
 
 Mr. CajIpbell then addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — If I had been asked what in the reason and nature of things, would 
 have first demanded and occupied the attention of this Convention, I would have an- 
 swered in accordance with reason, as I think that the first question to be discussed is, 
 toho shall be a citizen of this Commomcealth? The next question, embracing the very 
 basis of Go\;^ernment, would have been ; ichat shall he the privileges and duties of a citizen 
 of this Commomcealth ? On these two questions, as I think, Sir, depends the whole sys- 
 tem of Government. These questions correctly decided, and the frame of our Go- 
 vemraent would have been reared. I would call the attention of this Committee, Sir, 
 to the propriety of the term citizen; I need not inform you, Sir, nor any gentleman 
 present, that the term inhabitant, is not equivalent to the term citizen. Every citizen 
 is an inhabitant, but every inhabitant is not a citizen of Virginia. They are not con- 
 vertible terms. In Great Britain, every person is a subject of the King. Every per- 
 son from the Duke of York, down to the most obscure native of the British Isles, is a 
 subject of his Majesty the King of Great Britain. It is so in all Monarchical Govern- 
 ments. We have repudiated that term in these United States, and we have conse- 
 crated the term citizen. But, Sir, though we admire the term, and in a sort of com- 
 plimentary way, address all men as citizen, we do not in fact, recognize all men as 
 citizen. In Virginia, we have comparatively few citizens. What, let me ask. Sir, 
 does the term fairly import.' A citizen is a freeman, who has a voice in the Govern- 
 ment under which he lives, who has the privilege of being heard in the councils of his 
 
384 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 country, by his agent, or representative. No disfranchised man is a citizen. He may 
 be an inhabitant, ahen, or what you please, but without a vote he cannot be a citizen. 
 
 But, Sir, I have long thought, and I am more fully convinced from the debates 
 which I have heard in this House, that the science of politics, and the science of Go- 
 vernment, are yet in progress. We have not yet attained to perfection. Very far 
 from it, Sir. Man in society, is capable of much greater enjoyment than any Govern- 
 ment on earth has as yet afforded him. I allude, Sir, to the social enjoyments, which 
 directly, or indirectly, flow from Government, and which every good and wise Go- 
 vernment ought to aim at producing. The Constitution of Virginia, is the result of 
 all the discoveries and improvements of nearly six thousand years. Yes, Sir, the pre- 
 sent Constitution was the result of all the improvements in the science of Govern- 
 ment in the history of the world ; perfect or imperfect, it was the best the world ever 
 saw, till the year 1776. But how much more light have we attained in the science 
 of politics since So much at least, as to authorise us to say, that that instrument is 
 by no means perfect. 
 
 But, Sir, the great error of mankind, and the common error of all ages, has been, 
 to suppose that all reformations are perfect, or so nearly, as to admit of little or no 
 amendment. It is equally true in religion and politics. We have had both sorts of 
 reforms. After many ages of darkness and superstition, two men arose called Re- 
 formers; and they achieved what has been called a great reformation. But while 
 Luther and Calvin effected much, and laid the foundation of a real reformation, 
 their successors and admirers considered their work perfect, and pushed their enqui- 
 ries no farther. Since then, Sir, during an interval of three hundred years, their ad- 
 herents have not advanced an inch. So in politics. Some fifty or sixty years ago, 
 many distinguished men, deservedly called reformists, arose in the political worid. 
 They carried their views of reform to a very considerable extent, and not only laid the 
 foundation, but actually accomplished a very great reformation in Government, 
 Those illustrious fathers of the American Revolution, and founders of these Repub- 
 lics, are entitled to the admiration and gratitude of all the friends of the rights of man. 
 But it was not to be expected that these sages, great and wise, and good, as they 
 were, could have perfectly emerged out of the political darkness and errors, conse- 
 crated by the prescriptions of the monarchies of the old world for thousands of years. 
 
 We are wont to admire antiquity, and to venerate long established usages. We 
 think our ancestors were the wisest and best of men. Many of the ancient sages at- 
 tained reputation , merely because they advanced a little beyond the ordinary stature 
 of their times. Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates, cum multis aLiis, were men of only or- 
 dinary stature, but they lived a.mongst pigmies. Yet these men, famous as they were, 
 and still are, were but pigmies compared with myriads in after times. But, Sir, 
 
 Pigmies though perched on Alps, are pigmies still ; 
 And pyramids, are pyramids, though placed in vales, 
 
 I do not say that amongst the ancients there were not great men, but I do say, that 
 light and science are progressing, and that many of those reputed great, are not 
 worthy of the admiration bestowed upon them. They owe their fame to the age in 
 which they lived. The greatest of these sages, statesmen, and orators, have been far 
 surpassed by the moderns. It was well for the reputation of Demosthenes and Cicero, 
 that they lived so long before the days of Sheridan and Burke. 
 
 The science of politics and Government is as well understood in this age as in any 
 former age of the world. I would say better understood. Yes, Sir, and I would say 
 more, better understood in these United States, than in any other country upon the 
 face of the earth. But though our present Constitution was the best production of 
 nearly six thousand years, experience and the progress of political light have dis- 
 covered some defects in it. 
 
 I did expect, and did promise myself, that Virginia would at this time present to the 
 world a model, the best model of Government the world ever saw. When I heard of 
 the talent which was to be assembled here, and which I now see convened around 
 me, I thought myself warranted in expecting that such would be the result of our de- 
 liberations. All eyes have been turned to Virginia : all these United States are look- 
 ing with intense interest to Virginia. She owes it to herself, to the whole United 
 States, to the world, not to disappoint the general expectation. Will the Ancient Do- 
 minion respect herself, and realize the hopes of her friends? I am, Sir, beginning to 
 i despair, and to fear that we are again to prove that retrogression rather than progres- 
 sion is the common characteristic of man. 
 
 Some call every attempt at reformation, and e-very new suggestion, a ne2v theory. 
 With them, the reformist is a theorist, and his amendments are mere theories. I am 
 no friend to mere theories, but all reformations and all improvements are first theories. 
 I cannot call every effort to ameliorate the political condition of man a mere theory, 
 a visionary theory. And yet, Sir, I am no friend to new theories ; but remembering 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONYEXTIOX. 
 
 385 
 
 as I do, that we owe all our improvements which have raised the present above all 
 past ages, to mere theories, as some gentlemen please to call them, I cannot disparage 
 theories in the gross. Yes, Sir, printing itself, this art which has revolutionized, and 
 is revolutionizing tlie world, as well as all the American systems of Government, 
 were once but mere theories. 
 
 I have no new theory now to offer; I only wish to see the principles already defined, 
 understood, and canonized, carried out to their proper extent. I think we are prepared 
 for nothing more; we can reasonably ask for no more at present. But I am very far 
 from tliinking that the social compact has yet been perfected, or tliat society is yet 
 prepared for the best possible political institutions. That Government is best for any 
 people that is best adapted to their views, wants, wishes, and even prejudices: Not 
 that which is best administered, but that which best suits itself to tiie great mass of 
 society. This seems not to have been overlooked by the framers of the Bill of Rights, 
 and the founders of this Govermnent. They declared the principles, the just and 
 righteous principles of the social compact ; and progressed so far in the application as 
 they supposed the then existing state of society required and permitted. But fore- 
 seeing that changes would take place, and that the human mind was progressing and 
 would progress, they revised, and most prudently ad^nsed, a frequent recurrence to 
 fundamental principles : Not to change those principles as one gentleman, (Mr. Giles.) 
 asked; but to purge and reform our institutions by bringing them up near to the un- 
 changeable principles; by a continual approximation to the cardinal principles which 
 they propounded. x\mongst all the great political truths which these sages declared, 
 not one is more just or evident than this ; '* That no free Government, or the bless- 
 ing of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to justice, 
 moderation, temperance, frugality and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to funda- 
 mental principles." 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have based the resolutions which I have had the honor to submit, 
 upon the doctrine contained in the Gth article of the Bill of Rights. And, Sir, per- 
 mit me to say, that I am more attached to the Bill of Rights, than I was before the 
 iate discussion commenced. 1 have seen that this instrument has been our palladium, 
 and the only bulwark against the demolition of our republican citadel, and the de- 
 struction of tlie P^epublican character of our Government. Nothing has now saved us 
 from the establishment, the canonization of the most prominent features of an aristoc- 
 racy, but this same Bill of Rights. Have not the efforts of all the gentlemen anti-re- 
 formists been directed in some way or other against the letter of this instrument '? 
 Some have oppugned it one way, and some another. But all who have plead the 
 mixed basis and the freehold qualification, have found it in their wa}", and have made 
 it in whole, or in part, a dead letter. Whether they intended it or not, such has been 
 the eff'ect of all their criticisms upon it. And, Sir. give me leave to add, if those gen- 
 tlemen had succeeded in their efforts, and at this time carried the taxation basis, upon 
 their constructions of the Bill of R-ights, would it not be possible some fifty years 
 hence upon a more liberal construction, and with the precedent of these proceedings 
 before another Convention, to originate a legalized aristocracy in the fullest sense of 
 the term Yes, Sir, if in the short period of Jiftij-four years, so great a departure 
 from the principles developed and prescribed by the framers of the existing Constitu- 
 tion, should have been completed as the basing of this Government on wealth, on 
 wealth. Sir, I repeat, disguise it as gentlemen may, fifty-four years more, and another 
 Convention following such examples, and such interpretations, and we would have 
 an oligarchy in propria forma, a by-law established nobility. Seeing the warfare 
 which has been waged against this now more than ever dear to me instrument, and 
 seeing the barrier wliich it has thrown in the way of all encroachments upon our free 
 institutions, I shall vote for its being perpetually a part of the fundamental law of our 
 country. 
 
 I was glad on yesterday morning, to hear the gentleman from Henrico, (Mr. Nicho- 
 las,) begin his speech with the doctrine of this section of that instrument; not, 
 Sir, with the apphcation wliich he made of tliat doctrine. According to his interpre- 
 tation, no man has any attachment to the community or country, but a freeholder. 
 You will observe. Sir, that I have, in the resolutions before you, only developed the 
 meaning of the Gth section of the Bill of Rights; the plain English interpretation of 
 the words. If a single idea, not founded onlhe fairest and mdst just interpretation of 
 these words, is found in any one of those resolutions, I hope it may not be retained. 
 Some gentlemen allege, that in the year 1776, the words common interest icith, and at- 
 tachment to, the community, meant neither less nor more than a freeholder. Accord- 
 ing to what dictionary or mode of interpretation; this meaning is m.ade out, I have not 
 as yet learned. Words may be used in an appropriated sense, I own; but some proof 
 of tills appropriated sense niust be produced; as yet, I have not heard any authority 
 other than assertion. Please observe that the words common interest'' do not mean 
 equal interest. That they do not, the single fact of the inequality of the freeholds from 
 twenty-five to one thousand acres in extent, and from twenty-five to one hundred 
 
 49 
 
386 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 thousand dollars in value, unquestionably indicates. Common interest admits of the 
 greatest variety in the extent and value of that interest. One gentleman had spoken 
 of the interest which one man might have in a ship which had a valuable cargo aboard, 
 and another who had only his person. They both had a common interest, it was true; 
 but he mio-ht have given to the figure a greater extent, and supposed that many indi- 
 viduals mioht have had different stakes embarked on the same bottom. Besides their 
 own persons, they might have a great diversity of interests, and though dispropor- 
 tioned in value, equally interesting them all in the safety of the ship. No two inter- 
 ests are precisely equal, yet all have a common interest. But it is said that this com- 
 mon interest must also be a permanent interest. This further defines the nature of 
 this common interest. This restrictive term denotes that it is not to be a transient in- 
 terest. But still this word permmicjit is only comparative and necessarily limited. 
 The various interests which we found embarked in the same ship, are as permanent 
 as the voyage from port to port. It may be a long voyage or a short voyage. So it 
 may be, and so often is the journey of human life. Our interests in the State are as 
 transient and as uncertain as our lives. We all have a common interest in the State, 
 but how permanent or how transient that interest may be , cannot be defined . Besides, it 
 may in any given instance, be more transient than our lives. He who has a freehold of 
 any given extent, may either sell or spend it in a very short time, and if we make his 
 tenure of that estate the test of his permanent interest in the State, we have fixed 
 upon as great an uncertainty as can be well conceived. It is a very precarious per- 
 manency, as uncertain as the tenure of life, and not necessarily of longer duration 
 than any other man's interest in society. The landlord and the tenant may have, as 
 far as law or reason can determine, the same permanency of interest. 
 
 But there is another consideration mentioned in this article, to w-hich I presume 
 this permanent, common interest is subordinate, and to which it stands rather in the 
 relation of means to end. This is comprehended in the word attachment. This is 
 the desideratum. Attachment to the community is the best guarantee, and indeed 
 the only guarantee. A person may possess the propei'ty of a freehold without the 
 attachment, and the attachment without the property. No man can intentionally, by 
 his vote, injure that community to which he is attached. And as property in the 
 earth was supposed, and justly supposed, in most instances, to attach persons to the 
 Community, it has been selected as one proof, (and it is but one,) and not the strongest 
 proof of such attachment. Nativity is a stronger, a much stronger, and a more invari- 
 able evidence of attachment to a community, than wealth or any other consideration. It 
 is upon this incontrovertible fact, which I presume no person will impugn, that I base 
 my second resolution. My first embraces all the present voters in Virginia. And, 
 taking for granted that the Bill of Rights makes attachment to the community, the 
 great consideration which qualifies an elector, I contend that it is the letter and spirit 
 of this article to extend the Right of Suffi-age to every free white male of the age of 
 twenty-two years, born within this Commonwealth. The reason why I fix upon the 
 age of tioenty-two years rather than tiDenty-onc, is to meet a fastidious objection, which 
 1 had anticipated as possible to be presented upon a very literal interpretation of the 
 text. It might be said, and with some plausibility too, that a young man of the age 
 of twenty-one, has, by no act of his life, afforded any evidence of permanent, com- 
 mon interest with, or attachment to, the community, who has just arrived at the age 
 of twenty-one, inasmuch as he has, till that moment, been under the guardian and 
 compulsory authority of his parent or guardian. His living one year after he has 
 become a free agent, destroys that objection, and, in addition to his nativity, affords 
 all necessary evidence of his attachment to the community. This is the i-ationale of 
 the second resolution. 
 
 To fortify or illustrate this position, or, in other words, to prove that nativity is the 
 best guarantee for attachment to any community, I deem, at this time, a work of su- 
 pererogation. I feel no disposition to repeat arguments already offered on this and 
 other topics connected with it. After the very able argument of the gentleman from 
 Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson,) which, like a tornado, left nothing behind it, I think such 
 an effort on my part altogether superfluous. True, Sir, one gentleman from South- 
 ampton, (Mr. Trezvant,) cahed it ''empty declamation" but I would like to see him 
 or any other gentleman attempt by a fair analysis to prove it declamatory, and not 
 argumentative. I do think that no gentleman can refute the arguments of the gen- 
 tleman from Loudoun. They carried irresistible conviction to my mind; and I think 
 it unnecessary to repeat or defend them, until they have at least been formally as- 
 sailed. The memorials laid upon that table, suflaciently argue this question. 
 
 My third resolution, Mr, Chairman, has respect to another class of inhabitants in 
 this Commonwealth. And the only difficulty, as indeed, the only question of much 
 consideration, which occurs in setthng who shall be citizens of this Commonwealth, 
 is, what shall be required of those not natives of Virginia, nor embraced in the pre- 
 sent laws conferring the Right of Suffrage You see, I prefer residence and a moral 
 qualification, to a pecuniary or property qualification. The payment of any given tax 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 imposed on the purchasing of a piece of land, does not present to my understanding, 
 according to my views of human nature, such evidence of common interest with, 
 and attachment to, the community, as that submitted, and it certainly does not pre- 
 sent such temptations to corruption, or to that buying of votes of which some gen- 
 tlemen speak, as the fixing of a certain amount of tax as the qualifying consideration. 
 Where there is no price proposed, there is no temptation offered, and therefore, cor- 
 ruption is rendered as impossible as the freehold can be supposed to make it. If we 
 desire to see men act a dignified part, we must treat them according to the dignity of 
 human nature. If you put the tax at one dollar, you make the price of a thousand 
 votes only a thousand dollars. But, according to the principle of this resolution, 
 every improper incentive is removed out of the way. A person who becomes an in- 
 habitant of this State, and who desires to become a citizen, a permanent resident, not 
 upon the excitement of an election immediately approaching, calmly and dispassion- 
 ately goes to the court in the county in which he resides, and declares his intention 
 of becoming a permanent resident. Twelve months afterwards, he returns to the 
 same court, and promises to submit to, and support the Government of, this Com- 
 monwealth. Now, I ask, is not this the strongest evidence which the native of any 
 other State can give of his attachment to, and of his feeling a common interest with, 
 the community.'' I think it must appear so to all, except them who think that virtue, 
 intelligence and patriotism, spring up out of the soil, and grow like mushrooms upon 
 its surface, after a person has paid a stipulated price for it. But in these United States, 
 the principle embraced in this resolution is regarded as a higher proof of attachment 
 to the community, than the pu.rchase of any amount of real estate. When a foreigner 
 from any other country expatriates himself, and desires to become a citizen of these 
 United States, the purchasing of no amount of real or personal estate, will prove his 
 attachment to the country. He must, if he will become a citizen, go into court and 
 make a solemn renunciation of every foreign Prince and Potentate, of all allegiance 
 to any foreign Government, and promise to submit to and support the Constitution of 
 these United States. This, in the estimation of the good and wise framers of our 
 State and Federal Governments, is the highest proof of attachment to, and of feeling 
 a common interest with, the community, which can be afforded. Now, although I 
 would not require all the same formalities, I contend that the principle of the tliird 
 resolution warrants us to entertain more confidence in the person who thus becomes 
 a citizen, than the mere possession of any freehold. For, unless gentlemen will argue 
 that moral qualities ai-e in the soil, and spring up in a man's mind from the ownership 
 of it, they cannot, I presume, prefer it to the plan proposed upon any principle im- 
 plied in, or derivable from, the Bill of Rights. The second and third resolutions, I 
 conclude from these and other considerations, are equitably based upon the sixth 
 section of the Bill of Rights. 
 
 One word upon the tburth resolution, and I dismiss this part of the subject. I 
 cannot consent to disfranchise all paupers. Ingratitude is one of the greatest crimes 
 against Heaven and man. If then. Sir, any pauper shall have rendered any impor- 
 tant service to his country ; if he shall have fought her battles, and his virtues have 
 made him a pauper, it would be as cruel, as ungrateful, as it would be impolitic, to 
 disfranchise him. It would be a bad precedent ; it would evince a destitution of the 
 noblest principle which can dignify a man, or exalt a nation. 
 
 This, Mr. Chairman, is the whole rationale of the scheme proposed. I was not so 
 studious of the terms, as of a clear development of the principle. But, I will be told 
 by Dr. Expedient, that however reasonable, or however just, and however accordant 
 with the spirit of the age, and the meaning of our fundamental principles of the 
 social compact, it is not expedient. I never liked this doctrine of expediency. Its 
 grand-father was a Jesuit. It was the popular doctrine in the Catholic Dominions of 
 the Roman Hierarchy. It kindled all the fires, heated the furnace, and prepared the 
 red-hot pincers of the Holy Inquisition. His Majesty the King of Great Britain, and 
 his Court, on the doctrine of expediency, established Episcopacy in England, Pres- 
 byterianism in Scotland, Popery in Canada, and Paganism in the East Indies. Yes, 
 Sir, it was expedient to lay a capitation tax upon the worshippers of Jugo'ernaut, just 
 as the Turks levied a capitation tax upon the pilgrims who went to visit the Holy 
 Sepulchre. This, Sir, I believe, furnished the first model, and is the true origin of 
 the Virginia " 'poll-tax.''' This doctrine of expediency is an off-set against all reason, 
 argument, and principle too. It was not expedient for England to let France govern 
 itself. It was not expedient to permit any other sort of Government to be erected 
 so near the British Throne, than that which accorded with the genius of the English 
 Monarchy. Thus, the flame of war spreads over Europe, and England, from her 
 regard to the doctrine of expediency, made Buonaparte the wonder of the world. 
 Had she permitted France to manage her own affairs, the ambition of Napoleon would 
 not, in all human probability, have ti-anscended the ancient limits of France. But, 
 she made him acquainted with his own military prowess, and forced him to extend 
 his sceptre in the year 1813, over 64,000,000 of human beings. But, Sir, it would be 
 
388 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 endless to detail the enormities which have been perpetrated , the blood that has been 
 shed, the havoc of human life which has been made, in obedience to the suggestions 
 of this popular doctrine of expediency. It has invaded and destroyed every right of 
 man. Pardon me, Sir, for mentioning the rights of man. For it would seem, that 
 man has no rights but v/hat the different Governments in the world please to bestow 
 upon him. His rights in Russia, Turkey, France and England, are just what the 
 Governments please to bestow upon him. Believe this who may, I cannot. He has, 
 in my judgment, certain inherent and inalienable rights, of which he cannot be 
 divested with impunity. Amongst those is the right of a voice in the Government, 
 to which he is to submit. 
 
 But I am told that Universal Suffrage, (I am no advocate for Universal Suffrage,) or 
 more correctly General Suffrage, was the invention of the age of the Lord Protector 
 Cromwell — that it sprung up for the first time, during the Commonwealth of England. 
 It is called novel doctrine. Were it so, that would not prove it false. Steamboats are 
 a novel invention, and many other useful arts are comparative novelties. The new 
 race of men which modern science has created and made, is a new invention. I 
 mean the wooden, brazen and iron men, which neither eat, drink, sleep, nor get tired; 
 which are adults without being infants, full grown men as soon as born. These new 
 men, these novelties, are likely to be a very useful race; for when inspired by steam, 
 they are as rational as our black population. England has two hundred millions of 
 them, and these United States have more than ten millions of them. They are all 
 revolutionists and will as certainly revolutionize the world as ever did the art of printing, 
 or any conquering invader. They are all novel too. No prophetic eye, nor prophetic 
 pen, can describe their progress, or foretell their destiny. All novelties are not fic- 
 tions. But, Sir, notwithstanding the general historic accuracy of gentlemen on the 
 other side, they have mistaken the date of the origin of General Suffrage. It is more 
 ancient than the British, the Roman, the Grecian, or the Persian Governments. It is 
 now three thousand three hundred and twenty-nine years old. I have heard gentle- 
 men quote the Mosaic history on this floor. It will be no sin, I hope, for me to quote 
 the same authority. Now, Sir, if gentlemen will look into the Exodus of Israel, 
 they will find that the Virginia Constitution was not the first imitten Constitution, 
 nor the General Suffrage the invention of Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell, Sir, was a 
 prodigious genius, but this he did not invent. When Israel became a Commonwealth, 
 and, Sir, they were a Commonwealth, and were so denominated two thousand years 
 ago by a very high authority, I say when Israel became a Commonwealth, they re- 
 ceived a Constitution from him who led them through the Red Sea. Israel in the 
 wilderness amounted to six hundred thousand fighting men. The God of Israel 
 first proposed a social compact. It was called in Hebrew Berith, in Greek Diatheke, 
 in Latin Constitutio, in Scotch Covenant, after the manner of the " Solemn League 
 and Covenant." It is precisely equivalent to our English word Constitution. This 
 was lorltten, and it is the oldest written document upon earth. After it was written, 
 it was submitted to every man upon the muster roll of Israel. Their vote was re- 
 quired and they voted for its adoption as their national compact. So old, Sir, and so 
 venerable is the origin of General Suffrage. 
 
 It is no novel doctrine in this country. My colleague and friend from Monongalia, 
 (Mr. Morgan,) this morning, presented us with the history of General Suffrage in 
 these United States. He has anticipated my remarks on this topic. It is enough for 
 me to observe, that no less than half the States in this Union, have totally discarded 
 the property qualificcition of electors. And half of these, Sir, are slave States. And 
 it has appeared too. Sir, that so far from impairing the safety of property or the pro- 
 gress of improvement, or the peace and happiness of these States, it has contributed 
 to the prosperity of all of them. 
 
 The gentleman from Southampton, (Mr. Trezvant,) informed us, that all history 
 shewed, that in all Governments where General Suffrage prevailed, a military despo- 
 tism ensued, and ultimately the liberties of the people were destipyed. I know not. 
 Sir, whence this gentleman has derived his historic information, but one thing I will 
 venture to affirm, that he can shew no one instance of the practice of General Suf- 
 frage issuing in a despotism, civil or military, where the Government v^n.s representa- 
 tive. Such an instance will be necessary, if not to sustain his position, at least to 
 give it any application to the question now before the Committee. 
 
 But, Sir, what was the overthrow of every Government that has hitherto fallen into 
 ruins ? And many Governments have been subverted ; many great empires have 
 gone to perdition. When the real, the true cause is ascertained, the cause which all 
 history developes, it will appear that a disregard of the rights of man was the sole 
 cause of their subversion. Yes, Sir, one party, and always the governing party of the 
 community , invaded the rights of the other.* An infraction of these inherent rights, these 
 natural rights of man, has proved the overthrow, the ruin of every Government now ex- 
 tinct in the world. Search the annals of all time, and not an instance can be found con- 
 trary to this fact. No Government which has paid a due regard to the rights of man 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 389 
 
 has ever been subverted. Where are all the ancient empires of the world? The 
 Egyptian, Assyrian, Persian, Grecian, Roman? All, all, Sir, dilapidated, all gone to 
 ruin. And what was the cause ? Either they were not founded on a just regard of 
 social rights, or ceased justly to regard man according to his nature. Their perdition 
 is, and ought to be, a beacon, a caveat to us. I said upon another occasion, that every 
 departure from the principles of the true philosophy of man was dangerous. The 
 illustration which I used has been perverted by the gentleman from Spottsylvania. 
 I did not say that the laws and rules of mathematical science were to be apphed to 
 civil Government, but that there was as much certainty, as much truth in morals, in 
 politics too, as in mathematics. It is not always so perceptible, but it is nevertheless 
 just as certain, and as unchangeable. And, Sir, however slow, however gradual, the 
 departure from correct and fundamental principles, if persisted in, if continued, it 
 must result in very great and fatal enormities. 
 
 I was sorry to hear, the other day, the eloquent gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. 
 Randolph,) protest against his majesty King Aumhcrs, and declared his readiness to 
 revolt from his government, and to migrate from his dominions. King Numbers, 
 Mr. Chairman, is the legitimate sovereign of all this country. General Jackson, the 
 President of these United States, is only the representative, the laicful representative 
 of King Numbers. And, whither. Sir, can that gentleman fly from the government 
 of this King ? In the North, in the South, in the East and in the West, he can find 
 no other monarch. Except he cross the ocean, he can put himself under no other 
 King. And whenever he may please to expatriate himself, he will find beyond the 
 domtnions of King Numbers, there is no other monarch, save King Cypher, King 
 Blood, Kmg Sword, or King Purse. And, Sir, permit me to add, there is none of 
 those so august as our King. I love King Numbers; I wish to live, and I hope to 
 die, under the government of this majestic personage. He is, Sir, a wise, benevolent, 
 patriotic and powerful prince — the most dignified personage under the canopy of 
 Heaven, 
 
 I heard that same gentleman, Mr. Chairman, with pleasure too, refer to a saying of 
 the immortal Bacon. Twice he alluded to it; twice he spoke of the great innovator, 
 time. I did wish to hear him quote the whole sentence, and apply it. Lord Bacon 
 said, (I think I give it in his own words) — Mcximus innovator tempus ; Quidni igitur 
 tempus imitemur?'' Why then, says he, can we not imitate time, the greatest of all 
 innovators ? The Romans long ago learned this lesson. Their moralists taught it to 
 their children — " Tempera miitantur, et nos mutamur in illis." Why, then, Sir, cannot 
 we learn to imitate time ? 
 
 I am glad, Sir, to find myself associated with many gentlemen on this floor, who 
 are inspired with the spirit of this age, who have not only grown up under this age, 
 but grown up with it. They are willing to learn what time, the great teacher, and 
 the greatest revolutionist, teacheth. And, Sir, she is an eloquent preceptor. These 
 gentlemen. Sir, who feel the current of time, who are in heart, in unison, with this 
 age, have no idea of making Chinese shoes for American feet; or of constructing a 
 new bedstead after the m^anner of Procrustes, for men of American stature. 
 
 But, Sir, there is one most august tribunal to which we must all bow. Time will 
 make us all do homage before it. This, I need not inform you, is the tribunal of 
 public opinion. This is the supreme tribunal in all this extensive country. No sen- 
 timent is canonical in this country, which this tribunal reprobates. All our acts 
 must be judged by it, and I rejoice to live in a country in which this is the supreme 
 law — and in which no political maxim can prevail which does not quadrate at all an- 
 gles with the dicta of this tribunal. 
 
 I am assured, Mr. Chairman, that it is in the power of this body to make this land 
 one day, the happiest land on the earth — to infuse into our institutions, such principles 
 as would elevate, enlighten, and happify this community, greatly beyond any thing 
 yet experienced on this continent. I mean to say. Sir, that from the lights which 
 concentrate their influences upon us — from the wisdom and talent assembled here, 
 we have every facility for carrying to a much greater extent improvements into the 
 social compact. Were this assembly far inferior to what it is, such a result might 
 reasonably be expected. Standing as we do, upon the shoulders of all former Con- 
 ventions, and being furnished with all the experiments which have been made in an- 
 cient and modern times, much is reasonably expected from us. But I fear these mono- 
 syllables mine and thine, are about to frustrate all attempts at a thorough amelioration 
 of our condition. 
 
 I did hope that we would feel a little more in accordance with the progress of im- 
 provement and the spirit of the age, than to put forth all our energies in a contest 
 about mere local interests, which a few years will change in defiance of all our ef- 
 forts. Yes, Sir ; a few years will settle all these questions about miney and thiney. 
 But should the improvement of the condition of society have been taken into con- 
 sideration — should the adaptation of our political institutions to the actual condition 
 and circumstances of the great mass of the community have engrossed our attention 
 
390 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 or entered into our hearts, I doubt not but we could have endeared our memory to the 
 latest posterity. To mention only one instance ; we have been told that it is quite 
 practical now to give birth to a system of education, which in tiventy years from this 
 day would render it impossible for a child to be born in this Commonwealth and to 
 live to manhood, without receiving a good education, and that too, Sir, without the 
 laying any tax after that day for the support of such a system. I have understood, 
 Sir, and from good authority too, that in some parts of Massachusetts, particularly in 
 the environs of Boston, any child, without the contribution of a single cent, may re- 
 ceive not only a good English, but a classical education. Such is the extent to which 
 the common school system has been carried in that enlightened community. 
 
 Yes, Mr. Chairman, we might now bless Virginia with a social compact which 
 would, in the gradual progress of time, develop and improve the intellectual and 
 moral powers of every member of the community, and contribute to the political good 
 of the whole Commonwealth. Is not such an object worthy of such a Convention ? 
 And would not the origination of such a splendid scheme carry down, for a thousand 
 generations, the grateful admiration of our services.? But, if we exhaust our energies 
 on these little localities, time, the great innovator, will break our arrangements to 
 pieces: For it is decreed, that every system of Government not based upon the true 
 philosophy of man — not adapted to public opinion, to the genius of the age, shall fall 
 into ruins. 
 
 But, Sir, one gentleman, (Mr. Randolph,) referred us to the great men, which the 
 present system in Virginia had produced. We doubt it not, Sir. I have lived in a 
 country in which there were many great men : very learned and very powerful men. 
 But how were they created. Sir.? For one noble Lord, there were ten thousand igno- 
 ble paupers, and for one great scholar, there were ten thousand ignoramuses. That 
 is the secret, Sir. I never wish to see this mode of making great men introduced 
 into this Commonwealth. I trust. Sir, we will rather strive to make many middling 
 men, than a few great or noble men. When we adopt the English way of making 
 great men, we will soon adopt the English way of speaking to them. I have heard 
 of but one " noble friend" in this Committee, as yet ; but. Sir, it is a contagious spirit. 
 There are many sorts of great men. It is not necessary to create them in advance 
 of the demands of society. Peculiar crises call them into being. This sort of great 
 men, has always been the creature of circumstances. One of them was once found 
 on Mount Horeb, another on the way to Damascus — one at Mount Vernon, and 
 another was found in the county of Hanover, with a fishing rod in his hand. The 
 Island of Corsica produced one, when he was wanted. There is no occasion to de- 
 vise any plan for creating this sort of great men. But, Sir, under a proper system of 
 Government, we should be able to multiply other sorts of great men a hundred fold, 
 and we should not fail to derive benefits of every sort, intellectual, moral, and political, 
 incomparably surpassing any sacrifice we should be obliged to make in commencing 
 such a system. 
 
 One word more, Sir, and I will not further trespass upon the patience of the Com- 
 mittee. The scheme which is contemplated in these resolutions, is not only, I think, 
 adapted to the general good of the whole State, but especially to the Eastern part of 
 it. I was much pleased with the suggestion of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. 
 Gordon,) it was founded on a correct knowledge of man. When we disfranchise one 
 class of men, or deprive them of their political and natural rights, to secure any pro- 
 perty or privilege we possess, we endanger that very property and those very privi- 
 leges, more by such disfranchisements, than we protect them. We give an invidious 
 character to those interests and privileges, and we create antipathies against ourselves. 
 It is in the nature of man to hate, and to attempt to impair and destroy, that which 
 is held at his expense, and which degrades him in his own estimation. For the safety, 
 then, and preservation of those very interests, I would conceive this extension of the 
 Right of Suffrage indispensable. If the extension sought for in these resolutions, 
 can be obtained, I am not tenacious of the words or of the form in which it is sought, 
 I chose thus to develop the principle. I aimed at no more, than to shew, that it is 
 in accordance with the Bill of Rights. I did not expect to have addressed the Com- 
 mittee at this time ; but on the failure of the scheme submitted by the gentleman from 
 Monongalia, (Mr. Wilson,) I thought it expedient to make another experiment. Had 
 it been my object to do more than to expose the principle, I should have, in a more 
 syllogistic form, fortified and defended the grounds on which it is based. But, even 
 in this, I have been, in a great measure, anticipated by the gentlemen who have pre- 
 ceded me. 
 
 The question being then taken, it passed in the negative by a very large majority, 
 eleven only rising in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. Scott then gave notice that in case the resolution offered by Mr. Pleasants yes- 
 terday shall be rejected, he will move the following: 
 
 Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard should be had to the white population exclusively, and in the Senate to taxa- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 391 
 
 tion exclusirsly : That the House of Delegates shall consist of one hundred mem- 
 bers : and the Senate of fortv-eight: That the Senate shall hare the same Legisla- 
 tive powers in all respects as the House of Delegates — and all appointments to office, 
 which by the Constitution shall be referred to the two Houses of the Legislature, 
 shall be made by a concurrent vote. 
 
 The Cormnittee then rose and the House adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, NoTE.MBER 20, lS-29. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Taylor, of the Baptist Church. 
 
 Mr. Thompson of Amherst, offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That duringf the remainder of the session of this Convention, the 22d rule 
 thereof shall be observed in the Committee of the Whole, and that " it shall be the duty 
 of the Clerk hereafter to keep a Jom-nal of the proceedings of said Committee, and to 
 insert in such Journal, if they can be ascertained, all the proceedings heretofore had 
 therein.'' 
 
 Mr. Wilson called for the reading of the 22d rule. 
 
 The 22d rule is as follows : 
 Any member on his motion made for that purpose, on being seconded, pro-vnded 
 seven of the members present be in favor of the motion, shall have a right to have 
 the Ayes and Noes taken upon the determination of any question, provided he shall 
 give notice of his intention to call the Ayes and Noes, before the question be put, and 
 in such case tlie House shall not divide, or be counted on the question, but the names 
 of the members shall be called over by the Secretary, and the Ayes and Noes shall be 
 respectively entered on the Journal, and the question shall be decided as a majority 
 of votes shall thereupon appeur: provided that after the Ayes and Noes shall be sepa- 
 rately taken, and before they are counted, or entered on the Journal, the Secretary 
 shall read over the names of those who voted in the affirmative, and of those who 
 voted in the negative; and any member shall have liberty at such reading to correct 
 any mistake which may have been committed in hsting his name, either in the affir- 
 mative or negative." 
 
 In supporting the resolution, Mr. T. observed, tliat it might have been foreseen, and 
 must now be obvious to all, that the whole of the important business of this Conven- 
 tion would be done in a Committee of the Whole; the Convention, as such, havinc 
 little left for it to do but to give its sanction to the acts of the Conunittee of the Whole, 
 and embody them in a regular form. If then the privilege of recording his vote was 
 important to a Delegate any where, it was eminently so here : for, the Conunittee was 
 nothing else but the Convention in another form. The adoption of the resolution, 
 would be productive of an economy of time. All the members came charged with 
 some grievance liis constituents desired to have redressed. If they were allowed the 
 opportunity of satisfying their constituents, that they had made an attempt to discharo-e 
 the duty entrusted to them in the Committee of the Whole, there would be no need 
 of repeating their motions to that effect, in the Convention : tlie District havinof seen 
 the course pursued by their Delegate, would be satisfied, and much time would be 
 saved. Such a measure was not unsupported by precedents. A similar rec'ulation 
 had been adopted in the Federal Convention, when the Constitution of the^Lnited 
 States was framed : the Yeas and Nays were recorded, and a regular Journal kept in 
 the Committee of the Whole. Another precedent was to be found in the records of 
 the New York Convention, in 1S20. He hoped that gentlemen, who professed to 
 hope every thing from a re-action in the pubhc mind, would offer no opposition to a 
 proposal of this description. 
 
 Mr. Leigh was opposed to the resolution. He had supposed that if there was any 
 body of law in the world approved by the experience of mankind, and altocfether un- 
 exceptionable, it was the body of Parhamentary Law. The Committee of fhe Whole 
 was one of the most valuable institutions ever devised for facilitating the business of 
 a deliberative body. It gave opportunity for full, fair and free discussion, untram- 
 melled by the forms necessarily attendant upon the definitive action of a Leo'islative 
 Assembly. Yet here, said Mr. Leigh, we have a proposition to abohsh all distinction 
 between the Committee of the Whole, and the House in its Conventional capacity. 
 Its effect will be to make the Committee of the Whole, the Convention — the only re- 
 maining difference will be that the presiding officer of the one is called a Chairman, 
 and tlie other a President. I differ entirely Irom the gentleman's view of the matter. 
 I hold that there is a great and essential difference between the two, and in that dif- 
 ference it is that the excellence and advantage of the Committee of the Whole entirely 
 consists. But there is precedent for it. The gentleman has quoted two, but the first 
 
392 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of them is no precedent at all; for the Convention of '87 voted not by members, but 
 by States, and it was necessary to declare, which States were for, and which were 
 against any proposition, in order to determine the question. It is true that such a rule 
 was adopted by the Convention of New York, which sat at Albany in 1820. Why, I 
 do not know ; but this I do know, that there was in that Convention such bidding in 
 the auction of popularity, as never was known on earth before. It seems to have 
 been adopted there in order to record the bids, but here there is no bidding that I 
 know of, and if there shall be any, there can be no need of recording it ; for the opi- 
 nions we deliver here, are as well known by the public, as if they were recorded on 
 our Journal. 
 
 Mr. Thompson thought the gentleman from Chesterfield, had not been very happy 
 in his appeal to experience ; he had said that no such example could be furnished. 
 There have been many deliberative bodies, they are of ancient origin ; but there have 
 been only a few Conventions, and they belong to modern times. We have adduced 
 the experience of two of these Conventions; whether the same expedient be resorted 
 to in the others which have been holden, I cannot tell : but it is very probable. But, 
 how has the gentleman succeeded in shewing, that the case of the Federal Conven- 
 tion was so entirely dissimilar, as to furnish no precedent for this body ? The gentle- 
 man says, it is because the votes there taken, were given, not by individuals, but by 
 States. But, surely there was no more need to record the votes on that account, than 
 if they had been given by individuals. I can see no distinction whatever, in princi- 
 ple; we may just as well record our votes, as they recorded theirs. The experience 
 we have already had in this Convention, proves the utility of the plan ; for we have 
 already been compelled to resort to it. We have been greatly crowded by company, 
 who have almost mingled themselves with the members. This may be the case again, 
 and we may be again compelled to take the same course. It occupies little more time 
 to record the names than it does to call them, and surely we have not shewn ourselves 
 penurious of time. As to the auction of popularity, of which the gentleman spoke, I 
 have nothing to say, because he has disclaimed any personal allusion. Whether he is 
 right in his opinion of the New York Convention in this respect, I cannot tell. I 
 have read the Journal of their Debates, and I did not perceive the evidence of any 
 thing of the kind. I thought their proceedings were such as did honour to the State, 
 and I consider them well worthy of our imitation. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, that judging from appearances as to what the gentleman's object 
 was, he thought he had taken a .very round-about way to get at it : his more direct 
 and obvious course would have been to move at once to abrogate the Committee of 
 the Whole. His resolution did that in effect; for, why have any Committee of the 
 Whole, if its proceedings are to be attended with the same formality, and to have the 
 same effect as those of the original body ? The gentleman had better march up at 
 once, fairly, to his object. He has quoted precedents, said Mr. S., and what are they ? 
 He ventures to suppose that the precedents in the Conventions of all the States are 
 in his favour : it is a bold supposition. Yet it is a little extraordinary, that that gen- 
 tleman has contented himself with supposing, and has forborne to examine. This 
 will appear strange to any one who knows with what accuracy that gentleman fur- 
 nishes information, and what pains he takes to be exact in all his facts. If, indeed, 
 the gentleman has examined, he cannot be ignorant that there have been thirty Con- 
 ventions in this country, which have had the same service to perform as this ; and yet 
 out of that whole number, there have been but two which have so much as thought of 
 recording their proceedings in Committee of the Whole. One law seems to have go- 
 verned bodies of that kind, ever since they existed, and I am not in favour of any in- 
 novation. It is a measure likely to end in no good, and there is not the least shadow 
 of necessity for it. 
 
 The question being now about to be put, 
 
 Mr. Gordon demanded that it should be taken by Yeas and Nays. It was accor- 
 dingly so taken, when the Yeas and Nays stood as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Goode, Anderson, Coffman, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Baxter, Mercer, Henderson, Cooke, Opie, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Gordon, Thompson and Joynes — 39. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Monroe, (Prest.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chester- 
 field, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Harrison, 
 Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, Mason, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Barbour of Orange, Stanard, Holhday, Powell, 
 Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, Townes, Pleasants, Massie, Talia- 
 ferro, Bates, Neale, Rose, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 51. 
 
 So the House refused to rescind the rule as proposed, and to record their proceed- 
 ings in Committee of the Whole. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 393 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to the Order of the Day, and went into Com- 
 mittee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair; and the question still being on the 
 third resolution reported by the Legislative Committee, and amended by the Conven- 
 tiou, in the following words : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who 
 now enjoy it under the existing Constitution ; and shall be extended, Ist, to every 
 free white male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein, above the age of 
 twenty-one years, who owns, and has possessed for six months, or who has acquired 
 by marriage ,^escent or devise, a freehold estate, assessed to the value of not less than 
 dollars, for the payment of taxes, if such assessment shall be required by 
 law; 2d, or who shall own a vested estate in fee, in remainder, or reversion, in land, 
 the assessed value of which shall be dollars ; 3d, or who shall own, and have 
 
 possessed a leasehold estate, with the evidence of title recorded, of a term originally 
 not less than five years, and one of wJiich shall be unexpired, of the annyal value or 
 rent of dollars ; 4th, or who for twelve months next preceding, has been a 
 
 house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, borough or election dis- 
 trict, where he may offer to vote, and who shall have been assessed with a part of the 
 revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, and actuall}^ paid the same : 
 Provided, nevertheless. That the Ptight of Suffrage shall not be exercised by any person 
 of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, soldier, 
 sailor or marine, in the service of the United States, nor by any person convicted of 
 any infamous offence; nor by citizens born without the Commonwealth, unless they 
 shall have resided therein for five years immediately preceding the election at which 
 they shall offer to vote, and two years preceding tlie said election, in the county, city, 
 borough or election district, where they shall offer to vote, (the mode of proving such 
 previous residence, when disputed, to be prescribed by law), and shall possess, more- 
 over, some one or more of the qualifications above enumerated." 
 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield moved to amend the resolution by striking out all after 
 the words Resolved, that," and inserting the following as a substitute : 
 
 " Every male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein (other than free ne- 
 groes and mulattoes.) aged 21 years and upwards, qualified to exercise the Right of 
 Suffrage by the existing Constitution and laws, — 
 
 And every such citizen being possessed, or Vviiose tenant for years, at will and at 
 sufferance, is possessed, of land of the assessed value of dollars, and having an 
 
 estate of freehold therein, — 
 
 And every such citizen being possessed, as tenant in common, joint-tenant or co- 
 parcener, of an interest in or share of land, and having an estate of freehold therein, 
 such interest or share being of the value of dollars, — 
 
 And ever}'- such citizen, being entitled to a reversion, or vested remainder in fee, 
 expectant on any estate for life, or lives in land of the assessed value of dollars, — 
 
 x\nd every such citizen, being possessed of a leasehold estate in land, claiming un- 
 der a lease, renewable at the option of the lessee, absolutel}-, or upon payment of a 
 fine, or performance of other condition, the yearly value of such land being 
 dollars, — 
 
 Each and every such citizen, unless his title shall have come to him by descent, 
 devise, marriage or marriage settlement, having been so possessed or entitled for six 
 months, — 
 
 And no other persons. 
 
 Shall be qualified to vote for members of the General Assemblj^, in tlie county, city, 
 or borough, respectively, wherein the land lieth: — 
 
 Provided, That no person shall be entitled to vote more than once, or at more places 
 than one, in any election ; — 
 
 And. jjrovided, That non-commissioned officers, soldiers, sailors, and marines, in the 
 land or naval service of the United States, shall not be qualified to vote ; — 
 
 And, j^rovided, That the Legislature may, by law, deprive any persons of the Right 
 of Suffrage, for crimes, whereof they shall or ma}' be convicted." 
 
 The amendment having been read, and the question upon it propounded from the 
 Chair, Mr. Leigh rose, and spoke to the following effect — 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — It may be, perhaps, that in submitting this proposition, and in the 
 earnest endeavour I am going to make to explain the principle it is founded on, to 
 maintain it as the vrisest and surest foundation of a Representative Republic, and par- 
 ticularly suited to the circumstances of this Commonwealth, and thus to recommend 
 it to the favourable consideration of the Committee, I am taking a task upon myself, 
 utterly nugatory, as well as laborious and ungracious. For, it seems, plainly enough, 
 to be the general opinion, that any effort to preserve a landed qualification of the 
 Right of Suffrage must fail. Yet, "if it shall fail, the principal reason of its failure, I 
 am persuaded, will be found in the prevalence of the opinion that it certainly will fail, 
 rather than that it ought to fail. It happens in most political questions and controversies 
 in our day and nation, that the first exertion of men's minds is to ascertain which way 
 
 50 
 
394 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the majority is, and if that point can be ascertained, it generally in fact (and in the 
 opinion of many, rightly too) sways and determines the majority. For my own part, 
 however, the landed qualification of the Right of Suffrage stands approved in my 
 judgment, by principle and experience, and the more I have reflected and the more 
 I have observed upon the subject, the more strongly approved ; and a departure from 
 it is condemned, in my view of things, by the experience of the other States of this 
 Union. In almost every instance, in which our sister States have broken up old 
 foundations, and departed from the landed qualification of Suffrage, they have pro- 
 ceeded eventually and instantaneously, to Universal Suffrage — I say, instantaneously — 
 for speaking in regard to the life of a nation, the transition is instantaneous. States 
 never go upward, in affairs of this kind — their course is always downward — the 
 downward course is easy, the downward tendency constant ; and dowri^own they go, 
 to those extremes of democracy, which have always ended, and wiTl always end, in 
 licence and anarchy, and thence, by inevitable consequence, in despotism. The first 
 wish of my 'heart is for a practical, regular, stable, Republican Government; to 
 which, in my apprehension, violent extremes of all kinds are equally dangerous and 
 hostile. And perceiving (as I do but too clearly for my own peace of mmd) that if 
 we too depart from the landed qualification of Suffrage, we shall not stop short of 
 Universal Suffrage, in the end — believing, indeed, that it is Universal Suffrage, in ef- 
 fect, to which the views of many gentlemen obviously tend — and feeling- the most 
 anxious forebodings of danger to all regular Government, from the admission of the 
 principle into our institutions — I am, therefore, desirous to extend the Right of Suf- 
 frage only to those who are within the equity of the original principle of the freehold 
 qualification, on which the founders of our Government placed it. 
 
 When my friend from Augusta (Mr. Johnson) gave the Committee his interpreta- 
 tion of the first resolution of the Legislative Committee, and endeavoured to shew us, 
 that the proposal to apportion the representation according to the white population 
 only, was tantamount to, and really meant, an apportionment of representation ac- 
 cording to the qualified voters ; and then endeavoured to reconcile us to that scheme 
 of apportioning the representation, thus expounded and understood, before it was yet 
 determined who should be the qvialified voters, I saw at once, and wondered he did 
 not see, that that argument went beyond and beside the purpose for which he used 
 it — that it would chiefly affect the question concerning the qualification of the Right 
 of Suffrage — that, with the exception of himself, and a very few others, all those who 
 are for apportioning representation according to white population only, if that should 
 be understood to mean according to the qualified voters, would be intent on making 
 every white man a qualified voter. That this was the effect of the argument, soon 
 appeared from the sentiments avowed by one of his own colleagues (Mr. M'Coy). 
 The gentleman from Augusta has thus lent the most efficient aid to the principle of 
 Universal Suffrage; which, I am sure, he deprecates as earnestly as 1 do. He has 
 borne a main part in bringing us into this fearful strait between Scylla and Charyhdis ; 
 and, confidently trusting that the Siren's voice cannot lure him to the fatal shore, I 
 implore him to lend me his aid, now — or rather, to put his own strong and skilful 
 hand to the helm, and, if possible, save us from being dashed against the impending 
 rock of destruction. Our hopes of avoiding the whirlpool which threatens to ingulph 
 all, must rest on others. 
 
 There is. Sir, one feature in the resolution of the Legislative Committee on this 
 subject, so strikingly unjust, I may say, so glaringly absurd, that I can hardly think 
 it was intended; but I mentioned it here, some days ago, and no friend of the princi- 
 ple of the resolution, has proposed any amendment of its details in this particular. 
 Observe, Sir — the resolution provides, that the owners of the smaller freehold estates 
 in land, shall not be allowed to vote, unless their land be of a certain assessed value, 
 though the owners must pay some land tax, no matter how trivial the value of their 
 land may be ; but, if a house-keeper and head of a family shall reside on one of these 
 small freeholds, as tenant of the owner or by his permission, paying any revenue tax, 
 of what kind or how trivial soever, such house-keeper and head of a family shall be 
 allowed to vote, though his landlord shall not. Can this be right.? Can it possibly 
 be intended.? I must still think, that it is to be imputed to inaccuracy in the details 
 of the resolution, which will be, as it easily may be, corrected: and 1 mention it now 
 again, as I did before, chiefly for the purpose of shewing how cautious we ought to be 
 against indulging in an intemperate zeal for innovation, miscalled reform, lest we run 
 into gross inconsistencies, and produce new and greater inconveniences or wrongs 
 than those we propose to remedy. 
 
 Permit me now, Sir, to explain succinctlv my own proposition. 
 
 In the first place, I propose, that all who now enjoy the R,ight of Suffrage, shall con- 
 tinue to exercise it. According to the existing provisions of the Constitution and laws 
 on this subject, it is land, a freehold estate in land, of a certain quantity, without regard 
 to its quality or value, which ascertains the right of the owner to vote.* We are told, 
 
 * For the existing freehold qualification of Suffrage in Virginia, see Rev. Code, vol. I. c. 51. $ 3— 
 " Every male citizen of this Commonwealth, aged twenty-one years, (other than free negroes or mu- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 395 
 
 that these regulations operate very unequally ; for that, in some parts of the State, 
 land is worth ten, twenty, fifty dollars per acre, while in other parts, and often in the 
 same county, it is worth less than a dollar per acre. And this is very true. Again 
 we are told, that, in many parts of the State, there are large tracts of barren land, and 
 in the Western country, particularly, vast bodies of mountainous land unfit for culti- 
 vation ; that these lands atford the holders of them the means of creating freeholders 
 and voters, jyro re tiata, to answer occasional electioneering purposes ; and that this is 
 a shameful and intolerable abuse. And, since the meeting of this Convention, 1 have 
 heard the existence of this abuse, in some parts of the Western country, to a very 
 enormous extent, asserted hy a delegate from that quarter of the State ; but to my 
 great satisfaction (though, considering from whom the first information came, much 
 to my surprise) I have since heard the fact of such abuses being either frequent, or 
 carried to any great extent, strenuously denied, on this floor, by another gentleman 
 from the same quarter. Some abuses of the kind, I doubt not, there have been, in 
 the West and in the East too ; but, upon reflection, I cannot but think, that they must 
 have been very rare. For, the provision of the election law, which requires that the 
 title in the land, unless derived by marriage, descent or devise, shall have been ac- 
 quired six months before the owner of it presents himself at the polls to vote, which 
 was intended to prevent such abuses, must, in practice, have proved generally effec- 
 tual to prevent them; since it cannot often happen, that the person who desires to 
 make a voter by makinsf a freeholder, does or can foresee the want of the vote so long 
 before the election at which it is to be given. Such abuses too, are in their nature, 
 very open to detection, and easy to be exposed. Although, therefore, I am sensible, 
 that the existing regulation of the Right of Suffrage, does operate unequally, by 
 reason of the inequalities in the value of lands — and although it may be liable 
 (for what regulation is not liable.') to some abuse — yet I am very sure, that it 
 brings to the polls, the great body of the settled residents of the Commonwealth, the 
 free, allodial cultivators of the soil for their own use ; and admits but few, very few 
 others. Imperfections there may be in the present regulation — but imperfections 
 which ought not to condemn it — such imperfections as are incident to all general 
 regulations, and indeed to all human institutions; such as perhaps, it would be hardly 
 possible to avoid. Besides, Sir, I hold that there is a wide difference betv.'een the re- 
 fusal in the first instance, to confer a right, which ouglit not to be conferred, and the 
 taking away a right, which has been alread}' conferred and long enjoyed, because in 
 justice and good policy it ought originally to have been withlield. If I had found the 
 Right of Suffrage extended ever so far beyond what I consider the proper point, how- 
 ever I might have lamented it, I should have hesitated long before I touched it. Im- 
 perious necessity only should have induced me to assent to new restrictions. There 
 is no such necessity here. Thoufrh a freehold of twenty-five acres of land in Jeffer- 
 son, may be worth five hundred dollars, while the like quantity of land on the sandy 
 ridges of the East or in the broken mountainous districts of the West, may not exceed in 
 value fifty or even twenty dollars, still the owner of the one, cultivating it for his 
 maintenance, has a common interest in the soil, as well as the other, and is affected 
 by whatever affects the general interests of the State or the local interests of his own 
 county. I have explained my views on this jjoint the more fullv. because I know 
 there are some gentlemen who ditfer with me in opinion concerning it, while they 
 concur with me as to the general principle of a landed qualification. 
 
 In the next place, I propose to extend the Right of Suffrage to all freeholders of 
 land, which though not equal in quantity to that now required as a qualification, is 
 yet equal in value to the average of the smaller freeholds which now constitute the 
 qualification. A man may be' the owner of one or two acres of land, with a mill, 
 
 • 
 
 lattoes, or such as have refused to give assurance of fidelity to tlie Commonwealth,) being possessed, 
 or whose tenant for years, at will, or at sufferance, is possessed, of twenty-live acres of land, with a house, 
 the superficial content of the foundation whereof is twelve feet square, or equal to that quantity, and a 
 plantation thereon, or fifty acres of uniniproved land, or a lot or part of lot of land in a city or town estab- 
 lished by act of General Assembly, with a house thereon of the like superficial content or quantity, having, 
 in such land, an estate of freehold at the Iea,<t, and unless the title shall have come to him by descent, de- 
 vise, marriage, or marriage settlement, having been so possessed six months, and no other person, shall 
 be qualified to vote for delegates to serve in General Assembly, for the county, city, or borough respec- 
 tively, in which the land lieth. If the fifty acres of land, heing one entire parcel, lie in several coun- 
 ties, the holder shall vote in that county wherein the greater part of the land lieth, only ; and, if the 
 twenty-five acres of land, being one entire parcel, be in several counties, the holder shall vote in that 
 county wherein the house standeth, only. In right of land holden by parceners, joint tenants or tenants 
 in common, but one vote shall be given by all the holders capable of voting, who may be present, and 
 agree to vote for the same candidate, or candidates, unless the quantity of land, in case partition had been 
 made thereof, be sufficient to entitle every holder present to vote separately, or unless some one or more 
 of the holders may lawfully vote in right of another estate or estates in the same county ; in which case, 
 the others may vote, if holding solely they might have voted: Provided, nevertheless, That no person 
 inhabiting within the District of Columbia, or elsewhere, not within the jurisdiction of this Common- 
 wealth, shall be entitled to exercise the Riirhl of Suffrage therein, except citizens thereof employed 
 abroad in the ser\'ice of the United States, or of this Commonwealth, and whose foreign residence is" oc- 
 casioned by such service." 
 
39G 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION^ 
 
 tannery, or otlier fixtures upon it, equal or far exceeding in value, many tracts of fifty 
 acres of unimproved land, or of twenty-five acres with a small dwelling house upon 
 them. I would extend the Right of Suffrage to freeholders of this class ; to all Iree- 
 holders of land of a certain assessed value; say, fifty dollars, or if you please, twenty- 
 five dollars — I am not particular about the sum with which the blank shall be filled. 
 Then, Sir, I propose to extend the right, to all parceners, joint tenants and tenants in 
 common, of lands of such aft assessed value, that the share of each shall be equal in 
 value, no matter how small in quantity, to the value of the small freeholds held iu 
 severalty, which I have just now described. I propose to extend the right, further j 
 to all remainder-men and reversioners in fee, expectant on estates for liie or lives, so 
 that the assessed value of the land be such that the estate in remainder or reversion 
 may be fairly estimated at an equal value with that of the small freeholds held in pos- 
 session. I know that the value of such interests depends on the complement or du- 
 ration of life of the tenant in possession ; but there is no occasion here for the accu- 
 racy which would be proper in making a bargain ; and a general rule may be easily 
 laid down, which will ansv/er the present purpose; as if we should estimate the lile 
 estate equal to one-tliird, and the remainder in fee equal to two-thirds, of the whole 
 fee-simple value of the land, and regulate the extent of this particular qualification 
 accordingly. Lastly, I propose to give the Right of Sufiirage to all tenants for years, 
 holding under leases renewable at their own option, upon the payment of a fine or 
 performance of other condition. These are estates for years, only in name ; they are, 
 in truth, fixed, permanent and independent interests. Such leases are generally pur- 
 chased for a consideration presently paid ; and only a ground-rent, very small and 
 very far short of the annual value of the property, is reserved. Such lessees are little, 
 if at all, dependent on the favour of their landlords. But I would require, that the 
 property should be of a given value; if estimated with respect to the value of the 
 fee-simple, it should be somewhat greater than the assessed value of the small free- 
 holds; if estimated with respect to the amount of rent reserved, that should be very 
 small. I am at present regardless of details, being only desirous to explain the prin- 
 ciple on which 1 propose to regulate the Right of Suffrage, which is, to require some 
 certain, fixed, permanent, independent interest in land, as the qualification of the 
 voter. And to any extent to which this principle can in reason be carried, to that 
 extent I am willing to go : but, to go farther — to depart, in any degree, from the prin- 
 ciple of a substantial and permanent landed qualification — this is what, in my opinion, 
 the true theory of pure Republican Government, and all experience of the practical 
 operation of political institutions, at home and in our sister States, far from dictating 
 to be done, warn us not to do. 
 
 The Legislative Committee proposes to extend the Right of Suffrage, to every 
 leaseholder of a term originally not less than five years, yielding an annual rent of a 
 certain amount, though but a month or a week of the term shoJl be left unexpired 
 when the lessee shall present himself at the polls; and to every person, who tor 
 twelve months next preceding, has been a housekeeper and head of a family, within 
 the county or town where he may ofiier to vote, and who shall have been assessed 
 with, and shall have paid, a revenue tax, of any kind, on any subject, or to any 
 amount. As to these housekeepers and heads of tamilies, which the proposition dis- 
 tinguishes from termors of five years, as well as from freehold owners of land, they 
 must be persons resident on the laiids of others — they must be either tenants from 
 year to year, paying rent — or tenants at the will of others, on whose bounty they are 
 dependent for a home and a shelter — or squatters, who have trespassed and seated 
 tliemselves on tJie lands of others. ■ These last, to be sure, may be independent of the 
 •owners of the land, and ready enough, quite too ready, to set them at defiance; and 
 they, I hope, are i^t witlnn the intent, though they are within the words, of the new 
 regulation of the Right of Suffrage, which the Legislative Committee has proposed 
 to us. But what will be the condition of the tenant at will, who is indebted to the 
 mere bounty of his landlord, for the shelter that covers his head? or of the tenant 
 from year to year, or of the termor of a five years lease, rendering a rent quarterly^ 
 half-yearly or yearly, equal to the full annual value of the land ? Is it expected, is it 
 really believed, that men in this situation, will or can vote without any regard to the 
 wishes of their landlords? that the tenant, when he goes to give his vote, will have nu 
 care to conciliate the favor, or to avoid the resentment, of the man, who may issue 
 his distress warrant whenever the rent is in arrear, and take the bed on which his 
 sick wife is lying, or the cradle from his new-born child ? Sir, the landlord holds such 
 a tenant by the very strings of his heart. He has the power, with the shghtest 
 twitch, to drag him to the polls, and to dictate his vote. Not the pusillanimity only, 
 but the very virtues of the man, may serve to ensure his dependence, and implicit 
 obedience to the master-power which constrains his will. If the landlord be indul- 
 gent and kind — if with power to exact his due by summary process of distress, he 
 yet forbears to do so, out of a kind regard to the interests of the tenant, or a generous 
 sympathy with any mislbrtunes which have befallen hiuij he binds the tenant to him 
 
DEBATES or THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 2W7 
 
 by favor : if there be gratitude in the human heart, such a tenant will respect the 
 wishes of such a landiord ; and the case will be rare indeed, in wliich he will hesitate 
 to give his vote at the polls, according to the landlord's desne or suggestion, or his 
 slightest hint. On the other hand, the hard and rigorous landlord may address his 
 dictation to the distresses or fears of his tenant 3 and may, in general, command his 
 vote, by the terror of a constable at his door, with a distress warrant in his hand. 
 The poor man, who loves his wife and children, will look to their welfare and com- 
 fort as the first object of his care, and will find in the pride of political independence, 
 no consolation for the misery in which it may involve them. Thus it is. Sir, that all 
 extremes approach. Tliis extension of the Right of SulFrage, professedly (and, I will 
 not doubt, sincerely) designed to raise the poor to a level with the rich in political 
 power, Vv'ill only increase the power of the rich : for, it m.ay safely be afiirmed, as a 
 general consequence of the principle, that, to give the Right of Suffrage to tenants 
 at will, the mere dependents on the bounty of the rich, or to tenants from 3-ear to 
 year, or to your termors of five j^ears, rendering a full rent, is, in effect, to give the 
 landlord as many votes, in addition to his own, as he has tenants. We have all heard 
 of the interest of landlords of England in their counties — an interest transferrible at 
 their pleasure, wliich is continually influencing, and often determining, the fate of 
 elections. "What is it ? how acquired ? and how exerted ? The explanation is very 
 simple. The great landholder lets to his tenant a petty forty shilling freehold, which, 
 qualifies him to vote in elections 3 and with this, he leases to him a farm for a term 
 of years, at a full rent of £50, £100, or £500. with a clause of re-entry, and the 
 legal power to distrain, for rent in arrear. Such a tenant is expected to give his vote, 
 whenever he shall be called upon, according to his landlord's will and pleasure, just 
 as much as he is expected to pay his rent when due ; and the vote, is given, as cer- 
 tainly, I doubt not far more certainly, than the rent is paid ; it being the only part of 
 the consideration, which the tenant finds no trouble in paying. I shall be told, no 
 doubt, as I have been often told, that ice may rel}' on the political virtue of this peo- 
 ple, as a complete safeguard against the exertion, or even the existence, of a.ny suck 
 influence of the landlord over his tenant. The virtue of the people is resorted to to 
 solve all difficulties. To me it seems passing strange, that an ai'gument should be 
 drawn from the present existence of political virtue, against the system, under which 
 that virtue has grown up and attained its utmost strength, and in favor of a new prin- 
 ciple, the obvious tendency of which is, to expose that virtue to temptation and cor- 
 ruption. And, with regard to that political influence, which a landlord may acquire 
 over his tenant, by kindness, indulgei:ice and favor, it is quite obvious, that the virtues 
 both of the one and of the other, far from tending to coimteract such an influence, 
 have a tendency to beget, to foster and confirm it. I own, that, at this time, and 
 perhaps for some ten or fifteen years to come, it is not probable, tliat any landlord will 
 dare to exercise a political influence over his tenant, by a rigorous exertion of the 
 powers which such a creditor has over such a debtor; but the time may come, the 
 time sooner or later will surely come, when, in the agitation of those violent political 
 contests, wliich certainly no man hopes or believes to be impossible or improbable ia 
 this Commonwealth, and which are so peculiarly calculated to excite the passions of 
 men, and to make them regardless of the pohtical morality of the means by which 
 party purposes can be accomplished, we may expect to see landlords exerting their 
 influence over their tenants, in vrhatever way such an influence may be most efiec- 
 tually exerted. Let there be one successful example of the kind, and there will soon 
 be imitation enough ; and the exertion of this corrupt and corrupting influence, 
 wliich viewed at a distance and in the abstract, is an object of just abomination, will 
 soon come to be regarded, as natural, fair and legitimate. What expedient will then 
 be resorted to to preserve the tenant's independence, and exempt him, as a voter at 
 the polls, from the influence of his landlord ? Sir, I have heard it hinted already — 
 not yet indeed openly upon this floor — but it has been hinted, tiiat the remedy is 
 quite obvious and easy — only abolish the right of the landlord to distrain for rent in 
 arrear. Suppose it shall be adopted — as in my conscience I believe it will be, and 
 that at no distant day — what then .- Would the genius of reform also deny the land- 
 lord his action of debt to recover his rent, and his execution to enforce the judgment.'* 
 Shall all clauses of re-entry for non-payment of rent, inserted in any lease^be de- 
 clared null and void by statute The ver}' suggestion of the possibility of such ex- 
 pedients to counteract the tendency of the proposed extension of the Right of Suf- 
 frage, is the strongest sentence of condemnation of the principle itself, since it serves 
 to shew, that the adoption of it is only a prelude to a direct attack upon the rights of 
 landed property. 
 
 It may be thought extraordinary, that I, who maintain, that property is justly en- 
 titled to representation — that, being inert in itself, to take from it all influence in the 
 Government, would be to make it, not an object of the most jealous care (as it ought 
 to be), but an object of plunder — that I should, nevertheless, reject the proposed ex- 
 tension of the Right of Suffrage, on the ground that it tends to increase the political 
 
398 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 influence of the fee-simple owners of land. And, to my knowledge, there are some 
 to v/hom the proposed extension of the Right of Suffrage is recommended, precisely 
 by the consideration which I have been urging as a vital objection to it — namely, that 
 it will increase the political influence of the landholder. Sir, 1 am for giving pro- 
 perty a fair, just, direct influence in the Government — an influence httle (if at all) 
 liable to abuse — an influence, which promotes, instead of undermining, public virtue; 
 an influence, which obviates the possibility of corruption — that kind of influence, 
 which it has hitherto had in this Commonwealth, and which has contributed, above 
 all things, to the preservation of political purity in the community at large, and in 
 the admmlstration of public affairs. But, regarding public virtue as essential to the 
 very being of a Republic, as the vital spirit which animates healthful liberty, and 
 makes her tlie parent of every blessing and the dearest object of our affections, I 
 shall be the last man to give property that kind of influence which can work only by 
 corruption; an influence, which will corrupt alike the citizen by whomit shall be ex- 
 ercised, and the citizen on whom it shall be exerted. 
 
 Sir, these house-keepers and termors of five years, stand in a relation towards their 
 landlords, to which the influence of the one, and the dependence of the other, are, 
 in my opinion, almost inseparably incident; and, tlierefore, they are the last class of 
 men (except p .upers) who ought to be admitted to the polls. 
 
 I am. Sir, for retaining, unchanged and unimpaired, the principle of the freehold 
 qualification of the Right of Suffrage, as established by the existing Constitution and 
 laws, only extending the right to such as come within the reason on which the prin- 
 ciple itself was established by our forefathers. Shall I be again told, that the Con- 
 vention of 1776 found this principle in the Constitution of the Colonial Government, 
 and preserved it unaltered — that it was copied from the institutions of England — that 
 it was in truth dictated to us, originally, by King Charles II. in 1667 — and that its 
 origin and its history stamp upon it, indelibly, the odious character of aristocracy? 
 Whence did we derive the institution of jury-trial.? Whence the principle of repre- 
 sentative Government itself.? Did we copy them from the Republic of Rome, or the 
 democracy of Athens.? Were they suggested by the v/isdom of Aristotle, or of Plato, 
 or of Tully ? Are gentlemen prepared to abolish the institution of jury-trial, and the 
 principle of representative Government itself, merely because they are (as undoubt- 
 edly they are) of English origin ? Are they prepared to draw the very blood from our 
 veins, because that too is derived from British ancestors ? Are they prepared to abro- 
 gate the whole body of the Common Law, because it is the Common Law of Eng- 
 land.? — that Common Law, which our ancestors brought with them to this land, and 
 claimed and enjoyed as their birthright — that Common Law, the genius of which is 
 found standing by the side of liberty, wherever liberty is found upon the globe, her 
 companion and her handmaid. As to the freehold qualification having been dictated 
 to the Colonial Government of Virginia, by a royal mandate in the reign of Charles 
 II., I do not question the fact ; nor have I the least doubt, that it was a high-handed ar- 
 bitrary measure, transcending the lawful authority of the crown, and essaying to 
 usurp powers, which the Constitution of the Colonial Government (such as it was) 
 vested in the whole Legislature: but it is not true, that the freehold qualification of 
 Suffrage was established in the Colony, by force of the royal mandate ; it was estab- 
 lished and regulated by the only competent authority — by an act of the whole Legis- 
 lature. He who attributes this measure to the personal interference of CJiarles, has 
 given very little attention to the character or history of that scoundrel King (as he 
 has been justly called.) It was only a measure of that reign — a measure of the 
 minister, whoever he was, that was charged with the care of Colonial affairs — and it 
 was intended, as it certainly was calculated, to give stability and dignity to the Colo- 
 nial Government. The King himself, intent only on sensual gratifications, pleasure 
 and ease, hardly bestowed a serious thought on the condition of his subjects at home, 
 much less on the political institutions of his distant Colonies. But this freehold quali- 
 fication of Suffrage in Virginia, was a measure of Charles's reign ! So was the act, 
 which is now the great safeguard of personal freedom, in England and America — the 
 act which secured the privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus! I hope, Sir, we shall 
 hear no more declamation on this subject — no more addresses to our prejudices : I 
 hope we shall discuss the merits of the freehold qualification of Suffrage, as a ques- 
 tion of political expediency, or (if gentlemen please) of political justice, or natural 
 right, without the least consideration of the Colonial or English or regal source, from 
 which it was originally derived. 
 
 In the various discussions I have heard on the subject of the qualification of the 
 Right of Suffrage, as well before as since the meeting of this Convention, I have un- 
 derstood those who are opposed to the freehold qualification, to contend, that the 
 Right of Suffrage belongs, of natural right, to all men who are subject to the Govern- 
 ment, and bound to contribute to its support, and to bear arms in defence of the State. 
 Now, Sir, for my own part, I am incapable of conceiving any natural right— (a. right, 
 distinct from, antecedent to, independent of, social conventional law — a right inherent 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 399 
 
 in man, derived from the law of nature, and with which he is indued by the God of 
 - nature) — which is not common to every human being. Take the definition of the 
 first article of the Bill of Rights : All men are by nature equally free and indepen- 
 dent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of so- 
 ciety, they cannot by any compacf deprive or divest their posterity ; namely, the en- 
 joyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and 
 pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." It is manifest, these rights belong not 
 only to every man who pays public taxes and bears arms, but also to every woman and 
 child in the community. Again; natural rights are rigiits inherent in man, vested 
 in him before he enters into society, distinct from and independent of social institu- 
 tions. Can there be a greater contradiction in terms, than to say tiiat the Right of 
 Suffrage is one of these natural rights, pertaining to man in a state of nature.^ — the 
 Right of Suffrage, which supposes a state of societ}- — which can never be exercised, 
 which can have no value, no effect, and no imaginable ideal existence, till society is 
 formed and regulated b}^ laws, nor indeed till it has attained to a very high degree of 
 civiUzation and refinement. The friends of Universal or (as it is now the fashion to 
 call it) General Suffrage, are themselves obliged to admit, that it is not a natural 
 right — that it is a merely conventional right : for, at the first stroke of the pen, they 
 exclude from the polls all women without exception, that is, about half of the commu- 
 nity ; and then, all minors, that is about half of the male sex ; and then, all paupers 
 and convicts — so that this right, which gentlemen claim as one of the natural rights 
 of man (and if so common, to all mankind), the}" themselves propose to confine to less 
 than a fourth of the people. We all agree, then, that the Right of Suffrage is a sub- 
 ject of conventional regulation — we all agree, that some limitation of it, and a very 
 extensive limitation too, is just and necessary. The question is, what qualification is 
 the most just, the most politic, the best suited to the nature and ends of a Represen- 
 tative Republic, and, in particular, to the peculiar circumstances of this Common- 
 wealth ? The question between us, is onlj^ a question of degree. And believino-. as 
 I do most conscientiously believe, that the landed freehold qualification is preferable, 
 far preferable, to an}'- other that can be devised, I am bound to maintain it with the 
 utmost exertion of my poor ability. 
 
 Gentlemen say, it is imperfect — that there are lazy, idle, drunken, vitious men, 
 who hold freeholds which may entitle them to vote, while their next neighbour, tliough 
 ever so industrious, honest and intelligent, ma}^ be excluded from the polls, because 
 he owns no freehold — that the man who owns a freehold to-day, and sells it to-mor- 
 row, is in all likelihood equally worthy to be entrusted with the exercise of political 
 power after he has made the sale as before, and that the purchaser can hardly be 
 deemed more worthy, the day after than he was the day before he made the acquisi- 
 tion — that, surely, intelligence, or independence, or any of the social virtues, cannot, 
 with truth, be ascribed to all the freeholders, or denied to all the non-freeholders: 
 and I admit all this. It has been said too, that there are freeholders wlio are paupers; 
 but that I cannot conceive the possibilit}- of But I admit, that the freehold qualifica- 
 tion is imperfect. What then I still say — and I appeal to every man who hears 
 me, whether or no I say the truth — that, in Virginia, the great mass of intelligence 
 and virtus resides in that stout and generous yeomanry, the freeholders of this land; 
 that to them belongs not only all the real property of the Commonwealth, but almost 
 all of the personal property also ; that they are the class, who feed, who clothe, who 
 educate all classes; who hold the greatest stake in society ; who are the only persons 
 who have any stake that may not be withdrawn at pleasure, in the twinkling of an 
 eye; who, therefore, have, and actually take, the deepest interest in the public wel- 
 fare. They alone support Government, constantly in peace, as well as occasionally 
 in war — they fight as well as pay — and the}' feed and clothe and pay all who do 
 fight. It has been my lot to mix, a great deal, in the society of these freeholders — 
 aye, Sir, vnth the very poorest of them. I think I know the character of our poor 
 fireeholder perfectly. Look at him — modest, unobtrusive, and unassuming, in Ins 
 manners and deportment, almost to humility, the idea has never entered into his head, 
 that he is a nobleman — the limb of a great aristocracy : on the contrary, the first im- 
 pression of a stranger would be, that he is not sensible of his dignity as a freeman. 
 But try him — go to his house, and you will find him, and especiallv his wife, hospi- 
 table to the utmost of their means — trust him, and you will find him proudly faithful 
 to his trust — appeal to him in any distress that may befall you ; you will find his heart 
 warm with generous sympathy, and his hand ready to aid you — Do him a service or a 
 kindness, he will remember it to tlie latest hour of his life ; and if ever opportunity 
 occurs, he will pay it back to you, or after your death, to your children, with interest — 
 let any one wrong him; he knows as well as the wisest, how to seek and obtain re- 
 dress — insult him, and he will fight you. I copy the portrait. Sir. from the picture of 
 the original painted on my ownTieart. I can hardly imagine a higher degree of vir- 
 tue, public or private, than that of the great body of the freeholders of Virginia. Has 
 one man of them all ever been bribed for his vote ? has any gentleman ever heard of 
 
400 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 a single instance ? The wealth of this Commonwealth cannot bribe the freeholders 
 of that little despised county of Warwick, so often referred to, on account of its size, 
 as the opprobrium of the existing Constitution. I say, therefore, that the freehold 
 landed qualification — thougli it is not absolutely perfect, as I willingly own it is not — 
 though, like all other general regulations, it may admit some to the polls, who, if re- 
 gard could be had to their individual character, ought to be excluded, and excludes 
 some, whom, regarding individual merit, all would be willing to admit — is still, in 
 Virginia at least, if not in all Republican States, the preferable qualification of Suf- 
 frage — the best criterion for ascertaining the class most worthy to be entrusted with 
 the political powers of the State. 
 
 No general regulation on the subject, can be exempt from imperfection. We all 
 (I believe — I am not quite sure of it) concur as to the qualifications of sex and age — 
 that all women and all minors, without exception, ought to be excluded from the 
 polls. Yet, I presume, no man entertains the opinion, that there is not a single wo- 
 man, that there are not many, very many women, fully equal to the most meritorious 
 of the other sex, in intelligence, in public spirit, and every otlier quality that consti- 
 tutes a good citizen. I have known women. Sir, who possessed, not only the gentler 
 virtues of their sex, and passive fortitude (in v/hich, I think, they generally surpass 
 men), but such active courage, as might shame many of the stronger sex. Is that a 
 perfect rule, which excludes all women, the firm and wise, as well as the silly and the 
 vain? As to the qualification of age, we all concur in admitting to the polls, the most 
 imbecile of mankind — men in the last extremity of dotage — men of any decree of 
 mental vv^eakness short of legal incapacity to manage their own affairs — while we ex- 
 clude all youths under twenty-one years of age,, whatever be their attainments or their 
 merits. Considered, then, in reference to individuals, gentlemen must perceive, that 
 even these qualifications of sex and age, which as yet no statesman surely has ever 
 doubted the propriety of, are imperfect. 
 
 Let us not waste our labour in a vain search after unattainable perfection in our 
 political institutions. If, in regulating the Right of Suffrage, we can find a rule which 
 will exclude the fewest of those who ought to be admitted, and admit the fewest of 
 those who on any account ought to be excluded, with that rule we ought to be con- 
 tent. And I shall forever maintain, that (in this Commonwealth particularly) the 
 freehold qualification is that rule. 
 
 It is, I suppose without question, the object of us all, to establish a wise, just, patri- 
 otic. Republican Govei-nment. And, looking to the accomplishment of that end, I in- 
 sist, tliat to ensure wisdom in the Governrnxent, and a strict observance of justice, and 
 a spirit of patriotism in tlie administration of public affairs, we ought to vest the Right 
 of Suffrage (the fountain, in our system, of all political power) in that class of men, 
 in whom we find, generally, the greatest degree of moral and intellectual cultivation; 
 in that class of men, who, holding the property of the State, are the most interested 
 in the administration of justice ; in that class of men, whose own interests are the most 
 completely identified with the interests of the Commonwealth. And this is the class 
 of freeholders. 
 
 Now, Sir, is the freehold qualification contrary to any sound principle of Republi- 
 can Government.? Gentlemen insist that it is — and they appeal to the Bill of Rights, 
 in which it is declared, that " all men, having sufiicient evidence of permanent com- 
 mon interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the Right of Suffrage." 
 We acknowledge the principle, in its utmost extent — but we tell them, that it is only 
 the general abstract principle, and that the question is as to its application in practice — 
 what is the sufiicient evidence of common interest with, and attachment to, the com- 
 munity, which ought to be required as the qualification of Suffrage? We tell them, 
 that the very men, who laid down the abstract principle, did, at the very same time, 
 in then* practical application of it, require a freehold in land, as the qualification. The 
 only answer they give us, is, simply, to repeat the principle: relying on the authority 
 of the Bill of Rights for the principle, which nobody disputes, and rejecting the autho- 
 rity of the Constitution, framed by the same men, as to the practical application of it, 
 which is the point in debate, they eternally repeat the principle. Now, I affirm, as 
 the Convention of 1776 affnmed in the Constitution, that a freehold, or other certain, 
 permanent, independent interest, in land, is tiie best and the only sufficient evidence 
 of permanent connnon interest with, and attachment to, the community. 
 
 For, I think it may safely be assumed, that not only all the land of the country is 
 owned by the freeholders, but at least nineteen twentieths (I believe the proportion is 
 much greater) of the visible, taxable, personal property also is owned by them. Sup- 
 pose one of these men purposes to sell his land, and migrate to the West; still he is 
 interested in whatever afl'ects the general weal of Virginia, to tlie last moment he 
 holds the land, since he cannot divest himself of his interest in its value. But mere 
 personal property has no locality. Slaves without land to work them on, are more 
 valuable in the South Western States than here. Money, Bank stock, stock in the 
 public funds, are of equal value every where : the owners of such property (it is with us, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 a very small part of the national wealth) have not, by reason of such ownership, any 
 common interest with or attachment to our community, in any sense of the words. 
 
 I shall forever contend, that those who must bear tlie burden of paying taxes, ought 
 to have the power of laying them. Is it right, that tlie land-holders of Virginia, who 
 must pay almost the whole revenue of the State, as well that raised on land, as that 
 raised on personal property, should be taxed by those who pay little or nothing, and 
 who by no contrivance can be made to contribute more ? 
 
 There is another view of this subject, which is very obvious, and yet seems to have 
 altogether escaped the attention of those who deny the propriety of the freehold quali- 
 fication. The Commonwealth of Virginia has three several classes of political inter- 
 ests. One is the interest she has, in common with all the States of the Federal Union, 
 in relation to foreign nations ; this is confided to the Federal Government. Another 
 is, the interest of Virginia, in relation to the Union, and to the several States which 
 compose it; this is confided, partly to the Federal, and partly to the State, Govern- 
 ment. In regard to both these classes of interests, every citizen of Virginia has, or 
 ought to have, the same common interest. But, as to the other class, the local inter- 
 ests of the several parts of the State in relation to each other — which are confided ex- 
 clusively to the State Government — which are continually brought home to every 
 man — I defy the wit of man to discover any evidence, or devise any cause, of commu- 
 nity of interest with or attachment to any particular county, other than the ownership 
 of land in it. What is the bond, which attaches the resident of the county of Ches- 
 terfield, who has only a slave, or a horse, or a gainful trade, to the peculiar interests 
 of that county, more than those of Henrico ? What is his comnmnity of interest 
 with the people of Chesterfield, for whose representative he is to vote I pray gen- 
 tlemen to tell me ; to tax their ingenuity, to exercise their invention, or their imagi- 
 nation, and point it out to me, if they can. There is none ; none conceivable. 
 
 There are those who affect to think, that the mere fact of the citizen being born in 
 the State, is enough to attach him forever to the interests of the Commonwealth, and 
 even of tlie particular county in which he is born; and that birth, therefore, with ac- 
 tual residence and mature age, is a sufficient qualification of the Right of Suffrage. 
 I wish I could think this reasoning well founded in fact. For my own part — though 
 I have never avowed the sentiment without exciting a smile — I yield all pretensions 
 to philosophy, and I am proud to own, that I cherish a narrow attachment for the spot 
 of earth where I was born, and where sleep in peace the ashes of my parents, and of 
 all the dead whom I have loved and honoured in my youth ; and a grateful affection 
 for the people among whom I was bred, and from whom, from my childhood to this 
 hour, I have been experiencing continual kindness. Would to God, this sentiment 
 was general! But we see men, every day, leaving this their native land, and mi- 
 grating to the most distant regions of the West, without a single pang at the separa- 
 tion from the home and the friends of their youth, and with no concern but that 
 which springs from the thought of their being obliged to pay for the land they have 
 bought of the United States. 
 
 While the freehold owners of the land, being owners also of the great mass of visi- 
 ble taxable personalty, have a community of interest, of which they never can divest 
 themselves, with every other class of the community, the other classes have no ne- 
 cessary community of interest with them. Retain the powers of Government in the 
 hands of the freeholders; and they can never adopt any course of measures, or im- 
 pose any public burdens, which will not affect themselves equally or more than the 
 non-freeholders. Place the Government in other hands than theirs; and they may 
 be ground to dust and ashes by those who have no fellow-feeling for them. All men, 
 we are told, are by nature equally free ; and thence it is inferred, that every man is 
 equally entitled, in a political way, to dispose of the property of others. The direct 
 contrary is the true inference — that every man is best entitled to dispose of his own. 
 This principle intended to operate as a protection of the rights of individuals from the 
 power of others, and expressly so applied by those who declared it, is converted into 
 a principle of power over others. Sir, these manifold perversions of the plain words 
 and simple elementary truths of the Bill of Rights, which I daily hear, are, to my ap- 
 prehension, the most alarming symptom of the times: they jeopard the very principle 
 of property ; they portend serious danger to all regular Government. 
 
 But it is contended, that the freehold qualification is an odious system of exclusion; 
 and every word we have heard on the subject here — and all the reasoning of that fa- 
 mous memorial, which was presented to us at the commencement of our session, and 
 which has been so much lauded — proceed on the assumption that this is the true cha- 
 racter of the principle. A stranger unacquainted with our institutions, and relying for 
 information concerning them on the language of our reformers, would conclude, that 
 the freeholders constitute a separate and higher rank in our society, and the non-free- 
 holders an inferiour degraded caste, from which the one can never rise, nor the other 
 descend ; that the freeholder can never part with his qualification and cease to enjoy 
 the Right of Suffrage, nor the non-freeholder acquire it. Yet, in truth, there is not 
 
 51 
 
402 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the least restraint on the alienation of freehold lands in Virginia ; and every fartliing's 
 worth of real estate is open to the fair and honest acquisition of all. No law secures 
 the possession of the soil to luxury and idleness, or denies it to honest labour and per- 
 severing industry. An odious system of exclusion ! where every man may acquire free* 
 hold estate in land enough to confer the Right of Suffrage for fifty dollars. There is not 
 a county in the State (unless, perhaps, the county of Jefferson) where a sufficient 
 freehold may not be bought for fifty dollars ; in many counties, it may be bought for 
 twenty, in many for five dollars. No honest industrious citizen is excluded, who 
 chooses to gain admission; no, none but the veriest paupers and drones in the com- 
 munity, whom all agree upon excluding. An interest in the soil is only required, be- 
 cause it affords the best and only certain general test of community of interest with 
 the great body of the State. It was, then, with surprise, ineffable surprise, that I 
 heard the information which the gentleman from Monongalia (Mr. Wilson) gave the 
 Committee the other day — that in his part of the country, men of the highest merit, 
 " of civic virtue and literary talent," debarred by the requisition of the freehold qualifi» 
 cation from exercising the invaluable Right of Suffrage, and disgusted with this 
 " odious exclusion," this degradation from the rank of citizens, were seen to abandon 
 their native land, and seek " in the free States," that equality with others which our 
 institutions sternly deny them. I should be glad to know of the gentleman, what a 
 sufficient freehold to give the Right of Suffrage, would cost in the county of Monon- 
 galia I suppose it might be bought for ten dollars ; twenty dollars would be a large 
 estimate. And if these gentlemen of " civic virtue and literary talent" felt, so very 
 acutely, the evil and degradation of their exclusion from the polls — if an attachment 
 to this State formed any ingredient in their " civic virtue" — if their taste for literature 
 had not spurned the vulgar processes of calculation — they would have considered, 
 that the expense of the first hundred miles of travel, in their emigration to " the free 
 States," would have sufficed to purchase a freehold at home, and this invaluable Right 
 of Suffrage into the bargain. The very facility, with which, for the slightest or for 
 no reason, these non-freeholders abandon the State, of which we have now, from one 
 of their advocates, the most authentic information, is conclusive proof to my mind, 
 that it is wise to exclude them from the polls — precisely, because it evinces, that they 
 have no permanent common interest with or attachment to the community. 
 
 The war of epithets too, which I hoped had spent its rage in the debate upon the ques- 
 tion of the basis of Representation, has been renewed upon this question of the qualifica- 
 tion of Suffrage. The freehold quafificalion is a remnant, a shred, a taint of aristocracy, 
 which we ought carefully to expurgate from our political institutions ! Any person is 
 at full liberty to think me an aristocrat — aye, and to call me so, if he pleases — provided 
 it is not done with design to insult me : I have no office to gain; no office, no emolu- 
 ment, no political fame or consequence to lose — naught is never in danger — political 
 proscription cannot harm me. 1 shall still enjoy the personal confidence of the gen- 
 erous people, whom it is my pride to represent here — I shall still enjoy the affections 
 of all those whose regard is at all necessary to my happiness in life — these I can only 
 forfeit by departing from the course (I wish I were sure I could persist in it) of virtue 
 and honour : and as loyalty of personal attachment is with me a ruling motive and 
 principle of action, so I look to it as my principal solace and support. I, therefore, 
 trust, that I shall have the fortitude to bear any political odium that can be heaped 
 upon my head ; and the courage to face any clamour that can be raised, however fierce 
 and loud. To constitute the justum et temicerii propositi virum, it is not more necessary 
 that he should be capable of withstanding the vultus instantis tyranni, tha,n that he should 
 be capable of beholding, unmoyed, the civium ardor prava jubentium. The freehold 
 qualification is aristocratical ! Was Patrick Henry an aristocrat ? was George Mason ? 
 was Edmund Pendleton.? was Spencer Roane.? Were all the great and good men in 
 Virginia, since the revolution, who have, so steadily, so anxiously adhered to this 
 principle, aristocrats ? Has Virginia herself been aristocratical for these fifty-four 
 years past ? Is this blasphemy of our glorious foref ithers to be endured ? I under- 
 stand the term " aristocracy," to describe political power vested in a particular order 
 of men, either designated by birth, or by election for life, which, by the Constitution 
 of the State, is unalienably vested in them, and in which no other order of men in the 
 community, can, by any act of their own, participate. Generally, in Governments 
 where orders of nobility are admitted, the rank and the political power incident to it, 
 are descendible. But what is the condition of this nobility of ours — this aristocratic 
 body of freeholders ? The freeholder sells his land to the plebeian non-freeholder : the 
 plebeian is exalted to the patrician order, and, eodemflatu, the patrician descends into 
 the plebeian; and these ups and downs are continually going on. Even gentlemen's 
 termors for years, and house-keepers, are nobility too, if enjoying the Right of Suf- 
 frage gives the patent of nobility; but, in their case, the landlord has only to say 
 " quit," and not only their patent of nobifity is revoked, but they are turned out of 
 house and home. To call the freehold qualification aristocratical, if not a wilful abuse 
 of words, implies a confusion of ideas. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 But if this institution is not an aristocracy, it is an oligarchy — the Government of 
 a few (for that, I beheve is the meaning of the word)— the number of freeholders does 
 not amount to a moiety of the free white citizens of the Commonwealth, of full age, 
 who contribute to the public revenue ! I know who it was that first said it — and I 
 know how little logic can avail to refute faith — but if undeniable facts have any vir- 
 tue in argument, our opponents have been at the pains to collect such facts as com- 
 mon reason, not sustained by faith, v/ill hardly be able to resist. They have called on 
 the Auditor, for " a statement of the number of persons in each county and town 
 charged with a State tax for the year lc28'"— and, for " a statement of the number of 
 persons, charged on the land books of IS^-S, with taxes on a quantity of land not less 
 than twenty-five acres, or on a lot or part of a lot in town." These statements have 
 been laid before us.* The first ascertains the number of tax-payers, to whom it is 
 proposed by some to extend the Right of Suffrage ; the other ascertains with sufii- 
 cient accuracy, the number of freehold estates of the extent which gives the Right of 
 Suffrage. And it appears, that the number of freeiiolds is ninety-two thousand eight 
 hundred and fifty- six — and the number of tax-payers only ninety-five tliousand five 
 hundred and ninety- three. There ought to be a deduction from the number of free- 
 holds, on account of the double, or rather the manifold charges of the same land on 
 the commissioners' books of the Western counties, in consequence of the number of 
 patents that have been issued for the same tracts: my friend from Spottsylvania (Mr. 
 Stanard) thinks this deduction ought to be ten thousand — which will leave the number 
 of freeholders about eighty-two thousand. The deductions of femes covert and mi- 
 nors are to be made equally from both lists. It is apparent the number of freeholders 
 is to that of the tax-payers (which, of course, includes all the freeholders) more than 
 eight to ten. And, then, we have an oligarchy — a Government of a ftic — vested in 
 more than eight-tenths of the people 1 
 
 I have no doubt myself, that a great many of the tax-payers, who are not also free- 
 holders, are the adult sons of freeholders, not yet married and settled in life ; because 
 whoever owns a horse, pays a revenue tax ; and, among that class of people in Vir- 
 ginia, who, in ni}^ part of the State, are called good-livers, the first present, which a 
 father makes to his son, when he puts on the toga xirilis, is a horse; which horse 
 makes that son chargeable with a State tax. And, gentlemen ask, wh}' are the sons of 
 freeholders — those sons, who are to inherit the lands of their fathers — those sons, who 
 have a cormnon interest in the soil with their fathers — why are they excluded from 
 the polls ? 1 believe, there would be little or no practical diflJerence, in the mere re- 
 sult of elections, between the admission and the exclusion of them. But suppose 
 them admitted : the sons would either vote with their father, or against him. If they 
 should vote with him (as it is to be expected they generally would) the result would 
 only be. to give the father as many votes, in addition to his own, as he has sons of full 
 age. If they should vote against him (and a puppy scoundrel son may take a pride 
 in voting against his father) then they would only countervail tlieir father's vote, and 
 stifle his voice in the Government — which can only be justified by that very peculiar 
 trait in the natural history of man, which is found in this country, (such is the march 
 of mind), though never imagined to exist in any other age or nation under heaven ; 
 namely, that the son is, of course, wiser than his father. Has it come to this pass.-" 
 Are the sons of this land to be taught, that they cannot safel}^ trust the political pow- 
 ers of the State, to their own fathers.'' Not only are all sentiments of generous chi- 
 valry to be decried, renounced, banished from our society — not only is the order of 
 private gentleman to be abolished, as aristocratic and odious — but even filial piety is 
 to be discouraged as incompatible with civil liberty. What manner of democracy is 
 this which teaches these doctrines of impiety and abomination Not that democracy 
 which our fathers loved and cherished — no. Sir ; but a siren democracy — gifted wnth 
 the voice of the charmer, indeed, and with face and breast of maiden beauty, but de- 
 clining into a foul and scaly serpent armed witli mortal stin^r. Prccv.l '. O Procul! 
 Sooner would I embrace monarchy at once, in any form, than democracy of that 
 family, which is sure after years of crime and blood and horror, to engender mihtary 
 despotism. 
 
 We are urged to aboHsh the freehold qualification of Suffrage, in order (as we are 
 gravely told) to subvert the lowland oligarchy — the lowland aristocracy — the aris- 
 tocracy of wealth ! And of the existence of this aristocracy of wealth, there stands 
 Col. William Allen of Surry, the living example and proof! Truly, Sir, but for him, 
 I apprehend gentlemen would have been somewhat at a loss to find an instance to 
 their purpose. That gentleman inherited a large estate from his ancestors, and in- 
 stead of squandering it away, he has kept it together, and improved his fortune; 
 which, in my opinion, is proof of good sense and virtue too. fie owns some thou- 
 sands of acres of land, and certainly a large number of slaves — eight hundred, I think we 
 were told at the commencement of our session, but now (wonderful increase) twelve 
 
 * See these statements appended to the Joiunal of the Convention, Nos. 6, 7. 
 
404 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 hundred — and he has a park stocked with deer — and he undoubtedly drinks, or rather 
 gives his guests to drink, the oldest and best wine in Virginia. Long may he live, say 
 I, to enjoy it all ! Because there are a few, a very few, wealthy individuals among 
 us, it seems to be supposed, that the great body of our freeholders are opulent. Gen- 
 tlemen take no note of Col. Allen's poor neighbors. The wealthy freeholders ! Would 
 to heaven, they were wealthy ! I am sorry to know, with perfect certainty, that the 
 reverse is the true state of their condition ; it is mockery to taunt them with their over- 
 grown wealth. The statute of descents is alone sufficient to prevent the possible 
 growth of aristocracy. This talk of the lowland aristocracy — the landed aristocracy — 
 the aristocracy of wealth — is downright slang. 
 
 Gentlemen have advanced one argument against the freehold qualification, which, 
 from the frequency with which they have recurred to it, and the earnestness with 
 which they have pressed it upon us, I suppose they think irrefragable — a sort of ar- 
 gumentum ad hcminem, or rcductio ad ahsurdum, which they seem to think it impos- 
 sible to escape from or resist — an argument, therefore, which it is my business to state 
 and meet fairly and directly. Indeed, to some it might seem uncourteous, and to 
 others sheer recreancy, if I were to decline it. The argument is this — Gentlemen 
 say to us, if you contend, that, in framing a Republican Constitution of Government 
 for the State, a freehold landed qualification of Suffrage is wise and proper, in order 
 to preserve a due regard to the interests of property in the ordinary administration of 
 public affairs, why do you not carry the principle out to all its consequences and to its 
 utmost extent, and allowing one vote to the man that owns ten acres of land (for in- 
 stance,) allow ten votes to the owner of a hundred, and fifty to the owner of five hun- 
 dred acres, and so on ? Will you pretend, that this would be right or that it would 
 be compatible with the true principles of a Representative Republic ? I answer, with- 
 out hesitation, no. But, in the first place, the argument, if of force to condemn the 
 freehold qualification, concludes against a property qualification of Suffrage of any 
 kind; and is inconsistent with the views of every man, who is not for Universal Suf- 
 frage in the utmost latitude ever lieard of. In the next place, I by no means allow, 
 with respect to any moral or political principle whatever, that because it would end 
 in vice or folly if pushed to extremes, it is therefore vitious and unwise, when ap- 
 plied with moderation and caution ; for I doubt, whether there is a single moral or po- 
 litical truth, however generally admitted and acted upon by men, that might not be 
 condemned by the same process of reasoning. Then, Sir, we have never contended, 
 that an undiLC influence in the Government should be allowed to property, but that 
 due regard and consideration should be had to the interests of property, and only so 
 much weight allowed to it in the Constitution of the Government, as will suffice for 
 its preservation and security ; and the fair state of the question is, whether, in insisting 
 on the freehold qualification, we ask more than political prudence dictates.? Now, 
 Sir, the owner of a thousand, or ten thousand acres of land, may safely trust the 
 owner of a hundred acres, or of ten, with an equal share of power over property, and 
 especially over taxation ; in other words, with an equal vote at the polls, because the 
 owner of the smaller property, has a common interest with the ov/ner of the larger; 
 he must feel precisely the same kind of interest in every public measure, which affects 
 the owners of real estate, either beneficially or injuriously; and as the modicum of the 
 poorer freeholder, and the broader lands of his more opulent neighbour, are equally 
 dear to the respective proprietors, each will unite with the other to promote or defend 
 the interest of all. If the poor freeholder contributes less, his means of contribution are 
 less ; the burden is proportioned to the ability ; and the more opulent freeholder finds 
 ample security in the self-love of the poorer, and the poorer in that of the more opu- 
 lent. All we desire is, to place the political power of the State, in the hands of those 
 who have a community of interest in whatever befals the State, whether of weal or 
 woe. 
 
 Comparisons have been inade between the condition of Virginia, who has so long 
 and so pertinaciously adhered to her freehold qualification of Suffrage, and that of our 
 sister States, who have adopted more liberal principles, in this particular; and, in 
 painting the portrait of Virginia, gentlemen seem to have thought that nothing but 
 shade is necessary to a likeness, and in the portraits of our sister States, nothing but 
 light. Where, they ask, are our arts, our literature, our manufactures, our commerce ? 
 What is the state of our agriculture What has become of our political rank and emi- 
 nence in the Union ? Whither, in the language of Henry, whither has the Genius of 
 Virginia fled ? As to arts (if gentlemen mean the fine arts) and literature, I grant we 
 have a very moderate share indeed of the one, afld none of the otlier — but, whether 
 owing to my ignorance, or to my national vanity, or national prejudices, I have never 
 been sensible of any great superiority of our fellow-citizens of other States in these 
 respects, while I am very sensible of the very great inferiority of us all to the nations 
 of Europe, though none of them enjoy, and not one (I believe) is capable of enjoying, 
 the blessing of Republican Government in any form. Gentlemen will hardly, upon 
 reflection, impute our defects in arts and in letters, to the freehold quahfication of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 405 
 
 Suflfrage. And how any man can impute the low state of our manufactures, and the 
 decay of our trade, to any measures or to any neglect of the State Government, I am 
 wholly at a loss to imagine ; since the interests of commerce belong exclusively to the 
 Federal Government ;"and it has assumed the care of manufactures also — but I do not 
 mean to discuss the justice or the policy of that system of measures. But that which 
 seems to me. the oddest of all the oddities and novelties which I have heard advanced 
 on this floor ,'is the opinion, that the languishing condition of our agriculture, is owing 
 to the nefflect of that great interest by the State Government, and that neglect im- 
 putable to~the circumstance of all political power being vested in the allodial cultiva- 
 tors of the soil. For my own part,"^! only wish the Federal Government would unite 
 with the State Government, in leaving manufactures and commerce and agriculture 
 to their natural course — but this no wise concerns our present question; and, I say 
 again, I shall not enter into that field. But, say gentlemen, Virginia has declined, 
 and is declining — she was once the first State in the Union — now she has sunk to be 
 the third, and will soon sink lower in the scale — New York has taken the lead of her. 
 I envy not the pre-eminence of New York, or of any other State, in population or in 
 wealth. Do gentlemen really believe, that it is owing to any diversity in the princi- 
 ples of the State Governments of the two States, that New York has advanced to be 
 the first State in the Union, and that Virginia, from being the first, is now the third, 
 in wealth and population ? Virginia ceded away her Kentucky, to form a new State ; 
 and New York has retained her Genessee — there lies the whole secret. The conduct 
 of both States was determined by a just regard to the geographical situation of their 
 original territory; and I am well content, that Virginia did make the cession, and that 
 New York retained her territory. The truth is, that so long as new and fertile lands 
 remain to be settled in the Western States, the old States never can advance in 
 population, as rapidly as they otherwise would; and of all the old States, none has 
 contributed more to the peopling of the new States, than Virginia — I dare to say, not 
 one so much. This is fne reason of what gentlemen call the decline of Virginia. 
 Her Government could not by any conceivable means have prevented it ; nor if it 
 could, ought it to have done so. Virginia, in common with most of the old States, 
 must of necessity forego, for a long time to come, the advantages of a full population ; 
 and may, meanwhile, content herself with an exemption from the evils incident to a 
 State of a crowded population. Is Virginia inferiour to any of her sister States, in 
 social peace and happiness, in intellig.ence, in the virtues of private life, in political 
 purity, in national character.? No, Sir — I say, proudly and confidently, no. I shall 
 not vaunt of her superiorit}^ — but I acknowledge no inferiority. I have been happy 
 to observe, that if she has, at times, been an object of some jealousy in other States, 
 she has still always enjoyed the respect of them all. And I shall add (what is pecu- 
 liarly pertinent to the present debate) that she has been chiefly respected for the even 
 tenor of her system, and the steadiness and probity of her character and her course; 
 which the most sagacious Statesmen of other States — I say it with the most perfect 
 conviction, or rather the most certain knowledge — have attributed, mainly, to this very 
 principle of the freehold qualification of Sufl'i-age, which it is now proposed to abolish. 
 
 And, Sir, the only point of comparison between the condition of Virginia and that 
 of any of our sister States, which is at all pertinent to the present question, is the 
 comparison of the practical effects of Universal or General Suffrage in those States 
 in which it has been adopted, with those of the freehold qualification of Suffrage in 
 Virginia : a point on which it vrould not become me to speak my thoughts with per- 
 fect freedom. I talve a deep interest in whatever concerns the happiness of our sister 
 Slates — not so deep, indeed, as that I feel for my own State, to which I owe and 
 cherish the most perfect allegiance of mind and heart — but yet a deep and sincere 
 interest. I am the last man to take pleasure in finding fault with their institutions, 
 much less with the political character or conduct of their citizens ; to think hardly 
 concerning them, or to speak unkindly. I hope it will not be thought inconsistent 
 with these sentiments, if I say, as I must say to this Committee, that I have never 
 conversed with any observant reflecting man, who has migrated from Virginia to a 
 land where Universal or General Suffrage prevails, who has not earnestly deprecated 
 the abandonment of the freehold qualification in this his native State ; and that I 
 have never known any Virginian, that had witnessed an election campaign, or even 
 a single scene of contested election, in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland or Ken- 
 tucky, however he may have been smitten with a passion for reform in this particuleir 
 before he left home, who did not return completely cured of it. Neither does the 
 passion ever recur. [Here a member said aloud — " It is like the small pox."] Yes, 
 Sir — it is like the small pox in that respect — but there is this difference, that distance 
 seems necessary to the communication of the Universal Suffrage fever — a near ex- 
 posure to it, in its utmost intensity, generally proves a cure and an antidote. A close 
 observation of the practical workings of the principle of Universal Suffrage, has 
 rarely if ever failed to produce disgust, reprobation, deprecation. Shall we learn 
 wisdom from the great State of New York, and profit by her experience and exam- 
 
406 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pie ? Her example, Sir, is a beacon to warn, not a guide to direct. I will not say— 
 for I do not think — that the scenes which but yesterday were exhibited in the elec- 
 tions held in the city of New York — the open attack on the very principle of pro- 
 perty, and on the principles of all regular Government, which excited serious alarm 
 there — that these scenes afford any fair criterion of the sentiments of the body of the 
 people of the State of New York. But, Sir, they afford abundant evidence, to my 
 mind, that the poison has begun to work ; and they afford us a lesson and a warning, 
 by which we shall profit if we are wise, never to administer a drop of that same 
 poison to our own body politic. As to our sister Maryland, the practical operation of her 
 Universal Suffrage, is more open to our observation, from her nearer neighbourhood; 
 and I shall say, that it was the actual view of it there, that first cured me of that 
 plausible and tempting but deluding philosophy (so called) which most men imbibe 
 in their youth, and which teaches that civil liberty is so good, that there is no neces- 
 sity for moderation in the enjoyment of it — that no intemperance can disturb its 
 healthful action. I received, very recently, by the mail, a newspaper printed at 
 Cumberland in that State, with a note on the margin, calling my attention to an ad- 
 vertisement of nine hundred and forty acres of land, for sale by a constable, to satisfy 
 a judgment rendered by a single justice of the peace ; and with this remark — " See 
 the effect of Universal Suffrage." Neither do 1 doubt, in the least, that the principle 
 tends, in its practical operation, to indifference and unconcern for the rights of pro- 
 perty, and especially of real property. How can it be otherwise, when those who 
 hold no property, have a full share of the Government on which the security of pro- 
 perty depends.? In many, perhaps, in most of the States, where the principle of Uni- 
 versal, or General, or Extended, or Free Suffrage (call it by which name you please) 
 prevails, I observe, the ballot has been substituted for the old method of voting viva 
 voce, on the avowed principle, that it is necessary to enable the voter to give his vote 
 with independence, that he should be allowed to vote secretly. Now, the introduc- 
 tion of the ballot, as part of the system and proper acco'mpaniment of Universal 
 Suffrage, is a plain distinct acknowledgement, that the Right of Suffrage is extended 
 too far — extended to men who cannot be expected to give an independent vote, openly, 
 in the face of day — to men liable to the influence of others, and desirous to conciliate 
 their favour, or to avoid their resentment. And this method of preserving the spirit 
 of political independence, by substituting the ballot for the pubhc poll and viva voce 
 vote, I fully expected to hear proposed to us, as part of our plan of reform. It is a 
 very odd expedient for cherishing the pohtical independence of the citizen, to take 
 away all occasion for the exercise of it ; as if political independence were not a virtue 
 of the mind, and, like all other virtues and faculties, sure to be invigorated by exer- 
 cise, and to wane and be extinguished by inaction. One remark more, before I leave 
 this topic — I pray gentlemen to observe, how generally the introduction of Universal 
 Suffrage has been followed by the caucus system of nomination — I know the name 
 of caucus has recently been discarded, and that caucuses, now a days, are conven- 
 tions, but the only difference is the name — caucuses or conventions to make a regular 
 nomination of candidates, to discipline parties, to whip in all who hope a share of the 
 loaves and fishes in their turn, and to whip out all who show a disposition to rebel 
 against "regular nomination." They cheat the people with the shew of popular elec- 
 tion ; the elective body, in fact, is the caucus. Where there is a people capable of 
 being drilled, there will not be wanting leaders to drill them. The freeholders of 
 Virginia require no caucus or convention, to direct them how they are to vote — they 
 require no drilling, and would submit to none — they want no ballot-box to hide their 
 votes from their neighbours, and to screen them from the indignation of others — they 
 'feel their independence, and it costs them no effort to exercise it on all occasions. 
 
 Gentlemen tell me, however, that men who have once enjoyed the blessing of 
 Universal Suffrage, can never be induced to forego it — that the farmers of Pennsyl- 
 vania and Maryland, are not to be tempted by the offer of the most beneficial leases, 
 to migrate hither ; and our landholders can get no tenants, because the requisition of 
 the freehold qualification debars such tenants from the invaluable privilege of Suffrage, 
 If this is meant as an argumentative deduction from the supposed operation of politi- 
 cal causes, I have nothing to say to it : but if intended as the assertion of a matter of 
 fact, I must say, that I am incredulous. Let gentlemen name a single instance, in 
 which any man has been prevented from migrating to Virginia, by any consideration 
 of the laws regulating Suffrage. I should be curious to see such a man — for sure I 
 am that I should see the most thorough bred philosopher of modern times, or at least 
 a sample of the utmost extreme of political fanaticism. The true reason, I apprehend, 
 why the farmers of Pennsylvania and Maryland, do not turn their attention to the 
 beneficial leases which court them in Virginia, is, that if they find it prudent to mi- 
 grate at all, they know very well whither to go, to procure land, and the best land, 
 upon the easiest terms, in absolute property, which they may enjoy during fife, and 
 leave to their children. If the good people who dwell on our northern border, hope 
 advantage of this kind from the proposed reform, I fear that hope will be disappointed. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 407 
 
 It is remarkable — I mention it for the curiosity of the fact — that, if any evil, physi- 
 cal or moral, arise in any of the States south of us, it never takes a nortlierly direc- 
 tion, or taints the southern breeze ; whereas if any plague originate in the North, it is 
 sure to spread to the South and to invade us sooner or later : the influenza — the small- 
 pox — the varioloid — the Hessian fly — the Circuit Court system — Universal Sulfrage — 
 all come from the North — and they always cross above the falls of the great rivers : 
 below, it seems, the broad expanse of waters interposing, effectually arrests their 
 progress. 
 
 Ilhought before the Convention met, that I was already familiar with the utmost 
 extravagance of theoretical politics ; but I have heard one proposition advanced on 
 this floor, which is absolutely new to me — namely, that none but those who are al- 
 lowed the exercise of the Right of Suffrage, are citizens — that all who are denied that 
 right, are. in every just political view, slaves. Whence I learn, that our mothers, 
 wives and daughters are not and never can be citizens; and that our sons never be- 
 come citizens till they attain the age of twenty-one years, and acquire the legal qua- 
 lification of Suffrage, whatever it may be. For my own part, I fondly imagine, that 
 the mother who bore me was a free woman and a Virginian citizen — that Iny wife, 
 and my children — male and female, are free born citizens of Virginia — and that I 
 myself enjoyed exactly the same civil liberty before I attained to full acre as I have 
 ever done since — in short, that civil liberty, much more citizenship, depends not at 
 all on the right to exercise political powers. Neither shall I render any thanks, (for 
 I feel no gratitude) to those who have taken the pains to correct mv errors in these 
 points. It is, indeed, a great blessing — it is the first and the highest of social bless- 
 ings — to live under a regular, free, Representative Republican Government; to be- 
 long to a society, fitted to enjo}-, capable of enjoying, such a Government; but neither 
 the blessing itself, nor any happiness which it can confer upon any individual, de- 
 pends on the right of that individual to exercise, in his own person, the Rig-ht of Suf- 
 frage. The blessing of free Government, and all the happiness that can^flow from 
 it, is best secured to each individual, by the wisest general" regulation of that ricrht 
 whether such regulation admits him or excludes him. And in' this view of the sub- 
 ject, gentlemen will see, upon a little reflection, the general opinions and feelincrs of 
 men concur with perfect unanimity: for no one ever heard of any vendor of land 
 demanding any consideration for the surrender of his Right of Suffraofe in making 
 the alienation, or of any purchasers advancing a cent more in the price^for the acqui- 
 sition of the right ; and though I have known many to buy freeholds, in order to en- 
 title themselves to receive the votes of others, I have never known any man to buy- 
 land . merely for the sake of acquiring a right to vote, however trivial the cos't 
 would be. 
 
 It has been said, that the people, that the great body of the freeholders themselves 
 are not only willing but desirous to abolish the freehold qualification — that the desire 
 to reform the Constitution in this respect, was the ruling motive which led to the 
 calling of this Convention. Willing the freeholders may be. and I believe are. to ex- 
 tend the Right of Suffrage, as I propose to extend it, to all who come within the rea- 
 son of the principle of freehold qualification — but, that they are willing to abolish the 
 principle itself, I never can believe. The vote in favour of calhng^ Convention 
 given by the freeholders in this cismontane part of the State, I am sure was dictated 
 by no such motive. I do know that many, very many of them, were cheated into a 
 belief that the freehold qualification was in no danger; and I heard a member of the 
 Legislature, and as sagacious a man as any in Virginia, declare, that he gave his vote 
 for a Convention, in the firm belief that it would put an end to all disputes about the 
 Right of Suffrage, and confirm and establish the freehold qualification forever. He 
 was sincere, but he was deluded. 
 
 I little expected, Sir. after what passed in this Committee, in the debate upon the 
 question of the basis of Representation, to see the attempt renewed, in this place, to 
 discredit the Convention of 1776, and the Constitution it framed for the State, by re- 
 ference to the untoward circumstances in which it was placed — but we have been 
 again told, that that illustrious body was in a state of too much hurry and alarm to 
 execute with due deliberation a work so important; that the enemy was at their door* 
 and the roar of hostile cannon resounding in their ears; that other and more pressing 
 affairs occupied their attention; and that, therefore, (as gentlemen would have us in- 
 fer) they were content to leave the qualification of the Right of Suffrao-e as they 
 found it in the Colonial Government, rather than devote the necessary tune to irn- 
 prove it. It has been already shewn, that no part of this representation is justified 
 in point of fact, by the truth of history ; and I shall not repeat what has been better 
 said by other gentlemen. I have always thouglit, and shall forever tliink, that the 
 circumstances in which the Convention of 1776 were placed, were the most propitious 
 imaginable to the work tliat body had to perform ; precisely the circumstances best 
 calculated to repress the spirit of faction, and to kindle every spark of patriotism : to 
 stimulate political wisdom to its utmost exertion, to force men to look only to practical 
 
408 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 good, to stifle all propensity to the vain speculations of theory, and to enforce on them 
 the observance of the lessons of experience. But I find my sentiments on this sub- 
 ject expressed so exactly, so clearly, and so forcibly, by another and a far wiser man 
 than ever I hope to be, that I shall borrow his language — and I do so the rather, be- 
 cause, very probably, it was the source from which my own sentiments were origi- 
 nally derived. The writer of the 69th number of the Federalist — I know not which 
 of the three it was — speaking of a celebrated scheme of Constitution-mendmg, by 
 which it was proposed, " that whenever any two of the three branches of the Govern- 
 ment, shall concur in opinion, each by the voices of two-thirds of their whole number, 
 that a Convention is necessary for altering the Constitution or correcting the breaches 
 of it, a Convention shall be called for the purpose" — says : It may be considered as 
 an objection inherent in the principle, that as every appeal to the people would carry 
 an implication of some defect in the Government, frequent appeals would in great 
 measure deprive the Government of that veneration which time bestows on every 
 thing, and without which perhaps the wisest and freest Governments would not pos- 
 sess the requisite stability. If it be true, that all Governments rest on opinion, it is 
 no less true that the strength of opinion in each individual, and its practical influence 
 on his conduct, depend much on the number which he supposes to have entertained 
 the same opinion. The reason of man, like man himself, is timid and cautious, when 
 left alone; and acquires firmness and confidence, in proportion to the number with 
 which it is associated. When the examples, which fortify opinion, are ancient as well 
 as mimerous, they are known to have a double effect. In a nation of philosophers, 
 this consideration ought to be disregarded. A reverence for the laws, would be suf- 
 ficiently inculcated by the voice of an enlightened reason. But a nation of philoso- 
 phers is as little to be expected, as the philosophical race of Kings wished for by Plato. 
 And in every other nation, the most rational Government will not find it a superflu- 
 ous advantage to have the prejudices of the community on its side. The danger of 
 disturbing the public tranquillity by interesting too strongly the public passions, is a 
 still more serious objection against a frequent reference of Constitutional questions, 
 to the decision of the whole society. Notwithstanding the success which has attended 
 the revisions of our established forms of Government, and which does so much honour 
 to the virtue and intelhgence of the people of America, it must be confessed, that the 
 experiments are of too ticklish a nature to be unnecessarily multiplied. We are to 
 recollect, that all the existing Constitutions were formed in the midst of a danger 
 which repressed the passions most unfriendly to order and concord ; of an enthusiastic 
 confidence of the people in their patriotic leaders, which stifled the ordinary diversity 
 of opinions on great national questions ; of a universal ardor for new and opposite 
 forms, produced by a universal resentment and indignation against the ancient Go- 
 vernment ; and whilst no spirit of party, connected with the changes to be made, or 
 the abuses to be reformed, could mingle its leaven in the operation. The future situ- 
 ations in which we must expect to be usually placed, do not present any equivalent 
 security against the danger which is apprehended." Now, I pray gentlemen to hear- 
 ken to these words of wisdom, and to weigh them well. As to that veneration for 
 ancient institutions, which has hitherto constituted the great moral force of our Go- 
 vernment, and sufficed alone to execute the laws ; all that is gone — forever gone — 
 extinguished by the agitation which produced this Convention. Our children will 
 hardly comprehend the sentiment. Then, let gentlemen, if they can bear to do so, 
 institute a comparison between the Convention of 1776 and this body. That Conven- 
 tion, after full and free debate, adopted the Constitution it framed, by an unanimous 
 vote. This Convention is torn by dissensions, and divided by parties marked by geo- 
 graphical lines — incited by mutual opposition to the extremes of political animosity — 
 engaged (in the opinion of one party at least) in a mere contest for power ; such a con- 
 test, as in any other country on earth, and, but for a sense of the controlling influence 
 of the General Government, in this country too, would and could only be decided by 
 the sword. No good that we can now accomplish, can ever compensate for the mis- 
 chief which this contest has already engendered, and entailed upon the State. 
 
 I am not casting censure on others — 1 take to myself my full share of blame for the 
 heats, which the collision of interests and opinions have produced in this assembly — 
 my heart rises above all petty personal resentments and party views, and feels only 
 for the woes of ray country. Though I shall continue to resist to the uttermost of my 
 power, all unreasonable demands from the West, I do not feel — whatever others may 
 think of me — I do not, I cannot feel (heaven forbid that I should !) any hostihty to my 
 fellow-citizens of that part of the country, any disregard of their just rights, any in- 
 difference for their happiness. Gentlemen who have any knowledge of me, must 
 know, that these sentiments are not uttered for the occasion, to serve a purpose here. 
 In the paper I addressed to my countrymen in 1824 (commonly called The Substitute) 
 after having exhibited the state of the existing representation in the Legislature, and 
 shewed that the representation of the Western counties, compared even with that of 
 the Eastern counties, was excessive, I said : " The Western counties have at present 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTION. 
 
 409 
 
 about one-fourth of the representation in the House of Delegates. Comparing the 
 population of these counties (about one hundred and forty -five thousand five hundred) 
 with that of the Commonwealth (about one million and fifty thousand) it is plain, that 
 no plan can be devised for equalizing the Representation, which will not reduce their 
 proportion to something less than a seventh. He who tliinks, that the people of those 
 counties ought to consent to such a diminution of their weight in the Legislature, has 
 no fellow-feeling for them: he who thinks that they ever i^i^/, counts the heart of man 
 for nothing, in his political speculations. The schemes of equalization, which would 
 work such consequences, could only be imposed on them by force. There is, indeed, 
 one principle, on which the Western people might consent to such equalization: one, 
 on which they would lose none of their relative strength in the Legislature. If, in 
 apportioning the Representation, the slave population, so inconsiderable in the Western 
 counties, so large in the Middle and Eastern, shall be wholly disregarded, the Western 
 counties will perhaps as eagerly embrace, as the Middle and Eastern will strenuously 
 resist, this blessing of equality. And let the attempt be made when it will, this ques- 
 tion, (v.-hich seems to be the very daemon of discord.) Vvull be sure to rise up to con- 
 found our peace. In the apprehension of this meeting, the ver}' agitation of this 
 subject is calculated to do great mischief. It is a searching blast, which will find every 
 weak part of the body politic. And we implore tliose, who are prosecuting this de- 
 sign, to beware, lest, while they mean only an equitable arrangement of the Repre- 
 sentation, they be not strikmg a fatal blow at the integrity of the Commonwealth. 
 For, we feel the most painful conviction, that the actual attempt to execute the desio-n, 
 will array in direct opposition, all the conflicting interests of the State, growing out 
 of natural diversities in the face of the country, and out of the mioral diversities of our 
 population ; and wake into action, all the latent causes of civil contention, v.-hich good 
 men should wish, and wise men should labour, by all means, to aiia3^" The same 
 sentiments I entertained then, I entertain still. Did m}^ fears magnify the danger? 
 The evil has now come upon us in a form more aggrava.ted — the storm is raging with 
 greater violence — than even my anxious mind foreboded. 
 
 Bat, upon this question of the qualification of Suffrage, I do not discern any reason 
 for difference of opinion among us, growing out of diversity of local interests. And I 
 implore gentlemen to pause in their adventurous career of experimental reform; to 
 preserve every part of our ancient institutions, which they cannot alter with any cer- 
 tain assurance of amendment; and, especially, to leave us unimpaired the essential 
 principle of the freehold qualification. If the State shall make a false step here — par- 
 ticularly, here — that step she can never hope to retrace, any more than we can recal 
 the hour v>"hich has passed away and brought us so much nearer to the grave. 
 
 After Mr. Leigh had concluded his speech, a short explanation took place between 
 himself and Mr. Doddridge, on a point of law involved in the amendment; when Mr. 
 D. moved that the Committee rise. 
 
 It rose accordingly-, and thereupon the House adjom-ned. 
 
 SATURDAY, November 2L 1S29. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Courtney of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The Convention having again resolved itself into a Cominittee of the Whole, Mr. 
 Powell in the Chair, and the question being on the amendment offered hy Mr. Leigh 
 of Chesterfield to the third resolution reported by the Legislative Committee : 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, (who, having moved for the rising of the Committee yesterday, 
 was, by Parliamentary usage, entitled to the floor,) signified his intention of yielding 
 that privilege to the member from Amherst, (Mr. Thompson.) but previously gave 
 notice, that should the amendment now before the Committee (Mr. Leigh's) be re- 
 jected, he should offer the following amendment to the third resolution — viz : 
 
 Third resolution, second and third lines — from the word " resolution." strike out to 
 the word " provided," in the twenty-third line, and insert: 
 
 And shall be extended to every free white male citizen, aged twenty-one years or 
 upwards, who shall have resided at least one whole year in the county, city, borough 
 or district, in which he shall offer to vote, immediately preceding the time of voting; 
 and who, during that period, shall have actually paid a revenue tax leo-ally assessed — 
 And to every free white male citizen, aged twenty-one years or upwards, who shall 
 have actually resided at least one whole year in the count}-, city, borough or district, 
 where he offers to vote; and who, for the period of six months at least, shall have 
 been an house-keeper therem." 
 
 52 - 
 
410 
 
 DEBATES OF TflE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Thompson of Amherst, addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : The gentleman from Brooke, who by Parliamentary usage, was 
 entitled to the floor this morning, having for the present waved his right, 1 rise to 
 solicit for a short time the attention of the Committee, whilst I endeavom', in my 
 poor manner, to discharge an obligation of duty, which 1 owe to the constituents in 
 part represented by me m this Convention. It is, as you well know from personal 
 experience, Mr. Chairman, a painful and embarrassing duty. I would to God it had 
 been committed to other and abler hands. When I consider the time, place, and cir- 
 cumstances that surround me, the momentous interests involved in our dehberations, 
 and the weighty responsibility that rests on each and every one of us, in connection 
 with the humility of my own pretensions, I almost shrink from the task that lies be- 
 fore me : but on the other hand, when I call to mind that I am the representative in 
 part of many thousand free-men, who spontaneously, and without any solicitation of 
 mine, have clothed me with this high, delicate and responsible trust, all personal conside- 
 rations vanish, and 1 resolve fearlessly to speak their sentiments on this floor, regardless 
 of all the sarcasm, wit, ridicule and even derision, with which principles they hold 
 dear and sacred, have been assailed in the progress of the debates of this Convention. 
 Had not imperious duty, in ray humble estimation, forbidden silence, my lips had 
 been sealed, hermetically sealed, during the session of this august Assembly. But I 
 should forever despise myself, if whilst I am the representative of freemen, I could 
 sit by in silence and hear the sacred and unalienable rights of man derided, and 
 should tamely shrink from their defence, under the influence of any unmanly fear of 
 criticism, or of any personal consequences whatever. 
 
 I feel that I shall need much of the polite attention and kind indulgence of this 
 Committee to sustain me in the task I have imposed on myself ; and the wonted mag- 
 nanimity and courtesy of a Virginia Assembly, I am sure, will always accord it to a 
 member of its body, so long as that member shall merit it, by courtesy and decorum 
 on his part. Like an honorable gentleman, who addressed you on a former day, of 
 this Convention, I too may disclaim any intention of entering the lists to break a 
 lance, with the redoubtable knights who have contended for victory on this arena. I 
 have neither the prowess to impel, the strength to sustain, nor the panoply to protect 
 me in so unequal a conflict. In common with this Committee, I have participated in 
 the dehght of listening to the luminous and eloquent arguments of gentlemen who 
 have addressed you on this and other questions. And after so long rioting on the 
 rich banquet they have spread before us, I but the more regret that 1 have nothing 
 but the homeliest fare to olier in return. I lament my inability to rsciprocate hght 
 for light— I have the consolation, however, to know that the same spirit which 
 prompted to the offering of the widow's mite, has dictated this poor attempt of mine; 
 and I therefore trust, that my offering, however humble, will meet a similar fate, 
 from the benignity of this Committee. Mr. Chairman, I somewhat regret that in the 
 order of debate, it is my lot to follow the talented and eloquent gentleman from Ches- 
 terfield. I have not the vanity to suppose, under the most auspicious circumstances, 
 that I could interest this enlightened Committee by any view I could present of a 
 subject, much less when preceded in the debate by that gentleman. Believe me. Sir, 
 1 have not the vanity to contest with him the palm of victory in the fields of rhetoric, 
 of erudition, or of wit. No, Sir. As to them, so far as I am concerned, I leave him 
 the undisputed victor of the field. I do mean, however, in the course of my remarks, 
 to question many of his facts, or rather assumptions, and the conclusions he has ad- 
 duced from the facts assumed. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I scruple not in limine to avow that I am one of those visionary 
 politicians who advocate General Suffrage, what gentlemen are pleased to term Uni- 
 versal Suffrage. And, in this avowal, I believe I speak the sentiments of a large 
 majority of my constituents. What I mean by General Suffrage, is the extension of 
 that inestimable right of voting in the election of all public functionaries, made eligi- 
 ble by the people to all white freemen of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, 
 who are citizens by birth or residence for a certain time, and who have discharged all 
 the burthens personal, including militia duties, and pecuniary, such as taxes, imposed 
 upon them by the laws of the land, and excluding such as are rendered infamous by 
 the commission of crime. In other V\^ords, I wish to establish a qualification that is 
 personal, and respects age and residence, and to abolish forever the freehold qualifi- 
 cation, which to me has always appeared an invidious and anti-republican test. Like 
 the gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph.) I did not come here to vote for the 
 disfranchisement of one human being qualified to vote under the old Constitution, 
 but to aid in the enfranchisement of all who come within the foregoing description. 
 I came here to contribute my feeble aid in the great cause of non-freehold emancipa- 
 tion, but not to imitate an example set us elsewhere, of disfranchising the forty shilling 
 freeholders. I am, therefore, diametrically opposed, to the amendment proposed by 
 the gentleman from Chesterfield, as I am to all amendments that go to restrict the 
 Right of Suffrage ; and upon this question, I will meet and take issue with the friends 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 411 
 
 of freehold qualification, amongst the most strenuous of whom, the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield, has proved himself, by the argument which he yesterday addressed to 
 this Committee. 1 am willing to rest this argument upon the authority of reason 
 and common sense, the Bill of Rights, upon tlie doctrine of expediency, or upon ex- 
 perience, which, visionary as 1 am, I consider more valuable than volumes of specu- 
 lation and theory. It is with me perfectly indifferent, whether this right be regarded 
 as a natural, a social, a civil, or a political one ; the conclusion at which I arrive, sa- 
 tisfactorily at least to myself, is the same. 
 
 Before I proceed with my argument, I must trouble the Committee with a few 
 general observations suggested by the course of this debate. I cannot forbear to ex- 
 press my surprise and regret at some of the principles avowed by gentlemen on this 
 floor, and the change which public sentiment seems to have undergone in this ancient 
 Commonwealth. In the opinion of some gentlemen. Government has no principles. 
 The idea of patriotism and virtue even are exploded, and self-love and self-interest 
 are the only springs of human action. The rights of men are a mere chimera of dis- 
 tempered imaginations, and in this debate have been made the theme of ridicule and 
 derision, rather than eulogy. Against this, I solemnly protest. There was a time 
 when this would not have been endured, wlien such language would have been of- 
 fensive to republican ears. In the whole progress of this debate, the name of Thomas 
 Jefferson, the great Apostle of liberty, has never once been invoked, nor has one ap- 
 peal been made to the author of the Rights of Man, whose innnortal work, in the 
 darkest days of our revolution, served as a political decalogue and o])erated as a talis- 
 man to lead our armies to victory. There was a time when it was honorable to pro- 
 fess the faith of these great fathers of the church, when it was perilous to be a sceptic, 
 when the name of Fox was venerated, and the principles of Burke abhorred — but the 
 sentiment of the Latin poet quoted in this debate are but too true, " tempora mutan- 
 tur," &c. rendered into English, 
 
 " Men change with manners, manners change with clime", , . • . 
 
 " Tenets with books and principles with times." 
 
 Then, the authority of the sage of Monticello would have stood against the world ; 
 now, there are " none so poor as to do him reverence." Then, was Burke regarded as 
 the enemy of human rights and the firmest defender of aristocracy and monarchy — 
 but now. Burke, Filmer, and Hobbes, judging from their arguments, have become the 
 text books of our statesmen. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have spoken of political faith and political church — it recalls to 
 my mind an observation I have often made, and no doubt has often occurred to the 
 mind of every member of this Committee — and that is the great similarity in the 
 conduct of the votaries of religion and politics. In these days, you find no atheist 
 and few professed deists, but how many practical ones? men who, whilst they yield 
 a sort of historical belief or assent to divine truths, live in the open and daily 
 disregard of them, and utterly refuse all practical obedience. They cannot impose 
 upon themselves that forbearance, self-denial, and humiiit}^ enjoined by the author of 
 that religion — their pride and their manhood revolt at that text, which informs them 
 that they must emulate the simplicity of infant innocence ere they can enter the 
 kingdom of Heaven. So, Mr. Chairman, with a large class of our politicians, who, 
 whilst they have not the bold daring to deny the great principles of our political faith, 
 whilst they profess to keep that faith, they refuse all practical obedience. They say 
 the theory is very good — but the pride of intellect and of wealth, that inherent love 
 of distinction in man, that overwhelming self-love, and that pharasaical spirit which 
 induces frail man to plume himself on his own supposed perfections, and to congra- 
 tulate himself on the infirmities of his fellow-man — revolt at that political equality 
 taught us by the precepts and practice of otu- forefathers. I like not their theoretical 
 republicanism. I care not for professions unless the precept and the practice corres- 
 pond — as I will judge the tree by its fruit, as I will judge the christian by his works, 
 so I will judge the professor of republicanism by his practice. 
 
 Let us now, Mr. Chairman, return to the subject immediately under consideration— 
 the Right of Suffrage— -I shall bestow but little time upon the consideration of the 
 question, whether it is a natural, social, civil, or political right — for the inquiry is rather 
 curious than useful. What boots it, if it be a valuable right, whether it be the one or 
 the other ? Nor shall I, like other gentlemen have done, resort to any laborious inquiry 
 into the question, whether a state of nature ever in fact existed? I leave this task 
 where those gentlemen have left it, who have endeavoured by most metaphysical ar- 
 guments to prove it a creature of abstraction. This, however, I will say, that whe- 
 ther it ever did or could exist or not, it is as fair and necessary to suppose its exis- 
 tence, and to assume it as a postulate on which to bottom a political deduction, as for 
 the mathematician to suppose the existence of a straight line on a point, as a postulate 
 on which to found his demonstrations ; nor are maxims in politics less useful in prac- 
 
412 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tical results to the statesman, than are the axiomata and postulata to the practical 
 geometrician. 
 
 What, then, is the Right of Suffrage? Not what gentlemen seem to understand it, 
 in its technical and confined sense, the right to vote for public functionaries only, in 
 a regular organized Government: in its enlarged sense, it is the right by which man 
 first signifies liis will to become a member of Government of the social compact — the 
 means by which that same man gives expression to his will in the formation of that 
 compact, his consent to, or his veto upon, measures of the Government in legislation 
 in a pure democracy, as at Athens, and in others of the ancient republics, and some 
 of the modern, or the right of voting for public functionaries as above mentioned, 
 in a Representative Democracy such as ours, where the people do by their agents 
 what they could not conveniently or even possibly do in person. This being its defi- 
 nition then, is it a natural right? I understand natural rights to mean such as apper- 
 tain to man in a state of nature ; this appertained to him in a state of nature, for it 
 was by its exercise in that state that he agreed to relinquish the natural state and enter 
 into society — But, say the gentlemen, such a state never existed — the consequence is 
 that man has' no natural rights, if my definition of natural rights be correct — but the 
 gentlemen admit lie has natural rights, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the 
 means of acquiring and enjoying property. Suffrage is the substratum, the paramount 
 right upon whicli all these rest for protection, preservation, and safety. This right, 
 as has been very properly said, has its origin in every human being, when he arrives 
 at the age of discretion : it is inherent, and appertains to him in right of his existence; 
 his person is the title deed, unless it be those on whom the same natural law has pro- 
 nounced judgment of disability, or those who have forfeited it by crime or profligacy; 
 and one other class in this country who must be the victims of necessity, that can 
 never be urged as an example for disfranchising the white man. It is said not to be 
 a natural right, because we curtail, restrict, and confine it, as before said; that it is 
 forfeitable, and that our exceptions include more than our rule. Life, liberty, &c. 
 are curtailed, restricted, and forfeitable, and subjected to exceptions, yet they are ad- 
 mitted to be natural rights. Natural rights may be transplanted into the social, civil, 
 and political state, yet they are still natural rights. A distinguished statesman has 
 informed us that most of our civil rights have natural rights to rest upon — nor do I 
 think I should be far wrong, were I to assert that all our important rights, whether 
 civil, social, or political, are, properly speaking, natural rights. The exceptions, we 
 all admit to the universality of the right, by which the gentlemen endeavour to over- 
 throw the rule itself, I shall notice a little farther on. But suppose it be not a natural 
 right, it must be one of the other three, and I care not which — why should a majority 
 of freeholders have it in exclusion of a minority of non-freeholders? if the non-free- 
 holders were consulted, and upon the score of expediency voluntarily made the sur- 
 render, there would be no cause of complaint on their part — but it is claimed of them 
 as a right. Have they ever been consulted ? No. Do you purpose to consult them ? 
 No. Then it conies to this, that a minority of one class have taken possession to the 
 exclusion of a majority, not hy the consent of that majority, but by consent among 
 themselves, or by accident, or by jure divino I suppose, and now claim to hold the 
 possession against the right. Have not the majority as much right to exclude the 
 minority as the minority the majority ? Yea, more. But we claim for the poor no 
 right to exclude tlie rich, for the many no right to exclude the few ; we claim only 
 equality (which is equity,) for all, and deny the right of any arbitrarily to exclude the 
 rest. These claims and these denials, I stated in the beginning, to be founded upon 
 reason and common sense, upon our declaration of rights, which is a plain and simple 
 deduction of principles from that paramount source, rigiit reason.^ upon experience, 
 and expediency, the gentlemen's own grounds. 
 
 By the way, 1 would ask if it be a question of expediency, why is the non-free- 
 holder not permitted to pass upon the question by his vote ? Why will you deny to 
 him an opportunity of making a merit of necessity, if he must be disfranchised ? Why 
 is it, that Virginia has presented the first instance of a Convention called to form a 
 Constitution without consulting- the non-freeholder, any more than your free negroes, 
 and without allowing him any voice in the election of delegates that compose that 
 Convention ? And why is it, that you purpose to carry the injustice still farther by 
 submitting this Constitution to the ratification of freeholders only ? If expediency be 
 the plea, and it be true, and has been true for more than half a century, why should 
 gentlemen now labor so hard to prove it ? Are these arguments to convince the free- 
 holders they ought to hold on, or to reconcile the proscribed to their fate ? The object, 
 Sir, is to indtice the freeholder to hold on, not to convince or to reconcile the non- 
 freeholder ; for believe me, Sir, that were impossible ; you cannot convince a freeman 
 in this country that his neighbour has more political rights than himself, and that it is 
 expedient for him to be guilty of committing the suicidal folly of surrendering up all 
 or any of his rights into the hands and keeping of others — You will find many men 
 willing to admit, that their neighbours are incapable of exercising the rights of sove- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 413 
 
 reignty, but none that will ascribe that incapacity to themselves — and I congratulate 
 the country upon the march of liberal principles, that the freeholders themselves are 
 prepared to surrender these pretensions. This is a freehold Convention, and I be- 
 lieve that a laro-e majority of the constituent body have decided upon the abolition of 
 the freehold test — unless the worthy gentlemen who have undertaken to rejudge their 
 justice— should succeed in their attempt to induce them to retrace their steps, which 
 God forbid ! Mr. Chairman, I said the proposition affirming the right of General Suf- 
 frage could be sustained upon the principles of reason and common sense. Is it not 
 sof Does it not command the assent of every unprejudiced and unsophisticated mind 
 as almost a self-evident truth ? Is it not the affirmation of a principle written by the 
 pen of nature upon the heart of every human being, whose spirit is not bowed down 
 by oppression and political degradation ? Who doubts the proposition when it is an- 
 nounced .= Not the great body of the people, in whom of right the sovereignty resides, 
 whose polar star is right, and not expediency. None but those statesmen who make 
 human rights any thing or nothing to suit their varying ideas of expediency, which 
 has been,"in all ages, the pretext for every atrocity, the tyrant's plea, and the Jesuit's 
 watchword. But why need I detain the Committee in discussing principles derived 
 from reason and common sense, which, more than half a century ago, were deduced 
 by our forefathers, and so happily expressed in our Bill of Rights ? Here is a text that 
 no commentary can illustrate, written in characters so legible, that he who runs may 
 read, and in terms so simple, so intelligible, and so consonant to the love of equal 
 liberty implanted in our hearts, that it " comes home to the business and bosoms of 
 men." To this text let us appeal for the evidence of that Right of Suffrage for which 
 I contend; a " right inestimable to freemen, and formidable to tyrants only." The 
 first article of the Bill of Rights reads thus : That all men are by nature equally 
 free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter 
 into a state of society, they cannot by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity, 
 namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty with the means of acquiring, and pos- 
 sessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." The second 
 declares, " that all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people : that 
 magistrates are their trustees, and servants, and at all times amenable to them." The 
 third declares the end and object of Government to be, " the common benefit, pro- 
 tection and security, of the people, nation, or community," and affirms the right of a 
 majority, " to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner, as shall be deemed most 
 conducive to the public weal." The sixth affirms, that " elections ought to be free, 
 and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent, common interest with, 
 and attachment to, the community, have the Right of Suffrage." 
 
 Now, Mr. Chairman, if I were to ask a plain man, who were entitled to vote under 
 these provisions, would he answer land-owners only, or such persons as I have here- 
 tofore described, including the great body of the people, a majority at least.' He 
 certainly would not answer freeholders ; there would be no doubt in his mind, unless 
 indeed, he should chance to take the advice of counsel, who like Doctor Doubty, finds 
 doubts in every thing ; then perhaps a doubt would be suggested ; but to understand 
 the Bill of Rights, requires not the aid of counsel, or statesman, nor of wise, nor 
 learned men: it is intelligible to the most unintelligent above the grade of nan com- 
 pos mentis ; and well it is, Mr. Chairman, that it is so. If only the wise and the 
 learned were capable of comprehending the fundamental rights of a free Government, 
 such a Government could never have existed, and if it had, would necessarily have 
 been of short duration. But when we quote the Bill of Rights upon our opponents, they 
 do not flatly deny its force and authority, but explain it away by the Constitution. 
 They say their authors are the same men, and that they have given a contemporaneous 
 and practical exposition in the one, of what they meant by the other, in establishing 
 Freehold Suffrage in the Constitution. A conclusive answer to this has been fur- 
 nished by the arguments of more than one gentleman, that has preceded me in the 
 debate. 
 
 The circumstances in which our forefathers were placed, and under which they 
 acted, would have rendered it very unwise and impolitic to carry out at that time to 
 their full results all the principles established by the Bill of Rights. They had not the 
 time, had it been wise to do so. They acted in haste, and it was then more than pro- 
 blematical what would be the issue of the struggle they had just embarked in. Why 
 should they then create division at home, by disturbing the settled order of things, 
 when harmony was so essential to the success of their great enterprise.' They 
 thought it wise to leave the perfection of their work for more auspicious times ; this 
 we are told by the immortal Jefferson, and as every one must infer from the instru- 
 ment itself. Is this not proved by the ordinance of the Convention, passed only three 
 days after the Constitution, by which we adopted for a system of distributive justice 
 the common law of England and the statutes made in aid thereof, up to the fourth 
 year of James the 1st ? By this, we had engrafted upon our code the law of primoge- 
 niture, of entails and the institutions of the hierarchy. Might not the same reasons 
 
414 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 now assigned for adhering to the freehold test, have heen urged against our statute of 
 distributions, the statute for docking entails, and the act of religious toleration, the 
 work of the immortal Jefferson ? To the same causes, that we assign for the adop- 
 tion of the freehold Suffrage in part, want of time for reflection and deliberation, must 
 be ascribed anotlier imperfection or inconsistency in the Constitution ; a failure to 
 prescribe any qualification whatever for your Governor, your Judges, your Magis- 
 trates, your Militia officers, &c. Now, is it not absurd to say, that before a man can 
 vote for his neighbor, to represent him in the Assembly, he must furnish as a test of 
 his independence or patriotism, the possession of his fifty acres? yet no test either of 
 property, residence, or citizenship, is required of your Governor; for aught the Con- 
 stitution contains, your highest Executive, your highest Judicial, and your highest 
 Military officers may be aliens. This surely proves the imperfect character of the in- 
 strument, and the cause of that imperfection, as before assigned; but it proves also 
 another thing; it proves the absurdity and inutility of the freehold test. If you can 
 trust your Governor to execute your laws, and to temper them by the high preroga- 
 tive of mercy, in the exercise of the pardoning power ; if you can trust your lives, 
 liberty, and property to your Judges ; the defence of your homes and your fire-sides 
 to Military commanders and militia-men, though they possess not one acre of land, 
 and though they be as poor as Lazarus; in the name of common sense, why is it that 
 you cannot trust a citizen without fifty acres of land to go to the polls, and vote in the 
 election of public functionaries ? 
 
 Mr! Chairman, it has been said by the gentleman from Chesterfield, and by other 
 gentlemen, that we derive a rule from the law of nature and the Bill of Rights, in re- 
 lation to Suffrage, that is in its terms universal, and that we ourselves abandon it, and 
 thereby prove its fallacy: the females, including one half of the population, are dis- 
 franchised at one fell swoop; minors, convicts, paupers, slaves, &c., which together, 
 compose a large majority of every community : and hence they argue, that as our rule, 
 if carried out to its extreme results, will not work well, it must be erroneous.- 
 For this argument, I have a short answer ; it will not do to test any rule by extreme 
 cases. I presume it cannot be necessary for me to assign a reason for the exceptions. 
 In this the gentleman and myself would doubtless agree. He has himself very hap- 
 pily assigned the reason for excluding females ; and could assign reasons as satisfac- 
 tory for the other exceptions. In the foregoing exceptions we are all agreed, I do not 
 understand any of those excepted classes, as now complaining, nor that any member of 
 the Committee wishes to include them. Why then lug their claims into this debate ; 
 For what purpose do the gentlemen so generously step forward to their relief, who 
 seek no relief, and for whom none is intended by either party? I can tell you. Sir; 
 the gentlemen seek by argument to elevate their rights, in order to disparage ours. I 
 object to this change of issue ; the question is now "between freeholder and non-free- 
 holder; to which contest these others are no parties. I insist upon a comparison of 
 our titles in this our writ of right, if I may be allowed to borrow a figure from that 
 profession of which I am an humble member. In this form of action, and not as an 
 ejectment, neither party can rely upon the weakness of his adversary's title, provided 
 it be better than his own ; it is simply as before stated, a comparison of titles; this I 
 insist to be the law of this case. If the freeholder and non-freeholder have usurped 
 the rights of other classes, it is no reason in the mouth of the freeholder, against an 
 equal division of the spoil. I have always heard that honour was observed among 
 thieves and robbers. I have thought it necessary to say this much, to sliew that the 
 exclusion of females, &c. had not legitimately the least connexion with this question. 
 If it be a good argument, carried out to its results, it would justify any man to make a 
 slave of his neighbour, provided that neighbour happened to be the owner of a slave. 
 The argument of the kidnapper would be this, to his enslaved captive ; " you, Sir, 
 held a fellovz-creature in bondage, because you thought it expedient to do so. I have 
 the same right to enslave you, and I think it expedient to do so. I justify myself by 
 your own example. I try you by your own rule." So with the freeholders, when 
 they are challenged to shew a better title than the non-freeholder, they resort to the 
 plea of expediency; that it is expedient they should have the power, and that as fe- 
 males, &c., are excluded by mutual consent, ergo, we the freeholders will exclude the 
 non-freeholders, because they concurred in tlie exclusion of females, minors, &c. In 
 what does the case just supposed, differ from this? So we find that their arguments 
 will not abide the test of being carried to their extreme results. And this is not the 
 only argument of the gentlemen, obnoxious to the same criticism. In the discussion 
 of the question of Representation, they contended for the mixed basis : we replied, that 
 it was inadmissible, that it was anti-republican, to give out political power, in propor- 
 tion to the wealth of the voter; and that if it was just, to give one district weight in 
 proportion to its wealth, it was equally so to divide power among citizens of the same 
 county in the same ratio, and so it is : but of this argument they complained as being 
 unfair, and founded on extremes, which they said was an unfair mode of treating their 
 proposition. And this reminds me of a discrepancy between the first and last argu- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 415 
 
 ment of the gentleman from Chesterfield. In the argument of the question of Re- 
 presentation, we contended that the fears of the East were unfounded ; for, that all the 
 country between the Alleghany and the sea-shore, was slave-holding; that it therefore 
 had a coannon interest, and would always have the power, as it now had ; that al- 
 though the Valley had not as many slaves as the East, yet taking the ratio between the 
 tythables and slave-owners; it appeared that the slave property was more generally dif- 
 fused there, than in the East ; there were more small slave-holders ; and that the owner 
 of one slave was as safe a depository of power, as the owner of one thousand ; inasmuch 
 as the tax on that one would be as onerous to him, as the tax on the one thousand would 
 be to their owner ; and would make liim as vigilant to guard and protect that right. This 
 argument, then, from our side of the question vras \vholly repudiated, and if I remem- 
 ber rightly, by the gentleman from Chesterfield; yet on yesterday he used that very 
 identical argument to prove that Col. Allen's poor neighbour owning but one slave 
 was as safe's, political partner for the Colonel, '^s though he owned one thousand slaves, 
 and assigned the very identical reasons heretofore assigned by the friends of the white 
 basis. But, other discrepancies exist in the arguments which could not have escaped 
 the attention of this Committee. They complain, that by extending Suffrage, you 
 augment the power of the rich ; a singular complaint coming from the friends of re- 
 stricted Suffrage, and most generally, if not always, used by the rich themselves. 
 They say that tenants are not to be trusted, because they will vote for their landlords, 
 or as they direct ; the poor will vote for the rich, or as they direct ; yet these very same 
 gentlemen claim power in Representation, for the protection of the property of the 
 rich. They disguise the effect of the claim by telling us, they claim it not for indi- 
 viduals, nor counties, but for sections of country; and that the effect of it is, to ascribe 
 power to the poor, in right of their vicinity to wealth, for its protection ; in other words, 
 to give them all equal portions of this surplus power reserved on the score of wealth, 
 in trust for the benefit of their rich neighbours. If this be so, why should the gen- 
 tleman from Chesterfield and his associates, fear the subserviency of the tenant to the 
 landlord, or of the poor to the rich ? If they hold power for the benefit of the landlord 
 and the rich, they must either yield to the views of those persons, or set up for them- 
 selves; if they set up for themselves and disregard the wishes of the property-holders, 
 they would prove unfaithful trustees, and the object of property Representation would 
 be defeated ; if, on the contrary, they should prove subservient, then only could the 
 object of protection be accomplished by the means of property Representation ; and 
 the gentleman should, therefore, not complain, of this effect of universal or extended 
 Suffrage. But again : the gentleman, on yesterday, objected to tenants being voters, 
 because, said he, the landlord held them by their very heart-strings ; could distrain 
 upon themi, sell their last cow^, and even the cradle on which their infants reposed. 
 If the gentleman's argument be a good one, I think it will prove too much. I think 
 it will prove that his favourite freehold test, is not quite so good a one as he seems to 
 think, unless there be something in the ownership of land, that by enchantment or 
 magic converts frail erring man, into an infallible and impeccable being. I think all 
 the tests, except those of age and residence, will be found too imperfect to act upon. 
 A moral test no man would advocate, neither a religious; an independence test 
 founded on the possession of property is equally Utopian, equally unjust, and equally 
 fallacious ; no man contends that the land is a test of patriotism ; and even if it were, 
 should it, therefore, be established as the test of SuiTrage.' I presume there are as 
 many degrees in patriotism as there are men; and as there are degrees in any other 
 virtue. Every man is more or less a patriot, if patriotism means love of country. 
 A man that loves not his country, is a monster; such a one as I have never yet seen, 
 though such have lived, and live to infamy on the page of history, as Benedict Arnold, 
 and a very few such. The love of country is formed in the heart of man in child- 
 hood, in youth, and does not, as seems to be supposed, grow out of the self-love and 
 self-interest of mature years ; it springs from the affections and the associations of 
 childhood and youth, before the sordid and selfish cares of manhood have taken pos- 
 session of the heart. Did the patriotism of Aristides, of Marcellus, and of other great 
 names that might be mentioned, rest upon the freehold; were they less patriots in 
 exile, than the ungrateful men that banished them.' I humbly answer no. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, will not the reasons assigned by the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 for the exclusion of tenants, operate in equal degree to exclude his own favorite free- 
 holders ? will it not furnish a good reason for excluding every man that is indebted, 
 and for putting the Government in the hands of the creditor class of the community.? 
 And if this be the rule of exclusion, how many of the freeholders, think you, will be 
 excluded ? I venture to affirm at least one half or three-fourths : is there not that 
 proportion indebted to their neighbours, their merchants, to the Banks, &c., by ac- 
 count, by bond, and by trust deed, or otherwise ; and will not a debt have the same 
 influence upon a freeholder, as upon a tenant or other non-freeholders ? Indebtedness 
 is, in substance, the reason assigned for excluding the tenant; and can it be a matter 
 of^ any importance what sort of debt it be, whether it be for rent or any other con- 
 
416 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 sideration ; whether it be collectable by distress- warrant, or by fieri facias, whether 
 the cow or the cradle be sold by the constable, the sheriff, or a trustee or marshal, or 
 whether the person indebted be turned out of possession by notice, to quit if a tenant, 
 or by a habere facias possessionem, or scsinam if a mortgaged freeholder ? I, therefore, 
 conclude, the gentleman's own rule, tried by his own arguments, would include as 
 much too many voters as it would exclude, improperly, tried by our arguments. The 
 gentleman's argument has evidently on several occasions varied with itself. This has 
 not been the fault of the gentleman's ingenuity or ability, but the fault of the princi- 
 ples he advocates; his premises are wrong; " he has laboured under a cause too light 
 to carry him, and too heavy to be borne by him." 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield, has said Universal Suffrage originated in Crom- 
 well's army. He has been well answered by the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. 
 Cooke.) Did the gentleman, when he made this assertion, forget ■pure democra- 
 cies of antiquity, where all voted and legislated in propria persona ; did he forget 
 those of more modern date, but still more ancient than the age of Cromwell ? I mean 
 the Swiss Cantons. Their Suffrage was more universal than it ever was before or 
 since : every male of the age of fifteen years was allowed to vote, and I take it upon 
 me to say, that no evil there resulted from this extended Suftrage. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield, in his argument in favor of property Representa- 
 tion, warned us against the white basis, equal Representation. He said it would in- 
 evitably lead to the subversion of our free Government and to despotism. He cited 
 as examples, Greece, Rome, and all the ancieiit Republics, and held up to us the 
 English Government as an example in many respects worthy of our imitation. Pie 
 yesterday predicted that the same effect must necessarily result from Univer?ai Suf- 
 frage, but instead of again vouching tlie ancient republics to sustain him in this pro- 
 phecy, I think he said these Republics furnished no light for our guidance, but that 
 England was the country we must look to for our analogies and for lessons of instruc- 
 tion and experience, it being the only Representative Government bearing a real 
 similitude to ours, in the world, or that ever existed. Then all free Governments 
 have perished by these formidable foes of liberty : equal Representation, and Univer- 
 sal Suffrage. How do the gentlemen account for the fall of despotisms they too, 
 have perished, and free Governments established on their ruins. Did Universal Suf- 
 frage, and equal Representation, produce these effects too 'i if so, they have done as 
 much good as evil, and deserve not such utter reprobation. But the truth is, gentle- 
 men have been misled ; they knew only the historic fact, that Governments free and 
 despotic have perished, have shared the fate of every thing mortal, have obeyed that 
 great law, which sooner, or later, consigns to the tomb, man, and all the works of 
 man; but the remote and hidden causes, that produced these effects, ever have been, 
 and ever will be, mere matter of speculation. The ancient or the modern Republics, 
 are surely incapable of teaching us any lessons of instruction, or of furnishing any 
 beacons for our warning ; they are not cases in point ; there is no resemblance be- 
 tween the pure democracies of antiquity, and the Representative democracies of the 
 United States. Here was made the first experiment of that form of Government, and 
 ours are the only Representative democracies that ever existed. Had the Republics 
 of Rome and Greece, been based as ours, upon the Representative principle, their 
 liberties might have been immortal ; for, if that attribute can, without impiety, be as- 
 cribed to any Government, it must be to a Government like ours. I fondly trust ours 
 will be immortal. For this Representative principle we are indebted to England, and 
 she borrowed it from the woods of Germany; but in borrowing this part of her Go- 
 vernment, we discarded her monarchy, and her aristocracy, infusing instead, the pure 
 democratic spirit into our institutions. Greece and Rome have furnished us models of 
 architecture, statuary, poetry, and painting, but not of Government. It would be as 
 just to compare their beautiful temples to our steam-boats, cotton-gins, and printing- 
 presses, as to compare our institutions of Government with theirs; they are as 
 dissimilar. They, therefore, can shed no light on our deliberations, much less, Mr. 
 Chairman, than the Cherokee nation of Indians, who have recently established a free 
 Constitution of Government, and laws. Mr. Chairman, we have heard many pro- 
 fessions of patriotism, and love of country. I doubt not their sincerity, but I shall 
 make none myself, after telling you that the man who loves not his country, is a mon- 
 ster in human shape. 
 
 Nor shall I, Mr. Chairman, join in the war of epithets, so much complained of by 
 the gentleman from Chesterfield, and the gentleman from Spottsylvania. I submit 
 it to the candour of this Committee to decide, who cast the first stone, and whether 
 if aristocrat and monarchist, be obnoxious epithets ; whether visionaries, abstract theo- 
 rists, demagogues, bidders at the shrine of popularity, slang, &c., be not entitled to 
 the same appellation. I submit it to the candour of the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 whether in his zeal, he has not been betrayed into the same fardt, which he has im- 
 puted to our side. For one example among others, that might be enumerated, of in- 
 temperate zeal and harsh epithet, we had asserted the claims of tire sons of freeholders 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 417 
 
 to the Right of Suffrage, he rephes, that if they are permitted to vote, the consequence 
 will be, that the son will vote with, or differently from his father — if with his father, 
 the man with four sons will have five votes — if they vote differently from the father, 
 these four sons, v^ill be four scoundrels and puppies. Surely the gentleman's reflec- 
 tions cannot sanction now such opinions ; if they do, I would ask him at what age 
 may a son, a freeholder, ever vote independently, without meriting the epithet of 
 scoundrel and puppy ; and this, Mr. Chairman, is a sentiment expressed by one, who 
 has so strenuously contended for the independence of voters ! 
 
 I agree with the gentleman from Chesterfield, in the eulogy he has paid to the free- 
 holders of the State : there is not in the world a more respectable body of men. I have 
 cause to respect, and love them — it was their partiality, undeserved I am sure on my 
 part, that sent me here — I am sure they will not consider me as disparaging their 
 claims, when I say, that the non-freeholders are a respectable body of men. There 
 are virtuous and vicious amongst both classes. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, we have been 
 told by a very philosophic poet, and I think truly, 
 
 " Virtuous and vicious every man must be, 
 " Few in the extreme, but ali in the degree." 
 
 But I cannot agree with the member from Chesterfield in the cGmpliment he has paid 
 to the intelligence of the so much lauded freeholders, by supposing them to have been 
 cheated out of their votes in calling this Convention, or in the elections to this body, 
 or cheated into sentiments so hostile to their true interests. After attributing to them 
 the suicidal folly of callino; this Convention, not in terms, but b};- the tenor of all his 
 arguments, it was indeed fhe most cliaritable supposition, as to them, to suppose them 
 to have been misguided. The people in my district, I venture to say, were not cheated ; 
 I cannot say how it was in others. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I cannot see what the ballot boxes (or Pandora's, if it better please 
 the gentleman), and the constable's advertisement sent by some anonymous corres- 
 pondent from JNIaryland, have to do with the subject of this debate. The gentleman 
 very confidently expresses his preference for the viva voce election, reprobates the 
 mode of voting by ballot, then gratuitously assumes this latter mode to be the neces- 
 sary consequence of extended Suffrage, and by this assuniption he readily justifies 
 his reprobation of the cause of this consequence. I agree with him in preferrino- the 
 viva voce mode of voting, but I am not prepared so confidentl}-, as he seems to be, to 
 pronounce an anathema upon the other. We should, at least, pause and reflect well 
 before we condemn a practice adopted by many of our sister republics, and, so far as 
 I am informed to the contrary, ^vith good effect; a practice, the adoption of which is 
 now advocated by some of the Whigs of England, as the very best guaranty of inde- 
 pendence in voters — but I do not mean to argue this question at this time ; it would 
 be travelling out of the record — all I intended to say was, that there was no affinity 
 between the question of the extension of Suffrage and the mode of voting. 
 
 And as little, as it seems to me. is theie betvveen the Maryland advertisement and 
 this question: the gentleman did not even attempt to shev/ how the supposed cause 
 produced the supposed effect. If Universal Suffrage produced the passage of the law, 
 that subjected land, however large the tract, to the payment of its owner's debts, how- 
 ever small, it is my humble opinion, an eulogy on tJniv(a'sal Suf&age. It proves that 
 the voters, instead of being lawless free-booters, are lovers of justice. Mr. Chairman, 
 may it not be that this correspondent is the debtor and the owner of the land, and 
 that it is because he is made to feel the operation of a wholesome law, that he feels 
 no very good opinion of it.' According to Hudibras, 
 
 " A thief ne'er felt the halter draw, 
 " With good opinion of the law." 
 
 But we are told, if the Right of Suffrage be extended, the rights of property will be 
 invaded : we shall have an agrarian law, tumults, confusion, civil discord, and finally 
 despotism. The only answer I have to make to arguments so derogatory to the dig- 
 nity of human nature in these United States, is, that twenty-two out of twenty-four 
 sister Republics, many of them situated precisely as we are in relation to slave popula- 
 tion, have this Free Suffrage, called by the gentleman Universal, and none of these 
 results have happened, or are likely to happen there, so far as we are informed. Vir- 
 ginia and North Carolina are the only States that adhere to the freehold test, and the 
 latter only in one branch of the Legislature. What length of time the gentleman re- 
 quires for the fulfilment of his luorubrious prophecies, he has not informed us. Believe 
 me. Sir, it is all speculation and theory, against the rights of man. and we have this 
 advantage, if we are theorists and speculators, we speculate and theorise in favour of 
 equal rights, and our theories and vagaries have been reduced to successful operation. 
 They have been called on, and cannot shew one case in point: on the contrary, we 
 
 53 
 
418 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOK* 
 
 can triumphantly point to the example of twenty-two Republics, our sisters in this 
 great confiederacy of States. I have now a gentleman in my eye, who has informed 
 me, that he owns a large real estate in Ohio, and that no where are the rights of pro- 
 perty more secure. His language was, that a twig could not be cut from his pre- 
 mises, without exposing the transgressor to reparation in damages." During the ses- 
 sion of this Convention, I have conversed with a distinguished functionary from the 
 State of Mississippi, a native of Virginia, and he informs me, that in that State, the 
 Legislature is in the hands of the non-property holder ; and that so far from their 
 having any oppressive taxation of property, their civil list is actually defrayed by a 
 capitation or poll-tax. During the past summer, I was informed by a citizen of Ala- 
 bama, that a part of that State, which owned least property and fewest slaves, wielded 
 the power of Legislation — situated as to slave property, as the East of this State is to 
 the West, and yet that no abuse had intervened, and that none was apprehended. 
 Let us turn our eyes to the States North, West, East and South of us, and we look in 
 vain for any of the evils pourtrayed in such glowing colours by the gentlemen on the 
 other side of this question. Liberty and law, equality and justice, peace, prosperity 
 and good order, reign throughout their borders ; with those few exceptions of popular 
 excitement, incident to, and inseparable from, all free Governments under the sun. 
 Mr. Chairman, the little temporary excesses of a free people must be borne : it is the 
 evil inseparable from the good ; there is no human good without its alloy of evil. I 
 prefer even the hurricanes and the tempests of liberty, to the calm of despotism. 
 
 And is Virginia less fit for free Government than her sister States .'' Would the 
 same causes produce different effects here? In my poor judgment, we are better 
 situated to adopt the principle of extended Suffrage than the free States, according to 
 the gentlemen's own theories. The presence of upwards of four hundred thousand 
 slaves entitled to no political power, and excluding perhaps as many of that class de- 
 nominated hy the gentleman from Chesterfield as peasantry, at once diminishes the 
 number of dangerous voters by that amount, dangerous in the estimation of others, 
 not in mine. In addition to this, we have no overgrown cities — no overgrown manu- 
 factory establishments. With a population proverbial for their attachme^it to law, or- 
 der, and public tranquillity, I boldly say, if any State in this Union can adopt Free 
 Suffrage with safety, Virginia is that State. The extension of the right does not en- 
 danger the tranquillity of election — as the experience of the Eastern States has con- 
 clusively proven — and if we adopt it, and pursue the policy now in progress, of estab- 
 lishing precinct or separate elections, we disarm these primary assemblies of any dan- 
 gerous tendencies to excess, which they may be supposed to have. 
 
 Have not the non-freeholders of the United States, shewn their capacity for self- 
 government in the election of members of Congress ? and your Presidents, from Wash- 
 ington down to the present incumbent.? I say the present incumbent, because what- 
 ever be my opinions of him, he was the choice of Virginia. Are the delegations in 
 Congress from other States less talented and respected than our own.? I mean no 
 disparagement, when I say no. And can a non-freeholder vote discreetly for a Fede- 
 ral and not for a State officer? Look to the New York Convention of 1821, the first 
 fruits of this General Suffrage, which numbered among its members, Kent, Spencer, 
 Lansing, Rufus King, Sanford. and many others, though less known to fame, not the 
 less entitled to distinction. Here we have seen a body of men elected by General 
 Suffrage ; a comparison with which, in my humble opinion, whatever be the opinions 
 of others to the contrary, would not disparage this freehold Convention of ours, 
 talented as I am willing to admit it to be. Look too, to the Bench, the Bar, the Le- 
 gislative Halls of New York : you behold a blaze of talents, a constellation of great 
 men, unsurpassed by those of any other State. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the non-freeholders are told they are contending for a shadow — a 
 right, if extended to them, would be of no great importance — that under the old state 
 of things, every thin^ has gone on well — we have lived happily, and that their com- 
 plaints are unfounded, and their grievances imaginary. We are told, the owners of 
 the country should govern the country : that the freeholders are the safest deposito- 
 ries of power ; that they hold it in their trust for the whole community, and that through 
 them all are virtually represented. My reply to this is, that a man who has no voice 
 in the Government, holds his rights by the sufferance of him who has ; and he that 
 thus holds his liberty at the will of another, is already half a slave. Because the non- 
 freeholders have not been hung up without a Judge or Jury- — because they have been 
 allowed their civil rights, the gentlemen say they have not been injured. Free ne- 
 groes are allowed all their civil rights ; the non-freeholders no more : and here I would 
 recall to mind a very proper distinction heretofore taken by the gentleman from 
 Orange, (Mr. Barbour,) between civil and pohtical rights. Civil rights may be, oflen 
 are, and have been, respected and secure under the veriest despotism : and he very 
 properly illustrated his remark by a reference to the reign of Augustus, and many of 
 his successors. 1 consider the denial to any man of any portion of his political rights, 
 or giving to his neighbour more than his own, an injury of the gravest character. If 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 419 
 
 the right be ideal, existing only in the fancy of men, equally so are many of the pos- 
 sessions men hold dearest — liberty itself, reputation, fair fame, all dearer than life, and 
 the invasion of which inflicts the deepest wound on the peace and happiness of their 
 possessors. But I have shewn sufiicient injury done to the non-freeholders, by simply 
 announcing, that a Convention has been called and members delegated to it, without 
 consulting them any more tlian if they were slaves or free negroes — an example, so 
 far as I am informed, never before set in these United States. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, in answering the arguments of gentlemen, I have, in some mea- 
 sure, anticipated the grounds of expediency and experience, to which I promised to 
 appeal in the conmiencement of my remarks : 1 intended, however, to have carried 
 out my remarks on these two branches of the subject, for the purpose of supplying 
 such views as I had not presented in answering the arguments of gentlemen, who had 
 appealed to expediency and experience. I had intended to endeavor to shew the be- 
 neficent effects of extending Suffrage, by allaying discord and discontent, restoring 
 harmony and good feeling among all classes and conditions. I intended to shew its 
 moral and political tendencies, and amongst these its direct influence and operation — 
 to elevate the character of the enfranchised; but finding my strength exhausted, and 
 my voice faihng, I will detain the Committee with but a few more remarks in con- 
 clusion. 
 
 We are told there is a great crisis in our aifairs, big with danger to the peace, safety 
 and integrity of the State. I doubt not the sincerity nor the moral courage of those 
 gentlemen, who have admonished us of these dangers; but. 3Ir. Chairman, I have no 
 faith in these predictions — I am not perturbed by the alarms that have been sounded : 
 the dangers so much dreaded by gentlemen, are the creatures of their own imagina- 
 tions : that bloody sword which has been brandished over our heads by the gentleman 
 from Hanover, reeking with the best blood of the land, has inspired no terror, in my 
 mind ; because I trust that his sword, and that of every true Virginian, like the noble 
 Roman's sword, for their friends have only leaden points," and that they will never 
 be formidable except to the enemies of the Commonwealth. I trust that ere the time 
 shall arrive to unsheathe a sword to shed each other's blood, consideration will, like 
 an angel, come to save us from the obloquy." Js it possible that Virginia, of all the 
 States in this Union, the birth-place of sons whose sires were foremost in the revolu- 
 tionary struggle, has not the wisdom and the patriotism to reform her fundamental 
 law without violent revolution and blood-shed — to perform quietly, and without tu- 
 mult, an act of sovereignty, which even the Cherokee Indians can perform without 
 violence ; for, they lately established for themselves a Constitution for their govern- 
 ment.' For one moment to suppose separation, disunion, or dismemberment possible, 
 is to pronounce a libel upon the wisdom and the patriotism of our constituents. Be- 
 lieve me. Sir, it would be bej'ond our power to produce such a result, were each of us 
 to return to our constituents, and exert our utmost powers to bring about so calamitous 
 a consummation. In vain would be all our puii}^ efforts to agitate into a tempest the 
 great body of the people. They would remain, in despite of all our efforts, as tran- 
 quil as the great ocean, when it is unrufiled by the storm — that ocean, whose awful 
 sublimity, the people in their sovereign power and grandeur, so much resemble. 
 
 Let us, then, banish from our minds, and from our deliberations, all intemperate 
 feelings. Let us practice towards each other the republican virtues of temperance, 
 moderation and forbearance, maintaining our opinions always with firmness, but with 
 deference for the opinions of others — feeling the fortiter in re, but practising the sua- 
 xiter in modo — eschewing violence, and cultivating harmony and good feeling — for, 
 depend upon it, that as much wisdom and worth as I admit to be concentered in this 
 body, there is yet more in the community we represent. The eyes and the thoughts 
 of that community are now directed towards this ancient metropolis, the seat of our 
 deliberations — a community, in whom dwells an abiding sense of justice, and a deep- 
 rooted loyalty to social order and law: and that community will not hold him guiltless 
 who throws the first firebrand into the fair temple of our political liberty, and saps the 
 deep foundations of our ancient and beloved Commonwealth. 
 
 Mr. Thompson having resumed his seat, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge took the floor, and addressed the Committee as follows: 
 Mr. Chairman. — I am forced to meet the question of Suffrage at a period of our dis- 
 cussions when I did not expect it. With a very few exceptions, the friends of reform 
 had determined to adjust the basis of Representation in both branches of the General 
 Assembly first. In this they have met with difficulties which the}' have been unable 
 to overcome. My own opinion was, that this basis in both Houses ought to be estab- 
 lished by the same resolution, and such was my first proposition. That proposition 
 was divided at the suggestion of those who thought otherwise, to enable them to sus- 
 tain the white basis in the House of Delegates, and some other in the Senate. A dif- 
 ferent basis in the Senate was claimed on two grounds : first, to protect the owners 
 of slaves fi*om oppressive taxation on that species of property, and secondly, to pre- 
 serve the title from being affected by any species of Legislation. The present views 
 
420 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of a majority are sufticiently known, but it is uncertain whether the Senate will not 
 be placed on a worse ground than this Convention found the House of Delegates. 
 Should that be the case, the greatest end for which the people called us together will 
 have failed, and in this state of things the question of Suffrage is pressed, and we 
 are impelled, while considering it, to act, in some degree, as if the very worst that 
 can happen to the people in adjusting representation, had actually happened. Thus 
 situated. Universal Sulfrage would be rendered acceptable to thousands, who never 
 dreamed of its introduction. The proposition of my colleague, from Monongalia, has 
 not yet been fully tested, because of the existing uncertainty of the real ground on 
 which we stand. Should a slave, with a white, Representation be introduced into 
 the Senate ; or an exclusive Representation of taxation, or of property, there will be 
 a necessity to array all that the denounced King Numbers, can command. The 
 amendment of my colleague fell but little short of Universal Suffrage. It required 
 the payment of taxes if assessed, but did not require their assessment. It excluded 
 paupers, soldiers, persons adjudged infamous, and all such as had not resided a suffi- 
 cient time to furnish evidence of permanent attachment to the community. The un- 
 certainty of the ratio, both acquired and lost friends to Suffrage, on the rejection of 
 my colleague's amendment. The rejection of the resolutions of my colleague from 
 Brooke, followed as a matter of course. They did not, subtantially, differ from my 
 other colleague's amendment, except in the facilities proposed for a foreigner to ac- 
 quire Suffrage without an oath, and the exclusion of a native until twenty-two years 
 of age. In these particulars, I would have proposed a small alteration to remove, per- 
 haps, but a seeming objection ; but that the fate of these resolutions had already been 
 decided, and that decision, according to known rules, governing a Committee of the 
 Whole, as well as the House, stands as their judgment, until reversed in the House. 
 So far as the propositions of my other colleague from Monongalia, have relation to 
 Suffrage, they are in like manner disposed of. That in relation to education is, in- 
 deed, untouched. That most important subject may find another place in our delibe- 
 rations, or if not, it will remain a subject of legislation, and may form an important 
 adjunct to the Literary Fund. 
 
 The question of extending Suffrage in the manner proposed by all my colleagues^ 
 although at rest in this Committee, will remain open for decision in the House, where 
 I hope it will be renewed by them, or some of them, when e\evj vole may be spread 
 before our constituents, and the world. 
 
 I will, in my turn, offer an amendment, presenting Suffrage in another form — not 
 quite so extended, yet falling but little short of the plans already discussed. My plan 
 is to leave the present right untouched, and to extend it to all those, whether free- 
 holders or not, to whom Government looks for support, whether by revenue taxes or 
 county levies ; by impositions payable in money or to be discharged by labour. To go 
 farther than this, vv^ould be to trench on the decisions of the Committee ; and to stop 
 short of it, v/ould be disobedience to the well known wishes of my constituents. 
 
 Mr. Chairman: In support of the principles asserted by the amendment now under 
 consideration, I need not detain the Committee long. My constituents have been so 
 fully heard, and their rights and interests so ably defended by each of my colleagues, 
 that I have, indeed, little more to do, than to implore the Committee, to bear in their 
 recollections, the able, a,nd as I think, unanswerable, arguments of each of them, v;hile 
 I endeavour, briefly to arrange and pass in review the principal topics touched in this 
 debate, as w^ell by them as others. The decisions of the Committee on the resolutions 
 of my colleagues, have settled the principle, so far as the Committee are concerned, 
 that Suffrage shall not be extended to those not taxed, and they have settled nothing 
 further. My efibrt now, is to extend it to all such as are taxed. This I know, at 
 least, to be conformable to the wish of the whole body of my constituents. My col- 
 leagues are equally certain that the public wish is to go farther. Having been very 
 generally from home the last five years, my information is less exact than theirs, but 
 I have no doubt they are correct, and therefore voted with them for the extension 
 they desired. 
 
 I admit, the proposition of the gentleman from Chesterfield offers one valuable ex- 
 tension of Suffrage : I mean that which embraces freeholders now excluded. These 
 are the holders of less than twenty -five acres of land, and of lots in towns without 
 dwelling houses, where the value shall come up to the amount required. These 
 freeholders are numerous, and the estates of many of them worth more than sufficient 
 to purchase an hundred freeholds at the prices at which Suffrage has been estimated 
 in this debate. The other class embraced by his proposition, are termors, in a legal 
 sense only. They are virtually freeholders, and are so considered by the gentleman 
 himself Leases of the description proposed to be provided for, are unknown in the 
 West, and perhaps, are only to be found in or near Norfolk, so that the effects of the 
 provision in their favor will be both hmited and local. If Suffrage is not to be ex- 
 tended farther than the gentleman from Chesterfield proposes, this Convention might 
 as well not have been called, if its principal object was, what the gentleman from 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 421 
 
 Charlotte (Mr. Randolph) affirms it to have been — the extension of the Rigid of Suf- 
 frage. The extension of Suffi-age, proposed by the gentleman from Chesterfield, is 
 nof that which has been called for by public opinion. It is not such an extension of 
 that privilege as -svas claimed from 1606 to the present time, nor is it that for wliich a 
 majority of~freeholders voted in when they spoke this body into existence. A 
 
 brief review of the Learislative proceedings which led to the present Convention, 
 will not only prove the objects for which we have been convened, but that their 
 publicitv has been such as to render it almost incredible that in calling tliis Conven- 
 tion any portion of freeholders who voted for it could have been cheated out of their 
 votes, as has been allecred, or could have been ignorant of the extent to which it would 
 be attempted to extend the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 Before entering into tiiis review, I wish to get rid of a difficulty which has been 
 constantly thrown in the way of the present debate. That difficulty arises from the 
 sensitiveness of gentlemen at the use of the terms aristocracy and oligarchy. By the 
 use of these terms, I have never meant an application of them to the hearts, feelings, 
 or characters of those opposed to me ; but to the tendency and effects of the princi- 
 ples they maintain. I have never meant them as personal, or as offensive or abusive 
 epithets. The term aristocrat has been applied to me nearly all my life, and I never 
 took personal offence, because, I knew none was intended by those who used it. 
 They supposed my political principles to be aristocratical, in which I knew they 
 were honestly mistaken. The gentleman from Chesterfield says, he has so far for- 
 gotten his Greek as not to remember the meanmg of these terms in that language, 
 and he only knows their meaning in good old English, and not the modern dialect of 
 that tongue. 1 will, in that dialect, explain my meaning of both terms. They are 
 in fact synonymous. Each of these terms is descriptive of a Government whose 
 powers are vested in a minority. A Government thus described, is contradistin- 
 guished from a monarchy, or Government in the hands of one man, and from a pure 
 democracy, or Government in the hands of every man. By Government in the 
 hands of a few, we do not mean a smaJl select few. Few and many, as tlie gentle- 
 man from Chesterfield says, are relative terms. In their just sense they are equiva- 
 lent with the terms majority and minority. In this sense I use them. A Govern- 
 ment to be an aristocracy or oligarchy, is not necessarily one in which power is ac- 
 quired by descent or by patent. Tliis is the sense in which I use the terms, and if I 
 am correct, to constitute a statesman an aristocrat or an oligarch, it is only necessary 
 that he sliould be one of those holding and exercising the powers of the few over the 
 many — of the minority over the majority. And I maintain, and before I sit down 
 will attempt to prove, that our opponents are not only sustaining in this Convention 
 the powers, wishes and principles of a minority over those of a majority, but the 
 power of the minority of a minority over the majority. I will now proceed to the 
 proposed review of Legislative proceedings leading to the call of this body. 
 
 In the session of 1>06. after many preceding efforts, a resolution, requiring the 
 sheriffs to take the votes of the freeholders at their next election, on calhng a Con- 
 vention, passed the House of Delegates. In the Senate it was postponed indefinitely. 
 At that period we were so divided into political parties, and such was tlie heat and 
 animosity prevailing, that prudent men on ever}' side feared the call of a Convention. 
 We were not quahfied for cool and dispassionate discussion. The causes of our divi- 
 sions were of a temporary character, and we 8.U hoped to survive them with their ef- 
 fects. We hoped to see the tranquilhty of the present hour. But we would not re- 
 ject the resolution, lest it might be inferred that we acknowledged no defects to exist, 
 or, at least, none of sufficient magnitude to authorise its adoption. The subject, 
 moreover, had not been sufficiently canvassed to elicit pubhc opinion, and in that 
 state of things, the measure was calculated to excite, rather than quiet the public 
 mind. A preamble assigning those reasons as the grounds of it was drawn up, con- 
 cluding with a resolution of postponement. I now see before me two Judges of the 
 General Court, not members of tliis body, and another gentleman who is a member, 
 all of whom were partakers of these councils, and, if the curiosity of any one should 
 be excited, he can satisfy it by inspecting the Journal of the Senate of that day. In 
 tlie year 1614, a bill in the House of Delegates was rejected by a small majority of 
 votes. On that occasion those in the affirmative represented a considerable majority 
 of the people. As that bill was reported, it had the following preamble, viz: 
 '• Whereas, it is represented to the present General Assembly of Virtiinia, that many 
 good citizens desire various amendments to the Constitution of this State; among 
 the most important is the extension of the RigJit of Suffrage, and equalization of Repre- 
 sentation, and a diminution of the numbers of members elected in pursuance of the pre- 
 sent laics and Constitution of this Cominoniccalth^' ^-c. The words describing the 
 causes of discontent were stricken from the preamble before the question on the pas- 
 saofe was taken. This was done to avoid any legislative commitment of members, as 
 to the causes of complaint or necessity of redress. Although that bill did not pass, 
 and is not to be found on the Journals, a printed copy is to be found in the clerk's of- 
 
422 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 fice. By this measure, it is made manifest, as well as by the resolution of 1806, and 
 all the intervening efforts, that the people had settled upon freehold Suffrage as one 
 of the evils demanding redress. The rejection of the bill of 1815, by those repre- 
 senting a minority of the people, increased the public discontent, and led first to 
 a meeting of a political character at Winchester, and after that to the assemblage at 
 Staunton, called the Staunton Convention, of 1816. The memorial of that body, to- 
 gether with numerous petitions, were referred to a committee in the House of Dele- 
 gates of 1816. Their report underwent a tedious discussion. The bill ordered to be 
 brought in contained a provision looking to the same object witli that of 1815, but the 
 objects were more particularly described in the bill of 1816, viz : " To call a Conven- 
 tion to equalize the representation of the free white people of this State, in both 
 Houses of the General Assembly — to equalize taxation — to extend the Right of Suf- 
 frage to all persons having sufficient evidence of a permanent common interest with, 
 and attachment to, the community, and provide for such future amendments in the 
 Constitution of State as experience shall suggest to be necessary."* 
 
 Here the complaints are specified, and the redress suggested — " to equalize the re- 
 presentation," of whom? " the free wliite people;" and not of white people and ne- 
 groes, nor of white people and taxes. Again, where is their representation to be 
 equalized.^ and the answer is in both Houses of the General Assembly," and not in 
 the House of Delegates alone. The Convention of 1825, at Staunton, need not be 
 mentioned. Their memorial was the subject of the most laboured debates in the 
 House of Delegates of that year, and in both Houses in the two years following, in 
 the latter of which the prayer of it was granted. Thus it appears, that the question 
 of Suffrage is one among others which has agitated the public mind incessantly since 
 the year 1806; and after it has undergone so many discussions in the General Assem- 
 bly — in the newspapers and at the Hustings, where it was made a test, is it not paying 
 a miserable compliment to the judgments or recollections of our freeholding-consti- 
 tuents to suppose them ignorant in the spring of 1828, when they voted for this Con- 
 vention, that the contemplated extension of Suffrage would be among the most pro- 
 minent of its measures ? I will not say how this may have been elsewhere, but I will 
 fearlessly affirm, that my constituents were not imposed on, and that no man was ca- 
 pable of practising such an imposition in my district. Mr. Chairman, permit me to 
 ask, whether after this review, it is fair to deny, that the freeholders of this State have, 
 in fact, decided the question under consideration, and that tee, ourselves, are called here 
 by their authority to execute their judgment. 
 
 While on the question of Suffrage, permit me to follow the example of others, by 
 bringing to view, as connected with it, the principal questions in dispute, and to cast 
 from the consideration of it all such matters as we agree about. The remarks I in- 
 tend to offer on this head will serve to shew, and I think to demonstrate what I pro- 
 mised to prove, that our opponents here are but the representatives of a minority of 
 a minority. 
 
 In determining, then, who are, according to all our principles, the only safe deposi- 
 tories of political power, whether we commence with the fall of Adam— whether we 
 draw our maxims from the savage, the natural or the social state of man — by what- 
 ever path we have travelled in our researches or reasonings, we have all arrived at 
 the following results — We all agree to exclude the other sex — We all concur in ex- 
 cluding infants, those under military bondage in actual service — those rendered infa- 
 mous by their crimes, and those of unsound mind. Who then are they whom we all 
 agree to be fit and capable depositories of power ? They are males of twenty-one 
 years of age and upwards — of sound mind, not infamous, nor subject to another man's 
 will — that is, freemen. So far we are all agreed, from whatever reasoning we may 
 have arrived at this agreement. Questions of policy, however, present themselves 
 for our decision, and as a matter of policy we require citizenship and residence for a 
 certain time, but those opposed to us require in addition to age, citizenship and resi- 
 dence, an ownership of part of the soil of the State, believing that nothing less than 
 this furnishes sufficient evidence of interest and attachment to it. In this we differ, 
 and this presents the great question of policy on which we are so seriously divided. 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield said, very significantly, the other day, that he knew 
 who he was who had asserted that the non-freeholders were a majority over the free- 
 holding class of the community. I do not know to whom he alluded, but 1 will say 
 that the non-freeholders in the Western country are to the freeholders a majority of 
 about three to two. I have understood that a census of population was lately taken 
 in the county of Frederick, from which it appeared that there were about two thou- 
 sand five hundred non-freeholders in that single, county, excluded from Suffrage, and 
 who would be otherwise safe depositories of power under all our principles, and I 
 cannot doubt that they are a majority throughout the State. We perfectly agree as 
 to those who are the depositories of every scintilla of power, but differ only in the 
 
 * See Journal of House of Delegates of 1816, page 180. 
 
DEBATES OF THE C ON'rEXTION". 
 
 423 
 
 evidence of attachment to the community that such ought to possess before we admit 
 him to participate in its exercise. On our part we agree that this evidence ought to 
 be afibrded, but we insist that residence, birth, business, choice and other cir- 
 cumstances, furnisli this evidence, with satisfactory certainty. If I am right in be- 
 Uevin^ the non-freeholders to be a majority of the qualified depositories of power, 
 then 1 must be right in charging those opposed to us with supporting the pretensions 
 of a minoritv to govern a majority. But the proof does not stop here. 
 
 I have understood that the freehold vote on the question of calling a Convention, 
 was a verv full one. From all the information I have been able to collect, from con- 
 versations with members of this Convention, and of the last House of Delegates, I 
 have come to the conclusion that about one-seventh part of those qualified to vote did 
 not exercise that right on that occasion. If I am right in this estimate, the numbers 
 of qualified voters under the present laws will be ascertained thus : 
 
 They who voted for a Convention were, 2l,S93 
 And they who voted acrainst it. 16.567 
 
 Making, 35,780 
 To this number add one-seventh, not voting. 5.540 
 
 Making the number of voters, 44.320 
 If this be true, and if none but freeholders ought to vote, then gentlemen are here 
 sustaining the pretensions of a minority of those, who alone ought to be entitled. Add 
 to the number who voted against a Convention sixteen tliousand eio:ht hundred and 
 eighty-seven, one seventh part of that nxmiber, and we have nineteen thousand three 
 hundred and twenty-nine freeholders, who are opposed to reform, and if all the free- 
 holders are but a minority of qualified persons, then it is manifest that the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield and those who act with him, are exerting themselves here to carry 
 into effect the principles of a minority of a minority — a ramority of the freeholders 
 who are a viuwrity of the ichole ; and the intentions of nineteen thousand three hundred 
 and twenty- nine men alone, if carried out into the form of a Constitution will result 
 in estabhshing the will of that handful as the Government of tliis whole people. This 
 will be an oligarchy. Nor less will their will be effectual to rule and control the com- 
 munity, if it should prevail to prevent those amendments of the Constitution, which 
 are required by the majority. Tiiis latter consequence, I fear, is but too probable, 
 and should this be the result of our labours, the efiects will be deplorable. 
 
 The gentleman from Southampton, (Mr. Trezvant,) joining in self-commendation 
 of our public morals, attributes their purity to our Constitution and laws : urging, that 
 Governments have a tendency to form and correct pubhc opinion. That legislation 
 has this effect, is a political truth — it is not the whole truth, however, but only half. 
 
 The law-giver, to be wise, must regard public opinion. Wise laws, in a great de- 
 gree, spring out of that opinion and conform to it. Wliile public opinion acts on the 
 Tegislator, his laws act back on that opinion and assist to enlighten and control it. 
 Thus, legislation and public opinion mutually act on each other as moral cause and 
 effect. This consideration susfsrests the dutv of Government to consult the will Eind 
 feelings of the people under every ai-pect and every change — a duty so well defined, 
 and so ably enforced bv mv worthv colleacrue from Brooke, (Mr. Campbell,) that I 
 have only to beo- the Committee to bear his argument on this topic in mind. I will 
 not attempt to add to it. 
 
 Having shewn how many persons are entitled to Sufirage at present. I will proceed 
 to enquire what number vriil be added to them by extending the privilege to all per- 
 sons paying a revenue tax. and how many more, if those subject to levies and not 
 taxes were embraced. Those charged with land tax are ninety-two thousand — From 
 this whole number are deducted, first, aU females ; second, all male minors, and per- 
 sons of unsoimd mind ; third, all foreigners; and fourth, all freeholders holding real 
 estates less than that which at present confers the right. These deductions leave, as 
 I suppose, the number I have already stated as that of the qualified voters, viz : forty- 
 four thousand three hundred and twenty — The nmnber of persons paying taxes on 
 personal property are ninety-five thousand ; of these, I may say, each person paying a 
 land tax is one, and therefore, deducting the qualified voters from those paying a pro- 
 perty tax, there will remain about fifty-one thousand : but to ascertain what portion 
 of these vrill be admitted to Sufirage by my present proposition, I have had examina- 
 tions made to ascertain what proportion of the ninety-five thousand are females, and 
 find them to be one-ninth of die whole, and supposing that male minors and persons 
 labouring under disabilities, may amount to as large a proportion as all females of 
 every description, (which is allowing too much,) I arrive at the result in the following 
 manner : 
 
424 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Number of persons paying taxes on personal property as stated in the Commis- 
 sioners' books, 96,856 
 
 Deduct for females of all descriptions one-ninth, 10,650 
 
 Ditto for infant males and others, 10,650 
 
 Ditto all those now entitled to vote, as freeholders, and 
 
 also on the property list, 44,320 
 
 65,620 
 
 30,236 
 
 This would leave thirty thousand two hundred and thirty-six persons to v/hom, by 
 my present proposition, I would, extend the Right of Suffrage. By this addition 
 the number of voters will be augmented to seventy-four thousand five hundred and 
 fifty-six. Should this proposition prevail, it will encourage me to propose its further 
 enlargement to all persons subject to levies, or other county impositions payable in 
 money or labour. It is difficult to arrive at any correct estimate of the number of 
 males twenty-one years of age, who are subject to road laws and levies. From militia 
 returns, and from imperfect lists of titheables in our power, it is reasonable to estimate 
 them at about twenty-two thousand. These added to the thirty thousand two hundred 
 and thirty-six, who pay a property tax, make a total of fifty-two thousand two hundred 
 and thirty-six men, twenty-one years of age, of sound mind, and therefore safe de- 
 positories of political power, who are wholly disfranchised in Virginia ; others make 
 this number greater, but I am sure my calculation is within bounds. The class, thus 
 excluded, have been claiming their rights ever since 1806. They have not been noisy 
 and troublesome, because they depended on their freeholding brethren, whose honor- 
 able exertions in their favour have been incessant. The excluded classes were told 
 from every quarter to be patient, and the freeholders, their neighbours, would deal 
 liberally with them. When the vote was taken on the law of 1827, whether a Con- 
 vention should be called or not, they were excluded, as they had been on the passage 
 of that law. They were again excluded from the polls when the members of this 
 body were elected, because those who made the law of last session were, like our- 
 selves, the agents of freeholders. Last June these people were assured that this Con- 
 vention would make full provision for them : this they believed and rested in quiet. A 
 majority of freeholders are here ready by their delegates to redeem every pledge : 
 they are manacled, however, by the law which scaled their power by the census of 
 1810. Instead of relieving the majority of qualified persons, members of this body, 
 representing nineteen thousand three hundred and twenty-nine freeholders, are ten- 
 dering to us with an unrelenting hand, their ratios of representation in three forms — 
 first, white persons and taxation; second, the Federal number, and third, taxation 
 alone in the Senate, as if determined on an aristocracy of wealth in one house at least. 
 I have shewn, that the freeholding class qualified to vote by the present laws are to 
 the number of qualified persons as forty-four thousand three hundred and twenty, to 
 fifty-two thousand two hundred and thirty-six ; of the former number, twenty-one 
 thousand eight hundred and ninety-three voted for relief : to these are to be added 
 one-seventh of their number, who omitted to vote, and three thousand one hundred 
 and twenty-seven, making twenty-five thousand and twenty freeholders on the side 
 of the non-freeholders, and of course, against every basis except the free white popu- 
 lation. To come at a satisfactory estimate of popular strength, I think it fair to add 
 to the excluded classes, the freeholders who voted for this Convention and their pro- 
 portion of qualified voters who did not vote : this will present us with an astonishing 
 state of things ; nineteen thousand three hundred and twenty-nine freeholders, oppos- 
 ing the will of twenty-five thousand and twenty of their own class, and of fifty-two 
 thousand two hundred and thirty-six qualified persons, not of their class ; that is, 
 nineteen thousand three hundred and twenty-nine men, against seventy-seven thou- 
 sand two hundred and fifty, and (owing to the injustice of the law under which we 
 are acting) with a fair prospect of success. Here we behold that oligarchy we depre- 
 cate ! After the rise of this" Convention, if nothing be done for their relief, this large 
 proscribed class will not again be lulled to sleep — their eyes are on us at this moment — 
 not a paragraph in the Gazettes escapes them — they will discover in these, that they 
 have no attachment to their country in common with a freeholder. They will read 
 in the speeches of members, that ilieir allegiance is that of the heart, that there is 
 another allegiance which is the creature of reason. After all this, should this country 
 be again involved in war, how can these oppressed, excluded, disgraced men, be en- 
 trusted to bear arms in its defence.? When the gentleman assures us, that the alle- 
 giance he bears the Commonwealth is that of the heart, I believe him— not because 
 he declares it, I know it by comparing him with myself, and such as I am, I suppose 
 every other member to be. Rely upon it, all those to whom Government looks for 
 support, either of general or county administration, in peace or in war, owe it the al- 
 legiance of the heart, or they ouffht not to be trusted with its defence ; and thus al- 
 legiance ought not to be worn down by that oppression which breaks the heart. 
 
DEBATES OF THE COyVZSTlOy. 
 
 425 
 
 I iiave altars considered out system of making and repairing public roads as pecu- 
 liarlv oppressive. Farmers and others in the West, who employ white labour, feel it 
 in the waofes ther are compelled to crive. In some places a poor man walks ten or 
 fifteen miTes with his spade. £Lxe, or mattock, to work on roads. In many places, ten 
 and twenty dars in the year are required, and this from journeymen, who have not 
 yet acquired stock enough to commence for themselves — from labourers and others 
 who have no property in the world. I had hopes, that afrer reforming Representa- 
 tion, one of the first measures of legislation would be. to abolish our present road 
 laws, and with them every species of poU-ta^ : until then, I have no hope to see this 
 great evil cured. I have witnessed so many abortive efibrts to put down these 
 oppressive regulations, that until Representation is reformed. 1 never hope for a suc- 
 cessfiil one. 
 
 Mr. Chairman,. I do not concur in the expressions of alarm for our divisions. 
 There is not the least dajiger without. When I belbre spoke vf numbers. I meant 
 any thing else than a threat of forty-two tliousand bayonets. I said that if om- hopes 
 were to appease the anxiety of so many men, these hopes would be fatally blasted by 
 a rejection of their jixst claims, and to urge, that soon, very soon, these claims must 
 prevail. I am happy to find that but one gentlemen, (Gov. Giles.) considered me as 
 uttering a threat, and that but one ether gentlemen. (Mr. Stanard.) looked on my 
 language as uncourteous. Many expressions escape us in the heat of debate which 
 our own refiections would chasten. Of this description, was the figure of the bloody 
 sword used by the gentleman from Hanover, (Mr. 3Iorris.) cind the declaration of the 
 gentleman from Chesterfield, ^JSli. Leigh.) that a Government in the hands of a ma- 
 jority of numbers, would be such an oppressive and insupportable tyranny, as no man 
 eter'did or would submit to. There is no danger of a dismemberment of tiiis State, I 
 hope, and yet it will soon be ruled by numbers. To those who are in the habit of 
 looiiing to such an event. I will communicate an advice once given to mvself. by 
 ilajor Jackson of Philadelphia, who I was told, was the last surviving member of 
 G-eneral Washington's military family. Speaking of the purchase of Louisiana as an 
 acquisition likely to produce a division of the Union of these States in time, the sren- 
 tleman I hare mentioned, cautioned me in a low voice thus : - when any man speaks 
 of a division of these States, as a thing desfrable or possible, he does more than com- 
 mit an error." And I can assure gentlemen here, that when they speak of a division 
 of this State, as a thing to be desired, they do more than commit an error." 
 
 We are told from several quarters, that if Sufirage be extended, the purity of our 
 elections will be destroyed, and tumult and riot take place of peace and order. The 
 gentleman from Chesterfield, almost questions the words of my colleagues, when 
 speaking of matters vrithin thefr own knowledge. They had said that their consti- 
 tuents were well acquainted with the efi'ects of General Sufea^e. in the States on 
 our border, and that they nevertheless desired that privilege extended here as far as 
 we propose. That gentleman declares, he never heard of one Virg-inian. who had 
 ever seen an election in Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Kentucky, who was not cured, for- 
 ever cured, of a desfre to see Sntfrage extended, or the ballot introduced. I, in my place, 
 am bound to confirm what my colleagues have declared. 3Iy experience is not great ; 
 indeed, I never saw many elections in Pennsylvania, and none in Ohio ; those I saw 
 in Pennsylvania were on the border of Vfrginia, wheie many of the inhabitants were 
 of Virginia origin, having been inhabitants of our cotinty of Tohioghany, so gaUantly 
 given away by the wisdom of the men of 1776. I never saw there, a more riotous elec- 
 tion, than that of 17c'9, in this city, when one of the candidates for Congress, was a 
 gentleman now a member of this House, and the otlier, the father of another mem- 
 ber ;. he was personated on that occasion, by a third member of this Convention, who, 
 since then, held for twenty years, the office of Attorney General, during all which 
 time, he says, the whole Government went on very well. 
 
 Mr. Chafrman, — The eflort we are making is one. the object of which, is to reform 
 our Constitution, on our own principles, and to give practical effect to those declared 
 in the Bui of Rights. What we contemplate is not a revolution. The Government 
 is an elective Repubhc, and we mean to leave it so. Yet we are warned of tiie dan- 
 gers and horrors of revolution. Revolutions, it is said, never stop at the objects first 
 had in view, but the ball once set in motion, goes downward on the road to anar- 
 chy or despotism, and never stops. One false step can never be recalled ; the descent 
 to ruin is easy, but to return, difficult, if not impossible : hoc opus, hie labor est. Could 
 we forget where we are. and listen to the speeches of gendemen in opposition, we 
 should forget the business we are enaaged in ; we should imagine we were listening 
 to Burke on the French Revolution. All the horrors of that volcano are set before 
 us. as if in our madness, we were ready to plunge into it. We are likened to the 
 impious priests of France in the last age ; we are cEilled fanatics, dreamers, and even 
 drivellers, by a gentieman of this city : the history of the ancient Repubfics is invoked 
 to alarm us : at one time it is said, that each of these perished when Suffiage was made 
 general, and Goveniments established on the rights of numbers, With much mor» 
 
 54 
 
426 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 truth we are again told, that these Republics with all their temporary Governments, 
 have fallen, without leaving in their histories any thing for our instruction: the truth 
 is, that neither in antiquity, nor in the ages succeeding the fall of Rome, were there 
 any Governments formed on our model ; not one. Before ours, there never existed 
 one Government in the world in which the whole power was vested in the people, 
 and exercised by them through their Representatives; in which, powers were divided 
 between separate and distinct bodies of magistracy, and in which no nobility or privi- 
 leged order existed. It is in vain, theretore, that we are incessantly lectured like 
 school-boys about the Republics of Greece, Sparta, Lacedaemon, Rome, and Car- 
 thage. In our sense of the term, in the Virginia sense of it, neither of these was a 
 Republic; they have perished indeed, as all others of the same age have done; some 
 by war and conquest, some by one cause, and some by another. Perhaps, among the 
 inscrutable decrees of Providence, there is one by which all Governments like the men 
 composing them, are to have a beginning, a maturity, and an end. 
 
 Gentlemen who oppose us, continually turn our attention to England, as the coun- 
 try whose history is replete with instruction, and from whose Constitution and laws, 
 we have borrowed the trial by jury, habeas corpus, and the scheme of Representation 
 itself. I concur with the gentlemen in their appeals to this source of informa- 
 tion. I believe with the gentlemen opposed to us, that the Government of Eng- 
 land is the best that could exist for that people ; it would not do for us. We have 
 dispensed with king, nobility, and hierarchy; we have no use for these establish- 
 ments. I do not believe the English people could be governed by our Constitution 
 and laws, and I am the more proud of tliem and my country, in proportion as I am 
 satisfied that no people on earth, ourselves excepted, could sustain our free institu- 
 tions. It cannot be denied, that in the elective system of England, in her common 
 law, in her charters, and customs, we are to look tor the sources from which we and 
 our ancestors have extracted our best principles. Thus far I do most heartily concur 
 with the gentlemen from Chesterfield, from Richmond, and from Orange. 
 
 But the ball of revolution, once set in motion, rolls down to anarchy first, and then 
 to despotism ! It never returns ! And is it really so Permit me to call the atten- 
 tion of the Committee to some of the civil revolutions of England, (for there have 
 been several.) in which the ball of revolution ascended, and stopped at the point de- 
 sired; and the fruits of which, are now the boast, both of that country and of this. On 
 what does the Englishman pride himself, when contrasting his condition, with that of 
 the subject of any other country ? The answer readily occurs ; the great and lesser 
 charters of English liberties ; jury trial, the habeas corpus, the common law, the 
 Right of Sufirage ; in short, the Englishman rejoices in his civil and religious liberties ; 
 in a Government of laws. Among all his blessings, he is in the habit of naming 
 magna charta as the first : when and how was that charter obtained It was obtained 
 by revolution at Runny Meade. A majority of the Barons demanded of King John 
 a charter of privileges and liberties, as English subjects : the King refused, and this 
 majority of Barons armed themselves, {for numbers ruled there.) The King wrote to 
 them, to know, what were these liberties and privileges about which they were so 
 anxious. The Barons answered, that the privileges they demanded were granted by 
 the King's father. From this answer it is supposed, that the great charter had first 
 been granted by King Henry the third. This fact is not certain however, nor is it 
 important : the King signed certain articles of agreement, promising a charter of the 
 rights demanded, w^iich the Barons had drawn up in writing, as we propose to do : 
 he engaged to meet them on a certain day, in July, 1215, to give full effect to this 
 agreement. Instead of performing what he had promissd to do in good faith, the 
 King interposed a difficulty ; that difficulty was not a ratio of freemen and villains, 
 of men and taxes, or of federal numbers. He wrote to the Pope, and placed his 
 kingdom under his protection, offijring himself for a crusade to the Holy Land, and 
 when the day arrived, instead of performing his engagement, he informed the Barons 
 of his intentions, and that his kingdom being now the patrimony of St. Peter, they could 
 not touch it without impious, (if I recollect we have heard this word here,) hands. The 
 Barons, on receipt of this evasive answer, attacked and carried several of the King's 
 castles ; and, as the Pope could give no assistance, and St. Peter came not to claim his 
 heritage, the King and his minority had to yield to a majority of Barons. The char- 
 ter was signed and sealed, and with the agreement which preceded it, is preserved in 
 the tower of London to this day. This charter is a body of what we would now call 
 common law, of family law. The ladies of that day were as effectually represented 
 by those Barons, as they of the present, are by us. Their rights of dower ; of quaran- 
 tine ; of protection during minority against disparaging marriages, are enforced; not 
 granted, for they had existed from time immemorial. 
 
 This glorious civil revolution, was effected in two or three short months, in the 
 year 1215. Between that year, and the year, 1688, several revolutions occurred and 
 were attended with the same happy results, the consequences of which, were fre- 
 quent renewals of the great, and the additions of the lesser charter, and the articuli 
 
DEBATES OF THE COJ^VENTION. 
 
 427 
 
 super cartas. In each of these revolutions the ball was rolled up, and. at the end of 
 each, the rights of the people who rolled it, acquired additional strength. 
 
 I pass on to the well-known revolution of 1(588. Until this time, England had 
 never known the blessings of an independent Judiciary. The tenure quamdiu bene 
 se gesserit, had never been inserted in but one commission. Great as was the value 
 placed by our Whig ancestors in 1688, on their charters, their laws, their jury trial, 
 and their writ of habeas corpus, they looked upon these rights and privileges, as in 
 some degree of danger, so long as the Judges were dependent on the King or his 
 ministry. The gentleman from Chesterfield said the other day, that when the King 
 is weak and protiigate, the rights of the people gain ground. Winiam was weak at 
 least : his ruhng desire was to insert in the act ot settlement, a provision limiting the 
 succession to the heirs of his kins-woman, the Princess Sophia of Hanover : he was 
 too weak to perceive that his Parliament were determined to do this at all events; 
 that no other course could consist with their policy. The Parliament practised on 
 the King's weakness, and as a consideration for the settlement of the Crown, ex- 
 torted his concession, that the Judges of England should hold their commissions 
 during good behaviour. Unfortunately for Scotland and Ireland, this provision was 
 omitted in each of their acts of union with England, and the effects of Judicial de- 
 pendence and independence, have been manifested in the three kingdoms in our own 
 days, A great effort, conunon to the Whigs of England, Ireland, and Scotland, was 
 made at tiie same time. The object was Parliamentary reform. The necessity of re- 
 form was manifest. The means proposed were orderly and constitutional. Govern- 
 ment endeavored to suppress the United Irish in Ireland, the friends of reform in 
 Scotland, and corresponding societies in London. In conflicts between Government 
 and people, considerable excesses happened in each kingdom. The laws of Ireland 
 differ from those of Scotland, and the laws of each from those of England ; I mean 
 those relating to crimes and punishments : the greatest difference was in the Forums, 
 before which the subjects of each kingdom were brouofht for trial. The Englishman, 
 was brought before independent Judges ; those of Ireland and Scotland, before Judges 
 amenable to the King and his ministers-. The Irishman suffered death ; the Scotch- 
 man banishment; while the Englishman was acqiiitted and greeted as a patriot. En- 
 ghshmen were not yet satisfied witli the concession of William ; the Judges were 
 not secure from a demise of the Crown, and this defect, at length, was remedied by 
 statute, in the reign of one of the George's. Here is a brief outline of the history of 
 four or five civil revolutions, if our present effort may be called one. All these hap- 
 pened in our mother country. Before the first, the Government of that country was 
 a feudal monarchy, a despotism ; since the last, it is a free limited monarchy. These 
 civil revolutions have made that Government such, that it is receiving every day the 
 warm and reiterated plaudits of our opponents on this floor. From the last of these 
 revolutions, we have copied our independent Judiciary ; and, although, I will aid to 
 create more responsibility there, I pray, that we. and our posterity to remotest time, 
 may never be weak enough to part with this surest, greatest, sheet-anchor of every 
 free State. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, what do we hear on tiiis occasion, more than the alarming predic- 
 tions, melancholy forebodings, and evil auguries usual on every question of re- 
 form ? When were men in power ready for reform ? When did they yield power 
 except to force or fear r We have lived to see Cathohc emancipation in Ireland, after 
 the failure of many attempts to accomplish that measure. On each of these occa- 
 sions, ministers answered according to custom ; sometimes, that the country was at 
 war with France, or the whole Continent; sometimes, the Christian religion was in 
 danger; and at others, that reform would jeo] ardize both Church and State. Their 
 predictions were never more fearful and gloomy, than on the eve of Catholic eman- 
 cipation. They were precisely of the same nature, and of the same justice, with 
 those of our opponents here. The Catholics are emancipated, and England has 
 gained strength by that act of justice. By a similar act of political emancipation, 
 Virginia will increase her strength and happiness, notwithstanding the forebodings of 
 men about to part with power. 
 
 Permit me to ask, if all civil revolutions go downward, and necessarily tend to an- 
 archy and despotism, what do gentlemen make of that of 1776 .' Perhaps, there are 
 those who think us anarchists at the present moment. 
 
 History does not present us with the arguments of King John and his minority, in 
 1215 ; these are lost in the mists of time. The same may be said of all revolutionary 
 transactions before that of 1638. With the Tory arguments of that time, we are well 
 acquainted. The exclusive friends of the old Constitution of England, treated all in- 
 novation as dangerous, and as tending to destroy the royal prerogative. There was 
 a respectable party opposed to that revolution, when it took place, and many an 
 honest Englishman is of that opinion at tlie present day. There always was, and 
 there always will be, a strong party in every country opposed to reform, however ne- 
 cessary, and however apparent that necessity, and their intentions are generally 
 
428 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 honest, and their views patriotic. Between the contending parties on such occasions, 
 time is the judge, and experience the arbiter. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — I acknowledge the kindness of the Chair and Committee, mani- 
 fested in their attention to my remarks on tliis trying occasion. 
 
 Mr. Stanard olfered, by way of concihation and compromise, the following amend- 
 ment to the amendment of Mr. Leigh : 
 
 " And every such citizen who shall be a lessee of a tenement of the yearly value 
 of dollars, for a term of or more years, by deed duly recorded three months 
 
 before the time he may offer to vote, and of which lease at least years shall 
 
 be unexpired at the time he offers to vote. 
 
 " And every such citizen who shall within one year before he may offer to vote, 
 have a tax or taxes to tlie amount of assessed on property, whether real or 
 
 personal owned by him, and shall have actually paid such tax or taxes at least three 
 months before he shall so offer to vote." 
 
 Mr. P. P. Barbour called for a division of the question, and it was divided accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Johnson suggested, that if the present amendment should be adopted, it would 
 supercede that part of Mr. Leigh's amendment which admits termors with leases re- 
 newable at pleasure. He pointed out as an objection to that part of Mr. Leigh's 
 amendment, that leases of the description he has mentioned, instead of being as now 
 confined to Norfolk, would be multiplied every where, and so drawn as to confer the 
 Right of Suffrage, and yet not to extend beyond a single year or other limited term : 
 this could easily be effected by making the fine to be paid for the renewal of the lease 
 so large that no tenant could pay it. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas felt embarrassed in voting for Mr. Stanard's amendment before the 
 blanks were filled. He thought Mr. Leigh's more safe. 
 
 After some desultory conversation on the details of Mr. Stanard's amendment : 
 
 Mr. Mercer expressed his regret at the present course, and his preference to have 
 the resolutions of the Legislative Committee taken up and decided on in their order. 
 The present amendments applied to the first three resolutions — he wished to see the 
 fourth taken up, which related to house-keepers. 
 
 The question was now put on the first member of Mr. Stanard's amendment, viz : 
 
 " And every such citizen who shall be a lessee of a tenement of the yearly value 
 of dollars, for a term of or more years, by deed duly recorded three 
 
 months before the time he may offer to vote, and of which lease at least years 
 shall be unexpired at the time he offers to vote;" and decided in the negative : Ayes 
 37, Noes 52. So the first clause of the amendment was rejected. 
 
 The question now recurring on the second part of Mr. Stanard's amendment, Mr. 
 Johnson expressed his decided predilection for the amendment of Mr. Leigh (slightly 
 modified) — but expressed his willingness to vote for Mr. Stanard's proposition, if it 
 should prove the best that can be got. He declared himself the advocate of a landed 
 basis for the Right of Suffrage — which he pressed as a ground on which both parties 
 might meet. 
 
 Mr. Monroe then said : It is with great regret that I rise to address the Committee 
 at this late hour ; but, as I presume the House will take a vote on the question to-day, 
 X deem it ray duty to do it. Having stated^ in an earl}'^ stage of this debate, that I 
 thought that the Right of Suffrage might be extended beyond the hmit prescribed by 
 the present Constitution, and with advantage to every class in the community, it is 
 my desire to show to what extent, I think it may be carried, and within what limit it 
 should be confined. I feel bound to do this in explanation of my own conduct, and 
 that my principles may be understood by my fellow-citizens. I will be very brief. 
 
 By the resolution as reported from the Legislative Committee, as well as by the 
 amendments to it, which have been proposed, the Right of Suffrage is secured to all 
 who now enjoy it. This is perfectly right, and if any individual holds a freehold in- 
 terest which has come to him by descent, devise, marriage, or marriage settlement, or 
 by reversion of a voter, which it is proposed to make very moderate, the Right of 
 Suffrage is to be extended to him also : and by another amendment which is now be- 
 fore the Committee, it is proposed to extend this right to lessees. I confess, that under 
 certain modifications, I shall readily agree to this. But my object is to confine the 
 elective franchise to an interest in land : to some interest of moderate value in the 
 territory of the Commonwealth. What is our country is it any thing more than 
 our territory ? and why are we attached to it ? is it not the effect of our residence in 
 it, either as the land of our nativity or the country of our choice ? Our adopted coun- 
 try ? And of our attachment to its institutions.? And what excites and is the best evi- 
 dence of such attachment.? Some hold in the territory itself; some interest in the 
 soil : something tiiat we own, not as passengers or voyagers, who have no property 
 in the State, and nothing to bind them to it. The object is to give firmness and per- 
 manency to our attachment. And these are the best means by which it may be ac- 
 complished. Mere transient passengers may be foreigners. As to the citizens of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 429 
 
 other States of the Union, I consider them as citizens of Virginia, and so identified 
 with us, that they may be rehed on in that character. But our country is an asylum 
 for the oppressed of ail countries ; they fly to us from all regions of the globe, parti- 
 cularly from Great Britain ; and more especially from Ireland — they fly to us from 
 poverty and oppression. I am wilhng to receive them ; but I consider those people 
 as very ditferent from ours ; and as they are not fit to be at once admitted to equal 
 political rights amoncr us, they should not be permitted to participate in the sove- 
 reignty, nor get hold upon the Government till they have been rendered fit for it by 
 the acquirement of different feelings and principles. 
 
 Oars is a Government of the people : it may properly be called self-government. I 
 wish it may be preserved forever in the hands of the people. Our revolution was 
 prosecuted on those principles, and all the Constitutions which have been adopted in 
 tills country are founded on the same basis. But the whole system is as yet an ex- 
 periment ; it remains to be seen whether such a Government can be maintained ; and 
 that it may, in our Union, I have no doubt. But wise provisions, as to the exercise 
 of the Right of Suffrage, and the powers of Government, are indispensable for its 
 preservation. We ought to profit by the examples of every other nation ; we ought 
 to look at the history of other E.epublics, and see the causes which led to their over- 
 throw. When we find that the most important and democratical among them have 
 been soon overthrown, we ought to guard against the causes which led to their down- 
 fall. We have come here that we may prepare a form of Government for our native 
 State. The experience of all the other States and our own experience are before us. 
 But the experiment is still in operation, and nothing can be considered as conclusive, 
 especially in tlie new States, which are of such recent establishment. Of the effect 
 produced by the original organization, in the other States, and by the changes they 
 have severally made in it, different reports are given in this House, on the represen- 
 tation of different parties in each State, which proves, that the experiment is still de- 
 pending and its result unknown. I have the utmost confidence in the integrity of 
 gentlemen on both sides of the question in this House. I can see great cause for a 
 difference of opinion between them. It is very natural that those on the one side 
 should feel a strong inchnation to give the greatest possible extent to the rights of 
 every citizen, whatever may be his circumstances. It is equally natural that doubts 
 should be felt on the other side, when the experience of other Governments has ad- 
 monished them of danger. 
 
 There are three great epochs in the history of the human race in regard to Govern- 
 ment! The first commenced with the origin of the ancient Republics and terminated 
 with them. The second commenced at the overthrow of the Roman Empire : with 
 the Governments that were estabhshed on its ruins, and comprises their career to the 
 present time. The third and last, commenced with the discovery of this hemisphere, 
 the emigration of our ancestors, to this section, with their colonial state, the revolu- 
 tion which followed, and the Governments founded on its principles. Each of these 
 epochs, is marked by characters, peculiar to itself. The Governments of the two 
 first, warn us of dangers which we should always have in view. Athens and Lace- 
 daemon are the best specimens among the Greeks — Carthage and Rome are the only 
 others worth considering. And first let us look at the state of Athens. There we 
 find the people e?i masse in one great assembly, possessed of the power of the Gov- 
 ernment under certain modifications. The Government and sovereignty were united 
 in them; but the people could originate nothing. A Senate must propose all that 
 was done — and that Senate consisted of the wealthy. The Government had com- 
 menced with nobility and a Prince, and so it continued till Solon formed the Govern- 
 ment and instituted a Senate. This State consisted, therefore, of two classes, the rich 
 and the poor. And as was truly observed by the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. 
 Nicholas.) it lasted but ten years, when it was overthrown by Pisistratus, who de- 
 ceived the people. 
 
 Lacedeemon was under two Kings and a Senate who held their places for life. 
 This Government lasted longer. And why The lands were divided equally ; the 
 people fed together, Kings, Senators and people at the same tables. This had a ten- 
 dency to connect them together ; at the same time all intercourse with foreign na- 
 tions was prohibited. The bonds were close ; and the Government was never over- 
 thrown until these bonds were first broken. Commerce introduced war and acquired, 
 plunder, whereby the manners of the people were changed. But would any body 
 think of introducing such a Government here ? 
 
 The same remarks apply, in substance, to Carthage and to Rome. My idea is, that 
 the causes which overthrew all these Governments are so many warning-s for us to 
 profit by. Of the peculiar characteristics of the second epoch, and of the differences 
 between ours and both, by which we were placed on more advantageous ground than 
 either, I cannot now enter into. 
 
 I think if tlie Right of Suffrage should be so extended as I have suggested, I can 
 see in tliat event no remaining cause of variance. All who wish to enjoy it can pro- 
 
430 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 cure it by a few months' labour, and if pubhc virtue and the general abhorrence of 
 corruption shall prevail, as I hope and believe they will, we shall have those who en- 
 joy the right, so nearly on a level with those who do not, that their influence will 
 operate to tranquillize the whole mass of society, and induce the poor man to use ex- 
 ertions which will soon obtain for him the right of voting. 
 
 I thought it my duty to shew to the Committee how far I wished the right should 
 be extended, and where we ought to stop : I think we are not in a situation to go 
 farther. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he believed he was not singular in the opinion he was about to 
 express, (though he might be the only member of the Convention, by whom it was 
 uttered,) of sincere gratification, on finding that the gentleman who had just taken 
 his seat, was in favour of what he (Mr. R.) conceived to be the only safe ground, in 
 this Commonwealth, for the Right of Suffrage — he meant terra firma : literally ^rma: 
 The land. The moment, said he, you quit the land, (I mean no pun.) that moment 
 you will find yourselves at sea : and without compass — without land-mark or polar 
 star. I said that I considered it the only safe foundation ixn this Commonwealth. 
 For whom are we to make a Constitution.? For Holland ? For Venice, (where there is ■ 
 no land .'') For a country, where the land is monopolized by a few? where it is locked 
 up not only by entails, (I do not mean such as the English law would laugh at,) but 
 by marriage settlements, so that a large part of the people, are necessarily excluded 
 from the possession of it : but for a people emphatically agricultural ; where land is 
 in plenty, and where it is accessible to every exertion of honest industry. I will ven- 
 ture to say, that if one-half the time had been spent in honest labour, which has been 
 spent in murmuring and getting up petitions, that the signers might be invested with 
 that right, all-important at muster-rolls, at cross-roads, and in this Convention, yet 
 not worth three months' labour, the right would have been possessed and exercised 
 long ago. 
 
 I will not go into the discussion ; I rose merely to express my extreme satisfaction, 
 that the gentleman who has just taken his seat, is of opinion, that we ought to abide 
 in the land. 
 
 The amendment of the gentleman from Chesterfield, as proposed to be modified by 
 the gentleman from Spottsylvania, is one which I do not exactly understand. So far 
 as it depends on a landed qualification, (which is the great principle of our present 
 Government,) the proposition of the gentleman from Chesterfield, appears to be only 
 an equitable modification of it, and to retain the great stable, solid qualification of land, 
 which I view as the only sufficient evidence of permanent, common interest in, and 
 attachment to, the Commonwealth, 
 
 I had thought, that the experience of this Commonwealth, and of the United States, 
 had read us such lessons on the subject of personal security, that we never should 
 think of leaving real. As I am not sufficiently acquainted with the measure pro- 
 posed by the gentleman from Spottsylvania, I respectfully move that the Committee 
 do now rise. 
 
 The Committee rose accordingly, and the House adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, November 23, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Armstrong of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The President laid before the Convention the following letter from Mr. Taliaferro : 
 
 RICHMOND, 23d November, 1829. 
 SIR,~A domestic occurrence, which threatens the most serious family affhction, 
 demands my immediate presence at home. In obeying this call, my first object is to 
 provide, in the most eff*ectual manner, for the future execution of the important trust 
 with which I am now charged ; and as I do not, under existing circumstances, consi- 
 der it safe and proper, that the District, in whose delegation I am associated, should 
 be left by me without its entire representation, my design is to resign. I therefore, 
 beg leave, through you, to announce to the Convention, that my right to a seat in 
 that Assembly is hereby vacated : My colleagues will proceed at once to execute the 
 function which the Act of Assembly, in such a case, devolves on them. May I be 
 allowed to say, that very many considerations combine to excite in me feelings of deep 
 regret at the necessity I am under to withdraw myself from the Convention — and to 
 add, that no considerations, certainly none personal to myself, could prevail on me to 
 do so, unless the power existed to supply my place without possible embarrassment 
 to my constituents, from my resignation. I cannot, in justice to my feelings, close 
 this communication, and not express the cordial hope, that the result of the work in 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 
 
 431 
 
 which you are engaged, may unite, in harmonious accord, the affections and interests 
 of all the citizens of this Commonwealth; and that, with sentiments, Sir, of the most 
 profound respect for you, and for the body in which you preside, I am your friend and 
 fellow-citizen, 
 
 JOHN TALIAFERRO. 
 
 The honorable James Monroe, 
 
 President of the Convention. 
 
 The letter was laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Neale then rose and signified to the Convention that the remaining Delegates 
 from the District to which Mr. Taliaferro belonged, had selected as a suitable person 
 to fill his place, John Coalter, Esq. of Stafford county, (one of the Judges of the Court 
 of Appeals.) 
 
 The Convention then went into Committee of the Whole, on the Constitution, Mr, 
 Powell in the Chair, and the question being on the amendment proposed by Mr, 
 Stanard to Mr. Leigh's amendment of the third resolution of the Legislative Commit- 
 tee. [See Saturday's proceedings.] 
 
 Mr. Monroe then addressed the Committee in nearly the following terms : 
 Mr. Chairman, — On Saturday, I engaged the attention of the Committee for a few 
 moments in explaining my views with regard to the extension of the Right of Suf- 
 frage, but as it was near the hour of adjournment, I was unwilhng to prolong my re- 
 marks. There are some ideas which I did not then state, and which 1 beg leave now 
 to explain. I stated it to be my view, that the Right of Suffrage should be confined 
 so as in some form to be connected with the soil — it was my idea that those who en- 
 joyed it ought to possess some interest in society, and to have a home : at the same 
 time I wislied to see the interest limited as much as possible, and made as moderate 
 as prudence would allow. My reasons for desiring that the elective franchise should 
 be connected with the soil, were then stated, and need not now be repeated. My 
 reasons for wishing to make that interest as moderate as practicable, I wish now more 
 fully to explain. 
 
 I observed, that in fixing a Constitution for the State, either by the amendment of 
 the old one or the adoption of a new, we ought to profit by the examples of other Go- 
 vernments, and particularly of the ancient Republics, as furnishing us with a warn- 
 ing of the dangers to which free Governments are exposed, but that none of them 
 could present to us such an example as we ought to follow : but as a warning, it may 
 be very profitable that we should keep them in view. Here the sovereignty resides 
 in the people : ours may truly be called a system of self-government : and my object 
 is, to preserve it in their hands forever. It is with that view, I would look at the 
 dangers to which it is exposed. 
 
 I remarked that there were three great epochs in history, as it respected Govern- 
 ment. The first of them commenced with the ancient Republics, and ended with 
 their overthrow. The second, with the overthrow of the Roman Empire, and the 
 establishment of those Governments which were erected on its ruins. The third and 
 last commenced with the discovery of this liemisphere: the emigration to it by our 
 ancestors, the Governments which were formed in our colonial state, and after our 
 revolutionary struggle, with the Governments which were formed on the principles 
 of the revolution. I gave an illustration of this remark, so far as relates to the first 
 period, viz : during the continuance of the ancient Republics. 
 
 What are the characteristic features of those Governments, and what the warning they 
 hold out to us ? The people who settled on the ruins of the Roman Empire were rude 
 in their condition and character : their Governments were monarchical, accompanied 
 with an order of nobility. In all the great powers, with the exception of England, 
 the Government was despotic; and in England herself, hberty had, through a long 
 space, no solid basis on which to rest. The effort there was to avoid despotism ; and 
 the most that the friends of liberty aspired to, and contended for, was to rescue the 
 people from slavery, and acquire for them some hold in the system. A representa- 
 tion in one branch of the Legislature was all that they sought, and all that they ob- 
 tained. I will not go into further details. From such a Government, what example 
 is afforded, which we ought to imitate ? It was during this struggle that our ances- 
 tors fled from persecution — and settled on this Continent, under charters from the 
 Crown, which charters formed the connecting link between the Colonies and the pa- 
 rent country. In all these Colonial Governments, the power was in the people: the 
 Governor was the agent of the King. His powers were limited. Every proposition 
 originated with the people — there was a negative in the Crown. This was the only 
 cheek upon their authority. There was no nobility or prince. The revolution trans- 
 ferred the whole power to the people. There were no privileged orders ; nor was the 
 Government hereditary. It consisted of a House of Burgesses, a Council, and a Go- 
 vernor. Every proposition originated %vith the people, under our Colonial Govern- 
 ment; and, therefore, liberal and free principles were inculcated, which were made 
 
432 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 perfect by our revolution. The whole Government, in all its branches, is now that 
 of the people : every proposition may be said to originate from them, for, when checks 
 on the most popular branch are provided, as by the Senate, for example, on the House 
 of Delegates, they are formed by representatives of the people, and intended to give 
 greater stability and permanence to their Government. Such a condition, theretore, 
 as the rich and poor, and such a struggle between them, as overthrew the Govern- 
 ment of Athens, and prostrated the power of the people, did not and does not exist 
 here in the slightest degree. In the ancient Republics, and especially in that of 
 Athens, the people possessed the whole power : the sovereignty and the Government 
 were united in them: with us it is different. The sovereignty is in the people, 
 but the exercise of Government is in their representatives. Every voter partakes a 
 share of the sovereignty ; and thus the Right of Suffrage is the basis of our system of 
 Government. And hence the necessity tor caution how we extend the right to such 
 as have no permanent interest in the community. When we see that the representa- 
 tives are so numerous, and that the voters constitute so great a mass, we have the cer- 
 tainty that they never can pass laws in favor of one class of society to the injury of 
 another class. 
 
 Many reasons urge us in looking to self-government, to cause this Right of Suf- 
 frage to draw as near as possible every class in society together. But it should be 
 connected with an interest in the soil. I wish to see no distinction, order, nor any 
 thing like rank introduced amongst us. Let all be in the hands of the people. Let a 
 majority rule. The laws of primogeniture and of entail are gone, and what is the 
 tendency of such a state of things? The father brings up his sons, in his own princi- 
 ples and habits, and when he dies he divides his estate among them ; or if he dies in- 
 testate, the law of descents comes in and divides it for him. His sons live without 
 labour, and thus in two or three generations the largest estates become subdivided 
 until the owners become reduced into one mass; and the whole aspect of society be- 
 comes nearly the same. Does not this present a reason why the Right of Suttrage 
 should be connected in some degree with the soil But let the test be made as mo- 
 derate as it can be. Here we see none of those causes which overthrew the ancient 
 Republics. The bases of our society are different from theirs. Our interests are more 
 combined. The mass of the people are more connected with each other. Here are 
 aio great divisions of rich and poor existing distinct from each other, and engaged in 
 perpetual conflicts. For these reasons, I should like to see the Right of Suffrage 
 connected with the soil, but to an extent as moderate as circumstances will admit. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Stanard's amendment, and decided in the ne- 
 gative — Ayes 41, Noes 44. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison, Monroe, and Marshall, voted in the affirmative.) 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Leigh's amendment, and decided in the nega- 
 tive — Ayes 37, Noes 51. 
 
 Aye — Mr. Monroe. Noes — Messrs. Madison and Marshall. 
 
 Mr. Cooke then offered the following amendment : 
 
 Strike out from the resolution of the Legislative Committee, all after the words 
 
 Resolved, that" and insert: "the election of all Executive, Legislative, or other 
 functionaries, in this Commonwealth, whose election shall be submitted directly 
 to the people, by the provisions of any new Constitution, or amendment of the old, 
 to be framed by the Convention now assembled, shall be : 
 
 " All white male citizens of the United States, of the age of twenty-one years, or 
 upwards, and resident in the county, city, borough or other electoral district, where 
 they shall respectively offer to vote, at the time of any election ; except 
 
 " That citizens of the United States, born in the United States, but without the 
 limits of the Commonwealth, shall not enjoy the Right of Suffrage, unless they shall 
 have resided therein for years immediately preceding the election at which 
 
 they shall respectively offer to vote ; and immediately preceding such elec- 
 
 tion in the county, city, borough or other electoral district, where they shall respec- 
 tively offer to vote : the mode of proving such residence to be prescribed by law : 
 
 " That naturalized citizens of the United States, shall not enjoy the right until, in 
 addition to the qualification of residence required by the next preceding clause, they 
 shall have respectively acquired by marriage, by descent or purchase, a freehold estate 
 in land of the a^essed value of dollars, situated within the Commonwealth, 
 
 (the title to which shall have been evidenced by a recorded deed, or will, and shall have 
 been in possession of the same for the space of before any election at which 
 
 they shall respectively offer to vote ; the mode of proving the previous residence re- 
 quired by this clause to be prescribed by law.) 
 
 " That no person shall exercise the Right of Suffrage at any election unless he shall 
 have paid a State, county, or corporation tax, imposed on him by law, and legally de- 
 manded of him, during the two years immediately preceding such election : the mode 
 of proving or disproving such payment, if disputed, to be prescribed by law. 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTIOX. 
 
 433 
 
 ** That no person convicted of any infamous offence, shall, at any election thereafter, 
 enjoy or exercise tiie Right of Sutfrage; tiie enumeration of such offences to be made 
 by law. 
 
 Tliat the Ricrht of Suffrage shall not be enjoyed or exercised, by any pauper — (the 
 definition of the term pauper to be made by law :) 
 
 " By any person who shall have been declared, by a lawful tribunal, to be of unsound 
 mind, daring the continuance of such disability; or, 
 
 " By any non-commissioned ofHcer, or private soldier, seaman or marine, in the regu- 
 lar service of the United States, or of this Commonwealth."' 
 
 (The preceding is the shape which Mr. Cooke's proposition assmned, after being 
 modified by subsequent amendments.) 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that the Convention was now in the eighth week of its session, and 
 had decided almost notliing. He added, that notwithstanding the ability with which 
 the various subjects had been discussed, it v.-as quite apparent that the Committee was 
 absolutely surfeited with discussion and debate. It would ill become liim, under such 
 circuuistances. to trespass on the time and patience of the Committee, by what was 
 commonly called a " set speech." Nothing was fai-ther from his purpose. Indeed, 
 if the views comprehended in the amendment he had just oftered on the subject of 
 Suffrage, had been presented by any other member, he should have contented him- 
 self, after a discussion so protracted, with giving a silent vote in their support. 
 
 Under existing circumstances, he deemed it his duty to explain and support tliose 
 views, but would endeavor to do it with as much brevity as possible. He hoped it 
 would not be considered a departure from this plan of brevity, to make a few remarks 
 on the two amendments yesterday proposed by the gentleman from Spottsylvania, 
 (Mr. Stanard,) as he should in explainmg the reasons which induced him to vote 
 against both of the amendments alluded to, present at the same time the gromids of 
 his preference for those which he had had the honour himself to submit. 
 
 The gentleman from Spottsylvania had proposed to extend the Right of Suffrage to 
 
 1st. '• Every such citizen as shall be a lessee of a tenement of the yearly value of 
 dollars, for a term of or more years, by a deed duly recorded 
 
 three months before the time he may offer to vote, and of ichic/i lease at least 
 years s/uill be unexpired at the time he ojj'ers to zote.'^ And 
 
 2d. Every such citizen as shall, witliin one 3'ear before he may offer to vote, have 
 a tax or taxes to the amount of assessed on property, whether real or per- 
 
 sonal, owned by him, and shall have actually paid such tax or taxes at least three 
 months before he shall so offer to vote.'" 
 
 Now, Sir, said Mr. C, I am opposed to both of these modifications of the Right of 
 Suffrage, because of the fluctuating and mutable character of the qualification they 
 prescribe. I am opposed to the first, because it confers the right on a lessee in 1S21;), 
 and deprives him of it in 1830. In 1829, his lease has two years to run, and he is a 
 voter: he enjoys a share in the soterdgntij of tlie country: in 1830, it has but one year 
 to run, and he is disfranchised, and yet he is the same man — possesses the same moral 
 and intellectual qualities — the same love of country — the same stake in the commu- 
 nity — the same evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, 
 the communit}^" — in short, the same fitness to exercise the Right of Suffrage as in 
 the preceding year. He has done no act to change his relation to the cominunity in 
 any respect, and yet he finds himself degraded from the rank of one of tlie sovereigns 
 of the country, and a member of a disfranchised class. Sir, it ought to be borne in 
 mind, that in forming a Constitution for the people of Virginia, we are not dealing 
 with mere machines — with those '-men of wood and brass and iron," to which the 
 gentleman from Brooke (Mr. Campbell) the other day so forcibly alluded ; but with 
 sentient beings, whose feelings must be consulted and respected. And in this view 
 I would ask, whether the free and high-spirited people of ^'irginia would submit, with 
 patience, to a regulation sd arbitrary and capricious in its character! Would not ita 
 enforcement produce disaffection, if not turmoil and confusion, in the class of per- 
 sons subjected to its operation.^ I apprehend that such consequences would inevita- 
 bly flow from the enforcement of a rule not only fluctuating, but in itself unjust and 
 arbitrary. 
 
 The same principle of mutability pervades and vitiates the other qualification pro- 
 posed by the gentleman from Spottsylvania. He proposes that the qualification shall 
 consist in the payment of a certain sum of money to the Government, in the shape of 
 an assessed tax on property, real or personal, owned by the voter, and that the right 
 to vote shall cease when the tax shall be either abolished or reduced in amount below 
 that certain and specified sum. There are, incident to this qualification, tw^o principles 
 ©f mutability or destruction, one extrinsic, the other essential and inherent. Although 
 recommended as a part of the fundamental laic of the country, which of course should 
 not be changeable by ordinary legislation, it is liable to be destroyed, at any moment, 
 by the whim, or caprice, or settled policy, if you please, of the Legislative bodies. 
 And this too,' on the colourable and popuiai- pretext of diniinisliing the burthens of 
 
 55 
 
434 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 the Government, by the abolition or reduction of the taxes. You put the tax, for ex- 
 ample, the payment of whicli is to confer the right of voting, at twelve and one-half 
 cents, and at the time of the adoption of the Constitution of which this provision forms 
 a part, there happens to be a tax on horses of twelve and one half cents a head. A 
 Legislature is chosen, in w^hich there is found a majority of members, who honestly 
 and deliberately think, that the poorer classes of the people cannot safely be entrusted 
 with a participation in political power — that the good order, and well-being of the 
 community, require them to be disfranchised, A Legislature composed of such ma- 
 terials, has only to abolish the tax on horses, and it disfranchises at once all those 
 poorer citizens, who have beasts of the plough, but neither land nor slaves. And 
 this, too, as I said before, on the popular pretext of diminishing the burthens of Govern- 
 ment. Nay, Sir, the tax on horses, may become, in the course of events, wholly un- 
 necessary; for, one of the great objects of our assembling here, is to reduce the ex- 
 penses of Government, and dispense with as many taxes as possible. But by adopt- 
 ing the resolution in question, you would put it out of the power of the Government 
 to perform one of the most beneficent functions of a Government, the diminution of 
 the burthens of the people, without, by the same act, disfranchising a considerable 
 part of them. Can a Constitutional provision, which involves such consequences, 
 recommend itself to the good sense of the people of Virginia? 
 
 But I have said that there is, in the qualification which I am now considering, a 
 principle of mutability essential and inherent. I alluded to the provision which makes 
 the payment of a certain fixed and unchangeable sum of money, in the shape of taxes, 
 the qualification of the voter. Now, Sir, it appears to me, that few things are more 
 unsteady in their value than money, and that a worse standard could scarcely be found, 
 by which to measure and apportion political power. 
 
 If we look back into the history of other ages, and nations, we shall find that, in 
 England, the value of silver decreased between 1570 and 1640, seventy-five per cen- 
 tum. So that forty shillings, in 1640, would command no more labour, would pur- 
 chase no more of the necessaries of life, than ten shillings in 1570. 
 
 We shall find that the perpetual rents, reserved in money some centuries ago, have 
 become, by reason of its diminished value, a mere nominal incumbrance on the land 
 in the hands of the tenant, while those retained in corn, have preserved their proper 
 proportion to the fee simple value of the land : That in the same manner the mcdvs, 
 or commutation of tythes in kind for a fixed sum of money, payable annually, estab- 
 lished by contracts, made some centuries ago, by the church, and the proprietors of 
 particular tracts of land in England, has become a mere nominal incumbrance on land 
 eo situated. 
 
 But we need not resort, for instruction, to the history of remote ages or distant na- 
 tions. We have seen, in our own times, and in our own country, a still more forcible 
 illustration of the unsteadiness and mutability of that standard by which it is now 
 proposed to measure political power, and distribute it among the people. Between 
 the year 1812 and the year 1817 the dollar depreciated, in Virginia, sixty-six per cent, 
 so that a dollar would command in 1817 no more labour and no more of the necessa- 
 ries of life than thirty-three cents would command in 1812. But a still more striking 
 illustration is seen in the fact, that since 1817 the dollar has risen in value two hun- 
 dred per cent. — so that thirty-three cents, at present, will command as much labour, 
 and as great a quantity of the necessaries of life, as one hundred would have com- 
 manded or purchased in 1817. 
 
 The scheme of qualifications which I have had the honour to submit, possesses at 
 least, the negative merit of being free from these objectionable features. It will be 
 perceived that the proposed amendment of, or substitute for, the resolution of the 
 Select Committee, is founded on the assumption or postulate that all the free white 
 male citizens in the Commonwealth of mature age, have, prima, facie, a right to a 
 voice in the Government. I shall not repeat the arguments by which this proposition 
 has been sustained, in the discussions which have taken place on an analagous sub- 
 ject. I hope I may be allowed to express the opinion that those arguments have not 
 been answered, and the belief that they are unanswerable. 
 
 But those who believe in the original universality of this right, insist, at the same 
 time, for reasons which have been given again and again, that the majority of the male 
 adults, or members of the community, have a right to adopt and enforce a fundamental 
 law, by which certain classes or descriptions of persons shall be excluded from the 
 exercise of the right. That the majority have a right to say that the good order, well- 
 being and safety of the community, require such exclusion. In conformity with this 
 view of the subject, I have submitted to the Committee, a series of disqualifications, 
 to which I now beg leave, with the utmost brevity, to call its attention. 
 
 The first disqualification includes all citizens born in the United States, but without 
 the limits of the Commonwealth, until they shall have manifested, by a residence of 
 some duration, an intention to reside permanently among us; until they shall have 
 afforded by residence at least, evidence of " permanent common interest with, and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 435 
 
 attachment to, the community." This disquaUfication attaches great, and I think de- 
 served iniportance, to the feehng of love for the natal soil. I shall not attempt, Sir, 
 to prove to this Assembly, that men love their country. 
 
 The second disquahfication is but another exempiification of the same principle. It 
 supposes that foreigners, though naturalized, want the attachmciit of the heart which is 
 felt by the natives of the country, and should be required to bind themselves to the 
 community by the acquisition of land — by the factitious tie of interest^ before they 
 shall be admitted to a share of the sovereign power. 
 
 Passing by the disqualification of persons convicted of infamous offences, because 
 they have shewn by their conduct, that they are not merely indifferent, but hostile to 
 the community in which they live — of persons of unsound mind, because of their in- 
 capacity to exercise the right — of paupers, because of their dependent condition, and 
 consequent want of free agency, and of their want of interest in the well-being of a 
 community in which they have no stake, I ask the attention of the Committee to the 
 only one which remains. 
 
 It is that which denies the Right of Suffrage to those who neglect or refuse to pay 
 to the Government or the local authorities, the taxes and levies imposed on them by 
 law. I confess, Sir, that I attach to this disqualification, great practical importance. 
 I need not tell those whom I address, that there are many citizens in this Common- 
 wealth, and I fear, not a few freeholders, who are regularly returned delinquent by 
 the collecting officers, and whose delinquency arises not so much from their want of 
 ability to pay, as from their utter worthlessness. Where the public contributions are 
 so light and trifling in amount as those demanded by our Government, it may be 
 eafely assumed as a ger>ieral principle, that those who do not pay them, are idle and 
 worthless. And, in fact, the class of delinquents includes a great proportion of the 
 habitual drunkards and idle vagabonds who are a dead weight, and worse than a dead 
 weight, on the country which supports them. The practical effect of this disqualifica- 
 tion, then, is to deny political power to those who constitute, in fact, " the rabble" 
 of this and every country. 
 
 In this exposition of my views, Mr. Chairman, I have been studiously brief ; and 
 I regret that a sense of duty has compelled me to trespass, even as long as I have, 
 on the valuable time of the Committee. 
 
 Mr. p. p. Barbour then addressed the Committee in nearly the following terms: 
 
 I shall certainly emulate the example set me by the gentleman from Frederick 
 (Mr. Cooke) in brevity at least. I have no idea of going into any set speech ; I am 
 satisfied the temper of the Committee is not nov/ such as to endure it, if it has been at 
 any time. As I am most decidedly opposed to the whole scheme, I shall vote under 
 an utterly different view of it from tliat which has been taken by the gentleman ; and 
 since he has seen proper to impute very grave charges to those who insist that the 
 Right of Suffrage shall be connected with the soil, I shall present to the Committee, 
 and to the public, two or three of the reasons which influence the vote I shall give. 
 
 I throw out, in the m.ean while, as a mere suggestion to the gentleman from Frede- 
 rick, the enquiry, whether his resolutions will not conflict with some of the provisions 
 in the Constitution of the United States ? I do not say that I have formed any clear 
 opinion as to this bearing of tlie subject, but I throw out the enquiry, as one that may 
 be worthy of consideration. One of the articles of the Constitution declares, " that 
 the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens 
 in the several States." 
 
 How far the distinction which the gentleman proposes to make between the rights 
 of citizens of Virginia and those of the citizens of sister Slates, consists with the ob- 
 servance of this Constitutional principle, presents a subject for enquiry : but to the 
 question before us. 
 
 We have been engaged in discussing the enquiry, in what proportion power shall 
 be divided, among the body politic? and the question now before us is, of whom does 
 this body politic consist? who constitute the body politic of the State of Virginia? It 
 is hardly necessary to enter on the enquiry now as to the power of this body to declare, 
 who shall, and who shall not, exercise the Right of Suffrage. All agree that we pos- 
 sess such power, in its utmost latitude ; the only limitation upon its exercise is the con- 
 sideration, what is just? what is proper? 
 
 My purpose is to put, if possible, the vessel of State at a sure anchorage ; such as 
 shall enable her to outride the political storms, which all history combines to prove, 
 will ever continue to agitate the great ocean of human affairs. My purpose is to lay 
 the foundations of the Government on a permanent basis, such as shall endure the 
 shocks of time. T wish to sanction no unjust exclusion of any portion of the commu- 
 nity. I seek to divide the State into no castes or classes. God forbid ! Such a desitrn 
 was utterly incompatible with the spirit of the Constitution: but I want to establish 
 sound and equitable criteria to determine who shall, and who shall not, enjoy the elec- 
 tive franchise, and thereby exercise a control in the Government. 
 
 Is not some landed qualification the best surety for such a permanent interest in the 
 community as justly entitles any citizen to the exercise of this right ? In answer to 
 
436 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 this inquiry, I might derive an argument from the gentleman from Frederick himself : 
 for, when he comes to provide for the exercise of the right by ahens, he himself pro- 
 poses to exact a landed qualification, as the only adequate security. He then thinks 
 the soil presents the only solid foundation : that a right in the soil presents the best 
 and surest evidence of a permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the 
 community, none will dispute. Other things may indicate an interest in the commu- 
 nity, but whether they indicate that degree of permanency in that interest which is 
 required by the Bill of Rights, may well admit of dispute. The distinction between 
 any and every other qualification, and that derived from an interest in the soil, is as 
 broad as the Ecliptic. As to all other property, it is transient and perishable in its 
 nature : it has no local habitation, and scarce a name. It is with us to-day, it is with 
 another to-morrow. It pertains not to one person, or to one State, but may be said 
 to belong to the Universe at large. Does the immense personal wealth of Stephen 
 Girard belong to the State of Pennsylvania.? No, Sir. It may be at New York to- 
 day, and at Charleston to-morrow. Permanence is an attribute which has nothing 
 to do with personal property. It belongs to landed property alone. Landed estate 
 has another advantage : it is visible, tangible, immovable ; the man who owns personal 
 property may be benefitted or injured by the operations of your Government, but the 
 man who owns the soil, must be benefitted or injured by them. If called to regulate 
 the affairs of your household (and the principles of right reason which apply to a 
 household, apply in their degree to the body politic.) would you invite those who sojourn 
 upon your estate for a week or a month, or would you ask such as were members of 
 your household, and were personally connected with the interests of your farm While 
 I am disposed, like the gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Monroe.) to adhere to the soil, 
 I am willing to go to every i-easonable length in extending the Right of Suffrage un- 
 der that sole modification. I would not confine it to freeholders alone : I would go 
 to the reversioner, and to the lessee: all I ask is for some indication from an interest 
 in the soil, that the voter has some sort of permanent interest in the well-being and 
 the fortunes of the Commonwealth. 
 
 The gentleman from Frederick objects to admit the lessee on the ground that his 
 lease is to be valued, and that that value is mutable. 
 
 [Here Mr. Cooke rose to explain. He said the gentleman from Orange had slightly 
 misapprehended his meaning. He had objected to the clause respecting the lessee, 
 because it gave the Right of Suffrage to such lessee so long as liis lease had yet a cer- 
 tain time to run, and then took it away from him, when the period for which he held 
 it approached within a certain distance of its termination. If it was just to confer the 
 Right of Suffrage on the ground of the lease, it certainly was unjufit to take it away 
 from the lessee until the lease was expired.] 
 
 Mi. Barbour replied, that he had understood that to be one ground of the gentle- 
 man's objection, and he would now proceed to answer it. Did not the gentleman 
 perceive that his argument turned in a circle .? that it immediately recoiled upon him ? 
 Did he not see that the argument in its utmost extent might be turned against himself.'* 
 Did not the gentleman himself lay down requirements which extended retrospectively 
 from the period of voting ? and according to which a man who voted last year, would 
 be deprived of the right of voting this.? and so the Right of Suffrage would be as un- 
 settled as a pendulum.? Let him look at his own resolutions; certain classes of per- 
 sons must have dwelt for two years within the county before they were admitted to 
 vote: so, that one year before the election they would lose that privilege. In other 
 parts of the resolutions, voters were required to have paid taxes for a certain time pre- 
 vious to voting : the same objection applied in that case. Take the case of the free- 
 holder : while he continued to own the land, he was permitted to vote, but the mo- 
 ment it passed out of his possession, the privilege went with it. The same objection 
 applied to the case of the minor, who could vote this year, though he could not last. 
 The gentleman must certainly abandon this argument. 
 
 But, I am told that to insist upon connecting the Right of Suffrage, with an inter- 
 est in the soil, is aristocracy ; rank aristocracy. Sir, this is a grave charge, and I shall 
 certainly be the last to advocate any measure, against which such a charge will justly 
 lie. The gentleman from Chesterfield, presented to the Convention, some happy il- 
 lustrations on this term aristocracy. According to the idea he so forcibly illustrated, 
 if you are about to make an aristocracy, you must create a certain class in the com- 
 mvmity, distinguished from the rest by privileges and immunities, which are not 
 only peculiar to them, but which continue to be theirs, under all changes of circum- 
 stances : which adhere to their persons and cannot be separated from thern. Thus, the 
 House of Lords in Great Britain, are a class of persons separate and distinct from all 
 other subjects, with privileges, which they possess by hereditary descent, except a 
 few, who", from time to time are added to the class by patent from the Crown. The 
 aristocracy of a country all belong to a distinct class, and must remain distinct and 
 separate, ad indefinitum. How can a term, which designates such a class as this, be 
 applied in this eountry to freeholders, who derive the power to vote, from owning a 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 437 
 
 portion in the soil ? Must a man who owns a freehold to-day, own it forever ? Does not 
 this interest in the soil pass from hand to hand ? is it not actually changing every day 
 and hour ? Besides all the mutations which it suffers from buying and selling, it is ex- 
 posed to another and a more serious cause of change ; that which arises from its parti- 
 tion among the descendants of those who possess it. This operation is continually 
 widening the foundation on whicli freehold Suffrage rests. Thus the dreaded aris- 
 tocracy is a matter of bargain and sale, and the moment any man purchases the land 
 of his neighbour, behold ! a new aristocrat ! What propriety can there be in apply- 
 ing the term aristocracy to a body of individuals, whose claim to power is based on a 
 foundation as fluctuating as the waves of the ocean ? a body of men, into which, a man 
 may enter to-day, and out of which he may pass again to-m.orrow To make the two 
 cases alike, it should first be shewn, that the aristocracy in England can sell at plea- 
 sure their patents of nobility, and that any conmioner may become a noble, who is 
 rich enough to pay the market price. But every body knows, that no man in Eng- 
 land can enter this privileged order, but by the sovereign pleasure of the King, and 
 that a man who has once been admitted, cannot lose his privileges, but by a process 
 of law. Has the Committee, asked Mr. B., turned its attention to our law-parcenary ? 
 Here is an individual who owns ten tiiousand acres of land; he has a family of six 
 children ; the first descent divides this tract into six parts. Suppose each of his chil- 
 dren should have as many children as his father had, then tlie second descent divides 
 the tract into thirty-six parts ; and on the same principle, a third descent vould break 
 it down into two hundred ;ind sixteen portions. Where then is the danger of a landed 
 aristocracy when but the third link in the chain of descent breaks up by a mere opera- 
 tion of law, the largest estate, into portions, too small to support a family ? Unless 
 with every new apportionment, there is bequeathed such an energy of character, aa 
 enables each descendant to add largely to his patrimony, the posteritv of the most for- 
 midable aristocrat must inevitably come to poverty. Of th^> truth of which assertion, 
 the past history and present condition of Virginia will furnish abundant pftof to every 
 man. The territory of the State contains about sixtj'-five thousand square miles, 
 each mile containing six hundred and forty acres of land. A process of arithmetic 
 will speedily show, that there is soil enough in Virginia, to give a fifty acre freehold 
 to one hundred and thirty thousand persons, after first supplying every man, woman, 
 and child in the State. Yet, gentlemen are alarmed at the prospect of a landed aris- 
 tocracy. So far is the community from such a danger, that to base the Right of Suf- 
 frage on a landed qualification, (considering the area of the State, the ease of trans- 
 mutation, and the inevitable effect of partition,) is to place that privilege on a basis 
 perpetually extending, and to make it the property of no man or set of men. Such 
 a provision does not confine the right of voting to merchants, to farmers, or to pro- 
 fessional men; it gives it to whoever may hold the land; to whoever may purchase 
 the land; and, who is disposed to gratify his ambition to be an aristocrat, at the small 
 expense required to possess himself of a freehold. It places the elective franchise 
 within the reach of every man in the community, who possesses ordinary industry 
 and economy. From sucli an arrangement, no danger can arise to the liberties of the 
 people. 
 
 This danger being removed, I ask, whether the possession of land will not be con- 
 fessed, to furnish the best evidence of a man's permanent interest in the well he'inrr 
 of the community. Every man who has remained for any length of time in the Com- 
 monwealth, without possessing himself of some interest in its soil, gives reason to 
 doubt whether he intends to stay among us, and wh-ther he is disposed to identify his 
 interest with ours. It is so very easy to acquire sufficient land to entitle a man to vote, 
 and the privilege of voting is in its nature so far bej'ond all price, that the presumption 
 is a fair one, that he, who acquires no freehold, either underrates that privileo-e, or 
 does not mean to become permanently a citizen among us. But, we are told that 
 under the present Constitution, many valuable citizens of great talents and virtue, 
 are excluded from the polls. It m.ay be so ; but what line can possibly be drawn, 
 which will not leave excluded some angles of the State ? No regulation can be adopt- 
 ed, under which some cases of hardship will not possibly occur." 3s it not a hard case, 
 that a young man, who lacks twenty-four hours of being of age, should be deprived 
 of the privilege of voting, for the want of those twenty-four hours, especially if he he 
 something of a precose and forward youtli ? Such an arofument will not do, unless 
 gentlemen can shew it to be possible for imperfect and fallible men, to make rules 
 which shall be beyond all imperfection: to shew, that the rule we propose, will be at- 
 tended with some inconvenience, is only to shew, that our rule is human, and is like 
 all other rules, that have men for their authors. As to the case of those citizens, who 
 own such vast amounts of personal property, as liave been represented by sfentlemen, 
 and whose exclusion from the polls has drawn forth so much commiseration, if, with 
 all their wealth, they are unwillino- to purchase one pnor fifty acre tract of land, their 
 case certainly receives little commiseration of mine : their exclusion is their own fault, 
 their thousands remain intangible to our taxation, and if they will not subject the 
 
438 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 price of one poor freehold, to the reach of the Government, tliey deserve to have 
 neitlier part nor lot in its control. 
 
 Mr. Leigh next addressed the Committee. According to my understanding of the 
 resolutions now moved by the gentleman from Frederick, a man who has never been 
 assessed with a tax of any sort, is to be allowed to vote ; but the man who has been 
 assessed with a tax, and has not paid it, is to be excluded from the polls ! It comes 
 then to this, that those " drunken vagabonds," against whom the gentleman mani- 
 fests so earnest a zeal, are only to be excluded, if they chance to have property 
 enough on which to be assessed ; but such vagabonds as have no property, and whom 
 no man wovild ever think of taxing, are the peculiar objects of his favour. They must 
 have a right to vote. If I had used such a phrase, it would doubtless, have been at- 
 tributed to my aristocratical prejudices ; it would immediately have been imputed to 
 my political creed. But I submit to the Committee, whether a man who has some 
 property and some means of subsistence, or a man who has none at all, is more likely 
 to be a " vagabond," and to belong to the rabble ;" yes, Sir, to " the rabble." It is a 
 proper phrase, and it is a phrase too, used by a gentleman on the other side. Mr. 
 Chairman, I do not contend that the possession of property is a security against vice. 
 I know better, and sorry I am that I do ; but this I say, if you look at the state of 
 mankind with a view to determine who is the most likely to become base and unde- 
 serving; to become drunken vagabonds, and a part of the rabble, you will be con- 
 strained to confess, that those who have some property, are at least more apt to be vir- 
 tuous, than those who have none. You will be almost sure to find, among those 
 without property, no industry and no economy ; and if you then look to those who ex- 
 hibit the greatest degree of vice, you will find them to consist of persons precisely of 
 this description. I throw out these objections to the details of the gentleman's plan, 
 that it may the better be compared with the amendment I proposed. It is hardly to 
 be imagined, that the gentleman seriously intends such consequences to result from 
 his measur*. I shall not attempt to enter on the question of a landed qualification as 
 the basis for the elective franchise. On that subject hope is winged, and ready to 
 take its departure. I feel it dying in my heart. This very morning, I heard the 
 venerable gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Monroe,) insist on connecting tliat privi- 
 lege with the soil, and I then saw him vote in favour of a proposition of the gentle- 
 man from Spottsylvania, the object of which was to dispense with all landed quahfi-' 
 cation whatever. After this I can hope for nothing more ; far less, can I expect that 
 my shoulders will be broad enough to sustain the weight of such a cause, I consider 
 that question as at an end. Whether I shall ever revive, depends upon circumstan- 
 ces; but I never shall abandon it, while one scintilla of hope is left me. 
 
 There is one consideration, which I consider of much more importance, than the 
 question of freehold qualification : whether the voter is to possess a freehold or not, is 
 comparatively of little consequence. But gentlemen insist, that every form of a 
 landed qualification, amounts to an exclusion of all who do not possess it, and they 
 argue on a similar assumption as to all other qualifications. Sir, this is no exclusion 
 whatever, of any man, who, according to the gentlemen themselves, would be enti- 
 tled to vote ; (for, they themselves advocate a permanent exclusion of all females and 
 coloured persons.) When gentlemen talk of the exclusion of any free white man, 
 from the privilege of voting, I am at a loss to understand their meaning. Is there a 
 free white man in all Virginia, who may not obtain the right to vote ? If he has his 
 health, and is industrious, he may compass enough to purchase ten or twenty, or even 
 fifty acres of land, which is the most that any one thinks of requiring as a freehold. 
 Who then is excluded ? Those only, who are too lazy to earn, or who do not think 
 proper to acquire it. There is not a man who may not acquire even the qualification 
 demanded by the existing Constitution. He may possess it at pleasure, if he is an in- 
 dustrious man. Far less is he prevented from acquiring the reduced qualification, 
 which is proposed to be acquired by the new Constitution, 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — I do not agree in the position, that no man who is not qualified to 
 vote for members of the General Assembly, is not a member of the body politic. I 
 insist, that the wife and the daughters of such voter, are members of the body politic. 
 They are not the slaves of their husbands or their fathers ; they are free-born citi- 
 zens of this Commonwealth. God forbid they should be otherwise ! It is not a ne- 
 cessary qualification of a citizen that he should be entitled to vote ; it would be most 
 absurd to exclude from the privilege of citizenship, every female, and every minor in 
 the community. 
 
 .We hear gentlemen on the other side constantly speaking of the Right of Suffrage, 
 as being of inestimable value; the dearest right of freemen; dear as life itself, &c. 
 1 have heard this language all my life, and I once thought, (it was when I was fresh 
 from school,) that 1 understood it; but latterly I have ceased to understand it, and I 
 cannot recall the ideas I once had on this subject. It is certainly a most invaluable privi- 
 lege to live under a Government freely elected by the most virtuous portion of the 
 community; to live under rulers, who can pass no act injurious to me, that will not 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ' be equally injurious to themselves, and more so. But, is the privilege that I mdivi- 
 dually should vote for them an invaluable privilege, when I can purchase it for fifty 
 dollars ? 1 ask gentlemen to reflect upon this view of the subject. _ ^Vhen a young 
 man is twenty years old and six months, is this privilege a whit less inestimable, than 
 after he is of age But I go farther, and I ask, is the blessing of Republican Govern- 
 ment confinedlo the men who live under it.= does it not belong to the women also? 
 do they not enjoy the free benefit of it The enjoyment of the inestimable blessmg 
 does not then depend on our exercising the Right of SulTrage, but it consists in this, 
 that those govern, who themselves hold property, and that they cannot injure others, 
 without in the same degree injuring themselves; that those govern the community 
 who feed, clothe, and educate the wliole community, and pay all its burdens. This 
 is the privilege, and it is a privilege indeed. Does any man believe, 1 consider it an 
 invaluable privilege to vote for a member of the General Assembly Witliout the 
 least disrespect fo°r that body, I may say, that I consider this, as a matter of no mo- 
 ment. I do not regard him alone as my Representative. I put my confidence in the 
 great body of the Legislature as a whole ; as the body which in its collective capacity 
 protects mv rights and gives me my share of the general liberty and safety. The 
 only benefit they are to me, consists'in this ; that they protect all the happiness which 
 I succeed in carving out for myself. But according to the doctrine of the invaluable 
 privilege, unless I vote, I enjoy no share in the political sovereignty of the community. 
 Now, if I vote against a candidate who succeeds in his election, I am worse oft than it I 
 had not voted, because I see others share in the Government, in direct contradiction 
 to my wishes and elforts. I wish in conclusion, distinctly to say, that the advantage 
 I derive from a free Government consists in this, that the Government is adrninis- 
 tered by those who have a common interest with me, and that I cannot be injured 
 unless others are, and among those, the rulers themselves. If I am protected, that is 
 all I desire. Mr. L. concluded by expressing his conviction, that to insist upon a 
 landed qualification for the Right of Suffrage, involved no exclusion of any man; 
 established no order of nobility, but was simply a provision, that those who were in 
 general the most fit to rule should exercise the powers of Government. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said that he should reply to Mr Cooke's criticism on his amendment, 
 if this was the proper time to do it: but the amendment having been rejected, could 
 not now be discussed. 
 
 Mr. Monroe now explained, — I fe,el it incumbent on me to give an explanation of 
 the ground on which I gave the vote that has been remarked upon by my very v\-orthy 
 friend irom Chesterfield, for whom I feel great respect and regaid. I am for adhering 
 to an interest in the territory. I am for providing some tie which shall connect the 
 voter with the soil. Perhaps I did not distinctly understand the !>" --position of my 
 friend from Spottsylvania, but I viewed it in this light: that the person .\h.o had been 
 assessed to a certain amount which was left blank, and who had paid his assessment, 
 should be admitted to vote. My idea was, that if he was taxed, he must of course be 
 a resident : and if taxed to the extent which I expected, (and it was my view that the 
 tax should be made to exceed the value of a freehold cr a lease.) it would enjoin upon 
 him an obligation to purchase or lease real property. I had no idea of abandoning a 
 hold upon the land, not in the least. The proposition ii5 still before the House, <uid 
 after all the amendments should have been proposed and passed upon, the result of 
 the whole proposition Avould still be in our power. It was my purpose to take a de- 
 liberate view of the proposition as it should appear in its last stage, and then to vote 
 for or against it as my best judgment should dictate. 1 never meant to abandon some 
 hold upon the land, but to give security by it to our system of Government. I am 
 for giving permanence, if jjossible, to a system of self-government. But you go 
 afloat, the moment j^ou put the Right of Suffrage in the hands of a transient popula- 
 tion. You can have no security. Go to Great Britain, I name that countr}- because 
 its history and condition are most acceptable and best knov/n by us. Put tlie Go- 
 vernment there in the hands of the people ; and they Avould immediately beliead the 
 King and cut oft' the heads of the Nol)ility, and throw every thinof into confusion : the 
 reason is, they are incompetent to self-government. Bat we are competent. We 
 are altogether in a different situation. The general diffusion of knowledge amontf our 
 people inspires me with the strongest confidence in the success of our system. "Still, 
 let us be on our guard as to the exercise of the Right of Suffrage, on which the sove- 
 reignty rests, which is in the people. 
 
 All the officers of the Government, though many of them are not elected immedi- 
 ately by the people, are their Representatives, since they derive their appointments 
 from the people, by the agency of those whom the people do elect. My object is to 
 connect the Right of Suffrage with the territory. 
 
 The Chair now said that the remarks of Mr. Cooke on the amendment of Mr. 
 Stanard had been permitted, not as a discussion of that amendment after it had been, 
 rejected, but as a part of his argument intended to bear on his own amendment. 
 
440 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 Mr. Leigh gave an assurance of his personal regard and respect for Mr, Monroe, 
 and expressed his satisfaction at learning that he still adhered to a landed qualification 
 for voters. 
 
 He then urged this farther objection to Mr. Cooke's amendment ; that its effect 
 would be to give the elective franchise to persons like some in Richmond and Peters- 
 burg, wlio were the mere factors for the manufacturing houses of the North, and who 
 had not only no common interest with the people of Virginia, but an interest directly- 
 hostile to theirs. It would admit every man who owns a horse : and there were nvim- 
 bers in his own county who owned nothing else, living by charity on the lands of 
 others and wholly devoted to their will in every thing that was not directly dishonest. 
 All these would give the votes not of themselves, but of their benefactors, 
 
 Mr. Campbell in reply to Mr. Monroe, referred to the fact that in twelve States of 
 the Union, notliing more is required of a voter than residence and the payment of 
 taxes. No condition of the ancient Governments had been analogous to this, and 
 therefore their downflill was no warning against it. As to the case of procuring a 
 freehold, no man with due respect to himself and his rights, would stoop to purchase 
 what he had a right to demand. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied to Mr. Leigh, whose criticism he thought more witty than can- 
 did. He wished to sweep off all, who from moral degradation, were incapable of an 
 upright and proper exercise of the elective franchise. His amendment would not 
 admit vagabonds without any property, while it admitted vagabonds who nominally 
 had some; because it excluded all who did not comply with county levies; now the 
 rabble of whom Mr. Leigh had spoken, were all included in the poll-tax ; and if re- 
 turned delinquent, all these would be excluded. 
 
 In reply to Mr. Barbour, he thought there was a distinction between the word 
 " rights" and the terms "privileges and immunities." The elective franchise was in- 
 cluded in the former term, but not in the latter ; and, therefore, the amendment would 
 not contradict the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Leigh observed that Mr. Cooke had said, and repeated three times that which 
 he had said was more witty than candid. He desired that Mr. Cooke would have the 
 goodness to recall that word uncandid. 
 
 Mr. Cooke was about to reply, when the Chairman interposed, and remarked that 
 he had not understood Mr. Cooke as imputing any intentional misrepresentation to 
 Mr. Leigh, otherwise he should have stopped him. 
 
 Mr. Leigh repeated his call on Mr. Cooke, to recall the word. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that he had not the slightest objection to saying, with the utmost 
 frankness, what was precisely the fact, that he had not imputed, or intended to impute, 
 to Mr. Leigh, any intentional misrepresentation. He added, that he wondered greatly 
 at the excitability manifested by Mr. Leigh, since nothing that he had said could b& 
 fairly construed into an intention on his part, to wound Mr. Leigh's feelings; which^ 
 in fact, he had not the remotest idea of doing That he meant nothing more than 
 that Mr. Leigh's remarks, made in the ardour of debate, had, in their eft'ect, presented 
 an unfair view of his (Mr. Cooke's) proposition. Deliberate or intentional unfairness, 
 he had not imputed to him. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that, personally, he was satisfied. But he had appealed to Mr, 
 Cooke in the course of his remarks to say, whether the interpretation put by him (Mr. 
 Leigh) on his (Mr. Cooke's) proposition was not correct; to which Mr. Cooke had 
 nodded assent. After that he thought it was rather singular, that Mr. Cooke should 
 impute to his argument any v/ant of candour. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied, that the proposition which his assent to, or dissent from, wa» 
 asked by Mr. Leigh, was simply this — that Mr. Cooke's scheme of quahfication, ad- 
 mitted persons to vote who had no taxable property, and excluded from Suffrage 
 those who had taxable property, and failed to pay the taxes assessed on it. To th& 
 correctness of that construction of his proposition, Mr. C. had nodded assent. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now objected to that part of Mr. Cooke's amendment, which had re- 
 lation to aliens; he moved to strike out that clause. He briefly explained his objec- 
 tions to it, as going farther than the laws relating to aliens go, respecting- real estate. 
 
 Mr. Cooke modified his amendment, by inserting the words, " if acquired by pur- 
 chase" — (requiring the deed to be recorded, when the freehold was acquired by pur- 
 chase.) 
 
 Mr. Joynes expressed an objection to Mr. Cooke's amendment, as going to admit 
 the poorest man in the county, while the richest might be excluded, if the poll-tax 
 should ever be repeated. 
 
 The question being put on striking out, it passed in the negative, without a count. 
 
 Mr. Coalter, after an apology, referring to his recent occupation of a seat, ex- 
 pressed his opposition to cutting down the venerable tree planted by our forefathers 
 and planting another in its stead ; he would endeavour to strike one blow for Vir- 
 ginia, and bear down on the enemy ; by whom he meant the passions and prejudices 
 of members, his own included. "To pluck up the tree, would be the sin of man 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 441 
 
 only; for Eve, looked on with deep anxiety clutching her child to her bosom. 
 He expressed his decided approbation of the present form of Government, as the best 
 in the world, under which the people had lived contented and happy. He reflected 
 on the injustice of tlie friends of Internal Improvement laying the burden on those 
 who had no personal interest in the object, and imposing a lasting mortgage on the 
 lands of the State, 
 
 Mr . Campbell thought the gentleman's alarm about the axe imaginary ; it was only 
 a pruning knife to lop oft a few aristocratical branches. 
 
 Mr. Cooke farther modified his amendment at the suggestion of Mr. Joynes, so as 
 to include any State, county, or corporation tax. 
 
 In this form the question was taken upon its adoption and negatived. — Ayes 43, 
 Noes 49. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved the amendment he had referred to on Saturday, and 
 which is in th-ese words : 
 
 And shall be extended to every free white male citizen, aged twenty-one years or 
 upwards ; who shall have resided at least two years in the county, city, borough, or 
 district, in which he shall offer to vote, immediately preceding the time of voting, and 
 who, during that period, shall have actually paid a revenue tax legally assessed; 
 and to ever}^ free white male citizen, aged tv/enty-one years or upwards, who shall 
 have actually resided, at least two years in the county, city, borough or district, where 
 he offers to vote, and who, for the period of six months at least, shall have been an 
 liouse-keeper therein, and shall actually have paid a State, county, or corporation tax." 
 
 Mr. Mercer wished to know why Mr. D. desired to strike out the first and second 
 cla^s of persons included in the resolution of the Legislative Committee ? 
 
 Mr. Doddridge replied, because the generality of his proposition covered them all, 
 provided they paid taxes. 
 
 Mr. Mercer stated that he could not vote for the proposition. The gentleman from 
 Brooke hhnself had agreed that all who now have the Right of Suffrage should retain 
 it. Was it liis object to make the right to vote to depend on the pa3anent of a tax ? 
 In eight States of the Union there is no tax whatever imposed. Even within sight 
 of this Capitol, there is a gentleman v/ho has an estate worth twenty -five thousand 
 dollars, but who has no right to vote because there is no tax imposed on his property. 
 Why were such persons to be excluded ? He was in favor of comprehending all 
 those whom that gentleman intended to include ; but he would not vote to exclude 
 those who held by exactly the same tenure, but who were denied the right to vote be- 
 cause they were not taxed. The gentleman from Brooke himself, insisted that there 
 should be a sufficient evidence of permanent common interest. He moved to amend 
 the proposition to am.end, by inserting the amendment in the fourteenth line, after 
 the word " dollars" — the effect would be to leave the first and second classes un- 
 touched. 
 
 The Chair decided that the amendment was not in order ; but 
 
 Mr. Doddridge having accepted the proposition, modified his amendment accord- 
 ingly; 
 
 Mr. Joynes moved to amend the amendment by adding the words and who shall 
 have actually paid a State, corporation, or county tax." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge accepted the amendment as a inodification of his amendment. 
 Mr. Mason asked for a division of the question ; and. 
 
 The question was then taken on striking out, v/hich, after an unsuccessful motion 
 by Mr. Henderson, that for the sake of accuracy the names of members should be 
 called over, was decided in the affirmative. 
 
 The question was then taken on inserting the words moved by Mr. Doddridge, and 
 decided in the negative. — Ayes 44, Noes 48. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then moved to fill the blank occasioned by striking out, with the fourth 
 class of persons included in the report of the Legislative Committee, in the following 
 words : 
 
 Or who for twelve months next preceding has been a house-keeper, and head of 
 a family within the county, borough, or election district, where he may ofier to vote, 
 and who shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the Commomvealth 
 within the preceding year, and actually paid the same." 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he would not presume to violate the rule which had been laid 
 down by others, of abstaining from going into the merits of the general question. 
 There was one view which he wished to take : while gentlemen on one side represent 
 the acquisition of the Right of Suffrage as to be gained with the greatest facility, they 
 seemed to attach the greatest importance to the exclusion of others fi-om its exercise. 
 If it were so easy to acquire a qualification, and it was of such importance, why could 
 not faction purchase the freehold ? According to the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. 
 P. P. Barbour.) the multiplication of the square miles in the State by the acres, gave suf- 
 ficient quantity of land to every individual in the State, and left a considerable surplus. 
 He computed that putting the value of the freehold, as estimated by gentlemen, it 
 
 56 
 
442 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 would take a capital of three millions of dollars to supply the sixty thousand now ex- 
 cluded with the qualification. He tlaen reviewed the proposition by gentlemen on the 
 other side, denying that the land qualification was necessary. The people who lived 
 in a shepherd state, had other property besides land, and that was considered quite as 
 permanent and essential as land. Was it necessary for him to direct the attention of 
 gentlemen to England ? Is not the fixed capital in that country as important as land? 
 Is it not here in the low-land country, where labor is capital and is an essential ingre- 
 dient in the wealth of the country Implements of trade are essential, and every one 
 will thus perceive, that other property is as essential as land. If this principle be 
 true, what becomes of the foundation of the argument, which rests on the durability 
 of land.? The right is not founded on the land, but the relation in which the pro- 
 prietor stands to it. And so it is with other capital. It is the relation of the proprietor 
 to it; as it is between the freeholder and the soil. Personal property is an essential 
 ingredient in the wealth of the country, and the title to it is as good, as that of the 
 land-owner to the land. By shutting out the sixty thousand free whites who lack the 
 qualification of land, we shut out not only the majority now, but the increase of that 
 majority. He referred to the time, when tenants for life were every where to be 
 found ; when all that part which was now called the back-woods and the part where 
 he lived, were cultivated by tenants for life. The practice had been discontinued, be- 
 cause of its eflfect on the independence of the tenants, and so completely had this 
 class disappeared, that in twenty years, he had known but two instances of tenants 
 for life. Suppose, men of fortune found it to their interest to divert part of their capi- 
 tal from manufactures to land, would it not be better to introduce the tenantry- system 
 again, and to supercede slave-labor.'' In his part of the country, tenantry for years 
 had superceded slavery. Gentlemen imagined that sixty thousand non-freeholders, 
 might be easily converted into freeholders. He requested them to look at the conse- 
 quences of this. Suppose sixty thousand persons purchased freeholds of fifty dollars 
 each ; three millions would thus be expended merely for the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 He took a view of the different value of land in different sections of the country, 
 and resisted the idea, that a qualification could at any time be purchased at a mode- 
 rate price. In the district he represented, the non-freeholders greatly outnumber the 
 freeholders, and he supposed, that all the non-freeholders there, desired to purchase 
 a freehold each, and taking this for his basis, he asserted, that it would take ten millions 
 to purchase freeholds for the non-freeholders, in order to give them the qualification 
 to vote. You would make all these men farmers. He repeated, that the basis of the 
 qualification, was not the land, but the relation in which the owner stood to his land. 
 
 He adverted to the assertion of gentlemen, that this question which we are now 
 Bettling, was of limited importance, only embracing the Commonwealth. It was for- 
 gotten that the United States had a representation from this State, which would be af- 
 fected by our measures, and which taxes our productions, to the amount of six times 
 our whole State revenue. He did not believe, that his venerable friend and colleague, 
 (Mr. Monroe,) intended to exclude house-keepers, who have an interest in the soil. 
 
 Mr. Johnson moved to amend the amendment, by inserting after the words " and 
 who shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth, 
 within the preceding year," the words " not less than cents." 
 
 But his motion was negatived. — Ayes 42, Noes 51. 
 
 Mr. Leigh again pointed out the inconsistency of letting a tenant vote who. paid a 
 ten cent tax, and excluding his landlord, because his freehold did not come up to the 
 value fixed by the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Mercer acknowledged this, but reserved that for another time, when the whole 
 should be referred to a Select Committee to revise. He pressed the question; and it 
 was then taken and decided in the affir77iative.—Ayes 53, Noes not counted. 
 
 That whole resolution, as amended, will now read : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who 
 now enjoy it under tiie existing Constitution: and shall be extended, 1st, to every 
 free white male citizen of tlie Common v/ealth resident therein, above the age of 
 twenty-one years, v/ho owns-, and has possessed for six months, or who has acquired 
 by marriage, descent, or devise, a freehold estate, assessed to the value of not less 
 than dollars for the payment of taxes, if such assessment shall be required by 
 
 law: 2d, or who shall own a vested estate in fee, in remainder, or reversion, in land, 
 the assessed value of which shall be dollars : 3d, or who for twelve months 
 
 next preceding, has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, 
 borough, or election district, where he may offer to vote, and who shall have been as- 
 sessed with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, 
 and actually paid the same : Provided, nevertheless, That the Right of Suffrage shall 
 not be exercised by any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non- 
 commissioned officer, soldier, sailor, or marine, in the service of the United States, 
 nor by any person convicted of any infamous offence ; nor by citizens born without 
 the Commonwealth, unless they shall have resided therein for five years immediately 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 443 
 
 preceding the election at which they shall offer to vote, and two years preceding the 
 said election, in the county, city, borough, or election district, where they shall olfer 
 to vote, (the mode of proving such previous residence, when disputed, to be pre- 
 scribed by law,) and shall possess, mereover, some one or more of the qualifications 
 above enumerated." 
 
 The Committee then rose and the House adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, November 24, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Douglass, of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the 
 Chair, and the question being on the third resolution reported to the Convention by 
 the Legislative Committee, viz: 
 
 " Resolved, That the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who now^ 
 enjoy it under the existing Constitution: and shall be extended, 1st, to every free 
 white male citizen of the Commonwealth resident therein, above the age of twenty- 
 one years, who owns, and has possessed for six months, or who has acquired by mar- 
 riage, descent, or devise, a freehold estate, assessed to the value of not less than 
 dollars for the payment of taxes, if such assessment shall be required by law: 2d, or 
 who shall own a vested estate in fee, in remainder, or reversion, in land, the assessed 
 value of which shall be dollars : 3d, or who for twelve months next preceding, 
 
 has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, borough or elec- 
 tion district, where he may offer to vote, and who shall have been assessed with a part 
 of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, and actually paid 
 the same : Provided, nevertheless, That the Right of Suffrage shall not be exercised by 
 any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, 
 soldier, sailor or marine, in the service of the United States, nor by any person con- 
 victed of any infamous offence; nor by citizens born without the Commonwealth, un- 
 less they shall have resided therein for five years immediately preceding the election 
 at which they shall offer to vote, and two years precedmg the said election, in the 
 county, city, borough or election district, where they shall offer to vote, (the mode of 
 proving such previous residence, when disputed, to be prescribed by law.) and shall 
 possess, moreover, some one or more of the qualifications above enumerated." 
 
 Mr. Summers of Kanavdia, offered the following amendment, (applying to the third 
 class of voters added) being the same he had oftered in the Legislative Committee, 
 with a slight modification, substituting occupancy for possession : 
 
 " Or who shall own and be himself in actual occupation of a lease-hold estate, with 
 the evidence of title recorded, of a term originally not less than five years, and one of 
 which shall he unexpired, of the annual value or rent of dollars." 
 
 The amendment was very briefly explained by the mover, and supported by Mr. 
 Claytor. 
 
 At the suggestion of Mr. Leigh, 
 
 Mr. Summers farther modified his amendment, so as to confine the occupancy to 
 the termor himself, and not extend it to his tenant. 
 
 Mr. Henderson of Loudoun, moved to amend the amendment, by striking out after 
 the words of a term originally not less than five years," the words which immedi- 
 ately follow, viz : " and one of tchich shall be unexpired.'' 
 
 The motion prevailed, Ayes 48 — (Mr. Marshall was observed to vote for it, Mr. 
 Madison and Mr. Monroe against it.) So the words requiring one year of the lease 
 to remain unexpired, were stricken out. 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved to strike out the word five" (in the original length of the lease) 
 with a view to insert a longer period. 
 
 This motion was supported by Mr. Doddridge, as tending to benefit the tenure of 
 lease-hold property, by encouraging long leases. 
 
 Mr. Johnson wished first to know how the blank was to be filled. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he meant to insert ten, instead of five years. 
 
 Mr. Claytor said, he should then move to fill the blank with three instead of five. 
 
 Mr. Lei^h then varied his motion, so as to strike out, and insert ten. The motion 
 was negatived. 
 
 Mr. Claytor moved to strike out five and insert three. 
 
 Mr. Scott called for a division of the question ; and then the question being put on 
 striking out five, it was negatived. 
 
 So the term of five years as the original length of the lease, was left unaltered. 
 
 Mr. Tyler asked, and obtained a re-consideration of the motion to strike out the un- 
 expired term of one year ; but the vote being again taken, the striking out was again 
 carried — Ayes 45, Noes 44. 
 
444 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIONo 
 
 Mr. Wilson moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Summers, by striking out the 
 words (in respect to the lease) " of the annual value or rent of dollars." 
 But the motion was negatived. 
 
 The question was then put on Mr. Summers's amendment as amended, and carried 
 by a large majority. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now moved to amend, by inserting after the word " year," (in reference 
 to the payment of a part of the revenue within the preceding year) the words " to the 
 amount of ." But the motion was negatived — Ayes 43, Noes 44. 
 
 Mr. Stanard then m.oved to insert, (in the same place, and in reference to the same 
 subject, namely, the tax paid,) the words "by a tax on property oioned by him.'" 
 
 Mr. Mercer explained the effect of this amendment to be, to exclude the tenant who 
 pays a tax on his house, the merchant who pays a tax on his licence, or a slave-em- 
 ployer on the slaves he hires. 
 
 Mr. Stanard thought differently : when the tenant paid the tax, it formed a part of 
 the rent. The amendment would exclude mountebanks, pedlars, &c. Those who 
 had not some little modicum of property hung loosely on society. 
 
 Mr. Moore opposed the amendment, as leading to disputes at elections, and after- 
 ward as to the votes to be admitted. 
 
 Mr. Green said, the resolution as it stood, would give the K-ight of Suffrage to every 
 man who sues out a writ, with or without cause of action, for there is a tax on ail 
 writs. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. Stanard was negatived — Ayes 41, Noes 48. 
 (Messrs. Madison, Monroe and Marshall, against it.) 
 
 Mr. Stanard, (to avoid disputes about votes,) varied his amendment, so as to read, 
 " by a tax on property charged to him on the Commissioners' books." 
 
 Mr. S. explained his object to be, to exclude all who paid tax on their profession or 
 trade merely. It was unfair that the mechanic, who sells the work of his own hands, 
 should be excluded, and the merchant, who sells foreign goods, admitted to vote. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, of all books, printed or in MS., the Commissioners' books were 
 the most inaccurate. Besides, this would be fixing the Right of Suffrage on a varia- 
 ble mode of taxation, liable to continual change. 
 
 Mr. Leigh had never heard the Commissioners' books charged with inaccuracy be- 
 fore. As to the tax on merchants' licenses, it was not the merchant who paid them, 
 but the consumers. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied, tliat he had known the same tract of land to be charged three 
 times over, on the Commissioner's book, and never to its right owner in either case. 
 Many merchants would be glad if the fact was as stated by Mr. S., and lawyers too. 
 
 The question was taken on Mr. Stanard's amendment, and the votes stood — Ayes 
 47, Noes 46. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison and Marshall for it, Mr. Monroe against it.) 
 
 The Chair voting in the negative, produced a tie ; and of course the motion was lost. 
 
 Mr. Summers, after expressing his satisfaction that there was now, as he hoped, a 
 final end to the freehold Right of Suffrage in Virginia^ moved the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 " Or who having resided two years in the county, city, town or election district, 
 should have been assessed with, and paid to the Commonwealth any part of the reve- 
 nue of the preceding year." 
 
 The amendment was to be inserted immediately before the proviso. 
 
 Mr. Stanard enquired whether this was not, in substance, the same provision, which 
 had been three times rejected already.'' 
 
 The Chair thereupon compared the present amendment with all those which had 
 been rejected; and then announced, that though this proposition had been rejected, it 
 had always, heretofore, been in connexion with some other proposition, and had never, 
 until now, been presented specifically, and alone; it was therefore in order. 
 
 Mr. Johnson strongly objected to this amendment, as going in effect to put the ex-. 
 tent of the Right of Suffrage, v/ithin the control, and at the discretion of the Legisla- 
 ture : who, by increasing or diminishing the taxes, could enlarge or lessen the number 
 of voters at pleasure. A tax of one cent a head would at any time introduce Universal 
 Suffrage. 
 
 Mr, Randolph then rose and addressed the Committee, nearly as follows: 
 As one of not the least zealous of those who wish (in company with the gentleman 
 who stands at the head of the delegation from Loudoun, and presides over this Con- 
 vention, the benefit of whose vote I trust we shall have when we come into the House,) 
 to restrain the Right of Suffrage to the possession of land, I feel almost indifferent 
 whether this amendment shall prevail or not. I will go farther, and say, that if the 
 proposition, written in sport, by my old friend and fellow-labourer, who sits behind 
 me (Mr. Garnett,) and which gives the Right of Suffrage to every free white man 
 who has been twenty-four hours within the bounds of an election district, should be 
 offered by him, I do not know, if I should have any great objection to that proposition. 
 
DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 445 
 
 But I will say, with the most perfect sincerity, that I had rather this Committee should 
 rise, after having adopted a resolution committing the whole powers of the State, Le- 
 gislative, Executive, and Judicial, to the Legislature of Virginia, than that any of the 
 propositions inserted in the third resolution of the Legislative Committee, should be- 
 come a part of the Constitution. I believe it would be safer to trust solely to the dis- 
 cretion of the Legislature, than to adopt these propositions; for, we should then at 
 least rest upon the good sense of the people. Sir, I put it to every gentleman who 
 hears me, whether it would not be safer to give the Legislature a carte blanche, and 
 make them as omnipotent as the Parliament ot" Great Britain, rather than to give them 
 these propositions as the fundamental IvlW by which they are to be bound. 1 have 
 said, and I will now repeat it, that if the first resolution in the report of the Legisla- 
 tive Committee shall be adopted, in the naked form in which it now stands, it will be 
 a matter of indifference to me, personally, what shall be done by tliis body hereafter, on 
 any subject. And it is only because this first resolution lies as yet, in abeyance on 
 your table, that I am disposed to struggle in relation to what I consider next in im- 
 portance. Sir, if the freeholders of this Commonwealth, in whom is the power, shall 
 be weak and mad enough to surrender tliis question, they will have eftaced, (were it 
 not in Holy Writ,) all record of the stupidity of Esau. If we, the proprietors of the 
 soil, the land-owners, who can give notice to quit, aye, and compel to quit too, all 
 those persons who insist on taxing our land, submit to this, our ineffable stupidity" 
 (' I thank thee, Jew, for teachinglne that word,") I say om- ineffable stupidity'' will 
 have effaced, (were it not inscribed by the pen of inspiration on the pages of Holy 
 Writ,) all record of the stupidity of Esau. I do not know whether I shall take the 
 trouble to rise, or keep my seat, when the question shall be called on the amendment 
 of the gentleman from Kanawha. 
 
 I had no expectation of entering into this debate, but the appearance of apathy, 
 which i witness (with a solitary exception,) is to me most afflicting and painful. There 
 is one class of non-freeholders toward whom my heart yearns, if it were not restrained 
 by my judgment : I mean the sons of freeholders ;. whose fathers cannot yet afford to lay 
 them otf their little modicum of land, and who, therefore, have to wait. To that class, 
 I would now address myself, and I would say to them, cannot you trust your fathers ? 
 cannot you have a little patience ? must you not, necessarily, succeed to this power 
 if not by inheritance, or bequest, at least by a fevv years industry ? Will you go into 
 joint stock with those " vagabonds" and that rahble,''' so well designated by the gen- 
 tleman from Frederick, who never mean to have a freehold.' the profligate, the home- 
 less; who, as was well said by the gentleman from Spottsylvania, hang very loosely on 
 society," but stick very closely to her skirts, and who are determined to pick up their 
 vile and infamous bread, by every despicable means I call on the young non-free- 
 holders, the sons of freeholders, (and if I had a son, he should be my men son) I call on 
 them to wait, and not to unite themselves with those who, in the nature of things, can 
 have no permanent interest in the Commonwealth. I am very sure, that when they 
 shall have understood this question, they will rally round tlieir fathers and their bro- 
 thers. 1 have no belief, that a Constitution with such principles in it, will ever be re- 
 ceived by the sober sense of this good old Commonwealth. I would rather wish that 
 all powers, Executive, Legislative and Judicial, should be at once entrusted to the Ge- 
 neral Assembly, and then trust the good sense of ihe people of Virginia, tlian inflict 
 on them the curse of sucli provisions as those v\diich the Committee have adopted. 
 
 Mr. Summers, in reply to Mr. Johnson, expressed regret at not being able to attach 
 as much weight to his opinion in this case, as he was accustomed to do. He thought 
 the expansive power attending this amendment, was its most valuable feature. He 
 was willing to commit it to the wisdom of the Legislature, believing it to be a just 
 principle, fhat all who contribute to the burdens of society, should have some voice in 
 its affairs. 
 
 Mr. Stanard thought the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha, went, at 
 least, a bow-shot furlher, toward Universal Suffrage, than any proposition yet sub- 
 mitted to the Committee. He did not know how the gentleman woidd manage the 
 matter with his friend from Loudoun, who, in his speech on a former occasion, had 
 insisted that all taxes on consumption were paid by the consumer. If this were true, 
 and an excise should be laid on spirits, every man who bought a gill of rum, would 
 thereby pay a tax and get tJie Right of Suffrage : and thus the vagabonds" and 
 "rabble" of the gentleman from Frederick, (very properly so called,) would be enti- 
 tled jjar excellence to that privilege. He insisted on the objection urged by Mr. John- 
 son, and then shevv'ed that the hghtest cattle-tax, would give a vote to every man 
 west of the mountains ; inferred the ease of introducing Universal Suffrage, and con- 
 cluded with a strong appeal to the Committee, against so sweeping an amendment. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was rejected without a count. 
 
 Mr. Henderson now moved to amend that clause of the resolution which requires a 
 residence of five years, of citizens of other States moving into Virginia, before they 
 can be permitted to vote. He thought two years residence in the State, and one in 
 the county, a sufficient test of permanent interest in the Common wealth. 
 
446 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said he should vote for the amendment. He was willing to give these 
 citizens the right of voting after a residence of two years, but he would superadd to 
 the qualification of persons of this class, the attainment of a freehold. He did not 
 think that his part of the country would be injured by this proposition; and he thought 
 it impolitic to throw impediments in the way of emigration to the State. He did not 
 go with the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. P. P. Barbour,) in his doubts, that by 
 prescribing one Right of Suffrage, we should interfere with the Constitution of 
 the United States. He thought that this construction of the Constitution, went to 
 impair the sovereignty of the States. He thought that we ought to extend courtesy 
 towards the sister States, and endeavour to promote harmony with the States, by 
 adopting a system of indulgent courtesy, and not restrict the rights of citizens of 
 other States to such as have resided five years. He would, however, require a free- 
 hold, as the citizens of the other States cannot claim to be put on a footing with the 
 citizens of Virginia. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy concurred in the sentiment, that the period of probation was too long, 
 and that citizens of other States ought to be put on the same footing with our own : 
 but he conceived this case provided for by that clause in the first part of the resolu- 
 tion, which declares that " the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all 
 who now enjoy it under the existing Constitution :" a residence of six months only 
 is now required. 
 
 Mr. Leigh thought this clause superceded by the effect of the subsequent proviso. 
 He, however, disapproved of the whole of that part of the resolution relating to citi- 
 zens of other States, as unjust, and hard in its bearing. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Henderson, the whole of that clause was stricken out, from the 
 word " nor," to the end of the proviso. [See above.] 
 
 The Committee now proceeded to the fourth resolution of the Legislative Com- 
 mittee ; which is in the following words : 
 
 Resolved, That the number of members in the Senate of this State ought to be 
 neither increased nor diminished, nor the classification of its members changed." 
 
 Mr. Pleasants moved to amend the resolution by striking out all after the words 
 " Resolved that" and substituting the following: 
 
 " Representation in the Senate shall be ba.sed on the whole number of free persons, 
 including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, 
 and adding to the aforesaid number of free persons, three-fifths of all other persons, 
 and the Senate shall consist of a number not exceeding , and its term of service 
 
 and classification remain as at present." 
 
 Mr. Pleasairts said, that he was not very sanguine in the hope that the resolution 
 which he had the honour to submit, would be carried by a large majority, but he hoped 
 that something would be done ; that a meeting of the two parties into which the ques- 
 tion had divided the Committee, would take place. It was a subject of serious con- 
 sideration what must be done. He observed at the time, that this mode of basing re- 
 presentation in the Senate was not acceded to by some of his friends. Provided that 
 any gentleman thought the compound basis preferable, he was at liberty to modify his 
 proposition. Such mode was suggested by the gentleman from Fauquier, but it did 
 not meet his approbation. 
 
 He would take the liberty of making a few remarks in support of his proposition. 
 The first idea which suggested itself to him was, to base the Senate on Federal num- 
 bers, or three-fifths of the slaves. His proposition, he thought, was more simple, less 
 complex, and less fluctuating than the other mode. Besides, it produced nearly the 
 same results as taxation and numbers combined. Under these circumstances, it was 
 preferable to the mixed basis. He would add another reason which was mentioned 
 out of doors, and which suggested itself to him. There was a strong objection to re- 
 ject the Federal numbers, as it would give a plausible pretext to the other States to 
 disturb the Federal basis in the United States, and to take away the influence of the 
 Southern States. This idea would reconcile even those who were fanatical (if he 
 might be permitted to use that term,) in their attachment to the other basis. In any 
 amendment hereafter proposed by the States to the Constitution, such a pretext could 
 not be assumed. These were the reasons why he gave the basis of Federal numbers 
 a preference. 
 
 He was sanguine in the hope that this proposition would be adopted, as it would 
 afford every security against the unequal taxation which was apprehended from basing 
 the House of Delegates on numbers alone. A Senate so constituted, particularly 
 when its numbers are extended, (as he hoped it would be extended to thirty-six, and he 
 intended to fill the blank with that number,) it would give every degree of security 
 which could be wished for. He was satisfied in the behef, that security would be ob- 
 tained — he used the word security, as gentlemen objected to a guarantee — if the Senate 
 was so constituted. He may be mistaken, though he had not much confidence in his 
 opinion, but it would have the effect he mentioned, if the basis were so modified. 
 He adverted to the resolution offered by the gentleman from Fauquier, which was in 
 the following words : 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 447 
 
 " Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the Senate, regard shall 
 be had to taxation exclusively ; that the Senate shall consist of tliirty-six members, 
 and siiall have the same legislative powers, in all respects, as the House of Delegates, 
 and all appointments referred by the Constitution to both branches of the Legislature, 
 shall be made by a concurrent vote of both Houses." 
 
 This appeared to him to give to the Senate a power of originating tax bills — to give 
 them a concurrent power. Even the L nited States' Senate has not this power — it 
 was prohibited by the Constitution. But if this proposition of the gentleman from 
 Fauquier prevail, it will crive to the Senate a power of originating money bills which 
 is not enjoyed by any other Senate. He had a strong predilection for his proposition. 
 He had no' hesitation to allow the Senate to exercise the power of a veto on the mea- 
 sures of the House of Delegates. He had experience in this matter, and he preferred 
 the practice of the Virginia Senate to that of the United States. The last year he 
 had the honour to serve in the Senate of the United States, it reported almost as many 
 bills as the House of Representatives. It was customary to present memorials to 
 the Senate, and to originate bills thereon, after they had been rejected by the House 
 of Representatives, He recollected this perfectly. He had no doubt, that this sub- 
 ject being so long under the consideration of the Committee, gentlemen had made 
 up their minds upon it. He would therefore leave it to the consideration of the 
 Committee. He was prepared to listen to the arguments of gentlemen, and he would 
 adopt that proposition which to him appeared best. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to amend the amendment by striking out all after the word 
 " based,'' and inserting the following : 
 
 "On the whole number of free white persons, including those bound to service for 
 a term of years, and taxation combined." 
 
 Mr. Tazewell submitted to the Chair whether the motion was in order. The ffen- 
 tleraan from Goochland, (I\Ir. Pleasants.) had moved an amendment to the original 
 proposition — the o-entleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott.) had moved an araendmient to 
 that amendment^ and now the gentleman from Brooke offers an amendment to an 
 amendment. 
 
 The Chair decided that the motion was in order. The gentleman from Fkuquier 
 havmor merely given notice of his intention to offer an amendment at a proper time, 
 but not having offered it. 
 
 x*Ir. C. Johnson said, no difficulty on the point of order could arise in regard to this 
 proposition, nor would any difficulty be thrown in the way of the gentleman from 
 Fauquier. The question now before the Committee, related to the comparative merits 
 of the two propositions relative to the Federal and the compound basis. Whether 
 he should afterwards prefer the simple proposition of the gentleman from Fauquier to 
 both, he could not now say ; but he did not hesitate to say that of the propositions now 
 presented to him for his choice, the Federal and compound basis, he should prefer the 
 Federal numbers. He knew that on the minds of the people there was an unpleasant 
 impression respecting the introduction of the Federal numbers in any way into the 
 State Constitution, but he was not to be deluded by names. He looked to the cha- 
 racter of the thing, and examined the consequences, whether if the mixed basis or 
 the Federal numbers were adopted, the apportionment of power would be nearly the 
 same. He was induced to favour the principles of the Federal numbers, because it 
 was simple in its character, easy to be ascertained, known to the laws, had been 
 habitually applied in prrretice — was not variable at the will of the Legislature, nor 
 leaving with them the discretion to change it as they might think fit. The compound 
 basis was liable to these objections, and this led him to vote for the Federal numbers, 
 and against this amendment. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said he would make but a very few remarks. If any thing was 
 due to the feelings of those, who, if not the majority, are a large minority, it should 
 impress itself now. If the East should obtain the mixed basis in either House, the 
 Western people will believe it to be an improper decision of the Convention. As to 
 numbers, if there be any diange, he would prefer to that, the combined basis of per- 
 sons and taxation. The effect would not be the same. The people of colour in the 
 East were increasincf in a ratio greater than the wliites. From 1790, the ratio of in- 
 crease of blacks had been forty-four and a fraction, while that of the whites had been 
 but thirty-six and a fraction. The increase of the blacks will be still greater hereaf- 
 ter. By the increase of population, and the improvement of the lands in the West, 
 the amount of taxes made to the revenue has increased, and its burdensome relation 
 to the General Government has diminished. As to the propositions before the Com- 
 mittee, he was disposed to go far for the purpose of conciliation. If harmony could 
 be produced, it would be almost sufficient to reconcile him to any sacrifice. Still if 
 we must submit, it was but fair to allow us a choice. 
 
 One word more : propositions have been made to increase the number of the Senate. 
 He from reflection was particularly opposed to such an increase. If we retain the 
 number twenty-four in the Senate, we have a divisor of the House of Delegates. 
 
448 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Concurring in the views of gentlemen on the other side so far, as to be unwilling to 
 disturb the existing Constitution where there is no absolute occasion for it, he was 
 desirous to have it undisturbed in this particular. To twenty-four as the number of 
 the Senate, we have been long accustomed. For all the purposes of a check it is 
 sufficient. The Senate has heretofore been what it was intended to be — a body of 
 calm, reflecting men, not disturbed by any agitation originating with themselves, but 
 having time to regulate and check those of the other branch— having in fact a much 
 more elevated and useful duty to perform than merely to dot the i's and cross the t's 
 of the other body. The proportion of bills from the House of Delegates which had 
 been rejected in the Senate had been large — it was less than usual at the last session — 
 he beheved about ten. Some of these were bills which in their passage in the House - 
 of Delegates excited considerable sensation. There was one bill which wa.s Jive times 
 rejected during a single session, and its discussion lengthened the session about a 
 week. A great excitement prevailed in the Capitol on that occasion, but he believed 
 that it did not extend beyond the Capitol. He mentioned this for the purpose of shew- 
 ing, that the Senate was a serious check on the other House, particularly in relation 
 to revenue bills, and he had never heard any complaints of that body. He was willing 
 to increase the number, if that would give the Senate a larger scope of action, but 
 this would depend on the collateral increase of public confidence. He who had 
 greater confidence in large bodies than in small ones, would wish to increase the 
 number, in order to increase the influence of the Senate. But he who thinks that in 
 small bodies there exists a greater proportion of wisdom and stability, will not wish 
 to increase the number. Thinking a small body better calculated to proceed with 
 caution and wisdom, his confidence was in the opposite ratio to numbers. He there- 
 fore had more confidence in a Senate of twenty-four members, than he should have 
 in one of twice that number. If an increase is not called for by the people, why should 
 the Senate be increased ? The people are taught to believe that one of the motives for 
 the diminution of the number of the House of Delegates, is to diminish the ordinary 
 expenses of the Legislature. Instead of a diminution, an increase of expenditure 
 must be the result of an increase of the number of the Senate. He hoped there 
 would'be no diversity of opinions on this subject. It had been already said, that the 
 Senate was deprived of the power to originate bills, or schemes of finance, and this 
 leaves them sufficient time for deliberation and digestion. Here then we have some- 
 thing by which to demonstrate that the Senate deliberates more than the House of 
 Delegates, and we have found it to be so. An augmentation of the number would 
 be productive of an increased expenditure, both on account of the addition to the 
 present number, and of the lengthening of the session. He hoped that his amend- 
 ment would be favourably received by the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Leigh in rising to address the Chair, said that he would not enter into any 
 comparison between the two propositions. Both of them were abhorrent to his ideas. 
 He desired a different basis. He merely intended to remark on the argument which 
 had been used by the gentleman from Brooke, in comparing it with the argument 
 which the gentleman had used in the discussion of the white basis. The gentleman 
 now tells us that as the population of the West increases, taxation will also increase; 
 that the slaves are increasing in the West in a greater ratio than in the East, but 
 that the increase of power in the West would not be in proportion. Now, he had un- 
 derstood the other day, that considering the course taken by the States of Ohio and 
 Pennsylvania as the cause, slave property had not increased in the West. If there is 
 to be this increase of slaves in the West, cannot the W^est obtain the power which 
 they wish by taxation, in the Senate, as they would surely have it in the House of 
 Delegates ? He might have misunderstood the gentleman from Brooke, but he could 
 not avoid considering his two arguments in opposition to each other. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he could not suppose his argument on the basis of Representa- 
 tion in the House, was at all forgotten. The question in the discussion was this, 
 whether if the power was in the West, there would not be danger of oppression to 
 the slave-holder in the East.'' To prove that there was no danger, he shewed the pro- 
 bability of the increase of slaves on the Western waters. With the slaves already 
 there, and their natural increase, there would be an increasing confidence in the East 
 that they had nothing of injury to themselves to apprehend. But now he was pro- 
 ceeding to shew, however it may be, that we should be less oppressed — for, oppression 
 it would still be — we should have less to fear from the principle of taxation and num- 
 bers, than from the Federal numbers. He begged to bring the view of the gentleman 
 to the present state of the country. The lands from the head of tide-water to the 
 ocean, are nearly worn out; so are they in a great degree, worn out between tide- 
 water and the Blue Ridge. There is not much to be gained, therefore, in those parts 
 of the State, from any system of reclaiming culture. There might be something 
 gained by increased persons and population. He believed there was no inconsistency 
 in the arguments he had advanced. He had alluded to the vast number of slaves on 
 this side the Blue Ridge, and the ratio of increase as compared with the ratio of in- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. * 449 
 
 crease to the West. How was it possible for him to hving any tiling which could 
 occur in the West, to counterpoise this increase in the East ? 
 
 Mr. Leiffh rejoined : He said, this was a singular kind of explanation — under pre- 
 tence of explanation the gentleman had taken the floor from him, and interposed in 
 the midst of remarks he was making, a new argument on the point in debate. He 
 did not admit the explanation as satrsfactory, and urged and enforced the charge of 
 inconsistency. He was indifferent which plan should prevail : he objected to arsenic 
 as much in a preserved cherry, as in a preserved straic berry. It had been latel}' ne- 
 cessary to administer calomel to a little son of his, and sweetmeats were employed to 
 cover "it; but the child could not be deceived by it; neither could his father by a 
 similar process. The mixed basis in the House of Delegates had been opposed on 
 principle as " aristocracy." The principle here was the same, though not the degree; 
 and were the Dfentlemen on the other side in favour of an " aristocracy" to a degree 
 The only way lie could conceive to account for their apparent inconsistency, was in 
 their conviction (in which he agreed) -ihat the mixed basis in the Senate would be 
 valueless, and no effectual security whatever against the power of the House of De- 
 legates. He said that he had a peculiarity of temper, which rendered him perfectly 
 indifferent to the cliarge of aristocrac}^ imputed to him personally, but at the same time 
 very sensitive to the imputation of aristocracy to any measures or principles, wliich 
 lie thought calculated to advance the general weal. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge rose to suggest a smgle remark. The proposition assumed, had 
 been treated aslf it had originated with tlrem. If a physician present me with two 
 pills — one more nauseous than the other, I am surely at liberty to select which I will 
 take. I regard either the mixed basis, or the Federal basis, as an evil ; but I suppose 
 one or the other must be taken, and I must take that which is the least nauseous. 
 
 Mr. Mercer suggested, that as they had a Constitution, and were called to 
 amend it, if they could not get what they esteemed the best amendment, they must 
 then try and get the second best. If he must swallow either arsenic or calomel, he 
 should preferlhe calomel, [f his child was very sick, and in great pain, it might pos- 
 sibly be induced to swallow arsenic itself, (which, administered in a certain measure, 
 may be taken without injury.) to continuing under the pain it endured. They had 
 never advocated the propriety of basing representation on property, and, therefore, 
 the charge of inconsistency did not hold. The existing Constitution bases Represen- 
 tation, neither on property nor numbers, but on an arbitrary arrangement of districts, 
 by which one hundred and eighty thousand men were made to out-vote four hundred 
 and twenty thousand: and by which, one man on the sea-board, was made equal to 
 twenty-seven men in the interior. He remarked to Mr. Pleasants, that if the Senate 
 remained of its present number, he should vote for allo-Rung it concurrent power with 
 the House of Delegates, in the joint election of ofScers; but not, if its numbers were 
 enlarged. 
 
 The question was then taken on jNIr. Doddridge's amendment, and decided in tlie 
 negative : Ayes 34, Noes 59. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison, Monroe and Marshall, all voting against it.) 
 
 So the Committee refused to sanction the mixed basis in the Senate. 
 
 jNIr. Scott now moved the amendment he had formerly read, and which is in the 
 following words : 
 
 ^' Eesolrcd, That in the apportionment of representation in tlie Senate, regard shall 
 he had to taxation exclusive!}^ ; that the Senate shall consist of thirty-six members, 
 and shall have the same legislative powers, in all respects, as the House of Delegates; 
 and all appointments referred by the Constitution to both branches of the Legislature, 
 shall be made by a concurrent vote of both Houses." 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was negatived : Ayes 39, Noes 54. 
 
 (Messrs. ^Madison. Marshall and Giles voting /o?- it.) 
 
 The question then recurring on the amendment of Mr. Pleasants, 
 
 Mr. Joynes moved to fill the blank for tlie number of Senators, and to strike out 
 the words " a number not exceeding." 
 
 The motion was negatived : Ayes 42. Noes 51. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison and Marshall in the affirmative, Monroe and Giles in the ne- 
 gative.) 
 
 Mr. Summers now moved to fill the blank with the number tlmty-two; 3Ir. Brod- 
 nax with forty-eight, and ]Mr. Doddridge with twenty-four. 
 
 Mr. Upshur expressed his desire to see some Constitution formed which should be 
 acceptable to the people ; and if there should be such a distribution of power between 
 the two Houses as he could approve, he should vote in favour of the plan. But this 
 he would never do, unless there was a large increase in the number of the Senate. 
 Without this, it was vain to tell him of anv- security. Give us. said he. such a num- 
 ber as will at least afford us, in our own view, somethino- like security. Ever}- feelino- 
 of my heart would urofe me to the most amicable com'se. I have none but the most 
 friendly feeling toward those whose views differ from mine. Yet. I must be per- 
 
 57 
 
450 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 mitted to say, that it is, in effect, (though not in their intention,) a mere mockery 
 to tell us of security, while they adopt such a basis for the Right of Suffrage, and 
 are pursuing a course to render the Senate as little of a check upon the other 
 House as possible. Even there my best feelings lead me to meet them (a compro- 
 mise is out of the question,) on such ground as will permit us to beheve that we 
 have some security. I believe that I could be contented with some modification of 
 the Senate. Nothing would delight me more, than to be able to go home and 
 advise my constituents to adopt the Constitution. But if gentlemen will base the 
 House of Delegates on tlie wJiite population, and then refuse to give us more than 
 twenty-four members in the Senate, they afford us no security, and their very best 
 friends on our side of the House will be driven from them. 1 could wish a Senate 
 of forty-eight members, but I will be content with thirty-six. Lower than this, I 
 cannot go. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he had no doubt the gentleman would be gratified to see the 
 Constitution adopted ; but if he wished to send a Constitution to the people, which 
 they could not accept, he was taking the very course to do it. The people already are 
 represented on the white basis in the Senate : they stood as they wished in that 
 branch of the Government. You then proposed to afford us a correction of the evils 
 of which we complained, by a new basis in the House of Delegates; but now you 
 are for taking away from us all the relief we got in 1816, and you propose to turn the 
 Senate, in effect, into a new House of Delegates, adding to the basis three-fifths of 
 your slaves, and giving such a Senate the power to originate all bills. If this is to 
 prevail, our evils will only have changed sides, and we shall be worse off than we were 
 before. 
 
 Mr. Baldwin, after some remarks upon the difficulty of their situation, proposed to 
 lay the present resolution on the table, until that fixing the basis of representation 
 should be settled. Let there be a full, fair, and manly compromise on that subject, 
 and then give gentlemen as large a Senate as they desire. He declared himself in a 
 clear and emphatic manner, as opposed to all higgling. He concluded with submit- 
 ting a motion to lay the resolution upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Mercer suggested, that a better course would be, to append the resolution with 
 respect to the basis of representation to the present resolution, in the form of an 
 amendment, but 
 
 Mr. Baldwin, not accepting this suggestion, persisted in his motion to lay on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. Naylor was opposed to it, wishing first to know what price he was to get, if he 
 consented to a compromise. Before, however, any vote was taken. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Baldwin, the Committee rose, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, November 25, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Armstrong of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair ; 
 and the question being on the several numbers proposed wherewith to fall the blank 
 in the resolution, fixing the number of members in the Senate, 
 
 Mr. Bayly rose and said, that he would take this opportunity of proposing that 
 the blank should be filled with the word forty. 
 
 He did not believe that the nuniber forty-eight, which had been proposed by the 
 gentleman from Brunswick, (Mr. Brodnax,) would be agreed to, and the number 
 thirty-six had been rejected. He had offered forty, and would explain his reasons. 
 
 When I first sav/ (said Mr. B.) the report of the Legislative Committee, declaring 
 that the present number of the Senate (twenty-four,) should neither be increased nor 
 diminished, I had determined to vote against the resolution ; for I had believed, before 
 I came to this Convention, that forty members would not make the Senate too large. 
 The proposition is, therefore, not made in reference to the basis of representation in 
 the House of Delegates, nor did it originate with me to affect any principle of com- 
 promising that great question, which agitates this Assembly. On most occasions, I 
 do not like compromising rights, but some concessions must be made; and if the 
 Senate can be so constituted, as to effect that most desirable object, it must be by in- 
 creasing their number, and giving them concurrent power to originate laws. I shall, 
 however, advocate the motion entirely upon its own merits, because I am convinced, 
 that constitute the House of Delegates as you please, and make the number of mem- 
 bers one hundred and twenty, or more, your Senate ought to be one-third the whole 
 number of Delegates, and with equal powers of legislation. 
 
 Sir, I have had some experience on this subject. By the old Constitution, " all 
 laws must originate in the House of Delegates, to be approved of or rejected by the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 451 
 
 Senate, or to be amended -vrith the consent of the House of Delegates, except money 
 bills, -which, in no instance shall be altered by the Senate, but whoUy approved or re- 
 jected;" and under this power of amendment, many of the most important laws now 
 in your Code, have been introduced original bills in the Senate and concurred in by 
 the House of Delegates, as amendments to bills sent to the Senate; for example, the 
 House of Delegates pass an act. making a trivial alteration in the law respecting the 
 Courts, and the Senate amend, by striking out the whole after the enacting clause, 
 and re-model the Judiciary system, not as it relates to one Court only, but to every 
 Court : for, the title of the bill has given the power, and the Constitution jurisdiction, 
 by the term amendment. 
 
 The Senate do not consider their power, by this word amendment, restricted merely 
 to verbal or critical alterations. You had better expressly give equal power of origi- 
 nating laws to both Houses of the General Assembly, and Thereby prevent collisions 
 between them, than to permit it to be used by implication, which has heretofore pro- 
 tracted the sessions many days. On one occasion the Senate amended the appropri- 
 ation bill, and were unanimous, that they had the right; the House of Delegates re- 
 jected the bill and amendment, with unanimity, denying the right to the Senate, and 
 insisted, that an appropriation is a money bill. In that instance only, did the Senate 
 succeed against the House of Delegates, and maintained the doctrine, that laws laying 
 the taxes were the money bills contemplated by the Constitution, and that when the 
 money was in the Treasury, the Senate had equal power over it. Sir, the Senators are 
 equally the representatives of the people, and have no interest separate and distinct 
 from them ; this jealousy of the two Houses of Assembly towards each other, ought 
 to be guarded against by the Constitution we are endeavoring to make, by conferring 
 upon the Senate the authority to originate any bills, even monei/ bills. This restric- 
 tion upon the Senate respecting money bills, is borrowed from' the Constitution of 
 England into our own. It is refused to the Upper House of Parliament to lav the 
 taxes, because the Lords do not derive their power from the people, are created by 
 the Crown, and have a separate and distinct interest from the Commons. ?so such 
 reason exists in this country. 
 
 Should this power be given to the Senate, they will freely confer with the Dele- 
 gates, and each knowing what acts of Legislation it is necessary to pass for the good 
 of the State, both Houses will be employed at the same time perfecting the public 
 business upon different subjects. But now, the Senate after eight or ten days session, 
 adjourn for two or three weeks, because the House of Delegates before that time, will 
 not probably pass any important bills, and the Senators having nothing to act upon, 
 some go home, others remain without any public duties to perform. Give the Senate 
 power to originate bills, and all will be right. 
 
 The Senate of the United States may be compared to an Assembly of Ambassadors, 
 representing Sovereign States, and their duties are complicated and various : they 
 participate in and greatly control the Government in the policy towards foreign na- 
 tions : this, with their Executive duties, which is often very perplexinof, occupies 
 as much of their time as is bestowed on Legislative business ; and yet, the}- possess 
 equal power in originating laws as the House of Representatives. I may appeal with 
 confidence to genflemen in this Convention, who now are or have been members of 
 the Senate of Virginia, to say whether the power to originate bills would not greatly 
 contribute to shorten the sessions of the General Assembly. 
 
 The long and expensive sessions was one great cause for calling the Convention, 
 though it certainly was not the leading cause. The House of Delegates now consists 
 of two hundred and fourteen members ; the Senate of twenty-four. If we organize 
 the House of Delegates with one hundred and twenty members and the Senate with 
 forty, the General Assembly will be reduced seventy-eight members, which will 
 shorten the sessions perhaps one-fifth of their usual length of late years, which, toge- 
 ther with the reduction of tlie members, we may calculate on a saving of public money 
 of 40 or 50,000 dollars annually, and have the business of the State better done. 
 
 The last General Assembly was in session ninety days, and cost the State 106,773 
 dollars 85 cents, which v-^as more than 1200 dollars a day. The mem^orable General 
 Assembly of 179S, was in session f]ft3--three days. The "Delen-ates were one hundred 
 and seventy-nine: the pay of the members being two dollars a day, the whole ex- 
 penses of the session were 8 29,332 tiO. The General Assembly the next year, 1799, 
 continued in session fifty-seven days ; the daily pay of the members was raised to three 
 dollars, and the expenses of that session w-ere S40.631 19. And I believe it is uni- 
 versally admitted, these two General Assemblies possessed more eloquence, talents 
 and wisdom., than any that has ever since assembled in Virginia. 
 
 The present number of the Senate, twenty-four, is too small : the House is considered 
 very full with twenty members, and many of the most important laws now in the 
 Code, were passed into laws by not more than eight or nine votes, and with a majority 
 of one or two. This is too small a number of men to give law to this Commonwealth, 
 or to controul the immediate representatives of the people, if they fall into error. In- 
 
452 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 crease their number, give them employment by originating laws, and the State will 
 have the benefit of their wisdom, experience and industry ^ the business of legislation 
 will progress equally in the two Houses, with harmony and expedition, and Vv^ill have 
 the confidence of the people. 
 
 In 1776, when the Constitution was made, the Convention then wisely fixed the 
 number of the Senate to twenty-four. At that time the population was not one-half 
 what it now is, and was condensed on the East of the mountain; it was then abso- 
 lutely necessar}'- to have a most economical Government : a revolution was com- 
 mencing, and the State had little money or credit. There were twenty districts below 
 the Blue Pv.idge, and they were small: the local interest well known and respected; 
 and should the number be increased to forty, each district will contain more popula- 
 tion, than under the present Government, when first put into operation, and for many 
 3^ears afterwards. The Senate must represent the people, and the Representative 
 should be known personally to a large portion of his constituents, to obtain their con- 
 fidence and respect : this will not be the case in large districts. 
 
 Examine the Map of Virginia and the position of the water courses, and more es- 
 pecially the district I have the honor in part to represent. Two counties on the Eastern 
 Shore, Accomack and Northampton, and three on the Western Shore, Gloucester, 
 Matthews and Middlesex, separated by the Mediterranean of the United States, the 
 Chesapeake. On the East of that water, the trade is to New York, the London of 
 America, or to Philadelphia, while the produce of the Western Shore of that Bay 
 finds a market within the Capes of Virginia. The people of the district, thus sepa- 
 rated, and their trade going to difiierent places, and having no intercourse, ihej are as 
 unknown to each other, as if they resided in different States. The Senators who re- 
 presented that district the two last terms of four years each, resided on the W^estern 
 Shore, and were unknov/n to the people on the Eastern Shore when the election 
 commenced, and I do believe, never trod on that land before they commenced their 
 canvass. Do you believe that these Senators being unknown to that people, would 
 command their respect and confidence equal to a Delegate that was known to them, 
 should a difterence of opinion exist, respecting a great and important political mea- 
 sure. On such an occasion, the people would espouse the opinions of that man who 
 resided among them. Before the great change of the Senatorial Districts took place 
 throughout the State in 181 0, the Eastern Shore from the adoption of the Constitution 
 to that time, formed a separate Senatorial District ; and although one county had more 
 than three votes to the other's one, the people having great intercourse and confidence 
 in each other, their interests being the same, it was not considered by them material 
 in which county the Senator resided, and immediately after the first election under 
 the Constitution, it was considered wise, that each county should alternately have 
 one of its citizens sent to the Senate, which arrangement continued forty-one years, 
 in harmony and good feeling between the people of these counties, as a strong illus- 
 tration of the advantage of small districts, to the peace and happiness of the country. 
 The situation of other parts of the State, also requires the election districts to be small. 
 The counties of Brooke and Ohio, formed from a long strip of land, bounded by the 
 States of Pennsylvania and Ohio, and united to Virginia by a line of fifteen or twenty 
 miles, and having more intercourse with these States than with Virginia, the people 
 of these counties cannot be presumed to have great intercourse with the pec^ple of 
 Kanawha, so as to judge of the qualifications of the Senator residing so remote from 
 them. The same argument will apply to other parts of the State, divided by great 
 rivers and mountains : for example, take the country situated between the wide rivers 
 of James and York, and extending from Hampton towards Richmond, and before you 
 get the requisite population to form a district for a Senate of twenty-four members for 
 the whole State, you will pass this city, and your district will be one hundred and 
 fifty miles long; and is it probable that the home-staying and industrious farmer, will 
 be sufficiently acquainted with the character and talents of gentlemen who reside at 
 the extremity of the district, to give him his vote ? 
 
 The Northern Neck is similarly situated: commencing at Smith's Point, and pro- 
 ceeding up between the Potomac and Rappahannock, before you form a district of 
 sufficient population, you will be in full view of the mountains. The same difficulty 
 is to be met with in some of the sections of the Alleghany country. The Senator from 
 such large districts, will not know the grievances of the people, or their local interest, 
 but must depend for information upon others, when called to act; and he will not 
 lon^ possess the affections of the people. Sir, should the Senator put himself in op- 
 
 Eosition to the five or six Delegates of the district, (and his duty will often compel 
 im so to do.) and they go before the people supporting their own views and opinions; 
 the Delegates thus united, will defeat the re-election of the wisest and most patriotic 
 Senator that ever sat in the Senate-house ; nor will his virtue, integrity and talents 
 shield him against the attack of those who are so much better known to the people. 
 
 I have examined the Constitutions of several of the States, to see what proportion 
 of the number of members the two Houses of the Legislature are to each other ; and 
 I find, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 453 
 
 Delaware has nine Senators and twenty-one Representatives : 
 
 North Carolina, sixty Senators and one hundred and twenty members of the House 
 of Commons : 
 
 Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Tennessee, the Senate shall never be less than one-third, 
 nor more than one-half of the number of R-epresentatives : 
 
 Mississippi and Alabama, the Senate never less than one-fourth, nor more than 
 one-third of the number of the Representatives : 
 
 Louisiana, the Senate always fourteen, the Representatives never less than twen- 
 ty-five, nor more thcui fifty. 
 
 " Should the motion prevail to fill the blank as I have proposed, it will give the Se- 
 nate a controling power, which it ought to have, and make it such a representative 
 body, as to secure the respect and confidence of the people. 
 
 Mr. Baldwin explained what would be his proposition for compromise, viz : to pro- 
 pose the white basis in the House of Delegates, and the Federal number in the Senate, 
 and make the number of the latter thirtj-'Six : but as it was not in order to move it 
 now, he moved first, that the Conunittee pass over the propositions for filling the 
 blank, in the resolution prescribing the numbers of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, if that motion sliould prevail and the proposition of the gen- 
 tleman be presented to the Committee, he should immediately call for a division of 
 the question upon it, and take its pai'ts separately. 
 
 Mr. fiercer gave notice that after the Conunittee should have passed on the pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Augusta, (Jslr. Baldwin,) he should move the con- 
 sideration of the report of the Executive Committee, with a view to settling the 
 power of the Senate before determining its number. He would consent to give them 
 concurrence in the appointing power, if on the white, or on the mixed basis, but not if 
 its number was to be so enlarged as to open a door for faction. The power of the 
 Senate would be more strengthened by tiie power of appointment than by an aug- 
 mentation of its numbers. 
 
 Mr. Leigh was in favour of passing by for the present, the propositions for fixing 
 the number of the Senate, and then taking up the report, not of the Executive, but 
 of the Judicial Committee. He had in his mind, a proposal, different from any that 
 had yet been submitted and which he hoped would unite the assent of all, (provided 
 gentlemen, as they said, were wilhng to give and take.) but before he could announce 
 it, he wished to consult the delegations from one or two of the districts which would 
 be most affected by the plan, if they should refuse their assent, he would not pro- 
 pose it. 
 
 Mk. Coalter then rose to address the Committee, as follows : 
 I threw myself, most improperly, and I now find unnecessaribj, on the Committee 
 the other day. I had been elsewhere engaged, and knew not the stage of the pro- 
 ceeding. 
 
 jNIy tHend from Chesterfield, seemed to say that the crisis was at hand, and I knew 
 not that I could again be regularly heard. 
 
 I am peculiarly situated. I belong, by birth, groicth and every kind of obligation to 
 the transmontane country. 
 
 The good opinion and good feeling of that country towards me, and of every mem- 
 ber of it on this floor, is a cordial which I will not have dashed from my lips or from 
 my heart, if I can help it. I give you my heart's blood, Sir, freely, if that will cure 
 all the evils that now afflict Virginia ; but leave me that cordial. 
 
 I may be viistaken in my opinions, and I may err in my course here ; but I will 
 yield to no native of the West in my love for the land of my birth 3 nor in the anxious 
 desire I feel to see it every thing which 1 know it is capable of being. 
 
 But, I now have iiew interests and neic connexions on this side of that line, and 
 these may lead me astray. This is very true, and I am very willing that it should be 
 thrown into the scale, to weigh against my judgment. I ought to weigh it myself 
 against myself. The words of truth say that the heart of man is deceitful, &c. I may 
 have vanity enough to suppose I am above this. But that most wise and excellent of 
 all Governors, Sancho Panza, has said, that there is nothing more tain than vanity. 
 
 I knoic I may be wrong — tfcar I ma}' be wrong in all I may say or do. 
 
 I have seen the day when I would have had no such fears-^when I would with 33 
 little fear of error, have drawn a new Constitution for tliis State — yes, on my knee in 
 a Court yard, as I would have drawn a declaration on a plain bond. I was'perfectly 
 persuaded that the great mass of the people were capable of every thino- ; that Uni- 
 versal Suffrage was the true palladium and safeguard of our rights, founded in nature, 
 and that all mankind must finally yield to it — that it was a mlllenium fast approach- 
 ing — that France was regenerated, and that all mankind would follow in the train — 
 America, glorious America at the head I 1 — that our Senate was an aristocratic body, 
 thwarting the good sense of the people in their Hall of Representatives — that the 
 Council was a fungus — that the people ought to elect their own Governor, and their 
 Executive and Ministerial Officers, civil and military, for which they were created for 
 
454 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 them, and hy them, and they alone were the proper judges of their fitness and capa- 
 city. But, suppose 1 was now a Western man, and joined with Western men in all their 
 views, could I be more certain that there was no alloy of interest, no feeling that has 
 been produced by excited passions in myself or those around me — no real, or supposed 
 sense of past injustice, which may have warped my judgment, which may have led 
 me back to the visions of my youth, and courted me to go back to opinions once 
 solenmly abandoned ? Surely this would be a fit cause for serious self-cxaminatiGn. 
 
 I have lived. Sir, either to have much weaker nerves; or, having witnessed what 
 has passed here and elsewhere, during the last thirty years, to have acquired a sounder 
 judgment, and a more correct view of things — perhaps, I have become too fearful — 
 Discretion, it is said, is the better part of valor ; and perhaps a little fear is not a bad 
 ingredient in a politician, who is about to put forth his hand to tear up — plant a-new, 
 or even to prune away and replace portions of a Government, under which such a 
 people as these of Virginia have lived, until within a few short weeks, safely and 
 happily. I confess / am afraid — perhaps I have caught the epidemic which prevails 
 in the country. Who is there then who is not afraid ? Not one ! 1 must nerve myself 
 though, as well as I can, at least against idle fears. 
 
 I must try and make such amendments to the Constitution, that I will neither be 
 afraid nor ashamed to recommend to the confidence and affections of this people. 
 
 But, I must have a very large majority of this body to back me in it ; or my strength 
 will depart from me. 
 
 There is one thing which I now wish distinctly to make known to this body, and 
 to my constituents. 
 
 It is of little consequence to me, in this, or any future stage of the business, whe- 
 ther I fall into the minority or majority, provided that minority is large, or that majority 
 is small. This is not ordinary legislation ; to be re-examined at the next session, and 
 the evils, if any growing out of it, corrected with as much ease as they are inflicted. 
 When we adjourn, we adjourn sine die. 
 
 There is no locus penitentice left to us. We can only go home, and as individuals, 
 oppose or approve the work of this body, 
 
 I consider a large minority as an eqzial division of this body — as a state of things 
 which does not admit of final action ; and if in the course of human events I am in 
 a small majority, I will not impose on a large minority a Constitution against which 
 their feelings or judgments rebel. I will vote down finally, so far as my voice goes, 
 all innovations of that kind ; as believing it most safe and wise to leave the present 
 Constitution as to such matter, where we found it. 
 
 If my constituents disapprove of this, the sooner they recall me, the better; I will 
 most willingly obey that call. 
 
 I feel a responsibility that is almost deadening to me, and would willingly shift it to 
 abler hands. 
 
 I believe — I cant think otherwise — that I will be in a majority, finally, on this point. 
 
 Surely — surely, we are not prepared to enter the great arena of the human passions, 
 with the anathemas of Aristocrat — Monarchist — Oppressor of the Poor — Enemy of the 
 People, and of human rights, on the one side, in order to carry through our work, — ■ 
 and with the denunciations of Demagogue — Agitator — Radical, &c. on the other ! ! 
 No, Sir ; the few hairs I have remaining, rise on my head at the bare supposition. 
 
 No, Sir; we were sent here by the people, as their ^wre and true friends ; to see 
 whether we could confer on them any additional Messing : To be sure, that we could 
 confer this on them, before we deprived them of what they had: Not to inflict on 
 them the countless miseries which must arise from such a state of things. 
 
 No, Sir; we must either return to them the gold which they have entrusted to us, 
 without farther alloy ; or we must purify it yet more, and put the Tower Stamp on it. 
 This can only be done by a large majority of this body. 
 
 We can't return it to them mixed up with the dregs of contending passions and in- 
 terests, and put it on them to purify and refine it. 
 
 They can only reject such a mass, and, if indeed man is capable of self-government, 
 they tcill reject it. They will say, as I say, we will not impose on a large minority of 
 our fellow-citizens a Constitution which they think a bad one, for one which they and 
 we know is a good one. We may be mistaken; some of our wisest men, and most 
 tried patriots think we are mistaken, and we will not risk it. 
 
 Surely all would say, that this would be wisdom— patriotism— magnanimity of the 
 highest order. But can we say that the great body of the people will take this course, 
 if we set them a contrary example.? We are now to say whether such would be the 
 correct course. If we say no; you must bandy words and epithets; call in the pas- 
 sions ; avail yourselves of every prejudice. This is the way to establish your hberties 
 and the happiness of the State ; then indeed the foundation of the great deep will be 
 opened, and woe be to those who do not seek safety in that Ark of the Covenant, the 
 old Constitution, which has borne us triumphantly through so many dangers and diffi- 
 culties ! 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 455 
 
 Impressed with these views, I hailed with pleasure unspeakable, the proposition of 
 my friend from Augusta; seconded by my trusty friend and coadjutor on another in- 
 teresting occasion, troin Hampshire, to see if a. fair, open, jnanbj, and honourable com- 
 promise of contlicting interests and opinions could not be made. 
 
 They very wisely want to see the quid pro quo ; this is precisely what I want to 
 see, also. 
 
 But, it seems to me we cannot see tliis at present. There are other great interests 
 to discuss, besides those which have been before the Committee. How are we to 
 ao-ree on tktin? It is of no consequence to me when the evil is to creep in, wliich 
 shall put it out of my power to vote for the amendments which may be offered. I 
 might' yield much on some points, for a safe Constitution on others ; and which I 
 would not yield but for that quid. All would avail nothing, if Mordccai still sits at 
 the door ; 1 want to see the whole ground ; the whole instrument, before I can sign 
 and seal any part. I must tear off my seal, if I don't agree to the whole instrument. 
 
 I plead non est factum — in fact, it seems to me impossible to come to any available 
 compromise' until we have the whole ground before us. There are things to come 
 that may be equally, or even more objectiovjable to me, if possible, than extending the 
 Riglit of Suffrage, substantially beyond what it now is. 
 
 i allude particularly to the mode to be agreed on for electing the Governor. As to 
 the Judiciary, I never have entertained any fears about it. 1 fear unwise legislation 
 in regard to it, it is true ; having much experience on- that point ; but I have no fears 
 as to the fundamental laws in regard to that department ; I mean as to the Superior 
 Courts. As to the county magistracy, there may be danger; but of what character 
 I am not apprized. These, Sir, are my views at present ; I am not prepared to pro- 
 pose any thing ; 1 thought it due to myself to state candidly what were my general 
 views. 
 
 Mr. C. concluded by saying that he had not seen any of the documents printed for 
 the Committee ; that he had no specific propositions to make ; but that he would prefer 
 with the gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer,) to pass on to the Report of the 
 Executive Committee. 
 
 Mr. Baldwin withdrew his motion to pass by filling the blank with numbers for the 
 Senate; but 
 
 Mr. Mercer renewed it, with a view to taking up the Report of the Executive Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. Gordon, after some remarks on his peculiar situation, and his earnest desire to 
 effect a compromise, read in his place the following amendment to Mr. Pleasants's 
 proposition, as a plan to effect that object : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Representation in tlie Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : that is to say, 
 
 There shall be ten Senators West of the Blue Ridge of mountains, and fourteen 
 East of those mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates one hundred and twenty members ; of 
 whom twenty-six shall be elected from that part of Virginia lying West of the Alle- 
 ghany mountains ; twenty-four from the Valley betv/een the Alleghany and Blue 
 Ridge ; thirty-seven from the Blue Ridge to the head of tide- water; and tiiirty-three 
 thence below." 
 
 He commented at some length on this proposal, shewing what would be its practi- 
 cal effect. It would leave in the whole House of Delegates a majority of twenty to 
 the East of the mountain. 
 
 The twenty-six counties West of the Alleghany, would have twenty-six Delegates : 
 the fourteen counties in the Valley, twenty-tbur Delegates ; the twenty-nine coun- 
 ties of middle Virginia, would have thirty-seven Delegates ; and the thirty-six coun- 
 ties and four boroughs of the tide -water country, would have thirty-three Delegates. 
 
 He preferred the county basis for representation ; and thought it might with some 
 little accommodation be arranged in the tide-water country as m the rest of the State; 
 a few of the smallest counties giving up their claim to individual representation. 
 
 He placed this copy of the resolution on the table for the inspection of the members. 
 
 The question being taken, it was determined to pass by hlhng the blank for tlie 
 present : Ayes 51. 
 
 Mr. Mercer now moved to take up the report of the Executive Committee : the 
 motion was opposed by Messrs. Brodnax and Nicholas, and negatived. 
 
 The Committee then proceeded with the report of the Legislative Committee, and 
 took up the eighth resolution, which reads as tullows : 
 
 " Resolved, That it ought to be provided, that in all elections for members of either 
 branch of the General Assembly ; and in the election of all officers which may be 
 required to be made by the two Houses of Assembly, j.ointly, or in either separately, 
 with the exception of the appointment of their own officers, the vote should be given 
 openly, or viva voce, and not by ballot." 
 
456 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax now moved as a substitute for the above, the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That it ought to be provided in the Constitution, that in all elections in 
 this State, to any office or place of trust, honor or profit, with the exception of the 
 appointment of the officers of the General Assembly, the votes should be given viva 
 voce, and not by ballot." 
 
 On the suggestion of Mr. Randolph, he asked leave to withdraw the clause which 
 permits the officers of the House of Assembly to vote by ballot for their own officers. 
 
 Mr. Claytor, approving the general principle of viva voce elections, objected to carry 
 it into all Legislative Assemblies, so as to open a poll for the choice of their officers. 
 He was about to reinstate the clause ; when 
 
 The Chair suggested that to vote against leave to withdraw it, would have the . 
 same effect. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax defended the principle, and contended that there should be no excep- 
 tion on its application. In some elections in Congress, resort had been had to ballots 
 of different colours that members might have the opportunity of letting their votes be 
 known to all. 
 
 Mr. Claytor thought there was no need of enjoining it by Constitutional provision : 
 the Legislature might use their discretion in the case. 
 
 Mr. Johnson concurred in this view. There was no danger of intrigue and cor- 
 ruption in the election of the officers of the Assembly ; and it was not desirable, that 
 officers who were continually to come in contact with the members, should know who 
 had voted for and who against them. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that he hoped in common courtesy the Committee would not 
 refuse the leave asked by the gentleman from Dinwiddle. In the whole course of his 
 Parliamentary life, he had never known the leave denied. If the gentleman from 
 Campbell, (Mr. Claytor,) felt strenuous on the subject, he would move to re-insert the 
 clause. As I am on my feet, said Mr. R., permit me to say that there are many who 
 remember the important election of Speaker to the House of Burgesses in 1799 — 1800; 
 an election, in which the Commonwealth of Virginia felt as much interest as she has 
 done in any one election from that day to this. It was durmg that session that the 
 venerable gentleman who is at the head of the Orange delegation, and, I may say — 
 speaking of his experience and weight of character — at the head Of this Assembly, 
 brought in his celebrated report on the Alien and Sedition Laws, which put a curb 
 in the mouth and a hook in the, nose of the great Federal Leviathan, and which some 
 gentlemen seem so anxious to remove. As to the saving of time, the Clerk can call 
 over the names of the members in far less time than it takes to collect the ballots, 
 count them and ascertain and report the result. All gentlemen know the difference 
 in time between merely calling the yeas and nays, and conducting an election by bal- 
 lot. The Clerkship of the House of Delegates is an office of great profit, and of yet 
 greater trust and honour. I can see no ground of discrimination between an election 
 in the House of Delegates, and an election elsewhere. But it was not with this view 
 that I rose, but merely to vindicate what I consider as in common courtesy, the right 
 of the gentleman from Dinwiddle : I coald not justify it to myself to offer such an 
 act of rudeness and indignity to that gentleman, as to refuse the leave he has re- 
 quested. 
 
 Mr. Claytor disclaimed all intention of offering any rudeness or indignity to the 
 gentleman from Dinwiddle : on the contrary, the course he had originally chosen, 
 was the very one pointed out by the gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph.) He 
 did not rise to prolong the debate, but only to vindicate his own conduct. 
 
 The Chair said, he had not understood the gentleman from Charlotte as having any 
 personal allusion in his remarks. 
 
 Mr. R. disclaimed it entirely. 
 
 Mr. Johnson explained himself as intending to refuse no courtesy to the gentleman; 
 but as having understood this as the mode of trying the question, whether the clause 
 should remain or be stricken out. 
 
 After some farther explanation, the question was taken on granting leave, and car- 
 ried : Ayes 50. 
 
 Mr. Claytor now moved to re-instate the clause — (so as to leave it discretionary 
 with the Legislature, to vote for their own officers, by ballot or viva voce.) 
 
 And the question being taken, the votes as counted by the Chair stood. Ayes 44, 
 Noes 43 : but the Chair fearing some inaccuracy in the count, appointed tellers ; and 
 then the vote appeared : Ayes 43, Noes 46. So the Committee refused to re-instate 
 the clause — thereby requiring all elections to be held viva voce. 
 
 The Committee then proceeded to the ninth resolution, which reads as follovv^s : 
 Resolved, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious 
 worship, place, or ministry whatsoever; nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, 
 or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his reli- 
 gious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free tt) profess, and by argument to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 457 
 
 mamtain their opinions in matters of reKgion, and that the same shall in no wise di- 
 minish, enlarge, or affect their ciril capacities," 
 
 2vlr. Brodna-x explauied tliis to be a literal transcript from the celebrated act dravrn 
 by Mr. Jefferson, and passed in 1755. for the freedom of rehgion, 
 
 ' He moved to amend the resolution by adding to the first member of it. a clausej 
 declaring edl persons who disbeheved in a God or a future state of rewards and pun- 
 ishments, as incapable of being received as witnesses in any Court of law in the Com- 
 monwealth. He" did not himself consider such a claxise absolutely necessary, as the 
 same thino- was virtually included in the resolutiou. or not contradicted by it: but it 
 was best to add the clause by way of caution. 
 
 On the sugorestion of ^h. Pv-andolph, Mr. Brodnax withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. Cooke moved to amend the second member of the resolution, by striking out 
 the proviso (which disqualified ministers from being elected to the Legislature.) 
 
 ^h. Doddrido-e was in favour of the motion. He disapproved the election of min- 
 isters to a legisfative body as much as most men : but he would not vote to prevent 
 the people from makinof whom they would their Delegate to tiieir own Hall of Legis- 
 lation- He considered the exclusion as at war with the principle of the whole reso- 
 lution : which allowed men to promulgate their religious opinions free fi-om all politi- 
 cal consequences : but the language of this proviso was — unless tliey uttered them in 
 Uie pulpit, then they must be disfranchised. 
 
 Mr. Brodiiax said,, the gentleman firom Brooke had forgotten the Hall of Legislation. 
 Ministers might vent their opinions every where, and any where, but iu that Hall. 
 The gentleman from Brooke was commonly ven,- fehcitous in appealinof to the ex- 
 ample of other States, and sometimes carried that appeal farther thaxi he was disposed 
 to follow him. He beUeved, all the States in the Union went to the extent of this 
 resolution, and many of them much farther. In the new Constitution of New York, 
 which had been lugged in — (He begged pardon — which had been brought in most 
 gracefully) into this debate, ministers were disabled from holding any civil office 
 whatever. Mr. B. disclaimed all want of respect for the clergy, either personally, or 
 in their clerical capacity : but there was a proper place for them; and that place* was 
 not in the Leorislative Hall. He entertained, indeed, no fear as to a union of 
 Church and State in this country. The fears of our forefathers, he beheved, were 
 well founded: but the progress of time, and the division of the Church into four, five, 
 or six, he might alnaost say into four, five, or six thousand, difierent firagments, ren- 
 dered that danger nugatory. This was the best and" stronsrest of all oruards on that 
 subject. But iher-e were numerous reasons which forbade the appearance of minis- 
 ters of the Gospel in the political arena. It was totally inconsistent with their sacer- 
 dotal habits and sentiments ; every power of tlieir mind ought to be, and he believed, 
 was, turned in different and opposite directions from temporal leodslation. He ad- 
 verted to the influence (not consciously indulged) of sectarian attachments, and its 
 operation on ail questions where the interests of a sect were directly or indirectlv in- 
 volved : and the influence of a minister over the numerous individuals attached to 
 him — both of which were foreign to impartial legislation on his part or impartial judg- 
 ment on theirs.- 
 
 Mr. Doddridge assured the gentleman from Dinwiddie, that he did know the dif- 
 ference between the pulpit and the Hall of Legislation — having seen both more than 
 once. But he still insisted on his former ground. The resolution declared, that a 
 man's relicrious opinions shall not affect his civil capacities : but the proviso declares, 
 that if tho^e opinions are uttered in the pulpit, the utterance of them shall affect his 
 civil capacities, even to disfreuichisement. At the polls he should probably act with 
 the gentleman : but why tie up the hands of the people f 
 
 ]Mr. Cooke considered it as at war v*-ith the whole spirit of our institutions, to dis- 
 franciiise an entire class of our citizens, without any good reason assigned : a class 
 too, which he considered far tlie most virtuous and efiicient in the community. He 
 insisted on the objection urged by Mr. Doddridge. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, that it was precisely because he wished the clergy to remain what 
 he now believed them to be, that he was against striking out the proviso. Tlieir mas- 
 ter had said that his kingdom was not of this world: he had commanded his servants 
 to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the tilings which 
 are God's, He had been himself wihing to have nothing to do with pohtics, and his 
 servants ought to have no more to do with them than He. 
 
 3Ir. Brodnax, in reply to Mr. Doddridge and Mr. Cooke, observed, that a proviso, 
 is. of course.. something which involves a discrepancy and exception. It might be 
 deemed very ginful in him to wish to exclude ministers, but he found himself, at any '■ 
 rate, in very good company. The exclusion was carried yet farther than this by the 
 old Constitution of Virginia. He called it the old Constitution: he knew it was 
 spoken of very commonly now vdth great contempt ; and perhaps he ought to beg 
 pardon for mentioning it at all : but this old Constitution had been formed by men, 
 not lialf so wise, to be sore, as they, (because, as the Committee had been informed. 
 
 58 
 
458 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 by the gentleman from Chesterfield, sons were younger, and of course wiser than their 
 fathers,) but by men who had some little reputation in their day ; and those men had 
 said that ministers should not be eligible as members of the Governor's Council. He 
 knew that the act on Religious Freedom was no part of the Constitution, but it had 
 received universal sanction from the people of Virginia. 
 
 But Kentucky, Tennessee, and New York, v/hile they had the same general pro- 
 vision on the subject of Religious Freedom, added besides this exclusion of the clergy 
 from the Legislature : and in New York they are excluded from " any civil or military 
 place or otfice whatsoever." 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that on the ground of authority, he was not prepared; but he was 
 informed that in eighteen States out of the twenty-four in this Union, ministers are 
 admitted to a full participation in all civil and political rights with other men. He 
 admitted, that the Constitution of Virginia did treat the clergy with not very high re- 
 spect: but probably this arose from old habitudes derived from England, where the 
 clergy were excluded from the House of Commons, because they had a House of 
 their own, 
 
 Mr. Morgan said, there seemed to be but a single question to be settled ; which was, 
 whether the Constitution shall be so formed that the clergy shall be dispossessed of 
 all modes of amassing power over the people. Now, there were two modes of effect- 
 ing this object, either to exclude them from the Legislature ; or to divest the Legis- 
 lature of all jurisdiction whatever over the subject of religion. 
 
 If the Committee adopted the latter mode, there could be no necessity of resorting 
 to the former. 
 
 Under the existing Constitution, their exclusion is jjersonal only : the Legislature 
 may give them any degree of patronage, and any amount of support, but not a seat in 
 the Legislative Hall. But they now proposed to forbid the Legislature's granting 
 them any aid or patronage, and, therefore he was for admitting them to a seat, if the 
 people chose to elect them. He was in favor of striking out the proviso. 
 
 Mr. Moore was opposed to it. He thought any clergyman who offered himself as 
 a candidate for a seat in the Legislature, shewed himself unv/orthy to be trusted any 
 where. He considered their habits and studies as totally unfitting them for politics; 
 and, in the last place, he owned that he was afraid of them. Keep them in their 
 proper place, and there is no danger; but allow them to be connected with the State 
 in any way, and you have the dreaded union of Church and State at once. 
 
 Mr. Randolph then said : 
 
 To me this is a most unlooked-for proposition. There is not one single article of 
 my political creed, about which 1 have not a greater disposition to doubt, than of the 
 propriety of excluding a class of men, dedicated to the office of religion, from the 
 possession of political power. A gentleman told us, that but for the insertion of that 
 proviso in the Constitution, he should be for excluding them from the Legislature. I 
 would much rather vote to strike out the whole, and to leave the Constitution as it 
 now stands; and for this plain reason: I am, and have been, and ever shall be, a 
 practical man ; and when I meet with legislative provisions of this kind, I rather 
 smile at the fears which dictated them, than applaud the caution they exhibit. The 
 Constitution is just as safe without, as with them. The Legislature of Virginia can- 
 not, and if it could, it dare not, attempt such legislation as is forbidden in the body of 
 this resolution. I feel myself perfectly safe. I find, somewhere else, a provision 
 that we shall have no orders of nobility in this country. Who dreams that we ever 
 can ? Sir, when the time shall come that the people of this country are ripe for a 
 union of Church and State, or for orders of nobility either, they will have them in 
 spite of all the moth-eaten parchment in your archives. I fearlessly pronounce, that 
 the admission of gentlemen of the cloth into your^Legislative Halls is ipso facto the 
 union of Church and State. Sir, are there no other considerations which weigh with 
 us in altering ? or in keeping the Constitution as it is ? They are now excluded. 
 Are there no other considerations None that every well regulated mind belonging 
 to the clerical profession ought of itself to suggest ? I have had the pleasure (I was 
 about to say 1 have had the honor, but the term would be misplaced) to be acquainted 
 with many of them : with men of the most unaffected piety, of high attainments and 
 great talents ; and who, moreover, were clothed with that humilitT/ which is the Alpha 
 and Omega of the christian character — Yes, Sir, its all in all : and I never knew one 
 of them who dared to trust himself in such a situation. Not one, who if such an offer 
 had been made him, might not justly have said, " lead us not into temptation." Sir, 
 what are the offices of the clerical body ? Do they not mingle with all classes of so- 
 ciety and above all, in the dom.estic circle.? Is not their influence there paramount 
 to that of all others ? Is it not their duty to serve a master whose kingdom is not of 
 this world As well to reprove as to console ? 
 
 Figure to yourself, Sir, a minister of the gospel of peace, about to reprove for his sins, 
 a man of wealth and influence in his county ; having, at the same time, a desire himself 
 to represent that county. Sir, this is no exclusion on account of the profession of any 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 459 
 
 opinions. It is an exclusion of an occupation ; of an occupation incompatible with 
 the discharge of the duties of a member of either branch of the Legislature. The task 
 of legislation is at war with the duties of the pastor. The two are iltterly incompati- 
 ble. Sir, no man can busy liimself in electioneering, (and in these times who can be 
 elected without it.') jS^o man can mingle in Legislative cabals; 1 say no man can 
 touch that pitch, without being defiled. No man can so employ hunself, without being 
 disqualified for those sacred duties which every minister of the gospel takes upon him- 
 self; and for which he is accountable, not to his constituents at home, but to the God 
 who made Mm; and who v\-ill call him to a much more rigorous account tiaan that he 
 renders to his parishioners. 
 
 Sir, there is an indecency in this thing. We have heard much about exclusion of 
 the ladies; but there is not greater indecency and incompatibihty in a woman's 
 thrusting herself into a political assembly and all its cabals, than in a clergyman's un- 
 dertakinof the same thing. One of the greatest masters of the human heart, and of 
 political philosophy too, declares, that while the French are in their manners more de- 
 ferential to woman than any other people, they have less real esteem for woman than 
 any other nation on earth. 
 
 Let me illustrate this. The Turk shews that he values his wife, by locking her 
 up ; it is, to be sure, a mistaken mode : but he shews that he estimates the value of 
 the treasure, by putting it under lock and key. The Frenchman permits his wife to 
 mingle in political afiairs ; and if 2^Iadame Roland had not been engaged in such af- 
 fairs. Madame Roland would never have ascended the scaflold. If women will un- 
 sex themselves; and if priests — (what shall I say.') will degrade themselves by 
 mingling in scenes and in affairs for wliich their function renders them improper and 
 unfit, they must take the consequences. If ladies wiU plunge into the afiuirs of men, 
 they will lose the deference they now enjoy ; they will be treated roughly — like 
 men. Just so it is with priests. They lose all the deference which belongs, and 
 wliich is paid to their of&ce, (whether they merit it or no.) 
 
 Sir, rel}' upon it. if you permit priests to be made members of the Legislature, they 
 will soon constitute a large portion of all your assemblies. And it has been truly said, 
 that no countries are so ill-governed as those which were ruled by the counsels of wo- 
 men, except such as have been governed by the counsels of priests. 
 
 The question was now put on striking out the proviso, and decided in the negative ; 
 only twelve members rising in its support. (Mr. ^Madison beinff one.) 
 
 Mr. Brodnax now moved a further amendment, to be added at the close of the 
 resolution, viz: 
 
 2sor shall be so construed, as to deprive the Legislature of the power of incorpo- 
 rating by law, the trustees or directors of any Theological Seminary, or other Reli- 
 gious Society, or body of men created for charitable purposes, or the advancement of 
 piety and learning, so as to protect them in the enjoyment of their property and im- 
 munities, in such case, and under such regulations, as the Legislature may'deem ex- 
 pedient and proper. But the Leoislature of this State, during all future time, shall 
 possess the power to alter, re-model, or entirely repeal such charter, or act of incor- 
 poration, whenever they shall deem it expedient.'' 
 
 Mr. Giles rose in opposition to the amendment, which he hoped would not be passed 
 upon without due consideration. He then went into a series of observations on the 
 injurious effect of the incorporating power, when the corporations were of a civil cha- 
 racter, and nmch more when they were of a religious description. He considered 
 their multiplication a serious evil which had already accomplished much mischief, 
 ajid which threatened much more. They were bodies very irresponsible, and were 
 gradually absorbing to themselves all the powers of the Legislature. He dwelt es- 
 pecially upon the injurious effects of Banks ; and he hoped no sanction would be 
 introduced into the Constitution, tending to encourage the Legislature in granting 
 incorporations of any kind. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax spoke in reply. He agreed in the sentiments expressed by that gen- 
 tleman, but contended that the amendment he had offered went to modify, and re- 
 strain, not to increase the evil. The Legislature had now Constitutional liberty to in- 
 corporate Theological Seminaries, and if once incorporated, their charters could not 
 be altered or revoked, unless legally forfeited : But this amendment conferred on the 
 Legislature, power to alter or amend their charters at pleasure. He spoke of the de- 
 gradation of being obliged to send young men who were seeking, and who would o-et, 
 and ought to get, a clerical education, out of the State to be educated. Two Theologi- 
 cal Seminaries raised by Virginia capital, and supplied with Virginia students, had, 
 through sheer necessity, been built and incorporated, beycnd the limits of the State, 
 because they could not be incorporated within it. He denied that the amendment 
 gave any preference to one sect over another; and, as there would be a ministry in 
 society, and that ministry must possess great influence, was it not better to provide 
 the means of giving them a becoming education .' As to the danger of Church and 
 State, it was a cliimera. ISot one-elexenth part of the inhabitants of the United States, 
 
460 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 were members of a church of any denomination whatever: and when it was remem- 
 bered into how many various and incompatible sects, this small fraction was itself di- 
 vided, all fears of anything like a religious establishment in this country, must be ac- 
 knowledged to be visionary in the extreme. He did not believe, that any one sect 
 would wish, or accept such a distinction if it were offered to them: and sure he was, 
 that if they should, all the other sects would be in hostility to them immediately. 
 The experience of England on this subject, had taught a lesson which could never be 
 forgotten. Union with the State was deadly in its effect on any religious denomina- 
 tion, and none in this country were so weak as to desire it. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke said, that every argument he had heard from Mr. B. went 
 to prove the necessity of a religious establishment. For himself, he had no partiality 
 for religious incorporations of any sort. He had, on the coiitrary, a great abhorrence 
 to them in every form. He had many objections ;igainst them ; but having heard no 
 good reasons brought forward to prove that any advantage would attend them, (those 
 hitherto used only professed to shew that they would be attended with no danger,) he 
 should urge but one objection, and that was, that one feature of such institutions must 
 be, to put it in their power to compel persons to the support of religion. If not, 
 they were of no use ; and all such compulsion was incompatible witli the spirit of 
 Christianity. He, as a republican, should vote against compelling any person to sup- 
 port any ministry whatever. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax rejoined. The Reverend, or the Rigid Reverend gentleman from 
 Brooke, has discovered an objection to his amendment, which, he confessed had never 
 entered into his brain. He must certainly have been very unhappy either in the se- 
 lection or the expression of his argument, if he had conveyed no better idea of his 
 meaning. The Rev. gentleman said, he had pointed out no good consequence what- 
 ever, as likely to attend Theological Seminaries. He hoped they would , at least, have 
 this good effect, to teach ministers of the gospel good morals and good manners. 
 The gentleman had said, that such incorporations could be of no use, unless they 
 compelled contributions to the support of their ministry: but could the gentle- 
 man forget that in the body of the resolution, such a power is expressly prohibited, 
 not to a mere corporation, but to the Legislature of the State? a clause which had been 
 introduced with the precise view to prevent that compulsion which some other States 
 had sanctioned. 
 
 The question being now taken on the amendment, it was promptly negatived, 
 twelve only rising in its favour. 
 
 The tenth and eleventh resolutions were passed over without amendment. They 
 read as follows : 
 
 10. Resolved, That no bill of attainder, or expost facto law, or law impairing tlie 
 obligation of contracts, ouoht to be passed." 
 
 11. " Resolved, That private property ought not to be taken for public uses without 
 just compensation." 
 
 The Committee then proceeded to consider the twelfth resolution, which is in the 
 following words : 
 
 12. " Resolved, That the members of the Legislature shall receive for their services, 
 a compensation, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the public treasury, but no 
 law increasing the compensation of members of the Legislature shall take effect, until 
 
 . the end of the next annual session after the said law may have been enacted." 
 
 Mr. Naylor moved to strike out the word " end" and insert in lieu thereof, the word 
 " commencement." 
 
 Mr. Chapman of Giles, (who had introduced this resolution in the Legislative Com- 
 mittee,) explained the reason why he did not wish the amendment to prevail. Sup- 
 posing a Legislature, sitting this year, to pass a resolution increasing the amount of the 
 wages of a Representative : and supposing the people to be dissatisfied with what was 
 done : when the Legislature meets the next year, they nmst meet under that law, and 
 receive the extra compensation, until time should elapse to pass a bill to repeal the 
 law. This he was desirous to avoid ; and in order to avoid it, he would not have the 
 law take effect, till the end of the session. Then there would be ample leisure to con- 
 sider the subject, and to introduce, mature, and pass a bill for the repeal, if it should 
 be deemed advisable. 
 
 Mr. Naylor thought this v/as an excess of caution ; it was looking too far ahead to le 
 gislate at the distance of two sessions off. If the people shall be dissatisfied, according 
 to the case put by the gentleman, the remedy is easy. Let there be an understand- 
 ing that the extra wages shall not be received. 
 
 The question being put, the amendment was negatived. Ayes 37, Noes 50. 
 
 The thirteenth resolution, which is the last reported by the Legislative Committee, 
 was then passed by without amendment. It is in the words following : 
 
 " Resolved, That no Senator or Delegate shall, during the term for which he shall 
 have been elected, be appointed to any civil ofnce of profit under this State, Vi^hich 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 461 
 
 shall have been created, or the emoluments of which shall have been increased during 
 such term, except such' offices as may be filled by elections by the people." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved to take up the second resolution, (on the subject of the 
 census.) but after some conversation as to the next subject to be considered, 
 
 Mr. Nicholas moved that the Committee rise : the motion prevailed. Ayes 44, 
 Noes 42. 
 
 The Committee rose accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Mercer moved a resolution, which was referred to the Committee of the 
 Whole, viz: 
 
 " Resolved, That all taxes on lands, slaves, and horses, shall be founded on a fair as- 
 sessment of their value, that no one of these subjects shall be taxed separately from the 
 other two, and that w-hen taxed, the same rate shall be charged and levied upon all." 
 
 Mr. Doddridcre moved to take up the second resolution about the census ; and then 
 proposed the following substitute to his former proposition : 
 
 Second resolution, second line, after t-aken,'" strike out to the end of the resolution, 
 and insert " in the year Ic^SS, and in every tenth year thereafter, and upon every such 
 census being taken, and also upon the next census taken under the authority of the 
 United States, a new apportionment of Representation shall be made, according to 
 the principles declared in the foregoing resolution, (if the state of the population shall 
 have so changed, as to render the same necessary,) and upon every apportionment 
 hereafter to be made, there shall be a new assessment of lands for the purposes of 
 taxation." 
 
 Mr. Massie then moved that the resolution proposed by Mr. Gordon be pointed for 
 the use of the members ; and Mr. Goode made a similar motion respecting Mr. Dod- - 
 dridge's amendment in relation to the census; and the printing was ordered accord- 
 
 And thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, November 26, 1829, 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr, 
 Douglass of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mason, the Convention passed an order, authorising the Com- 
 mittee of the Whole to have such printing executed, as they might judge conducive 
 to the dispatch of the public business 3 and then. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Macrae, certain documents were ordered to be printed. 
 
 The House went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell at first, in the Chair; 
 but, his voice being impaired by a severe cold, he soon after requested Mr. P. P. Bar- 
 bour to take his place as Chairman. 
 
 And the question being on the following amendment offered by Mr. Doddridge, to " • 
 the second resolution of the Legislative Committee: 
 
 Second resolution, second line, after taken," strike out to the end of the resolu- 
 tion, and insert in the year 1835, and in every tenth year thereafter, and upon every 
 such Census being taken, and also upon the next Census talven under the authority 
 of the United States, a new apportionment of representation shall be made, according 
 to the principles declared in the foregoing resolution, (if the state of the population 
 shall have so changed, as to render the same necessary.) and upon every apportion- 
 ment hereafter to be made, there shall be a new assessment of lands for the purposes 
 of taxation." 
 
 Mr. Johnson objected to the amendment, and stated the expense which would have 
 to be incurred, if an assessment was made every five years, (reckoning the State and 
 Federal Census :) he referred to a statement from the Auditor's Office, for the expense 
 of the last assessment of lands, to shew that it cost $51,.399 94. This would occur 
 every ten years, in addition to the cost of the Census. He concluded with a motion, 
 that this resolution be, for the present, passed over, which was carried. 
 The fifth resolution, which is in these words, was also passed by: 
 " Resolved, That the number of members in the House of Delegates, ought to be re- 
 duced, so that the same be not less than one hundred and twenty, nor more than one 
 hundred and fifty." 
 
 The Committee then proceeded to take up the sixth resolution, which reads as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 " Resolved, That no person ought to be elected a member of the Senate of this State, 
 who is not at least thirty years of age." 
 
 Mr. Bayly moved to amend the resolution, by striking out the Avord " thirty" and 
 inserting " twenty-five." 
 
 In support of this amendment, he addressed the Committee as follo^vs : 
 
462 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — I cannot agree to the resolution which requires the age to be longer 
 in the Constitution we are endeavouring to make, than in the old Constitution, with- 
 out very strong reasons to justify the cliange. For, although we have iieard very 
 many and great complaints from various parts of the State against the Constitution, 
 in most parts of its organization, yet I have never heard a whisper of disapprobation 
 from any portion of tlie Commonwealth, or from any man, that the Senators were not 
 of sufficient age at twenty-five. It seems to me, that this part of the Constitution, 
 heretofore, has been considered by all, free from exception, until we have met in 
 Convention, and an imaginary evil is now supposed to exist. And yet gentlemen, 
 who are very unwilling to make, and resist with all their force and power of argu- 
 ment, any and every change in those very great defects in the Constitution which 
 have compelled tlie people to convene this Convention to remove, seem determined 
 to change some of those parts of the Constitution wliich now place no restraint upon 
 the people. But, such parts of tlie Constitution as the people have demanded shall be 
 so altered or amended, whereby they shall have greater power in the Government 
 than they have heretofore possessed, are to remain unaltered and unalterable, and a 
 strong limitation put upon their right of electing the man of their choice, who they 
 desire to be tlieir representative, and upon the supposition that they cannot distinguish 
 between the merits of old and young men; the young man without experience, and 
 the old man who has not profited by experience. 
 
 Has a single or solitary instance been quoted, where the Commonwealth has re- 
 ceived any injury from the very numerous number of young men of great merit and 
 promise, which the people, the freeholders, have introduced into their two Houses of 
 General Assembly, that thereby in early life, they may acquire those useful and ne- 
 cessary accomplishments, which will in due time fit them for the Councils of the 
 Union.? The people are to be restricted from selecting a man under thirty years of 
 age, to deliberate with grave Senators, who will be quick to correct any error which 
 will lead him from his duty; but should his aged companions in the Senate, not re- 
 strain the youthful Senators of twenty-five years from doing wrong, his constituents 
 will, at the next election, apply the corrective. You add restriction upon the people 
 when they elect or appoint to office, but when the General Assembly or your Execu- 
 tive elect or appoint to office, no restriction will then be met with in your Constitu- 
 tion. Your Judges, your Generals, your Auditor, Treasurer, and all the host of civil 
 and military officers, will be created without the requisite of any qualification of age : 
 I might add your Councillors of State; but they are dead, and nothing but a miracle 
 can bring to life. The only cases where age will be required as a qualification to office, 
 is, when the people choose ; then they are to be restrained in their election, to mem- 
 bers of the General Assembly, and in the election of the Governor, who is to be thirty 
 years of age and elected by the people, as seems to be at this time the determination 
 of the Convention, which I hope and trust will be adhered to. 
 
 When we consider the reduction we are making of the number of Legislators, and 
 that half the counties which heretofore have been privileged with two Law-givers, 
 will hereafter only have one, it may readily be supposed that they will be more solicit- 
 ous upon whom their choice will fall, and will select their brightest man, be he 
 young or old. A majority of the States finding no evil resulting, from permitting 
 their young men early in life to enter into their service in deliberative assemblies, 
 have required the age of twentj^-one for a Representative, and twenty-five for a Sena- 
 tor ; and some of these modern Constitutions may have been copied from the Virginia 
 Constitution, which is not only the oldest written Constitution of any of the States of 
 this Confederation, but it is believed it is the oldest written Constitution of Govern- 
 ment in the world. Why then shall we change this feature which has been approved ? 
 Sir, the people may, can, and ought to be trusted, to select without restriction as to 
 age after twenty-five, whosoever they wish to be their rulers. It will not do so often 
 to say, that the citizens of Virginia are so virtuous, wise and independent in voting 
 viva voce for their agents, and yet restrain them from promoting their interest by se- 
 lecting a rising genius of great expectations to advocate their rights. By this resolu- 
 tion, you compel them to turn away from a man who has every qualification except 
 age, to another who has no other qualification. But, Sir, so far from this provision 
 producing mischief, and I think it has produced none, for none has been stated or 
 complained of, it has produced much good. Soon after the age of twenty-one, the 
 three venerable gentlemen who stand at the head of this Convention, (Ex-Presidents 
 Madison and Monroe, and Chief Justice Marshall,) entered into the service of Virgi- 
 nia : to these I may add the gentleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell.) Another gen- 
 tleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Grigsby,) in this Convention, is not now twenty-three years 
 old, and yet he has been twice elected by the citizens of that Borough, to represeiit 
 them in General Assembly. I may mention the names of many more illustrious citi- 
 zens of Virginia to justify my motion ; one more I will refer to, the gentleman from 
 Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph,) when elected to Congress, it was supposed he had not 
 acquired the age of twenty-five years, (which I believe was the fact,) and when called 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 463 
 
 upon to take the usual oatlis in the Hall of the Representatives of the Nation, the 
 Speaker demanded as by authority, " Sir, are you twenty-Jive years old?''' The reply 
 of the young Statesman struck him dumb: "Go axd ask my Coxstituexts;" and 
 that was the proper reply. His constituents were the rightful judges of his qualifica- 
 tions, and if that gentleman had studied from that to this time, for an answer more 
 proper to have been given, he would not have succeeded. 
 
 A newspaper I have received this morning, gives the ages of the fifty-six illustrious 
 men at the time they signed the Declaration of Independence of the United States. 
 
 Edward Rutledge was twenty-six years old, Thomas Lynch, jr. twenty-seven; 
 Thomas Heyward, jr. thirty. These three, the youngest of the fitty-six, were from 
 South Carohna. Benjamin Rush thirty ; Elbridge Gerry thirty-one; William Hooper 
 thirty-one; Thomas Stone thirty-two: Thomas Jefferson thirty-three; James Wilson 
 thirty-three. 
 
 It is not probable, that the first entrance into public life of these men, was in that 
 glorious Congress, and I may safe!}^ presume, that they had often been chosen by 
 their countrymen, to fill public stations, before they were selected for that great and 
 trying occasion. 
 
 William Pitt the younger, who is considered by Englishmen, the wisest jMinister 
 England ever had, took upon himself the government of that wonderful people, at the 
 age of twenty-two or tweniy-three, and sustained himself against every opposition, 
 for twenty-three years, and until his death. 
 
 Taking'^the example of our own and other States and countries, it does appear to 
 me, that the restriction upon the people which we are about to impose in choosino- their 
 Representatives, is not necessary, and therefore I have made the motion. 
 
 Mr. Jovxes addressed tlie Committee, in substance, as follows: 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — The resolutions relative to the ages of Senators and Deleffates, 
 having been adopted in the Legislative Committee on my motion, it may, perhaps, be 
 expected of me to state the reasons which induced me to propose to chano-e the pro- 
 visions of the present Constitution on these subjects. I confess I do not regard it as a 
 matter of very great importance, that Senators should be thirty, rather than tVenty-five 
 years of age ; but there are several considerations which induce me to prefer thirty as 
 the age of Senators. There is no general rule without exceptions; and I admit, that 
 one of the greatest Statesmen England ever produced, was Prime Minister of that 
 Kingdom at much less than tliirty years of age. And our own country has produced 
 some splendid examples of very early developments of great powers of mind. Some of 
 the greatest orators the world has ever knoAvn. have attained very hig-li distinction 
 before the age of thirty : but these exceptions do not disprove the propriety of the pro- 
 posed change. 
 
 It is not enough to fit a man for the duties of a Senator, that he should be a man of 
 brilliant genius, or great powers of eloquence; but it is necessary that he should pos- 
 sess a maturity of judgment, and a knowledge of the Constitution and laws of the 
 State, which very few young men possess. It is proposed that the Senate should be 
 retained at its present number of twenty-four members ; and a bare majority being 
 necessary to form a quorum, the votes of seven members (which is a majority of a 
 majority,) will be sufficient to enact or repeal the most important laws. The territory 
 of Virginia, from its extent and fertility, is able to sustain more than twice the num- 
 ber of its present population ; and with this increased population, and from other 
 causes, it may reasonabty be expected that new interests will spring up, and whatever 
 may be the increased population, and however diversified may be^the interests of so- 
 ciety, it is proposed forever to limit the number of Senators to twenty -four. 
 
 In addition to the ordinary powers of legislation, it is proposed in the Convention 
 to confer new and important powers on the Senate, It is proposed, to give to the 
 Senate the power of trying all impeachments — to give it a concvrrent vote with the 
 House of Delegates in the appointment of all important officers of the Government, or 
 to constitute it as a Council, by whose advice and consent, the Governor is to make 
 such appointments ; and it is also proposed to give to the Senate and House of Dele- 
 gates, by concurrent vote, the power of removing Judges from office. All these im- 
 portant powers to be exercised by twenty-four men, it seems to me, require that tliese 
 twenty-four men, should be men who possess great wisdom and experience, and that 
 maturity of judgment and discretion, which age alone can o-ive. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, there is another consideration which it appears to me. is enti- 
 tled to some weight upon this subject. Although I ardently hope that the Union of 
 these States may be perpetual, yet in modern "times, a dissolution of the Union is so 
 frequently spoken of, that there is some reason to apprehend that that is not merely a 
 possible event. If such a catastrophe should ever happen to this confederacy, the 
 Legislature of Virginia, will not then, as at present, be confined to legislation for the 
 internal concerns of the State, but other new and important duties will devolve upon, 
 them in reference to the connexion of Virginia, with the great family of nations. Such 
 
464 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 important duties as would then devolve upon the Legislature, ought not to be per- 
 formed, except by the wisest and most experienced of the sons of Viro inia. 
 
 It is said, that the people may be safely trusted on this subject, and that they are 
 the best judges of the fitness of candidates for office, and that there is no dano-er of 
 their electing a man to the Senate who is not well quahfied lor the station. I should 
 be the last man to question the competency of the people to decide upon the qualifi- 
 cations of candidates for office ; or to impose any improper restrictions upon the exer- 
 cise of their discretion ; but the arguments of gentlemen upon this subject prove too 
 much. The restraints imposed by a people upon themselves in their fundamental 
 laws, are restraints imposed by them for their own benefit. If no restraint should be 
 imposed upon the right of selection by the people, why do gentlemen propose that 
 Senators should be tzvejity-five years of age ? Why not trust the people to elect Sena- 
 tors at twent^y-one years of age ? Nay, Sir, even less than twenty -one ; for, I dare say 
 that some young men might be found even under twenty-one, who would, jwssibly 
 make good Senators. 
 
 The same argument would apply with equal force to the Constitution of the United 
 States. The wise men who made that Constitution, required the President to be 
 thirty-five, Senators thirty, and Representatives twenty-five years of age; and the 
 Constitution having been adopted by the people, shews that they approved of those 
 limitations on their own discretion. The united voice of the people of the United 
 States would not be sufficient to elect to the Presidential Chair the most distinguished 
 man in the nation, unless he were thirty-five years of age. Why not remove all these 
 Constitutional restraints, and confide to the discretion of the people and to the State 
 Legislatures, the power of electing a President, Senators and Representatives of 
 whatever ages they choose ? The people of other States have thought it wise to im- 
 pose limitations upon themselves in their Constitutions upon this subject. In four of 
 the States, Senators are required to be thirty years of age, in one twenty-eight, in four 
 twenty-seven, in one twenty-six, and in all the rest of the States, twenty-five years 
 of age are required. In two of the States, Representatives are required to be twenty- 
 five years of age, in three twenty-four, and in one twenty-two. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, I consider it much more important to require Delegates to be 
 twenty-five, than Senators thirty years of age. Between the ages of twenty-one and 
 twenty-five, young men ought to be engaged in study, and in preparing themselves 
 to become members of the Legislature ; and the observation of every man who has 
 ,been a member of the House of Delegates, I am sure, has furnished him with oppor- 
 tunities of seeing young men under twenty-five years of age in that House, who had 
 not sufficient experience and judgment to fit them to be Legislators. 
 
 I know that some gentlemen are opposed to changing tlie existing state of things, 
 unless great practical evils have resulted from them. Innovations upon established 
 regulations on important subjects, I admit, ought to be cautiously made ; but in the 
 proposed changes, no possible danger can arise. If the proposed changes would ex- 
 clude some young men well qualified, they would also, probably, exclude more who 
 had not sufficient experience for the important duties of legislation; and those who 
 were qualified, would be still better qualified, after a few more years devoted to the 
 acquisition of knowledge and experience. 
 
 The question being taken, the motion of Mr. Bayly was negatived — Ayes 37, Noes 
 45. (Mr. Marshall Aye, Messrs. Madison and Monroe, JYo.) 
 
 The seventh resolution was then read as follows : 
 Resolved, That no person ought to be elected a member of the House of Delegates 
 of this State, who is not at least twenty-five years of age." 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved to amend it, so as to make the age of a Delegate twenty-one 
 instead of twenty-five. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge opposed the motion, and it was lost — Ayes 37. (Mr. Madison 
 among the Ayes.) 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mercer, the Committee then proceeded to the consideration of 
 the report of the Executive Committee. 
 
 The first resolution having been read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Chief Executive Office of this Commonwealth, ought to be 
 vested in a Governor." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved the following amendment: 
 
 " To be elected once in every three years, at the time of the general annual elec- 
 tions, by the persons qualified to vote for the most numerous branch of the General 
 Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved to amend Mr. Doddridge's amendment, by inserting the 
 words " most numerous branch of," which was accepted by Mr. D. as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved to amend the amendment by striking out the words after " elect- 
 ed," and inserting " to be elected by the two Houses of the General Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Leigh said here was a proposition of the Legislative Committee to elect a Go- 
 vernor. The second resolution is to abolish the Council. The proposition of the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 465 
 
 gentleman from Brooke, is to give the election to the qualified voters. If this amend- 
 ment were rejected, the Constitution would stand as it now stands. He wished to 
 know if such be the fact. 
 
 At the suggestion of the Chair, who said that if no proposition to amend were car- 
 ried, the Constitution would remain as it was, Mr. Leigh withdrew his motion to 
 amend. 
 
 Mr. Leigh then called upon gentlemen for some reasons, founded on practical views, 
 for the change they required. Upon them was the onus prohandi. 
 
 Mr. Powell regretted that the state of his voice prevented him from taking the 
 course which he otherwise would, by presentmg the amendment which he had him- 
 self moved to this whole report. Mr. P. then moved to pass by the resolution, and to 
 take up the other reports. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said he did not know that the gentleman from Chesterfield had any 
 right to call upon him to answer interrogatories. It was a practice growing upon the 
 Convention. He had been a few days ago charged with being cognizant of a motion 
 in the House of Delegates, when he was not a member of that branch, but he was not 
 permitted to explain, and to deny that he was a member; and the gentleman then 
 proceeded to ask him questions as to what he would do in certain cases. Pie denied 
 this right, and declared that he was at liberty to address the Committee on the sub- 
 ject of his proposition, or to submit it to a silent vote. He suggested to the gentleman 
 from Frederick, to permit the question now to be taken on the report, and reserve his 
 argument for a future stage of the proceedings. 
 
 Mr. Powell persisted in his motion, and gave the reasons which induced him to view 
 the election of the Governor, as the most important question which was likely to arise 
 in the consideration of this report. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said that as it was at his instance, the report of the Executive Committee 
 was taken up, he felt it necessary to make a few observations, with respect to the mo- 
 tion made by the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell). If he thought that the 
 gentleman from Frederick, from his present indisposition, would do any injustice to 
 the advocacy of the substitute w^hich he submitted, for the Executive report, he cer- 
 tainly would not press the decision at the present time. But if that gentleman would 
 reflect and perceive the converse of his argument, he would find that we were invol- 
 ved in the same difficulty from which he wished to extricate himself. On this prin- 
 ciple we cannot proceed one step ; we cannot move at all. It was objected the other 
 day when it was proposed to take this report under consideration, that it would be im- 
 proper, until we had settled the whole basis of Representation. There is no report, 
 which does not, in part, involve in its consideration, that of another report. The 
 Executive depends on the Legislative, and the Judicial on both^^the Legislative and 
 Executive Departments. We cannot decide any proposition separately : every ques- 
 tion is argued hypotheticalJy in the Committee, and inferences are drawn in this 
 manner. Suppose the Executive power is to be enlarged, then we are to consider 
 the expediency of vesting the power of appointment in the people ; if the Executive 
 powers remain as they are, then we must consider whether he is to be appointed ac- 
 cording to the present Constitution. At last when we have settled the question in 
 the Committee, we then go into the Plouse, with a full knowledge of the whole prin- 
 ciples of the proposition, and we can vote and decide, not hypothetically. If then it 
 was decided, that the Executive is to be elected by the people, he would vote to give 
 him powers to act independently of the Legislature. If the Executive was made the 
 creature of the Legislature, he would regulate his vote accordingly. He said the gen- 
 tleman from Frederick, would have an opportunity to offer his substitute hereafter. 
 The Executive report will be open to amendment : he hoped, therefore, he would with- 
 draw his motion, so that the report might be considered. 
 
 Mr. Leigh asked, if it was or was not parliamentary, to ask of the friends of a pro- 
 position to give their reasons for it. 
 
 The Chair said there war, no parliamentary rule on the subject. The only rule is 
 to avoid personality, and imputation of motive. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he was sure he had attributed no personal motive. He asked the 
 gentleman from Brooke, if he supposed, he had any authority for carrying a propo- 
 sition through the House, without assigning any reasons, or, if he had a right to take 
 offence against any one for requiring reasons? He wished to know, if it was to be 
 expected that a system which has all the sanctions of time in its favour, was to be at 
 once changed at the suggestion of the gentleman, without any reasons being as- 
 signed. He had thought our object was to compare our reasons, and he was willing 
 to meet the consequences of any change of reasons. When he submitted a pro- 
 position, he considered himself required to state any reasons without any specific 
 call. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge wished to say one word. The gentleman from Chesterfield had 
 made an amendment to his proposition, and before he sat down, seemed to call on him 
 in a somewhat peremptory manner. He stated that he was as little disposed as any 
 
 59 
 
466 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 man to look at the conduct of any one in an unfavourable view ; and was as ready to 
 make this explanation to the gentleman from Chesterfield, as to any gentleman. He 
 said, that as this projoosition was to be submitted to the people, and the subject had been 
 sufficiently discussed, he had a right to leave the question to be taken, without giving 
 any reasons. 
 
 After an explanation from Mr. Leigh and Mr. Doddridge, Mr. Powell withdrew his 
 motion to pass by the proposition. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he would now assign his reasons for the proposed change in 
 the Executive, and he would do so, without adverting to any of the existing abuses in 
 its constitution. In the first place, he objected in theory to its power of appointment, 
 as sufficient to show that the Executive Department should undergo a new organiza- 
 tion. If we are agreed on any one principle which has been discussed amongst us, it 
 is that the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Departments of the Government, 
 should be separated, and that the duties of neither should be exercised by another de- 
 partment. This, with some exceptions, would be admitted as a general rule. 
 
 What is the Executive of Virginia.? It is nothing more nor less, than an emana- 
 tion of the Legislative pov/er. He is appointed every year, and is responsible, only 
 to those to whom he is looking for a re-appointment. And the Executive Magistrate 
 by an interpretation of the Constitution, has been deprived of all Executive power. 
 By a construction which was given to it, in the time of General Wood, it was decided^ 
 that when the Executive Council was divided, the Governor had no power to give a 
 casting vote. This was the prevailing doctrine to the present time. The Governor 
 requires no other qualification, than to be a gentleman, to be enabled to fill his office. 
 All he has to do, is to write his name when commanded; and not till he is com- 
 manded by the Executive Council, can he do so. He is the creature of the Legisla- 
 ture and not of the people, and he is responsible to the Legislature alone, except when 
 the process of impeachment is resorted to; and from the tenure of office, it would be 
 useless. He understood from the ISTotes of Mr. Jeffisrson, that the Executive was 
 nothing but an emanation of the Legislative power. He had not the Notes here now, 
 but he had read them so often, and they made such an impression on him, that he 
 could readily give their substance. Mr. Jefferson proved, that the Executive was not 
 a co-ordinate branch of the Government ; that it was not responsible to the people. 
 The conclusion was, that the Executive power resulted in the Legislative body. It 
 was asked had the Judicial body a sufficiency of independence. Their tenure is, quam 
 (Liu scsc bene gesserint. This did not make a Judge independent, because after pro- 
 viding an adequate salary, the words, " which shall not be denied during the continu- 
 ance of offi.ce," are omitted. 
 
 The Legislature could thus starve a Judge out of office. The Judiciary is in fine de- 
 pendent on the Legislature. What are the words of Mr. Jefferson.? " When all the 
 powers of Government, Legislative, Executive and Judicial, result to the Legislative 
 body, and the concentration of them is in the same hands, it is a precise definition of 
 despotic power." Independent of this authority, is it not so in fact .? What can prevent 
 the Executive Council from doing an unpopular act, since they are not farther ac- 
 countable to the General Assembly, and have no motive to induce them to act pro- 
 perly, except that the General Assembly may not re-elect them 
 
 Another defect is, that effectually and efficiently they are in no manner responsible. 
 In the Council, which consists of eight members, unless there is a majority on every 
 question, the Governor has no responsibility. The Executive Council is periodically 
 removed, not appointed, and this was a most odious and disgusting office. Two of the 
 eight must go out, and this circumstance creates amongst them a disposition to elec- 
 tioneer in the General Assembly against each other. The result is, the dishonour of 
 him who is removed from office. 
 
 Among the complaints which brought this Convention together, and which were 
 published in the Gazettes of the country, was one against the E'xecutive. After the 
 extension of the Right of Suffrage, what the people next desired, was the establish- 
 ment of an independent, responsible Executive. If the Executive Council be abol- 
 ished, tlie Governor will be responsible for whatever abuse may be committed, and 
 there will be no necessity to refer for the Ayes and Noes to the Executive Council 
 book. The objections against the Executive, would come with greater force, espe- 
 cially if he be invested v/ith the pov/er of making appoiutments. 
 
 The objection, therefore, to the constitution of the present Executive, is, being an 
 emanation of the Legislative body; as lacking independence, and, as not possessing 
 the power necessary for the Executive of any country. He would not go further in 
 his argument. It was said that no abuses existed; that none had taken place under 
 the present system. He was not prepared to go into this subject; yet all had not 
 given satisfaction. Many of the appointments have given dissatisfaction ; there have 
 been many made independent of, and against the nomination of the county courts. 
 There was another subject which he had omitted to mention. An increase of power 
 has devolved upon the Executive by an enactment of the Legislature. He referred 
 
DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 46f 
 
 to the administration of the Literary Fund, and of the fund for Internal Improvement ; 
 the distribution of which the Executive possesses, not in virtue of any constitutional 
 power it enjoys in this respect, but by an enactment of the Legislature. The con- 
 sideration surely shews the necessity of there being a greater responsibility on the 
 part of the Executive. He had briefly and imperfectly assigned his objections to the 
 present system. As to the power of impeaching the Executive, it was futile. We 
 were not an impeaching people. There was but one impeachmxent which ever took 
 place here, and that was made at the request of the gentleman himself. But as to the 
 impeachment of a Governor, whose tenure of office is but one jrear, it was useless, as 
 - his time would expire before the impeachment could be effected. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said, he would suggest an amendment to his colleague, to strike out 
 the word three," and leave a blank. He had intended to vote for the appointment 
 of the Executive by the Legislature, if the election was made annually. His reason 
 for making this motion was, to have the most responsible Executive in the United 
 States, which he thought would be thus attained. The blank m.ay be again filled vvith 
 ^' two," or with " three," if the Committee prefer the latter number. For himself, he 
 preferred that the appointment should be made every two years, if the Executive is 
 to be elected directly by the people; but if by the General Assembly, he preferred an 
 annual election, as the Executive was thus held as a tenancy from year to year, and 
 therefore more responsible. An annual election by the people would be inconvenient ; 
 an annual election by the Legislature, constituted as that body now is, he would never 
 consent to. He would move that the word three" be stricken out. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge accepted the modification proposed by his colleague. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said, he would further remark, that he was opposed to the augmenta- 
 tion of power in the Executive branch of the Government. It was dangerous. He 
 thought the weakest Executive in the world to be the best. It v/as the safest. No 
 original good whatever can result to tlie people from the power of this brancii. It is 
 the business of the Executive to see that the laws sliall be faithfully executed. All 
 good resulting from Government to the people, must originate and come from the 
 Legislature. It can originate no where else. But so far as the Executive is con- 
 cerned in the execution of the laws, there ought to be a high responsibility. He 
 would vote for the amendment, but against every thing calculated to augment Exe- 
 cutive power or influence. He wished to keep that branch feeble. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge accepted the motion as a modification of his amendment, so as to 
 leave the term of service blank for the present. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 It appears to me, Mr. Chairman, that we are passing over vital interests, rapidly, 
 and without due consideration. This is one of the most important branches of the 
 Government, and a sense of duty impels me, to state the result of my reflections on 
 the subject. There is also, a relation, in which I stand to this question, which renders 
 it proper that I should address the Committee. I had the honour to submit to the 
 Executive Committee, of which I was a mtember, a proposition relative to the Execu- 
 tive Department; which since, with the consent of the Convention, was laid on the 
 table, and referred to this Committee. I have announced my intention, to submit it 
 as a substitute for a part of the report of the Executive Committee. The resolution 
 now before the Committee, is limited to the declaration, that the Governor ought to 
 be elected by the people, instead of the Legislature, But there are other matters 
 connected with the organization of the Executive Department, which have been al- 
 ready adverted to in debate, and which, in truth, will have an important bearing on 
 the question now before the Committee. The proposition I submitted, was, that the 
 ninth and tenth sections of the Constitution should be retained, and that the eleventh 
 should be substituted by a new section, which provides for retaining four members of 
 the Council, one of them to be chosen and act as Lieutenant Governor ; half the 
 Council to go out at the end of two 3'ears, the other two at the end of four, so that 
 though the members are to be re-eligible, it shall be in the power of the Assembly, if 
 necessary, to renovate half the body once in two years. It is also proposed to abolish 
 the present mode of ejecting members from the Council, and to allow them salaries, 
 moderate but adequate. 
 
 It is stated by the gentleman from Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge) that one object of 
 calling the Convention, was to abohsb the Executive Council. I do not know what 
 other gentlemen's constituents may think on the subject, but I believe mine have ex- 
 pressed no opinion on the matter, and I feel myself free to consult m}^ own views of 
 what is right and proper. 
 
 I admit, that I have my fears, that any attempt that I may make to defend the 
 Council, will prove fruitless, because many seem to entertain strong prepossessions 
 against it. But this will not deter me from doing my duty, in endeavouring to de- 
 monstrate, that the public interests will be promoted, by preserving tliis branch of the 
 Executive, under certain modifications. Whether the Council ought to be abolished, 
 depends upon our ideas, of what are the proper characteristics of Ihe Executive De- 
 
468 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 partment. I take it for granted, that every gentleman would think it proper, to con- 
 struct the Executive Department on principles suited to republican institutions. The 
 Government from which we were separated by the Revolution, was one which con- 
 centrated inordinate authority in the hands of a single Executive Magistrate. The 
 monarch had the powers of war and peace, was the fountain of honour and office, 
 and could increase the House of Peers, who are a body of hereditary nobles, to an 
 unlimited extent. Look at the preamble to your Constitution, which enumerates the 
 causes which induced our ancestors to separate from Great Britain, and you will see, 
 that our revolution was to a great extent, founded on the tyrannical and oppressive 
 exercise of the vast powers and prerogatives of the British King. Smarting as our 
 ancestors did, under what they declared to be " a detestable and insupportable tyranny," 
 it was natural as well as proper, that in the Government the}'' were about to establish, 
 they sliould endeavour to conform the structure of the Executive Department to the 
 genius of a Republic. But, now, we are about, it would seem, to depart from these 
 principles. We are to have a splendid Executive. It is contemplated to vest this 
 authority in a single magistrate ; and the appointment to all offices in the gift of this 
 Department, is to be given to him, as some contend, without controul, and as others 
 maintain, with no other check, save the power of rejecting his nominations by the 
 Senate. I am not prepared for this. The gentleman from Monongalia, (Mr. Mor- 
 gan,) says he is for a feeble Executive. This is not precisely the phrase I would 
 adopt. I wish the Executive to have power enough to execute the laws and no 
 more. I would not invest it with splendor, or extensive patronage, or make it the 
 mark, or instrument of inordinate ambition. Our Executive as at present constituted, 
 is simple and unostentatious. Your Governor is nothing more than a citizen called 
 upon, temporarily, to execute the laws; this done, he returns to the level of the great 
 body of the people. Whilst in office, he has with the advice of the Council all the 
 power which is necessary to give efficacy to your Government. What more can be 
 desired.^ If you invest all power and extensive patronage in a single magistrate, you 
 create a petty monarchy. The gentlemen who are on the other side of this question, 
 admit the propriety of interposing checks to prevent the abuse of power in the other 
 Departments of Government ; but the framers of our Constitution felt that these 
 checks were equally, indeed, more necessary in the Executive. The check they in- 
 terposed, was the Executive Council. This is a constitutional body, not dependent 
 on the Governor. 
 
 The President of the United States has enormous powers and patronage, and he 
 has no constitutional Council. The Constitution authorises him to call for the opinion 
 of the principal officer, in each of the Executive Departments, upon any subject re- 
 lating to the duties of his office ; and usage has erected these officers into what is 
 called the Cabinet. But there is all the diiference in the world between such a body, 
 and a Council organized as ours. These Executive officers hold at the will of the 
 President, and he can act without, or contrary to their advice. The Governor can do 
 no important act, without the advice of Council. They not only know his acts, but 
 they understand the motives and secret springs which set these acts in motion. If 
 you entrust power to one man to act in the dark, and without the possibility of de- 
 termining his motives, you give facilities and temptations to do wrong, you enable 
 him to indulge a spirit of favouritism, and to confer offices, in pi'omotion of objects of 
 personal ambition. 
 
 By a constitutional Council, you superadd to the responsibility of the Governor, the 
 means, if not of preventing the formation of improper schemes, yet of their being 
 carried into effect. 
 
 But, it is proposed to give the election of Governor to the people. It seems to me, 
 that the power is essentially exercised by the people, when carried into effect by their 
 immediate representatives. Both the Governor and the members of the Legislature 
 are elected for short periods, which constitutes a sufficient security for the proper ex- 
 ercise of this power of appointment, by those to whom the present Constitution has 
 entrusted it. This is one of those selections for office, which can be best exercised 
 by intermediate agents. It is impossible that the candidates for Governor, can be 
 known but in a very few counties of the State. But, to the members of the Legis- 
 lature, who are on the scene of action, all the public men of the State, who would be 
 fit for the station, would be known, and they could make the best choice. If the 
 Governor is to be elected by the people at large, they must depend upon the repre- 
 sentations made to them of the characters of the candidates. The persons who may 
 make these representations, will, in effect, control the election. In the one case, then, 
 the elections would be made by the representatives of the people, acting under a 
 sense of duty and official responsibility'; in the other, by the influence of heated and 
 interested partizans. 
 
 But it is said, that the creation of a single Executive magistrate, and vesting his 
 choice in the people, will increase responsibility. Strange, that a large increase of 
 power, and the investiture in a single hand, should have tliat effect. It is further 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 469 
 
 said, that the existence of the Council destroys all responsibility in the Governor. 
 Tills is not so. The Governor cannot act vdthout the advice of Council, and that 
 advice is to be spread on their journal, signed by each member, and laid before the 
 Legislature when required ; besides, any member may enter his protest. The Gover- 
 nor and Council then, are both responsible ; the former for following, or not following 
 their advice, and the latter for that which they give. I beg gentfemen before they 
 adopt a svstem which gives all power and patronage to one man, and the election of 
 him to the people, to turn their eyes to the operation of this system in our sister 
 States. Look at Xew York, Pennsylvania and Kentucky. It appears from the de- 
 bates of the Convention in New York, that before the recent change in her Consti- 
 tution, about eight thousand offices, were in the gift of the Executive, including 
 niihtia appointments, prothonotaries and a multitude of smaller offices. Whenever 
 the election comes round, in some of these States, the community is convulsed to the 
 centre. Every man is made an office-hunter and dabbler in elections. As soon as 
 a new Governor is elected, all the incumbents in office go by tlie board. And then 
 begins a new struggle, so that the State is kept in continual ferment and agitation. 
 The inevitable effiict of these systems is, not only to destroy the peace and happiness 
 of the people, but to undermine their political morality. Under our plan, the machine 
 of Government works so smoothly, that whilst our Executive possesses power all-suf- 
 ficient to execute the laws, no sensation is felt on the change of the Chief ^Magistrate, 
 and it is not unlikely that many citizens of the State are frequently ignorant who the 
 Governor is, unless he happens to be a man who has acquired distinction in other 
 pohtical stations. 
 
 But it is objected by tlie gentleman from Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge.) that in giving 
 the election of the Governor to the Legislature, you violate that valuable pohtical 
 maxim, which requires the different departments to be kept separate and distinct. If 
 the gentleman will advert to the forty-seventh Number of the Federahst. in which 
 this subject is discussed, he will find that the true meaning of the maxim laid down 
 by Montesquieu, is that where the ichole imicer of one department is exercised by the 
 same hands which possess the ichole poicer of another department, the fundamental 
 principles of a free Constitution are subverted." And that he did not mean, "'that 
 these departments ought to have no partial agency in. or no controul over, the acts of 
 each other," And this Number also demonstrates by reference to the British Govern- 
 ment, and the Governments of the different States (to which may be now added, that 
 of the United States.) that it is extremely difficult, if not unpossible, to prevent the 
 powers of one department from running into those of_another. Besides, how does the 
 power of appointment of Governor, confer on the Legislature, Executive power in 
 the sense in which the maxim before quoted, can alone apply .' As weR mi^ht it be 
 contended, that the appointment of the Judges, confers on the Legislature, "Judicial 
 powers. 
 
 But the gentleman from Brooke, says the Governor has no power ; he is a mere 
 cypher. I do not think so. He is not boxmd to obey the advice of the Council. It 
 is true he cannot act without their advice, but he can, after they give it, execute it or 
 not, on his responsibility. This is the uniform construction which has been put on 
 the Constitution. Besides, my plan proposes, that when the Council is divided, the 
 Governor shall have the easting vote. How does it appeaj, that the Governor and 
 Council have not adequate power i Have they not the power to execute the laws ? 
 And have not the laws been always executed Why give them more power .- It can 
 only be necessary to confer splendor and patronage. The powers of the Executive 
 are very considerable. It must be so in every Government in a State as large as 
 this. The power of executing the laws must always be commensurate with the 
 legislation of a country. They have the power of appointing magistrates, sheriffs, 
 all the militia officers, and many others, and the power of filhnor vacancies in various 
 offices during the recess of the Legislature. They have also a general superinten- 
 dence of all the departments, subordinate to them, the Treasurer's office, those of the 
 Auditors, the Penitentiary, to which may be added, the Boards of Internal Improve- 
 ment and the Literary Fund. Can any one man discharofe these various important 
 duties .' In the exercise of the power of appointment, can the Governor possess the 
 local information, or the knowledge of men dispersed over this great State which 
 would enable him to make proper selections .' With a Council of four, elected with 
 any reference to this object, he would have always at hand, the means of makino; a 
 judicious choice. 
 
 There is one power vested in the Executive, which I should be unvriUing to confer 
 on any individual. I mean the power of pardon. Is there any o-entlemanliere, who 
 is willing so to invest tlus power, which may involve the liberty ."and even the life of 
 any citizen of the land.' There is no man, however elevated," however prosperous, 
 however virtuous or chcumspect, such is the frailty of our nature, and such are the 
 accidents and vicissitudes of life, who may not either in his own person, or that of 
 ills connexions, have a deep interest in the exercise of tliis power. 
 
470 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The idea advanced by some, that the Council may be dispensed with, by taking the 
 advice of the Treasurer, Auditors, and some other officers of Government, is not, in 
 my mind, one which can be sustained. The objects for which these officers are 
 selected, are entirely distinct, and they may require different qualifications. But 
 what seems conclusive, is, that these officers are under the supervision, and to a cer- 
 tain extent, the controul of the Executive, and have already laborious duties to per- 
 form, which occupy all their time. It is the opinion of others, that we should con- 
 form our Executive to the model of that of the United States. I should be more dis- \ 
 posed, had I the power, to reverse this proposition. The powers of the Federal Ex- 
 ecutive are enormous, and its patronage most extensive. For this cause, we see the 
 nation frequently convulsed in the choice of this magistrate. The office of President 
 overshadows every other part of the Government. His election absorbs the wishes 
 and thoughts of a large portion of the nation. Other elections, and political mea- 
 sures of vital importance, are too often made subservient to the advancement of the 
 interests of favorite candidates for the Presidency. It is much to be feared, that the 
 conflicts which take place for this glittering object of ambition, may more endanger 
 the permanency of our General Government than any thing else which can happen 
 to it. The remedy would be found in diminishing the power, or, at least the pa- 
 tronage of the Executive of the United States. 
 
 It may be well supposed^ however, that there are some of the powers which are 
 conferred on the Executive of the Union which may be necessary to it, but would 
 be entirely otherwise, as applied to the State Government. In the United States, are 
 invested, the powers of war and peace, the regulation of commerce, and the manage- 
 ment of our external relations. The cares of the State Government are principally 
 confined to the regulation of our internal affairs. And for the management of these, 
 the powers we have given the Executive have been found amply sufficient, and to 
 have been judiciously arranged, under the existing Government. 
 
 The gentleman from Brooke says, that the impeachment to which the Governor is 
 liable, is a mere nominal thing ; it contains no terror, because he can only be im- 
 peached after his office ceases. But will the gentleman recollect, that if convicted 
 on impeachment, he may be disabled to hold any office in future, and subjected to 
 such pains and penalties as may be prescribed by law ? 
 
 The gentlemen who are against the Council, under any modification, have not 
 agreed upon what they will substitute for it. Now, I am persuaded, that whenever 
 they bring forvv'-ard a plan, it will be found that it will not be as efficient, or economi- 
 cal, as the small Council I propose to be retained. 
 
 The Executive Committee have decided there shall be a Lieutenant Governor, but 
 iiave as yet, assigned him no duties. 
 
 He must, if tlie Council be abolished, be a salaried officer. There must be also, 
 some other subordinate and auxiliary officers, to transact the public business. By 
 my plan, the Lieutenant Governor is to be one of the Council, as at present, and to 
 receive no additional salary. 
 
 The Committee will, however, be better enabled to decide, on the intrinsic, or com- 
 parative merits, of what is intended to be substituted, for a Council under any modi- 
 fication, when gentlemen shall see fit, more fully to develop their views on the 
 subject. 
 
 Mr. Henderson remarked, that it was his misfortune, again to differ with the esti- 
 mable gentleman who had just favored the Committee with his views, I v^^ill not, 
 said Mr. H., detain the Committee long, because I am aware, that what I may say, 
 will come recommended neither by weight of reputation, nor by any grace of manner. 
 I agree, Mr. Chairman, that the friends of the proposition itnder consideration, are 
 bound to give reasons to this Convention, and to the people themselves, for the con- 
 templated change, and sound and strong reasons too. Unless this can be done, let 
 the existing mode of election continue. Such, I admit, is the course of prudence and 
 common sense. It really does appear to me, Sir, that it were not difficult to place 
 this matter in a point of light, clearly shewing the propriety of electing the Chief 
 Magistrate of the State by the citizens in their primary capacity. The gentleman 
 from this city, who has just taken his seat, has amused us with something like a de- 
 clamation upon the topic of a splendid Executive. In this, the gentleman has leaped 
 before he reached the stile. He has invested the Governor with an imaginary splen- 
 dor ; and, having done this, he has very gravely proceeded to prove that this gorgeous 
 pageant ought not to be elected by the people. Now, Sir, this is varying the question 
 in a manner singular enough. We contend that the Governor should be elected by 
 the people; and to prove this political position untrue, we are told that lie ought not 
 to be so elected, because he is to be armed with great powers, and arrayed in great 
 magnificence. The presumption is, that this body, in its wisdom, will give to this de- 
 partment of the Government, such powers as are consistent with the interest and ho- 
 nor of the Commonwealth. Thus presuming, we are called upon to decide on the 
 mode of his election. My opinion is, that he ought to be elected by the people, and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 471 
 
 for the space of three years. I voted for striking out the term of years, conceiving it 
 more regular to test the principle first, and fill the blank afterwards. 
 
 Let us then, Mr. Chairman, without heeding nicknames, by which principles are 
 too often prejudiced, proceed with the enquiry. And here, Sir, I venture to assume 
 a ground, the soundness of which may dety criticism, that, as an individual ovght, in 
 no important concern, to do by another ichat he can as iccU do hj himself, so a people 
 ought not to execute by agency that to ichich it is competent in its proper original cha- 
 racter. If this be true, then, we have to ascertain whether the citizens at large can 
 perform this duty, as well as their Legislature, or not. I maintain the aifirmative, not 
 only of this proposition, but of the other one ; that they can perform it better ; and that 
 strong, very strong objections to the action of the Legislature upon the subject, exist. 
 
 What is the nature of the duty ? What the qualifications necessary to its discharge ? 
 Sound understanding and honesty. Are there any recondite principles of science 
 in the matter? Is it complete in its parts .-^ Do any pecuhar difficulties attend, or 
 obscurities hang over it ? No man ought to be a Governor of Virginia, who has not 
 attained considerable age, performed eminent public 'services, and required a diffusive 
 reputation, a high standing. All men of that description are, in the very nature of the 
 thing, generally known to the people. Have the people, then, not judgment enough 
 to discern who is fit, and rectitude enough to have a sufficient regai'd, indeed, for*lieir 
 own interests and dignity, tu choose him when discerned ? I cannot, and will not, im- 
 pute to the sovereign people of this ancient Commonwealth, so much folly, or obli- 
 quity as to doubt it. 
 
 It may not be amiss. Sir, to advert to our sister States for a moment : eighteen elect 
 their Chief Magistrates by the people ; six, including Virginia, by their Legislatures. 
 This is not referred to, in the expectation, that we shall blindly follow their example ;^ 
 but, in the hope that gentlemen will be persuaded to pause, and ponder on the fact, 
 that three-fourths of tlie States in our Union, have adopted the system which we ad- 
 vocate. 
 
 He who will study the European Governments, and especially that of England, 
 will be struck with the idea, that they are built upon the ground of making the prin- 
 ciples of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, conflict with each other in such pro- 
 portions, as to preserve the energy of the whole. Such is the theory of the British 
 Government. I will not examine it now, in tlie abstract, or in its supposed aptitude 
 or inaptitude, to the circumstances or character of that or any other people. Suffice 
 it to say, that no American politician ought to resist the declaration, that the theory 
 of our Governments is the sovereignty of the people, and the responsibility of their 
 agents. And, to maintain this responsibility in its full vigor, the wise men who framed 
 our institutions, have so ordered, that tlie Legislative and Executive Departments, 
 should emanate directly from the people themselves. Thus, each looking to its source, 
 will feel that jealousy of the other, which inspires mutual vigilance, perpetuates li- 
 berty, and establishes public security. This is the broad, the vital, the beautiful prin- 
 ciple, which stands substitute for the European plan of checks and balances. This 
 it is, that gives to the Governments composing our happy political fraternity, tlie 
 spirit which assures us, they will not prove disloyal to the societies over which they 
 preside. Remove this responsibility, destroy this laudable and mauly jealousy; and, al- 
 though circumstances may prostrate the existence of free institutions, they are the sport 
 of casualty. It is no answer to this argument, to say, that all the powers of the Go- 
 vernment are vested, not in one man, but in many. Many tyrants are not more tolera- 
 ble tlian one. It is against the principle of tyranny, that I struggle with, in its details. 
 Sir, said Mr. H., I am advancing no novelties. I am the humble echo of the voice of 
 the fathers of the Revohition; the Statesmen whom Virginia has delighted to honor. 
 Few of those to whom I allude, are gathered to their fathers; another graces, by his 
 venerable presence, the deliberations of this body. 
 
 Here Mr. H. read from Jefferson's Notes on Virginia, as follows : " All the powers, 
 Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary, result to the Legislative body. The concentra- 
 tion of these, in the same hands, is precisely the definition of despotic Government. It 
 will be no alleviation, that these powers will be exercised by a plurahty of hands, and 
 not by a single one. One hundred and sereiity-three Despots, would surely be as op' 
 pressive as one." 
 
 Again: Mr. H. read, '^They, (meaning the Legislature,) have, accordingly, in 
 many instances, decided rights, which should have been left to Judiciary controversy; 
 ajid tfic direction of the Execidive, during the ichole time of their session, is becoming ha- 
 bitual and familiar." 
 
 He then referred to the 47th No. of the Federalist, written by Mr. Madison, and 
 read as follows: "No political truth is of greater intrinsic value, or is stamped with 
 the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty, than that on which the objection 
 is founded. The accumulation of all powers. Legislative, Executive and Judiciary, in 
 the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-ap- 
 pointed, or elective, may. justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." Mr. 
 
 • 
 
472 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 H. here called the attention of the Committee to the 40th No. of the same work, writ- 
 ten by the same gentleman, and read as follows : " It is agreed on all sides, that the 
 powers properly belonging to one of the Departments ought not to be directly and 
 completely administered by either of the other Departments. It is equally evident, 
 that in reference to each other, neither of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, 
 an overruling influence in the administration of their respective powers." Mr. H. then 
 referred to the 51st No. of the Federalist, written by General Hamilton, and read as 
 follows: " In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of 
 the different powers of Government, which, to a certain extent, is admitted to be es- 
 sential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each Department should have 
 a will of its own; and, consequently, should be so constituted, that the members of 
 each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the 
 others." 
 
 Again : " But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several pow- 
 ers in the same Department, consists in giving those who administer each Depart- 
 ment, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resist the encroach- 
 ments of the others. The provision for defence must, in this, as in all other cases, 
 be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to encoun- 
 ter ambition. The interests of the man must be connected with tlie constitutional 
 rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices should 
 be necessary to control the abuses of Government. But what is Government itself, 
 but the greatest of all reflections on human nature.'' If men were angels, no Govern- 
 ment would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor inter- 
 nal controls on Government would be necessary." I may, continued Mr. H., have 
 fatigued the attention, or offended the taste of the Committee. My excuse. Sir, is 
 this : We are boldly called on to give reasons for the alteration v/e project. I am 
 without consequence, true; unknown to fame, and without those powers which ena- 
 ble some men to spread a charm over every topic which they touch. I am also one 
 of a class of men denounced as innovators, visionaries. All that I can hope is, that 
 my arguments, when sustained by the names of Jefferson, Hamilton, and of the ho- 
 nored fellow-labourer of Hamilton, shall be particularly and soberly considered. I ask, 
 Sir, if my doctrine is not fully borne out by the writings of those great men, who, 
 however they may have differed on other subjects, all unite in proclaiming the prin- 
 ciples of the sovereignty of the people, the separation of the different Departments of 
 Government, and their independence of each other, the folly and danger of permitting 
 the one Department to ajyjwint the other, and that to allow one an undue influence indi- 
 rectly, is equivalent to a direct control. These, Sir, are the springs of republican Go- 
 vernment, its vital elements, the pledges of its durability, the rock of its safety. 
 
 Mr. Chairman : Gentlemen in the face of one of the greatest men in America, the 
 political patriarch of Virginia, over the ashes of his illustrious compatriots, persist in 
 denying these great political truths. They pronounce our Governors wise and good, 
 and challenge us] to specify acts of official abuse or turpitude. Surrounded as we 
 are by gentlemen who have acted in the affairs of the Executive : mingling as many 
 of these respectable gentlemen do in our deliberations, shall we perform the invidious 
 and painful office to which we are invited ? And for what? We are not scanning the 
 official conduct of any body. We came here on no such errand. Their acts are em- 
 bodied in the history of the Commonwealth : the citizens know them well. In the 
 year 1781, Thomas Jefferson prepared his Notes. He had recently filled the Chair of 
 Governor, and knew better than any man in the State, the action of the Legislature 
 on the Executive. What does he say ? That the direction of the Executive by the 
 Legislature was habitual and familiar. He had felt it. This is history, not specula- 
 tion. It proves that your Governor lias no loill of his oicnj that he is the creature of 
 the Legislature ; a very man of straw. * 
 
 The gentleman to whose remarks I have heretofore alluded, gave us a fane picture 
 of Executive excellence; and finished it by informing us, that so harmless an Execu- 
 tive had we, that a great portion of the 'people actually did not hnoto ivho the Governor 
 was. Is this desirable A free people, professing to be intelligent, and to take an in- 
 terest in their own affairs, not to know who their Governor is ! and to be felicitated 
 upon it in this assemblage. Truly, the gentleman has placed the sovereign people in 
 a most dreamy and beatified state ! Sir, I wish to arouse them from their unmanly 
 torpor. I wish, Sir, that the people may know their Governor, and that the Governor 
 may knoiv the people. Mr. Jefferson in his Notes, states, " in December, 1776, our 
 circumstances being much distressed, it was proposed in the House of Delegates to 
 create a Dictator, invested with every power. Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary, 
 civil and military, of life and death, over our own persons and over our own proper- 
 ties ; and in June, 1781, again under calamity, the same proposition was repeated, and 
 wanted a few votes only of being passed.'' Is there a living man who will doubt the 
 wisdom and patriotism of the Legislatures of 1776, and 1781 ? ' Surely the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, who seems so confident that we can give no good reasons for the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 47S 
 
 course we recommend, is not that man. The cause, then, of tliis most extraordinary 
 and appalling project of clothing one man with absolute despotism, ui order that the Re- 
 public might receive no harm, is to be found in the utter imbecihty of the Executive 
 Department of the Government. Any other supposition, imputes treason against the 
 freedom of the people, to the fathers o'f the Revolution. Are we, in the teeth of rea- 
 son, against the advice of the wise, the warnings of history, to continue an Executive 
 utterly incompetent.- An Executive for the piping times of peace," that will trem- 
 ble to its centre when war blows its blast .' A fair-weather Government, that may be 
 \\-recked on the first billow of the tempest r I trust not. Sir. No, let us embark our 
 fortunes in a vessel that will ride proudly amidst the roarings of the storm, and bear 
 unshaken, that broad pendant of freedom under the hghtning's flash. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — I am not a gloomy politician ; on the contrary. I hope the best of 
 men and things ; but I cannot shut my ears to what passes around me. An able gen- 
 tleman told us, we ought to prepare for a state of affairs within the scope of possi- 
 bility, and to which alf good men look with mournful apprehension. The day may 
 come, when Virginia may be compelled to take her rank amongst the nations of the 
 earth. Suppose a scene of turmoil, of peril, is there a man of sense in the Common- 
 wealth, who would rest securely, at such a crisis, on an Executive constructed like 
 ours.' Let us, for Heaven's sake, frame such a Government as will bring out and 
 wield the energies of the whole people, when the fortune of war imperiously de- 
 mands it. Again, Sir ; the very term Legislature indicates the appropriate functions 
 of the body. It is no part of that duty to elect the Executive. How many, how va- 
 rious, how difficult the subjects of legislation '. What labour, reflection, devotion, and 
 sober-minded men are necessary to do justice to them .' Surelv, our law-givers have 
 ample employment, if confined within their legitimate sphere. We all know how the 
 passions, intrigues, combinations, incident to these elections, asitate any body of men, 
 and unfit them for that cool thought, accurate analysis, and profoxind research, so in- 
 dispensable to pubHc usefulness in tliis great department. I appeal to the people of 
 Virginia, if the past is not a lucid commentary upon this doctrine. Some gentlemen 
 are so very tender of the public repose, that they would not expose the people to the 
 agitations arising from the election of tlieir Governor. Sir, I maintain that a moderate 
 exercise of the pubhc mind, has a most salutary effect in instructing the people, in 
 habituating them to think of their rights and interests, and in preserving that vigi- 
 lance and self-respect, which are the stren^rth and fflory of a Republic. The people 
 will not thank gentlemen for consulting their ease'hj curtailing their rights. I am 
 not one of those zealous and minute pohticians, who would continually teaze the citi- 
 zens of the country with the election of constables and all the httle machinery of 
 place. I despise it; I will not 
 
 . " Ocean into tempest work, 
 To waft a feather, or to drown a fly." 
 
 But the great Legislative and Executive Departments of Government ought to be 
 elected, not by eacjh other, but by the people themselves. 
 
 The gentleman from tliis city told us, that the citizens elected the Legislature, and 
 the Legislature the Governor; and that, therefore, the citizens elected the Governor. 
 Sir, this is very good doctrine at that forum where the ijentleman plays an eminent 
 part: but he will not be able to satisfv the common sense of his fellow-citizens by this 
 pohtical special pleading. And he will permit me to express my surprise, that he 
 should so far play upon their creduhty, as to present tliem a law-adage in lieu of their 
 political privileges. We are informed, that our Councillors ai-e endued with great 
 wisdom and efficiency. It may be so. But I remain to learn that they are the supe- 
 riors, or the peers of the Attorney General and Auditor of Pubhc Accounts. At 
 any rate, we certainly can provide an inexpensive and dignified advisory Council. It 
 is objected, that we are about to confide the interesting prerogative of mercy to a sin- 
 gle man. Why so.= May we not provide, that advice shall T)e taken under our plan 
 as well as under that the abohtion of which we seek : 
 
 I have trespassed too long on the patience of the Committee, in making these de- 
 sultory remarks. And I close by askino", if their spirit be not approved by the best 
 theories of Government, supported by fhe highest authorities in America, and vindi- 
 cated by the history of the Commonwealth itself.' 
 
 . Mr. Leigh followed Mr. Henderson, and expressed the desire he had long felt, to 
 know more about a fact stated in Jefferson's Notes, and adverted to by Mr. H. con- 
 cerning a proposal twice made, in 1776 and 1751, by the Legislature of Virginia, to 
 appoint a Dictator. He wanted to know, whether this was 3Ir. J"s. account of his 
 own view of the effect of the proposition, or whether the proposal was actually made 
 in terms. It was not to be found on the Journals of the Assembly, but might have 
 been offered in Committee of the "^'Miole. As to another passage, also quoted fi:om 
 the same work, expressing 3Ir. J's. views as to the practical subserviency of the 
 Governor to the Assembly j'^he could not understand its meaning. The Governor was 
 
 60 
 
474 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 merely an Executive ofEcer, and had no independent power to exercise, unless it was 
 the prerogative of pardon. He adverted to the investigation into Mr. J's. conduct, 
 and his honorable acquittal, as part of his general position, that 710 one abuse had oc- 
 curred in the Executive Department from the foundation of the present Government 
 to the present day. To this statement he challenged contradiction. He himself then 
 stated one instance, viz: the granting a few barrels of damaged powder to be fired on 
 the public square. [Here a well known voice was heard to remark, that the grant 
 had made far more noise than ever the powder did, for that would not burn.] Mr. 
 L. denied that the Governor was dependent on the Legislature in any other sense than 
 every other Governor was ; and asked if gentlemen wished a Governor with a pre- 
 rogative like that of the Crown, and povt^er to call out the militia against the will of 
 the Legislature ? He remarked, with some severity, on the proposition to abolish the 
 Council, and concluded, it had answered precisely the end of its appointment; which 
 was to reduce, by dividing the Executive power, and so render it incapable of evil. 
 
 He retorted the charge of aristocracy, by charging the plan to give power to the 
 Executive, with a spice of monarchy. He contended the Executive of the United 
 States was an elective monarch; and went into a long digression on the effect of 
 patronage in the General Government, and concluded with insisting, that if the 
 Executive of Virginia was to have similar powers, the election of a Governor would 
 immediately grow into as great importance in Virginia, as tlie election of a President 
 was to the United States. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge promising to answer the gentleman's call for information to-morrow, 
 moved that the Committee rise. 
 
 It rose accordingly. 
 
 The President laid before the Convention the following letter from Calohill Mennis: 
 
 Richmond, November 26th. 
 Sir— My health having become so feeble as to prevent my discharging the duties 
 of a member of the Convention, I resiffn my seat. With high respect, 
 
 CALOHILL MENNIS. 
 
 James Monroe, President of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Claytor then announced , that the Delegation from Mr. Mennis's District, had 
 agreed upon Samuel Branch, Esq. of Bucking-ham, as a suitable person to fill the va- 
 cancy caused by his resignation ; and moved that the Sergeant at Arms, cause Mff. 
 Branch to be notified of his election : Which was ordered accordingly. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, November 27, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by tlie Rev. Mr, 
 Armstrong of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. P. P. Barbour in the 
 Chair; the question being on the amendment of Mr. Doddridge to the first reso- 
 lution of the Executive Committee. 
 
 (The resolution reads, 
 
 " Resolved, That the Chief Executive office of this Commonwealth ought to be 
 vested in a Governor." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge's amendment is in these words : 
 
 " To be elected once in every three years, at the time of the general annual elec- 
 tions, by the persons qualified to vote for the most numerous branch of the General 
 
 Assembly.") 
 
 Mr. Doddridge took the floor in explanation of his amendment: 
 I observed yesterday evening, said he, that the discussion was becoming too latitu- 
 dinous, and I will now endeavour to confine myself to the question raised by my amend- 
 ment, and to that alone. This question is, not, whether we shall build up a splendid 
 Executive, or whether any spice of monarchy shall be infused into it. The question 
 is, should the first resolution prevail, whether the Governor of this Commonwealth 
 shall be elected by the people, or by the General Assembly as heretofore. The amend- 
 ment involves nothing more. The decision of this question will greatly influence 
 our votes on others. If the people shall elect their Governor, to the people he will be 
 responsible, and not to the Legislature. It is hereafter to be determined whether the 
 Executive shall be entrusted with additional powers, and if so, whether these shall be 
 exercised by him alone, or with the advice and under the direction of a controlling 
 Council. The decisions of these latter questions will greatly depend on the fate of 
 the present amendment. I do not mean at this time^ to give an opinion whether ad- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 475 
 
 ditional powers of any description ought to be conferred, but simply to enquire 
 whether the election of our Governors ought not to be given to the people. My re- 
 marks, will, of course, lie within a narrow compass. In my remarks of yesterday, 
 I referred to the opinion of Mr. Jefferson on the very question propounded by the 
 amendment under consideration. This opinion is contained in the Notes on Vir- 
 ginia. The words of the author were yesterday quoted from memory only. Since 
 then the book has been furnished me by a friend and I will use it for greater accuracy. 
 I am the more induced to do this, as the authority of that gentleman, contained in a 
 private letter, has been used against me in this body by one of his friends. 
 
 1 acknowledge, that I did not generally approve the conduct of Mr. Jefferson as a 
 practical politician. Many of his opinions, formed at a time when he had attained to 
 a maturity of age and judgment, ripened by much experience — when the Consti- 
 tution of the United States with its honours and emoluments was not thought of — 
 when these States were bound together by the feeble cords of the Confederation 
 alone — I have approved of since my youth. Such are his opinions on the great 
 principles of our present Constitution, and particularly the organization of the Exe- 
 cutive and Judicial Departments. After urging as an objection to the latter, the 
 omission to provide that their salaries shall not be reduced during their continuance 
 in office, and to the former, the entire dependence of the Executive on the Legisla- 
 ture, and the uselessness of the Council, Mr. Jefferson proceeds thus : (See Notes 
 on Virginia, pp. 126, 7.) All the powers of Government result to the Legislative 
 body. The concentration of these in the same hands is pi-ecisely the definition of des- 
 potic Government. It will be no alleviation, that these powers will be exercised by 
 a plurality of persons, and not by a single one. One hundred and seventy-three des- 
 pots would surely be as oppressive as one. Let those who doubt it, turn their eyes on 
 the Republic of Venice. As little will it avail us that they are chosen by ourselves. 
 An elective despotism was not the Government we fought for ; but one wloich should 
 not only be founded on free principles, but in which the pov/er of Government should 
 be so divided and balanced, among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could 
 transcend the legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the 
 others. For these reasons that Convention which passed the ordinance of Govern- 
 ment, laid its foundation on this basis; that the Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary 
 Departments should be separate and distinct, so that no person should exercise the 
 powers of more than one of them at the same time. But no barrier was placed be- 
 tween these separate powers. The Judiciary and Executive members were left de- 
 pendent on the Legislative for their subsistence in office, and some of them for their 
 continuance in it." 
 
 Thus we see, that shortly afler the adoption of the present Constitution, it was ob- 
 jected that the Executive, instead of being elected by the people and responsible to 
 them, was appointed by the General Assembl}^ and only responsible to them. The 
 theory maintained in the Notes on Virginia is our theory. I will now show, that afler 
 Mr. Jefferson's retirement from the Presidency of the United States, he maintained the 
 Bame opinions, and expressed them with such force as to assure us, that his intellect 
 not only remained unimpaired, but that li;ls convictions were strengthened by a longer 
 experience of the defects in our present system, which he had so early pointed out. 
 
 In a letter to his friend, dated July 12, 1816, Mr. Jefferson sa}- s : "The question 
 you propose on equal representation, has become a party one, in which I wish to take 
 no public share. Yet if it be asked for your own satisfaction onl}^, and not to be quoted 
 before the public, I have no motive to withhold it, and the less from you, as it coin- 
 cides with your own. At the birth of our Republic I committed that opinion to the 
 world, in the draught of a Constitution annexed to the Notes on Virginia, in which 
 a provision was made for a representation permanently equal. The infancy of the 
 subject at that moment, and our inexperience of self-government, occasioned gross 
 departures in that draught from genuine republican canons. In truth, the abuses 
 of monarchy had so much filled all the space of political contemplation, that we 
 imagined every thing republican that was not monarchy. We had not yet pene- 
 trated into the mother principle, that ' Governments are republican only as they em- 
 body the will of their people and execute it.' Hence our first Constitutions had, 
 really no principle in them. But experience and reflection have more and more con- 
 firmed me in the particular importance of the representation then proposed. On that 
 point then, I ani entirely in sentiment with your letters, &c. 
 
 " But inequality of representation in both Houses of our Legislature is not the only 
 republican heresy in this first essay of our revolutionary patriots, at forming a Consti- 
 tution. For, let it be agreed that Government is repubhcan in proportion as every 
 member composing it has his equal voice in the direction of its concerns (not indeed 
 in person, which would be impracticable beyond the limits of a city or small township, 
 but,) by representatives chosen by liimself and responsible to him at short periods ; 
 and let us bring to the test of this canon every branch of our Constitution. 
 
476 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION^, 
 
 " In the Legislature, the House of Bepresentatives is chosen by less than half the 
 people, and not at all in proportion to those who do choose. The Senate are still 
 more disproportionate, and for long terms of responsibility. In the Executive, the 
 Governor is entirely independent of the choice of the people and of their control ; his Coun- 
 cil equally so, and at best but a fifth wheel to a icaggon." 
 
 Again, But it will be said, that it is easier to find faults than to amend. I do 
 not think their amendment so difficult as is pretended. Only lay down true princi- 
 ples and adhere to them inflexibly. Do not be frightened into their surrender by the 
 alarms of the timid, or the croakings of wealth against the ascendancy of the people. 
 If experience be called for, appeal to that of our fifteen or twenty Governments for 
 forty years, and shew me where the people have done half the mischief in these forty 
 years, that a single despot would have done in a single year, or half the riots and re- 
 bellions, the crimes and the punishments, which have taken place in any single nation 
 under Kingly Government during the same period. The true foundation of repub- 
 lican Government is, the equal rights of every citizen in his person and property, and 
 in their management. Try by this, as a tally, every provision in our Constitution^ 
 and see if it hangs directly on the will of the people. Reduce your Legislature to a 
 convenient number, for full, but orderly discussion. Let every man who fights or pays j 
 exercise his just and equal right in their election. Let the Executive be chosen in the 
 same way, and for the same term, by those whose agent he is to be, and have no 
 screen of a Council, behind which to skulk from responsibility." 
 
 Mr. Chairman : I will make a further quotation from the same author, to shew the 
 advantage of a single Executive head, uncontrolled by any species of Council. The 
 words are these : " Nomination to office is an Executive function. To give it to th® 
 Legislature as we do, is a violation of the principle of the separation of powers. It 
 swerves the members from correctness, by temptations to intrigue for office them- 
 selves, and to a corrupt barter of votes ; and destroys responsibility, by dividing it 
 among a multitude. By leaving nomination in its proper place, among Executive 
 functions, the principle of the distribution of powers is preserved, and responsibility 
 weighs with its heaviest force, on a single head." 
 
 They who have sought the present Convention, generally agree in the following 
 principles, as comprehending the amendments desired ; first, an equal apportionment 
 of Representation among white population : second, an extension of the Right of Suf- 
 frage to all who pay taxes : third, a total abolition of the Executive Council : fourth^ 
 a single Executive Head, or Governor, to be elected by the people and responsible 
 to them : fifth, future apportionments to keep representation equal among the people ; 
 sixth, a provision for future amendments. Our theory requires that every man to 
 whom Government looks for support is a member of the community, and entitled t© 
 an equal share of power, and that to separate the Executive from the Legislative De- 
 partment, it is necessary that the Governor should be immediately responsible to the 
 people as the members of the Legislature are, and as completely independent of them 
 as they are of him; and to secure Executive responsibility to the people, we are dis- 
 posed to give him " no screen of a Cotmcd, behind which to skulk from that responsibi" 
 lity." Every principle for which we contend, is supported by the dehberate opinions 
 of Mr. Jefferson, who has been quoted against us to disprove an historical fact. He 
 is even an authority for us as to that fact. We have asserted that our present Con- 
 stitution was got up in haste, and not intended by those who made it as a durable in- 
 strument. We are so far from being contradicted by Mr. Jefferson in this, that he 
 goes beyond us, and says that the Convention of 1776, were not even elected with a 
 view to independence and a final separation from Great Britain. 
 
 His opinions are thus expressed in the Notes, page 128 : Speaking of the Conven- 
 tions of 1775, and 1776, he says, "These were first chosen, anew, for every particular 
 session. But in March, 1775, they recommended to the people to choose a Conven- 
 tion, which should continue in office a year. This was done accordingly in April, 
 1775; and in July following, that Convention passed an ordinance for the election of 
 Delegates in the month of April annually. It is well knov^^n that in July, 1775, a se- 
 paration from Great Britain, and establishment of republican Government, had never 
 yet entered into any person's mind. A Convention, therefore, chosen under that or- 
 dinance, cannot be said to have been chosen for purposes tchich certainly did not exist 
 in the minds of those loho passed it. Under this ordinance, at the annual election in 
 April, 1776, a Convention for the year was chosen. Independence, and the establish- 
 w.ent of a neioform of Governmeiit were not even yet the objects of the people at large.'* 
 In Mr. Jefferson's views of the historical fact we are more than supported by his as- 
 sertion, that they who made our Constitution were not elected for such a purpose. It 
 is not to be wondered at, therefore, that in page 124 of the Notes, he should speak 
 thus of the Constitution made by them, viz: " The Constitution was formed when 
 we were new and inexperienced in the science of Government. It was the first, too, 
 which was formed in the whole United States. No wonder, then, that time and trial 
 have discovered very capital defects in it." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 477 
 
 So much, then, for the authority of Mr. Jefferson, who has been dragged into this 
 debate by his friends, to serve purposes directly contrary to his own principles, which 
 are proved to be in strict accordance with ours throughout. 
 
 I have already said, that the Governor is not a responsible officer, even to the 
 General Assembly, who appoint him. This position I now repeat, for the purpose of 
 meeting more directly the arguments of gentlemen opposed to me. In sustaining 
 this position, I beg leave to notice the actual organization of the Executive Council. 
 This body is composed of eight members appointed by joint ballot of the Senate and 
 House of Delegates. The appointing power can only remove two of them at the ex- 
 piration of every three years. Each third year has on this account acquired the title 
 of scratch year. Should every member of this body become at once obnoxious to the 
 General Assembly ; should all become rotten at the same time in this little State of 
 Denmark, what can the Assembly do.'' At the end of three years they can remove 
 two, and three years afterwards two more, and so on. Thus an operation of twelve 
 years is required to displace eight Councillors, although every one of them has lost 
 public confidence. In the mean time, those appointed to succeed the members re- 
 moved may have become just as obnoxious as they. Practically, therefore, there may 
 always be an Executive Council, possessing neither the confidence of the Assembly nor 
 the country. Universal experience has proved, that when responsibility is divided 
 among many agents, it ceases to be responsibility. This 1 consider a political truth 
 of universal acceptation. If Councillors are not thus responsible to the Assembly, 
 the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Nicholas,) triumphantly says, that this circum- 
 stance proves the Executive Department to be as independent as we claim it should 
 be. But the gentleman forgets that our argument is, that the Governor is not an in- 
 dependent Executive officer, and therefore, not responsible for the manner in which 
 the Executive functions are performed. The Council is, at least, too imperfectly re- 
 sponsible to the General Assembly, while to the people the members are not account- 
 able at all. Yet these Councillors are a shield to the Governor, behind which he may 
 skulk with the most perfect security. Not only is this evident from the Constitution 
 itself, but the very explanation of the gentleman from Amelia, (Gov. Giles,) makes 
 it more plain, if possible. According to the Constitution, and the practice thus ex- 
 plained, the Governor, except when acting as Commander-in-Chief, can do no Execu- 
 tive act, without the advice of Council. Without that advice he cannot even award 
 a Commission on recommendation of the County Court. Is it not idle then, to hold 
 him accountable for the omission to act, when the Council shall have omitted or re- 
 fused to advise him to do his duty ^ But it is said, that he is not bound to act on the 
 advice when given, and is therefore, independent of the Council. This may be true ; 
 yet when he is advised to violate the most important and sacred of his duties, and he 
 follows that advice, all experience has taught us, that the advice he receives is his- 
 perfect and sure defence, and I have heard that defence made within these walls 
 against a motion for an impeachment ; and there are now sitting by me two members of 
 this Convention who have given their votes against an impeachment on that very 
 ground. If, therefore, the Governor is advised to commit a malfeasance in office, and 
 he does it, he is not responsible, because the advice is his protection; and if he and 
 the Council concur in the omission to discharge an important duty, he is not respon- 
 sible for non-feasance, because he could not act without advice. From this view, it 
 is manifest that the Governor of this Commonwealtn is a mere creature of the Gene- 
 ral Assembly ; a political irresponsible cypher, and the Council of State a perfect 
 nuisance. 
 
 There is another view of the situation of the Executive Council which I feel it 
 necessary to take, and in doing this I will beg to be understood as having no reference 
 to any member of that body, past, present, or to come. In this view I will only have 
 reference to the weakness of our nature ; that weakness, of which I acknowledge 
 myself a large partaker. Whoever feels himself exempt from frailties has not studied 
 himself. Since the fall of our first parents we are indeed all exposed to be led astray, 
 by the suggestions of interest, and even to be deluded through our virtues and the 
 amiabilities of our natures. The situation of an Executive Councillor peculiarly ex- 
 poses him to temptation. When he takes his seat at the board, he does not expect to 
 be the victim of the first, or of any future scratch, as it is called. He hopes to hold 
 his office for life or until he can obtain some higher preferment. His salary will not 
 maintain him as a private gentleman in tliis city ; much less will it sustain or enable 
 him to provide for a family. He must fellow the law, physic or some other laudable 
 occupation, with the profits of which and the aid of his small salary he can get along. 
 A Councillor, in fact, becomes to every intent and purpose, a citizen of Richmond, 
 in which, surrounded by his friends, associates and dearest connexions, he intends to 
 live and expects to die. The Councillor elected from the country, ceases to be its 
 representative, and being blinded by the interests of the city, becomes, without his 
 own knowledge, its advocate at the Council board. Should the Governor with ad- 
 vice of Council expend the public money too profusely on the Penitentiary, Armory, 
 
478 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Warehouse or James river, or other city interests, this profusion, although a practical 
 evil, is not felt in the city. Nay, it is unknown there — those living within the circle 
 and influence of these expenditures feel a benefit, without knowing or dreaming of 
 any wrong. They have full confidence in their neighbours and friends, the Governor 
 and members of the Council of State. It is not their business, nor their immediate 
 interest to suspect or enquire after abuses, and believing that none exist, they are 
 ready to join in the declaration, so often repeated here, that " all has gone on 
 smoothly — all has worked well !" &c. If such be the tendency of things — if the 
 residence of Councillors in the city, and of the habits formed there, withdraws their 
 allegiance from the country and attaches them to city interests, it is not to be ex- 
 pected that where there is any competition between these and country interests, the 
 latter will be fairly represented. Considering the large sums expended here by Gov- 
 ernment, and the incessant opportunities afforded for gain by improper disbursements, 
 it cannot be doubted that by one means or another many have been drawn into temp- 
 tation. The means of temptation are of no importance. The abuse is the evil, and 
 it is our desire to prevent it. 
 
 [I wish to know, Mr. Chairman, whether, following the example of others, I am at 
 liberty to refer to the remarks of the gentleman from Chesterfield in the Committee. 
 
 Here the Chair stated, that it could only be tolerated now, because such violations 
 of Parliamentary practice had been permitted before. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that he was willing that any thing he had said any where should 
 be the subject of remark. 
 
 The Chair, in its decision, disclaimed any reference to any individual.] 
 
 Mr. Doddridge resumed : I only desired to make a reference to certain remarks on 
 our general tendency to corruption with our growth in years. The gentleman stated, 
 that from his early manhood to the present day, he had marked its growth, and had 
 especially traced its effects in the increasing love of office, and in the character of the 
 means to which men resort to obtain it. There is much truth in the observation. I 
 am not disposed to look altogether on the dark side of things. There is a German or 
 Dutch writer of aphorisms, (I do not remember which,) who says, that a man who has 
 known a great many villains is an old man, and that he who has not known them is 
 still young, though in years he may be as old as Methusaleh. Our growing old in 
 the knowledge of man, exposes more, his weakness to our view. Along the toilsome 
 path of life we make so many discoveries of error and abuse, that we too easily g'ive 
 ourselves up to the distressing belief that all is growing in corruption around us — a 
 belief, which may serve to increase our distrust, but should not be allowed to lessen 
 our enjoyments or diminish our confidence in our friends and countrymen generally. 
 Whether men of the present age are more corrupt than those of ages gone by, or 
 not, is a question about which men may form different opinions. That human nature 
 is the same every where and in all times, is a practical truth. Human nature both 
 formerly and now, has been such that to insure order, discipline and integrity in the 
 administration, of public affairs, real, substantial, and not formal, responsibility, in pub- 
 lic functionaries, is indispensable. 
 
 While discussing this subject, I understood the gentleman from Chesterfield as say- 
 ing that he was acting for the Commonwealth. I have turned myself round to reflect 
 what that Commonwealth can be, for which the gentleman had taken a stand so dis- 
 tinct from others. Who is this Commonwealth ? Against whose assaults is it to be 
 defended.? According to some, it consists of certain freeholders alone; according to 
 others, of all tax-paying citizens; while others again, compose it of the whole white 
 population. This latter is the Commonwealth I am supporting. What then is that 
 which the gentleman from Chesterfield defends ? Is it the sixteen thousand freeholders 
 who voted against a Convention ? 
 
 [Mr. Leigh expressed some surprise at the manner in which the gentleman from 
 Brooke was treating a somewhat idle remark which fell from him. He had considered 
 the member from Frederick as preferring a bill of indictment against the Legislature, 
 and he had set himself up for the defence, thus considering himself for the Common- 
 wealth, in as much as he stood to defend the Commonwealth against charges of abuse 
 of power by the Legislature.] 
 
 Mr. Doddridge : It is unnecessary for me to express the respect I feel for the public 
 and private virtues of the gentleman from Chesterfield ; that I believe is known to 
 him, and he may rest assured that I would not willingly misunderstand him. In his 
 remarks yesterday, that gentleman had enquired what act of abuse by the Executive 
 could be pointed out and sustained, and I understood him to say he would yield the 
 present question if one could be sustained, and moreover be thankful to any gentle- 
 man who would thus add to the knowledge he at present possessed of the manner of 
 discharging Executive functions, 
 
 [Mr. Leigh said, he spoke of usurjyations of power. He was not about to defend the 
 Executive against errors of judgment.] 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 479 
 
 Mr. Doddridge : I understood the gentleman to say, an aluse of poicer, and I had 
 then in my recollection a case, the production of -which would entitle me to tlae gen- 
 tleman's thanks. I will request the Secretary to read from the Journal of the House 
 of Delegates in the session of 1S08-9, the report of the Armory Committee from page 
 108 to 114, inclusive. (That report being read, Mr. D. resumed.) 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — Before that year, strong grounds existed for suspecting abuses, al- 
 though the Executive reports of each successive year were of the most flattering 
 character. It was supposed by some, that many of the arms were deficient in 
 quahty, and by others that their cost was greatly beyond that at wliich good arms of 
 the same description could be purchased. These d'oubts increased every year; and 
 every year, the Governor's message with the Armory report was calculated to dispel 
 them. I refer to this report as furnishing record evidence of abuses which occupied 
 a period of eiffht years of imexampled expenditure. I do not refer to it as censuring 
 the Governor's under whose administrations those abuses happened ; nor any one 
 else. My sole purpose is to shew, that while thousands and hundreds of thousands 
 were in a course of expenditure on tlie Armory and its fixtures, and in the manufactory 
 of arms, there was no system of care, accountability or supervisorship observed by 
 the Executive Council. The Governors, (for, these proceedings occupied the whole 
 administrations of several Executives.) were as unqualifiedly honest as any of their 
 predecessors or successors. The fault was that of the Council, without whose ad- 
 vice the Governors could not act — Nay, could not act in one single instance otherwise 
 than in conformity with that advice. 
 
 The officers of the Armory were of Executive appointment. The Executive was 
 invested with full power to make all contracts, supervise their performance, and 
 certify their execution with the sums due, to the Auditor. For payment of claims, 
 the Auditor had no voucher except the Governor's warrant, drawn in pursuance of 
 the advice of Council. In fine, the Executive power over these extraordinary ex- 
 penditures was ample, and if our constitutional theory had been right, the Executive 
 responsibihty would have been conunensurate with their power ; instead of which, 
 none was found to exist, except in the humble power of removing two members from 
 the Council every three years. 
 
 From the report of the Committee it appears, that the Executive contracted with 
 the Superintendent for finishing the buildings and fixtures witliin a limited time, and 
 to pay the contractor for this labour in certain instalments as the work progressed. 
 This contract was in writing, but being filed with the Council, it was in their power, 
 and they permitted the contractor, who was Superintendent, to vary this contract 
 from time to time to suit his own convenience, or as changes were suggested by his 
 judgment; these changes resulted in immense additions to the contract under the head 
 of extra work." These alterations were never reduced to writing, because of the 
 unlimited confidence reposed in the Superintendent. 
 
 Thus, public moneys were paid away in immense sums on contracts between the 
 Executive Council and the contractor, of which contracts neither the Auditor, Gene- 
 ral Assembly, nor people, had any evidence; nor was tliere any record, book, voucher, 
 or paper of any description kept, at the Armory, in the Council chamber or Auditor's 
 office, by which the accounting committees of the Senate and House of Delegates 
 could detect an excess in payment, if any existed. The Superintendent, in this " ex- 
 tra work," employed the labour of his own slaves, and certified the number of days 
 and the amount of pay ; and this certificate was the only evidence on which the ad- 
 vice of Council was founded. An ilhterate man was examined before that committee, 
 whose investigation was the most laborious I ever witnessed. This man testified 
 that he kept the number of days' work on small slips of paper which he returned to 
 the Superintendent, who made up (what he supposed to be) the results on sheets of 
 paper, which he certified or deposed to. These sheets constituted the only evidence 
 on v.'hich the Council advised payment of sometliing like fourteen thousand days' 
 work. When tlie committee of investigation called for evidences of this labour, 
 neither the sheets containing the general results, nor the shps of paper, nor book, 
 nor voucher of any kind could be found; nor does tlaere exist to this hour one letter, 
 or vestige of a letter, whereby this account can be either refuted or supported. The 
 Journal of that session contains (I think in page 124 or 12.5.) a proposition to pass a 
 resolution of censure with a view to an impeachment. That resolution was neither 
 adopted nor rejected. It was postponed ; and it was on that occasion I heard the ad- 
 vice of Council urged as a defence of the Governors as to all these transactions ; and 
 it was this defence', that induced at least two members of this Convention to vote for 
 the postponement of that resolution. 
 
 A bill providing against future abuses of this kind grew out of the Armory report, 
 and passed both Houses, which is now the law. Tliis law may be found in the first 
 volume of the Revised Code of 1819, page 130. 
 
 That law divested the Executive of the power of appointing Annory officers. It 
 provided that vifiihtrc no money should be drawn from the Treasury, except in pur- 
 
480 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION* 
 
 suance of loritten contracts, and that all contracts whereby money should be so drawn, 
 should be filed with the Auditor of Public Accounts, instead of the Executive Coun- 
 cil. To the best of my recollection the bill as it passed the lower House had a clause 
 to this effect, " that the officers of the Armory be removed." This clause contained a 
 direct censure, which was unnecessary, and 1 believe it was stricken out on my mo- 
 tion. Here, then, is record evidence of the irresponsibility of the Governor to the 
 General Assembly, and of the entire independence of the Executive Council, of all 
 the world. They are convicted of negligence, carelessness and gross improvidence 
 in the money transactions of Government committed to their controul, through a long 
 series of years. For this, what did the Assembly do ? Why, took from them the power 
 of appointment — they disabled them from making or varying a contract otherwise 
 than by writing, and they deprived them of the custody of their own contracts ichen made. 
 They imposed many other restraints, as may be seen by the law referred to. Here the 
 confidence of the General Assembly was completely withdrawn, yet they had to con- 
 tent themselves with the slow operation of the scratch. Such is the Executive responsi- 
 bility of which the gentleman, who is now at its head, has boasted so much, and 
 of which, he and others have so often declared, that, " it works so well that all has 
 gone on smoothly." 
 
 At the time of the investigation to which I have alluded, a new Governor was ap- 
 pointed, of whom I would more particularly speak, but that his son is present, a mem- 
 ber of this body. The Armory report shewed that the Superintendent claimed yet, 
 a small balance, the payment of which had been suspended during the investigation. 
 It was at the time, a current report in this city, that the Council, indignant at what 
 they heard within these walls, retired to their chamber and advised the payment of 
 that balance, and that the new Governor refused to act on that advice. This part I 
 cannot assert to be true, as I did not enquire into it. But this I can assert, that the 
 citizens of Richmond appeared to be as much excited against the investigation of the 
 Armory Committee then, as they are against some of the efforts made in this Con- 
 vention now. I will mention another fact. Governor Tyler, after having heard what 
 passed in the Hall of Delegates, appointed a committee of men, commonly called 
 here, back- woods-men, to examine the rifles. They tried them, and found them as 
 they said, more dangerous to those who would use them than those against whom 
 they were employed. Many pistols were reported to be unfit for use, on account of 
 largeness of calibre, being made out of the barrels of muskets, bursted in the proof. 
 
 These remarks, Mr. Chairman, I thought it my reasonable duty to make ; they are 
 crude 1 know. It has been but a short time since the report of the Executive Com- 
 mittee was taken up, and I found it necessary to examine the Legislative Journal of 
 1808, rather than trust my frail memory. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose in reply, and went into a history of the causes which led to the ap- 
 pointment of the Committee of Investigation. He referred to the determination of 
 a party to put down the Armory ; the means resorted to to libel the Superintendent ; 
 the unfair and oppressive course which was pursued in denying him an opportunity of 
 defence : he then went on to give a farther history of the suit at law instituted against 
 that officer ; the elaborate trial of the cause before the General Court of the Common- 
 wealth ; the ample admission of the testimony from all quarters, and the result in his 
 honorable and triumphant acquittal. His ixanocence was farther confirmed by his 
 poverty. This one fact, he considered as an answer to Mr. D's. whole argument : for, 
 if the Superintendent (Major John Clarke) had been guilty of no injury to the public, 
 the Council had not permitted an injury to be done, and so were free from the charge 
 which had been brought against them. Mr. L. defended Mr. Clarke (who resides in 
 his District) with ardent zeal, and challenged the world to disprove his statement, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge rejoined. Major Clarke's acquittal did not touch his argument, or 
 weaken it in the least. He had not charged him with malfeasance, but the Council 
 with the grossest negligence ; and though Major Clarke's honesty saved the State from 
 injury at his hands, no thanks were due to those who had left power in his hands by 
 which he might have depredated to a vast extent upon the public money. He knew 
 Clarke well, and was his personal friend. 
 
 Mr. Cooke, after adverting to what had fallen sportively (and once more seriously) 
 from Mr. Leigh, as to defending the Commonwealth in an indictment to be brought 
 by him against the past course of legislation, said, that if he had not before been con- 
 vinced of the imprudence of the pledge extorted from him to bring such an indict- 
 ment, what he had now witnessed would be sufficient to admonish him, that to pre- 
 fer any further charges would be imprudent indeed. He, therefore gave notice, that 
 the day for the trying of that indictment would never come. He was far from blam- 
 ing his friend from Brooke for what he had done, and as far from blaming his friend 
 from Chesterfield, for his eloquent defence of an injured man ; but he plainly saw, 
 that if such charges, with their specifications, were to be tried here, the Convention 
 would sit, not only till Christmas, but till Christmas of next year. 
 
 (Here Mr. Randolph's voice was heard to say, " Enter then a nolle prosequi.'') 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTION. \ 
 
 481 
 
 Mk. Moxroe rose and addressed the Committee in nearly the following words : 
 
 I wish to submit a few remarks in explanation of the ground on which I shall give 
 my own vote, rather than with the expectation of producing any effect in the decision 
 on this subject. It has been argued with great ability on both sides, and in a manner 
 very gratifying to me as a citizen of this State and of the Union. The real question 
 before the Committee is, whether the Governor shall be elected by the General As- 
 sembly in the manner now prescribed by the Constitution, or by the people at large. 
 This is the question before you. I will concisely present my view of it, stating the 
 objections which apply to each mode, and on which side in my judgment they pre- 
 ponderate. I consider the question as very important: inferior it is true to some 
 which have come before us ; but, involving in a high degree the fate of the Republic. 
 I do believe it a question, involving in a high degree, the success of our system of 
 Government. Tlie objection to the election of the Executive by the Gener.-\I Assem- 
 bly, is founded on the idea, that you thereby concentrate all the powers of Govern- 
 ment in that body, uniting in one branch, not only the Legislative power, but a con- 
 trol over the other two branches, and thus bringing all the three in effect into one. 
 This is the objection. Let us examine it. I admit most fully, that the unqualified 
 concurrence of the three great powers of Government in one body, especially if in 
 one person, gives it the character of a despotism. If these powers meet in a mo- 
 narch who is hereditary, and responsible to nobod}-, that monarch is a despot, and the 
 people are his slaves. But there is another aspect of the subject. 
 
 If these three powers are united in a General i\ssembly of the people, as in tlie 
 ancient Republics, though tlie Government is not despotic, yet the consequences are 
 equally fatal and even worse, than in the other case. All things are soon thrown into 
 confusion; there is no security for property or any thing else. Life itself is not safe. 
 Some popular leader gets the control, and soon makes himself a despot. In either 
 of these instances, the concurrence of the three powers produces a despotism. But 
 as soon as you pass the power firom the people to their Representatives, the matter is 
 changed. The people control all their movements. The people have a complete 
 check upon them, if they are only true to themselves, intellicrent and virtuous. Con- 
 sider the operation on the Legislative body, even supposing the whole power to be in 
 it. That power is liable to abuse, and has been abused th 're is no doubt. But still 
 there is a check, although the whole power of Government be in one body. But, if 
 there be a regular Constitution, and the three branches of Government be separated, 
 and a limit is prescribed to the Legislative branch, and its power clearly defined ; and, if 
 in like manner, liaiits are set to the Executive Department and its power also defined; 
 and the same with respect to the Judiciarv : the powers of all being distinct and clearly 
 defined; though the election of a Governor (for I now confine myself to that) be by the 
 General Assembh', it cannot be said that the three powers are concentrated tncrether 
 in that body. There is a separation of them. How can they encroach on each other.'' 
 How can the Governor interfere with the power of the Legislature ? or the Le^isla- 
 ture with the Executive f Common sense itself is a sure barrier. The difference of 
 their duties, that of the one being to make the laws, and that of the other to execute 
 them, is so marked and obvious that they cannot be mistaken. The duties of the Ju- 
 diciary are still more distinct, and its limits more clearly and more easily defined. It 
 is the Executive and Legislative powers, if any, which are likely to interfere. If the 
 Constitution be well drawn. I see no danger on that score. The Judiciary will be in- 
 dependent, if they hold their offices during good behaviour. They ought to be main- 
 tained so, and should have power to declare an}- law which is contrary to the Consti- 
 tution. This is my opinion. The dancfer is in the Legislative branch. I should be 
 glad to see a check upon it in the Executive as well as m the Judiciary. 
 
 The success of our system of Government depends upon its organization, on the 
 distribution of ^ower between the different branches, and on keeping each branch in- 
 dependent of the others. Power I know may be abused : that the Legislature may in- 
 fluence the Governor. I cannot doubt. A leadingf man in the Legislature who can 
 contribute greatly to his re-election is likely to have some weight with him : and that 
 he may turn that weight to his own account in an improper manner, is probable. It is 
 incident to the frailt}' of human nature. The check is in the intelligence of the peo- 
 ple, and in the circulation by the press of the proceedings of public bodies. The peo- 
 ple are the great check upon all. 
 
 Now let us look to the objections which exist to the election of a Governor by the 
 people. From my own experience" and reflection, I have learned, that when the ap- 
 peal is made to the people, the most estimable men will be sought out. In the dis- 
 charge of my official duties, I have traversed my country from iVorth to South, and 
 from East to' West. 1 am acquainted with the whole of "it. I know that the people 
 are enlightened themselves, and are disposed to select the most enlightened men as 
 their Representatives. I view my fellow-citizens from tlie East and from the West, 
 from the North and from the South, with the same confidence and attachment, and 
 consider them as a portion of the humaji race more capable of self-government than 
 
 Gl 
 
482 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 any other in the fv'orld. When the question is for giving the election to the people, 
 they have my enUre confidence so far as in the nature of things they are qualified for 
 such an office. But from their situation, they can hardly ever be acquainted with the 
 real merits of the candidates. They cannot confer together to any great extent ; they 
 can hold no general meeting where the matter may be discussed, nor can they get im- 
 partial information. 
 
 They may hold meetings for local purposes, but this is all that they can do. Great 
 caucusses are vbrmed who niiike the nominations, and into whose hands the body of the 
 people fall. It is by their agency and under their influence that the Governor is 
 elected. 
 
 He then looks to his friends, and they in return look to him, and thus the country is 
 divided m'co two parties on the worst and most dangerous of principles. Those who 
 voted for the candidate consider themselves as conipromitted, and bound to support 
 all his measures whatever they may be; and he in like manner feels bound to support 
 them. Such is human nature, and such are the passions of men, as proved by their 
 condact in all Governments in all nges, and on which I found these remarks. By this 
 meuns the independence of the people is v/eakened. While their elective power is 
 confined to the choice of Senators and Delegates, and members of Congress, they are 
 fally competent to the trust. They can perform their duty with perfect success. They 
 have a personal knowledge of the men, and will choose those best qualified for the 
 trust, and no consequence v/ill follow that can operate to the injury of the State at 
 large. But when you extend this to the Chief Magistrate, who has great power in 
 the Government, the result is different. 
 
 As to the power the Chief Magistrate ought to possess, it is another question. 
 WhefJtier he ought to liave the pov/er of appointment is a matter that turns on other 
 considerations. Be his election by whom it may, my opinion is, that he should hold 
 his office for one term only. Then he is made independent. He serves his one term 
 and retires. No selfish motives can operate upon him. 
 
 If we look to history on this subject, we see the demonstration, that the more you 
 connect the people with the Executive, and the greater you make his power, the 
 greater is the danger to Republican Government. What overthrew the ancient Re- 
 publics.? Go to Rome, and what do you find there.? Was it not their own Consuls, 
 whom they themselves had chosen, that overthrew the liberties of the State Marius 
 and Sylla, Pompey and CoBsar, till Caesar made himself a despot.? It was the people 
 who elected him, and they stuck to him and their own destruction. The Republic 
 was broken up into parties : their contentions were pushed to extremes, and ruin was 
 the consequence. Self-government depends for its success, on keeping the people in 
 a state of calmness. The less you give them to do in exercising their elective privi- 
 lege, the safer they will be. Embark them in the election of a Chief Magistrate, and 
 you agitate at once the v/hole State, from which I dread unfavorable consequences. 
 The whole system turns upon the election of the Representatives to the Legislature, 
 and to which they are fully competent. 
 
 I have thought it proper to state my view. I know that there are strong arguments 
 both for and against each plan ; but my idea is, that the more you confine the people 
 within the limit stated, the safer will the Government be. If they are confined to 
 the election of their R.epresentatives they will sustain their dignity, and their judg- 
 ment will be enlightened by the competition of the candidates, whose mutual rivalry 
 will expose their errors to public view. It is on this that the security of the whole 
 system turns. My opinion is, that the Legislature supplies the place of the people as 
 a Representative body: they occupy that ground which the people themselves would 
 occupy. If the Legislature has the power of impeachment, and the Senate power to 
 try the persons impeached, they v»^ill watch over every other branch of the Govern- 
 ment and keep it in order. It is my opinion, that through the Legislature, as occu- 
 pying the place of the people, the whole movement will be controlled, and every 
 hranch made subservient to their will. This is iny view. 
 Mr. Coalter said : 
 
 ■Is there to be any compromise of interests and opinions in this case ? 
 What are the great evils wiiich led to this Convention ? 
 
 The inequality of Representation is the greatest and is one aclcnoicledged by all. 
 
 Serious evils have been felt, and which are supposed to grow out of this inequality. 
 
 The most jlagrcmt ; the most unjustifiahle, (for it is without parallel in outrage, as it 
 is without a semblance of reason or justice to support it,) is that refusal of the Legis- 
 lature, to extend its aid to the courts in which Judge White loXoij, and so long, so 
 honorably, and so satisfactorily presided. 
 
 The next has arisen out of the subject of Internal Improvement. This is one in 
 which there are great conflicting interests; and, as may well be expected under every 
 system in which justice may have been, and hereafter may be, withheld from par- 
 ticular sections. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 m 
 
 1 may possibly take the liberty to say something more at large on this subject, at 
 some time hereafter, having heretofore taken a deep interest in, and turned my atten- 
 tion a good deal to, that subject : suffice it to say at present, that part of the country 
 beyond the Blue Ridge, confessedly not having its equal share in Representation, 
 may- well demand to have their due weight in tlie Legislature, in order to promote 
 these great interests, so far as that weight may enable them. 
 
 There is also another evil of great magnitucle, and which all acknowledge ; and that 
 is the great number of R,epresenta'dves, and the great expense consequently attend- 
 ing our Legislative deliberations. 
 
 These are evils which all admit; and these evils caused the people to vote for this 
 Convention. 
 
 Had the question been put to the people : ¥7111 you have a Convention to remedy 
 these evils ? I believe there would not have been one dissenting voice in the State. 
 
 Had a separate and distinct question though, been put to them ; will you also have 
 a Convention to extend the Right of Suffrage in the terms and to the extent in which 
 this Committee has extended it, what response w^ould have been given to that ques- 
 tion.? I appeal to this body, and to the knowledge they have of this people, whether 
 thousands, and tens of thousands, nay hundreds of thousands, of those who voted for 
 this Convention ; not in loiocr Virginia only, but in all Virginia, would not have voted 
 against that distinct proposition ? In other words, had the freehold Suffrage, been the 
 only evil complained of, would we have been here deliberating on that question ? 
 I verily believe, that in that case, no Convention, would have prevailed one hundred 
 to one. In fact, but for the other great and apparent evils, a Convention/or thisjrur- 
 pose never would have been thovght of. 
 
 The Western country has much changed v/itliln the last eighteen years that I have 
 been absent from it, if in truth that had been the only evil they complained of, such 
 a proposition would have been supported b}-^ one in one hundred. 
 
 It has been merely brought in as auxiiiarij, and in the tempest of those passions 
 which have been engendered by real evils. 
 
 But suppose a third question had been taken ; shall we have a Convention that the 
 Governor may he elected by the vcoyle? I will not go farther. For whether he is to 
 have a patronage tliat will rouse the people from that quiet slumber in which they 
 have reposed for fifty years, and unlicnncl the pack who will be seeking for office, and 
 who will make the welkin ring, has not yet developed itself— I will take the naked 
 proposition as presented by the amendment. 
 
 What would the people have said ? Vf hy, we never heard of this as an evil. Our 
 sleep has been so profound, that v/e never even dfcamt of it. 
 
 Each man v/ill say — how can / elect a Governor ? I would be very willing to make 
 my neighbour A. Governor ; but his vorlh. may not h% known to others. How am / 
 to act? He will be told, some man v.^ill be nominated to you; you will be called on. 
 to send some representative to a Caucras, to nominate a Governor — or your neighbours: 
 will send some one to this Caucus. You are a good Jackson-man, or you are a good 
 Clay-man, and you must take care to vote for the man nominated by yotir Caucus, or 
 your party will be overthrov/n. 
 
 If that is to be the case, he will say, I had rather the Caucus would elect him them- 
 selves, at once. "Why call on me, if my judgment is not to be exercised.'' 
 
 No, no, that won't do — that is too much like the present Constitution, which you 
 must now vote to abolish. Our tried friend Mr. Jefferson has said there is danger in 
 it, and although we have not yet felt it, we must guard against danger. 
 
 But if there must be a Caucus, why not let the members of the Legislature be that 
 Caucus.'' Why, my dear Sir, that is worse and worse — that is still coming nearer to 
 the present Constitution — they miglit as v/ell elect directly, as thus to do it indirectly. 
 
 But suppose they will Caucus it.? The members of Congress do so as to the Presi- 
 dent, and so do our members of Assembly ; and in fact, between them actually elect 
 the President. In short, they have done little else for the last eight or ten years, but 
 elect Presidents. Do you mean. Sir, that we shall be placed in The same situation as 
 to our Governor ? That I am to be placed in a situation, in which, so far as I can 
 learn, knowing nothing myself, and giving due faith and credit to all that is said on 
 both sides, as to the candidates, it can only be a choice of evils ! If this is what you 
 mean, I am not for it — I must go to my wlieat-stack and draw straws : and if the Le- 
 gislature will be bound to pass a law to make that a good vote, and that I may send 
 the result to the polls, tliere to be registered as my vote, as Mr. Jefferson thought the 
 present Constitution dangerous, I may vote for a change. But if I am to mix in the 
 /mc and cry against, or in eidogising a man that I knew^othing about, I beg to be ex- 
 cused. 
 
 I would rather stay at home and attend to my business ; in v.^hicli case the election 
 must be abandoned by me to those yA\o have something in view. 
 
 At present, I ought to vote for an Elector of President of the United States, whom 
 I know, and in whom I can confide. 
 
484 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 That was understood to be the spirit of that Constitution, when I gave my sanction 
 to it — and it was so practised on for some time. 
 
 I now elect my members to the Legislature of the State, and by the Constitution, 
 they are my electors of Governor. 
 
 I have witnessed no evil growing out of that. 
 
 I have though, witnessed the deadly sin and wickedness growing out of the change 
 in practice, which has deprived me of tlie power of electing an elector of President, 
 whom I know. Nay, I am told, that the Congressional or State Caucvsscs have gone so 
 far, that no man shall be elected by me, who will not give in his adhesion — his promise 
 to vote for a certain man as President, however unfit, either from bodily infirmity, or 
 otherwise, he may thereafter be discovered to be. 
 
 This, in fact, makes me not the elector myself of the President, for which I am 
 incompetent, as well by my natural constitution, as by the Constitution of the United 
 States, but the cats-paw of a Congressional and State Caucus, or some other party 
 Caucus. 
 
 I go against the whole of this as a deception on the people ; alike contrary to sound 
 sense and good morals, and of course, contrary to the true interest of any people. 
 
 Such, it seems to me, would be the common-sense argument of any plain man in 
 the country, possessing common-sense, and a small knowledge of the course of things 
 passing before him. 
 
 As to the history of the Executive branch of our Government, said to have been 
 written by Mr. Jefferson — 1 don't recollect when it was written. If very soon after 
 his own administration of that department, or he intended to say, that from his oicn 
 experience, the Governor acted, not under the influence of his ovm conscience, hut un- 
 der that of the Legislature, it may be received as evidence, so far as it regarded him- 
 self; but, surely, not to implicate Patrick Henry — Governor Nelson — Governor Har- 
 rison — or any other Governor of those early days. No, Sir, he intended no such 
 thing, either as to himself or others. 
 
 He merely intended to state his views of the tendency of the system, or of what 
 it might thereafter result in. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun has given the history. He has read it in the eyes 
 of this nation. A sleep, it is true ; but not that sleep, which is often the symptom of 
 approaching dissolution ; and to arouse from which cataplasms are to be applied ; but 
 the sound, calm, refreshing sleep of the peaceful husbandman — untroubled by dreams 
 of amhition, or fears for his safety. 
 
 I think a higher eulogium never was passed on any Executive Government than 
 tliat history, so well depicted, has given of ours. 
 
 Like Almighty Providence, it causes punishment to be inflicted on the guilty viola- 
 tor of our laws. They feel it, and they alone tremble under it — all others are in 
 mansions of peace, rest, and quietness. 
 
 I wish to sleep in peace after this Convention rises, and therefore I must vote 
 against this amendment. 
 
 It is essential to the salvation of the State, according to my views, to resist it; and 
 I must, at all times, and in all places, vote against a Constitution which shall have 
 this provision in it. 
 
 Is it equally important to its friends Must they oppose, liere and elsewhere, any 
 Constitution which has not this provision in it ^ If so, so far as I am concerned, a 
 compromise is of no avail. Gentlemen must be finally willing, however they may 
 vote now, to give up things not deemed absolutely essential to their rights at present — • 
 things that may wait to a future day, without injury to the State : Something for pos- 
 terity to do, if real evils shall be found to arise, and accord for the present those 
 things which are deemed by others as essential to the good of society, until evils are 
 found to grow out of them, which they are not now prepared^ and cannot agree to 
 change. 
 
 I am desirous — most icilling to remedy real evils — I am willing to go far in doing 
 it. Tardy justice often leads to some degree of injustice. The jury may give too 
 heavy damages. Be it so: it is the nature of things — against excessive damages, 
 though the Court will release and grant a new trial ; unless there is a release that 
 will bring them down to something like censure ; in which case, and for the sake of 
 peace, judgment will be entered. 
 
 Let us be cautious how we go before our judges for a new trial. 
 
 Let us rather agree vpon the icay. 
 
 Mr, Stanard wishing to have the sense of the Committee taken on the isolated 
 proposition, whether the Governor shall be elected by the people, moved to amend 
 the amendment of Mr. Doddridge by striking out that part of it which says that he 
 shall be so elected. 
 
 The question being put, it was decided in the negative : Ayes 43, Noes 48. 
 (Messrs. Monroe and Marshall, Ayes : Mr. Madison, No.) 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 485 
 
 The question recurred on the whole of Mr. Doddridge's amendment., and tlie votes 
 stood, Ayes 46, Noes 46. 
 
 (Mr. Madison, Aye: Messrs. Monroe and Marshall, No.) 
 
 The votes being equally divided, the Chairman voted in the negative ; so Mr. 
 Doddridge's amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Fftzhugh said, that if the question was taken as between leaving the appoint- 
 ment of the Governor and his term of office as at present, and an election by the 
 people, he should be for the latter ; but he wished a different course taken; and he, 
 therefore, moved the following amendment : 
 
 " Resolved^ That the Executive Office of tliis Commonwealth ought to be vested 
 in a Governor ;" as follows : " To be elected by the General Assembly for three years, 
 and to be ineligible for three years thereafter." 
 
 Mr. F. said, his sole object was to render the Governor independent of the Legis- 
 lature : to effect that object, he must either be elected by the people, or if by the Le- 
 gislature, his term of service must be prolonged. The latter mode avoided Caucusses 
 and popular excitement, and therefore, he offered his amendment. 
 
 Mr. Powell being disabled by a severe cold and hoarseness from advocating at 
 length the plan for an Executive, which he had proposed in the Executive Conunittee, 
 contented himself with simply moving it as an amendment. 
 
 It was suggested by the Chair, that the proper course would be, first to allow the 
 present amendment to be modified by its friends and made as perfect as possible, be- 
 fore admitting a substitute for it; but as he was informed the practice of the House 
 of Delegates was different, he should receive the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Stanard suggested that if it was received, still the existing amendment, with 
 its modifications, would have priority ; the other being subsequent in the order of na- 
 ture, no matter what might be its place in the order of time. 
 
 At the suggestion of the Chair, Mr. Powell withdrew his amendment for the 
 present. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge was opposed to the amendment of Mr. Fitzhugh; and gave notice 
 that if it should fail, he would then modify his former amendment, so as to make the 
 Governor eligible by the qualified voters for the most numerous branch of the Legis- 
 lature, his term to be three years, and then to be ineligible for three years. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Fitzlmgh, and carried: 
 Ayes 47, Noes 43. 
 
 '(Messrs. Marshall and Monroe in the affirmative, Mr. Madison in the neo-ative.) 
 
 Mr. Upshur enquired of the Chair, if it would be in order to ofier a substitute for 
 this amendment. He explained himself to be in favour of having the Governor 
 elected by the people rather than the Legislature, and to serve one term onlv. 
 
 The Chair replying in the affirmative, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to strike out the whole, and insert as a substitute, the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Executive Office of this Commonwealth be vested in a Gover- 
 nor to be elected by the electors qualified to vote for members of the most numerous 
 branch of the General Assembly, who shall continue in office years and be in- 
 
 eligible thereafter until after the expiration of years." 
 
 Mr. Randolph rose merely to suggest a hope that after the sense of the Committee 
 had been so fairly and distinctly expressed, the amendment would not be pressed at 
 this particular time, when two members from the south side of James river (Mr. 
 Venabie and Mr. Branch,) were absent. 
 
 [Mr. Branch has not yet arrived, and Mr. Venabie is indisposed.] 
 
 Mr. Doddridge then moved that this resolution be for the present passed by. 
 
 Mr. Giles wished to know of the mover, whether he intended tlie election to be by 
 a jnajority or only by a ijluralitij of the qualified voters 
 
 Mr. D. said, he had not thought of the details — they could be reserved. 
 
 The resolution was passed over, and the Committee proceeded to the second reso- 
 lution which reads as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That there ought to be appointed a Lieutenant Governor of this Com- 
 monwealth." 
 
 Mr. Mercer thought this resolution out of its due order. If the Council should 
 be retained, there could be norneed of a Lieutenant Governor, He moved to pass it 
 over. 
 
 The Committee then passed to the third resolution, in the followino- words : 
 " Resolved, That the Executive Council, as at present organized, ought to be abo- 
 lished, and that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council." 
 
 Mr. G-iles being disabled by the state of his health and voice from discussino- this 
 subject, in which he was desirous of stating some facts and arguments, moved to 
 pass it by. 
 
 The Committee then passed by the fourth resolution, which was in the following 
 words : ^ 
 
486 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 " Resolved, That in case of the removal of the Governor from office, or of his 
 death, resignation, or inability to discharge the duties and powers of his office, the 
 said powers and duties shall devolve on the Lieutenant Governor ; and the Legisla- 
 ture may provide for the case of removal, death, or similar inability of the Lieutenant 
 Governor." 
 
 And the fifth resolution having been read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Sheriffs of the different counties in the Commonwealth, shall 
 hereafter be elected by the voters qualified to vote for the most numerous branch of 
 the Legislature :" 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved to strike out the word Resolved, (in effect to destroy the 
 resolution.) 
 
 Mr. Naylor went into a defence of the resolution : 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — As it is expected that the advocates for each provision now to be 
 introduced into the Constitution should say something in support of it, or show some 
 cause for its adoption; and, as it was on my motion that this one was reported, I think 
 it incumbent upon me to state the considerations which prevailed in the Committee, 
 and which I think ought to prevail generally in favour of this provision. In doing 
 this, I shall be as brief as possible. It is essential to the character of a Republican Go- 
 vernment, that the people with whom or in whom is all the power, should have the 
 appointment of all their officers or public functionaries, either directly or indirectly. 
 Now, there is not an officer in this Governinent, so far, or so entirely removed from 
 the control of the people in his appointment or otherwise, as the Sheriff. They have 
 no agency in his appointment either directly or indirectly. He is a creature entirely 
 of the county courts, and the county courts create themselves. They perpetuate 
 their own body, and are what is termed hnperium in imperio. They have also by long 
 usage, appropriated the office of Sheriff to themselves, although there is not a word in 
 the Constitution v/hich indicates such a meaning. They have just as much right to 
 appropriate the clerkship to themselves, as the Sheriffalty, It is nothing more or less, 
 than a set of men entrusted with the power of appointment for the good of the com- 
 munity, who have taken to themselves tlie whole benefit of it, and do now exercise 
 that power of appointment for their own use and benefit. They have established an 
 order of things among tiiemselves, by which they take this office in a kind of rota- 
 tion. And it is now the universal practice, with every one of those county court 
 magistrates, who receives the office, to sell it for the highest price they can obtain, 
 and in some instances, as I have been informed, tliis has been done at public auction. 
 This has raised up another class of officers called Deputy Sheriffs, many of whom are 
 worthy and respectable in their character, correct and upright in the discharge of 
 their duty, though, from the circumstances in which they are placed, they are all ex- 
 posed to strong temptation. And where any are disposed to yield to this temptation, 
 there is no situation in which it can be done to so much advantage, with so much 
 impunity, and unfortunately there are too many so disposed. And on account of the 
 illicit gains which are to be made in that office, many of those who farm the office, 
 give for it more than the v/hole fees would amount to, which is manifestly done upon 
 the calculation of indemnifying themselves by peculation and exactions in one shape 
 or another, from unfortunate debtors, to a large amount. Yes, Sir, and by these 
 means, the misfortunes of the unfortunate are every day aggravated to an extreme de- 
 gree. The officer by delay in the first instance, discourages the creditor or plaintiff, 
 insomuch, that at last he sells to the Deputy Sheriff his whole claim at a large dis- 
 count of perhaps one-fourth of the whole. The sale of the debtor's property is then 
 immediately forced, which was always delayed before, and the property purchased by 
 the Deputy or for his benefit at perhaps one half of its value ; it is immediately re-sold 
 to the debtor at its full value on a short. credit, taking bond and good security for the 
 amount. This bond is immediately put into suit when it is due, and then another 
 round of shaving and extortion takes place, and may be repeated until the original 
 debt is doubled or tripled. These men who have been for some years thus engaged, 
 look a-head and secure the office for a number of years in advance. The longer they 
 hold it, the more adroit they become in their extortions, until they become the per- 
 fect leeches of society. It is in this office alone, that the bold and daring usurer can 
 escape ; it throws around him a protection which the law cannot or does not break 
 through, and here alone the laws against usury and extortion are totally inefficient. 
 Thus it is, that many who wish to follow the practice of shaving or exacting unlaw- 
 ful interest for their money, seek the off.ce of Deputy Sheriff, as the only situation in 
 which it can be carried on with impunity. It may be enquired, why are not these 
 peculators punished.? and why is not the law put in force against them ? The answer 
 is, that the only persons to put the law in force, are always so much in the power of 
 those usurers and extortioners that they dare not complain. 
 
 If the Sheriffs were elected by the people, these enormities could not and would 
 not take place, for, although, these men might escape from the bar of pubhc justice, 
 yet they would be taken up, tried, and condemned at the bar of public opinion, and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 487 
 
 none such would be permitted to hold the office. But it will be objected, that to 
 make the Sheriff eligible by the people, would be increasing the turmoil and turbu- 
 lence of popular elections, from which much danger is apprehended. For my part, 
 I do not apprehend the danger so much, or indeed any at all. Even in the States of 
 New York and Pennsylvania, which are held up to us as frightful examples of popular 
 elections, I do not see that so much evil has resulted. Where there is the vitality of li- 
 berty, there will be the vivacity of liberty, and this is far preferable to the calm which 
 reigns in those Governments v/here there is no liberty, where its fires are repressed 
 and buried deeply within the mountain as it were that shuts them in, until with con- 
 centrated violence they burst into a volcano. Carry those fears a degree further, and 
 it may be found convenient and safe to deprive the people of all elections, and to save 
 them from the trouble and demoralizing influence of choosing any of their public 
 functionaries. But there is certainly much more danger in this fear, than all which 
 gives rise to it. I would rather drink at the hving rapid mountain stream, although 
 it may sometimes be turbulent, and sometimes overflow its banks, than to drink at the 
 stagnant pool which breeds pestilence and death. The one is an apt representation 
 of free men in the exercise of their rights, the other of an all paralizing despotism. 
 Moreover, I am compelled to say, that there is something in the Virginian character, 
 which secures us against all apprehension of those excesses which have been pointed 
 out to us, as resulting from popular elections in some States to the North. The peo- 
 ple in those last mentioned States are much more mixed : the native American cha- 
 racter there has been much alloyed with a material which makes it more variable and 
 unstable. Not so with the people of Virginia, where political sentiment moves on a 
 larger scale, and cannot be so easily agitated. Their history shows, that no capri- 
 cious, or unreasonable commotion has ever prevailed amongst them, and if there is a 
 people on earth whom it is safe to trust with their own business in this respect, it is 
 they. Why, then, refuse to permit them to elect their Sheriffs: officers, who are 
 elected in a great majority of the other Sto.tes by the people ? especially, when it ap- 
 pears to be the most effectual remedy for the evils which I have pointed out. 
 
 Mr. Leigh replied at some length to Mr. Naylor. (But the Reporter has, unfortu- 
 nately, made no sketch of his speech.) 
 
 Mr. Naylor in reply to Mr. Leigh, said, that he knew something of the practice in 
 Maryland, where the Sheriffs are elected by the people, and he never knew or heard 
 of the evils, such as had been pointed out by the gentleman from Chesterfield, as ex- 
 isting there. In fact, he did not see how they could exist, for the Sheriff there, be- 
 fore the sitting of a court, summonses forty-eight men, qualified to serve as jurors, 
 and who serve during the whole court. At the trial of every cause, tlie names of 
 those forty-eight men, written upon separate tickets are thrown into a box promiscu- 
 ously , out of which the clerk draws by lot, twelve, who constitute the jury to try the 
 cause. So that, unless the Sheriff, during the sitting of the court, should summon 
 the whole forty-eight, with an eye to some particular cause, (which cannot be pre- 
 sumed,) there can be no such packing of juries. And as to our own system of se- 
 lecting juries, among other good things, which he did hope would result from this 
 Convention, would be the rem_oval of that abomination in the administration of jus- 
 tice ; for, it goes upon the unfounded presumption, that there are at all times to be 
 found in the court yard during the sitting of the court twelve men, who are compe- 
 tent and fit to be trusted in determining every cause as it comes on for trial, in which 
 may be involved the whole estate, or the characters of those citizens interested in 
 those causes. And as to men in office, such as Sheriffs, pursuing with hostility those 
 who voted against them, it is to be hoped, that a high example of that kind of vengeance 
 will remain a solitary one, not to be repeated nor followed by those in the humbler 
 walks of life. Knowing and believing it to be the desire of a large number of those 
 citizens, whom I have the honour in part to represent, that this alteration should be 
 made in the Constitution, with whom I do concur, I have, therefore, urged it, as I 
 thought it my duty to do. 
 
 Mr. Giles supported the vievv^s of Mr. Leigh, and opposed the resolution as going 
 to destroy the foundation of the existing county court system, which Mr. G. con- 
 sidered the most valuable part of the Constitution, and that to which the peaceful and 
 happy progress of affairs for fifly-four years was mainly to be attributed. It tended 
 to keep the power in the hands of the middle class of society, where it ought to be : 
 it gave justice to the poor at little or no expense, and made the justices of the peace 
 to be what their names import ; the conservators and promoters of the social peace of 
 the Commonwealth. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. Henderson's motion, it was carried by a large 
 majority : so the resolution was stricken out. 
 
 The Committee then rose, and the House adjourned. 
 
488 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 SATURDAY, November 28, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 
 Douglass, of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The House then went again into Committee of the Whole, Mr. P. P. Barbour in 
 
 the Chair ; and the question being on the sixth resolution of the Executive Committee, 
 
 which is in the words following : 
 
 Resolved, That the commissioned officers of Militia Companies be nominated to 
 
 the Executive by a majority of their respective companies." 
 Mr. Mercer moved that it be passed by for the present. 
 The Committee then passed to the third resolution, which is as follows: 
 " Resolved, That the Executive Council, as at present organized, ought to be abol- 
 ished, and that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council." 
 
 Mr. Mason, observing the absence of Mr. Nicholas, who had moved an amendment 
 
 to this resolution, moved that it be passed over for the present. 
 
 The fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh resolutions having been passed over yesterday, 
 The Committee took n\i the eighth resolution, which reads as follows : 
 '■'■Resolved, That no pardon shall be granted in any case, until after conviction or 
 
 judgment." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge having called for an explanation of the reasons on which this reso- 
 lution was founded, 
 
 Mr. Morgan of Monongalia, briefly explained it to be, to prevent the interference 
 of the Executive in the punishment of crimes, by interposing a pardon before trial 
 and conviction. He referred to the cases so frequent in the State trials of Encrland, 
 where the Crown had thrown in the pardoning prerogative to shield the accused be- 
 fore prosecution and judgment. Some instances had also occurred in this country: 
 he did not desire to trammel the prerogative of pardon, but only to have crime proved 
 before it was forgiven. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge thought the reasons not satisfactory. In cases of riot, or extensive 
 combinations to resist the law, a pardon might be a necessary means of obtaining tes- 
 timony. There was not the same danger of abuse here as in England, because the 
 officer having the pardoning power, is responsible for all his acts. The Executive is 
 not a ^'^ first estate,'" as in Europe. He moved to strike out the word Ptesolved," (in 
 effect to destroy the resolution.) 
 
 Mr. Morgan insisted on his former ground, and stated the cnse where one Governor, 
 (Desha) had pardoned his son without convictioii or trial. He saw no danger of such 
 combinations or conspiracies, as the gentleman had mentioned. He thought less 
 danger would result from the adnption of the resolution than its rejection. No man 
 ought to be pardoned without Judicial enquiry into his offence. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge admitted this as a general rule ; but insisted that the public good 
 might, in extraordinary cases, require a departure from it. He instanced the whiskey 
 insurrection in Pennsylvania, and enquired what must have been the result, if the 
 hands of the Executive had been tied up by such an article in the Constitution The 
 Attorney General would have had to file bills of indictment against a whole commu- 
 nity. Suppose a civil war to be quelled by the arm of the Government, how was the 
 country to be settled if such an obstacle as this stood in the way.'' 
 
 The question was then taken on striking out, and carried without a count. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas having, during the above debate, appeared and took his seat, 
 
 Mr. Mason moved that the Committee take up now the third resolution. 
 
 It was taken up accordingly, and again read as follows: 
 
 " Resolved, That the Executive Council, as at present organized, ought to be abol- 
 ished, and that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council." 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved that the question on adopting the two members of the reso- 
 lution be divided. 
 
 The Chair reminded him that no question would be taken on the resolution, unless 
 some amendment should be offered. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas now moved the following amendment : 
 
 " Resolved, That the ninth and tenth sections of the present Constitution be re- 
 tained, and that the eleventh be substituted by the following resolution : 
 
 " A Privy Council or Council of State, consisting of four members, shall be chosen 
 by both Houses of Assembly, either from their own members, or the people at large, 
 to assist in the administration of Government. They shall annually choose out of 
 their own members a Lieutenant Governor, who in the case of the death, inability, 
 or necessary absence of the Governor, from the Government, shall act as Governor. 
 The Governor shall be the President of the Council, and shall in all cases of decision 
 have the casting vote. , Two members with the Governor, or Lieutenant Governor, 
 as the case may be, shall be sufficient to act, and their advice and proceedings shall 
 be entered of record, and signed by the members present, (to any part whereof any 
 member may enter his dissent) to be laid before the General Assembly when called 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 489 
 
 for by them. The members of the Council shall be elected by both Houses of the 
 General Assembly for four years. At the first election, the two Houses shall, by 
 joint resolution, divide the persons elected into two classes. The seats of the Coun- 
 cillors 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 ; so that one half may be chosen every 
 second year; and if vacancies happen by resignation or otherwise, they shall be filled 
 by the two Houses of the General Assembly. An adequate, but moderate salary, 
 shall be settled on them during their continuance in office, and they shall be incapa- 
 ble during that time, of sitting in either House of Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Nicholas, without going into the general question as to the propriety of abol- 
 ishing the Council, (having shewn at length his objections to it on a late occasion,) 
 briefly explained the alterations he proposed to introduce. Leaving the number as 
 at present, and also the manner of appointing the Lieutenant Governor ; both which 
 he considered as most promotive of economy, he would abolish what is called the 
 " scratch,'''' or dismission of two members selected by the Legislature to go out at a 
 given period: this he had always disapproved, as an ostracism very odious in its cha- 
 racter, and often very injurious in its practical effect. He preferred classing the mem' 
 bers, and letting their time of exclusion come on statedly, so as to avoid any hard 
 feelings or invidious distinctions. He dishked the present arrangement in respect to 
 the pay of the members, which was besides inoperative in practice, as by agreement 
 among themselves, the total amount of salary is equally divided. He would do this 
 by the Constitution. A more important change was to give the Governor the casting 
 vote where the Council shall be equally divided. He concluded by a few general 
 remarks on the responsibility of the whole Executive. 
 
 Mr. Giles now rose in support of the amendment of Mr. Nicholas, and contended 
 with great earnestness against the abolition of the Council, He replied to an argu- 
 ment repeatedly urged by Mr. Doddridge, as to the very decided majority of the free- 
 holders who had called the Convention. He had always doubted that there was any 
 such majority actually in favour of the meesure. Those who were contented with 
 the present state of things had, in a multitude of cases, either not voted at all, or 
 consented to the Convention out of a wish to indulge their neighbours : while those 
 on the other side had been active and persevering, and had turned out to a man. He 
 believed if the two first classes should, be added to the minority, there would be a 
 large majority in opposition to the whole affair. However this might be, he had not 
 a doubt that now, after the exhibition made by this body, the majority would be very 
 decided. 
 
 He then went into an examination of the responsibility of the Executive body— 
 the relation of the Council to the Governor as advisers, and the liberty as well as 
 personal responsibility of that officer; contending that a more responsible body, in 
 every particular of all its acts, did not exist under the sun — and challenging the 
 gentlemen on the other side to devise, if the}'- could, any conceivable mode to make 
 persons more responsible. Every a,ct and every advice had to be recorded and signed, 
 submitted annually to that body from whom they received their office, and then pub-* 
 lished to all the world. Nay, the principle was carried even to harshness ; in the in- 
 stance of the scratch, or ostracism of the Council : a measure shewing, however, the 
 wise caution of the framers of tiie system, and one wiiich had a powerful, though not 
 a pleasant influence as a stimulant to duty. He was wilhng to have this feature sof» 
 tened. Nor was the impeachment of the Governor so arranged, that before it could 
 be issued, he was out of office. It did not commence till he was out of office, and 
 then it might disqualify him from office for the rest of his life. What more would 
 they desire an impeachment to effect ? 
 
 He then went into a review of the power of the Executive. He referred to the 
 mass of incidental power thrown into its hands every year by the orders of the Legis- 
 lature, and the satisfactory manner in which it had always been exercised ; on which 
 point he adverted to the late quotations from the I>egislative Journal, and the result 
 in triumphantly vindicating the parties accused. He touched on the power of the 
 Lieutenant Governor — and on the abortive attempt to improve the nature of his of- 
 fice — the new plan gave him no duties at all. As to substituting the Attorney Gene- 
 ral, the Treasurer and Auditor as a Council, he scouted the idea. The first of these 
 officers is now the Governor's official adviser, and the other two, it is his business to 
 watch over and controul, (and this had been so done as to detect great defalcations 
 and save much money to the Commonwealth.) 
 
 The pardoning power had been discussed by Mr. Nicholas. The administration of 
 the Contingent Fund was, in practice, the scrutiny of a miser over his gold : accounts 
 were sifted down to a dollar, insomuch that the money-hunters had given up the 
 Council entirely. 
 
 Mr. G. then went into an earnest remonstrance against pulling down an institution 
 fiill of wisdom, tested by fifty-four years' experience, and w^hich defied scrutiny. 
 When called to build up something in its place, they flinched, and could not agree, 
 
 62 
 
490 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Some wished to assimilate the Executive of this State, to that of the United States, 
 which he viewed as neither more nor less than a limited monarch. Mr. G. here 
 went into the practical effects which had been produced in the General Government 
 by Executive patronage, &c. and deprecated the introduction -of similar evils into 
 Virginia. He adverted to the Executive of Pennsylvania, as furnishing a similar il- 
 lustration, though on a smaller scale. He concluded by forcibly pressing the respon- 
 sibility under which every member was acting, and the solemn results to himself and 
 to posterity.* 
 
 The Convention now became involved in a labyrinth of questions of order which 
 suspended all actual business for a long time ; the particulars of which can be of no 
 interest to the public. They at length became extricated by a motion of Mr. Powell 
 to strike out the last clause of the resolution reported by tiie Executive Committee, 
 viz: and that it is inexpedient to appoint any other Executive Council.'' 
 
 The question being taken on this question, it was carried ; Ayes 55. 
 
 [So the Committee determined that it is expedient there shall be a Council : and by 
 leaving the first clause standing, viz : 
 
 Resolved, That the Executive Council as at present organized, ought to be 
 abolished:" They did virtually determine, that the Council shall 7iot be constituted 
 as at present.'] 
 
 Mr. Nicholas now moved to amend the resolution by adding thereto the following: 
 
 " Resolved, That the ninth and tenth sections of the present Constitution be retained, 
 and that the eleventh be substituted by the following resolution :" 
 
 ''_A Privy Council or Council of State, consisting of four members, shall be chosen 
 by joint ballot of both Houses of Assembly, either from their own members, or the 
 people at large, to assist in the administration of Government. They shall annually 
 choose out of their own members, a Lieutenant Governor, who in case of the death, 
 inability, or necessary absence of the Governor from tlie Government, shall act as 
 Governor. The Governor shall be the President of the Council, and shall in all 
 cases of division, have the casting vote. Two menibers, with the Governor or Lieu- 
 tenant Governor, as the case may be, shall be sufhcient to act, and their advice and 
 proceedings shall be entered of record, and signed by the members present (to any 
 part whereof, any member may enter his dissent) to be laid before the General As- 
 sembly, when called for by tliem. The members of that Council shall be elected by 
 joint ballot of both Houses of the General Assembly, for four years. At the first 
 election the two Houses shall by joint resolution, divide the persons elected into two 
 classes. The seats of the Councillors of the first class shall be vacated at the expira- 
 tion of the second year ; of the second class at the expiration of the fourth year ; so 
 that one half may be chosen every second year ; and if vacancies happen by resigna- 
 tion, or otherwise, they shall be filled by joint ballot of the two Houses of the General 
 Assembly. An adequate, but moderate salary, shall be settled on them during their 
 continuance in office, and they shall be incapable during that time, of sitting in either 
 House of Assembly." 
 
 The question was taken without debate, and decided in the negative: Ayes 32, 
 Noes not counted. 
 
 (Messrs. Monroe, Marshall and Giles, in the affirmative ; Mr. Madison in the 
 negative.) 
 
 So Mr. Nicholas's amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Leiffh now enquiring, what sort of a Council gentlemen wished 
 Mr. Fitzhugh referred him to section eleventh of Mr. Powell's substitute : 
 ^' Sect. 11. The Governor shall have power to require in writing, the opinions of 
 the Lieutenant Governor, and of the Attorney General, upon all matters appertaining 
 to tlie duties of his office." 
 
 Mr. Leigh denied that this was any Council at all. The Governor had now the 
 riglit to ask counsel where he pleased. The Attorney General answered him. offici- 
 ally — but other lawyers were frequently consulted, and who would refuse ? 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, the plan made it obligatory, and did not leave it a mere act of 
 courtesy. 
 
 Mr. Leigh thought the difference immaterial in practice. His idea of a Council 
 was, that they must be consulted, and that the Governor must act according to their 
 official advice. 
 
 After some conversation between Messrs. Leigh and Powell, 
 
 Mr. Brodnax moved a modification of the proposition, which had been offisred by 
 Mr. Nicholas, viz : 
 
 " A Privy Council or Council of State, consisting of members, shall be cho- 
 sen by both Houses of Assembly, either from their own members, or the people at 
 large, to assist in the administration of Government." 
 
 His wish was to fill the blank with an odd number, three or five, 
 
 * For a more extended report of Mr. Giles's speech, see the Appendix, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 49% 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said, as it seemed pretty generally determined, that a Lieutenant Gov- 
 ernor there is to be, somehow or other, he made the suggestion, whether it would not 
 be well to give to him the duties now performed by the Council? He presumed it 
 was not the plan to have a Lieutenant Governor, who should only be the President 
 of a Bank, and act in case of the Governor's death. He ought to have some duty, 
 which continually devolved on him ; and he could not imagine any thing better for 
 him to do, than to perfect himself in his knowledge of the office of Governor, by 
 acting as his Council. He would make the Lieutenant Governor a substitute for the 
 Council, 
 
 Mr. Mercer suggested to Mr. Brodnax, as a difficulty growing out of his plan, that 
 if the Council were all in attendance, and the number uneven, the Governor must 
 either have two votes, or in fact none at all; and if the advice of the Council is to 
 be made binding, where is his power ? If any thing was to be considered as settled in 
 Republican Government, it was, that the Executive should derive its power from the 
 people, and be responsible to them; and that being tlius responsible, should be so 
 constituted, as to have unity and efficiency. Such Vv'ere the principles laid down in 
 the Federalist ; there he had learned them ; nor had but a single State in the Union, 
 since the publication of that vv ork, adopted the feature of an Executive Council ; in 
 others, it had been abolished. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax replied — this was a matter of detail to be settled afterwards — some 
 might be sick or absent, it was rarely that all the members of any deliberative body 
 were in attendance. Some of the members of the Convention had been so rude as 
 to get sick and confine themselves to their rooms. As to the Governor, he must 
 never die: it would be infamous — treason — a desertion of his post: for, no substitu- 
 tion had been provided. As to the idea of the Lieutenant Governor's performing the 
 duties of the Council, it seemed to him very strange. He drew a picture of the 
 Governor and Lieutenant Governor tete a tete, warming their toes before the fire," 
 and then represented the Governor as bound to take the advice of the Lieutenant 
 Governor, and so the latter would rule. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas replied to Mr. M'Coy — and stating the Lieutenant Governor to be, 
 politically, a nonentity unless in case of the Governor's death, asked how he could 
 be his Council ? If he was to be always ready to act in case of the Governor's ab- 
 sence or death, he must always be on the spot, and have a competent salary — and so 
 be a charge on the State while he did nothing. 
 
 Mr. N. then read a section of an act empowering the Governor to supervise the 
 Auditor, Treasurer, &c. and to demand the advice of the Attorney General. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now took the floor in earnest defence of the Council as one of the most 
 important features of the Constitution, the preservation of which was essential to the 
 peace of the Commonwealth. He compared the plans of a Council whose advice 
 the Governor shall be obliged to obtain, (then acting on his own responsibility) and a 
 Council whose advice he might ask or not at pleasure. He warmly defended the ex- 
 isting plan as calculated, first, to divide the power of Executive patronage, so as to 
 render it innocuous ; second, to supply to a Governor new in office a mass of expe- 
 rience in the details of police, and of information essential to the right discharge of 
 his duty; third, to give him mature and recorded advice on all his official acts — ad- 
 vice he was compelled to ask, and by whicli he was usually governed, tliough free to 
 disregard it if he was willing to risk the responsibility. 
 
 This last, he contended for as the vital principle of the present Executive system. 
 He dwelt on the virtues which had adorned this Council; the assiduity with which • 
 they had attended to their duties, and the happy effects to the public peace which had 
 grown out of this system for fifty-four -years. Not a charge could be substantiated to 
 shew usurpation or oppression : on this subject he reiterated his challenge to the world, 
 professing to stand ready at any moment to meet and refute the charge. He depre- 
 cated it as the very wantonness of innovation to destroy such an institution, v/hich 
 had continued through two wars, in the most anxious period of the world's history, 
 without a single act of oppression. Could as much be said for any Executive on 
 eartii beside ? He adverted to one of their acts of mercy in pardoning a criminal — he 
 thought they had erred — but it was not to save a rich or influential delinquent, but a 
 poor despised slave. (Here lie quoted Sterne with happy effect.) He earnestly pleaded, 
 for the love of Heaven, that the Committee would not, when in perfect political 
 health, venture on such an experiment upon the happiness of the Commonwealth, 
 He concluded a very impassioned address, by saying that he felt bound to say thus 
 much, to save an institution he had alwaj-s viewed next after the Freehold Suffrage, 
 and the happy system of County Court police, as the distinguishing excellence of the 
 Commonwealth. Give me, said Mr. L. this plural Executive: give me the neigh- 
 bourly ' tribunals of the County Court system, which bring justice to every man's 
 door almost free of expense : and give me, finally, the power of Government in the 
 hands of the independent yeomanry of the State ; and I will be content that you 
 modify or abolish all the rest at your pleasure. 
 
492 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 Mr. M'Coy explained in reply to Mr. Brodnax, who, he thought, had treated his 
 suggestion rather cavalierly. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax explained in reply, disclaiming the least intentional disrespect. As a 
 close to Mr. Leigh's appeal, he promised an anecdote : and then referred to the well 
 known epitaph, " I was well — seeking to be better — I took physic — and here I am." 
 
 Mr. Johnson explained the grounds on which he had voted against the proposition 
 of Mr. Nicholas, and should vote against it as now modified. He was not decidedly 
 of opinion, that the Council as now organized ought to be abolished : he would not 
 say that he should never so vote under any circumstances, but never until some plan 
 should be proposed which his mind could prefer. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he now rose for the first and last time, to make his protest against 
 the assertion, so often repeated, that the friends of a different organization of some 
 features of the Government meant any wanton innovation in the existing Constitu- 
 tion; and against the assertion, made before, and now repeated, that because no spe- 
 cification of examples of the abuse of power had been brought forward, that it was, 
 therefore, to be interred, that gentlemen on his side of the House, " dare not' make the 
 attempt. He said thus much, lest his silence might be construed into an acquiescence 
 in the truth of such a position. 
 
 Mr. Randolph then addressed the Committee nearly as follows : 
 
 I was of opinion, before I came to this Assembly, that this species of legislation 
 was an anomaly. I did not expect to find introduced here, the practice which obtains 
 in the British House of Peers ; where every member — every noble Lord- — represent- 
 ing his noble self, is at liberty to enter his protest on the Journal of the House, against 
 any thing he happens to disapprove. 
 
 I don't know where the protest of the gentleman over the way is intended to be 
 inscribed ; but, inscribe it where he will, there are none who will remember it to-mor- 
 row. 
 
 Sir, I have been brought by experience — and especially by recent observation, to 
 the conclusion to which a man of sense and reflection might have arrived a priori — 
 that of all the mechanists under the sun. Constitution-makers least understand their 
 own, trade. We have given, I think, to all the world, most ample evidence of our un- 
 fitness — I do not say to make a Constitution — but I was almost about to say, to tinker 
 the old Constitution we have. Sir, I am well satisfied that this Assembly has already 
 lost — and is daily losing the confidence of the people of Virginia. It becomes not me 
 to pass an eulogium on the wisdom and the worth of many of those who compose it ; 
 but the truth is, such is the wisdom of our existing form of Government, that no 
 proposition can be brought forward with a view to make an inroad upon it, that can 
 command a respectable majority: when 1 say respectable, 1 refer, of course, to num- 
 bers only — not one, that can get in its favor, a respectable majority — and yet, nothing 
 short of an overwhelming majority, can reconcile the people of Virginia to any impor- 
 tant change in their fundamental law. 
 
 I did vote, reluctantly, for the proposition of the gentleman from Richmond ; but I 
 had almost risen from my seat to move to strike out the clause for abolishing the 
 CounciL It has been better said, than I am capable of saying it, that the lust of inno- 
 vation — for it is a lust — that is the proper term for an unlawtul desire — this lust of in- 
 novation— this rerum novarum lubido has been the death of all Republics. All men 
 of sense, ought to guard and warn their neighbours against it. Sir, I have felt deep 
 aflS^iction — mortification — and humiliation, at seeing this venerable fabric of our Go- 
 vernment treated with as little ceremony as a mouse in the receiver of a natural phi- 
 losopher and experimenter. There are some things which ought to be changed. I had 
 hoped W"e should at length havo come to the source of the disease — which is to be 
 found in the Judicial body. It is because of the delay — the delay ad indefinitum — I 
 Bpeak it with feelings the most respectful toward those — and there are such — who 
 have faithfully discharged their duty ; but it is the want of that faithful discharge of 
 it, in too many, which has brought all tliis about. Sir, it is there we ought to apply 
 the remedy. But I am going away from the point before the Committee. 
 
 I rose to move, and when in order, I shall move you, to strike out the whole of the 
 resolution. 
 
 Sir, our discussions here have brought to my recollection that beautiful apologue, 
 or fable, of Addison's, where he represents the whole human race as summoned by 
 Jupiter into one assembly — the God listens to their various complaints, and then gives 
 permission to each to lay down his own grievance and take up any that he chose to 
 select among those deposited by his neighbours. A very handsome well-made man 
 lays down a disease under which he labours, and takes up the deformity which a 
 hump-backed man had thrown off : A mother brings her un dutiful son— a wife her 
 bad husband. A husband comes with his shrew of a wife, and selects another partner, 
 who, as he believes, will suit him better. All were anxious to make the change; for 
 it is human nature. Sir, to view all the miseries of others as very easy to be endured ; 
 yes, Sir, nothing is so easy as to endure other people's evils, unless it be to spend 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 
 
 493 
 
 other people's money. The assembly broke up well pleased, and each returned to 
 his home to try his altered situation. But. Sir, what was the issue '. In a little time 
 they all came back a^in. The once handsome man came to be set free from his 
 hamp — the diseased man to take it back again: The lady brought her new husband j 
 and the man who had before brought his shrew of a wife, came back to seek her ag-ain : 
 declaring that long habit and intimacy had so cemented their union, that the oCd ico' 
 mart was the best companion after all. 
 
 (Here loud laughter was heard in the gallery, and the Chair repeatedly called to 
 order,) Sir, I mean no pleasantry on such a subject: but what I mean is this j that 
 there is not now a mal-content in the Commonwealth, who, after this new Constitu- 
 tion shall have been adopted, will not in six months more be ju;:t as much dissatisfied 
 and more than he is now. But even if 1 am mistaken in this, recollect what a vast 
 minority you must have opposed to your plan. I believe there is a majority who are 
 well satisfied with the Council they have had for these fifty-four years, and who will 
 see it abolished with reoret. E.ecollect that change is not always amendment. Re- 
 member that you have to reconcile to new institutions the whole mass of those who 
 are contented with what they have, and seek no change — and besides these, all the 
 disappointed of the other class ; and what possible chance is there that your new Con- 
 stitution can be accepted? If you change tlie existing form of your Executive, your 
 Governor may come to the most important decisions at the most unguarded m.oments. 
 Publicity is the guardian of virtue. He cannot now decide in secret, where no eye 
 is upon him but that eye, which we are all too apt to forget. It is in privacy that tiie 
 deepest and most damning crmes are perpetrated. The man who is going to commit 
 wickedness, ever shrinks from the eye of his neighbour. Gentlemen tell us of the 
 economy of this new Constitution — by abolishing the Council and retrenching the 
 numbers of the House of Delegates, they are to save the Commonwealth a matter of 
 some b or 6.000 dollars. ^Vhy, Sir, the expense of this Convention, placed in the 
 funds, would pay the salaries of the Council forever — yes, Sir, forever. 
 
 These savinofs made by paring down the Legislature, and loppinor off the Council, 
 may not prove lo be true economy. Remember the fable — if the sheep will not spare 
 enouorh of their fleece to feed the dogs, they may have to spare the whole of it, and 
 the carcass to boot, to the wolf. 
 
 Mr, Mercer said, that he liad felt it his duty to maint-ain silence under the repeated 
 challenges so pointedly made on tlie other side, as long as silence was possible : yet to 
 guard against the imputation of acquiescence_in the views expressed in the remarks 
 of the gentleman from Chesterfield, he had used a form of expression common to the 
 humblest individual in the humblest assembly, by saying that he protested against 
 such an imputation: and now he had been told, tliat his protest, made to-dav. would 
 be forgotten to-morrow ; and this in a tone and manner, to which he could' not but 
 take exception. Humble as his station might be, he had constituents, whose eve was 
 upon him ; who watched over all his otScial conduct : and he could have stated several 
 abuses, which had been practised in special relation to them : having enjoved the mani- 
 festation of their favour and affection, for more than twenty years, durinor which time 
 it had never been intermitted, he felt bound to take care that his conduct should not 
 be misunderstood. Hitherto, he had done nothing which had induced them to with- 
 draw their confidence from hhn. and he- trusted he never should. 
 
 The question was now taken on the amendment proposed by Mr. Brodnax, and de- 
 cided in the negative — Ayes 39, Noes not counted. 
 
 Mr. Monroe and Mr. Marshall ^iye. !Mr. Madison .Ab.) 
 
 Mr. Randolph now moved to strike out the whole of the resolution, in order, that 
 should it prevail, the field might be clear, and gentlemen have a carte blanche before 
 them. 
 
 The question being taken, it was decided in the negative — Ayes 39, Noes 53. 
 Mr. Fitzhugh now moved the following amendment : 
 
 After these words, Resolved. That tlie Executive Council, as at present organized, 
 ought to be abolished," add these tcords, •'• and that the Governor shall have^wer to 
 require in writing, the opinions of upon all matters appertaining to the 
 
 duties of his office.'" 
 
 The amendment was adopted — Ayes 50. 
 
 (Mr. Madison in the affirmative.) 
 
 The Convention having now acted upon, or else resolved, for the present, to pass 
 by all the resolutions of the Executive Committee, 
 
 Mr. Powell expressed a desire to present and to discuss his substitute, on the sub- 
 ject of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, which he had offered in the Executive 
 Committee : but Mr. Henderson suggesting that it was now too late an hour (three 
 o'clock) to enter on that discussion, moved that the Committee rise. 
 
 It rose accordingly, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
494 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONYENTION. 
 
 MONDAY, November 30, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Sykes, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Upshur of Northampton, submitted as a proposition for a compromise, the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " Jiesolved, That the House of Delegates shall consist of one hundred and twenty 
 members, of which there shall be chosen for the hrst district, or district West of the 
 
 Alleghany Mountain, 26 
 For the second district, or district of the Valley, 22 
 For the third district, or district between the Blue Ridge and Tide-water, 38 
 For the fourth district, or district between the head of Tide-water and the 
 
 Ocean, 34 
 " Resolved, That the Senate shall consist of thirty members, of which there 
 shall be chosen for the first district aforesaid, 7 
 For the second district aforesaid, 6 
 For the third district aforesaid, 9 
 For the fourth district aforesaid, 8 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall have power to re-arrange the Representation 
 in both Houses of the General Assembly once in every years upon a fair 
 
 average of the following ratios, to wit: 1st, of white population; 2d, of white popula- 
 tion and taxation combmed; 3d, of the Federal numbers: Provided, That the number 
 of the House of Delegates shall never exceed one hundred and sixty, nor the number 
 of the Senate forty." 
 
 Mr. Upshur accompanied this proposition with a few remarks in explanation of its 
 principles. He referred to the three parties into which the House had been divided, 
 viz : those who were in favor of the basis of white population exclusivel}' ; those who 
 were in favor of the basis of white population combined with taxation, and those who 
 were in favor of the basis of Federal numbers. He stated his own plan to be an ave- 
 rage, as nearly as was practicable, of all these three ratios. He had carefully abstained 
 from introducing simple taxation as an element, being anxious to conciliate as far as 
 possible, the feelings of Western members, and desiring to oifer every concession on 
 his own part, whicli was possible, without a total sacrifice of principle, and an utter 
 disregard of those great interests which it was the object of all parties to protect. He 
 said it was obvious that the basis, thus presented by him, must operate favorably to those 
 portions of the country which were increasing most rapidly in all the elements of 
 which the basis was composed. In effect, he would not doubt that the power now 
 held by the East, would in a few years only, be transferred to the West. He had 
 not, however, made any calculations upon the subject, founded on our statistical tables. 
 He had purposely avoided every thing of the kind. He could not tell, nor did he de- 
 sire to know, whether the West would possess a majority in the Legislature in one year 
 or in fifty years. He presented his basis as a just and fair compromise among all par- 
 ties, and being just and tiiir in principle, he left its operation upon the several divi- 
 sions of the Slate, to ful.ure times. So far as the Senate was concerned, his Western 
 friends would perceive at a glance, that his proposition was much more favorable to 
 them than any other which had been offered. With this explanation of his views of 
 the principles of the measure he proposed, he moved that his resolutions be referred 
 to the Committee of the Whole, and printed for the use of the members. This was 
 accordingly done. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now submitted the following with a like view. He insisted only on the 
 principle on which it proceeded. And was willing if that was preserved, that the 
 details should be modified : 
 
 That Representation in the House of Delegates be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " The twenty-six counties lying West of the Alleghany shall have twenty-six 
 Delegates ; 
 
 " Thei^burteen counties lying betv/een the Alleghany and Blue Ridge shall have 
 twenty-three Delegates ; 
 
 " The twenty-nine counties lying East of the Blue Ridge and above tide-water shall 
 have forty-two Delegates ; 
 
 " And the thirty-six counties and four towns lying on tide-water shall have thirty- 
 five Delegates. 
 
 No more new counties shall ever be formed of the territory lying East of the Blue 
 Ridge of mountains; but the Legislature may in its discretion from time to time, a 
 majority of the whole number of both Houses concurring, whensoever the increase of 
 •' the population of the country West of the Blue Ridge and the more convenient ad- 
 ministration of justice and poUce may require, form new counties, not exceeding 
 eight, out of the territory West of the Blue Ridge, and whenever any such new 
 county shall be formed, an additional Delegate shall be allowed to the country West 
 of the Blue Ridge. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 496 
 
 And the Legislature, having regard to tjie relative state of the population of the 
 respective counties, cities, and towns, and three-fifths of both Houses always con- 
 curring, may, at any time, form two or more contiguous counties, into one district, for 
 the election of one Delegate; and may allow one or m.ore additional Deieg-ates to anv 
 county, city, town, or district, so that none shall ever be allovred more than four 
 Delegates: and may reduce the number of Delegates which may or shall be allowed 
 to any county, city, or town, to which more than one Delegate may in the first in- 
 stance be allowed, so that each be allowed at least one : Provided, That the number 
 of the House of Delegates shall never exceed one hundred and fifty." 
 
 Mr. Cooke, at the request of sundry members from the Western and middle parts 
 of the State, submitted the following proposition for compromise, which he stated to be 
 the result of an earnest, honest, and laborious comparison of opinions among mem.bers 
 from that portion of the State, and to have the support of a large portion of those who 
 were the friends of the white basis : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the opinion of this Committee, the Legislative Department of 
 the Government of this Commonwealth, should consist of a Senate containing thirty- 
 six, and a House of Delegates containing one hundred and twenty members. 
 
 •■ That the principle of Representation in the House of Delegates should be equal 
 Representation, as nearly as may be, of the free white people in every part of the 
 Commonwealth. 
 
 " That the principle of Representation in the Senate should be equal Representa- 
 tion, as nearly as may be, of all free persons taken in connection with three-fifths 
 of all other persons, in every part of the Conomonwealth ; or, in other words, the 
 equal Representation, throughout the Commonwealth, of what is familiarly called 
 ' Federal numbers.' 
 
 That an apportionment should be made, as soon as may be, afler the next census 
 which shall be taken under the authority of the United States, of the members of the 
 two Houses respectively, on the principles above stated throughout the Common- 
 wealth. 
 
 '•' That in default of a census by the Government of the L^nited States, in 1830, or 
 at any future Constitutional period, it should be the duty of the Legislature to cause 
 a census of the population of this Commonwealth to be taken, as soon as may be afler 
 such default shall occur. 
 
 That it should be competent to the Legislature to substitute a census made under 
 the authority of the State, for the Federal census, if the latter, after it shall have been 
 taken, shall be considered by the Legislature as inaccurate or imperfect: Provided 
 however, That the next ensuing Federal census, or that of 1S30, shall be definitely 
 taken, as the basis of the first apportionment. 
 
 " Tha.t there should be, as soon as may be, afler the organization of the Govern- 
 ment under any new Constitution, or any amended Co'nstitution which shall be 
 adopted by the people of Virginia, on the recommendation of this Convention, and 
 at the expiration of every ten years thereafter, an assessment of all the lands subject 
 to taxation, within the- limits of the Commonwealth." 
 
 This scheme, continued I\lr. C. for apportioning Representation throuo-hout the 
 Commonwealth, on the principle of compromise, has one recommendation which en- 
 titles it to the respectful consideration of the House. It is the result of an earnest, 
 honest, and laborious investigation and comparison of opinions, made by a very con- 
 siderable number of members from the middle and Western districts, and indeed, by 
 nearly ail those who voted for what is familiarly called the white basis"' of Repre- 
 sentation, as the rule of apportionment in the House of Delegates. 
 
 We had not been long assembled in this place, said Mr. C., before the character 
 and views of the two parties which divide the House were distinctly seen. One 
 of these parties, distinguished by brilliant talents, and respectable, even for its num- 
 bers, but still a small minority, was opposed to all change whatsoever. Some of them, 
 because they considered the Constitution under which we have lived for more than 
 half a century, as perfect as any institution merely human, can well be; others, be- 
 cause they thought that its defects were more than counterbalanced by its valuable 
 features, and that it was better, as they themselves expressed it, ^' to bear the ills we 
 have, than fly to others that we know not of." 
 
 A far more numerous party in the House, the friends of reform," or of " innova- 
 tion," if gentlemen like the term better, were of opinion, that the Constitution w-as 
 defective in many important points, and required material amendments. But this 
 party too was subdivided : while a small portion of it was content with minor chancres 
 a great majority of this more numerous party, and almost one half of the House, 
 came hitJier with the fixed and deliberate opinion, that the principle of Representa- 
 tion proclaimed in the Declaration of Rights — the principle of the equal Representa- 
 tion of the free white population of the State, was the only true Republican principle, 
 and one, which could not be departed from in the organization of either one or the 
 
496 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 other of the Legislative bodies, without deeply impairing the strength and durability 
 of our Republican institutions. 
 
 Deeply impressed with the correctness of these opinions, they adhered to them 
 with a pertinacity corresponding with the strength of their convictions. Discovering, 
 at length, however, the utter improbability of rallying round their standard, a ma- 
 jority of the House, they have abandoned the effort in despair. They see the alternative 
 presented to them, of returning to their constituents without having accomplished any 
 thing, or of endeavouring to find some middle ground on which the conflicting parties 
 may meet and be reconciled. Every feeling of patriotism, every suggestion of sober 
 reason, concurred in recommending the latter course, and they resolved to adopt it. 
 
 After repeated conferences they formed a compromise basis of Representation, that 
 which I have just read, and determined to offer it, in the true spirit of compromise, 
 and with the hope of being met in a similar spirit, by their brethren of the East and 
 the South. They have abandoned, in fact, a principle which is inexpressibly dear to 
 them, and in the feeling of expanded patriotism, have ofi'ered it up as a sacrifice on 
 the altar of the public safety. They have seen not this House only, but the whole 
 people of Virginia divided, distracted, and fevered for many weeks, by this harassing 
 and dangerous question; and they seek, by offering this compromise, to quiet these 
 alarming dissensions, and restore peace and tranquillity to the Commonwealth. It re- 
 mains to be seen, whether they will be met in a similar spirit, by their brethren of the 
 East and South. 
 
 I can assure gentlemen, that there are slender grounds for hoping, that either of 
 the plans of compromise this day offered by the gentlemen from Chesterfield and 
 Northampton, will be satisfactory to those, who have, after mature deliberation, de- 
 termined to offer the plan which I have just presented to the House. If it shall un- 
 happily fail to meet the approbation of those to v^hom it is offered, what will be the 
 result We shall separate, having done nothing to allay the ferment of the public 
 mind ; and icorse than nothing. We shall return to an angry and divided people. We 
 shall be asked by our constituents, what evil spirit pervaded our councils to prevent 
 us from adopting a Constitution which should heal the division, and restore the tran- 
 quillity of the Commonwealth. And what answer shall we give Is it not obvious 
 that each party, that each member of this body, will seek to throw on the opposite 
 party, and on other members, the blame of having produced this lamentable result.? 
 Is it not obvious that crimination and recrimination will become the order of the day ? 
 that the country will be inundated with inflammatory addresses that party epithets 
 will be bandied about, and party hatred inflamed to the highest degree of inveteracy 
 And can any man who loves his country, contemplate the results which are likely to 
 ensue from such a state of exasperation in the public mind, without a feeling of dis- 
 may .'' I implore all those who love their native State ; all those who are willing to 
 make some sacrifice of their preconceived notions on the altar of the public safety ; some 
 compromise of opinion in the formation of our organic law ; to rally round the com- 
 promise now offered, which has already received the approving sanction of so large a 
 portion of this assembly. Let us resolve, before this week shall close, to settle, and 
 to settle amicably and forever, the differences which have so long distracted the Com- 
 monwealth. Let us form a Constitution which will unite the people of Virginia as a 
 band of brothers. Let party names, and party criminations and recriminations, be 
 buried in eternal oblivion. Let us hear no more of Eastern men, and Middle men, 
 and Western men ; let us hereafter be Virginians and brethren. 
 
 The resolution was referred to the Committee of the Whole, and ordered to be 
 printed. 
 
 In reply to a queere of Mr. Henderson, Mr, Leigh stated it to be his purpose to carry 
 the same principle out in its application to the Senate, which he had proposed for the 
 House of Delegates. 
 
 Mr. Cooke proposed an adjournment to to-morrow, with a view to the consideration 
 of the several proposals which had been submitted; but withdrew his motion at the 
 request of 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, who suggested that there might be other gentlemen who wished to 
 BvDnvciit projets of a similar kind. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke then submitted the following preamble and plan, which he 
 prefaced with some remarks on the course of debate hitherto, and the relative posi- 
 tion and offers of the two great parties in the Convention : 
 
 Much has been said in this Committee on the subject of compromise. We confess 
 that we have heard nothing proposed as yet, which deserves the name of compromise. 
 As we understand that word, it imports mutual concession ; as yet, the concessions 
 have been required from one party, from the Representatives of the West. We of 
 the West have in Committee of the Whole, carried one principle, and only one, in 
 one branch of the Legislature, that is, the principle of equal Representation in the 
 House of Delegates. This has not been granted to the West in the spirit of compro- 
 mise, but by the decisions of immutable justice. The controversy now is about the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 same principle in the Senate. We are asked to compromise this principle in the 
 Senate. Now, had the East conceded to us this principle in the House of Delegates, 
 they might have asked us to concede something to them in the application of this prin- 
 ciple in the organization of the Senate. But they did not, we gained it so far with- 
 out any concession on their part. But now, we are required to make the whole con- 
 cession on our part of this principle to the East. This is not, as we think, compatible 
 with any just interpretation of the term compromise. If, however, the East had car- 
 ried without our concession, the principle of Federal numbers in the Senate, we would 
 have then been on equal ground, and both parties might have fairly talked of and 
 entered into a compromise. We of the West Vv^ould still be placed in awkward cir- 
 cumstances, because we would be called upon to compromise a principle, which, as 
 republicans we can never, without apostacy from our faith, and a renunciation of our 
 principles, yield. Our brethren of the East have as they think to compromise, no re- 
 publican principle : they admit, that the principle for which we contend is a just prin^ 
 ciple and a republican principle, were there no peculiar propertj^, or peculiar interest 
 in the way. But contemplating the local interests of the East and the West, and 
 the different states of the East and the West, they argue that the principle for which 
 we contend would be unjust and oppressive, or tend to injustice and oppression upon 
 them in the future application of it. This is, we think, a fair statement of the case. 
 
 Now, with the utmost deference to these arguments and reasonings, with the most 
 conscientious regard to our own principles, and in the true spirit of conciliation and 
 compromise, we tender the following scheme: 
 
 1. " The whole State shall be divided into one hundred Delegate districts, and 
 twenty-four Senatorial districts, after each and every census, according to the white 
 population ; so that the House of Delegates and the Senate shall never exceed tO" 
 gether, more than one hundred and tv.'enty-four members. 
 
 2. The taxes imposed upon every species of property shall be ad valorem, and on 
 a fixed ratio between real and personal property. 
 
 3. The appropriations of the revenue for any other purpose, than the payment of 
 the expenses of Government, for any improvements East or West of the Blue Ridge, 
 shall be always in exact proportion to the amount of taxes paid by the citizens East 
 and West of that Ridge of mountains. 
 
 4. The revenue resulting from any improvements which shall hereafler be made 
 in the East or the West, shall belong to that section of the State in which said im- 
 provements are made. 
 
 5. " Any roads which may be made over the Blue Ridge mountain, shall be made 
 at the expense of the whole State, in equal proportion to the taxes paid by the 
 Eastern and Western divisions of the State ; and the tolls thence accruing, shall, in 
 the same proportion be distributed between the East and the West." 
 
 These propositions are made in the spirit, and we humbly think, upon the fair and 
 just principles of conciliation and compromise. We would appeal to the good sense 
 of the citizens of ex'ery section of the State ; to the citizens of the whole United 
 States; nay, to the Universe itself, for the justice and impartiality of the scheme pro- 
 posed. If there is in it any latent principle of injustice, we see it not ; we know it 
 not; but upon the detection and exposition of such a principle, we would most cor- 
 dially renounce it. We ask for nothing, we propose nothing, which we know of, dis- 
 honourable to us or to our brethren. 
 
 We need not be told that such a scheme would be inefficient, being only inscribed 
 upon parchment; for if that were true, there is no use for, no security in, any instru- 
 ment called Constitution, bond or covenant, which human hands can sign and seal. 
 
 We tender this scheme of compromise now at the eleventh hour, having waited for 
 a full disclosure of the sentiments and views of more mature minds ; but nothing 
 having been yet tendered, which at once saves our principles and secures the interests 
 of all, we have felt it our duty to submit the above, and submit it with all deference, 
 to the revision and modification of every gentleman, who can improve it, without 
 changing the principles which it recommends. 
 
 Mr. Marshall now rose, and addressed the Committee nearly as follows: 
 
 Mr. President: No person in the House can be more truly gratified than I am, at 
 seeing the spirit that has been manifested here to-day ; and it is my earnest wish that 
 this spirit of concihation may be acted upon in a fair, equal and honest manner, adapt- 
 ed to the situation of the different parts of tlie Commonwealth, which are to be af- 
 fected. As to the general propositions which have been offered, there is no essential 
 difference between them. That tbe Federal numbers and the plan of the white basis 
 shall be blended together so as to allow each an equal portion of power, seems to be 
 very generally agreed to. The difference is, that one party applies these two prin- 
 ciples'separately°the one to the Senate, the other to the Ilouse of Delegates, while 
 the other party proposes to unite the two principles, and to carry them in their blended 
 form tlirough the whole Legislature. One gentleman differs in the whole outline of 
 
 63 
 
498 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 his plan. He seems to imagine that we claim nothing of republican principles, when 
 we claim a representation for property. Permit me to set him right. I do not say 
 that I hope to satisfy him or others, who say that Republican Government depends 
 on adopting the naked principle of numbers, that we are right; but I think I can sa- 
 tisfy him that we do entertain a different opinion. 1 think the soundest principles of 
 republicanism do sanction some relation between representation and taxation. Cer- 
 tainly no opinion has received the sanction of wiser statesmen and patriots. I think 
 the two ought to be connected. I think this was the principle of the revolution : the 
 ground on which the Colonies were torn from the motlier country and made inde- 
 pendent States. 
 
 1 shall not, however, go into that discussion now. The House has already heard 
 much said about it. 1 would observe, that this basis of Representation is a matter so 
 important to Virginia, that the subject was reviewed by every thinking individual be- 
 fore this Convention assembled. Several different plans were contemplated. The 
 basis of white population alone ; the basis of free population alone ; a basis of popu- 
 lation alone ; a basis compounded of taxation and white population, (or which is the 
 same thing, a basis of Federal numbers :) two other bases were also proposed, one re- 
 ferring to the total population of the State, the other to taxation alone. Now, of 
 these various propositions, the basis of white population, and the basis of taxation 
 alone are the two extremes. Between the free population, and the white population, 
 there is almost no difference : Between the basis of total population and the basis of 
 taxation, there is but little difference. The people of the East thought that they of- 
 fered a fair compromise, when they proposed the compound basis of population and 
 taxation, or the basis of the Federal numbers. We thought that we had republican: 
 precedent for this — a precedent given us by the wisest and truest patriots that ever 
 were assembled : but that is now past. We are nov/ willing to meet on a new middle 
 ground beyond what we thought was a middle ground, and the extreme on the other 
 side. We considered the Federal numbers as middle ground, and we may, perhaps, 
 now carry that proposition. The gentleman assumed too much when he said that 
 question was decided. It cannot be considered as decided, till it has come before the 
 House. The majority is too small to calculate upon it as certain in the finai decision. 
 We are all uncertain as to the issue. But all know this, that if either extreme is 
 carried, it must leave a wound in the breast of the opposite party which will fester 
 and rankle, and produce I know not what mischief. The majority, also, are now 
 content once more to divide the ground, and to take a new middle ground. The 
 only difficulty is, whether the compromise shall be effected by applying one principle 
 to the House of Delegates, and the other to the Senate, or by mingling the two prin- 
 ciples and applying them in the same form to both branches of the Legislature.'' I 
 incline to the latter opinion. I do not know, and have not heard, any sufficient reason 
 assigned for adopting different principles in the two branches. Both are the Legisla- 
 ture of Virginia, and if they are to be organized on different principles, there will be 
 just tlie same divisions between the two, as appears in this Convention, It can pro- 
 duce no good, and may, I fear, produce some mischief. It will be said, that one 
 branch is the representative of one division of the State, and the other branch of 
 another division of it. Ought they not both to represent the whole ? Yet I am 
 ready to submit to such an arrangement, if it shall be the opinion of a majority of this 
 House. If this Convention shall think it best that the House of Delegates shall be 
 organized in one way and the Senate another, I shall not withhold my assent. Give 
 me a Constitution that shall be received by the people; a Constitution in which I can 
 consider their different interests to be duly represented, and I will take it, though it 
 may not be that which I most approve. 
 
 While I agree in the main to the propositibn offered by the gentleman from. Ches- 
 terfield, there are some slight objections to it. It is not perfectly equal, if you take 
 tlie census of 1820, as the basis of computation. I have prepared no plan to be laid 
 before the House, but have made some calculations as a guide for my own judgment, 
 going to show what the apportionment ought to be on the basis he has assumed. His 
 ground is that the ratio ought to be an exact compromise of the principle of white 
 population, and that of the Federal numbers. I have endeavoured to calculate the 
 result of such a ratio. The whole white population being six hundred and three 
 thousand and thirty-one, and the House of Delegates consisting of one hundred and 
 twenty-six, each member will represent four thousand seven hundred and ninety-one 
 white persons. The country west of the Blue Ridge having one hundred and thirty- 
 three tliousand one hundred, will be entitled to twenty-seven members and a large 
 fraction : I have therefore allowed them twenty-eight. The Valley containing one 
 hundred and twenty-one thousand and ninety-six white persons will be entitled to 
 twenty-five members. The country between the Blue Ridge and tide-water, having 
 one hundred and eighty-nine thousand three hundred and fifty-six free whites, will be 
 entitled to thirty-nine members and a large fraction : I therefore allow that part of the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 State forty Delegates. The tide-water country containing one hundred and fifty-nine 
 thousand five hundred and seventeen, will be entitled to thirty-three Delegates. This 
 will be the ratio, taking the free white population as the basis. 
 
 Let us now assume as tiie basis the Federal numbers. The whole State contains 
 eight hundred and ninety-five thousand and three Federal persons. Each member 
 will, therefore, represent seven thousand and thirty-one Federal persons. The 
 Western district containing one hundred and forty-two thousand one hundred and 
 forty-seven of such persons, will be entitled to twenty Delegates. The Valley con- 
 taining one hundred and forty-two thousand and eighty-three, will also be entitled to 
 twenty Delegates. The middle country three hundred and thirty thousand and 
 twenty-five, will be entitled to forty-five and a large fraction, say forty-six. The 
 tide-water country, containing two hundred and eighty thousand six hundred and 
 nineteen, will be entitled to thirty-nine. 
 
 Now, Sir, I added these several results of the white basis, and of Federal numbers, 
 and I divided the amount by two, which gave me the following, as the average of the 
 two ratios : 
 
 For the Western district, 24 Delegates. 
 
 For the Valley, 22i, say 23. 
 
 For the Middle Country, 43i, say 43. 
 
 For the Tide-water Country, 36. 
 I think if we do adopt an exact compound of these two ratios, we ought to carry 
 the principle through, and take the above numbers, unless I have committed some 
 arithmetical error — it is possible I may, but I think I have not. The principle, then, 
 which I propose as a compromise is, that the apportionment of representation shall 
 foe made according to an exact compound of the two principles, of the white basis 
 and of the Federal numbers, according to the Census of 1820. There can be but one 
 objection to this calculation. It is that the Census of 1820 is not the Census of 1829. 
 I admit it. But every thing of the population of 1829 considered as a basis is so 
 much conjectural, that it will be difficult to come to any satisfactory result. I take 
 the Census of 1820, as preferable to such a conjectural basis. If it produces injustice, 
 that injustice will be temporary and of short duration. The proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from Chesterfield, which has my perfect approbation with this exception, al- 
 lows an immediate increase of numbers to that part of the State which must suffer 
 by the Census of 1820. It cannot do permanent injustice to them ; perhaps not for a 
 moment; and even if it should, the other part of the plan will effectually remove it. 
 Should there be an}'' injustice, it must speedily be removed hy a new Census. I 
 wished to avoid going into the detail of the apportionment in each county. That may 
 be left to the first Legislature v/hich shall assemble under the amended Constitution. 
 Let the first House of Delegates be constituted of five Representatives from each 
 Senatorial district, you will then have a House consistmg of one hundred and twenty 
 Delegates, who will be more competent than ourselves, to apportion the total repre- 
 sentation among the counties, and who can more appropriate!}'- perform that office. I 
 should regret to see the time of the Convention wasted in balancing the controver- 
 sies of the counties. I barely throw this out, however, for consideration. 1 only 
 wish, that the calculations may be understood by the Convention, together with the 
 principles on which they have been made. It will be necessary to carry the substance 
 of this calculation in mind, before we form a definite judgment on the estimates 
 which differ from it. 
 
 Mr, Leigh's Plan is a House of 126 Members. 
 
 White population amounts by the Census of 1820, to 603,081 
 In a House of 126. each member will represent persons, 4,791 
 
 West of the Alleghany, 133,100 27—3,743 28 
 
 Between the Alleghany and Blue Rido-e, 121,096 25—1.321 25 
 
 Between the Blue Ridge and Tide-water, 189.^56 39—2,507 40 
 
 On Tide- water, 159,517 33—1.414 33 
 
 603,069 124 126 
 
 Federal numbers amount to 895,003 
 
 Each member will represent persons, 7,031 
 
 West of the Alleghany, > 142,147 20—1,527 20 
 
 Between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge, 142,083 20 -1,463 20 
 
 Between the Blue Ridge and Tide-water, 330,025 46—6.599 47 
 
 On Tide -water, 280,619 39—6,410 39 
 
 894,874 125 126 
 
500 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 To divide the apportionment between white population and Federal numbers : 
 West of the Alleghany, ^ Federal, 20 
 
 On Tide-water, > p^^^^^'j 
 
 48 24 
 
 Between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge, ^ j^jlfj^ 20 
 
 45 23 
 
 Between the Blue Ridge and Tide-waterj ^ J^^e^j.^^] 4? 
 
 87 43 
 
 White, 33 
 
 39 
 
 72 36 
 
 126 
 
 The white population and Federal numbers added, and then divided, give 220,068 
 If the country on tide-water be entitled to 36 members, then each member 
 
 will represent, 6,113 
 
 Whites. Fed. Noa. 
 The Henrico district contains, - 21,885 40,395 
 
 Its share of 36 members, is 4—3,001 5—4,240 9—7,241 
 
 4_8,620 
 
 Mr. Leigh explained the ground of the slight difference between his estimate and 
 that of Mr. Marshall, arising from the latter's having referred to the Census of 1820, 
 while Mr. L. endeavoured to approximate the true estimate of the present population. 
 He had allowed two more to the Western district, being resolved to guard against the 
 influence of his own partialities. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas would not commit himself by any pledge to vote for either of these 
 plans till he had considered their practical effect on his own district : in matters of 
 general principles he was a representative of the State at large— but in a plan of 
 compromise he must look at home. 
 
 Mr. Randolph expressed his very high personal respect for the gentleman from 
 Richmond, (Mr. Marshall,) who had given his views to the Convention. The very 
 ^reat weight, said Mr. R., which that gentleman has here, in the Commonwealth, and 
 in the Union, makes me desirous that I may be under no misapprehension of his mean- 
 ing. I rise to put myself right. If I understood him rightly, he describes the two 
 extremes of the question to be, on one side the principle of naked numbers, and on 
 the other, that of taxation taken alone. Between these two extremes he has found a 
 medium — consisting of the Federal numbers. This he considers as a proper, middle 
 ground of compromise. Now, I see nothing in a fair sprit of compromise in depart- 
 ing from this golden mean, and taking the white basis as one extreme and the Federal 
 numbers as the other, to meet half-way. Let me illustrate my meaning. Two neigh- 
 bours have a dispute, and the sum in controversy between them amounts to $100 : 
 Each rigorously insisting that that amount is due to him. They agree at length, (to use 
 tt phrase which has been already employed, and which though it be a vulgar one, ex- 
 actly expresses the idea) to split the difference: $50 is the half-way point. But, says 
 one of the parties, let us now make a fair compromise : I will take the $ 100 I claimed 
 as one point, and this $50 as the other, and then you shall pay me $75, With all 
 tny heartj says the other, but with this difference : I will take nothing for the one 
 point, and this $50 for the other, and then I will pay you $25. According to which 
 extreme you go, on one side or other of the middle ground, you must pay 75 or 
 2o p^r cent, of your n^'ghbour's demand. I cannot see the justice after we have 
 fixed upon one golden mean, a " vicdio tvtissimus,'' of leaving it for another middle 
 ground, between this and the extreme of the stern inexorable demand of our adver- 
 saries. I thought it due to myself to state what gross injustice I consider, first to fix 
 Upon the Federal numbers — and then, after settling upon that as a ground of compro- 
 mise, to make it only one of two extremes, taking the utmost claim of numbers for 
 the other extreme and going into a new compromise between these two. 
 
 Mr. Powell considei-ed the course which had been pursued as tending rather to re- 
 tard than advance a compromise — it was calculated to distract and divide, and to draw 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTIOX. 
 
 501 
 
 off the minds of gentlemen from the steady purpose they had cherished, Tvhen they 
 offered the compromise stated by liis friend from Frederick (Mr. Cooke.) All the 
 principles in Mr. Leigh's proposition had been discussed and successively rejected. 
 They had already conceded %Yhat they considered most important, by giving up the 
 white basis in the Senate : he called upon his friends to stand firm to the ground they 
 had taken, and not have their minds distracted by these various schemes, 
 
 Mr. Mercer moved that the House go into Committee of the Whole, but vrithdrew 
 the motion at the request of 
 
 Mr. Johnson, who expressed his lively satisfaction at seeing the gravest and most 
 experienced members coming forward, with endeavours to bring this vexed question 
 to an amicable issue : he did not now despair of success. He preferred having a prin- 
 ciple laid dovvn, for all future time, to leaving the ratio of Representation within the 
 reach of Legislative enactment. He disclaimed any thing like a pledge to vote for the 
 compromise°of 2vlr. Cooke — but held himself at liberty to embrace any other which he 
 should consider preferable in its results. He concluded by moving the reference of 
 the various projects to a Select Committee of seven, 
 
 Mr. Leio-h opposed the motion — According as the majority in the Select Committee 
 should be on one side or the other, so would be the report, and all would have to be 
 gone over again. He had himself been willing to concede — but the gentieman from 
 Frederick met that spirit, by calling on his friends to " stand firm/' 
 
 Mr. Powell disclaimed having spoken of any pledge. He had called on the friends 
 of the comprom.ise ofi'ered by the West, to stand firm, and not permit their minds to 
 be distracted hy various propositions from that which they had agreed to offer. 
 
 Mr. Leigh still referring to the import of " standing firm," 
 
 Mr. Powell said, he meant to call on them to stand firm, unless in their conscience 
 tliev believed some one of the other schemes to be better. 
 Mr. Doddridge enquired, what was the question ? 
 
 The President replied — Explained why he had given some latitude to the previous 
 conversation, and stated the question to be on 2ylr, Johnson's motion for a Select Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. Leigh again referring to Mr. Powell's call, said, if those gentlemen were re- 
 solved to -^stand firm," he trusted in God they (himself and friends) could stand as 
 firm on the ground of liberty, truth and justice they had taken. The moment gentle- 
 men should shew themselves ready to meet and offer for compromise, he was prepared 
 to meet them — but he would not travel one inch if tiiey were to "stand firm." He 
 opposed the plan of a Select Committee. 
 
 Mr. Stanard agreed in considering Mr. Johnson's motion as likely to issue in no- 
 thing; but was willing to give it a trial. He again adverted to the diflerent results ob- 
 tained by referring to tax-payers, qualified voters, and all persons over twenty-one. 
 If the tax-payers on the Commissioners" books should be taken as a basis, the result 
 would be nearly the same as by adopting the ratio of Federal numbers. He insisted 
 on the advantages of adopting this basis, as giving a permanent and fair rule of Re- 
 presentation, 
 
 Mr, Doddridge in explanation to ISlc. Stanard, disclaimed any opinion on the part 
 of his friends, tiiat Representation was to be based on voters alone : none of them held 
 it but Mr. Johnson. He opposed the plan of a Select Committee, as only ffoino- to 
 clothe the opinions of the majority, which ever side it should be, in the best Maimer 
 to be sent to the public, 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that he rose to express a hope that the motion of the gentleman 
 from Augusta., would not prevail. He was not surprised that it should have been 
 made. If he recollected right, this was the direction which that gentleman would, 
 have given to the proceedings of the Convention ah initio : it was therefore not sur- 
 prising that he should look with favour on such a plan. Though I, said Mr. R. am 
 not one of the protestors, I must be permitted to deny the right. (I speak of course of 
 the Parliamentary right.) of any gentleman on tins floor — on^behalf of himself and his 
 friends — I was about to use a "hard word, but I mean it in no offensive sense — to ar- 
 rogate to tiremselves the description of a majority, in great clemency and condescen- 
 sion, holding out concessions to a minority, as a prince would hold out an offer of 
 amnesty to his revolted subjects. There is nothing to justify any gentleman here in 
 assuming such a tone. If there be. why was not tlie famous white basis of their's loner 
 ago adopted by the Convention? But if there were a decided and fixed majority in 
 favor of such a proposition — I speak for myself and as no man's proxy — I will accept 
 no Constitution, that has the monstrous, the tyrannous, the preposterous, and abomi- 
 nable principle, that numbers alone are to be regarded as a fit basis of Representation 
 in the House of Delegates. You may compromise till the Day of Judgment : you may 
 offer us any plan you will : give us any form of the Senate vou hke, with a Governor 
 
 elected by that Senate: whife this principle is retained, I will reject' the whole I nail 
 
 my colours to the mast. I will go down : but I will never surrender to the principle of 
 mere white population as a basis for the lower House. It never can be endured. It leads 
 
502 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 to a despotism, and a state of vassalage, to which I never will submit — and to which 1 
 am very sure that the great body of the ti-eeholders of Virginia, on this side the moun- 
 tain, never will submit. Gild tlie pill as you will, they never can be made to swallow 
 this poison. There cannot be any Select Committee which will justly represent the 
 feelings of the whole of this body. I apprehend the plan is to bring forward some 
 project very disagreeable to all parties, under the sanction and authority of weighty 
 names. No Select Committee can be chosen, that will have my confidence. I will 
 make no man my proxy, to speak for me. 
 
 Mr. Mercer rose to express his thanks to his venerable friend before him (Mr. Mar- 
 shall) for the determination he had expressed, that if there should be a majority in fa- 
 vor of the scheme proposed by his friend from Frederick, he would yield his assent 
 to it, though it might not be that which he would prefer. It would be recollected 
 that that scheme proposed the white basis in one House, and the basis of Federal 
 numbers in the other. Mr. M. opposed at some length the plan of a Select Commit- 
 tee — the duty proposed to be assigned to them was one of the last that should be given 
 to a committee of that description. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion of Mr. Johnson, and decided in the 
 negative. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Nicholas, the statement submitted by Mr. Marshall was referred 
 to the Committee of the Whole, and ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. Cooke now moved an adjournment, but withdrew the motion at the request of 
 Mr. Leigh, with a view to taking up some other subject. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Nicholas, a Committee of three members was appointed to enquire 
 into some other place of meeting for the Convention (on account of the approaching 
 session of the Legislature.) 
 
 Messrs. Nicholas, Johnson and Leigh, were appointed to constitute such Committee. 
 
 Mr. Wilson gave notice, that on some day of this week he should move that this 
 Convention adjourn to meet again on the first Monday in October, 1830. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mercer, the House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. 
 Stanard in the Chair, and took up the report of the Judiciary Committee. And the 
 question being on the first resolution of that report, which reads as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such 
 Inferior Courts, as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish, and in 
 the County Courts. The jurisdiction of these tribunals shall be regulated by law. The 
 Judges of the Court of Appeals and of the Inferior Courts, shall hold their ofiices du- 
 ring good behaviour, or until removed in the manner prescribed in this Constitution: 
 and shall, at the same time, hold no other office, appointment or pubhc trust: and the 
 acceptance thereof, by either of them, shall vacate his Judicial office. No modifica- 
 tion or abolition of any court, shall be construed to deprive any Judge thereof of his 
 office; but such Judge shall perform any Judicial duties which the Legislature shall 
 assign him." 
 
 Mr. Bayly moved to amend the resolution by striking out the words " and in the 
 County Courts." 
 
 Mr. Bayly said : My motion, if agreed to,will not destroy the County Court system; 
 all it demands is to place them with the other Inferior Courts of this Commonwealth, 
 subject to the control and organization of the General Assembly; that the power may 
 be given to the people, by their representatives, to change them whenever, from their 
 incapacity, they become unfit to administer justice, or to abolish them whenever they 
 become corrupt, and are unworthy to be trusted with any authority. If my proposi- 
 tion shall prevail, it will make the Covirt of Appeals the only Supreme and Constitu- 
 tional Court, and leave all other courts subject to legislation as circumstances and the 
 good of the Commonwealth may require : it will not destroy these courts, but place 
 them by the side of the Superior Courts of Chancery and Common Law : and all 
 will remain as now organized, until the people experience the necessity of a reforma- 
 tion, and therefore it is proper that the Legislature should have the power of protecting 
 .them, if worthy of protection, or of destroying them, if they deserve such a fate. I 
 do not understand why courts of higher grade, and the Judges of these courts, 
 which it is the wish of gentlemen should be so perfectly independent, should be put 
 in the power of the General Assembly to abolish or reform, and the County Courts, 
 so inferior in every requisite qualification to exalt a tribunal of justice, shall be held 
 too sacred ever to be changed. 
 
 Much has been said in debate, in commendation of these courts before we have 
 reached the report of the Committee which relates to the Judiciary Department. In 
 my judgment, it would have been better if all that has heretofore been urged in their 
 favour, had been reserved for its proper place in the order of discussion. 
 
 I am aware that by some, these courts are deemed highly desirable, and in some 
 parts of the State the people approve the system ; but there are other sections of the 
 country that entertain very opposite opinions, and therefore I do not urge their des- 
 truction now. All I ask, is to let them hereafter be judged according to their good or 
 evil deeds. And if thej are so popular as their friends represent them to be, no 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 503 
 
 doubt the Legislature, speaking the will of the people, will preserre the system. 
 When these courts were first established, they were clothed witli the high power 
 they now possess, and nothing but the then necessity of the times, situation, and cir- 
 cumstances of the country would have justified so great a departure from republican 
 principles as to unite in the same body of men, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial 
 authority. These men, appointed by themselves, a self-constituted tribunal, which 
 appoint "all civil officers of the county, high and low 5 all mihtia officers under the 
 grade of Brigadier General ; they, lay all the taxes for county purposes, which is more 
 in some counties than the State 'tax. Tiie county and State taxes are collected by 
 tlie sherifi", who is appointed by the justices of the court, and is one of them when 
 they make the appointment, and vrill return to the bench after his term of two years 
 of sheriffalty ends ; for, he will be surely recommended. A sheriff thus appointed con- 
 siders himself perfedly secure from all punishment, however guilty , if charged before 
 this court. I will not say that a court thus appointed, and poss<^ssing the power and 
 authority they do, is aristocratic, lest some gentlemen may consider it pure republican. 
 To me, however, it appears to be in opposition to those great principles of free Gov- 
 ernment which declare that the Legislative and Executive powers should be separate 
 and distinct from the Judiciary, and that a freeman ought not to be taxed without his 
 consent, expressed by himself or his representative. In 1776, when the Constitution 
 was formed, the people were looking more at a state of war than peace, and the 
 County Courts were in effect committees of public safety : there was a necessity for 
 giving' the justices of the county high and responsible powers; they consisted of the 
 most "distinguished men, and their influence aided greatly in the revolutionary cause. 
 At that time it was politic, and I am persuaded it was the best Constitution that could 
 then be formed ; it was fitted to the times ; it did its full part in establishing the in- 
 dependence of the country, and it worked well for twenty years afterwards;, it was 
 then in its youth, virtuous and respected : now the times are changed, the system is 
 worn out ; the people understand more of the principles of free Government, feel 
 their power, and know their rights, and will exercise them. Tou must change the 
 mode of appointing the justices, or their courts will not be worthy of the confidence 
 of the people. 
 
 The ofentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh.) introduced the subject of the 
 County Courts, and th£ir powers, to aid his argument in opposing the election of the 
 sheriff by the people. He said, that the court, thus org-anized, had never done any 
 injur}", and that the appointment of sheriff ought to continue in their hands, to com- 
 pensate themselves for their services. 
 
 When this Committee refused to concur in the resolution of tlie Select Committee, 
 providing that the election of the sheriffs should be by the people, it was not thereby 
 decided that they should be appointed as heretofore. For, should no constitutional 
 provision be made, prescribing the manner of the appointments, it would be left to 
 the General Assembly, to be regulated by law; and I do not entertain a doubt, but 
 that public opinion, which is so powerful in this country, would in two or three vears, 
 compel the Legislature to give that appointment to the people, by election; and they 
 would make a better selection of a man capable and honest, to fill that office, than by 
 the mode now pursued : at all events, the people would so consider it, and be better 
 satisfied with the man of their choice. 
 
 We are informed by the same gentleman, that the justices are not compelled to ap- 
 point the sheriff from one of themselves. Sir, I know that they can recommend any 
 man not belonging to their bench, and it is no compliment to them to say, that al- 
 though tliey are not by the law, or the Constitution, compelled to appoint one of their 
 brethren, yet they always take care to do it, and their practice has made it law in ef- 
 fect. The justices of the peace not only give the sheriffalt}- to themselves, in rotation, 
 but every other office of honor or trust in their counties, they either fill from the 
 bench, or bestow on some family connexion. In some parts of the State, even the 
 petty office of the commissioner of the revenue is passed from one justice to another, 
 for the emoluments it affords, and they annually make the appointment, to give every 
 justice his rotation in that office. In other counties, a justice of the peace having 
 great influence in the court, is commissioner for life ; however unfit he may be to 
 discharge the duties, he considers himself perfectly secure, and thus lie is at the same 
 time a justice of the peace, a justice of the County Court, exercising great judicial 
 powers, and a commissioner of the revenue, appointed by the same court, and exer- 
 cising ministerial and executive duties ; and in all this the people are not consulted, 
 for they have no voice in the appointment of this man, who has a power of great 
 magnitude over them. In practice, the justices of the peace in court and out of 
 court, monopolize to tliemselves all the offices in the county that are worth possessing. 
 
 The gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. Giles.) has said that the County Court system 
 operates to throw all the power of the county into the middle class of the communitv. 
 What that gentleman means by the middle class of tlie communitv. he has not ex- 
 plained. Perhaps what he considers the middle class, I may consider the best class; 
 
504 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 but I have yet to learn that those who compose these courts, are either the middle or 
 the best part of the people. Constituted as they now are, with an unlimited jurisdic- 
 tion in all cases of law and equity, they certainly are not fit for that duty in a very 
 large portion of the State ; though it may be otherwise in some few counties and 
 cities, but in general they are very unfit to exercise chancery or common law jurisdic- 
 tion. They are perfectly incompetent to decide long and complicated chancery 
 causes, with voluminous documents and intricate accounts, which occupies a court 
 two or three days ; and it has happened, that there has not been on the bench a single 
 justice when the decree was pronounced, that was there when the cause was opened : 
 the case often happens in the trials of causes at common law, where the law is not 
 very clear, and the subject in demand is of great value. Sir, you give them the 
 authority to decree and render judgment in matters of great importance, but you 
 cannot give them the ability to discharge these duties correctly. 
 
 The dockets of these courts heretofore, have been so neglected, they became so 
 crowded with causes, that to enter a suit was a denial of justice ; and they are not 
 much better now. To remedy this evil, the General Assembly abolished the High 
 Court of Chancery, and nine District Courts of Chancery have been created to make 
 it convenient for the parties to leave the county and go into these courts. The Dis- 
 trict Courts of Common Law, which were the best that were ever established in Vir- 
 ginia, held by two Judges, and they every term exchanging circuits, with other 
 Judges of the General Court, for the same reason were abolished, and a Superior 
 Court of Common Law was created in each county to take the business from these 
 incompetent tribunals, the County Courts. And you now have twelve terms of the 
 County Coui't, and two terms of the Superior Court of Law, every year in each 
 county, small and great. If, Sir, the County Court could be abolished, the Superior 
 Court of Law would soon follow its fate. I rejoice, that I voted against the estab- 
 lishment of the Superior Court of Law, in 1808, but it passed the Senate ten to nine 
 votes : a court composed of one Judge, and he confined to his circuit: this court, the 
 offspring of the County Courts, is not a favourite of the people. Abolish both these 
 Courts, for be assured both greatly aided in the call of this Convention, and place in 
 their stead, tribunals of justice that will demand (which they will be certain to do if 
 they merit it,) the affection and confidence of the people. I know. Sir, this court of 
 one Judge is, by the report of the Committee, left subject to legislative controul, and 
 it seems to be the expectation and wish of a majority of the Convention, that the 
 first Legislature which shall assemble under the Constitution we are endeavouring to 
 make, will reform these Superior Courts of Law of each county. Let this Conven- 
 tion not do their business by halves. You cannot effectually reform the County Su- 
 perior Courts, without at the same time having under advisement the County Courts; 
 they are very much united together. And let both be under the guardianship of the 
 General Assembly. 
 
 Some gentlemen most highly approve of the County Court system, because they 
 say justice is administered cheap, and the saving of expense to the people is great. I 
 believe the people will not thank them for thus taking care of their expenses on this 
 occasion, for, so far is this from being the case, that my experience convinces me that 
 it is most expensive and most oppressive not only to suitors, but to all others having 
 any business in these courts, and constituted as they now are, with all their multifa- 
 rious duties and powers, every man is compelled occasionally to attend them upon 
 business other than that of litigation. Thus it is, that those persons who must re- 
 sort to them upon other than contested cases, have often to attend two or three days 
 before they can get their business done ; and the suitors are postponed from day to 
 day, from court to court, for years before they can get a trial of their causes ; the daily 
 expenses, the loss of time to suitors and their witnesses, exclusive of costs of attor- 
 nies, sheriffs and clerk's fees, are more than the subject of controversy is often worth, 
 and in fact, it is sometimes better for a man to give up a demand of one hundred 
 dollars, however plain his demand may be, than to resort to those courts, miscalled 
 courts of justice, administering the uncertainty of the law. 
 
 Mr. Marshall rose in opposition. The question now before the Committee is substan- 
 tially the question, whether the County Courts shall contmue to exist or not. Any ob- 
 jection to the details of the system is not sufficient, to induce us to strike out the 
 clause which is the subject of the present motion. If the jurisdiction of these courts 
 is considered as defective, let the system be so modified, as to make their jurisdiction 
 more perfect. The matter is perfectly open, and will continue to be perfectly open, if 
 this clause is permitted to stand. If the motion succeeds, either the County Courts 
 must be abandoned, or the article modified. The article, as it stands, purports to enu- 
 merate all the courts, in which the judicial power of the Commonwealth is to be 
 vested. County Courts form one of these depositories. If we expunge County Courts 
 from this fist, we shall virtually deny to them any part of the judicial power of the 
 State : it follows, that no objection to the jurisdiction of those courts as at present ex- 
 ercised, ought to induce us to consent to the proposed amendment, unless it is our 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 505 
 
 purpose that County Courts shall not continue to constitute any part of our Judiciary 
 system. The article, as it now stands, leaves the whole subject open to the Legislature. 
 They may limit or abridge the jurisdiction of all the courts as they please. If the Legis- 
 lature choose to give them all Chancery jurisdiction, or if they shall think fit, to limit 
 their jurisdiction in common law cases to a specific sum, the Legislature can do so. The 
 whole subject of jurisdiction is submitted, absolutely and without qualification, to the 
 power of the Legislature. The only effect therefore of the amendment will be, to abolish 
 the County Courts. Is the Committee prepared for this.? I certainly am not. The 
 County Courts may be for some causes, an ill organized tribunal. It may be, for in- 
 stance, unfit for Chancery jurisdiction: but that is no reason why such courts should 
 not exist. We luust have a County Court of some kind: its abolition will affect our 
 whole internal police. I am not in the habit of bestowing extravagant eulogies upon 
 my countrymen. I would rather hear them pronounced by others : but it is a truth, that 
 no State in the Union, has hitherto enjoj-ed more complete internal quiet than Virginia. 
 There is no part of America, where less disquiet and less of ill-feeling between man 
 and man is to be found than in this Commonwealth, and I believe most firmly that this 
 state of things is mainly to be ascribed to the practical operation of our County Courts. 
 The magistrates who compose those courts, consist in general of the best men in 
 their respective counties. They act in the spirit of peace-makers, and allay, rather 
 than excite the small disputes and differences which will sometimes arise among neigh- 
 bours. It is certainly much owing to this, that so much harmony prevails amongst 
 us. These courts must be preserved: if we part with them, can we be sure that we 
 shall retain among out' justices of the peace the same respectability and .weight of 
 character as are now to be found ? I think not. But my main object in rising, was 
 to remind the Committee that there was no need of striking out the clause, if all we 
 seek is some change in the jurisdiction of the courts. 
 Mr. Jovnes spoke in substance as follows: 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — In rising to support the motion of my colleague to strike out 
 " County Courts," from the first paragraph of the first resolution reported by the Com- 
 mittee on the Judicial Department of the Government. I regret, that I am under the 
 necessity of endeavouring to sustain an opinion, contrary to that which has just been 
 expressed by the venerable gentleman from Richmond, (Chief Justice Marshall). 
 The opinions of that gentleman are entitled to great weight not only in this Convei>- 
 tion, but throughout the United States, on every subject on which his opinions are ex- 
 pressed ; and, I am sure there is no man who feels more respect for those opinions 
 than the humble individual who now addresses you. But in political matters I cannot 
 feel such a high respect for the opinions of any man, however exalted by character or 
 talents, as iiuplicitly to adopt his opinions. I will attentively and respectfully listen 
 to the arguments of those who differ from me, and I must then decide according to 
 the honest dictates of my own judgment, humble as it may be, on a view of the whole 
 ground. 
 
 - .The gentleman from Richmond has told the Committee, that if the motion to strike 
 out County Courts from the first resolution reported by the Judicial Committee be sus- 
 tained by the vote of the Convention, it will totally destroy the County Courts; but 
 with all my respect for such high authority, I cannot so understand the effect of sustain- 
 ing the motion of my colleague. The first paragraph of the first resolution reported 
 by the Judicial Committee is in these words, " R.esolved, that the Judicial power shall 
 be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such inferior courts as the Legislature shall from 
 time to time ordain and establish, and in the County Courts." The motion is to strike 
 out County Courts, and notwithstanding all my respect for the contrary opinion ex- 
 pressed by the Chief Justice, I cannot avoid the conclusion, that if tlie motion to strike 
 out County Courts prevail, it will still be entirely competent to the Legislature, if they 
 think jJroper to do so, to retain the County Courts precisely as they are now organized, 
 and to confer upon them precisely the same powers now conferred upon them by law. 
 If the report of the Judicial Committee be adopted, the existence of the County 
 Courts as noio organized, will, forever, be placed entirely beyond the reach of legisla- 
 tion; whereas,if they be stricken out of the report, they will not be thereby abolished, 
 but will be subjected to the power of the Legislature, who may continue them or not, 
 or change their organization as past or future experience may render necessary. 
 
 In supporting the motion to strike out County Courts from the report of the Com- 
 mittee, I am not actuated by any wish to destroy those courts; very far from it; I 
 think it would be unwise either to destroy or retain them by Constitutional sanction ; 
 but my wish is to subject them, and all the other Judicial tribunals of the Common- 
 wealth, to the unlimited control of the Legislative power, which may from time to 
 time establish, modify, or abolish them, as experience may render advisable. Great 
 inconvenience has been heretofore experienced in this Commonwealth under the old 
 Constitution, from Judges of the General Court and Judges in Chancery being named 
 in the Constitution ; and which has been generally so construed as to prevent the Le- 
 gislature from conferring Chancery powers on Judges of the General Court. It is my 
 
 64 
 
506 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOH. 
 
 wish to leave the Legislature uncontrolled power to act on the subject from time t& 
 time as the public good may require. 
 
 I have the authority of the gentleman from Richmond, himself, for saying, that the 
 Constitution ought not to go too much into detail ; but that only general principles 
 should be established in the Constitution, and it should be left to the Legislature to 
 act upon those principles and carry them out in organizing the Government under 
 the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States declares, that " the Judicial 
 power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior 
 courts as the Congress may, from time to time, ordain and establish," and under that 
 Constitution it has been found necessary at different times to change the organization 
 of the courts. I wish to give similar powers to the Legislature over the courts of 
 Virginia ; and my objection to the report of the Judicial Committee is, that the County 
 Courts, as at present organized, are proposed to be retained in all future time and un- 
 der all possible circumstances, whatever may be the opinion of the Legislature or of 
 the people on the subject, founded upon the experience of past and future times. The 
 County Courts maij be necessary and proper tribunals now, and might hereafter be 
 rendered unnecessary or improper, by a different organization of the courts of the 
 Commonwealth, or by a change in the opinions of the people relative to those courts. 
 
 Under the present organization of the courts of the Commonwealth, we have Su- 
 perior Courts of Chancery and Superior Courts of Law ; and I imagine gentlemen 
 will agree that those courts are as necessary as County Courts — and if it be necessary 
 to retain County Courts in the Constitution, so as to render them independent of Le- 
 gislative control, why not also retain Superior Courts of Chancery and Common Law 
 by Constitutional sanction ? I can see no reason to retain the one any more than the 
 other in the Constitution. If it be safe to trust the Legislature with control over the 
 one, it appears to me that they may be safely trusted with control over the other. If 
 County Courts be stricken out of the resolution, will they thereby be abolished any 
 more than Superior Courts of Law and Chancery, which are not enumerated in the 
 resolution? By striking out County Courts from the resolution, they, as well as the 
 other courts will stand precisely upon the same footing, and will be continued or 
 abolished as in the wisdom of the Legislature may seem best ; and if the County 
 Courts possess the confidence of the people in the State generally, we may safely rely 
 on their being continued by the Legislature ; and if they have not that confidence, 
 they ought not to be continued. 
 
 The report of the Judicial Committee proposes to leave the powers and j urisdiction 
 of the different courts to be regulated by law — and if it be prudent to give to the Le- 
 gislature unlimited control over the organization of all other courts, and over the ju- 
 ristliction and 'poivers of the County Courts, as well as th-e other courts of the State, 
 where can be the necessity of retaining the County Courts, eo noniine in the Consti- 
 tution.? As the resolution now stands, the County Courts are to be retained at all 
 events, and yet the Legislature may take away all the powers and jurisdiction con- 
 ferred upon them by law. 
 
 The gentleman from Richmond tells us, that he is not in the habit of bestowing en- 
 comiums on his countrymen, but that he will say, that he believes that no people in 
 the United States enjoy more internal tranquillity and quiet than the people of Vir- 
 ginia, and that he believes that this is owing, in a very great degree, to the justices of the 
 County Courts who are the great peace-makers of the country. I have no doubt, Sir, of 
 the fact, that the internal peace and tranquillity of society depend more upon the jus- 
 tices of the peace, than upon all the other officers of the Commonwealth together — and 
 I have as much confidence in the justice and impartiality of these courts, as any man in 
 the Convention. My connexion with these courts has been intimate for twenty years 
 past, and there are no tribunals in the State in whose justice and iritegrity I have 
 more confidence. But, Mr. Chairman, I have equal confidence in the Superior 
 Courts of Chancery and Law, and, I would as soon retain them as the County Courts 
 by Constitutional sanction. If it be unwise to trust the County Courts to the power 
 of the Legislature merely because we have confidence in those courts, the same rea- 
 son will apply with equal force to the Superior Courts of Law and Chancery. If we 
 cannot trust the Legislature, let us go on to designate by name, all the courts which 
 shall be established in Virginia in all future time ; and let us also fix and establish 
 their several powers and jurisdictions. While, Mr. Chairman, I willingly and un- 
 hesitatingly bear testimony, with the venerable gentleman from Richmond, to the iji- 
 tegrity and impartiality of the County Court magistrates, permit me to say, that I con- 
 sider tlLeir mode of aptpointment as entirely opposed to the principles of our Govern- 
 ment. In the second section of the Bill of Rights it is declared, " that all power is 
 vested in and consequently derived from the people." Although this principle jnay be 
 carried into practice as to all the other officers of the State, yet it is totally disregarded 
 in the mode of appointing County Court magistrates. Instead of justices of the peace 
 in Virginia deriving their powers from the people, they are totally independent of the 
 people for their appointment to, or continuance in office. The justices appointed un 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONYENTIOX. 
 
 607 
 
 der the Regal Government before the Revolution, were continued in office, and they 
 have continued to supply vacancies in their own body as completely independent of 
 the people of Virginia as is the Autocrat of all the Russias. I know that many justices 
 of the peace, themselves, consider their mode of appointment as highly objectionable, 
 and they would wilhngly see a different mode adopted for the future. 
 
 I am aware of the difficulty and perhaps impossibility of suggesting any mode of ap- 
 pointing justices of the peace different from tlie mode prescribed in the Old Constitu- 
 tion, which would be acceptable to a majority of this Convention — and, perhaps, it 
 would be best to leave that matter entirely to the Legislature : and if any mode of ap- 
 pointment were adopted by the Legislature which was found not to answer well in 
 practice, the present method could be restored, or such other adopted as tlie wisdom 
 of the Legislature might suorgest: whereas, a mode of appointment prescribed hi the 
 Constitution could not be altered by Legislative enactment. The mode of appointing 
 Sheriffs seems to be so nearly connected with the County Court system, that if one 
 be referred to Legislative control, it would, probably, be best to refer the other to the 
 same power. If justices of the peace are to be appointed and compensated as at pre- 
 sent, as a matter of course, the appointment of Sheriffs must devolve on them; but if 
 a different mode of appointing and compensating justices of the peace be adopted 
 either in the Constitution or by law, then the Sheriffs ought to be elected by the 
 people; and it would, probably, be hest, under existing circumstances, \o confide the 
 whole matter to the Legislature, who might from time to time change any regulations 
 which miofht be adopted as experience might prove to be necessary on both subjects. 
 
 Mr. P. 2. Barbour rose, not to enter into an argument, but to add a word of testi- 
 mony as to the practical effects of the County Court system. I have practised in these 
 courts for a quarter of a century, and I can say with the utmost truth, that my confi- 
 dence in them has grown with my growth, and strengthened with my strength. Af- 
 ter a twenty-five years' acquaintance with the County Courts of Virginia, it is my con- 
 scientious opinion that there is not, and never has been a tribunal under the Sun, 
 where more substantial practical justice is administered. I am for giving them a Con- 
 stitutional foothold in the Commonwealth, above the control of tSe Legislature : for 
 myself, I would sooner part with any other department of the Government : I look to 
 our County Courts as tabula in nmufragio. The gentleman from Richmond asks, whe- 
 ther we can expect that our justices will have the same respectability and weight of 
 character, if these courts shall be abolished ? I answer promptly in the negative. As 
 lonof as the County Courts continue to exist, not only our most intelligent and re- 
 spectable citizens will go upon tlie bench, buttliose courts will bring before them such 
 varied discussions of law points, as will materially contribute towards enabling them 
 the better to discharge the duties of their station; and these discussions are connected 
 with those courts mainly by the respectability of the Judges and the extent of their 
 jurisdiction. The idea was suggested to me fifteen years ago by one of the most dis- 
 tincfuished men we ever had among us ; who declared it to me as his own belief, that 
 the"County Courts of Virginia exerted an important pohtical influence upon her popu- 
 lation. The monthly meeting of neigiibours and of professional men, caused the peo- 
 ple to mingle and associate more than they otherwise would do, and produced a dis- 
 cussion of topics of public interest in regard to the administration of Government, 
 and the politics of the community. These meetings perpetually recurring in all the 
 counties of the State, constitute so many points from which political information was 
 thus diffused among the people, and their interest increased in public affairs. Mr. B. 
 concluded by observing that he had not risen to argue, but merely to bear liis testi- 
 mony to the importance and value of the County Courts, and to express his hope that 
 they would be permitted to continue. 
 
 Mr. Bayly said, he was well aware that any observations which he should offer 
 would be of no avail ao-ainst the name and influence of the venerable and worthy gen- 
 tleman from Richmond, (C^ief Justice Marshall.) or the learned gentleman from 
 Orange, (Mr. P. P. Barbour.) But he would refer, as authority, to the opinion of a 
 man, as great as either of these gentlemen, who held a very difterent sentiment upon 
 this subject, and was directly in opposition to them : their opponent was Mr. Jeffer- 
 son. The gentleman from Richmond had not mixed as much in society with the citi- 
 zens from different parts of the State, as !Mr. Jefferson had done. He had spent the 
 greater part of his life in Richmond and in other cities ; and his attention had, during 
 that time, been drawn to higher and more important concerns than the business of 
 County Courts. Mr. Bayly said, he had very gfreat confidence in the opinions of the 
 gentleman upon every subject where he had the opportunity^ by experience, to com- 
 mand the facts on which he founded them. But Mr. Jefferson had been a personal 
 witness to the operation of the County Court system; he was a justice of the peace 
 for the county where he resided, remote from the cities or places for holding the 
 higher Courts of the State ; he knew and had experienced tlie bad effects of the County 
 Court system. In the fourth volume of his writings, pubhshed since his death, is a. 
 letter to" Samuel Kerchival, dated IMonticello, July 19, 1616. 
 
503 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 A part of which I will read : 
 The justices of the Inferior Courts are self-chosen, are for life, and perpetuate 
 their own body in succession forever, so that a faction once possessing themselves of 
 the bench of a county, can never be broken up, but hold their county in chains, for- 
 ever indissoluble. Yet these justices are the real Executive as well as Judiciary, in 
 all our minor and most ordinary concerns. They tax us at will ; fill the office of 
 sherifl", the most important of all the Executive officers of the county; name nearly 
 all our military leaders, which leaders, once named, are removable but by themselves. 
 The juries, our judges of all fact, and of law when they choose it, are not selected 
 by the people, nor amenable to them. They are chosen by an officer named by the 
 court and Executive. Chosen, did I say Picked up by the sheriff from the loung- 
 ings of the court yard, after every thing respectable has retired from it. Where then 
 is our republicanism to be found ? Not in our Constitution certainly, but merely in 
 the spirit of our people. That would oblige even a despot to govern us republicanly. 
 Owing to this spirit, and to nothing in the form of our Constitution, all things have 
 gone well. But this fact, so triumphantly misquoted by the enemies of reformation, 
 is not the fruit of our Constitution, but has prevailed in spite of it. Our functionaries 
 have done well, because generally honest men. If any were not sOj they feared to 
 shew it. 
 
 " But it will be said, it is easier to find faults than to amend them. I do not think 
 their amendment so difficult as is pretended. Only lay down true principles, and ad- 
 here to them inflexibly. Do not be frightened into their surrender by the alarms of 
 the timid, or the croakings of wealth against the ascendancy of the people. 
 
 " The organization of our county administrations may be thought more difficult. 
 But follow principle, and the knot unties itself. Divide the counties into wards of 
 such size as that every citizen can attend when called on, and act in person. Ascribe 
 to them the government of their wards in all things relating to themselves exclusively. 
 A justice, chosen by themselves, in each, a constable, a military company, a patrol, a 
 school, the care of their own poor, their own portion of the public roads, the choice 
 of one or more jurors to serve in some court, and the delivery, within their own 
 wards, of their own votes for all elective officers of higher sphere, will relieve the 
 county administration of nearly all its business, wilWiave it better done, and by mak- 
 ing every citizen an acting member of the Government, and in the offices nearest 
 and most interesting to him, will attach him by his strongest feelings to the indepen- 
 dence of his country, and its republican Constitution. The justices thus chosen by 
 every ward, would constitute the County Court, would do its judiciary business, di- 
 rect roads and bridges, levy county and poor rates, and administer all the matters of 
 common interest to the whole county. These wards, called townships in New Eng- 
 land, are the vital principle of their Governments, and have proved themselves the 
 wisest invention ever devised by the wit of man for the perfect exercise of self-gov- 
 ernment, and for its preservation. We should thus marshal our Government into, 
 first, the general Federal Republic, for all concerns foreign and Federal; second, that 
 of the State, for what relates to our own citizens exclusively; third, the county re- 
 publics, for the duties and concerns of the county; and fourth, the ward republics, 
 for the small, and yet numerous and interesting concerns of the neighbourhood : and 
 in Government, as well as in every other business of life, it is by division and sub-di- 
 vision of duties alone, that all matters, great and small, can be managed to perfection. 
 And the whole is cemented by giving to every citizen, personally, a part in the ad- 
 ministration of the public affairs. 
 
 The smii of these amendments is, first, General Suffrage. Second, Equal repre- 
 sentation in the Legislature. Third, An Executive chosen by the people Fourth, 
 Judges elective or amovable. Fif9i, Justices, jurors and sheriffs elective. Sixth, 
 Ward divisions. And seventh, Periodical amendments of the Constitution." 
 
 In the same book is a letter to Col. John Taylor, a justice of the peace for the 
 county of Caroline, dated July 21, 1816. 
 
 I will read a part : ■ 
 
 " Nor, I believe, do we differ as to the County Courts. I acknowledge the value 
 of this institution ; that it is in truth our principal executive and judiciary, and that 
 it does much for little pecuniary reward. It is their self-appointment I wish to cor- 
 rect ; to find some means of breaking up a cabal, when such a one gets possession of 
 the bench. When this takes place, it becomes the most afflicting of tyrannies, be- 
 cause its powers are so various, and exercised on every thing most immediately 
 around us. And how many instances have you and I known of these monopolies of 
 county administration !* I knew a county in v/hich a particular family (a numerous 
 one) got possession of the bench, and for a whole generation never admitted a man 
 on it who was not of its clan or connexion. I know a county now of one thousand 
 and five hundred militia, of which sixty are federalists. Its court is of thirty mem- 
 bers, of whom twenty are federalists, (every third man of the sect.) There are large 
 and populous districts in it, without a justice, because without a federalist for appoint- 
 
DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 509 
 
 ment: the militia are as disproportionably under Federal ofRcers. And there is no 
 authority on earth wiiich can break up this junto, short of a general Convention. 
 The remaining one thousand four hundred and forty, free, fighting and paying citi- 
 zens, are governed by men neither of their choice nor confidence, and without a hope 
 of relief. They are certainly excluded from the blessings of a free Government for 
 life, and indefinitely, for aught the Constitution has provided. This solecism maybe 
 called any thing but t^eputflican, and ought undoubtedly tQ,be corrected." 
 
 These letters were written about the time of the first meeting of Delegates at 
 Staunton, to promote the calling of a Convention to reform the Constitution, and no 
 doubt had its influence on the State, in effecting and promoting the meeting of this 
 Assembly. 
 
 Mr. Bayly said, that it would seem that this patriotic man directed his attention 
 and scrutiny into every corner of Virginia, to consider and discover defects in the 
 Constitution requiring amendments that would render the condition of the people 
 more prosperous and happy. 
 
 What is it that I propose ? To abolish the County Courts ? No : All I desire at this 
 time, is, that they may be placed under Legislative restraint and organization. If the 
 Legislature shall say that the County Courts shall remain precisely as they are for 
 the next half century, they will have the authority; but if at any period to come, the 
 bench of these courts shall be found to be in a different situation from what at pre- 
 sent their friends wish us to believe, let the Legislature of your country have the 
 power to regulate and controul them, so as to remedy any evils which may arise or 
 which have arisen. Give them power to break up this monopoly of office among 
 family connexions, and to put an end to the intrigues by which it has been effected. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, that he did not rise to make a speech, (the season for speech-making 
 was now past,) but only to remind gentlemen of one thing which they seemed to 
 have forgot. The County Court system formed a part of the Constitution, as it now 
 existed. What was it now proposed to do ? To amend the Constitution by striking 
 out a feature which it now coiitains : and what would be the effect of such an opera- 
 tion ? Gentlemen say the effect will be not to destroy the County Courts. But cer- 
 tainly it will be giving a very broad hint to the Legislature that they shall destroy 
 them, yet gentlemen say, oh no, that they do not wish to destroy the County Courts. 
 One gentleman has furriished us with a variety of arguments on the subject ; but I 
 ask this Committee whether every argument he used, does not in fact go to the abo- 
 lition of these courts. If his arguments are well founded, the courts ought to be 
 abolished. The gentleman has introduced the opinions of Mr. Jefferson. I respect 
 Mr. Jefferson's opinions very highly, but I confess I was not a little astonished to see 
 the quarter from which the opinions of that gentleman are now urged upon this As- 
 sembly. Sir, it is something anomalous that this should come from gentlemen who 
 tell us that they have no respect, and never had, for his political opinions. 
 
 Here Mr. Bayly interposed. I do not know whether the gentleman means me, 
 but I shall ask him whether he does. 
 
 Mr. Giles resumed. I had no special reference to that gentleman, yet, as I un- 
 derstand that he disagrees with Mr. Jefferson generally, I include him with others. 
 We are told that Mr. Jefferson made a great discovery, viz: that this is not a Repub- 
 lican Government. Mr. Jefferson was certainly a highly respectable man, but as we 
 all know, he dealt very much in theories. He allows that the spirit of the people is 
 republican in a high degree, yet the people have sustained this Government: and 
 whence I ask is this republican spirit of the people derived ? I say, they have derived 
 it from their Government ; and more especially to that feature of it which relates 
 to the County Courts. Going extensively into theories, sometimes deprives us of a 
 knowledge of facts : all acknowledge that the County Courts are of great impor- 
 tance. The gentleman from Accomac moves to strike them out of the Constitution, 
 and in the next breath he tells us, that he does not wish to see them abolished. To 
 say the least, he puts their existence at imminent hazard. He will not destroy the 
 courts ; but he will leave them almost to the winds, and will himself give them a pretty 
 good breeze to begin with. Yet they are parts of our political system now, and the 
 reasons for which he asks us to strike them out of tlie Constitution are such as go to 
 justify their entire abolition. 
 
 Sir, I believe that our Government is Republican, though it does not draw that ex- 
 act line of separation between the departments which is held by some to be essential 
 to republicanism. Sir, it is impossible in practice to do this, and I look upon the doc- 
 trines which have been advanced by some, on that subject, as beautiful visions, but 
 as visions only. There never yet was a Government, where the Legislative, Execu- 
 tive and Judicial Departments were kept perfectly and absolutely distinct. Some 
 have maintained, that in the Government of the United States this end has been ef- 
 fected, but there never was a greater mistake. The Federal Government is a com- 
 plete mixture, a perfect Omnium Gatherum. The Executive is a unit, but he has the 
 controul of every law, provided he can get one more vote than one-third of both 
 
610 ^ 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Houses. And what is the Senate ? It is a co-ordinate branch of the Legislative De- 
 partment in all but money bills, and in yet in another aspect of it, the Senate is an 
 essential part of the Executive Department. It has a check upon all the nominations 
 of the President, and its consent is essential to the validity of all treaties ; while in 
 yet another view of it, that same body is a Judicial tribunal in the highest resort. It 
 has to decide on the impeachment of the greatest officers in the States. I did myself 
 sit -as a Judge in that body. To insist then, on the utter Reparation of the different 
 departments is to follow an ignis fatuus, to run after visions, while we have experience 
 for a guide, which is the best test of wisdom. Can this proceed from any thing but 
 the love of change.? A determination to take whatever we can pick up, and if it 
 does not answer, to strike it down and substitute something else.? What can be the 
 effect of such a course but to produce public agitation .? To destroy that quiet which 
 has been the peculiar blessing of Virginia.? The State, as we all believe, has some 
 celebrity : there is such a thing known in the United States as the Virginia character, 
 "Whence has it been derived .? From our Government ; from the happy operation of 
 those fundamental laws under which we have lived and prospered for fifty-four years. 
 Should we continue for fifty-four years more under the same state of things, we shall 
 become yet more distinguished than we now are : but once strike down these bul- 
 warks of the public peace and happiness, and nothing will ever be heard again of the 
 Virginia character. Rely upon it, that character goes with your Government. It 
 will not exist a moment after that shall have been prostrated. Your fate is inevitable, 
 the causes which urge it on are irresistible. Once commence this downward course 
 and you will infallibly go on, till every vestige of your former greatness shall be for- 
 ever effaced. There is nothing in this Virginia character but a regard to morality, 
 public and private. This it is that has won you the respect you enjoy. It is this 
 which makes men who are bargaining and trafficing in Congress, say to each other, 
 It is no use to go to him : he is a Virginian. Sir, the proposition before you hazards 
 much, and we shall not be acting with coolness and deliberation, if we consent even 
 to put at hazard political blessings so great as those we now enjoy. Let us not be 
 persuaded to do this, by gentlemen who cry up a system to the skies, and then pro- 
 pose a measure which insures its destruction. 
 
 Mr. Bayly rose in reply to Mr. Giles, and said, I never believed that either a young 
 or an old man ought to follow the opinions of others, unless he approved of them, and 
 I did not suppose that, that gentleman, (Mr. Giles) ought to object to any member of 
 this Committee introducing Mr. Jefferson as authority to support a motion upon a 
 subject where he had expressed an opinion directly in point. JNor did I believe it was 
 absolutely necessary for a man to agree in every sentiment, opinion or measure of po- 
 licy of an author, before he should be allowed to refer to them in debate, as worthy of 
 consideration. If, however, this new rule should be binding upon all, I might point 
 to a gentleman who would be deprived of the right to use as authority the writings of 
 any American statesman, because he never agreed with any. The time has been, and 
 not long since, when not only the opinions, but even the wishes of Mr. Jefferson 
 seemed almost to control the public sentiment of this country, and they yet have great 
 respect in a Virginia Assembly. 
 
 It was not my intention to have read to the Committee any part of this book, (Mr. 
 Jefferson's works,) but when the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, (the Chief 
 Justice of the United States,) so powerful in debate, opposed the motion, and finding 
 myself in opposition to him, who as a lawyer and Judge, is without a rival, it was my 
 duty to balance the great weight of his argument, by introducing the authority of Mr. 
 Jefferson, whose opinions precisely meet the argument of the gentleman from R,ich- 
 mond. I ought to have drawn to my aid so great and influential an assistant in sup- 
 port of the motion. To this, the gentleman from Amelia has such strong objections, 
 because he says, that I have not uniformly been an admirer of Mr. Jefferson's opinions. 
 Mr. Chairman, although I have never been in the habit of continually promulgating 
 my political creed and schemes by pushing them upon the people by newspaper essays, 
 pamphlets and books, lest they should suspect that I had no political fixed creed, that 
 did not change with the times ; yet I have for thirty years, obtained the approbation 
 and support of my constituents, who are of all parties, because my sentiments of pub- 
 lic men and measures, have never been concealed, and therefore, there was no neces- 
 sity of keeping alive party names for party purposes and for private interest, by such 
 means. I always distinguish between men, measures and principles, and if the gen- 
 tleman ever heard me disparage Mr. Jefferson's writings, he has heard what never 
 happened. And if he or any other gentleman ever imagined that they heard me speak 
 of that man in any manner, or on any occasion, but with the greatest respect, they 
 have heard what never took place. From early youth to the present day, his writings 
 ha been my favourite reading. It is true that I did disapprove of the repeal of the 
 Judiciary Law, which he greatly promoted, because I believed it was a good system 
 and ought to have been further tried ; and no better system has yet been substituted. 
 And where is the man living on the Eastern Shore, who was not grieved by the almost 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION; 
 
 511 
 
 fatal blow that was given to the navy and commerce of the country during his admin- 
 istration : that man is not to be found. But for the purchase of Louisiana, and many 
 others of his acts, I was numbered among his friends, which the Journal of the Senate 
 of Viro-inia from 1801 to 1809 will show^ 1 belong to that class of politicians, who 
 stand by their country in times of w^ar and great danger. The gentleman from Ameha 
 may know, that in the gloomy period of the last war, when it was necessary for every 
 man to stand by the Government, that I was not found united to a faction of open 
 enemies or pretended friends to the Administration, to destroy it and degrade the 
 country. I united my cheerful support to those in power, to bring that war to a happy 
 conclusion, and I stood by my post until that was accomplished. 
 
 Mr. Giles observed in reply, that he had not supposed that any thing he had said 
 would call out so much animation on the part of the gentleman. When speaking of 
 his introduction of the opinions of Mr. Jefferson, he really did not know that the gen- 
 tleman agreed vvith Mr. Jefferson's political sentiments ; he had always underst'- .d 
 that when the politicians of the country were divided into Federalists and Republicans^ 
 the gentleman had always ranked as a Federalist, and Mr. Jefferson as a Republican. 
 
 Mr. Bayly said, that the gentleman from Amelia was peculiarly fortunate in resi- 
 ding in a county where the court is so highly qualified for the discharge oftheir duty, 
 and we may imagine it is the most distinguished in Virginia. The reason is obvious : 
 that gentleman has placed himself at the head of the schools in that county, which has 
 educated the justices, and rendered them so accomplished. Not so in my part of the 
 country ; we have had no eminent statesman as yet, who has taken upon himself the. 
 education of boys. 
 
 When the gentleman made his long speech on the basis of Representation, he in- 
 troduced, as applicable to his subject, the County Court system. 1 am very sure I am 
 not mistaken in the fact, for he told us, by way of proving the excellence of these 
 courts, that a rich man could with difficulty get justice against a poor man. And if 
 they do not administer jnstice equally between rich and poor, how is it that they are 
 such favorites with the rich.'' But there are other parts of the State where the oppo- 
 site seems to be the case ; however, it is not probable that they will long be a favorite 
 in Virginia. There are more counties than Dinwiddle, which has been quoted as an 
 example by the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) where the magistracy of 
 the county is in the possession of one or two families only. 
 
 The gentleman from Amelia assimilated the County Courts to the Senate of the 
 United States, having Legislative, Executive, and Judicial power. He always finds, 
 his subject carry him in some way to the Constitution of the United States, the Ad- 
 ministration, or some department thereof, and has informed this Committee that he 
 has sat as a Judge in that Senate. I thank him for this example of illustrating his argu- 
 ment. Does Virginia wish that her Senators in Congress, with their Executive, Le- 
 gislative, and Judicial powers, sliould be appointed by themselves, and remain in office 
 during life, as County Court justices are appointed and remain in office .' Not so 
 Virginia has lamented the election of some of her Senators before their short term of 
 six 3^ears expired, which no man better knows than the Delegate from Amelia. 
 
 The gentleman has informed us, that if the freeholders of the State had all voted 
 for or against the call of this Convention, and the polls had been correctly taken and 
 returned by the Sherifts, there would not have been a majority in favor of it: and that 
 he had great doubts when he signed his proclamation, w^hether a majority was in favo? 
 of the measure, and that he still has great doubts now. If we examine his communica- 
 tion to the last General Assembly, it would seem to me that he entertained a differ- 
 ent opinion at that time. 
 
 We have also heard from the same gentleman, that a majority of the freeholders 
 would be against the call of the Convention, if they had to vote now for or against it; 
 and changes in public opinion have takeii place since we assembled. So far as my ex- 
 perience goes, and from all parts of the State that I have heard from, there has b^en 
 a great change, but that change is against the old Constitution, with, one exception^ 
 and perhaps that exception influenced the opinion of the gentleman, for the county 
 is not far from Richmond. 
 
 A gentleman of great authority informed me a few days ago, that there were great 
 changes in the county in which he resided, and that if the vote was now to be taken, 
 the majority against a Convention would be greater than it was in the Spring. 1 have 
 examined theleturn of the votes from that county, as communicated to the last Gene- 
 ral Assembly by the Governor, and I find that in May last only o>fE man voted in that 
 county for a Convention. 
 
 Mr. Giles rejoined : and expressed his regret that the gentleman appeared so sensi- 
 tive under the remarks which he had thrown out. He had served with that gentleman 
 in Congress, and sure he was, that the gentleman at that time had always been ranked 
 as one of the Federal Party. He was happy at this late period to hear fi-om the gen- 
 tleman a new profession. It was wholly new to him, but he was joyful to hear it 
 
512 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION* 
 
 even though it was so late. Mr. G. disclaimed having ever Baid, that there were 
 counties in the State in which a rich man could not get justice. What he had said 
 on that subject was intended not as a disparagement, but rather as a compliment to 
 the justices. So guarded were they against leaning to the side of the rich to the in- 
 jury of the poor, that their leaning, if they had any, was rather to the other side, so 
 that the possession of riches was, if any thing, rather a disadvantage than otherwise 
 to a suitor who sought to oppress his poor neighbour. This he conceived to be one of 
 the highest eulogiums which could be pronounced upon any judicial tribunal, 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that he could not permit the vote to be taken, without adding his 
 testimony to that of the gentleman from Orange, in favour of these ancient tribunals 
 of the land. When I was very young, said Mr. J. and but little experienced in the 
 duties of my profession, I had, I confess, some misgivings about our County Courts, 
 My perceptions enabled me to see those objections to them which lie upon the sur- 
 face, and to which none can be blind ; but, I had not appreciated the blessings which 
 daily flow to the community from this institution : blessings the mofet important and ex- 
 tensive ; which, because they operate silently, are not so apt to be observed by a tran- 
 sient looker-on. The ill effects are obvious and seen by all, but it is of the nature of all 
 well organized political institutions, that they dispense their benefits silently and with- 
 out observation. It is, therefore, that we find the young and inexperienced so often ar- 
 rayed against the most valuable parts of the Constitution. It was so with me : but I 
 had not long looked beneath the surface and reflected on the eflfects actually produced 
 by the County Court system, till I was perfectly satisfied of its value and importance 
 to the well-being of our Commonwealth. Evils it no doubt has, but they are such as 
 are inseparable from the imperfection of all human things. They might, many of 
 them, be corrected by ordinary legislation: but in getting rid of some, it is very ques- 
 tionable, whether you might not substitute others of more pernicious consequences. 
 I am well persuaded we could not surrender these institutions without losing one of 
 the best blessings of the country. I concur with the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. 
 Barbour,) and the gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. Giles,) in the opinions they have ex- 
 pressed, as to the influence of these courts on public sentiment, and the political 
 opinions of the people, and of their effect upon the character of the State. Yes, Sir, 
 it is in these family tribunals with their mild and patriarchal jurisdiction, their meet- 
 ings held at short periods, and in small districts, that the obligations and rights of the 
 citizen are taught to the humblest members of the community. Before these just and 
 equitable tribunals, the humblest and the poorest man can have his right to property, 
 to character, to liberty, and to life, brought into fair and equal competition with those 
 of his proudest and most wealthy neighbour. This equal administration of the laws, 
 tends to produce among the people a strong attachment to the country which thus 
 protects their persons and their lives, and so sensible are they of the value of these in- 
 stitutions that they are firmly determined never to give them up. 
 
 Strike out this clause from the Constitution, and what is the consequence ? Why^ 
 say the gentlemen, the consequence will be not to destroy the County Courts, but 
 only to leave them to the control of the Legislature. The Legislature may re-orga- 
 nize them if they please. Sir, do gentlemen really think, that such will be the effect 
 of striking out this clause ? Other parts of our Constitution make it necessary that the 
 County Courts should be Constitutional Courts, unless they also are to be surrendered 
 to the Legislature. Not the least of the benefits attending these courts is derived 
 from their participation in the Executive power of the Government, but how can this 
 be maintained if you strike them out as a Constitutional provision ? Are gentlemen 
 prepared to leave it to the Legislature to mould the Executive powers of the Govern- 
 ment? They must do so if this measure prevails ; they must vest the whole of it in 
 a single Executive, if they deprive the County Courts of all share in its participa- 
 tion. What will gentlemen do with the residuum of power which they take away 
 from these courts ? They recommend for appointment all justices and militia-officers. 
 This must be given to the Executive, and this forsooth is proposed as a means to get 
 rid of faction and cabals in the community. Will gentlemen look a moment at this 
 subject? when they indulge their fears of this spectre of cabal and intrigue and com- 
 motion? From whence is it to proceed? from the County Courts? what are they? 
 one hundred and four different bodies; one in each county. Can it be probable that 
 one hundred and four collections of respectable men possessed of property and charac- 
 ter, and having their all dependant on the good administration of the laws, will be 
 likely to produce as much cabal and intrigue in the State, as might be expected to 
 arise if the whole of this mass of power should be put into the hands of a single 
 Executive ? or of a Governor with an advisory Council ? or even of a Governor with 
 a Council of control ? Gentlemen fear lest the County Courts in a single county 
 should, in high party times, appoint two or three Federalists, with a view to influence 
 the balance of parties in the State, But, what might be apprehended if the whole of 
 this power should be in the hands of an Executive wholly Federal ? or wholly Repub- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 513 
 
 lican? Then instead of appointing two or three individuals of a particular party, 
 from party considerations, we might have two or three thousands appointed from the 
 same motives. 
 
 About what are these cabals and factions to arise ? Gentlemen tell us, it will be for 
 the purpose of keeping up family power, because these courts appoint the members 
 of their own body; but do gentlemen remember that the office of a justice is not an 
 office of profit, but an office of labour, of great labour? and do gentlemen remember 
 the nature of the responsibility under which these justices act ? not the responsibility 
 of being turned out of office, not the responsibility which they owe to the Constitu- 
 tion, but that which each man owes to his immediate neighbours. They have a di- 
 rect relation to all the country around them, and the moment a magistrate incurs by 
 ill conduct the public displeasure, that moment he loses all the honour of his office, and 
 all the peace and comfort of his life. This is the safeguard : the powerful and the con- 
 stant security, which the Commonwealth holds, for the due discharge of the duties of 
 tlie magisterial office ; this is the pledge against the undue influence of any party of 
 politicians or any sect of religionists. I have often heard the charge of partiality ad- 
 vanced, but I never yet knew it to be verified in one single instance. The responsi- 
 bility to which I have alluded is found to be sufficient and effectual, and I am not 
 willing for the sake of opening a field to Legislative ingenuity on a subject of such 
 vital importance to the well-being of the Commonwealth, to strike the County Courts 
 from our proposed Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, that he had intended to enter fully into a reply, but he should 
 not do so now. He differed from the gentleman who had spoken as to the necessity 
 of retaining these tribunals, by giving them a Constitutional consecration. He saw 
 no need whatever of making them a part of our organic law. If the arguments of 
 gentlemen were good, and the statements which they had made correct, the Legisla- 
 ture could not fail to retain these courts. Could it be believed that the Assembly 
 would be guilty of the wantonness of throwing such popular and such valuable tribu- 
 nals to the winds ? Mr. H. said, that in case he should find it likely to be of any 
 avail, he should present some different views of the subject; at present, he should 
 merely say, that it was his opinion that the County Courts ought not to be left in the 
 fundamental laws of the State. Gentlemen had said, that they had observed these 
 courts for a quarter of a century, and that they had constantly grown in their estima- 
 tion: He also had practised before tiiem, and was sorry that he could not in candour 
 bear the same testimony in their behalf The magistrates were in general worthy 
 men, but they were not acquainted with law, and were not capable of duly discharging 
 the duties that were required at their hands. However it might be in lower Virginia, 
 where, according to gentlemen's statements, the magistrates were men of fortune and 
 leisure, and took a pride in fitting themselves for their duty, in the remote parts of the 
 State this was not the case. The population were in a very different condition : the 
 magistrates were not so wealthy ; they had business at home and could not afford to 
 travel thirty, fifty, and one hundred miles, attend their courts and return again, on 
 their own charges. When they did so, the court could not be induced to sit long enough 
 to try the causes before them, and such were the impediments and the delays in ob- 
 taining justice, that though he was a professional man, he was in the habit of advising 
 clients who applied to him, to pocket their loss, if it did not exceed fifty or sixty dol- 
 lars, rather than encounter the difficulties and the hazard of going before these courts. 
 He repeated his belief, that the magistrates were in general very worthy men. He 
 felt high respect for those in his own portion of the State, yet he considered them for 
 the most part unfit for the stations they held : and this without any fault of their own, 
 or the least imputation against them. They were country gentlemen, very imper- 
 fectly acquainted with law, who liad affairs of their own to attend to, and could not 
 afford to neglect their own business for that of the public, without som-C compensation. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose in reply. The gentleman from Loudoun had said, that he could 
 see no reason why the Legislature might not be entrusted witli the entire control of 
 this subject; would the gentleman carr\'' out his principle, and leave the whole Judi- 
 cial Department of the Government to the management of the Legislature .'' Such was 
 the direct consequence of the gentleman's doctrine. Sir, said Mr. L. it is with inef- 
 fable surprise, that I learn that in the great and flourishing county of Loudomi, of 
 which we have all heard so much and so long, persons are not to be found, who are 
 fit to discharge the duties of a magistrate. Tf this had been affirmed of some very 
 poor or very small county of the State, I should have less difficulty in comprehending 
 the case, and in crediting the assertion ; but how there should be such a difference in 
 this respect, between the county of Loudoun and the county of Orange, I confess 
 myself to be at a loss to comprehend. I never before heard any complaint of Lou- 
 doun, or any thing about its insufficiency to produce good magistrates. However 
 this may be in Loudoun, it is certainly a fact that the County Courts accomplish nine- 
 tenths of the Judicial business of this State. The mass of business they go through 
 would hardly be believed by the mao-istrates themselves. Those unpretending men 
 
 65 
 
I 
 
 514 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 can scarce form a conception of the importance of their own situation : they do not exer- 
 cise a jurisdiction in common law and equity only, but perform all the duties of a Court 
 of Probat, and of an Orphan's Court. It is calculated, that every estate in England 
 passes the Court of Chancery once in thirty years ; if such is the case in England, in 
 Virginia where the law of descents is so different, the real estate must come under 
 Chancery decision in a much shorter period ; ninety-nine hundredths of the cases of 
 guardians and executors and all those of trustees are of this description. All our estates 
 are divided by descent or devise. Only compare the number of estates with the number 
 of law-questions which come to be settled. Now in ninety-nine cases out of one hun- 
 dred, the County Courts perform all this business. Of all the litigated questions of pro- 
 bat, what proportion ever reach the Court of Appeals ^ Nine hundred and ninety-nine 
 out of a thousand of these questions are finally determined in the County Courts. Take 
 the Circuit Court dockets and compare the number of causes there with the number 
 in the County Courts, and yoxx will find that the number in the latter is infinitely 
 greater. [Mr. P. P. Barbour, as four to one. Mr. Morris, aye as ten to one.] Now, 
 Sir, the County Courts do all this amount of business, and they do it well. A case 
 may accidentally occur under their Chancery jurisdiction involving some difficult 
 questions of law, and in these they may be somewhat at a loss ; yet I remember one such 
 case in Dinwiddie, which was very difliicult indeed, where the decision of the County 
 Court was carried up to the Superior Court and reversed ; it was afterwards carried 
 to the Court of Appeals, and after a full hearing, the judgment of the County Court 
 was there found to have been right. The Judges of the Superior Court bewildered 
 by their authorities had decided wrong, while these plain magistrates of the County 
 Court had followed the exact spirit of the law, and had decided right. How did this 
 happen that a collection of country justices should decide on a very difficult question 
 of law more correctly than men educated to the profession, and of long experience in 
 the very business of deciding questions of that kind ^ It happened, because the one 
 followed the principles of natural justice, while the other was perplexed and bewil 
 dered by a set of artificial rules : and hence it comes, that the eulogium pronounced 
 by the learned gentleman from Orange is perfectly just, in declaring that these tribu- 
 nals are not merely good, but the very best on earth. They accomplish all the busi- 
 ness I have stated : they do it well, and they do it for nothing : they have jurisdiction of 
 all common law causes over twenty dollars, of all cases in equity and probat ; all 
 cases of intestacy and of administration ; besides the jurisdiction over mills, roads, 
 bridges, &c., and the people get the whole of this for nothing. With what do gentle- 
 men propose to furnish a substitute for such an institution ? They will give us a few 
 ignorant Judges. These of course are to receive a salary. You cannot have less than 
 two in each county ; and what will you give them ? You cannot offer them less than 
 three hundred dollars, and their services are low at that. You must then have an ex- 
 penditure of six hundred dollars a-piece for one hundred and five counties, that is, an 
 expenditure of $ 63,000, and then what is all your saving by the reduction of the num- 
 ber of the Legislature ? Instead of our present upright justices of the peace, who 
 have learned none of the tricks of the profession, you are to get a pettifogger, too 
 young to understand his profession, or else an old one who never had brains to ac- 
 quire it. It is with materials like these that you are to fill your seat of judgment, 
 with young lawyers half read, who have some little knowledge of Blackstone : very 
 small ; very small indeed ; and a few of the principal Statutes, or an old lawyer who is 
 willing to take the place for three hundred dollars. These are to be your Judges. I 
 confess they are the very last that I should choose for mine. This is the gentleman's 
 expedient, and what conceivable benefit is likely to result from such a change.^ none 
 whatever. You will get nobody for your Judges, but the very last men in whom the 
 community v/ill have any confidence. It is an old remark that in the administration 
 of justice it is indispensable not only that it should be done fairly, and done prompt- 
 ly, but that it should be done to the satisfaction of the people. This is a considera- 
 tion which a statesman will not fail to keep in view. And how is it administered in 
 the County Courts Mr. Chairman, I am sometimes tempted to believe that I am in 
 a different part of the world, from the accounts some gentlemen give of these courts. 
 I have long practised in them ; 1 thought that I knew them well ; my confidence has 
 all sprung from observation and experience ; yet it seems that they know nothing of 
 law, and are wholly incompetent to the duties they perform. Sir, might not the same 
 objection be urged against the trial by jury ? We submit the law as well as the fact 
 to men who are not lawyers, and yet we all see good juries and sound verdicts. 
 
 Is any charge of arrogance brought against our justices? do the people complain of 
 them as tyrannical and overbearing far from it. On the contrary, there is a purity, an 
 easy unassuming unconscious dignity, and, above all, an impress of neighbourly kind- 
 ness, seen and felt in the administration of all their powers, which has endeared these 
 tribunals to tlie people, and procured for them universal respect. But we are told 
 there will be cabals ; tliere will be intrigues. Doubtless there will. There will be 
 cabals, and there will be intrigues among men at all times, and in every place. But 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 615 
 
 what cabals and what intrigues are likely to arise in these County Courts ? How 
 many instances of corruption have been so much as charged against any of them ? 
 I know of but one, in the county of Berkeley, and I believe one more in the county of 
 Amherst. Such is the amount of corruption which has been alleged against this en- 
 tire body of men in the course of two hundred years. I will be obliged to any gen- 
 tleman to point me out so much as a charge of corruption beyond this, and this so 
 far as I know is a charge only. If there are cabals, they have never been charged 
 to any unfairness of the justices in the discharge of their official duty. 
 
 But we are told that the County Courts renew themselves ; that the justices have 
 power to perpetuate their own body. Sir, I have seen them at this v/ork. They first 
 enquire whether an additional justice of the peace is required by the wants of the 
 county: they then select the most respectable man they can find ; they name him to 
 the Executive as a fit person to be put in commission, and the Executive rarely sees 
 cause to refuse the appointment. Much however has been said about the force of 
 family influence. A friend of mine very zealous for the reformation of old abuses, said 
 to me, some time ago, (and appealed to me for the truth of the remark), that the bench 
 of justices of the County Court of Dinwiddie consisted almost exclusively of two 
 families and their connexions; and I well remembered, and therefore admitted, that 
 when I belonged to that county, the fact was so. But I asked him, in my turn, whe- 
 ther he had ever known that court to refuse or hesitate to nominate any person of any 
 other family or connexion, proper to be put in the commission of the peace He 
 readily answered. No. Whether the number of persons of those families on the bench, 
 at the time he spoke of, was not owing intirely to the numerousness and general res- 
 pectability of those two families and tlieir connexions in the county ? This he readily 
 admitted. Were not the justices in commission, highly respectable, honorable, honest 
 men, fit and worthy of their station ? Yes. Did they not do their duty, and admi- 
 nister justice promptly, intelligently, impartially, in a spirit of neighbourh- kindness 
 towards the people, and at the same time with firmness Yes. Did they not admi- 
 nister justice to the satisfaction of the people ? Yes. Heard you ever any complaint 
 of thera.' No. Well then, said I, if justice was administered to me and mine, 
 honestly, fairly and promptly, and administered without fee or reward, why should 
 I care, that the judges were named Goodicijn or Pegram! As to incapacity and 
 ignorance, I have seen County Courts wliich were among the ablest tribunals 
 before which I ever practised, not excepting the Court of Appeals. They are in 
 general able tribunals for all they have to do. This was eminently true of the 
 County Court of Amelia twenty-seven years ago, when I practised there, I am for 
 retaining the County Courts, if to retain them be possible. A friend sent to me an ac- 
 count of the expense of accomplishing in the County Court of Baltimore, what would 
 be done in Virginia for nothinor. The fees of the register of wills alone, were equal 
 to what would be a salary for one of our justices. The charges of the Orphan's 
 Court were two or three dollars a day, whether the session consisted of a day or an 
 hour. In short, the costs beat those in our Court of Appeals all hollow. ' When 
 I knew that the County Courts were to be assailed, I made out a list of these ex- 
 penses, and according to my recollection, the amount greatly exceeded the revenue 
 paid by the like number of people in any part of Virginia. Yet, gentlemen are for 
 getting rid of this cheap system, and substituting a dear one in its place, the expense 
 of which will greatly exceed all the saving we shall effect by reducing the Legisla- 
 ture. But that is not all, nor the tenth part, nor the thousandth part of what we shall 
 lose, or of what Maryland lost, by exchanging her County Court system for Circuit 
 Courts and justices with fees, and Courts of Probat. How much they pay in fees, 
 I know not, but the sum is enormous. 
 
 When I was, sometime since, in the city of Philadelphia, a gentleman said to me, 
 partly in jest, "You Virginians are very proud;" I replied, that I had often heard 
 that charge advanced, and believed that there might be some truth in it. and that since 
 I had crossed the Potomac, I felt a little inclined to indulge such a feeling myself. 
 The gentleman answered, *• proud as you are, yon are not as proud as you ought to 
 be," and he then went into an eulogium of our institutions, which I am unwilling to 
 repeat. How he got his information, 1 do not know, but he was intimately acquainted 
 with our circumstances, and especially with our County Court system, which he ap- 
 peared to understand, at least as well as I did myself. By way of showing the 
 contrast between the state of matters in his own Commonwealth and ours, he related 
 to me this anecdote. He had once been foreman of a jury, when a black man was 
 tried for stealing a side of leather. There was but one witness, and he was an ap- 
 prentice. The black man had sold a side of leather to a white man, who was to pay 
 the money down, but failed to do so. The black man, sometime after, went to the 
 house of the white man to get the money; the white man was absent from home, and 
 the side of leather lay in a shop where this apprentice was at work. Seeing his own 
 property, which had not been paid for according to agreement, the black man laid it 
 on his shoulder and carried it home. For thus resuming his own property, he was 
 
516 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 committed by a justice of the peace to be tried for grand larceny. When a gentle- 
 man remonstrated with the justice on the hardship of the case, and asked him how- 
 he could do such a thing ; the justice replied, " It was all his own fault, if he would 
 have paid the costs, I would not have committed him." Sir, thus it is, and thus it 
 will be obliged to be, if you put men into the commission of the peace, and allow 
 them fees for their services. Litigation ; petty litigation with all its evils will prevail 
 and increase. Instead of composing the disputes of their neighbours, they will incite 
 them to strife, for the sake of Ihe lucre of gain. The office of a justice will come to 
 serve as a m.ere place for pettifogging. But, gentlemen say, they do not wish us to 
 abolish the Connty Courts, but only to give fees to the justices. Kentucky tried this 
 tack, and enacted a fee-bill, and from that ill-fated moment, she found the justices of 
 the peace prove a curse and not a blessing. All respectable men withdrew from the 
 office ; and to cure the evils which followed, the Legislature was obliged to narrow 
 down the jurisdiction of the County Courts, until they reduced it to almost nothing. 
 No, Sir. If you abolish the County Court system as it is now established, there is no 
 other alternative, than a set of petty Judges with fees; than whom I can imagine no 
 greater pest to this, or any other community. I do trust, that this ancient feature of 
 the internal polity of Virginia, will be permitted to remain. Gentlemen profess vast 
 veneration for the Constitution, but, I would thank them to tell me, what part of the 
 Constitution they do venerate. Let what change be proposed that will, it is sure of 
 having their vote. They abolish all they can, and yet they tell us, of their great and 
 profound veneration for our ancient institutions. From such veneration, may God 
 deliver all that I hold dear. 
 
 Mr. Henderson wishing to reply, moved that the Committee rise. It rose according- 
 ly, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, December 1, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Parks of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved, that the Convention go into Committee of the Whole, but 
 withdrew the motion at the request of, 
 
 Mr. Coalter, who rose and addressed the Committee from a written speech, as 
 follows : 
 
 I have been a week in this Convention, and but within the last two or three days 
 have been furnished with a copy of the reports of the various Committees which have 
 been under discussion ; and some reports of the Auditor. 
 
 I find that we are thrown on rather a tempestuous ocean ; and not being accustomed 
 to such voyages, I am getting somewhat sea-sick. I wish, if possible, to see land ; to 
 see my family, and to see my friends and constituents, who are looking out for the 
 good old ship, the Constitution, with no little anxiety ; and many of whom, I know, 
 would be willing to obtain a policy of insurance for her safety, at almost any pre- 
 mium — I too, have been thinking of a plan by which we may perhaps get again into 
 harbour, or at least into still-water. I have consulted no man about it; for, I wish no 
 one to be implicated with me in what may be considered so visionary a scheme. Be- 
 sides, I may be wrong in the extent to which I am at present prepared to go, in mak- 
 ing a compromise, or may not be willing to go far enough. 
 
 I know nothing o7 the order and forms to be pursued for the purpose of laying be- 
 fore this body the plan, which has suggested itself to my mind, in order to bring our 
 labours to a close. 
 
 We are pretty equally divided, it seems, on a great variety of most hnportant sub- 
 jects. It may be thought, that if those great subjects were grouped together, and 
 presented to us in some single or tangible shape, containing, in the whole instrument, 
 those things which can be acceded to on either side, and also indicating those which 
 cannot, we might come to some agreement. 
 
 I find, on looking over the table furnished by the Auditor, that the whole number 
 of freeholders in the State may amount, say to 92,856 
 By adding together the whole number West of the Blue Ridge, and non-residents 
 
 including therewith, the counties of Loudoun and Fairfax, (sup- and all. 
 
 posed to have an identity of opinion, feeling and interest on many 
 
 of these great questions) the whole number amounts, say to 48,920 
 
 Which deducted, leaves 43,936 
 It is supposed, however, that certain other counties below the Ridge, are also iden- 
 tified with them, if not m interest, at least in opinion and feeling as to some of these 
 questions. This, though, is doubted ; and it is said that the signs of the times in those 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 617 
 
 counties shew that there is in reahty no such serious disunion in the rest of lower 
 Virginia. Taking this to be so, the comparative strength is as 48,920 to 
 
 43,936 
 
 4,984 
 
 It is probable this majority would be lessened by estimating the number of non- 
 residents. 
 
 But whether I am in the majority of freeholcfers, or in the minority, or whether 
 from instructions, or other convictions operating on the Delegation from that section 
 of the State above alluded to, as to the opinions of their constituents, I may hereafter 
 find myself in a majority on this floor, is not the question. 
 
 The question with me is, whether should I be in such a majority against such a 
 minority as would then be on this floor, and in the country, am I prepared to adopt 
 an amendment to the Constitution, containing the mixed basis of Representation, or 
 the Federal number in both branches of the Legislature ? Now, though I most sin- 
 cerely and religiously tliink, that this latter is wliat we ought all to agree to, and 
 were it proper nov/, or should it become proper, I trust I can shew reasons enough to 
 induce a belief at least that I am as sincere in that opinion as those are who entertain 
 a contrary one, yet I could not exercise that power — no — I am not that man — I have 
 Scotch-Irish blood in me, it is true — of that old blood which did not come here to en- 
 joy a land already blessed with every thing that land can be blessed with; but to 
 subdue the wilderness, and to make a country for themselves — who came over about 
 the time when tlie Solemn League and Covenaiit was still talked of, and which I re- 
 collect to have heard talked of as far back as I can recollect any thing. 
 
 It is a blood I am proud of ; and I hope I don't disgrace it when I say I would trem 
 ble and shrink from such a step. 
 
 Reluctant as I would be for this Convention to rise without doing any thing, I 
 would rather do that — on this great question of basis of Representation. The power 
 of reason, it seems to me, is gone— -forever gone^ perhaps on both sides — we must 
 compra/nise or do nothing. 
 
 But, will I, if I have the power to do so, establish the mixed basis, or the Federal 
 number for the most numcrotis branch ? No, Sir, I would not even do this against such 
 a minority in this House, and probable majority in this country, although the majority 
 here be with me. I icill rather adjourn and do nothing. I would rather call on the 
 magnanimity of such a majority, to say, whether we ought not to adjourn, rather than 
 do this thing? But, as it is all-important that we should not so adjourn, then I again 
 call on them to say, whether, if other great interests, in which they, with me, feel 
 most deeply concerned, can be saved, at least for the present, and until more time and 
 reflection can be bestowed on them, this troubled ocean ought not to be at rest? 
 
 Whether this ought not to be done, even at the expense of considerable sacrifices? 
 
 And I call upon the other side to say, whether the storm is to continue to rage ; or 
 whether they will be satisfied with an ample redress of real grievances, leaving some- 
 thing for posterity to reflect upon and to do, if they think proper? I trust I will be 
 met in that spirit of candour and open-heartedness, by which / feel myself actuated. 
 As to the manner in which we shall come together, and as to many minor points, I 
 Sim a. nose of icax, to be fashioned as gentlemen choose. As to great and essential 
 points, if they can't be compromised, I am a rock of granite ; or what is nearly the 
 same thing — a Scotch-Irishman. I am willing now, if it be the pleasure of the House, 
 to expose fully my views. 
 
 In order to bring before the House what / am zcilling to do, as well as what I am 
 ■iwt willing to do, I will have reference to the reports of the Committees, which have 
 been under consideration — (all my projects may be said to be already in print :) It 
 being always understood, that wlaen [ agree to any proposition, by way of compro- 
 mise, to which it is known I am otherwise opposed, I am not to be considered as com- 
 mitted, unless other things, deemed essential by me, are yielded to me, or abandoned, 
 as the case may be. Should others act with the same frankness, we may, perhaps, 
 soon see whether we are likely to compromise. I will also premise, that if other 
 schemes of compromise are proposed, not touching certain cardinal points, from which 
 no evils have resulted, but leaving them to posterity to settle, I will feel myself quite 
 at liberty to choose between them. Some of these have been presented. But I wish 
 to see, combined icith them, the ^chole scheme of the instrument, that I may say, whe- 
 ther, 071 the ichole, I think it will be a blessing or a curse to the country. 
 
 Thus, then, and in this spirit, I am willing to agree to the first resolution of the 
 Legislative Committee, and also, of course, to the second, or any modification of it, 
 that may be satisfactory to a majority. 
 
 • In lieu of the third resolution, I am willing to adopt the amendment, (No. 35,) of- 
 fered by the member from Chesterfield. I would though, as at present advised, prefer 
 to retain the provision in the original resolution, to be found in the third, fourth, fiflh 
 and sixth lines, so as to require some reasonable value to be affixed to all freeholds : 
 
518 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 And I have reasons, which have considerable weight with me, and which I will be 
 ready to assign, if necessary, for preferring to amend that amendment, by striking 
 out the third resolution therein, concerning lease-holders. These, however, are not 
 essential points with me ; but it is a sine qua non with me, not to go farther than that 
 amendment goes, in enlarging the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 In lieu of the fourth resolution, I am content to take the amendment, (No. 35,) 
 proposed by the member from Goochland. That is also a sine qua non with me, if 
 nothing better can be had — and I* moreover, think it important, that the Senate 
 should have the right to propose amendments to revenue bills, as well as to any others. 
 
 I will, then, have no objections to the other resolutions of the Legislative Com 
 mittee. As to the report of the Executive Committee, I am for rejecting the whole 
 of it, except the first resolution, which ought to be amended by a provision, that the 
 Oovernor shall be elected by the Legislature. This is a sine qua non — but whether 
 he is to be elected for one or three years, is a matter of minor importance. The in- 
 clination of my mind, at present, is for the latter. 
 
 In lieu of the second, third and fourth resolutions, I would greatly prefer the propo- 
 sition, (No. 2!J,) of the member from this city, to any thing else which I have hitherto 
 seen. 1 will, however, be content with the will of the majority, on this point. It 
 has occurred to me though, that this proposition might, perhaps be more acceptable, 
 if five were the number — one of whom to be elected from the Western district, one 
 from the Valley, two between that and Tide-water, and one below : Or, if four con- 
 tinued the number, to have one from each district. Thus, the circumstances and 
 situation of each district, would, as it were, be represented in the Executive ; and the 
 people could more easily make known their wants. The changes that must be made 
 in many of the laws, to fit them to a new state of things, is also a consideration with 
 me. In executing many of those laws too, the Governor, it seems to me, must have 
 assistance, as well as advice. This must be provided and paid for. 
 
 There is nothing in the report of the Judicial Committee, (in relation to which, I 
 can or ought to express an opinion,) of which I can be said to disapprove, as I may 
 possibly give some reasonr,, at a proper time, to shew that it might be safest to vary it 
 in some respects. I allude particularly to the Chancery Jurisdiction — as, for instance, 
 after the word " Courts," in the second line, to introduce the words, " of Common 
 Law and Chancery Jurisdiction," so as to prevent the Legislature from a total aboli- 
 tion of Chancery Jurisdiction, in any shape. Should 1 conclude to propose any such 
 amendment, I will, at a proper time, assign my reasons. 
 
 There is nothing, however, in that report, (on which I can vote) in regard to which 
 I will not readily accede to the will of the majority, unless the words " Inferior 
 Courts," in the second line of the fourth resolution, can be construed as embracing 
 justices of the peace, which I presume was not intended : and unless the eighth reso- 
 lution can be construed to mean, that a Judge may be removed by a vote of two- 
 thirds of the Legislature, not only for an impeachable oflTence, but for an opinion 
 honestly given, but which may be vmpopular, or considered erroneous by the Legisla- 
 ture. I feel satisfied it was not so intended ; but I fear, lest in trying times, it might 
 be so construed. I presume the object was to provide for the removal of a Judge, 
 who, from age, confirmed bodily disease, or from any other incapacity, not of an im- 
 peachable character as a crime, is unable to perform the duties of his office. 
 
 I too, have bestowed a Sabbath in this work. It is lawful, on that day, to get our 
 neighbours up out of the ditch. I thought it, therefore, not unlawful, and not knowing 
 that others were making similar efforts, to try and get myself, as well as my neighbours, 
 out of the slough of despond, into which we seem unfortunately to have fallen. 
 
 I owe it to myself distinctly to state this much; and, thus, according to my notions 
 of difair, open, honorable and manly compact, to present something entire to the view 
 of the House. I am prepared to go thus far, in order to save some part of our ancient 
 and venerable institutions. Our County Courts amongst, if not above all others. 
 Sometimes, I think gentlemen only mean to scare me now — but I am scared enough 
 already for all wise purposes. Scare me now and it may give me courage. 
 
 There is a great deal in good habits, both in individuals and nations — Train up a 
 child in the way that he should go, and he will not depart from it. The habits — I 
 mean the political habits of the people of this ancient dominion, are good — peaceable — 
 law-abiding — and loyal to themselves and to the country. Change them and we may 
 change the whole character and mural influence of this State, so happily and elo- 
 quently pourtrayed, on yesterday, by our venerable Chief Magistrate. 
 
 I think it is stated, perhaps in Mr. Jefferson's Notes, that our present Constitution 
 is first written instrument of the kind, in the history of man. Shall we expunge 
 it from our records We are told to look at other States— I tell other States to look at 
 us. They are looking at us, and with an anxiety but little short of that with which 
 our own people are looking at us. The children of Israel wanted a King, that they 
 might be like the nations of the earth. They got their wish, and the Chronicles of 
 those Kings shew how much they profited by it — I am no prophet to say what our 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 519 
 
 future Chronicles will be. but if the page is as fair a one, and if our people shall be 
 as happy during the next fifty years, we will have made a lucky escape. Let others 
 pioneer for us and make experiments ; if theij succeed better than ice have done, they 
 will do great tilings, and we can profit by it 3 if not, they may live to profit by our 
 experiment. 
 
 We are all making a grand experiment. Let us not plant the whole crop in pota- 
 toes ; let us have a mixed culture, lest we all come to want. 
 
 There is no disease so fatal to individual man — and it must also be so as to man in 
 society — no disease which Heaven takes so little care to relieve him from, as that 
 which he brings on himself, b}^ imagining evils which do not exist in reahty . All such 
 repininors are ingratitude to Heaven, and, in individual man, too often end in suicide. 
 
 I say"l feel bound in justice to myself, to make this expose ; because I am told I am 
 counted on to support the proposition of the member from Frederick. This, I admit, 
 may be considered as trae. provided, nerertlieless, that he and his friends support me 
 in the great and leading propositions which I have here insisted on ; otherwise, not. 
 These have been my views, and I have always intended so to express them. 
 
 It is true, I have been something like the man who sent his turkey to market with 
 a note tied to its wing, informing all concerned that he asked 7s. 6d. for it, but if 
 he could not get that, he would take 6s. Verily, it was said of that man, that he was 
 more fool than knave. It does not become me to pay so high a compliment to my- 
 self: and, perhaps, I would not have been able to do so, had I known more of the na- 
 ture of Legislative proceedings. 
 
 Be this though as it may — I feel for my brethren of the West — they have suffered 
 injury and injustice; and I don't expect them to be as reasonable in their demands, 
 as otherwise they ought to be; but there is a point, beyond which, I can't go. We 
 may go on a while longer to try our strength ; but if we can finally adopt amendments, 
 such as I have indicated, and iio more, we will have done much good; and I Jnanbly 
 trust, will have done no injury which that good will not compensate us for. We can't 
 adjourn, either until next October, or sine die, if we have it in our power to do this, by 
 a respectable majority. 
 
 It may be though, that some of the various propositions, lately offered, will be more 
 acceptable, and command a larger majority than what I have thus proposed. It may 
 be thought most advisable to adopt some one of those schemes, even at the expense of 
 much which I hold so dear. Be it so. I suppose we must try it. If we fail, we have 
 only to turn back and see whether there is any thing good in my poor efforts. 
 
 I won't give up the ship yet. 
 
 I have the consolation, too, to stand alone — my sin is on my men head — my colleagues 
 are not committed; and my people will hear of my course time enough, I trust, to re- 
 call me, if I am going wrong. 
 
 I myself may think some of those schemes better than my own; and, at all events, 
 if I think any or all of them better than that which is offered by the member from 
 Frederick, so long as that is unaccompanied by a willingness to accede 10 my terms, I 
 must, of course, vote for them. 
 
 Let us, in some way, become reconciled to each other. The people of the West 
 can't do without us, nor can the people of the East do without them — neither of them 
 can do without the internal improvement of the country. This is now beginning fully 
 to be felt below. 
 
 Be ye reconciled one to the other ; and there will be joy in Heaven, and peace on earth, 
 and good will towards men. 
 
 ]\Ir. Summers, after some prefatory remarks, offered the following amendment, 
 which he intended only as expressive of the general principle he wished to see adopted, 
 leaving the details to subsequent arrangement: 
 
 Resolved, That each county ought to be divided into wards, so that there shall be 
 not less than three, or more than seven in any one county : that there ought to be 
 elected in each ward, by the voters qualified to vote for members of the House of De- 
 legates, one Commissioner, and that the Commissioners elected in the several wards, 
 ought to form a Board of Police for their respective counties. 
 
 Resolved, That the Commissioners of Police ought to go out of office, one at the 
 end of each year, to be determined in the first instance, by lot; and that successors 
 ought to be elected by their respective wards, to serve for a number of years equal to 
 the number of Commissioners in such county, so that one Commissioner of Pohce 
 may be chosen in each county at every annual election. 
 
 Resolved, That the Boards of Pohce ought to be charged with the superintendence 
 and direction of the fiscal concerns of their respective counties — with power to assess, 
 levy, and cause to be collected, all local, county, or ward taxes, and to direct the dis- 
 bursement of the same, to superintend all provisions and expenditures for the support 
 of the poor, and that the opening, preserving, and improving, of the public roads and 
 other highways, with the erection of bridges, and other public structures, ought to be 
 confided to the Boards of Pohce. 
 
520 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Resolved, That it ought to be the duty of the several Boards of Police from time 
 to time, or whenever required by the Governor, to recommend to him suitable persons 
 to fill the offices of justice of the peace, and to make any other recommendations, and 
 perform such other duties, as may be required by law. 
 
 " Resolved, That the proceedings of the several Boards ought to be recorded and 
 preserved by such officer as the General Assembly shall designate, and that the Com- 
 missioners ought to receive a moderate compensation for their services, to be ascer- 
 tained by law, and paid out of the county funds. 
 
 " Resolved, That each Commissioner of Police ought to be a conservator of the peace 
 within his county, and, if holding no office or employment incompatible with that of 
 justice of the peace, ought to be included in the Commission of the Peace." 
 
 Mr. S. explained and defended his amendment, objecting to the power of taxation 
 now deposited with the County Courts, and also their power to fill the vacancies in 
 their own body. If these two features were removed, he should desire the County 
 Court system to continue : if not, he should be opposed to giving them a Constitu- 
 tional perpetuity. 
 
 The amendment was referred to the Committee of the Whole, and ordered to be 
 printed. 
 
 The House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Stanard in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Bayly explained more fully the ground he had taken j^esterday in reply to Mr. 
 Giles, referring more at large to the opinioiis of Mr. Jefferson, expressed in conversa- 
 tion shortly before the Staunton Convention. Mr. B. then went into an explanation 
 of the course he had taken during Mr. Jefferson's administration, shewing how far he 
 had approved, and on what points he had dissented from Mr. Jefferson's policy. 
 
 Mr. Henderson considering the question in relation to the County Courts as of minor 
 importance, in comparison with the great questions of Representation and the Right 
 of Suffrage, moved to pass over for the present the report of the Judiciary Committee 
 and take up that of the Legislative Committee. 
 
 Mr. Leigh remonstrated against this course, as the gentleman who was to fill the 
 place of Mr. Mennis had not yet arrived, and another gentleman on that side of the 
 House was absent. 
 
 Mr. Henderson, to meet this objection, offered himself to withdraw, should any vote 
 be taken, calculated to settle important and controverted questions, which would ba- 
 lance the absence of the new Delegate: as to the other case, absences would always 
 be occurring on both sides, and furnished no just cause for delay. He hoped they 
 should proceed to take the question without much debate, after the authors of the seve- 
 ral projets had been heard. 
 
 Mr. Leigh objected, assuring gentlemen that no turning question would be taken 
 without much and strenuous debate. 
 
 Mr. Cooke was also opposed to the motion of the gentleman from Loudoun. 
 
 After a remark or two from Mr. Henderson, the question was taken on passing over 
 the Judicial report, and negatived— Ayes 27. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge confessing his mind to be so much engrossed with the more impor- 
 tant questions pending, that it was with difficulty he could bring it to the subject be- 
 fore the Committee, moved an adjournment. 
 
 But the motion was unsuccessful — Ayes 36, Noes 48. 
 
 The Committee then returned to the consideration of the report of the Judiciary 
 Committee, and the question still being on the motion of Mr. Bayly, to strike out in 
 the first resolution of that Committee, the words, " and in the County Courts:" 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, he reluctantly engaged in the discussion of this subject; and 
 that he would, certainly, have declined it, had not the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 (Mr. Leigh,) gone into an argument last evening, after he, Mr. H., had, in order to 
 save the time of the Committee, proposed to wave further debate. Mr. H. stated 
 that, in supporting the motion to strike out the words " County Courts," and to insert 
 ''justices of the peace," it was his wish to vest the judicial power of the Common- 
 wealth in the Court of Appeals, the Superior Courts, meaning the General Court, 
 the Circuit and Chancery Courts, or such substitutes fur them as legislative wisdom 
 might devise, and in the justices. Thus the County Courts would, like the Chancery 
 and Circuit Courts, be alterable as the interests of the State required. The gentle- 
 man had asked if it was the policy of the friends of the motion to distinguish the 
 Court of Appeals, and place it above the controul of the Legislature ? Surely, said 
 Mr. H. no lawyer of experience will require argument to prove that the Supreme 
 Appellate Tribunal of the State should have its foundations firmly laid in the organic 
 law. It is clear that such is the result of any icritten Constitution. If the Legislatufe 
 overstep the limits of the Constitution, there must be a tribunal to declare its acts in- 
 valid : it would be a mockery to place this tribunal at the mercy of the Legislature ; 
 a solecism in politics. From this reasoning the supremacy of the Court of Appeals 
 arises ; and the gentleman from Chesterfield will be the last man to controvert the 
 reasoning or to deny its consequence. Here we all agree — farther, in giving Con- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 621 
 
 Btitutional consecration to the courts, it appears to me we are forbiddeu by wisdom 
 and discretion to 2"o. The great principle of policy which founds and shields the 
 Court of Appeals, has no sort of application to the other courts; and, least of all, to 
 the County Courts. The General Court, which decides ultimately on the life of a 
 citizen, with the aid of a jury, and the Superior Comrts of Chancery as well as law, 
 are, to use the language of gentlemen, to be subjected to the whim of the Legisla- 
 ture/' while the County Courts are to be placed beyond its reach. Is this wise Is 
 it consistent r Is it not slighting the superior, and nursing the inferior ? What, in the 
 nature of things, in the merits of the subject, justifies this inversion of the order of 
 reasoning, and political action A plain man, who estimated things according to their 
 actual comparative value, would be surprised to hear learned gentlemen consigning 
 all these great courts, without hesitation or regret, to the ordinary Legislature, while 
 they declared the County Courts, too precious for its touch, too sacred for the opera- 
 tion of the discretion of tlie Legislature, or the judgment of the people. In all this, 
 I think. I can discern the influence of habit, and the delusion of prejudice. 
 
 The gentleman, said ^Ir. H., treats the proposition, which I have the honor to sup- 
 port, as if it went directly to the abolition of the County Courts. This is not true ; and 
 the Committee ought not so to regard it. I propose to let these courts stand where 
 their superiors stand, at the disposal of the Legislature, asjhe public interest may require. 
 It is due to candour to say, that I am decidedly of opinion, they ought to be abohshed; 
 but the question of their continuation, or abolition, is merely sought, by our plan, to 
 be left open: wliile by that of our opponents, the hands of the iTegislature are to be 
 always tied, whatever maybe the course of public opinion ; vrhatever the exigencies 
 of the State in all future time may require. Compare our views farther. We say, 
 if these courts are good, and tire community prefers them, tlie Legislature, which 
 speaks its voice, will retain them ; if bad, it will remove or change them. What is the 
 language of our opponents? Consecrate them. Retain them forever. Silence puhhc 
 opinion on tlie subject." Is not this a tacit admission, either that the courts will fall 
 by their own weakness, or that the people are not to be permitted to judge for them- 
 selves in their behalf? The organic law ought to be simple ; it should establish and 
 sanctify great principles which are true now, always have been true, and ahvays must 
 be true, embracing details so far only as may be necessary to carry those principles 
 into action. All the rest is a fair and proper subject for the operation of pubhc opinion 
 and the public interests, as new lights, or varying circumstances demand modifications 
 or changes. 
 
 Gentlemen insist that these institutions are the fittest imaginable ; that they are full 
 of wisdom, that their decisions are oflener affirmed by the Court of Appeals than 
 those of the Superior Courts of Law and Equity. Let us examine this matter. A 
 man cannot make a boot, give an opinion as a lawyer, build a house : in short, he can 
 do nothing which requires skill and knowledge, in any department, without previous 
 stud}' or instruction. Yet law, the most difficult of all sciences, is to be seized by in- 
 tuition. 3Ien are to be born judges, as they are said to be born poets. I should be 
 glad to know. Sir, if gentlemen would test the sincerity of this declaration by taking 
 the opinion of an ordinary County Court justice, rather than that of the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, when their farms are at stake. That gentleman told us, the other 
 day, tiiat his child was sick. I take leave to ask hun a question. Did he send for a 
 justice of the peace, a lawyer or a carpenter to prescribe to the interesting object of 
 his affections, or did he call in a physician? one skilled, studied, practised in the 
 healing art? The answer is easily known. Such, jNIr. Chairman, is the difierence 
 between the speculations and the conduct of ingenious gentlemen. But the argu- 
 ment in favour of the superior capacity of the justices proves too much; else, our 
 courts are radically wrong in their structure. If they are thus v,dse, why have any 
 Superior Courts or Appellate Courts at all? Why not Test all our rights upon their 
 decisions at once, and avoid the vast delays and charges of appellate litigation ? Surely 
 we ought either to do this, or to make the Court of Appeals. For if it be true, that 
 the less law a man knows the better judge he is, the magistrates are certainly better 
 judges than those who sit on the bench of the Court of i^ppeals. But, Sir, it is not 
 true that the Court of Appeals affirms more of the decisions of the justices than of 
 the Superior Courts ; for, of twenty decisions of the County Cotu:ts that go to the 
 Superior Courts of Law and Chancery, not more than one is taken to the Court of 
 Appeals. And this is the solution of the paradox. I will add that, if the judgments 
 of my old and able friend, now prevented by the visitation of Heaven, from continu- 
 ing to the tenth Judicial Circuit his useful talents, had been reversed by the Court of 
 Appeals ; or, if those of the Chancellor who now so advantageously acts in that quar- 
 ter of the State, were to meet a similar fate, the bar of the country would douht while 
 it submitted. ^ 
 
 Again, it is urged that sound policy persuades us to respect the habitudes, and the 
 very prejudices of a people. Admit it: is not this appeal referable to the Legislative 
 bodv ratiier than to the Convention ? Gentlemen assume too much when thev sup- 
 
 66 
 
522 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 pose the people of the State are so wedded to these tribunals; and, if they were, where 
 is the danger of their abolition ? Do not the zeal and pertinacity with which gentle- 
 men refuse to trust public opinion, clearly shew their diffidence of that attach- 
 ment of the people to these courts? So much are the arguments and the course 
 of gentlemen at war with each other ! I believe it is true that in the lower 
 country, where gentlemen own many slaves and have ample leisure ; and where 
 there is less enterprise and less business, these tribunals answer well, and may be 
 well approved. JNot so in the upper country generally. There the equal division of 
 property, the necessity that men are under to attend to their own affairs, with many 
 other circumstances, serve to make these courts a perfect incubus. Their delays in 
 the county of Loudoun are oppressive in the extreme ; and their expenses vastly 
 greater than those of the Superior Courts. I have, said Mr. H., repeatedly, and al- 
 most habitually, advised my clients, who lived any vi'here except in the immediate 
 neighbourhood of the Court-house, rather to abandon small disputed claims, than put 
 them in suit. I have often known the costs in such cases, without including extra- 
 ordinary expenses or loss of time, to exceed the subject of claim; and witnesses to 
 attend, on the courts, at such loss of time and money, that it would have been 
 better for them, far better, to have paid the claims themselves. Such are our cheap 
 tribunals — the dearest for the subjects of litigation, in the world ! 
 
 The gentleman from Orange has commended these courts, and has informed us 
 that he is a pra,ctitioner in them, of a quarter of a century standing. And so am I, 
 Mr. Chairman, God help me ! Of a disposition more churlish or less grateful than 
 that of the gentleman, i cannot unite in his praises. The gentleman is an indus- 
 trious man : by day he rode, and was compelled to trim the midnight lamp, in order 
 to acquire a competent knowledge of the principles of his vocation. I hope, like that 
 estimable gentleman, I am not indolent or idle. Behold the result of the action of 
 these courts upon us. We hear an illustrious gentleman, the colleague of the gen- 
 tleman from Orange, and my honoured colleague, termed venerable. I fear, Mr. 
 Chairman, if grey hairs and wan faces could confer the title, we should have two 
 venerable gentlemen from Orange and Loudoun; for, truly in those particulars, I fear 
 we may compare with our respected colleagues. Sir, I cannot thus deem of these tribu- 
 nals. The gentleman from Orange seems to think, that these County Courts are ad- 
 mirable machines for the diffusion of political information. In my humble opinion, 
 they are better calculated, much better, for the diffusion of intemperance amongst th© 
 people. A Court-house or a tavern is a poor political lecture-room. And I cannot 
 but believe this idea, which I have heard advanced before, to be quite chimerical. 
 Establish good schools. Educate your people, and they will become politicians fast 
 enough, without giving you the trouble to make courts to render them so. The true 
 interest of individuals, as well as of the community, is to interrupt the people as little 
 as possible in their pursuits of industry, and their domestic quiet and purity. Fre- 
 qilent assemblages, in lai-ge numbers, with little business, lead to drunkenness and 
 vice. Such is the result of my observation. I believe it is correct as to all classes 
 of men. 
 
 But, Sir, there is another great evil incident to these courts : they tend to make the 
 lawyers ignorant arid to impart that ignoranee to the benches of the Superior Courts. 
 This is obvious to a superficial observer : and it is a great pubfic calamity. Look at 
 the matter. How little legal knowledge suffices to fit a man to become an advocate 
 in such a court ! What motive is there to study, in order to practice successfully in 
 them Is not the capacity to ride far and fast, to bear the inclemencies of the weather, 
 more important than learning ? Is not assurance more valuable than mature judgment.? 
 Is it not the tendency of such courts to make a lawyer a post-rider } An able Judiciary 
 is an inappreciable treasure. Who will expect to find one under such a discipline 
 From such a bar ? What is your situation ? What your prospects Are you to find all 
 your Judges in your cities, or to fill your benches v/ith lack-learning lawyers .'' 
 
 To my astonishment, gentlemen extol these courts as peculiarly suited to the in- 
 terests of orphans. It is true. Sir, the justices are, in general, worthy men ; and feel 
 as such men do, for the fatherless. Notwithstanding this, such is their ignorance of 
 the science of equity, and such their necessary devotion to their own affairs, that, in 
 the region of country where I live, if you suppose a subject too small for the cogni- 
 zance of the Superior Court of Chancery, the orphan is as effectually at the mercy 
 of an adroit and unprincipled fiduciary character, as is the bleeding lamb at that of the 
 wolf which is devouring him. Here Mr. H. stated facts within his own knowledge 
 as illustrative of the superiority of the orphan system of Maryland, and commented 
 upon facts stated by Mr. Leigh. Mr. H. adduced other examples of the utter incom- 
 petency of these courts, derived from counties with whose business he was acquainted, 
 but not his own. The^ incidents were of a ludicrous character, and were avowed to 
 be an offset to anecdotes of a similar cast, related by Mr. Leigh, which went to bring 
 into disrepute tribunals in Maryland and FennsyJvania, which Mr. H. contended, 
 were much superior to our County Courts. 
 
DEBATES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 523 
 
 Mr. H. declared that he had seen magistrates, not in the county of his residence, in a 
 state of ebriety on the bench; that such spectacles were disgraceful; and remarked 
 that, if he had not been misinformed, in one of the counties of the lowland, so much 
 praised by the gentleman, a recent occurrence had taken place not very creditable. 
 These facts were painful in the allusion to them, or reflection upon them; but, when 
 an interesting subject was to be acted on, the truth should be revealed. We have 
 been repeatedly told, said Mr. H., that we were a great and happy people, and that 
 these courts contributed much to the production of these felicitous results. It is dif- 
 ficult to conceive how such causes should lead to such consequences. For our great- 
 ness I will not debate it. Others may possibly be regarded as better judges of it. At 
 any rate, it were as well to leave them to proclaim it. But we are exceedingly happy. 
 Happiness, continued Mr. H., is a ditTicult matter of investigation. I should, how- 
 ever, suppose, take them ago:regately. the people I have the honor to represent in part 
 were somewhat more happy"than those of lower ^^irginia. Butj Mr. Chairman, did 
 you ever, in a sickly country, ask a pale-faced, feeble anan or woman, if it was un- 
 healthy in the neighbourhood of his residence ; Was not the answer " oh no," not 
 immediately hereabout, but in the neighbourhood below they are very sickly indeed, 
 and several have died lately ? Did you, in a town in whose streets the grass that grew 
 up, was little disturbed, ask if com.merce was not declining? Was not the answer, 
 
 No truly, we were never doing better, there is not a house in town for rent.'"' Mr. 
 Chairman, I will not dispute our greatness : it were invidious to do so. And I will 
 leave every one to judge of his own happiness, with a sincere desire that it may 
 please God to make us all happy. What Cicero predicated of immortality may be 
 said, with equal truth, on this subject, if it be a di-e<im it is a sweet one." However 
 these points may be determined, I may, without incurring the imputation of temerity, 
 assert that our Coimty Courts have never rendered us either great or happy. 
 
 The gentleman asked what we meant to spare in our sweep of reform Let him 
 tell me what he means to surrender of the abuses, under whose united pressm-e we 
 are groaning? I am, myself, disposed to spare all that is right, and to sweep all that is 
 wrong. 
 
 It is not to be inferred, Mr. Chairman, by the course of my argument, that I feel 
 the smallest disrespect for the gentlemen in the commission of tiie peace, especially 
 in the county of my residence : those who so interpret my remarks will do me wrong. 
 I speak against the tribunals. Although suitable half a century since, I pronounce 
 them, at this day, and, in the part of the State with which I azn conversant, worn out, 
 and unfit, entirely so, for the end of their institution. I am confident I do not err, 
 when I declare that, of the magistrates of the county of Loudoun, five out of forty 
 would not refuse to sign a petition praying the abolition of their court. Many of 
 these gentlemen are my friends. They have too much understanding to be displeased 
 with me for endeavouring to prove what they know to be true, and to promote what 
 they ardently wish. 
 
 Mr. Scott bore a favorable testimony to the respectability of those courts in Faii- 
 quier county. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge next addressed the Committee, nearly as follows : 
 I mean not to enter into the argument of the proposition, nor to say whether the 
 County Courts ought to be abolished or not. That has been done by others and is 
 not properly under consideration; but the true question is, shall these courts exist in- 
 dependent of the Legislative will, and above that will? or, shall the General Assem- 
 bly have power over them ? The other day a gentleman on this floor, described a race 
 of politicians, who are of opinion that each son has a patent right to be wiser than his 
 father. But neither that gentleman nor I have any confidence in such politicians. I 
 have as little in another order of statesmen, who attribute to the present race, superior 
 wisdom to every person who shall follow them in life, or in oflice. I am not certain 
 what my constituents would do with these Courts, if it were left to them to retain or 
 put them down. I do not know their wishes on that point, but I do know that they 
 desire them to be placed within the power of the General Assembly. Should the pub- 
 lic will sustain them, they will be sustained, and otherwise, not. 
 
 Doubtless there are matters which should be unalterably laid deep in the founda- 
 tions of the Constitution — such are the departments of Government — the division of 
 their powers, and a reasonable degree of Judicial independence. There are some 
 powers, from the exercise of which the Legislature ought to be restrained. At no 
 time should an ex post facto law, or law im.pairing the obligation of contracts be passed, 
 nor any provision for suspending the writ of habccis corpus in time of peace, or taking 
 away the trial by jury, in criminal cases. 
 
 The County Courts are inferior tribunals, and to place them on Constitutional foun- 
 dations, is to suppose that at no future time and under no possible circumstances, will 
 it be wise to change them for some other establishments more suited to the times ; and 
 by placing these courts above the General Assembly, we put them beyond the con- 
 troul of the people, and we should not do this, unless we are satisfied that the judg- 
 
524 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 ment of posterity cannot be safely trusted to meddle with even County Courts. I 
 hope, therefore, they will be left within the scope of Legislative power, 
 
 Mr. Marshall wished to offer a few observations, merely with a view to put gentle- 
 men on a right footing, as to the nature of the question. They spoke of the County 
 Courts, as if the report of the Legislative Committee proposed to perpetuate them in 
 precisely their existing form, and with their present powers. They speak of the un- 
 ritness of those courts for all the jurisdiction they now possess; and if they prove, or 
 think that they prove that the present organization of those courts can be improved, they 
 think they have thereby proved that this clause ought to be stricken out. But the 
 whole jurisdiction of the County Courts is submitted to the Legislature ; the Legisla- 
 ture may take away the whole of it, and leave them to exist in Ibrra only. What in- 
 jury will ensue? no salaries will be taken away. The form of a County Court will 
 be left in existence, but without any power. Can they do any injury ? But, if they 
 cease to be nominal, they cease to be real. While they exist, they are capable of re- 
 ceiving any jui'isdiction the Legislature may choose to give them. But if they do 
 not exist, they can have no jurisdiction. Gentlemen, therefore, mistake the question, 
 and speak to a matter not before the Committee, when they shew that these courts 
 can be modified to advantage. Some gentlemen are opposed to the mode of appoint- 
 ment in these courts; but that question is not before the Committee. For myself, I 
 prefer the existing mode ; others may differ from me. Let the mode of continuing 
 them be changed, still the courts themselves will be preserved. We have not reached 
 the resolution which provides for that ; when we shall reach it, if gentlemen wish the 
 general system preserved, but the mode of appointment changed, they can give their 
 opinions then. That question is not now before the Committee. The only question 
 is, whether the form of the County Courts shall be preserved. When gentlemen say 
 that to strike this clause from the resolution amounts to nothing, and that the courts 
 nevertheless may still be preserved, I beg leave to repeat, that if the form of the reso- 
 lution remains and you strike out the words "and in the County Courts," you take 
 away from those courts all capacity to receive Judicial power, and do not leave the Le- 
 
 stands. It may indeed be altered, so as to leave all the jurisdiction in the power of 
 the Legislature, and I wish they would suggest such an alteration. But as the reso- 
 lution is now drawn, if you strike out this clause, you leave the County Courts inca- 
 pable of receiving any Judicial power whatever. You enumerate all the tribunals 
 which are to possess Judicial power; and tribunals not in the resolution, can have 
 none. Let it be recollected that all the various services performed by these courts, 
 and which were enumerated by the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) are 
 portions of Judicial power. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge asked, what it w^as that rendered it impossible that these courts could 
 receive Judicial power, if the express mention of them were stricken out. 
 
 Mr. Marshall replied, that it was because the resolution professes to enumerate all 
 the courts in which the Judicial power of the Commonwealth was to be reposed. If 
 County Courts are stricken out from that enumeration, they will be incapable of receiv- 
 ing any part of that power. Why should this be done ? 
 
 Mr. Henderson said he differed from the opinion just expressed. Supposing the 
 clause to be stricken out, the County Courts would still be included under the words 
 of the clause immediately preceding, viz : " such Inferior Courts as the Legislature 
 shall from time to time ordain and establish." 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, he was truly sorry so often to trouble the Committee, but he 
 wished to remove a misunderstanding which seemed to have obtained. If gentlemen 
 would look at the residue of the resolution, they would perceive that it goes on to give 
 salaries to all the Judges of the Inferior Courts. This, surely, does not extend to 
 County Courts. 
 
 It was plain, therefore, that the resolution does not comprehend County Courts, 
 when it speaks of" other Inferior Courts," but means to designate them by the spe- 
 cific and appropriate term. 
 
 Mr. Powell opposed the amendment, and testified to the manner in which the law 
 business of his own county, (Frederick) had been conducted for the last five years, 
 during which they had for the most part been without any Circuit Court Judge. He 
 eulogized the magistrates of that county — and attributed the opposite experience of 
 Mr. Henderson, to the peculiar character of the people of Loudoun, consisting of a 
 mixture of persons from without the Commonwealth — while those of Frederick were 
 of the true old Virginia stock. 
 
 Mr. Mercer protested against such comparisons as unparliamentary. He vindicated 
 the character of the citizens of Loudoun with much animation. 
 
 Mr. Powell explained. The people of Loudoun might be worthy, honest and indus- 
 trious, and yet not fit to make County Court magistrates. 
 
 Mr. Leigh went again into the defence and eulogy of the County Courts : adverted 
 to their criminal jurisdiction, particularly over slaves, and insisted that that jurisdic- 
 
 I speak of the resolution as it now 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 625 
 
 tion could not so well be lodged any where else. He dwelt on their value as a school 
 for young practitioners , in which all the greatest men of the State had at first been 
 trained. He remarjied on the peculiar situation of Loudoun, and charged upon that 
 county the chief ageiicy in introducing the Circuit Court system into Virginia, which 
 made no provision m case of the sickness of the Circuit Judge. 
 
 He replied to the arguments of Air. Henderson — urging the power of a jury to judge 
 of law as well as of fact, as a reply to that part of bis speech, in which he had urged 
 ignorance of law and equity as an argument against the County Courts. As to their 
 power to recommend suitable persons for magistrates, the Executive must act on some 
 recommendations, and it was better they should be given openly than in a secret and 
 irresponsible manner. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, rose to address the Committee: 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — We have now got the County Court system fairly and fully before 
 us. The gentleman from Chesterfield has even gone into the mode of appointino- the 
 justices, i rose some time ago to make a remark in reference to the construction 
 given to the first resolution of the report of the Judicial Committee, by the honorable 
 gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Marshall). I rise now to do more ; to carry my re- 
 marks a little further. He supposes that the Judicial power vested in these courts by 
 the Constitution will be unappropriated, if they should cease to be Constitutional Courts. 
 I had thought that it would still continue in the Inferior Courts, of which the County 
 Courts to be established by the Legislature would be one. 
 
 You know, Mr. Chairman, that the County Courts were once rejected as Constitu- 
 tional courts, in the Judicial Committee. You moved for a re-consideration, a member 
 being then present who was absent when they were rejected — they were then carried 
 by one of a majority, one of the friends of reform being absent. Tiiis fact will shew 
 that the report of this Judicial Committee, at the head of which is the venerable gen- 
 tleman from Richmond, is not to be regarded with all the authority wliich is com- 
 monly attached to the reports of Committees. 
 
 On the 24th of October, I had the honor to present to the Convention a substitute 
 for the first resolution, which embraced the amendment now under consideration. 
 That substitute presented a Court of Appeals and such Inferior Courts as the Legisla- 
 ture might from time to time ordain and establish, as the only Constitutional Courts; 
 leaving it to the wisdom and experience of the Legislature to establish and regulate 
 County Courts, as in their wisdom might seem good. This was placing the utility of 
 these courts where we humbly conceived it ought always to rest, under the supervi- 
 sion of future Legislative bodies. 
 
 I have been disappointed in the mode of defence adopted by the gentlemen who 
 are for giving them a Constitutional existence and character. They are for proving^ 
 their claims to such a distinction from testimony. One of the most illustrious sages 
 which Vhginia has produced, the immortal Jefterson, has testified against them. His- 
 testimony has been assailed by the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leio-h) on tha 
 ground of incompetency; for, says he, Mr. Jefferson never practised law before a 
 Count}'' Court, consequently could know little about tliem. But I am informed by 
 a gentleman on my left, that he was a justice of the peace, and sat upon the bench of 
 his own county, and therefore had the best opportunity of testing their merits. But 
 the venerable gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. Giles) has eulogized them. The gentle- 
 man from Orange, (Mr. Barbour,) the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson,) and 
 other gentlemen from different quarters, have given their testimony in favor of them : 
 Some of them too from the experience of twenty-five years. They affirm that they 
 are one of the wisest and most beneficial institutions in the country, if not in the 
 world. Now, without imputing any thing to their motives, or to their capacity to 
 judge of them, so far as their experience bas gone, I may be permitted to remark, that 
 the relations in which we stand to persons and things, and the media through which 
 we view them, generally, and often imperceptibly, influence our judgment, and lead 
 us to very different conclusions. Were we, Mr. Chairman, to ask the Autocrat of all 
 the Russias, what he had to testify concerning the Government over which he pre- 
 sides, he would doubtless say it was the best on earth. Were we to ask the Kino- of 
 Great Britain what he thinks of the Constitution, Government, and laws of England, 
 he would doubtless say they approacbed almost to perfection. Yes, Sir, were we to 
 ask every Peer of England, every member of tbe House of Lords, one by one, what is 
 the character of all the English institutions? each and everyone of them would doubt- 
 less testify, the very best on earth. Thus, Sir, some gentlemen here give the highest 
 character to the County Courts ; others, however, testify against them. They view 
 the system through different media, and stand in different relations to these tribunals. 
 But as we have heard much testimony on this subject, and the testimony of one Go- 
 vernor of this Commonwealth in favor of this system, we shall present as o. per contra^ 
 the testimony of another Governor of this same Commonwealth. 
 
 It is from the message of the Governor of this Commonwealth in the year 1810, 
 (Judge Tyler). Towards the conclusion of his message, he gives the following cha- 
 
526 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 racter of our Virginia County Courts : " As to the County Court system, every ex- 
 perienced and reflecting man must see and feel the incompetency of those persons 
 whose daily avocations prevent any acquisition in legal knowledge, to discharge the 
 important trust reposed in them of deciding between man and man, on their most im- 
 portant legal and equitable rights. Suppose it should be necessary, as it often is, that 
 instructions should be moved to aid the jury as to the evidence adduced on a point of 
 law arising out of the facts of a cause, what respect will an intelhgent jury pay to 
 them, when they are sensible that a little time before the justices were only jury-men, 
 and could not be made judges of the law by a mere translation of them from a jury- 
 room to the bench ? Tliey would in such a case (which often has liappened) act for 
 themselves, well knowing that the blind cannot lead the blind. Besides, it is not just 
 to call for so much public duty from the magistrates, without any compensation, ex- 
 cept that precarious one arismg out of the office of Sheriff, which may be obtained 
 once perhaps in the course of one's life. At present a Judge rides into every county 
 of the State ; let his jurisdiction therefore be extended to cases generally, and limit 
 the County Court jurisdiction to local matters, and to cases of small importance, bring- 
 ing back the out-oi-doors authority of a single magistrate to what it formerly was. At 
 any rate let the Superior Courts have concurrent jurisdiction, and leave it to every 
 man's option to go into either court he may please. 
 
 " I by no means mean to detract from the merit of the County Courts. They are a 
 valuable branch of our Government, and deserve, in general, much of their country. 
 But those citizens who fill the high office of dispensing law and justice, certainly 
 should be better qualified for so great a trust. And it is no reflection on those who 
 are liberally endowed by nature or a superior education, to say that they may not be 
 judges of law. These sentiments I submit to my country, with all due deference. 
 They are such as I expressed in the Legislature tweiity- eight years ago, and 1 never 
 heard a reason advanced, which made me doubt for a moment the propriety of them." 
 
 Thus testifies the experienced gentleman, who, at that time presided over this Com- 
 monwealth ; such, he adds, was the conviction, resulting from twenty-eight years ex- 
 perience,- from an intimacy of more than a quarter of a century with those tribunals. 
 This will certainly prove my proposition, that gentlemen may and do view persons 
 and things, through different relations and different media. 
 
 Without hazarding any thing, I think, Sir, 1 may say, more of the happiness of 
 this Commonwealth, depends upon the County Government under which we live, 
 than upon the State or United States' Government. The more we circumscribe 
 the supervision of any tribunal, the more interest we feel in it, and the more happi- 
 ness or misery it bestows upon us. The more you enlarge it, the less interest. And, 
 tlierefore, 1 venture to affirm, that no question which has been discussed in this 
 Committee, is more intimately allied to our interests, or more conducive to our po- 
 litical happiness or misery, than the very question now before us. What Govern- 
 ment is that. Sir, which has the greatest power to afflict us, or make us happy ? It 
 is that. Sir, which has the most limited jurisdiction ; it is the tribunal of our own 
 conscience. TJre quotation elegantly adduced a few days ago, by the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield, forcibly applies here. " Quis exul jaatria, se quoqiie fugity Self-go- 
 vernment, the government of our own passions, appetites, and propensities, more 
 than any other Government, contributes to our individual happiness. Next to this, 
 family government. We derive much of our social happiness lirom domestic govern- 
 ment; because we are always under its influence. For the same reasons we are 
 more interested in the County Government than in the State, or United States' Govern- 
 ment, and more of our happiness depends upon it, than upon any other. Not merely, 
 because it is nigher home, but because w.e have more to do with it, or under its juris- 
 diction. All the laws of the Commonwealth, reach us through the County Govern- 
 ment. No matter whence the laws are promulged, they first reach us through the 
 county tribunals. 
 
 Now, Sir, the citizens of any county in this Commonwealth, have no more control 
 over these tribunals, than they have over the Government of France or England. 
 They never created the officers who preside on the benches of the County Courts, 
 nor the ministers who execute their decisions. We live under a Government not 
 amenable to us, not responsible to us; because not created by us. The objections to 
 these tribunals, arise from the manner in which they are created, from their incom- 
 petency to discharge those duties assigned them, and the consequent evil influence 
 which they may exercise over the destinies of a county. 
 
 I heard, with much regret, the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell,) rise to 
 sustain them : 1 say regret, because I have heard him with pleasure support the most 
 Republican principles on this floor. But, how to reconcile these tribunals with Re- 
 publican Government, I know not. At best, they are elective, and most generally 
 terminate in a hereditary aristocracy. How a republican can advocate a system, 
 which, forever, puts a county under the control of a few individuals, without a per- 
 fect abandonment of his creed, I am unable to perceive. And is not, Mr. Chairman, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 527 
 
 every county in tliis Commonwealth, by the system, necessarily subjected to the go- 
 vernment of a few individuals by a legal investment ? 
 
 Let us, for example, place before us, the erection of a new county. A new county 
 and a new court are by the same authority at once erected. Some four or five justi- 
 ces are assigned to the bench of this new county, and the county assigned to them. 
 These justices are to nominate their successors forever. Thus the county is by an act 
 of incorporation, or a charter, or by whatever instrument you may please to call it, 
 signed, sealed, and delivered over to the four or five magistrates first appointed and 
 their successors, as far as all the offices of trust, honor, and profit, as far as the public 
 concerns and interests, as far as tlie public levies and their appropriations are con- 
 cerned, or assignable; they are all given over by one general deed of gift to these 
 justices, and their successors forever. 
 
 There are three influences, interests, or if you please, Mr. Chairman, three sorts of 
 pride, to which this countr}^ is now subordinate } I mean, religious, family, and politi- 
 cal pride. 
 
 The first batch of justices, we shall suppose, are either all, or a great majority of 
 them, of one religious creed. I care not of what sect. They are all men of like 
 passions. They have sectarian interests, and they have sectarian pride. Now, if they 
 yield to the temptation, which their station, and office present, and to the feelings 
 which the sectarian spirit creates and cherishes, will they not have the opportunity, 
 (and will they not most hkely embrace it.) of nominating .such, and such only, as be- 
 long to their own party, to fill all vacancies which occur in their body ? It is only 
 necessary to show, that they will have the opportunity to do so, to prove the system 
 to be a bad one. And that mankind are always too apt to secure every opportunity 
 which is thrown in their way, to aggrandize their own interests, and gratify their own 
 pride, is too plain; and, alas, too true, to need either illustration or proof. 
 
 It is not necessary for me to prove, that such has always been the case, and that 
 such must always be the issue ; but that it may be so, all must admit. Thus, one party 
 rides triumphantly in the county, as far as court influences are concerned. They are 
 the court party. And like the patented creed and party under a monarchy, they are 
 wont to become insolent and over-bearing. I %vish to give no opportunity for such a 
 state of things, and must reprobate every system, which thus creates invidious castes 
 in society. 
 
 But in the absence of such feelings, or in connexion with them, there is still a 
 more dangerous domination to which this new county before us is subjected. The 
 first lot of justices may all be of one family connexion, either related by affinity or 
 consanguinity. If this be the case, how easy will it be for them to concur in keeping 
 all the offices in the county in their own family ? And if they should not all be of 
 one and the same family, but of two or three families, how easy for them under this 
 system to enter into a co-partncrsldp understanding, and by a sort of rotation to secure 
 to themselves the dominion of the county for ages.' And, have we not heard that 
 such, even to this day, is the fact in sundry of the old counties ! But add to the 
 family the religious pride, and who can resist their united influence 
 
 But there is yet another sort of influence, which we choose to call political, because 
 arising from those parties and factions which have existed in all Governments, and 
 ever will exist, so long as men are governed more by passions and interest, than by 
 reason. Latel}'^ it was, and yet in some degreee, is, Jackson and Adams. It has been 
 Federalist and Republican. Now the first appointment of magistrates may be of one 
 political creed, or of another, and thus an undue preponderance is given to that which 
 is placed upon the bench without the hope of removal. Thus in the original estab- 
 lishment of a new county, and a new court, there is a real subordination of all the 
 interests of that county, as respects Government, to the influence of either religious, 
 famil}'-, or political pride, cupidity and ambition, and sometimes to all of them acting in 
 combmation. iVnd is this what gentlemen call a Republican institution .' the best, the 
 very best, which human ingenuity can devise, and which the world has ever seen ! ! 
 
 Next to the manner of creating these tribunals, the variety of powers and functions 
 which are lodged in the same hands, and their incompatibility with each other, have 
 been for a long time an object of serious and just complaint. These are full}" exposed 
 in the very learned dissertations of a highly respectable authority^, (Judge St. Geo. 
 Tucker.) I do not quote his words, but I think I give the substance : Justices of the 
 bench, says he, as such, may be elected to either branch of the Legislature, and are 
 very frequently elected to the House of Delegates. While the character of the jus- 
 tice is merged in that of the Legislator, he is under the present sj^stem. Constitution- 
 ally authorised to legislate for himself He may enact the law under which he 
 chooses to officiate at home, and thus, make his own office, what he wishes it to be. 
 He can also in part create the Governor, who, is afterwards to appoint and commis- 
 sion such of his friends as he may nominate to fill vacancies on the bench. He may 
 also assist, in creating the Judges of the Supreme Courts, who, are to judge of his of- 
 ficial proceedings. As Legislator, he may create Major and Brigadier Generals from 
 
528 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 amongst his friends upon the bench, if he pleases. Under the present system, he 
 may, and in part does, create and govern all the State officers, from the Treasurer 
 down to the State Attorney in his own county. 
 
 When on the bench at home, they are judges in all cases of life and death, when a 
 slave is to be tried, and of all offences under the grade of felony. They constitute 
 an Examining Court, when any free person is brought before them accused of any 
 crime amounting to felony at common law, and may remand him for a trial to the 
 District Court, or discharge him as they think proper. The}'- are also judges in all 
 other civil causes arising within the county, whatever may be the amount, both at 
 common law and equity, and without appeal when the sum is not over ten dollars. 
 
 As police officers, they open roads, build bridges, erect prisons, and court houses; 
 and levy the expenses thereof upon the county ; and last of all, recommend to the 
 Executive, whom they are willing to admit into their own body. 
 
 At one and the same time, they may be the Judges of the County Courts, mili- 
 tary officers of any rank whatever. State Legislators and members of Congress. 
 They, in short, unite in their own persons all sorts of powers, Legislative, Executive, 
 Judicial, military; and if all these can be safely lodged in the same hands, and at the 
 same time, then it must follow, and undeniably too, that all the doctrines on which 
 our political system is founded are erroneous and fallacious. 
 
 May I not ask. Sir, what are the fundamental doctrines of our Government ? Is 
 not the following one of them ? " All power is vested in and consequently derived 
 from the people. Magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amena- 
 ble to them." When did the justices of the peace derive their power from the people ; 
 and how, or in what sense are they responsible or amenable to them? Why then hold 
 this doctrine to be true, and deny it in practice? I must always recur to fundamental 
 principles, for one good reason, because I cannot reason without them. If I mistake 
 not, it is written in the sixth article of our Bill of Eights, that no persons in this 
 Commonwealth, " ought to be taxed, or deprived of their property for public uses, 
 without their own consent or that of their Representative elected by them." This is 
 deemed essential to the liberty and happiness of our community. Now, I ask, do not 
 the magistrates composing the County Courts tax us, and deprive us of our property 
 for public uses without our consent, or that of our Representatives? When did we 
 authorise them, by any act of ours, to levy taxes upon us ? They have no more right 
 to tax us, by any act of ours, nor according to the doctrine just now quoted, than we 
 have in this Convention to tax the citizens of Ohio. It is, in my humble opinion, as 
 real a grievance of which we complain, resulting to us from this system, as was the 
 complaint of this Commonwealth when a Colony, against the right usurped by the 
 English Government, to tax us without our own consent, or that of our Representa- 
 tives. 
 
 Does not another of our political maxims teach — " that no man, or set of men, are 
 entitled to exclusive, or separate emoluments or privileges from the community, but 
 in consideration of public services, which, not being descendible, neither ought the 
 offices of magistrate. Legislator, or Judge, to be hereditary f Does not the County 
 Court system virtually repudiate this maxim ? Does not the system confer exclusive 
 privileges, without, and anterior to any public services ? And does it not tend to 
 make the magistracy hereditary in certain families? 
 
 But again, does not the third article of the Constitution, the existing Constitution 
 of this Commonwealth, declare, that " the Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary De- 
 partments of Government, shall be separate and distinct, so that neither exercise the 
 powers properly belonging to the other ; nor shall ever any person exercise the 
 powers of more than one of them." This is clear and express. But mark what fol- 
 lows — Except that the justices of the County Courts shall be eligible to either 
 House of Assembly." This arbitrary exception shews, that it is not compatible with 
 the doctrine of the framers of the old Constitution. They saw it was incompatible 
 with the truth which they had propounded, and declared it an exccfption. Why was 
 the exception made? Tradition informs us, that most of the influential men, in v>'hat 
 is now called old Virginia, at the time of the Revolution, were magistrates on the 
 bench; and if proscribed from the Legislative Hall, it would have endangered the 
 great cause of liberty and the rights of man ; and as Virginia wished to rally all her 
 forces and to concentrate all her energies, she was willing to make an exception in 
 favour of the magistrates of that day. But they declared it an inconsistency, and so it 
 is. Attached to such a declaration, it is as incongruous, as if to a series of laws pro- 
 hibiting murder, it were added, " but killing a man is not murder." But time has 
 consecrated the exceiytion, and the error equally with the principle; and many are as 
 tenacious now of the exception as they are, yes, more than they are of the principle 
 from which it is an exception. However well it may have operated at that time, 
 during the struggle for independence, it has not operated so well since. 
 
 The Constitution gave the magistrates no reward whatever for their services. But 
 m making them eligible to the General Assembly, it put it in their power to provide 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 529 
 
 for themselves, which they have since done. It is known. I presume, to every mem- 
 ber of this Committee, that generally a quormn, and often a majority of the House of 
 "Deleo'ates, is composed of magistrates, sheriffs, and their deputies. Tradition in- 
 forms us, that such a Legislative body found it easy to seize the sheriffalty and to attach 
 it to their own office, or to secure it by way of an indirect compensation for their ser- 
 vices, so indirect as not to disqualify them from being eligible to the office of Legisla- 
 tors. In this wav they dispense justice for nothing I In this way they compensate 
 themselves I Thus, too, the sheriffs are irresponsible to the people, and this has been 
 a arrievance at least from the days of Patrick Henry, who gives them the following ad- 
 mirable character in one of his speeches in the Convention which ratified the Federal 
 Constitution. ■* Our State sheriffs, " says he, those unfeeling blood-suckers, have 
 under the watchful eye of the Legislature, committed the most horrid and barbarous 
 ravages upon our people. It has required the constant vigilance of the Legislature, 
 to keep them from totallv ruining the people. A repeated succession of laws has 
 been made to suppress their iniquitous speculations and cruel extortions, and as 
 often has their nefarious ingenuity devised methods of evading these laws."' Such 
 was the character of the sheriffs in those days, in the opinion of one of Virginia's 
 most distinguished men. It must often be so, when pubhc functionaries are not re- 
 sponsible to the people. 
 
 But we love a cheap magistracy, and the justices serve forTiothing I It is true, they 
 only divide among them, between -50 and 60.000 dollars per annum, in the way of 
 sheriffs' fees. Valuing the one hundred and five sheriffalties in this CommonweeJth 
 at -500 dollars per annum, we can easily estimate what serving for nothing means, 
 when applied to our present system. They are paid in the most exceptionable way, 
 and it is all one and the same, whether they receive the amount of the sheriffalty in 
 succession, or divide it annually amongst them according to their services ; it is stiU 
 ijt principle a compensation, and the office of justice is so far lucrative. 
 
 But, some o-entlemen tell us, of the immense expense to be incurred, by chanodng 
 the present svstem. It has been said by one cri^ntleman, (Mr. Giles.) that if the ma- 
 gistrates were to be paid only *2u0 dollars annually, it would surpass the whole reve- 
 nue of the State. And this is to affright us from a change of the system. But if the 
 justices of Virginia are so high-minded as to serve for nothing under the present sys- 
 tem, why might they not. if found expedient, serve under another system! ! 
 
 I had intended, to take some notice of the incGmpetency of these tribunals to render 
 satisfaction to the community, in the discharge of so many duties, for which in many 
 parts of the country they are so illy qualified. But in this, I have been preceded and 
 anticipated, by the gentleman from Loudoun, pir. Henderson.) who has gone so fully 
 into the details. I feel rather disposed to examine their claims to Constitutional con- 
 secration upon principle, but I confess. I cannot find a good reason, why they should 
 not be committed wholly to Legislative jurisdiction ancT management. To the prin- 
 ciple on which the County Court system is now built, I have insuperable objections. 
 It is at variance with all principle and precedent in these United States. 
 
 Time was. when ^lontesquieu wais considered as high authority in matters of this 
 sort : and what does Montesquieu say of the principle on which our County Courts 
 are founded? His words are, ••' In a Republic, if any body of magistracy, have the 
 power of jiUins tacancies occurring in their own body, or of appointino- their own 
 successors ; if they once become corrupt, which in all probability will be the case, 
 the evil will become incurable, because corrupt men will appoint corrupt successors." 
 Is this true or is it false ? Is it entitled to no weight : to no consideration on this ques" 
 tion.' I think it is. If, let me ask, one body of Judges may appoint their own suc- 
 cessors, why may not another body ? "Why not then penuit the Judges of the Infe- 
 rior Courts, of the Court of Appeals, to appoint their own successors.- Certainly 
 they are as competent as the judges of the County Courts I I might here appeal to; 
 nay, I might ask the venerable gentleman from Richmond, the Chief Justice cf 
 these United States, would he. with all his wisdom and experience, undertake to ap- 
 point his successor? and if not, would he sanction cind consecrate this principle and 
 this practice, in any other body of Judofes? 
 
 But some gentlemen eulogize these tribunals and the whole svstem as the wisest 
 in the world. One thing only is wanting to give them the highest dignity, and to 
 entitle them to the unqualified approbation of some, and that would seem to be, to in- 
 vest them with the power of filling all vacancies in the Legislative Assemblies; to 
 give them the right to elect all our R.epresentatives. Tliis they virtually do in some 
 instances already, by the exclusive privileges which they now possess. But to invest 
 them with this exclusive privilege, would prevent those tumults and cabals attendant 
 on elections, and thus give perfect peace to the Commonwealth I 
 
 But. I have yet to learn, why the corporate towns in this Commonwealth, Rich- 
 mond. Petersburg, ^Norfolk, &c. can elect their magistrates, who are at least as well 
 qualified judges as any in the Commonwealth, and why the counties of Ohio, and 
 Brooke, and other coimties in the State cannot do the same r The onlv relevant rea- 
 
 67 
 
530 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 sons which I have as yet heard assigned, why the Legislature should elect the Judges 
 of the supreme tribunals, is, because the people do not always, cannot always, know 
 the claims of the aspirants or candidates. If this be good logic or good sense, it will 
 prove that the counties ought to elect their own magistrates, because they can know 
 them better than any persons living out of the counties ; and the recommendation O'f 
 a whole ward of qualified voters, is better evidence to the chief Executive of their 
 competency, than is the recommendation of a few, perhaps interested magistrates. I 
 am for reposing the greatest confidence in the people. The pov^^er is safely lodged in 
 their hands ; more safely, I am sure, than in a few privileged ones, whom tliey never 
 appointed their trustees. 
 
 The virtue of the people, and not the goodness of the system, has hitherto pre- 
 vented that corruption to which many of our institutions tend. But, if that deteriora- 
 tion of the public morals which the gentleman from Chesterfield has assured us is 
 advancing v/ith such appalling rapidity, in a few years the County Court system will 
 become an intolerable grievance. 
 
 I am not an enemy to County Courts, but I Vvnsh to leave them in the power, and 
 subject to tiie wisdom of legislation. I do not wish to bind them irrevocably and un- 
 alterably upon posterity by Constitutional provision. If they are so wise and so use- 
 ful, as gentlemen suppose, they need not fear the Legislative power. 
 
 Bat, why we should only establish the prmciple of a Court of Appeals and of such 
 other Inferior Courts as the Legislature may ordain and establish, and bind by the de- 
 finite article the, the present County Courts upon the people, is to me unaccountable, 
 except upon one principle, and that is because so many complaints have been made 
 against them. V/hy should the article the precede County Courts, and the others be 
 spoken of indefinitely ? Thus the Legislature is debarred from touching them ! For, if 
 such an attempt should be made, some ten or twenty years hence, would it not be 
 argued that the phrase " the Coiinty Courts,'' just imported such County Courts so or- 
 ganized and so constituted as those existing at this day. A Court of Appeals will ad- 
 mit of Legislative provision, but tlie County Courts will not. I hope gentlemen will 
 perceive the impropriety of this phraseology, and correct it, if they wisii the Legisla- 
 ture ever to take these courts into examination. 
 
 I could produce many testimonies against them, were I to follow the example of 
 gentlemen who defend them; but I prefer examining their merits or demerits upon 
 principle; and, I doubt not, if we were fully acquainted with the whole history of 
 them, they will be found no better in practice than in principle. From the informa- 
 tion I have received, I can hazard nothing in saying that I am of opinion that at least 
 four-fifths of the magistrates in 'Western Virginia, would wish to see the present sys- 
 tem subjected to Legislative jurisdiction. I do therefore hope, that we will commit 
 them wholly to Legislative controul and management, which can best adapt them to 
 the ever-changing exigencies of society. 
 
 The question was now taken on striking out the clause, and decided in the nega- 
 tive—Ayes 22. 
 
 So the Committee refused to strike out the words " and in the County Courts," 
 from the resolution declaring in what courts the Judicial power of Virginia shall reside. 
 
 Mr. Campbell now moved (in consequence of an alleged suggestion of the venera- 
 ble gentleman from Richmond, Mr. Marshall,) to strike out the word the" before 
 " County Courts," so as to let the clause read " and in County Courts." _ 
 
 Mr. Marshall thought this could do no harm, and if it tended to reconcile any gen- 
 tleman to the resolution, it had better be adopted. 
 
 Mr. Randolph wished to hear what good it would do. 
 
 Mr. Henderson rephed, that if the word should be retained, the Legislature might 
 consider themselves as withheld from any alteration in the organization of these courts ; 
 if it was removed, that doubt would be removed. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, if the amendment was to have no efltect, he did not object to it ; 
 but if it was to give the Legislature power to organize the County Courts, so as to as- 
 sign them pay and put them on the civil list, he' should be against it. 
 
 Mr. Mercer was astonished to hear a doubt on that subject : the Legislature had at 
 present power to assign pay to the magistrates, if they pleased. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, the Constitution contained no power to that effect. 
 
 Mr. Morgan, in reply to Judge Coalter, said he had always understood, that by a 
 true construction of the Constitution, the Legislature has full authority to allow jus- 
 tices of the peace any compensation whatever. There can be no doubt, as no part of 
 the Constitution prohibits it. By one clause, justices are authorised to sit in either 
 House of Assembly ; but by another, the disqualifying clause, every person holding 
 any lucrative office is disqualified from sitting in the Legislature. Thus, if they be al- 
 lowed either fees, or a salary for their services, they cannot sit in either House under 
 this last clause ; the fees or salary, making the office a lucrative one. They have the 
 whole subject of compensation under their own controul, and in their own hands. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 531 
 
 But they prefer sitting in the Assembly, and \vieldino; their counties at home, as has 
 well been said by others, to any fees or salary whatever. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Campbell's motion, and carried — Ayes 48, 
 Noes 4.2. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison, Monroe and Marshall, voting in tlie affirmative.) 
 So the Committee resolved that the clause shall read : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such 
 Inferior Courts as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish, and in 
 County Courts." 
 
 The Committee then rose, and the House adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, December 2, 1S29, 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened w^ith prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Sj'kes of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The House then went into Com-mittee of the Whole, Mr. Stanard in the Chair, 
 and the question being on the first resolution in the report of the Judiciary Com- 
 mittee : 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, there were some additional provisions he wished to have intro- 
 duced into the resolution, and which he had not yet suggested. The resolution pro- 
 fesses to enumerate all the depositories of the Judicial power of the Commonwealth ; 
 and, therefore, all intended to be included must be enumerated. Justices of the 
 peace when not upon the bench, but acting singly, exercise an important portion of 
 the Judicial power. The trial of warrants was a considerable part of the Judicial 
 power of the Commonwealth. He, therefore, moved to amend the resolution by 
 adding the following clause after the words " County Courts 
 
 In the third line of the first resolution of the Judicial Committee, strike out the 
 word and" — and secondly, at the end of the .same line insert •'■ and in the justices 
 of the peace who shall compose the said courts." 
 
 The amendment was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JMarshall then proposed to add still farther to the enumeration. Corporation 
 Courts constituted a necessary part of the Judicial system, and should not be omitted. 
 He at first proposed to insert the amendment after the words County Courts," but 
 some gentlemen whom he had consulted, felt apprehensive that such a location might 
 render these Corporation Courts, Constitutional tribunals; and though he had no such 
 apprehension himself, for caution sake, he would not propose to insert them there, 
 but so introduce the am.endment, that it should be impossible to consider them as 
 courts Constitutionally established. He then moved the following : 
 
 " The Legislature may also vest such jurisdiction as shall be deemed necessary in 
 Corporation Courts, and in the magistrates who may belong to the Corporate body." 
 
 This amendment was also agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Mercer having moved fhat the report of the Judiciary Committee, wliich had 
 now been gone through, be laid aside, and that the Committee proceed to consider 
 the report of the Legislative Committee. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that it would be recollected by a vote taken yesterday, the Com- 
 mittee had agreed to strike out the word the'' before the words Comity Courts,'' in 
 the first resolution of the Judiciary Committee. Mr. P. said, that he had been one of 
 those who voted in the affirmative on that question, but he was now free to confess, 
 that he had given that vote under a total mistake, as to what would be the effect of 
 striking out the word, and his object in rising at this time was to move a re-considera- 
 tion. He had been confirmed in his opinion, b}' the view which had been taken by 
 the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Marshall.) that the effect would be to abrogate 
 the provision in the existing Constitution ; and if the present resolution should be 
 adopted, and the word " the" be stricken therefrom, what would be the necessary ef- 
 fect ? The effect must be, that the Legislature would be required forthwith to build 
 up anew the County Court system, with whatever power or jurisdiction attached to 
 it, that body might deem it proper to confer. Now, he was well satisfied, that this 
 had not been the object desired by most of those who had voted in favour of striking 
 out the word ^- tlie.'' Mr. P. said, that while he was desii-ous to preserve the system 
 of the County Courts, and to vest in the Legislature, a power to correct the existing 
 evils of that system, it was by no means his wish to impose upon the Legislature, the 
 duty of building up an entire system from the foundation. If the word " the" should 
 be retained, then the County Courts would be retained in their present organization, 
 the Legislature having power to alter and regulate the jurisdiction of those courts as 
 they might see proper. It was true, that that body might choose to retain the system. 
 
532 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 as it now existed, with its present jurisdiction unaltered; but it was also true that 
 they might do otherwise. He hoped tlie motion would be re-considered. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that he hoped and trusted that the Committee would re-consider. 
 He had never been more surprised in his life than on yesterday, when after the very 
 slender vote their exertions had enabled them to obtain, he found instantcr, a sudden 
 change produced by the adoption of an amendment, which, to put the most fair con- 
 struction upon it, was equivalent to striking out the whole of that, which the Com- 
 mittee had determined to retain, and which was susceptible of a construction still 
 more hostile to the existing system. Mr. R. said, that he did not know any other 
 thing which could have induced him, in the present pitiable condition of his frame, 
 to throw himself upon the attention of the Committee. He had long considered the 
 County Court system, and the freehold Suffrage, as the two main pillars in the an- 
 cient edifice of our State Constitution. In the course of my life I have repeatedly 
 been called upon by various eminent men, to explain to them the system of Govern- 
 ment in this Commonwealth; and I never knew a single individual of the number, 
 who was not struck with admiration at the structure of our County Court system. 
 I have been asked, whether it was the effect of design, or of one of those fortunate 
 combinations of circumstances, which enabled its framers to " snatch a grace beyond 
 the reach of art." Whether it was design or chance, one thing is certain, that the 
 plan has proved in practice, to be one of the very best which the wit of man could 
 have devised for this Commonwealth ; preserving in the happiest manner, a just ad- 
 ministration of our affairs, between the instability attendant upon popular elections, 
 and the corruption or oppression of Executive patronage. It insures to us, that the 
 power of the Commonwealth will always be in the hands of good and lawful men. 
 I never met an individual who cursed the appointment of Jackson, or a Federalist, 
 when Federalism was uppermost, or a Republican, when it was downmost, who did 
 not express envy at this feature of our polity. Virginia stands between Scylla and 
 Charybdis. We must have magistrates appointed by the people or by the Execu- 
 tive, (unless the present mode be continued.) Suppose by the people. Then, in a 
 cause between a man of great influence, popularity, and power — and a poor man, — 
 he that is poor will have no chance of justice. If they are appointed by the Execu- 
 tive, it must be by recommendation : — but of what sort.'' Such as prevails at Wash- 
 ington? (thank God no man ever dared to approach me, for my name to one of them,) 
 recommendations obtained by cabal and intrigue ? — and after all — you must be doomed 
 to instability — yes, to utter instability. At present the Government of each county, 
 is in, hands best fitted for it. The gentleman from Chesterfield, in enumerating so 
 ably and clearly the Herculean labours of their office, has truly said, that they step 
 in between the accused and the Commonwealth in all cases, where the crime is not 
 so great as to be sent on to the higher courts. Their mode of appointment may be 
 an anomaly — but I consider it the most valuable feature of the system. 
 
 If we abandon this, we must resort to infamous jobbers and trading justices ; who 
 will foment instead of allaying village quarrels. If you will strike the pettifogger 
 out of existence, you shall have my vote most heartily. It can be done thus alone. 
 But there are some (I speak, of course, of those 02it of this House.) who delight to 
 excite clamour — who long to suck blood — and raise popular commotion ; — who want 
 to be Judges and justices, because the people refuse them a livelihood as lawyers. I 
 was pained and surprised at the description given, by the gentleman from Loudoun, 
 of drunken justices. 1 had thought there were none of such a description ; but the 
 testimony is given by a respectable gentleman — and in his count}^, the fact must be 
 so. I bless God it is so no where else. Our justices are not so ignorant as he 
 imagines — my confidence is infinitely g-reater in County Courts than in the Superior 
 Courts. The bench of the latter is filled too often by lawyers — who can't get a live- 
 lihood at the bar. I speak not of Judges in general. But the gentleman says, that 
 when he wants a pair of boots, he goes to a skilful boot-maker : but, Sir, when I 
 want either boots or a Constitution, I will go to capable workmen, and not to cobblers. 
 
 Great stress has been laid on the opinion of Mr. Jefferson, by a gentleman not now 
 in his place. Sir, the opinion of Mr. Jefferson comes strangely from him. He has 
 gone beyond the Ganges into the uttermost East. But I have no hesitation to say, 
 that on a subject like this, I have not much deference for the opinion of Mr. Jeffer- 
 son. We all know he v/as very confident in his theories — but 1 am a practical man 
 and have no confidence a priori in the theories of Mr. Jefferson, or of any other man 
 under the sun. 
 
 Not an argument has been advanced against County Courts, but would be equally 
 good a ■priori against jury-trial. What could have taught us its value, but expe- 
 rience A 2)riori, it seems absurd to trust a dozen ploughmen — good and lawful of 
 the vicinage I grant, but still ploughmen — with a point of law in criminal cases, 
 without appeal — and in civil cases under circumstances almost equivalent. We can 
 hardly conceive any thing more ridiculous in theory — yet we find none half so valua- 
 ble in practice : — So vain is it to argue against fact. I once witnessed a contest of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 53S 
 
 argument against fact; and if it will relieve the oppression and ennui of this debate, I 
 will relate it: 1 saw one of the best and worthiest men on a visit at some distance from 
 home, urging his lady to make preparation to ride, for "the Sun was down" — His 
 lady said, Uie Sun was not down." Her lord gravely replied, " the Sun sets at half 
 past SIX : it is now past that time." (Every man's watch is right and his was in his 
 hand.) The company looked out of the window and saw the Sun in all his blaze of 
 glory — but the Sun ought to have been down, as fleas ought to have been lobsters. 
 The Sun, however, was not down, and fleas are not lobsters: whether it be because 
 they have not souls, I leave to St. Jerome and the Bishops to settle. 
 
 W e are not to be struck dowm by the authority of iNIr. Jefl:erson. Sir, if there be any 
 point in which the authority of Mr. Jefferson might be considered as valid, it is in the 
 mechanism of a plough. He once mathematically and geometrically demonstrated 
 the form of a mould-board which should present the least resistance : his mould-board 
 was sent to Paris, to tlie Savants — it was exhibited to all the visitors at the Garden of 
 Plants. The Sacants all declared una voce that this was the best mould-board that had 
 ever been devised. They did not decree to INIr. Jefterson the honors of Hermes Tris- 
 megistus, but they cast his mould-board in plaister ; and there it remains an eternal 
 proof, that this form of mould-board presents less resistance than any other on the face 
 of the earth. Some time after, an adversary brought into Virginia the Carey plough; 
 but it was such an awkward ill-looking thing, that it would not sell : at length some 
 one tried it, and though its mould-board was not that of least resistance, it beat Mr. 
 Jelferson's plough as much as common sense will always beat theory and reveries. 
 Now there is not in Virginia, I believe, one plough with the mould-hoard of least resis- 
 tance. I have had some experience in its use, and find it the handsomest plough to 
 draw I ever saw. So much lor authority ! 
 
 Sir, when we shall have given up County Courts, and jury-trial, and Freehold Suf- 
 frage, there will be nothing in the Commonwealth worth attention to any one of prac- 
 tical sense. The County Courts hold the just balance between popular mutability, 
 (the opprobrium and danger of all popular systems) on the one hand, and Executiva 
 patronage, on the other. 1 said before that there must be recommendation of some 
 sort. C^uaere then, which is better ? that it shall be made openly by the justices when 
 assembled, on notice, or by a private letter.'* Sir, I am for a strict adherence to the 
 anchorage ground of the Constitution : it has hitherto kept the Commonwealth from 
 swinging from its moorings : when it shall drag its anchors, or slip its cable, God knows 
 what will become of the vessel of State. But my hand may not be wanting at the 
 plough. If gentlemen succeed in introducing the newest, theoretical, pure, defeca- 
 ted Jacobinism into this Commonwealth, I do upon my soul believe, they will have 
 inflicted a deeper wound on Republican Government, than it ever experienced 
 before. 
 
 I wish I could have presented my thoughts in a manner more Avorthy of the subject 
 and the occasion. The gentleman who has aspired to out-act Ctesar in the Capitol, 
 folds himself in his robe, and exclaims et tu Brute! 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, he could assure the gentleman from Charlotte, that that gentle- 
 man was not a greater friend to the County Courts than he was, nor was he a greater 
 friend to the mode in which the justices are now appointed than lie; and whenever 
 the Committee should reach that part of the report which applied to this particular 
 question, the gentleman would find him following in his track, not closely perhaps, 
 but at some distance, yet certainly following. He was disposed to make a great sa- 
 crifice to secure that object. 
 
 He would now call the attention of the Committee to the fifth resolution of the re- 
 port, and which he trusted would be suffered to remain in it. It disposed of the subject 
 the gentleman from Charlotte appeared to be so much concerned about. [Here Mr. 
 M. read the fifth resolution in the following words: " Resolved, That on the creation 
 of any new county, justices of the peace shall be appointed in the first instance as 
 may be prescribed by law. When vacancies shall occur in any county, or it shall, 
 for any cause, be deemed necessary to increase their number, appointments shall be 
 made by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, on the re- 
 commendation of their respective County Courts."] 
 
 If the Convention should leave to the Governor an Executive Council, then he was 
 ready to say, let the appointment of justices be made by the Governor, by and wdth the 
 advice of the Council, as is now provided by the Constitution. But, if it should be 
 contrary to the will of the Convention that a Council be retained, then let the ap- 
 pointment be made with the advice of the Senate, on the recommendation of the 
 County Court. It was his purpose to offer an amendment, which would give 
 still more importance to the recommendation of the County Court. He would not 
 suggest it at present, but he should most certainly so endeavor. He did not differ 
 from the gentleman in his views of the County Courts. He did not, however, sup- 
 pose it to be necessary to re-instate the article " the'' in order to effect all that gentle- 
 man wished, and which he wished as strongly as the gentleman. When tlie word 
 
534 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 was stricken out, it was apprehended that the effect might be to have some new court 
 constituted and called " a County Court," and which might displace the County Courts 
 as at present established. Mr. M. said, he should be dissatisfied with such a change ; 
 but he did not apprehend it could result from omitting the article. The amendinent 
 which had been adopted rendered such a thing impossible. It directed that the jus- 
 tices of the peace should constitute the County Courts; and if so, what was there to 
 fear He perceived nothing. But with respect to the County Courts as now estab- 
 lished, and the mode of their appointment, there was not a member of the Convention 
 more strongly disposed to retain them than he. 
 
 Mr. Randolph rose to supply the omission of a fact which he had intended to state 
 when last up, which was, that he never had been, was not then, and never should be, 
 a magistrate ; nor was there a magistrate connected with him by blood or marriage, 
 within his own county, or as far as he knew, any where else. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, that he hoped he had not been considered as insinuating any 
 such motive as having actuated the gentleman from Charlotte. It would really give 
 him more pain than he could express. No person could be more fully satisfied that 
 that gentleman uttered his own opinions, and that what he said flowed from him in 
 a manner the most spontaneous and impartial. 
 
 Mr. Randolph replied, that it was impossible that what he had now stated could have 
 had the remotest connexion with the remarks of the distinguished gentleman from Rich- 
 mond, because he had intended to have said it when up before, and had omitted to do 
 so only tiirough inadvertence : that gentleman was the last man in the world that he 
 could suspect of intending to make any injurious insinuations whatever. He knew 
 that like my uncle Toby he would not hurt a fly." 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that he should not attempt, because he felt himself to be unquali- 
 fied, to oppose the interpretation which had been put upon the amendinent by the 
 venerable gentleman from Richmond; and if he could have satisfied his mind, that it 
 would have the effect that gentleman supposed, he should cheerfully have withdrawn 
 his motion for a re-consideration. He attributed it to the obtuseness of his own intel- 
 lect, that he was unable to subscribe to the opinion which the gentleman had ex- 
 pressed; but he could not still help believing, that if the efiect of the present resolution 
 would be, to abrogate so much of the existing Constitution as applied to this subject, 
 so that the Constitution would stand as if it contained no such clause at all, and in 
 place of it the naked resolution of the Committee was to be substituted, the effect 
 would be to vest a portion of the Judicial power in a County Court; of course, all the 
 laws resting on the present clause in the Constitution, must fall with it. They could 
 not operate with respect to a principle, now first proposed. This resolution, then, 
 was to be a substitute for, and an abrogation of, the existing provision in the Constitu- 
 tion. The Legislature would consequently have to create the duties and to define the 
 jurisdiction of the County Courts. If his view was correct, the result would be, to 
 impose that duty upon the Legislature. They must define by law, ail the powers and 
 all the duties of the new County Courts. He had before admitted, that it was possi- 
 ble that they might re-enact the present system just as it stood, but they might also 
 determine otherwise, and he for one, did not choose to entrust them with that power. 
 He had fears, that the Legislature might go beyond a mere pruning away of the ex- 
 crescences of the present County Court system. He wished to give them power to 
 do no more than to correct the abuses of that system — would the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Richmond have that effect? The amendment only said, that the 
 magistrates of which it spoke should constitute the County Court. But what County 
 Court.? It did not say what sort of a County Court it should be. Now, he thought 
 that the Legislature would be bound to supply this omission by regulating the whole 
 subject. Mr. P. however, concluded by acknowledging that he felt inclined to dis- 
 trust his own opinion, because he found that it differed from that of a venerable gen- 
 tleman for whose personal character, as well as exalted station, he felt the highest re- 
 verence. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that if his good and great friend w^ould give him his attention for 
 a moment, he thought he could satisfy him of the importance of re-inserting the 
 word " the" in the clause, which had been referred to. As the proposition now stood, 
 since that word had been stricken out, the whole amount of what was provided was, 
 that the Judicial power of the Commonwealth should be vested in a Court of Ap- 
 peals, in the Inferior Courts, and in County Courts generally. The effect would have 
 been, that the Legislature would have been at liberty to ordain County Courts, held 
 by pettifoggers, with a salary of $200; with an enormous expense to the public, and 
 to the great injury of tiie suitors. It would have enabled the Legislature to have 
 constituted those very tribunals, which he and his friend held m the most abhorrence, 
 but which some other gentlemen seemed so earnestly to desire. That danger, indeed, 
 was now taken away in some measure by the amendment, which had been adopted. In 
 that respect, the existing system was pursued, but it was pursued only in that parti- 
 cular. What had been the object of the Legislative Committee It certainly had been 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 535 
 
 to preserve the existing system of our County Courts, leaving to the Legislature 
 no other power in respect to them, but to modify their jurisdiction. But, if the 
 word •■ the" should not be inserted, the effect would be precisely that which had been 
 described by the gentleman from Frederick. (Mr. Powell.) It secured nothino- more 
 than that the State should have County Courts of some kind, and that these°should 
 consist of justices of the peace. But still, the existing Count}'- Courts would not be 
 preserved or continued. Not only would the County Court law have to be re-enacted 
 but there was hardly a statute in relation to the Executive authority of the State, and 
 not one in reference to its police, but must be re-enacted also: and every man must 
 know, that to re-build the entire system, would be an immense undertaking. Whole 
 bodies of law must be subjected to alterations, and years would be required to reinstate - 
 what it had taken two hundred years to perfect, and which had employed the wisdom of 
 their ancestors from the foundation of the Colony to the present "time. The effect 
 would be, not to preserve the Count}^ Courts as they were, but to obhge the Legis- 
 lature to re-enact and to revise every statute relating to them. 
 
 But should this not be the effect, and his apprehension unfounded, (for, he had found 
 that the high degree of alarm he had felt and expressed on this subject, appeared to 
 many gentlemen like insanity.) what course did it behove the wisdom of the g-entle- 
 man from Richmond to take 1 That gentleman had told the Committee, that he con- 
 sidered it as of no importance whether the word the was there or not — that it did 
 neither good nor harm. If so, he asked that the gentleman, if only out of deference 
 to those who thought the word of importance, would consent to let it be restored. 
 If he thought the word could do no evil, he hoped he would restore it, out of ren-ard 
 to their real and sincere apprehensions of the effect of its omission. ~ 
 
 Mr. Henderson in reply to Mr. E.andolph said, that he understood that gentleman 
 to have accused him of imputing to the magistracy of his own countv a oreater de- 
 gree of incompetency, than befonged to those of other counties simiiarFy situated. 
 He disclaimed any such intention, and thought that he had used no languao-e which 
 would justify it. The gentleman from Charlotte had charged Iris remarks\-itli a want 
 of decorum. He was free to own that a want of training, as well as of other qualifi- 
 cations, which were requisite to sustain his character inlhat House, subjected him to 
 just criticism. But he did not owe that acknowledgment to the o-entleman from 
 Charlotte — and from the sample which the House had witnessed to-day, he should 
 feel inclined to take some other model for miitation when he wished to improve his 
 manners. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that he had voted to strike out the word " the" before " County 
 Courts." He had done so from deference to the opinion of the gentleman from 
 Richmond, (Mr. Marshall.) and from a persuasion that to retain it, would operate in 
 a manner that might trammel the Legislature, (though he knew that no such inten- 
 tion was entertained by those who inserted it.) He had yielded the more readily, be- 
 cause the subject had been gravely considered in the Judicial Committee : whereas 
 he had not himself given it any close examination, except during the very short pe- 
 riod in which it had been discussed in Committee of the Whole. He was'now satis- 
 fied that he had done wrong — and that in voting to strike out the word, he had not 
 done that which was required from him. to maintain the doctrines he had alwavs vin- 
 dicated there and elsewhere. It had not been to a County Court that he was attached- 
 for a court organized in any manner and called a County Court he felt no particular 
 
 reverence. He had been endeavouring to vindicate the County Court system a 
 
 system long k nown to \ irgmians by its Constitutionalty and its practicabihtv. It was 
 this system which he had thought so beneficial. It was that County Court, which 
 was composed of justices of the peace with power to recommend their successors 
 
 and which participated so essentialh- in the Executive Department of Government ■ 
 
 it was that identical County Court, which he wished to see recoo-nized in the pro- 
 posed Constitution. Though he was not clear that striking out the word the would 
 hazard this, yet restoring it would clearly declare the intention of this body in that 
 behalf. The County Courts, he confessed, were his favourites — and he did not think 
 that the Legislative discretion could be restrained, if once entrusted with the subject 
 because that discretion would follow the declaration which preceded, viz: that the 
 jurisdiction of all the courts was to be regulated by the Legislature. A fair construc- 
 tion of this clause would not restrain tha^ body. The Legislature mioht sav that the 
 Constitution meant the courts to meet racnthly. or once in two months. or"^in three 
 or in four months : that it meant the court to consist of but three or four members' 
 &c. All was completely in the power of the Legislature. If any o-entleman feared 
 that retaining the word would too much trammel this discretion, fet them introduce a 
 guarded article to prevent it. But let it be tlie County Courts that we recognize. 
 He should vote in favour of re-considering the decision of yesterdav and re-instatinff 
 the word. 
 
 The question of re-consideration was now put, and decided in the affirmative — 
 Ayes 53, Noes 41. 
 
536 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Upshur said, he would trouble the Committee with but a few remarks. He 
 had voted for a re-consideration, and it was due to himself that he should make liis 
 course in this matter understood. He should vote against re-instating the word " the" 
 for reasons which he would now briefly state. It had been said that the Convention 
 by retaining that word, would shew its determination to retain the County Courts as 
 now organized in every respect : not only to preserve some of the forms of the pre- 
 sent system, but the County Courts, with all and every incident pertaining to them ; 
 and the objection to this was, that the vote would bind tlie Convention to take those 
 courts, not only with all their present jurisdiction, but also with the present mode of 
 appointing the justices who were to compose them ; what course he might take, was 
 questionable. He had listened with attention to the observaiions on both sides, but 
 he could not fully agree with either. He thought in the main, that these courts were 
 the most useful of all the branches of the Judiciary system, but he was willing that 
 all modes of appointing justices should be proposed. If any one of them was better 
 than that now in use, Mr. U. was ready to vote for it; but, unless it were better, he 
 should of course prefer to retain t)ie present mode. He should now vote with a view 
 to leave that point open. Gentlemen seemed to imagine, that if they did not adopt 
 the whole system, they would leave it in the power of the Legislature, to organize 
 under the name of a County Court any sort of tribunal they pleased. This might 
 be true, if the vote now given were final ; but they were now sitting, not in Conven- 
 tion, but in Committee of the Whole, and deliberating on the proper shape to be given 
 to the several Judicial tribunals of the Commonwealth. The vote now to be taken 
 would not deprive them of the power of hereafter adopting either the present mode 
 of appointing justices, or some other instead of it, as the Convention might prefer. 
 The subject would still be left open ; they would not be concluded by their present 
 act. If they voted against re-instating the word now, the resolution without it v/ould 
 only form a part of that Constitution, on each article of which they would hereafter 
 have to pass. They would only have determined that a part of the Judicial power of 
 the State should be vested in County Courts, and in justices of the peace. Who 
 were these to be ? Persons appointed under the Constitution which they should erect. 
 And how appointed As that Constitution might direct. They could provide that the 
 justices should be appointed in one mode, or in another mode. Would they be at all 
 precluded from devising some other scheme ? Not at all. This view of the matter 
 was with him conclusive. He was for letting gentlemen have an opportunity of sub- 
 mitting their various schemes for some better mode. If after these had been con- 
 sidered, the present plan should at last be found preferable to all others, they could at 
 the latest hour go back and adopt it. 
 
 But what would be the consequence of the opposite vote ? The entire system must 
 be retained precisely in its present form. If the whole must not be retained, then 
 his argument was good for nothing; but, if it must, they were now making a final 
 determination, and though a thousand schemes, hov^^ever judicious, should be proposed, 
 with a view to check and controul abuses now complained of, the Convention would 
 be precluded from considering any one of them. 
 
 The difficulty suggested by the gentleman from Chesterfield, did not weigh much 
 with him; there would be no necessity for re-enacting all those laws of which he 
 spoke. Let the justices of the peace be appointed under the same title, and the 
 County Courts be established under the same designation as at present. The one 
 would then take the place of the other, and the laws wouJd apply to them just as 
 they did at present; or if this were doulDtful, what could be easier than to cause them 
 to do so by a provision of the Constitution ? He saw no difficulty in the case. The 
 vote had been given on the idea (he would not say entertained by himself.) that re- 
 taining the word " the" precluded them from amending the mode of appointing jus- 
 tices. If it did not, the}^ were still left free. Why adhere to this precise phraseology, 
 while it did produce the most serious doubt? There were many members who would 
 vote to strike out the system altogether, rather than allow magistrates to be appointed 
 as they now are. Mr. U. said, he was not one of these, but he had an anxious desire 
 to give gentlemen an opportunity of submitting their plans. For himself, he believed 
 that nine out of ten would find the present plan best. He confessed that he was un- 
 able to see a better. He felt but little respect for theories, and had little doubt that 
 the existing system would be retained. But why preclude members from offering 
 their schemes.^ He did not wish to shut the door upon enquiry. Should any plan be 
 offered, the theory of which he might approve, and which he believed would not 
 prove injurious in practice, he should be disposed to go with it. But if retaining the 
 word " the" would leave open the question as to the appointment of justices, he 
 should not care a farthing which way the vote went. 
 
 The Chair here observed, that the consideration of the fifth resolution would open 
 that point. 
 
 Mr. Upshur said, he had so understood it. What, then, could be the use of re- 
 taining the word " the ?" 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 537 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, he would shew the gentleman what was the use of retaining. 
 Re-instating the word would not preclude any subsequent amendments. If the Com- 
 mittee chose to say, that justices of the peace should be appointed at the will of the 
 Governor, or should be elected by wards, or should be appointed on the recommen- 
 dation of the County Courts, by and with the consent of the Senate, it was surely 
 competent to them to do so. But, he was for re-instating the word " the,'' because the 
 striking of it out went to destroy the indication they had given as to the tribunal 
 they intended to erect. When the Constitution said, iAe County Courts 5 to what 
 could it be supposed to refer ? To the County Courts of Kentucky ? To the County 
 Courts of Maryland? Or, must it not refer to the County Courts of Virginia, as 
 known to them at the time the Constitution was adopted ? He understood the Com- 
 mittee as having said, that in these, a part of the Judicial power should be vested. But 
 how.? Precisely in all respects as at present ? No. If they adopted that resolution 
 alone, all the essential characteristics of the County Courts would be retained. But, 
 might they not say, that power should be vested in the County Courts, but that their 
 organization should be varied in such and such particulars ? Surely, there was no 
 inconsistency between these two. The general provision would have reference to a 
 well-known subject, while the subsequent clause went to qualify the generahty. The 
 Convention would declare, that the County Courts of Virginia should be such as they 
 now were, save in such respects as they chose to modify them. The gentleman from 
 Northampton thought with them, and ought to vote with them. He need not discard 
 the word the," for fear the Convention should control themselves. Any qualifica' 
 lions of the general proposition, would be considered on their own merits. Let it be 
 remembered, that the County Courts were not the creatures of this body, but had 
 subsisted in Virginia long before it came into existence ; and though the institution 
 was not now erected in terms, it was referred to as already in existence. There could 
 be no difficulty, either in understanding the clause, or in practising under it. The 
 power of the Legislature would not be controlled or restricted, but would be fully and 
 legitimately exercised. These courts had been organized since 76. Should the Con- 
 stitution refer to tliem as the County Courts, it would refer to them as they had ex- 
 isted at the time of its adoption : and it would leave to the Legislature full power to 
 act on the subject. Mr. J. concluded, by declaring his intention to vote against any 
 qualification of the existing system. 
 
 The question being at length taken on striking out the word ^' i/te," before the words 
 " Coimty Courts,'' it was decided in the negative. — Ayes 44, Noes 50. 
 
 So the word " the," was retained. 
 
 Messrs. Madison, Monroe and Marshall voting against striking out the word " the." 
 
 So the Committee resolved to retain the first resolution, in these words : 
 The Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such Inferior Courts 
 as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish, and in the County 
 Courts." 
 
 Mr. Mercer now renewed his motion, to pass over the residue of the report of the 
 Judiciary Committee, and expressed it as his desire, that the several propositions for 
 compromise should be taken up, not as in the character of amendments, but as dis- 
 tinct substantive propositions. 
 
 After a desultory debate on points of order, this arrangement prevailed, and the 
 Committee proceeded to consider the proposition offered by Mr. Upshur. 
 
 Mr. Madison now rose and addressed the Chair : the members rushed from their 
 seats, and crov^ded around him. 
 
 Although (says he) the actual posture of the subject before the Committee might 
 admit a full survey of it, it is not my purpose, in rising, to enter into the wide field of 
 discussion, which has called forth a display of intellectual resources and varied powers 
 of eloquence, that any country might be proud of, and which I have witnessed with 
 the highest gratification. Having been, for a very long period, withdrav\'n from any 
 participation in proceedings of deliberative bodies, and under other disqualifications 
 now, of which I am deeply sensible, though perhaps less sensible than others may 
 perceive that I ought to be, I shall not attempt more than a few observations, which 
 may suggest the views I have taken of the subject, and which will consume but little 
 of the time of the Committee, now become precious. It is sufficiently obvious, that 
 persons and property are the tv»^o great subjects on which Governments are to act; 
 and that the rights of persons, and the rights of property, are the objects, for the pro- 
 tection of which Government was instituted. These rights cannot well be separated. 
 The personal right to acquire property, which is a natural right, gives to property, 
 when acquired, a right to protection, as a social right. The essence of Government 
 is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to 
 abuse. In monarchies, the interests and happiness of all may be sacrificed to tlie 
 caprice and passions of a despot. In aristocracies, the rights and welfare of the many 
 may be sacrificed to the pride and cupidity of the few. In republics, the great danger 
 is, that the majority may not sufficiently respect the rights of the minority. Some 
 
538 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 gentlemen, consulting the purity and generosity of their own minds, without adverting 
 to the lessons of experience, would find a security against that danger, in our social 
 feelings; in a respect for character; in the dictates of the monitor within; in the 
 interests of individuals; in the aggregate interests of the community. But man is 
 known to be a selfish, as well as a social being. Respect for character, though often 
 a salutary restraint, is but too often overruled by other motives. When numbers of 
 men act in a body, respect for character is often lost, just in proportion as it is neces- 
 sary to control what is not right. We all know that conscience is not a sufficient 
 safe-guard ; and besides, that conscience itself may be deluded ; may be misled, by 
 an unconscious bias, into acts which an enlightened conscience would forbid. As to 
 the permanent interest of individuals in the aggregate interests of the community, 
 and in the proverbial maxim, that honesty is the best policy, present temptation is too 
 often found to be an over-match for those considerations. These favourable attributes 
 of the human character are all valuable, as auxiliaries; but they will not serve as a 
 substitute for the coercive provisions belonging to Government and Law. They will 
 always, in proportion as they prevail, be favourable to a mild administration of both : 
 but they can never be relied on as a guaranty of the rights of the minority against a 
 majority disposed to take unjust advantage of its power. The only effectual safe- 
 guard to the rights of the minority, must be laid in such a basis and structure of the 
 Government itself, as may afford, in a certain degree, directly or indirectly, a defen- 
 sive authority in behalf of a minority having right on its side. 
 
 To come more nearly to the subject before the Committee, viz : that peculiar fea- 
 ture in our community, which calls for a peculiar division in the basis of our Govern- 
 ment, I mean the coloured part of our population. It is apprehended, if the power 
 of the Commonwealth shall be in the hands of a majority, who have no interest in 
 this species of property, tlmt, from the facility with which it may be oppressed by ex- 
 cessive taxation, injustice may be done to its owners. It would seem, therefore, if 
 we can incorporate that interest into the basis of our system, it will be the most ap- 
 posite and effectual security that can be devised. Such an arrangement is recom- 
 mended to me by many very important considerations. It is due to justice; due to 
 humanity; due to truth; to the sympathies of our nature; in fine, to our character 
 as a people, both abroad and at home, that they should be considered, as much as pos- 
 sible, in the light of human beings, and not as mere property. As such, they are 
 acted upon by our lav/s, and have an interest in our Iaws. They may be considered 
 as making a part, though a degraded part, of the families to which they belong. 
 
 If they had the complexion of the Serfs in the North of Europe, or of the Villeins 
 formerly in England ; in other terms, if they were of our own complexion, much of 
 the difficulty would be removed. But the mere circumstance of complexion cannot 
 deprive them of the character of men. The Federal number, as it is called, is parti- 
 cularly recommended to attention in forming a basis of Representation, by its sim- 
 plicity, its certainty, its stability, and its permanency. Other expedients for securing 
 justice in the case of taxation, while they amount in pecuniary effect, to the same 
 thing, have been found hable to great objections : and I do not believe that a majority 
 of this Convention is disposed to adopt them, if they can find a substitute they can 
 approve. Nor is it a small recommendation of the Federal number, in my view, that 
 it is in conformity to the ratio recognized in the Federal Constitution. The cases, it 
 is true, are not precisely the same, but there is more of analogy than might at first 
 be supposed. If the coloured population were equally diftused through the State, 
 the analogy w^ould fail ; but existing as it does, in large masses, in particular parts of 
 it, the distinction between the different parts of the State, resembles that between 
 the slave-holding and non-slave^rolding States : and, if we reject a doctrine in our 
 own State, whilst we claim the bejiefit of it in our relations to other States, other 
 disagreeable consequences may be added to the charge of inconsistency, which will 
 be brought against us. If the example of our sister States is to have weight, we find 
 that in Georgia, tlie Federal number is made the basis of Representation in both 
 branches of tlieir Legislature : and I do not learn, that any dissatisfaction or incon- 
 venience has flowed from its adoption. I wish we could know more of the manner 
 in which particular organizations of Government operate in other parts of the United 
 States. There would be less danger of being misled into error, and we should have 
 the advantage of their experience, as well as our own. In the case I mention, there 
 can. I believe, be no error. 
 
 Whether, therefore, we be fixing a basis of R.epresentation, for the one branch or 
 the other of our Legislature, or for both, in a combination with other principles, the 
 Federal ratio is a favourite resource with me. It entered into my earhest views of 
 the subject, before this Convention was assembled : and though I have kept my mind 
 open, have hstened to every proposition which has been advanced, and given to them 
 ail a candid consideration, I must say, that in my judgment, we shall act wisely m 
 preferring it to others, which have been brought before us. Should the Federal num- 
 ber be made to enter into the basis in one branch of the Legislature, and not into th© 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 539 
 
 other, such an arrangement might prove favourable to the slaves themselves. It may 
 be, and I think it has been suggested, that those who have themselves no interest in 
 this species of property, are apt to sympathise with the slaves, more than may be the 
 case with their masters; and would, therefore, be disposed, when they had the ascen- 
 dancy, to protect them from laws of an oppressive character, wliilst the masters, who 
 have a common interest with the slaves, against undue taxation, which must be paid 
 out of their labour, will be their protectors when they have the ascendancy. 
 
 The Convention is now arrived at a point, where we must agree on some common 
 ground, all sides relaxing in their opinions, not clianging, but mutually surrendering 
 a part of them. In framing a Constitution, great difficulties are necessarily to be 
 overcome ; and nothincr can ever overcome them, but a spirit of compromise. Other 
 nations are surprised at nothing so much as our having been able to form Constitu- 
 tions in the manner which has been exemplified in this country. Even the union of 
 so many States, is, in the eyes of the world, a wonder ;. the harmonious establishment 
 of a common Government over them all, a miracle. I cannot but flatter myself, that 
 without a miracle, we shall be able to arrange all difficulties. I never have despaired, 
 notwitiistanding all the threatening appearances we have passed through. I have 
 now more than a hope — a consoling confidence, tliat v/e shall at last find, that our 
 labours have not been in vain. 
 
 IMr. Upshur then addressed the Chair, as follows : 
 
 jNIr. Chairman : I regret, that I have not been fortunate enough to hear any of the 
 remarks of tiie venerable gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Ivladison.) The low voice in 
 which he spoke, and the eager solicitude to hear him, which drew so many of the 
 Committee around his person, deprived me of the profit which I could not have failed 
 to derive from the lessons of his wisdom. For these reasons, I am unable to say what 
 bearing his remarks were designed to have on the subject immediately befor^ us; and 
 of course, I am constrained to proceed v/ith the development of ray views, without 
 regard to those remarks. In doing this, I shall carefully abstain from any laboured 
 argument, convinced that in the present state of the discussion, no such argument 
 can be necessary, even if it would be patiently endured. I will, therefore, content 
 myself with a simple reference to the few explanatory remarks, with which I intro- 
 duced these resolutions a few days ago, enlarging on them only so far as may be ne- 
 cessary to a full and correct understanding of the subject. 
 
 It must be evident to all, that I am contending for no peculiar principle. Our ex- 
 perience cannot have failed to admonish us, that no good can result from that array of 
 parties, which, from the very commencement of our session, I have dreaded and de- 
 precated. Nothing can now be done by a contest of strength. Argument is exhausted, 
 and no hope can be cherished of a happy result to our labours, except in that spirit of 
 conciliation, of which I trust every one of us feels the necessity. We all profess to 
 have a.bandoned the idea of carrjung our favorite measures, and to be seeking, in good 
 faith, for some middle ground, on which we mav meet and harmonize. Our only 
 enquiry, therefore, is, where can this middle ground be found Through what paths 
 are we to seek it? Each party must be prepared to abandon something, in conside- 
 ration of something to be abandoned to it in return. And these concessions. Sir, 
 must not only be mutual, but they must be eqiLoL also. In this way, and in this way 
 only, can we hope to rest the Constitution on the sure foundation of public confi- 
 dence. It has been my most anxious desire, to attain this golden medium. How far 
 I have succeeded, it is for the Committee now to determine. 
 
 We all know. Sir, that there are three distinct parties in this body. The first and 
 most numerous, contends for the basis of white population; the second contends for 
 the basis of white population and taxation combined ; and the third contends for the 
 basis of Federal numbers. Each party is entirely persuaded, that its principle is right, 
 and each is desirous to carry its principle into both Houses of the General Assembly. 
 Neither of them, however, is strong enough for this purpose ; and all profess to be 
 willing to depart in equal degree from their favourite principle. If so, Sir. it appears 
 to my mind most evident, that our present office is merely one of numbers. Our 
 object can be obtained by a simple arithmetical calculation, and that too, with absolute 
 certainty. We have nothing to do, but to add together the results of the several 
 ratios, and ascertain the fair average of all. This I have done. I have fixed the re- 
 presentation for the present time, and adopted the same principle as the rule for all 
 time to come. This, Sir, is the true average of principle. I am willing to abide by 
 it, whatever may be its effects upon tire several interests of the Commonwealth. I 
 believe, however — sincerely I believe, that of all the plans of compromise heretofore 
 submitted, this is most favourable to our Western friends. Indulge me in a short 
 comparison. 
 
 The scheme of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon.) is founded on the 
 Census of 1S'20 : mine is founded on the Auditor's estimates for 18.29. During this 
 interval, the population of the West has increased much more rapidly than that of the 
 East; and of course, the West would enjoy the advantage of this increase by my 
 
540 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 scheme, and lose it by that of the gentleman from Albemarle. In the present appor- 
 tionment of power, our plans result as follows : 
 
 For the House of Delegates — Fii'st District, or District West of the Alleghany : 
 Mr. Gordon's, . = 26 members. 
 
 The plan now before us, - - ^ - ^ 26 
 
 Second, or Valley District: 
 Mr. Gordon's, ...... 24 
 
 The plan now before us, - - . . . 22 
 
 Third, or Middle District : 
 Mr. Gordon's, = 37 
 
 The plan now before us, - - - - » 38 
 
 Fourth, or Tide- Water District: 
 Mr. Gordon's, ...... 33 
 
 The plan now before us, - - - - 34 
 
 Thus it appears, that according to the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, the 
 East will have a majority of twenty in the House of Delegates 5 and according to the 
 plan now under consideration, it will have a majority of twenty-four. This difference^ 
 however, is much more than compensated to the West, in the Senate. According to 
 the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, the East will have a majority of four in a 
 Senate of twenty-four : according to my plan, it will have a majority of only four in 
 a Senate of thirty. In truth, Sir, I have given to the West a larger number in the 
 Senate, than it can fairly claim upon my own principles. My reason was this r by 
 an exact estimate, the first District would be entitled to six and a half, and I have 
 given it seven ; the second District would be entitled to five and a half, and I have 
 given it six ; the third District would be entitled to nine and a half, and I have given 
 it nine ; the fourth District would be entitled to eight and a half, and I have given it 
 eight. Thus, I have taken from the East all the fractions to which it is entitled, 
 while I have counted the same fractions as integers to the West. I trust that this 
 will be received as some proof of friendly feeling, and a conciliatory temper, on the 
 part of the East. 
 
 There is, however, a still more important difference between the gentleman from 
 Albemarle and myself. He has provided no rule for future apportionments, whilst 
 the rule proposed by me secures to the West all the advantage to be derived from her 
 certain increase in every one of the elements of which that rule is composed. In» 
 deed. Sir, the only doubt should be, not whether the West, but whether the East^ 
 ought to accept of my rule ; for it is extremely obvious, that the East has every thing 
 to lose, and little or nothing to gain, whilst the West has every thing to gain, and 
 literally nothing to lose. Our tabular statements confirm the truth of this remark. 
 Population in the East is nearly full. Our white population increases by a very in- 
 Considerable ratio, whilst to the West, it increases with a rapidity which exceeds our 
 most sanguine calculations. On this one of the three ratios, therefore, their advan- 
 tage over us is manifest. In like manner, our taxation is probably as high as it will 
 ever be ; and if We ourselves are consulted, we shall scarcely desire an increase of 
 political power, at the expense of an increase of taxation. Our population is nearly 
 stationary ; our agriculture shews us no wealth in the distance ; our taxable subjects 
 are as numerous as they will be for years, perhaps in all time to come. Not so with 
 the West. As the people increase in numbers, their wealth will increase also. Their 
 taxable subjects will multiply; and they will have also this advantage; that the in- 
 crease of their taxes v/iW be in exact proportion to the increase of their ability to pay. 
 Even here, therefore, they have every reason to be satisfied. But, this is not alL 
 Their white population, in which their increase is acknowledged to be most rapid, is 
 twice counted to them. It is counted as a simple element ; and it is again counted 
 in combination with taxes. The same remarks apply to the third ratio, or Federal 
 numbers. We have already as many slaves as our agriculture requires, and. more 
 than we find profitable. They will not, it is to be hoped, increase to any extent with 
 tis ; but gentlemen themselves have assured us, that they are rapidly increasing to the 
 West. They assured us of this, in order to allay our apprehensions of unjust taxa- 
 tion on that species of property. I offer them now the full benefit of their own cal- 
 culations. 
 
 Gentlemen will perhaps reply that my rule works both ways ; that while I hold out 
 to them the prospect of advantage from multiplying these ratios, the East also enjoys 
 the benefit of two of these ratios in a greater degree. This is undoubtedly true, so far 
 as the present time is concerned. As the East would be benefitted by both the ratios 
 of population and taxation combined, and of Federal numbers, she undoubtedly gains 
 by bringing both these ratios, instead of one of them only, in connexion with another 
 ratio w^hich is adverse to her interests. But the gain is for the present time only, and 
 gentlemen are at liberty to choose between a small comparative advantage now, and 
 Q. double — nay, a four fold advantage in certain prospect ; and that too, at no distant 
 day. On this subject, however, gentlemen may consult their own views. I have 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 541 
 
 taken the average of three ratios instead of two, because I considered it most advantage- 
 ous to the West, and because I was anxious to advance at once, to the ultimate point 
 of concession. I will not, however, force upon gentlemen a benefit which they reject. 
 I give them a carte hlanche ; they may strike from my three ratios any one they please. 
 In this particular, the proposition-of the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh) 
 meets their ideas, and I have no hesitation myself, in adopting so much of that propo- 
 sition, in lieu of this part of my own. 
 
 In regard to the proviso, Mr. Chairman, I have but a few words to say. I have no 
 ultimatum as to the number of either House of the General Assembly. I must be per- 
 mitted to declare, however, that a Senate of twenty-four is not, in my opinion, large 
 enough for a territory so extensive as our own. If our Senators were chosen by elec- 
 tors, and those electors by the people, the number of the Senate would be a matter of 
 comparative indifference. But v-e contemplate no such regulation. The people are 
 to be alike the electors of both Houses, and it is therefore proper to establish such a 
 proportion between the representative and the electoral body, as will enable each to 
 know the other. We should place it in the power of the people to understand the 
 character, and weigh justly, tlie pretensions of tlie candidate, and the services of the 
 representative ; and surely it is of the utmost importance that the representative should 
 be well acquainted with the feelings, the wishes, and the interests of the people. This 
 will be impossible, if the Senatorial Districts be too widely extended. This principle 
 being preserved, I cheerfully surrender the details of my plan to the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have entered upon this delicate task, in the most accommodating 
 spirit. So far as I am myself concerned, there are now before us two other plans of 
 compromise, which I prefer to my own. My object is to settle this agitating contest 
 upon just and fair principles — nay, Sir, upon liberal principles, and I have gone farther 
 than I think could be properly required, in the hope of meeting the wishes of others. 
 I consider this scheme highly favorable to the West; but if gentlemen tliink other- 
 wise, I offer an alternative which will remove all just objections. If any just princi- 
 ple can be adopted, it must be manifest to all, that it ought to be tarried into both 
 Houses of the General Assembly. Upon such an organization, they would be much 
 more apt to act harmoniously, than if they were organized upon opposite and antago- 
 nist principles. I will not press this topic farther, because my present business is not 
 to argue, but to explain. I am offering a scheme for comproinise ; a scheme which I 
 humbly think, requires only to be understood, in order to be embraced. In adopting 
 it, no party can be accused of conceding more than it receives in return. It is evident 
 that a compromise which concedes only that which would have been obtained with- 
 out it, or such as does not in the least weaken the powers retained, does not deserve 
 the name. Such a compromise as will carry peace to the people, must be made by a 
 suhstanUal surrender on all sides: a surrender for the sake of peace, and one which 
 shall appear to all, to be nearly if not exactly equal. Sir, I offer such a compromise 
 to your acceptance, in the earnest hope that it will reconcile our conflicting claims, 
 allay all the excitements of this dangerous contest, give a happy issue to our arduous 
 labors, and enable us to return to our constituents with a well-founded hope, that we 
 have merited their confidence and favor. 
 
 Mr. JMoore of Rockbridge rose to say a few words in explanation of the course he 
 intended to take. When he last addressed the Committee, he had expressed his dis- 
 approbation of a proposition offered by the gentleman from Loudoun, and since pre- 
 sented in substance by tlie gentleman from Goochland, being the same as had since 
 been offered by the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Cooke.) He had then been op- 
 posed to all compromise, and had so declared himself, because he believed that the 
 East was not entitled to any representation of property as of right, nor as a protection, 
 and because he was convinced that the principle of the white basis was laid down in 
 the Bill of Rights. He had not changed his opinion: but he was wilhng to do now, 
 what he had not been willing to do then. 
 
 However satisfied he might be of the rectitude of his own opinion, he considered 
 that m.uch was due to the opinions of those who were acting with him, and something 
 also to the fears and prejudices of gentlemen on the other side: and a still weightier 
 consideration with hiiri was this ; that his constituents were willing to malve a sacrifice 
 on the altar of peace. These considerations alone induced him to vote for any com- 
 promise. He was opposed to all the projects, and if he voted for any, it would be 
 purely from a spirit of conciliation. Gentlemen had talked much of the unyielding 
 spirit of the West, themselves being very willing to yield to a compromise ; provided 
 they may fix it at a point exactly to suit themselves. If a neighbor of his had long 
 been in the unrightful possession of his farm, and he came to demand his own, the 
 wrong does not offer him a compromise, but it would be to give up all that he owed 
 him for the use of the property. A man stole his horse, and then offered to compro- 
 mise, on condition that he would give up the horse and tlie saddle to boot. Just such 
 a compromise he lield the proposition of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) 
 
542 
 
 DEBATES OE THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) and of the gentleman from 
 Culpeper, (Mr. Green.) 
 
 He was opposed to the proposition now before the Committee : when he first heard 
 it, he was astonished that the gentleman proposed to give so large a number of Sena- 
 tors to the Western District, but when he came to find, that that number was made 
 up by taking fractions from other districts, he found it to be the effect of force. He 
 had been astonished to find, that the West was to get more by the plan of the gentle- 
 man from Northampton, who makes an average of three ratios, than by that of the 
 gentleman from Chesterfield, who gives an average of two only. 
 
 Mr. Leigh explained. There was no discrepancy between them, except as to the 
 number of the House of Delegates. Mr. L. allowed a greater ratio of increase in the 
 West than in the East. This was the only difference between his plan and that of 
 Mr. Marshall. 
 
 Mr. Moore rephed, that let the difference arise as it might, both principles were 
 such as he could never assent to. There was an objection, on the face of Mr. L's 
 plan. It did not allow for an increase for the West, but it took care to provide, that 
 let that increase be what it might, a majority might still remain East of the Ridge. 
 Mr. M. now declared, that the only proposition he would ever assent to, was that of 
 the Federal numbers in the Senate, and the white basis in the House of Delegates. 
 He had voted against the mixed basis in the Senate, because he had been disposed to 
 act in a fair spirit of compromise, but farther he would never go. Nor did he mean 
 to be understood as pledging himself to go even thus far at the polls, when the Con- 
 stitution should be voted for. He wished first to know the will of his constituents. 
 The gentleman at the head of the Judiciary Committee (Mr. Marshall) had expressed 
 his desire to vote for some proposition which would meet with the acceptance of tlie 
 people of the Commonwealth. If that was the gentleman's wish, he hoped he would 
 vote for the proposition of the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Cooke ;) for he could 
 assure him that the people of the West never would adopt and never would submit 
 to any such proposition as that of the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh,) and 
 in his opinion they never ought to submit to it. The language of such a compromise 
 was, meet us on the ground where we are willing to meet, or we will break up and 
 do nothing. As to the proposition of the gentleman from Stafford (Mr. Coalter) it had 
 quite too many sine qua nons in it : more by far than he had heard of since the treaty of 
 Ghent. Some of them were sine qua nons with him. The gentleman had boasted of 
 his Scotch-Irish blood ; there was some of that blood in his own veins, and he consi- 
 deired it at least equal to that of what had been called the old Virginia stock. It was 
 blood which had been shed as freely in the cause of liberty; the two had mingled in 
 the hour of our revolution. The West was settled by the Wallaces, the Graemes, the 
 Douglasses. Every man was with Bruce, save Sir John Cummine, and he was found 
 under Edward's standard. He was sorry to see him there, and if the controversy must 
 come to be settled at Bannockburn, they would all be there, and old Kirkpatrick 
 among the rest. But it must be settled now. This question was not to be put off till 
 next October ; it must be settled now or not at all. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that he deeply lamented the course which the debate had taken, 
 and the course which it seemed about to take. From my soul, said he, do I lament it. 
 
 I listened, Mr. Chairman, with respectful attention, to the exposition made by the 
 gentleman from Northampton, of his plan of a compromise-basis of Representation 
 in the Legislative bodies. And, had he deemed it necessary to consume a far greater 
 portion of our time in the exjAanation and devclopement of his plan, I should have 
 listened, not with patience only, but with pleasure. His plan is a nnv one, and there- 
 fore requires development : it proposes an amicable adjustment of a dangerous con- 
 troversy, and therefore demands, from every lover of his country, a patient and res- 
 pectful hearing. 
 
 But, Sir, I hstened, I confess, with other feelings, with feehngs not of impatience 
 merely, but of heartfelt sorrow, to the angry declamation of the gentleman who fol- 
 lowed him. I did conceive, Sir, that the flag of truce was flying aloft — that a sus- 
 pension of hostilities had been proclaimed — I cherished the fond but delusive hope 
 that the war was at an end. The hope was indeed delusive : for, while the white flag 
 is still waving over our heads, the war has recommenced. In the midst of negocia- 
 tion the cry of battle is raised. Our passions are sought to be inflamed by angry de- 
 nunciations. We are told of blood that is to be shed, and of battles that are to be 
 fought. To be fought between whom.? To be fought between friends— countrymen- 
 brethren ! 
 
 Sir, the gentleman who has uttered these angry declamations, should have reflected 
 that even between belligerent nations the flag of truce is held sacred — that we are 
 actually engaged in negociating a compromise — and that it is not thus that we are to 
 bring our conflicting pretensions to an amicable adjustment. Deeply — deeply, do 1 
 lament tlie course he has pursued. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 543 
 
 For myself, Mr. Chairman, I did suppose, that after a three -u-eeks discussion had 
 exhausted eQI the topics wliich belong to the subject of the apportionment of Repre- 
 sentation, /uriAe/- debate of any sort was superfluous : and I did more especially sup- 
 pose, that polemical debate, while plans of compromise were under consideration, 
 would be in the highest degree pernicious. I took it for granted that the schemes of 
 compromise proposed by tlie gentlemen from Northampton and Chesterfield, would 
 be elaborately developed, fully explained, and then accepted or rejected by a silent 
 vote. I deemed it an evil augury, then, when I heard the gentleman from Chester- 
 field remark, that these plans of compromise would give birth to "a strenuous 
 debate." 
 
 What good purpose, I would ask him, can discussion occasion. The plans of com- 
 promise proposed by the gentlemen of the Middle, and Western country, by the mem- 
 ber from Northampton, and by himself, involve no element of representation which 
 is not fully understood by every member of the Committee. They involve topics 
 too, 1 must be permitted to say, which have already elicited, and whose discussion 
 will again stir up the angry passions of this excitable body. I implore the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield to content liimself with an exposition of his plan of compromise, 
 ofiered, 1 believe, with a sincere view to the adjustment of the points in dispute, and 
 to abandon, for the sake of peace, his expressed purpose of making them the subject 
 of " a strenuous debate." I would say to that gentleman, in the words of his favou- 
 rite author, 
 
 Incedis per ignes 
 
 Suppoiitos cineri doloso. 
 
 I would warn him, that there are fires concealed," under the deceitful ashes," 
 over which he rashly proposes to tread : That by pursuing the course he contemplates, 
 he will kindle again the half-extinguished flames of discord, and run the risk of frus- 
 trating the object so dear to us all. '~ I again entreat lum to abandon liis purpose of de- 
 hating the proposition before us. 
 
 Let us have no more strenuous debate," on tliis subject at least — let us express 
 by our votes, our deliberate opinion as to their merits. 
 
 If, unhappily, it siaall be found that we can agree on nothing, let us, at least, part 
 in peace. Let us not inflame our imaginations and our passions, by declaiming about 
 wars that are never to be waged, and about battles that are never to be fought. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that if the heart of the gentleman fi-om Frederick, and his own 
 could be examined, he believed they would be found more in unison than they ap- 
 peared to be. The gentleman, said Mr. L., tells us of the flag of truce that is waving 
 over our heads, and of some negociation in which we are engaged. If there be such 
 a flag, I have not yet seen its white colours. If a negociation is going on. I am not 
 among those who have been admitted to take a part in it. If there has been any 
 comparison of views, and any eflbrt towards a fair adjustment of interests, I, at least, 
 have not been admitted to the conclave : perhaps it has been, because I do not de- 
 serve it; perhaps the part I took has excluded me. When I asked that the snbject 
 might be postponed until I should have time to ofier what I considered as a fair com- 
 promise, in which something was to be yielded by both sides, I indicated the nature of 
 the compromise I meant to propose. At that very time, the proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from Goochland, (Mr. Pleasants,) vras pending. I then ofiered the flag of 
 truce, and I did not withdraw it, till the flag of truce was fired on ; tiU I was told 
 that my proposition would be rejected, without the least hesitation. It was then I 
 intimated that gentlemen might expect strenuous debate. Would to Heaven I were 
 willing to meet and to fulfil that promise; and never, while I have health to make my 
 protest heard, never will I surrender the principle, that property is to be vrholly and 
 utterly disregarded. The gentleman from E.ockbridge, teUs us of his Scotch-Irish 
 blood. That gentleman knows — yes, Sir, he well knows, that I have no prejudice 
 against it. ISobody knows tliat better than he. He has felt the efiects of it in his 
 own person. I am far from blaming the gentleman — I respect the sentiment. 
 
 But, let me tell him, that although personally there is not a man in the Common- 
 wealth or in this world that I would not as soon meet as him, yet if he brings us to 
 Bannockburn, he wiU find that Old Virginia is as httle disposed to submit to injustice 
 as Xeic Virginia. To what purpose are these threats i Does he suppose — can the 
 gentleman suppose, that Old Viroinia is to be scared whenever he shews the glittering 
 sword Does he imagine that w-e have lost all spirit, and all courage ? and are pre- 
 pared to submit to any yoke, that they propose to fasten upon us ? I put it to tlie gen- 
 tleman, knowing the persons whom he addresses, whether their spirit is not at least 
 as warm, as generous, and as true as the spirit of that gentleman's own country. 
 
 Here Mr. ^Moore explained — declaring that he had never expected or intended to 
 alarm the gentlemen of the East, but some gentleman had made a distmction between 
 the Old Virginia stock, and he presumed, the New Virginia stock; and if ground 
 like that, was to be taken, he would inform that gentleman, or any other, that they 
 
544 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of the West were prepared to take their stand : that they had no thought of yielding-, 
 and never would be driven to the wall. He had gone as far as he meant to go, and 
 never would go further. 
 
 Mr. Leigh resumed: It was I who alluded to Old Virginia, but I did so in no dis- 
 respecttul spirit. 1 thought 1 spoke in a manner highly complimentary, for 1 put the 
 New Virgmia stock on precisely the same footing as the old. I never manifested the 
 least partiality between them. 
 
 Mr. Ciiairman : Though 1 did mean to debate these propositions with all the strength ^ 
 that God had given me, never did I rise with the same embarrassment, as I have ex- 
 perienced on this occasion. I went to work with the honest purpose of compromise. 
 I met with difficulties without number, from quarters where 1 expected only support. 
 I thought I had done ample justice to the West, and at the same time had done full 
 justice to the East, and I expected the support of the East at least, if of no other part 
 of the Coniinonweaith : judge then what was my surprise and affliction, when my 
 good friend from Richmond, (Mr. Marshall,) gets up and expresses his approbation of 
 my plan, and in the very next breath, says that he will accept that of the gentleman 
 from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke). Up gets the gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Mercer,) 
 and thanks his honoured and venerable and venerated friend from Richmond, for say- 
 ing that he will vote for their proposition, and immediately after, another gentleman 
 from Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson,) made an occasion to say that his highly venerated 
 friend was his political father — that he took delight in following his lessons, and that 
 it is gratiiying to his heart to find, that his very venerable friend from Richmond, was 
 willing to take what they proposed to give, if he could not get what he preferred. 
 But, Kir, have we heard one word like a purpose to meet the generous spirit of that 
 gentleman with a like generous spirit? Any, the least intimation, that if their propo- 
 sition failed, they v/ould accede to his? Not one word. Not one word, Sir, — not a 
 syllable. To our atiections they make their appeal with confidence ; but when we in 
 return make our appeal to the teelings of Old Virginia, or New Virginia, from them, 
 we hear not one breath out of their hps. The generous and affectionate disposition 
 of the gentleman from Richmond they applaud and countenance — but tlicy — they will 
 yield nothing ! They were called upon to stand firm, and firm they stand. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson,) is willing to follow the gentle- 
 man from Richmond as his political father : in his wisdom, his virtue, his prudence, 
 his good sense, he has the most unbounded reliance upon all of it: and then he tells 
 him, it is his vote he wants, and not his advice. It is his vote he values; yet at the 
 same instant, he must have known that that gentleman had said, he would take their 
 proposition only as a last resort, and that he had recommended mine. Sir, I beg the 
 gentlemen from Loudoun, to act fairly and to follow the advice of the gentleman 
 from Richmond : but if it is not that, but his vote only that he v/ants, then let him 
 come out fairly and openly and say so. 
 
 It is not his vote onl}'^ tliat I want, I shall get that ; I want his support: I want his 
 w^eight of character : I am here feeble, and almost alone: alone, at least in this, that 
 I am the only one who think it proper to debate this ground. I want such support as 
 lie gave to the system of the County Courts ; let me have that support firmly and 
 steadily : let me have the weight of his mind : and then the propriety of that propo- 
 sition will be more perceptible to the House. 
 
 When I got to the House on Monday, I found the gentleman from Northamptom 
 upon the flom- explaining the nature of his proposition. I heard but a few of his re- 
 marks, and the few of the details that I did hear, were not sufficient to inform me of 
 the precise nature of his proposition. I did, to be sure, hear it read by the Clerk, 
 but for reasons which must be familiar to every gentleman who has ever attended to 
 the mere reading of a document where figures are concerned, I could not collect the 
 precise sense of it. I lost the opportuiuty of seeing it before it was presented, by 
 coming late to the House. Had 1 come but a few moments sooner, so as to have 
 been in the House when it was ofiered, I should have suggested to that gentleman a 
 slight modification, and not offered mine at all. That modification would have been 
 only in the details, and arising simply out of this circumstance, that after repeated 
 trials and considerations, I found when I came to district the small counties, that one 
 hundred and twenty-six, was a more convenient number for the House of Delegates, 
 than one hundred and twenty. But, I should have been contented to take all the 
 gentleman's resolutions, and I will take them now, leaving the details for future ar- 
 rangement. I will consent to withdraw mine, only submitting as an amendment to 
 his the number one hundred and twenty-six, instead of one hundred and twenty 
 members in tli^ House of Delegates. I should prefer its increase hereafter. How 
 that may meet the minds of the members from the West, I do not pretend to under- 
 stand. 
 
 I came yesterday fully determined, if the debate should be forced on the Committee, 
 that I would avow my willingness to take his proposition, and to withdraw mine. I 
 came with a confidence arising from that sanguine temperamentj with which I am 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 545 
 
 either blest or cursed, (and I redly cannot tell whether it is more a blessing or a curse,) 
 that I should be able to convince gentlemen from the West that I meant them fair : 
 that I had come in the real spirit of compromise ; but. Sir, I soon met with a damper. 
 A gentleman got up, (Mr. Coalter.) and addressing the Committee, divided as all 
 knew this Committee to be. declared that he would take the principle of the white 
 basis, if they would give him landed Sufiiage;. a vote for lease-holders; an election of 
 Governor by both Houses : an Executive Council, and the County Court system. If 
 each and all of these things were not complied with, they would find him **' firm as a 
 rock, or. in other words, as a Scotch-Irishman." Such was his own language. Did 
 the gentleman consider what he was doing Did he recollect, that any member of this 
 Committee by simply going over to the opposite party, has the absolute power at once 
 to put an end to the rights of that side to which he belongs? 1 have only to yield, 
 and the question is at an end ; and that gentleman has only to yield, and it is more 
 than at an end; for he is well known to possess that indomitable spirit, which, when 
 once he has taken a stand, leaves no hope of change. 
 
 The gentleman from Rockbridge meets the gentleman from Stafford, and is willing 
 to give him all he asks on the simple condition, that he shall take away immediately 
 all he had given. Do gentlemen remember that this Convention was called on the 
 declared principle, that the people have aright to amend the Constitution? Do they 
 tliink that no other Convention will ever be called ? When we have thrown all they 
 ask into their hands, does ctny gentleman imagine they will be content ? What is 
 there to take away the inherent right of the people to call Convention after Conven- 
 tion, till members shall have got all they demand ? Do gentlemen suppose that 
 w^hen this new Constitution shall be given, there will be no more complaints — no 
 clamours ? Do they think the new Constitution wiU be made so perfect, as to be in- 
 capable of amendment ? What is to prevent the call of a Convention at any moment, 
 but some effort by those who are able to take power into their own hands, and caU for 
 the protection of property ? 
 
 In the commencement of this debate, all the gentlemen on the other side told us 
 that an equal participation of pohtical power was the grand ftmdamental principle, to 
 depart from which, was to estabhsh an aristocracy or monarchy, and that all those 
 who did not share in that power, were at once made slaves. I will do the ofentleman 
 from Rockbridge the justice to own that his course is consistent, except in one re- 
 spect : he tells us that it is aristocracy to base the Representation in the House of 
 Delegates on any thing else than the number of free vmite citizens, and he formerly 
 told us the same thing in relation to the Senate. But now I find that aristocracy 
 may be tolerated in the Upper House, if they have democracy in the Lower. Now, 
 there is nothing in the Bill of B.ights to prevent our basing the Senate on an aristo- 
 cratical principte, and the Lower House on a democratical one. They have found 
 out, at last, that convenience may modify a general principle and adapt it to the wants 
 and circumstances of the community. Sir, I defy the gentlemen to relieve them- 
 selves from the inconsistency charged. (I do not say proved but charged) upon them, 
 on any principle in the world but this : They know that if they get the white basis 
 in the' Lower House, it is a matter of no sort of consequence what basis you adopt in 
 the Senate — none, Sir — none at all. You have no control over the Lower House, 
 and cannot have. ' When they offer this basis in the Senate, they know, perfectly, 
 that practically it will be of no avail. They will have as complete possession of the 
 Government and the property of the State, as it is possible for them to have — they 
 know it, perfectly, if all the friends of the compound basis do not. They know it, 
 and feel it. It is' only among us that the idea is to be found that there is to be any pro- 
 tection in the Senate. The Senate based on the Federal numbers is to be our protec- 
 tion. The Senate ! Are thev to orio-inate money bills ? If you give them that power, you 
 overturn at once the elemeiitary principles of Republican Government; you overturn 
 the entire theory on which the two branches have been kept separate hitherto. Gentle- 
 men, I suppose"! hardly intend this. Well, you are to have the Federal numbers in 
 the Senate and the white basis in the House of Delegates — the Senate is to be the 
 Representative of property — of slaves. What then? Do you give them the sole 
 power to reject money bills without amendment ? or do you let them amend ? What 
 then ? The Lower House sends up a money bill laying unequal exactions on pro- 
 pertv : the Senate rejects the bill: Do not all gentlemen see that by withholding 
 another money bill, which is very much needed, they can at anytime throw on the Se- 
 nate the responsibility of stopping the wheels of Government ? But they amend the bill : 
 what then? The Lower House rejects the amendments, and then the same confro- 
 versy and all the same consequences ensue. Which of these two bodies, think you, 
 wUl "prevail in such a contest? The Senate — a small body of men elected for four 
 years— or the House of Delegates, a large body of men, and elected but for a single 
 year? Has any body heard of a solitary case where the Senate has stood out and de- 
 feated the Lower House any where ? The only function of the Senate is to suspend 
 
 69 
 
54G 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the order of the Lower House, till the House shall have time to grow cool and abandon 
 their project, or till the people interpose and turn them out. 
 
 I appeal not to the examples in this country : I appeal to the history of England — 
 to the House of Commons, and the House of Lords. What proposition was ever 
 perseveringly pressed by the Commons and defeated by the other House ? I am 
 talking to gentlemen who are presumed to have studied the history and institutions of 
 the mother country, (if, I may be permitted to call it by that name ;) and I ask them to 
 produce to me a single instance. Yet, we are to expect from the Senate ample pro- 
 tection and resistance against the power of the Lower House. Sir, are there no 
 means of influence which can be brought to bear 
 
 If appointments are to be made by a joint vote of the two Houses, then the whole 
 patronage of Government will be in the House of Delegates. 
 
 If, by concurrent vote, great weight will be given to the Lower House, by its im- 
 mediate connexion with the people. I desire any gentleman to tell me the reason, 
 why members of the Senate are elected for four years, and members of the Lower 
 House for only one ? Why ? What is the motive ? You do not change the character 
 of individuals : the men are just the same. Why, then, do you allow members of 
 the Lower House a shorter term ? Because they have the tax-giving power. The 
 Lower House sends up a money-bill : if the people are dissatisfied with it, the next 
 year they turn them all out. But, if they are displeased with the Senate, how can 
 they get rid of tiieni ? That body remains firm and stable. They remain beyond 
 the reach of the people: all the evils have been accomplished and felt, and it is too 
 late to correct them. Constitute your two Houses on two different bases, and then 
 one will be the democratic House, and the other will be the aristocratic House. All 
 those who happen to have a little property, and much more those who have respect 
 for such as do own it, and who wish them to retain it in their hands ; all these will be 
 the friends of aristocracy. Then you will have formed the Lower House on a demo- 
 cratic principle, and the Upper and smaller House on an aristocratic one. Now, let 
 there be a contest between the two : and you will hear the same note that you heard 
 so long and so loud before this Convention, — the cry of aristocracy. The Senate wnll 
 immediately be condemned, as the aristocratic branch of the Legislature, and what 
 strength, what stability, I pray you, can stand against that blast? What shall re- 
 main firm when that volcano shakes the land.'' The moment that contest arises, just 
 as certainly as this Convention sits, will another Convention be called to abolish the 
 aristocratical branch in the Government. Sir, there is not the slightest hope of its 
 permanency. They begin in the outset with different principles in the construction 
 of the two Houses as if it were done on purpose to breed new monsters to excite the 
 passions of the people. 
 
 No, Sir, our whole chance is in giving some protection to property in the Lower 
 House. 
 
 Here Mr. Leigh not being prepared with some documentary details to which it 
 would be necessary to refer in farther prosecuting his argument, moved that the Com- 
 mittee rise. 
 
 It rose accordingly, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, December 3, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev, Mr. 
 Parks of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The House having again gone into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Pleasants in the 
 Chair, 
 
 Mr. Leigh resumed the argument he had suspended yesterday, and went into an 
 exposition and comparison of the several propositions, offered as grounds of compro- 
 mise. He remonstrated against the idea of considering the proposition of Mr. Cooke, 
 as any compromise at all, and dwelt on its effect, in ultimately swallowing up the 
 power of the Senate, by giving it an organization, similar to that of the Lower House, 
 and in the mean while cherishing a spirit of perpetual strife and the bitterest enmity 
 between the two branches of the Government. 
 
 He reviewed the plan proposed by Mr. Gordon, and compared it with his own, 
 shewing how Mr. G. arrived at his results, and insisting that if it should be adopted 
 as a permanent basis, in a few years the same inequality would arise, and the same 
 strviggle have to be gone over again. Mr. L. professed himself willing to take Mr. 
 Gordon's plan with one or two modifications. 
 
 He next proceeded to review Mr. Upshur's proposition, with which he was better 
 pleased, and v/hich he professed himself wilhng to adopt, if the number of the House 
 of Delegates was changed from one hundred and twenty to one hundred and twenty- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 647 
 
 six, a more convenient number in relation to the apportionment of districts ; particu- 
 larly in the Eastern parts of the State. 
 
 (Mr. Upshur expressed himself willing to make this modification.) 
 
 Mr. Leigh urged gentlemen's acceptance of the principles of this plan, and ex- 
 pressed his willingness to modify the details in any way tiiat would leave the princi- 
 ples untouched. 
 
 He then went into a full exposition of his own plan ; the general principle of which 
 was to split the difference between the white basis and the mixed basis ; with a modi- 
 fication. He explained the difference between his own and Mr. Marshall's plan, 
 arising chiefly from the fact that the latter had gone upon the Census of 1820, while 
 he had himself endeavoured to ascertain as nearly as possible the present population 
 of the State. 
 
 [To make the parallel more intelligible, we have here thrown side by side, for the 
 apportionment of the Houses, all the schemes proposed.] 
 
 Schemes. 
 
 Number of the 
 House of Dele- 
 gates. 
 
 Number of the 
 Senate. 
 
 House of 
 
 Delegates. 
 
 SE^'ATE. 
 
 1st or West- 
 ern district. 
 
 2d or Valley 
 district. 
 
 3d or Mid- 
 dle district. 
 
 4th or Tide 
 Water dis- 
 trict. 
 
 Lst district. 
 
 2d district. 
 
 3d district. 
 
 4th district. | 
 
 Mr. Cooke's, 
 
 120 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mr. Gordon's, 
 
 120 
 
 
 26 
 
 24 
 
 37 
 
 33 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mr. Upshur's, 
 
 120 
 
 
 26 
 
 22 
 
 38 
 
 34 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 Mr. Marshall's 
 
 12G 
 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 43 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mr. Leigh's, 
 
 126 
 
 
 26 
 
 23 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 He stated the considerations of justice which had induced him to give the two R.e- 
 presentatives which Mr. Marshall gave to the Middle and Tide-water districts, both 
 to the West or Alleghany district : it was intended to meet the increasing population 
 of the West. Besides, that district having twenty-six counties in it, he thought it 
 ought to have twenty-six Deleorates ; else the district became too large to admit a per- 
 sonal knowledge of "the Delegate by his constituents, and the proper degree of inter- 
 course between them. This could not be complained of by the Valley, as the great 
 Western division of the State got these votes on every question where Eastern and 
 Western interests would come in conflict. He explained it also to have been his 
 wish to have taken one more Delegate from each of the two Eastern districts, and 
 given them also to the West. He should have preferred taking both from the Tide- 
 water district ; because he thought policy required that the Middle district should be 
 strengthened as an arbiter between the two extremes, and a protector to both : to the 
 East, against unreasonable taxation of their slave propert)'-, because it held large 
 masses of that property : to the W^est, against any niggardliness of the East respect- 
 ing Internal Improvements, because it had a great interest in all reasonable and fea- 
 sible schemes for Internal Improvement. 
 
 Mr. L. then went into an explanation of the grounds on which this arrangement 
 had been opposed by the Delegates from the Eastern division, who insisted on that 
 division's having thirty-six Delegates in order that the Richmond district might have its 
 quota of five. He shewed that his scheme gave a larger proportion to the Eastern 
 division, or Tide- water country, than either Mr. Upshur's or Mr. Gordon's : thirty-five 
 out of one hundred and twenty-six, being better than thirty-two out of one-hundred 
 and twenty. (See the table above.) Mr. L. here went into a number of details as 
 to the apportionment of representatives among the various districts in the lower 
 country, concluding from the whole statement the unreasonableness of the pertinacity 
 which had diminished the advantage of his scheme, by insisting on so full a represen- 
 tation for the Richmond district. He addressed an argument to the members from 
 the Middle district, and who were in favour of Mr. Gordon's plan — shewing that they 
 would be greater gainers on his own schem.e. To shew that what he had before said, 
 as to the large counties of the West, and the propriety that one representative should 
 be allowed to each of them, was not said pro rc nata, merely to suit the case in hand, 
 but had long before been his settled and avowed opinion, Mr. Leigh read extracts 
 from a publication of his in 1824, called the Substitute, which went to the same ef- 
 fect and covered much of the ground he had lately been occupying in the general 
 debate. He then passed to some general reflections on the state of existing parties — 
 the odious nature of the struggle, the responsibility of those who had brought it on, 
 and its painful effect on his own feelings. 
 
548 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 He then went on to shew his reasons for the provision which forms a part of his 
 plan, that the Legislature might lay off eight counties to the West of the Ridge when- 
 ever their increase of population sliould justify it. He thought it hard, that this part 
 of his plan should have been censured, because he had not made this imperative upon 
 the Legislature. He professed his readiness to accommodate the representation of 
 every portion of the State to its circumstances, and his willingness to meet gentle- 
 men of the West in a fair spirit of compromise, on grounds of expediency, (but not 
 of imagined, natural or divine right to an equal representation of equal numbers). 
 He concluded the review of his plan by alluding to the variation in the population 
 of the same counties at different times, and then stated the arrangement he had made 
 to meet this by allowing the representation to increase and diminish when circum- 
 stances should require. 
 
 Mr. L. then adverted in very forcible language to the prospect which lay before the 
 Commonwealth, should all compromise be rejected. He proiessed his great horror at 
 the idea of a division of the State : of a civil war he felt no fears, because the pres- 
 sure of the General Government would prevent it, else it would be inevitable. All 
 seemed thus far to have gone on it as a conceded ground that the West never would 
 submit, but that the East would. He repelled such an idea; said the East had an al- 
 ternative, and that he should despise himself as a driveller if he could see none. He 
 knew perfectly what it was. He could not suppose the General Government would 
 refuse their assent to a division of the State, which would break the power of Vir- 
 ginia. It would not be according to their past poUcy so to refuse — and if the State 
 should be divided by the Ridge, it would be but a short time before the Valley would 
 have to take the same ground in relation to the Trans-Alleghany country, as the low- 
 lands were now taking with the entire West. 
 
 Mr. L. concluded by a reference to the natural ardour of his temper, and a profes- 
 sion of his freedom from every thing like personal resentment in matters of public 
 concern. 
 
 Mr. Tyler said, that lie was in no situation to address an argument to the Com- 
 mittee. His state of health rendered that impracticable. He had risen merely be- 
 cause of the frequent references made by the gentleman from Chesterfield, to himself 
 in common with those who represented the Richmond district. The gentleman had 
 done him the favor of submitting to his inspection, his scheme of Representation some 
 days before he submitted his proposition to the House. When he first saw it, the 
 gentleman from Chesterfield had proposed to make the whole district from the New 
 Kent line below, a tabula rasa — to obliterate the county fines, and to form one county 
 out of James City, Williamsburg, York, Warwick, and Elizabeth City. To this he 
 had objected, and the gentleman from Chesterfield had readily acquiesced in the ob- 
 jection. Charles City and New Kent were to have a Delegate each. 
 
 [Mr. Leigh said, that it was on the suggestion of Mr. Tyler, that New Kent, Charles 
 City and James City, were united as an election district — and that his plan had been 
 varied in this; that he had then intended to compose the House of Delegates of one 
 hundred and twenty-nine members ; whereas the present proposition reduced that 
 number to one hundred and twenty-six.] 
 
 Mr. Tyler resumed, that he did make the suggestion mentioned by the gentleman, 
 and he was ready to avow his reasons for it every where. The county of Charles 
 City was the county of his birth and residence ; but yet he could not consent to take 
 for it a Delegate, while one was denied to Elizabeth City, which in his view, presented 
 much stronger claims to a separate representation. The population of Elizabeth City 
 was greater than that of Charles City, and she had also a separate and distinct inter- 
 est to uphold — the pilot interest — one of great importance, and which he felt himself 
 incapable of properly representing. In truth, the General Assembly had uniformly 
 delivered a carte blanche into the hands of her Delegates on that subject. 
 
 He would frankly say, that he approved of a plan of county Representation through- 
 out the State, based upon the principles which had entered into the plan of his friend 
 from Northampton. He had in fact come to the House this morning with such a plan; 
 but that his colleagues had advised him not to present it, and he had for the present, 
 abandoned the idea of doing so. He was very unwilling to disfranchise any one of 
 the counties of his district — but he had shaken off" the influences of local attachment, 
 and was resolved to sacrifice much upon the altar of harmony and conciliation. Parga, 
 then, said he, must be surrendered to the Albanians. Be it so. Sir, if the surrender 
 can operate as a cement to our union in sentiment. He came here prepared to bind 
 up in one common bond all the people of Virginia — to preserve the integrity of the 
 State — and he should rejoice if the plan of gentlemen succeeded, although it visited 
 the counties of his district with extensive disfranchisement. His district paid an 
 amount of revenue, equal within a very small fraction, to the amount paid by all the 
 Trans-Alleghany country. The county of his birth and residence, at the hands of 
 whose inhabitants he had never received any thing but acts of unmeasured kindness 
 and confidence, was to part with its political power; but all this, nay more, he would 
 
DEBATES OF 
 
 THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 549 
 
 part with sooner than be instrumental in destroying those sentiments of brotherly 
 feeling which had heretofore bound the State together. He was Virginian throughout. 
 He acknowledcred no discrimination^between those of the ntw blood or the old blood. 
 In all his public course he had acted in reference to all Virginia,, and he should con- 
 tinue to do so — but he would ask if he could make the sacrifices he had indicated, 
 what could prevent others from harmonising ? 
 
 Before he took his seat, he would say that he knew of no yery sound objection to 
 preserving, if practicable, the count}'- system. It had worked well in his own opinion. 
 Was there any cancer which required to be cut out.' Warwick had been the theme of 
 much rhetorical display, and if disfranchised, we should destroy the most fruitful 
 source of popular eloquence; but he submitted it in all candour to gentlemen to say, 
 what evils Warwick had ever done .' From the dawn of the revolution she had always 
 been the fond advocate of free principles, and had contributed by her voice and from 
 her purse to maintain the cause of liberty. True ; she occupied a small space upon 
 the map, but surely no one would base representation upon a territ(jrial principle, 
 without reference to other considerations — she contained six hundred and eighty 
 white persons, and yet paid nearl}- one third the tax paid by fourteen thousand in the 
 populous county of Monongalia. Pie meant no invidious discriminations, but merely 
 to do justice to those who had sent him there. 
 
 He concluded by expressing the sincere v^-ish that the proposition then before the 
 House would prove to be the harbinger of an harmonious result. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that since the various propositions for a compromise-basis of Re- 
 presentation had been submitted to the House, he had, with a view to act advisedly 
 on the subject, carefully examined and compared them all, both as to their principles 
 and their results. Mj- purpose, at present, said he, is to lay some of these results be- 
 fore the Committee, and to make a few brief remarks on the principles involved in 
 three of the plans at present under consideration. I allude to those offered by the 
 members from the Middle and VVestern districts, by the member from ^Northampton, 
 and by the member from Chesterfield. In the comparison of their plans, the first dif- 
 ficulty which I encountered, arose out of the circmnstance that, in tbe number of the 
 Legislative bodies, each one varies from the rest : The plan of the members from the 
 Middle and Western districts, contemplating a House of Delegates of one hundred 
 and twenty, and a Senate of thirty-six: That of the member from Northampton, a 
 House of Delegates of one hundred and twenty, and a Senate of thirty : That of the 
 member from Chesterfield, a House of Delegates of one hundred and twenty-six, with- 
 out specifying at all the number of the Senatorial body. With a view to institute a 
 fair comparison between thern, as to practical resiilts, I reduced them all to the com- 
 mon standard of one hundred and twenty members in the House of Delegates, and 
 thirty-six in the Senate. I then applied the pri?iciple of opportionraent peculiar to each 
 plan, to a House of Delegates and a Senate containing the numbers just mentioned, 
 and found that they distributed political power to tiie people East of the Blue Ridge, 
 and to those West of it, in the following proportions : 
 
 The plans of the members fi-om the Middle and Western district, gives, in the 
 
 House of Delegates. 
 
 Members. 
 
 To tbe West, - - - - - 56 
 
 To the East, - - - - - 64 
 
 ^Majority for the East, - - - - 8 
 
 The plan of the gentleman from Chesterfield, gives, in the 
 
 House of Delegates. 
 To the West, - - - - - 48 
 
 To the East, - - - - - 72 
 
 Majority for the East, - - - - 24 
 
 The plan of the gentleman from Northampton, gives, in the 
 House of Delegates. 
 To the West, - - - " - - 48 
 
 To the East, - - - - - 72 
 
 Majority of the East, - - - - 24 
 
 The plan of the members from the Middle and Western districts, in the 
 
 Sex ATE OF THIRTY- SIX. 
 
 To the West, - - - - - 13 
 
 To the East, ■ - - - - - 23 
 
 Majority for the East, 
 
 10 
 
550 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The plan of the gentleman from Chesterfield, gives, in a 
 
 Senate of thirty-six. Members. 
 
 To the West, .... 14.4 or 14 
 
 To the East, - - - - 21 .6 or 22 
 
 Majority for the East, - - - - 8 
 The plan of the gentleman from Northampton, gives, in a 
 Senate of thirty-six. 
 
 To the West, . . . . 15.G or 16 
 
 To the East, - - - - 20.4 or 20 
 
 Majority for the East, - - - - 4 
 
 Having presented these practical results, I proceed to make a few remarks, and they 
 ehall be very brief, on the principle of apportiorwient on which these plans are formed, 
 or by which they are hereafter to be modified. That proposed by the Middle and West- 
 ern districts, requires little or no explanation. It was first proposed, in effect, by the 
 worthy member from Goochland, (Gov. Pleasants,) on the 1st ultimo, and has been 
 ever since under the view of the Committee. It proposes Federal numbers as the 
 basis of Representation in the Senate, and white population as the basis in the House 
 of Delegates. It is almost superfluous to remark, that the basis of white population 
 in the Senate, long and strenuously contended for by the members from the Middle 
 and Western districts, has been abandoned, on the principle of compromise. They 
 have also abandoned, on the same principle, their favorite number of twenty-four for 
 the Senate, and have proposed that it shall consist of thirty-six. They have added to 
 their plan a decennial assessment of all the lands in the Commonwealth subject to taxa- 
 tion, as a fit accompaniment for the decennial apportionment of Representation, which 
 they consider an essential feature in any jtist plan for the distribution of political power, 
 in a country whose population is increasing, in the different sections, in such unequal 
 a-atios. 
 
 In considering the principle of apportionment embraced in the plan of the gentle- 
 man from Northampton, the first remark to be made is, that it operates only infuturo, 
 and is not adhered to at all in the actual distribution of power made in presenti. His 
 •■act2ial distribution is an arbitrary one, and more favourable to the West than that of 
 the gentleman from Chesterfield. His principle of future apportionment, is on the 
 ■contrary, less favourable than that on which the gentleman from Chesterfield, in com- 
 mon with the Chief Justice of the United States, has founded his actual apportion- 
 ment. I understood the gentleman from Northampton to contend, that his principle 
 was more favourable to the West, than that of his friend from Chesterfield, and that 
 it derived this advantage from the circumstance of his having introduced a third ele- 
 ment into its constitution; from the circumstance of his proposing " a fair average 
 of the three ratios, viz : 1st, of vv'hite population ; 2d, of white population and taxa- 
 tion combined; and 3d, of Federal numbers;" while that of the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield proposes the average of two ratios only, that of white population, and 
 that of white population and taxation combined. In other words, he contends, that 
 the introduction of the third element, of Federal numbers, renders his average more 
 favourable to the West, than the average of the gentleman from Chesterfield. 
 
 But, in this he is clearly mistaken. A comparison of the two principles, through 
 the medium of their results, will shew that his is less favourable to the West, than that 
 of the gentleman from Chesterfield. 
 
 Take, for example, the calculation made by the Chief Justice, (and printed for the 
 use of the Committee,) of the results of his principle, which is the same with that 
 of the gentleman from Chesterfield, when applied to a House of one hundred and 
 twenty-six members. He tells you, and correctly, I doubt not, that in such a House 
 the West would be entitled. 
 
 On the basis of white population, to members . . - - 53 
 
 On the basis of Federal numbers, to ..... 40 
 
 On the average of the two, to ----- - 46^ 
 
 Now, it is conceded on all hands, that the basis of Federal numbers, and the basis 
 of white population and taxation combined, are practically, and in results, the same — 
 in other words, that either basis would give to the West forty-six members, and no 
 more, i of one hundred and twenty-six. Taking this as true, let us see how the 
 threefold average of the gentleman from Northampton will operate on the people of 
 the West. They will be entitled. 
 
 On the basis of white population, to ... - - 53 
 
 On the basis of Federal numbers, to - - " . ' " 
 
 On the basis of white population and taxation combined, again to - 40 
 
 Total, - - - - - 133 
 
 Divide by three, to attain the fair average of the three ratios," as proposed 
 
 by the gentleman from Northampton, and you have - - - 44^ 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 651 
 
 Thus, his three-fold average gives to the people of the West two and one-sixth mem- 
 bers less than the two-fold ratio of the gentleman from Chesterfield. And thus for the 
 plainest reason in the world, he introduces tico elements into his average, unfavour- 
 able to the Western people, viz : Federal numbers, and taxation and population com- 
 bined ; whereas, the gentleman from Chesterfield introduces only one unfavourable 
 element — the favourable element of white population being common to both. His 
 principle, then, of future apportionment, is worse than the principle of actual appor- 
 tionment resorted to by the gentleman from Chesterfield, as it regards the interests of 
 the Western people. His actual distribution, in ^^rcscnti, is, in regard to the Senate, 
 more- favourable to the West, being, as far as I can perceive, merely arbitrary, and not 
 in any manner conformable to his principle of future apportionment. 
 
 A word or two with regard to his plan for re-apportioning political power, at some 
 future period. Is it not a strong objection to that plan, iu the eyes of the W^estern 
 people, that its execution is left at tiie absolute discretion of an Eastern majority in 
 both of the Legislative bodies? Let us examine his third resolution. 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall have poicer to re-arrange the representation 
 in both Houses of the General Assembly, once in every j-ears, upon a fair 
 
 average of the following ratios, viz : 1st, of white population; 2d, of white T>opula- 
 tion and taxation combined; 3d, of Federal numbers." 
 
 Does he suppose, that the people of the West will regard, with a favourable eye, 
 a plan for a re-apportionment of representation — for an adaptation of the members of 
 the two Houses to their comparatively fast increasing population — which may or may 
 not be carried into execution at the will and pleasure of an Eastern majority in both 
 of the Legislative Houses.? Does he not perceive, that if his plan were carried into 
 full effect at present, and if it should be found some five or ten years hence, that from 
 the comparatively rapid increase of Western population, the two divisions of the 
 State are very unequally represented, the Western people will call loudly for a re- 
 apportionment And if the people of the East, acting on the principle which he and 
 his friends insist is the great master-spring of human actions — I mean on the princi- 
 ple of selfishness — should refuse to re-apportion representation, would not the same 
 divisions — the same sectional animosities — the same discord and confusion, be re- 
 'produced, which we are seeking to heal, and to prevent in all time to come.? In a 
 word, are not the seeds of new discord, of new dissentions, sowed in the very act by 
 which existing dissentions are sought to be removed ? Believing, as I do, that he 
 fairly and honestly seeks to provide, not only for present exigencies, but for future 
 tranquillity, I recommend these questions to his grave and considerate reflection. 
 
 In commenting on the objections to his plan for the future apportionment of repre- 
 sentation, I have anticipated some of those, v.'hich apply with equal force to that of 
 the gentleman from Chesterfield. The prospective augmentation of the power of the 
 West in the House of Delegates, is made in his plan too, to depend on the will and 
 pleasure of an overwhelming Eastern majority in both of the Legislative bodies. 
 He gives power to the Legislature to create eight Western counties, and to confer one 
 Representative in the House of Delegates, on each of these new counties. But does 
 he forget how often he has told us, and with what emphatic earnestness, that he will 
 put his rights in the power of no man, unless it be clearly the interest of that man to 
 exercise that power to his advantage — or at least with fairness ? And does he not 
 perceive, that it will be the interest of the Eastern people, or that, on his own prin- 
 ciple, of the selfishness of man, they will think it their interest, to refuse to create 
 these Western counties, and thus give additional power to the rival section of the 
 Commonwealth.'' May we not, on his own principles, entertain a well-grounded ap- 
 prehension, that the people of the East will so refuse ? And if they do, will not the 
 clamours of the West be as loud as ever Will they not again call for a Convention 
 to redress their grievances ? Is it not better, I ask him in sober seriousness, to make 
 his proposed re-apportionment imperative on the Legislative bodies, and thereby pre- 
 vent, as far as they can be prevented, all future trouble and dissention ? And I would 
 further ask him, if it would not be more just, and more satisfactory to the Western 
 people, to apply to future apportionments the same principle of the two-fold average, 
 by which he Jioio regulates the actual distribution of political power.'' If that princi- 
 ple be more just, and fair, and honourable, as I doubt not he thinks it is, will it not be 
 equally just, and fair, and honourable, in all time to come? Is he willing, that his 
 scheme of representation shall be considered a mere temporary expedient for the ad- 
 justiuent of existing differences, while it holds out the certain evidence of creating 
 future quarrels, and of embroiling the Commonwealth by a new strug-gle for power? 
 These are grave and serious questions, and worthy of his attentive colisideration. 
 
 But, is there not another feature in his scheme of future apportionment, wliich will 
 seem odious to the people of the West ? 
 
 He gives poicer to the Legislative bodies to add ticentyfovr members to the House 
 of Delegates, whenever, and from whatever quarter of the Commonwealth, it may to 
 them seem fit, provided three-fifths of each House of the Legislature shall concur in 
 
552 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the measure. These twenty-four members may be derived from the extreme JVcst, or 
 from the extreme East, or all from the East, if it shall seem good to three-fifOis of the 
 Legislative bodies. And, in this actual apportionment of the number of Representa- 
 tives in those bodies, he gives more than tlirec-jifths to the country East of the Ridge. 
 He thus gives to the Eastern people the -poicer, at the same time that he holds out to 
 them the strongest temptation, to re-establish a greater inequality of representation in 
 the House of Delegates, than has ever existed in the Commonwealth— a greater 
 inequality of representation than that which has produced all the dissentions, all the 
 turmoils, the existence of which, at present, he regards with so much horror. 
 
 In short, Sir, what would it avail, if we, the Rcqjresentatives of the people, were to 
 accept a compromise like this, which would be rejected by the unanimous voice of all 
 the vVest. 
 
 1 have thus stated, respectfully, but frankly, the objections which seem to me con- 
 clusive against the adoption of either of the proposed schemes of compromise, in 
 their present form. Believing, as I do, that they are nevertheless offered in the spirit 
 of conciliation, I submit to the gentlemen who have offered them, whether it would 
 not be advisable to attempt, at least, to render them more palatable to the great section 
 of the Commonwealth to which they are offered. 
 
 Mr. Upshur rose in reply to Mr. Cooke : 
 
 Mr. Cnairman, — i have iieard the remarks of the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. 
 Cooke) wiih peculiar pleasure. I perfectly understand, and I am fully able to appre- 
 ciate, the conciliatory temper in which they were offered. If there be no other ob- 
 jections to my scheme, than those which he has urged, 1 can remove them all so 
 easily, that 1 am not without hope of ultimately receiving his support. One con- 
 sideration there is, which would weaken this hope, if I did not know the gentleman 
 fnnn Frederick to be superior to all views of a personal kind, when opposed to his 
 sense of public duty, and to the obvious interests of the Commonwealth. The gen- 
 tleman has himself offered a plan of compromise, which has not yet been called up 
 for consideration, and which he doubtless believes to be preferable to that now before 
 us. He proposes to organize the House of Delegates upon the basis of white popula- 
 tion, and the Senate upju that of Federal numbers; increasing the Senate to thirty- 
 six, but conferring on it no additional Legislative powers, and preserving its present 
 organization in all other respects. Before I proceed to remove the objections which 
 have been urged against the measure now under consideration, permit me to remark, 
 that the scheme proposed by the gentleman from Frederick, as a substitute for it, is 
 in fact, no compromise at all. The term compromise, necessarily implies a surrender 
 of something which the party has power to retain, in consideration of something to 
 be surrendered to it in return. Now, no fact can be better estabhshed than this, that 
 froiri the coai.nencement of our Session to this hour, the advocates of the basis of 
 white population, have not been able to carry that principle for the Senate. They 
 have at all times been able to carry their principle for the House of Delegates, and 
 we, to carry ours for the Senate. What then do they offer us under the name of com- 
 promise Nothing more than this, Sir, that they will consent that we shall retain 
 what we already possess, and what thej' have not, and never have had, power to take 
 away from us. 1 will not enquire whether the terms thus offered, are fair, just and 
 equal, or not; I will not debate the terms of a compromise, where no compromise is 
 offered. It would, indeed, better deserve that name, if gentlemen would surrender 
 the Senate to us to be organized in all respects, upon our own principles, in considera- 
 tion of a similar surrender on our part, of the House of Delegates to them. Even 
 this would not be perfectly equal, but we should not hesitate to meet them on that 
 ground. This, however, they will not consent to, nor do they propose to yield any 
 thing whatever, except precisely that which v/e already possess, and that which their 
 consent will not give us either in greater degree, or in greater security. I entreat 
 gentlemen to reflect on this. We have undoubted proof that in many parts of the 
 Commonwealth, the people have taken this subject into their own hands. We are 
 but their agents, their servants, bound to obey their will. It is known that the changes 
 which have already taken place, have all been in favor of Eastern principles, and 
 such, it is but reasonable to suppose, will all future changes be. Suppose, Sir, that 
 the sceptre should pass over to us ; suppose that we should have, as we probably shall 
 have, power to carry our principle not for the Senate only, but for both Houses of the 
 General Assembly. Can gentlemen imagine that we shall be restrained from doing 
 so, by the acceptance of the proposition of the gentleman from Frederick ? Can we 
 feel under any obligation to refrain from the exercise of our power to its full extent, 
 merely because gentlemen who could not restrain us, have consented that v/e should 
 exercise that power in less degree.? What equivalent can be demanded, where 
 nothing is tendered.? How can gentlemen expect forbearance from us, after having 
 rejected all terms of compromise tendered by us, without having offered on their part, 
 any other terms which we can regard as compromise at all .? It is impossible, Sir, and 
 I entreat gentlemen to be assured, that it is impossible. If, however, gentlemen shall 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 553 
 
 meet us on the terms, offered by ourselves ; terms which demand no sacrifice of prin- 
 ciple, and which are no otherwise unequal, than as they operate more for their ad- 
 vantage than for ours; then, Sir, whatever may be the future condition of parties, we 
 shall feel under an absolute obligation to adhere to our agreement. This will certainly 
 be my own feeling, and I think I may safely affirm that it will be the feeling of all 
 those who act with me. This view of the subject certainly demands the grave con- 
 sideration of all those, who are seeking in good faith an amicable arrangement of our 
 present diff'erences. 
 
 The gentleman from Frederick has endeavored to shew, that the average of three 
 ratios, is less favorable to the West, than the average of two. So far as the present 
 time is concerned, he is undoubtedly correct, and the difference is precisely what he 
 states it to be. i distinctly admitted this in the exposition which I gave of this 
 measure, when it was first called up for consideration. Two of the ratios, in the 
 jiresent conditiun of the country, are favorable to the East, and of course, the combi- 
 nation of those two, with another less favorable to them, must produce a present re- 
 sult correspondently favorable. But it is for gentlemen to choose between the pre- 
 sent hour, and all future time. One thing is certain. If the West be, as it is ad- 
 mitted to be, acquiring more rapidly than the East, all the elements of pohtical power, 
 precisely in proportion as you multiply those elements, will you accelerate their pro- 
 gress and hasten the period at which their power will preponderate. Tliis, however, 
 is a topic which I have no disposition to press. If the arguments which I have al- 
 ready offered, have failed to convince, I have nothing now to add to them. I repeat, 
 that I will not be instrumental in forcing a benefit upon reluctant minds. Gentle- 
 men are at perfect liberty to carve for themselves. My three ratios are before them, 
 and I do in my conscience believe that it is the peculiar interest of the West, to re- 
 tain every one of them. But if those for whose benefit alone this combination was 
 designed, are dissatisfied with it, I will unite with tliem in erasing from the ratios, 
 any one which may be most obno.xious to them. 
 
 The gentleman from Frederick is undoubtedly mistaken in supposing, tliat the 
 scheme of the gentleman from Chesterfield (Mr. Leigh) is more favorable to the 
 West than my own. The difference between them, resulting from the operation of 
 three ratios instead of two, upon future apportionm.ents of Representation. I have al- 
 ready explained. There is an equall}^ obvious difference, if we consider the two 
 s-chemes only with reference to the distribution of power at the present time. It is 
 true that in the House of Delegates, the scheme of the gentleman from Cheste^eld 
 gives to the West, two members and a fraction more than my own 5 that is, there is 
 a difference of about one sixtieth part of that House, in favor of tlie scheme of the 
 gentleman from Chesterfield. But his principle, applied to the Senate, gives to the 
 West four members less than mine : that is, nearly one eighth of that House in 
 favor of my scheme. The gentleman from Frederick would not have failed to 
 discover this, had he apphed the principle of the gentleman from Chesterfield to 
 the Senate. He is equally mistaken in supposing that my arrangement of the Senate 
 is merely arbitrary, and not according to my own principle. It is true that the re- 
 sults do not precisely illustrate the principle, but the reason of tliis was fully explained 
 by me, in the opening of this subject a da\'' or two ago. In carrying out my calcu- 
 lations, I found a fraction of half a member in each of the four great districts, and in 
 every instance, not in the Senate only, but in the House of Delegates also, the frac- 
 tions were taken from the East and given to the West. Hence it is, that thirteen 
 Senators are assigned to the two districts West of the Ridge, instead of twelve, which 
 is their just number. This arrangement, sugcrested by a desire to reconcile the West 
 to this reasonable plan of compromise, and prompted by the most friendly feeling to- 
 wards that country, presents the onlj' instance, or the only reason for a departure 
 from my strict principle in its application to practice. 
 
 I have but one other remark to make upon this branch of the subject. It has ap- 
 peared to some gentlemen, too plain for argument, — manifest upon the very face of 
 my proposition, that it must be less favorable to them than that of the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield, since I have taken tico ratios favorable to the East, and he only one. 
 Gentlemen fall into this mistake, by forgetting the precise character of the object we 
 are pursuing. We are engaged in an arithmetical process, by which we propose to 
 arrive at an average of certain given quantities. In proportion, therefore, as you mul- 
 tiply those quantities, you necessarily increase your divisor . hxxi you do not necessarily 
 change your quotient. Let me illustrate by an example. Suppose that each of the 
 three ratios before us is equal to three ; then, to obtain the average of two of them, you 
 divide their sum, which is six, by two, and your quotient is three. To obtain the 
 average of all of them, you divide their sum, which is nine, by three, and your quo- 
 tient here also, is three. Thus if the ratios before us were all precisely equal, it is 
 evident that the result, with reference to the present distribution of power, would be 
 precisely the same, whether the average were taken of two, or of three of those ra- 
 tios. In point of fact, however, they are not equal. Population and taxation com- 
 
 70 
 
554 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 bined, give very nearly the same result with Federal numbers, and these two may 
 therefore be assumed as equal. But, white population is much more favorable to the 
 West tlian either of the other ratios j and the dilFerence in the averages, is precisely 
 the loss sustained in this largest ratio, by taking three as the divisor instead of two. 
 The mode of operation and tiie reason of the result, must be manifest to every arith- 
 metician. 
 
 The gentleman from Frederick urges a still farther objection to my scheme, founded 
 on the fact that it leaves it to the discretion of the Legislature, whether to re-arrange 
 the Representation at any future time, or not; and he argues, that as the majority irs 
 the Legislature must be with the East, according to any plan of present apportion- 
 ment, it will be in the power of that majority, by refusing to re-apportion, to with- 
 hold forever from the "West, all benefit of the rule. It did not enter into my contem- 
 plation, Sir, that any future Legislature of Virginia could so far misunderstand the 
 obvious meaning of the expression, as to be guilty of such gross injustice. In adopt- 
 ing the particular pliraseology before you, 1 had no object in view but this. It oc- 
 curred to me as probable, nay, almost certain, — that it would be found, at some future 
 period designated for re-apportionment of Representation, — that no change had oc- 
 curred in the relative condition of the several parts of the Commonwealth, to render 
 such re-apportionment necessary. In this view of the subject and not doubting that 
 the Legislature would be disposed at all times, and in good faith, to carry the Consti- 
 tution into effect, according to its true intent and meaning, I saw some convenience 
 and no danger, in trusting the subject to Legislative discretion. I have no difhculty, 
 however, in conforming to the wishes of other gentlemen in this respect. I will 
 therefore, Sir, with the leave of the Committee, strike out the words, " have power 
 to," so as to leave it mandatory upon the Legislature to re-apportion the Representa- 
 tion at stated periods. 
 
 I have thus endeavored, Sir, by a candid exposition of my plan, to obviate all the 
 objections of the gentleman from Frederick. It would rejoice me to believe, that he 
 is reconciled, if not convinced, and that we may yet hope for his co-operation in set- 
 tling, upon the simple plan before you, this distressing and oppressive contest. It 
 cannot be doubted, that the compromise I have offered is in substance and in truth, a 
 compromise of principle, and being so, we must submit to the consequences, let them 
 fall as they may. If, in the application of a just principle, an inequality of political 
 power shall be the result, it will only prove that the party which enjoys the supe- 
 riority, ought to enjoy it, and the opposing party, cannot, of course, have any good 
 reason to complain. In point of fact, however, the practical majority of the East 
 will be very small. The line of separation between parties, is not a geographical, but 
 a political line. Many counties lying immediately under the Eastern side of the 
 Blue Ridge, are essentially Western in their interests, and consequently, in their po- 
 litical views. These, therefore, must be counted to the West, as to all practical pur- 
 poses, and thus it is, that the apparent superiority of the East dwindles into nothing, 
 and cannot be seriously felt in the operations of Government. 
 
 But, Sir, all enquiries of this sort, are unworthy of the occasion. I again entreat 
 gentlemen not to confine their views to present results. Let us venture to hope that 
 we are laboring for distant times, and let us endeavor to accommodate our systems to 
 all the probable changes which those times will produce. I cannot sufficiently com- 
 mend the spirit which characterized the remarks of my honorable friend from Charles 
 City, (Mr. Tyler.) Like him, I am laboring for all Virginia, and dear to me as is the 
 hope that my own native county may have her separate Representation under the 
 new Constitution, I will not permit that, nor any other consideration merely local 
 or temporary, to oppose any obstacle to a just, fair, and wise arrangement of this per- 
 plexing subject. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge addressed the Committee as follows : 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — I certainly did not expect to say one word more on the basis of 
 Representation. I had supposed until yesterday, that every member considered the 
 argument as at an end, and all that remained was to give our votes finally. After a 
 session of nine weeks, we ought, if ever, to have made up our minds, so far as to pre- 
 clude all hope of altering them by farther discussion. 
 
 I will ask indulgence a few minutes. The gentleman from Northampton says, the 
 white basis in the House of Delegates is in the power of the West, and the Federal 
 basis in the Senate in the power of the East. This, he says, has been the case for a 
 long time. He therefore concludes, that acceding to these bases respectively, would 
 be no compromise. The gentleman is mistaken. I had supposed every member 
 knew, that although forty-nine members voted for our basis in the Lower House, yet 
 several of them only did so with a view to the Senate. They are not committed — 
 you all know they are not. 
 
 If they were committed, what would be the situation of parties in the Convention? 
 We have a majority as to one Plouse, and you as to the other. We cannot adopt an 
 amendment on our principles without your consent, nor can you on your principles 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 655 
 
 without ours. Neither of us can stir without the other ; we cannot move one step 
 without compromise. Tiiis view of our situation has induced me, (I only speak for my- 
 self,) to accede to the Federal number in the Senate, on securing the white basis in the 
 Lower House. When I agree, even to this, I do not certainly know that my constit- 
 uents would accept a Constitution founded on that agreement. But I do know, they 
 never will accept one in the least degree acknowledging a mixed basis in the House 
 of Delegates. It would be idle to offer one to them. They must and would reject it. 
 
 We are warned of the awful consequences of parting, without coming to some agree- 
 ment. This warning voice sounds both ways. The argument is a two-edged sword ; 
 it cuts both ways, and it behooves us to reflect well on whose shoulders the responsi- 
 bility will rest. It will not be taken amiss if I should say, that in every proposition 
 for accommodating our differences, except that submitted by the gentleman from Fre- 
 derick, there is one district which is to furnish the sacrifice required for peace. 1 need 
 not say, that is the district W^est of the Alleghany ; and I will, therefore, endeavour 
 to imitate the candour and decision of others. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield, in his first argument on the basis, declared that 
 a Government in this State, founded on the right of numbers of white population, 
 would be such a cruel, intolerable, and insupportable tyranny, as no man ever did, 
 could or would submit to. About seventy hours since, and again to-day, that gentle- 
 man has repeated this declaration. Sach, then, is the deliberate judgment of tliat gen- 
 tleman. The gentleman from Charlotte (Mr. Randolph,) with equal candour declared 
 yesterday, that any Constitution, which would establish in the House of Delegates 
 the basis of free white numbers, would be a Jacobinical Government, to which he ne- 
 ver could submit. Those gentlemen occupy, and deservedly, a large space in this 
 House, and in public opinion. On this ground, the latter genllem.an planted his staff, 
 and nailed his flag. As I view things, gentlemen have a right to maintain as they 
 do, that our doctrines tend to anarchy, despotism, or Jacobinism, and to support their 
 opinions by fair argument; in doing so, they give no cause of personal offence. On 
 the other hand, I have a right to maintain that their doctrines go to build up an oli- 
 garchy of weahh. Here, then, we stand on equal ground. In the same spirit of 
 frankness, that animates the gentleman from Charlotte, I now say, and for the last 
 time, that yielding us the free white basis in the House of Delegates, with a new ap- 
 portionment of Representation after the next Census, and periodical enumerations and 
 apportionments, I will yield the Federal number in the Senate. Further than this I 
 will never go, and here I nail my flag. 
 What then is to be done ^ 
 
 There are three possible results to our deliberations. One of these is certain. The 
 Srst, and perhaps the most probable, is an adjournment vrithout doing any thing. The 
 second, an agreement by the West to join the East, in forming a Constitution, which 
 the people must reject. The third, and that which I think will happen, if the first 
 does not, that the members from the East will act for themselves, and tender to the 
 people what shall seem to them most advisable. 
 
 Of these three results, the first would tend to the least present commotion. We 
 would return to our subjection under the present Government. We would labour for 
 a while under the inequality of which we complain, and which we came here to re- 
 move. This inequality would be the less odious, as the principles on which it rests, 
 are not of your own assumption. Your power came to you by descent, and is the re- 
 sult of accidental and fortuitous circumstances, of changes, of settlement, population 
 and wealth. The second result, I cannot contemplate without dismay. May I ask 
 my Western brethren, who of them feels that he has power from his constituents 
 to adopt in both Houses, any mixed basis whatever ? Do we not all know that such a 
 basis would not, ought not, and could not be accepted ? And surely, the rejection of 
 our work by our own constituents, would leave the public mind more exasperated 
 than we are now prepared to anticipate. Should gentlemen from the East do what 
 they have power to do, the responsibility will be their own. It is vain to conceal it; 
 they have power to do in this Convention what they please, unless some of them 
 should change their minds. Let them throw out for consideration, a Constitution 
 formed by themselves — they will consecrate their own power, and their unequal rule 
 will be the result of their own conduct — of principles assumed axid enforced, by them- 
 selves, for which they will be responsible. 
 
 The most favorable proposition for the West, is that of the gentleman from Rich- 
 mond (Chief Justice Marshall.) The ratio of Representation proposed by him, is to 
 be composed of all free whites, and three-tenths of all people of colour, bond and free. 
 I request gentlemen from the West to look at this. The whole slave population, is 
 four hundred and forty-eight thousand two hundred and ninet3^-four; of this, a balance 
 of three hundred and forty-six thousand eight hundred and seventy-three, is owned 
 in the East. Add to this, the balance of free people of colour in the East, which is 
 twenty-two thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, and they have a balance of co- 
 loured population, bond and free, in the East, of three hundred and seventy-five thou- 
 
556 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 sand seven hundred and fifty-nine; three-tenths of which, it is proposed to add to the 
 Eastern white population, which, by adding to it the present majority of white inha- 
 bitants, of forty-three thousand two hundred and twenty, will give the East a majority 
 of one hundred and fifty-five thousand nine hundred and forty-five j placing us nearly 
 back to our condition in 1790. 
 
 Who of us can venture to propose such a scheme to our constituents? 
 In these remarks, I assume the estimate of the Auditor, as sufficiently accurate for 
 the present purpose — and if not, whose fault is it, that this Convention is not in pos- 
 session of an official table of population ? The fault is not that of the West, but of a 
 public body not now existing, which forced us here on the Census of 1810, and pur- 
 posely kept from our eyes a true return of the present population. 
 
 Unless gentlemen accept our peace-oftering — unless they will accept the one basis 
 in the Senate, and yield our claim in the other House, I can see no good as likely to 
 result from our labours. We shall do nothing, but continue to exasperate each other. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, it was with unfeigned satisfaction, and equally unfeigned sur- 
 prise, he perceived that the gentleman who had just taken his seat had so far recon- 
 ciled himself to the good old Constitution, with all the burdens and privations it im- 
 posed, and against which he had waged an unrelenting war from the first day the 
 Convention had been sitting until now : And he rose to express his unfeigned satisfac- 
 tion, and equal surprise that he, the gentleman, had made the discovery that he could 
 live comfortably and happily under this old Constitution; all the clamour which had 
 been raised against it to the contrary notwithstanding. 
 
 A little while ago, and the Constitution, in the eyes of that gentleman, was one 
 mass of political deformity, but now it seemed that the gentleman on a nearer ap- 
 proach had inverted his glass, and had discovered that its features, if not perfectly 
 beautiful, were at least such as to constitute it a companion which any man might 
 feel himself happy and honoured to live with. 
 
 But, the main object for which he liad risen, was to assure the gentleman frona 
 Brooke, for whose conciliatory manner, observed throughout the entire course of this 
 debate, he offered him his most sincere and respectful acknowledgments, that if there 
 was one member on that side of the House, who, while he protested against having a 
 Constitution forced down their throats by a bare majority, would undertake to do that 
 to others which he would not suffer others to do to him, such a man should never 
 have his vote : so far as depended upon him, no other Constitution than that which 
 they had all lived happily under, for so long a course of time, should be imposed 
 upon the gentleman and his constituents. 
 
 He would add one word, as to the ultbnatttm for which the gentleman eontended, 
 viz : the basis of white population exclusively in one branch of the Legislature and 
 the Federal number in the other. He declared with a sincerity which his vote would 
 be found to vouch for, that if the gentleman should succeed in iimposing on thena 
 the hard and stern condition of submitting to so intolerable a yoke in the LoweT 
 House, he would yield to him the same principle in the other, and let both branches 
 be based on the white population alone. He should do so by preference. He would 
 prefer having both branches on the white basis, to the Manichoean plan, of a 
 good and an evil principle, in which, as in the Maiiichoean system, the evil principle 
 was the stronger, and was always in the end sure to prevail. To adopt such 
 a plan could be doing nothing but sowing the seeds of interminable discord, which 
 must lead to consequences that all could see. He would vote with the gentleman so 
 soon as he should have vanquished them. He would then go for the whole of what 
 he contended for, by preference. He would sooner throw himself upon the genero- 
 sity, he might almost say, the charity of the West, than take a fallacious security — 
 not the Balkan — but a mound of sand — something with which to cheat his constitu- 
 ents, crying to them peace, peace, when there was no peace, and never could be any. 
 
 From the days of Aristotle till that day, no such Government had ever been heard 
 of— it was a monster. Two branches of the Legislature representing the same people^ 
 elected by the same voters, to manage the same interests, to be pitted against each 
 other like two game cocks, to tear and wound each other till one or the other should 
 be forced to submit ; that was the Government proposed for Virginia for all time to 
 come. A Government of numbers in opposition to property was Jacobinism, rank 
 Jacobinism. He was about to say pure Jacobinism — but nothing pure; nothing de- 
 fecated could belong to the thing. It was to be an arraying of numbers against pro- 
 perty, and then they would soon hear the old cry, " peace to the cottage, war to the 
 palace," and when the Convention should have established this Jacobinical principle, 
 it was not a few despised nobles— not a few hated priests, odious at once for their hy- 
 pocricy and their rapacity, no— it was the body of freeholders, the substantial yeo- 
 manry of the Commonwealth, into whose mouth they were to put that bridle, and 
 into whose nose they would put that hook. But they never could do it : by him and 
 his friends they never should do it : they ought not — they could not consent to it. 
 And aa he had said once before, to make the attempt would only be to sound the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 5^7 
 
 ttumpet of civil war. It might, at first, be a weaponless warfare, a war of words ; 
 but it would pour into the cup of existence an animosity so deep and deadly ; it would 
 fix in the bosoms of the injured a wound so rankling and remediless; that nothing 
 short of the plenary power of the Federal Government would be able to keep Vir- 
 ginia together. Tliere was another consideration which he had intended to reserve 
 for an after time — but he would submit it now — to those who were opposed to the un- 
 constitutional ;. he was about to say, to the arbitrary usurpations of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment — not to trust their objections to this Convention or to the Constitution which 
 the Convention might finally adopt, to be submitted to their masters at "Washington 
 to have their imprimatur. He foresaw if the basis of white population should be 
 agreed to for the Lower House, and the basis of the Federal number for the Senate, 
 when it came to be debated in Congress whether such a form of Government was re- 
 publican or not (for the General Government was bound to guaranty to every State 
 in the Union a republican form of Government,) it was easy to see what would be 
 the course of such a debate in the future House of Representatives and Senate, 
 
 But, his purpose had not been to enter into the question, but to assure the gentle- 
 man from Brooke that he should be the last man in the world to mete out to him and 
 to his friends in the West the hard measure which that gentleman until that day liad 
 with relentless and inexorable determination endeavoured to mete out to him and his 
 friends. What had produced so great a change, he did not pretend to know: it was 
 sufficient for him to mark it and to note it. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that his sentiments had undergone no change whatever, 
 and if 
 
 [Here 3Jr. Ptandolph interposed to explain : It was to the gentleman's preference 
 for the existing Government, and his willingness to adjourn re infecta and sine die, 
 that he had alluded.] 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that he owed to the Committee an explanation of that. He 
 had said that three results Vvere before them. One was, that the whole of the Wes- 
 tern counties would unanimously go against the new Constitution, and then the Gov- 
 ernment would continue as it now stood. This he should view as a grievance. But 
 the Constitution by which the Eastern majority now governed the State, was one 
 which they made not — it came into their hands in a fair, honest, and legitimate man- 
 ner. But a Government they should create by the vote of a majority of this Con- 
 vention, would be their own work ; its oppression would be their own act and deed, 
 and for that reason the people of the West would be less satisfied with such a Con- 
 stitution than with that which now existed. 
 
 It ought not to be inferred that his views of the existing Constitution were at all 
 changed, or that he was in the least degree better satisfied with it because he prefer- 
 red it to a worse Constitution imposed b}^ the members from the East. He would 
 submit to it, because it was tiie established Government of the State : and so he 
 should to any other, however objectionable in his view, which the people should en- 
 join. His loyalty would be the same, though his personal satisfaction might be less. But 
 suppose, as a third result, that a majority of this House should send out a Constitu- 
 tion containing the principle of Federal numbers in both branches of the Legislature, 
 and that the people should reject it : then, the excitement and dissatisfaction would be 
 far greater than if the Convention should break up, having done notliing. 
 
 Mr. Coalter now rose and said: 
 
 I had, in a msual conversauon said, that I for one, would yield much in order to 
 save to the country our ancient Right of Suffrage, and other great interests, deemed 
 by me, essential to the preservation of the Commonwealth. And if this could be ef- 
 fected, I would be disposed, for that purpose, to accept the basis of Federal numbers 
 in the Senate. I was afterwards informed that this casual obscrzation had been stated, 
 and was counted on, so far as one vote wc-nt, in relation to certain measures about to 
 be proposed. I consequently considered it due to myself and to those gentlemen, to 
 explain, distinctly, the extent to which, at that time, 1 had been disposed to go : at the 
 same time apprising them, that propositions were now before us, which I might prefer. 
 
 jMy siiie qua non, which have been received with so little apparent respect by the 
 member from Rockbridge, were merely carrying into detail, on my part, what I had 
 always asked to be favoured with on the part of others, as far as possible ; that is to 
 say, a view of the ichole bond. I wanted, as to all essential jioints, to see tlie quid for 
 the quo. I find, though, that this can't be done ; and I beg pardon of both sides for 
 the attempt. I fear, greatly fear, from the reception of my simple remarks — you may 
 take the word simple in either sense — that no proposition, which one party may think 
 reasonable, will be received by the other, except under an idea that some insult is 
 intended. 
 
 I am now fearful too, that nothing can stay the hand of innovation except a steady 
 vote. Nay, I am more than fearful, that if the gentlemen from the West could, by 
 one single vote, fix the white basis in both Houses, and could carry every scheme of in- 
 novation which they have proposed, by a similar vote, they would think they were 
 doing God's service^ by giving such a Constitution to Virginia. 
 
558 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 I have, therefore, given all I have said, or thought on that subject, to the idle winds. 
 
 I do this now, with the less regret, because I find that my notions on that subject 
 are entirely unsatisfactory, at this time, and I have no doubt will so continue, to both 
 sides of the House. 
 
 I do this, too, with still less regret, because I am now perfectly confirmed, in what I 
 had before been satisfied of, that the Federal basis is the true and just basis on which 
 the representation of the country ought to be established . 
 
 I ought not to darken counsel, by saying one word on this subject, after the argu- 
 ment of the member from Orange, (Mr. Madison.) That argument must and will 
 carry conviction to the mind of every cool-refiecting man. It ought to be the tabula 
 in nuufragio, in the hands of every Virginia politician on this subject. It will be re- 
 collected, that I was not in the House to hear the arguments on this subject formerly 
 delivered — nor have I seen them in print. 
 
 The combined ratio, too, is not so plain, and so easily understood as the Federal. 
 
 But I beg to be permitted to say, that this has always appeared to me to be a ques- 
 tion about which there ought to be no division here. We have two Governments and 
 two Constitutions ; and we ought not to put them at war with each other. The same 
 reason for the provision in the one applies to the other. This is not denied, so far as 
 I have heard ; but the one was a compact, and it is the bond. Let us be careful how 
 we take from that bond its just basis, so ably maintained in the argument I have al- 
 luded to. Virginia may again be called upon to stand in the breath, and on this very 
 subject, a Daniel may come to judgment, if we stand purely on the bond. We will 
 then want that panoply and shield of justice, which has always covered the breast of 
 Virginia in her hour of need. 
 
 The lower country then, in my opinion, are justly entitled to that as the basis in 
 both Houses. They agree though to yield it so far, according to my understanding 
 of the ])rinciple proposed in the resolutions, as to give to the people West of the Al- 
 leghany three or four members, and to the Valley district two or three members more 
 than they would be entitled to on that basis 5 and take from the district between the 
 Blue Ridge and Tide-water, three or four, and from the district below the head of 
 Tide-water, two or three, to which they would be entitled, according to that principle, 
 -Now, when we recollect that, in counting votes, five or seven are taken from one side 
 :and given to the other, I think it must be manifest, that if this sacrifice, for the 
 sake of peace, is not enough, it is in vain to offer any thing short of total surrender. 
 
 These calculations do not embrace the gain on one side, and loss on the other, in 
 the Senate. And should they not be minutely accurate in other respects ; yet I un- 
 derstood the principle on which the resolutions are founded must work an effect of 
 this kind ; and that to all time, according to the modification now indicated. 
 
 Assuming then, that the Federal number is the correct basis, this plain statement 
 aiust satisfy every one of the generosity of this offer for a compromise. 
 
 The people of the West will only have to reconcile themselves to the propriety of 
 that basis to be satisfied, that ample justice has been done them. The people here, 
 who most conscientiously believe that this basis is just, and none more so than myself, 
 have to reconcile to themselves the loss of these five or seven members more or less, 
 to which they are entitled, and which may make a difference of ten or fourteen on a 
 vote and to a probable future loss, in the same proportion, when the number of mem- 
 bers is added to ; to say nothing of a similar loss in the Senate. 
 
 They must find their consolation in this ; that it was the price of peace and 
 harmony. 
 
 I feel at present perfectly convinced, that under existing circumstances, this measure, 
 so plain, and so easily understood by every one, will reconcile more people to it, on 
 all sides of the question and country, than any other that it is now in our power to 
 adopt. 
 
 The principle of the resolution, therefore, has my hearty approbation and cordial 
 support. 
 
 Gentlemen have planted their standard — I now plant mine firmly in lower Virginia, 
 I think she has law, justice and sound policy in her favor, and much of the spirit of 
 conciliation. 
 
 Mr. Stanard, after recognizing with gratification the liberal spirit in which Mr. 
 Cooke's remarks had been presented, went into a lengthy argument to shew, that the 
 doctrine of the white population, being a fair exponent of the number of qualified 
 voters, was false and delusive. Going on the basis of taxable inhabitants, the propor- 
 tions of representation between the East and West, would be fifty Representatives for 
 the West, and seventy for the East ; whereas Mr. Cooke gave to the West fifty-six, 
 and to the East sixty-four. Taxation gave the East a majority of twenty ; Numbers, 
 a majority of only eight. Yet, he would not take taxation as a rule, because the re- 
 turns were liable to fraudulent misrepresentation, and taxation itself was under the 
 control of the Legislature : but he would combine it with population and Federal 
 number — the result would coincide almost exactly with that which would follow from 
 
DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION'. 
 
 550 
 
 taking voters only. He urged the ground of principle as leading to the same basis of 
 K-epresentation in both Houses, and exposed the inconsistency of pleading for one 
 House on the around of principle, and yet surrendering the other, though the prin- 
 ciple applied equally to both. He concluded by insisting; that a plan like that of Mr. 
 Cooke did not deserve to be considered as a compromise. In the course of his Speech, 
 Mr. S. referred to the tabular statement below. 
 
 Distribution of representation in the House of Delegates, consisting of one hun- 
 dred and twenty members, and in a Senate of twenty-four members, upon the basis 
 of white population exclusively, taking as the rule the Auditor's estimate of the po- 
 pulation of 18*29 ; and shewing the number of land-holders, and of those assessed to 
 the payment of property taxes, which would be necessary to give one Representative 
 in each House in the four great districts of the State ; and the average amount of 
 direct and indirect taxes assessed upon, and paid bv, the constituents of each member 
 in lS-28 : 
 
 Districts. 
 
 
 
 ^ ?. ~ 
 
 1 • 
 
 
 
 .. 
 
 _c J: 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 4 ^ ^ 
 
 
 Western, 
 Vallev, 
 Middle, 
 Tide-Water, 
 
 1S13S4 
 138132 
 1972-22 
 165523 
 
 20946 
 15114 
 23744 
 28052 
 
 23323 
 ia559 
 30419 
 25724 
 
 31888 
 24295 
 34688 
 29129 
 
 6311 
 4859 
 5937 
 5825 
 
 655 
 622 
 783 
 963 
 
 3280 
 3110 
 3915 
 4815 
 
 731 
 681 
 876 
 883 
 
 3655 
 3405 
 4380 
 4415 
 
 S 952 
 2168 
 4092 
 4051 
 
 270 
 402 
 639 
 13&4 
 
 4660 
 10840 
 20460 
 20255 
 
 laSOj 11159 
 2010 2344 
 319514:331 
 6820,4958 
 
 .5295 
 11720 
 •21655 
 24790 
 
 
 
 92856 
 
 9602.5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Representation according to land-holders. Representation on tax-payers on personal propertii. 
 
 West, - - - - 46,816 West, ______ "49,315 
 
 East, - - - - 73,184 East, 70,785 
 
 Mr. Gordon now moved to amend the resolution, by substituting the following .■■ 
 Resolved, That the representation in the Senate and House of ^Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " There shall be thirteen Senators West of the Blue Ridge mountains, and nine- 
 teen East of those mountains. 
 
 Tiiere shall be in the House of Delegates one hundred and twenty-six members: 
 of whom, twenty-nine shall be elected from the district West of the Alleorhany moun- 
 tains ; twenty-four from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge ; thirty- 
 nine from the Blue Ridge to the head of tide-water; and thirty -four thence below.'* 
 
 He wished to avoid the diiScult question of future apportionments, thinking it 
 better to leave that wholly unprovided for, than to adopt any plan that would be re- 
 voltinsr to any larcre portion of the State. 
 
 On Motion of Mr. Leigh, the Committee rose. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. Gordon was ordered to be printed; and then the House 
 adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, December 4, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Sykes of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. [Nicholas, from the Committee appointed to enquire on the subject of a place 
 of meeting for the Convention, after the meeting of the Legislature, made the fol- 
 lowing report : 
 
 The Committee appointed to enquire into the expediency of providing other ac- 
 commodations for the Convention, have performed that service, and submit the fol- 
 lowing report : 
 
 It is'supposed, that as the Legislature will meet on Monday, it will not be practica- 
 ble for the Convention to continue their sittings in the Hall of the House of Dele- 
 gates. Acting under this impression, the Committee next turned its attention to 
 various buildings in the City, but soon found that no other building would afford the 
 necessary accommodation, but some one of the Churches in this City. Havincr 
 examined the New Presbyterian Church on F street, the Committee are of opinioif, 
 that it is well suited to the object in view. Lender this impression, tliey made appli- 
 
560 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 cation to the Rev. Mr. Armstrong, and through him, to the Trustees of the Church; 
 to ascertain whether it could be obtained. The Committee beg leave to state, that 
 their application was received in a gratifying manner ; and that tJie Trustees, as well 
 as the Fastor of the Church, evinced the greatest promptitude and liberality, in af- 
 fording the Convention any accommodation in their power. The subject was referred 
 to a Committee of the Trustees of the Church, who, in a meeting "with this Com- 
 mittee, expressed their willingness, that the Convention should have the use of their 
 Church; but, with an understanding, that all the lower floor of the Church be appro- 
 priated to the use of the Convention, of ladies, and such persons as the President, 
 under the established rules, may admit to seats on the first floor ; the galleries, which 
 are large and commodious, to be appropriated to visitors generally. The above ar- 
 rangement the Trustees supposed to be calculated to guard the Church against injury ; 
 but, as the building is recently finished at a great expense to the congregation, the 
 Trustees expect, tiiat in case it sustain injury, it shall be returned by the Conven- 
 tion, or under its authority, in as good a condition as it may be received by it. The 
 Trustees are also desirous that hucksters, and other venders, should not be admitted 
 into the Church, or the anti-chamber to the same, for the purpose of selling or dis- 
 posing of the articles in which they deal. 
 
 The Committee submit to the Convention, the propriety of adopting the following 
 resolutions: 
 
 1. That the Convention agree to receive the use of the Presbyterian Church on F 
 street, upon the terms stated in the report of their Committee, to have been proposed 
 by the Trustees of said Church. 
 
 2. That the Secretary cause to be procured, and placed in the Presbyterian Church 
 on F street, a suitable seat for the President, and such other fixtures as are necessary 
 for the accommodation of the Convention. 
 
 A conversation ensued between Messrs. Nicholas, Mason, Doddridge, Goode, and 
 Claytor, which resulted in laying the report for the present upon the table. — Ayes 47, 
 Noes 44. 
 
 The Convention then went again into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Stanard in 
 the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Gordon withdrew his amendment, and the question then being on the first 
 resolution in the scheme proposed by Mr. Upshur, 
 
 Mr. Green suggested, that the question pending was not on the adoption of the 
 clause, but on a motion to strike out the first word " Resolved." 
 
 The Chair reminded Mr. Green, that this, though it had been talked of in the dis- 
 cussion upon order, had not been expressly moved. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, expressing it to be his wish to get the sense of the House on the 
 merits of the plan, made that motion. 
 
 A conversation in relation to the proper course to be pursued took place between 
 Messrs. Johnson, Leigh, P. P. Barbour, Upshur, and Mercer, which resulted in put- 
 ting the question on the motion to strike out the word " Resolved," (in effect, to de- 
 stroy Mr. Upshur's proposition.) 
 
 Mr. Johnson rose in support of his motion: 
 
 He said that he expected the Committee would consider the proposition on its 
 merits — that they would direct their attention only to the principles, and consider the 
 details as if modified to suit their own inclinations. He was sorry the propositions 
 from his side of the House had not been met in that temper with which every attempt 
 at conciliation ought to be received — and that this fault extended in some degree to 
 both sides of the House. He was himself disposed to give gentlemen credit for the 
 utmost sincerity and the best spirit, insomuch that, personally, he had some difficulty 
 in choosing among the propositions, and if made umpire between the parties he should 
 prefer those of Mr. Upshur or Mr. Leigh (which he considered substantially the same) 
 as surpassing in simplicity and harmony of action. But he was not umpire, nor did 
 those on his side agree Vv^ith him in the opinion he had avowed. He preferred greatly 
 the basis of qualified voters — but in that he had been sustained by neither side. He 
 was now left to choose not what was most acceptable to him, but what would unite 
 the greatest number of the members of the Convention. 
 
 Such a compromise ought to be sought as when fixed upon would unite not a bare 
 negative, but a large portion of the minority also. He was led on these grounds, to 
 prefer the proposition of Mr. Cooke. 
 
 He owned the force of the arguments addressed to him by the other side in favor of 
 the Federal number — but it could not be made plain to his constituents. They had a 
 deep-rooted antipathy to that ground of apportionment — and even if it was a preju- 
 dice, it was entitled to respect. The compromise of Mr. Cooke was more simple — 
 more easily imderstood, and would, he believed, be more acceptable to the people. 
 The only difference between the plans of Mr. Cooke and Mr. Upshur lay in this, that 
 the same elements of compromise were separately applied to one, and applied in a 
 combined form by the other : how then, would one be a compromise, and the other 
 none ^ 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 561 
 
 The danger of taking Federal numbers as a true exponent of the number of quali- 
 fied voters lay in this, that if the calculation proved erroneous, it could not be reme- 
 died, and it might turn out to have been irrevocably surrendered into the hands of a 
 minority: if a minority get the ascendancy in one branch, they had it in both. 
 
 But, if Mr. Cooke's compromise were adopted, the Government would be surren- 
 dered neither to a majority nor a minority; it would be in the hands of a majority in 
 one House and of a minority in the other. He insisted, that the veto of the Senate 
 was an all-sufficient guaranty for the protection of the slave-property in the East. 
 
 In reply to Mr. Leigh's argument that the Senate would be overcome and a new 
 Convention called to destroy its power, he said that this objection applied to every 
 plan — a new Convention might overturn any system. He appealed to experience to 
 shew, that the Senate had been able to resist the Lower House, but if the deliberate will 
 of its constituents was expressed, it ought not to have power to resist that v/ill. As to 
 the constancy of the Senate being subdued by the Lower House refusing to send up 
 necessary money bills and stopping the wheels of Government, it was what no Dele- 
 gates annually elected would dare to do. He had seen the experiment made ; the 
 Senate did reject almost unanimously a money bill passed in the liouse by an over- 
 whelming majority. The charge of aristocracy, while it might intimidate some men, 
 would make others but the more firm ; and besides, if weak nerves feared the charge 
 here, would they not fear the opposite charge nmcli more at home ? Some trust must 
 be reposed, if gentlemen would have any Representative Government at all : if not, they 
 must go back to pure democracy or forward to absolute despotism. The objection as 
 to a constant conflict between the two Houses was not without weight; but he had con- 
 fidence in the discretion of both, and had besides seen the thing in practice, under the 
 former organization of the Senate; and it produced no serious conflict or injury. 
 
 Mr. Marshall rose and addressed the Cluiir nearly as follows : 
 
 Two propositions respecting the basis of Representation have divided this Conven- 
 tion almost equally. One party has supported the basis of white population alone, the 
 other has supported a basis compounded of white population and taxation ; or which 
 is the same thing in its result, the basis of Federal numbers. The question has been 
 discussed, until discussion has become useless. It has been argued, until argument is 
 exhausted. We have now met on the ground of compromise. It is now no longer a 
 question whether the one or the other shall be adopted entirely, but whether we 
 shall, as a compromise, adopt a combination of the two, so as to unite the House on 
 something which we may recommend to the people of Virginia, with a reasonable 
 hope that it may be adopted. 
 
 Now, when on the subject of compromise, two propositions are again submitted to 
 the Committee; one of them is, that the two principles originally proposed shall re- 
 main distinct ; one of them constituting the basis of the House of Delegates, and the 
 other of the Senate. The other proposition is, that the two principles shall be com- 
 bined and made the basis of both Houses. This latter proposition presents the exact 
 middle ground between white population exclusively, and the basis of white population 
 combined with taxation, or what has been denominated the basis of Federal numbers. 
 
 The motion of the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson) to strike out the word 
 " Resolved," from the proposition offered by the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. 
 Upshur,) is intended to substitute for the combined ratio, which is the foundation of 
 that gentleman's scheme, the proposition of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. 
 Cooke,) which is to introduce white population exclusively as tlie basis of the House 
 of Delegates, and white population and taxation combined as the basis of the Senate. 
 This is the question now before the Committee. 
 
 We are engaged on the subject of compromise, — a compromise of principles which 
 neither is willing to surrender. The very term implies mutual concession. Some 
 concession must be made on both sides, but the quantum to be made by each must 
 depend on the relative situation of the parties, and this must be considered before a 
 right judgment can be formed on the subject. Let us enquire, then, what is the real 
 situation of the parties on this question. On this enquiry will depend the reasona- 
 bleness of any compromise that may be proposed. 
 
 The past discussion shows conclusively the sincerity with which each principle has 
 been supported. There can be no doubt of the honest conviction of each side, that 
 its pretensions are fair and just. The claims of both are sustained with equal sin- 
 cerity, and an equally honest conviction, that their own principle is correct, and the 
 adversary principle is unwise and incorrect. On the subject of principle, nothing can 
 be added, no advantage can be claimed by either side ; for, no doubt can be entertained 
 of the sincerity of either. To attempt now to throw considerations of principle into 
 either scale, is to add fuel to a flame which it is our purpose to extinguish. We must 
 lose sight of the situation of parties and state of opinion, if we make this attempt. 
 
 What is that situation? 
 
 A question has been taken in the Committee on the proposition first submitted to 
 us, and it has been carried by a majority of two. Is it possible under existing cir- 
 
 71 
 
562 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 cumstances, that any confidence can be reposed in this decision ? Can either the 
 majority or minority feel any confidence that the same question will hereafter be again 
 decided precisely in the same manner ? Can we be blind to the actual working of 
 public opinion ? Do not gentlemen believe it to be more probable, that at least some 
 one of the members of this majority, ma}'- change his opinion and thus leave the 
 House equally divided ? Is it not even probable that a still greater change may take 
 place, so as to place the present scanty majority, with the same paucity of numbers 
 on the other side ? Can any gentleman be confident how this question will be ulti- 
 mately decided ? None of us can be certain that its result in the House will be the 
 same that it has been in Committee. 
 
 But let us decide one way or the other; if the majority shall be so small, if the opi- 
 nions of the Convention shall be so nearly balanced, tlie Constitution will go forth to 
 the people, deriving very little additional weight from the recommendation of this 
 body. The majority and minority will have almost equal weight, and the Constitu- 
 tion will rest on itself. Is it possible to conceal from ourselves, that the powerful ar- 
 guments of the minority conveyed to the people through the Press, supported by the 
 co-operating interest of a large district of country whose weight has been placed in 
 the opposite scale, may produce great effect? The endeavor would be vain to con- 
 ceai the fact, that in a part of tlie Eastern country — that lying upon and South of 
 James river near tlie Blue Ridge, there are iiiterests which must and will operate with 
 great force, unless human nature shall cease to be what it has been in all time. It is 
 impossible to say what may be the influence on those interests abroad, though they 
 may exert none on the members of this Convention. It is impossible to say, how far 
 they may affect the adoption or rejection of the Constitution. But it is by no means 
 certain, that this change in public opinion will not be felt in this body also. Admitting 
 gentlemen to retain their theories — theories which they maintain with perfect sin- 
 cerity, still there exists another theory equally Republican, and which they equally 
 respect, the theory that it is the duty of a Representative to speak the will of his con- 
 stituents. We cannot say how far this may carry gentlemen. Neither can we say 
 what will be the iiltimate decision of this House or of the people. 
 
 Taking this view of the state of parties, it is manifest that to obtain a just compro- 
 mise, concession must not only be mutual — it must be equal also. The claims of the 
 parties are tlie same. Each ought to concede to the other as much as he demands from 
 that other, and thus meet on middle ground. There can be no hope that either will 
 yield more than it gets in retu^rn. 
 
 What is that middle ground ? 
 
 One party proposes that the House of Delegates shall be formed on the basis of 
 white population exclusively, and the Senate on the mixed basis of white population 
 and taxation, or on the Federal numbers. The other party proposes that the white 
 population shall be combined with Federal numbers, and shall, mixed in equal pro- 
 portions, form the basis of Representation in both Houses. This last proposition 
 must be equal. All feel it to be equal. If the two principles are combined exactly, 
 and thus combined, form the basis of both Houses, the compromise must be perfectly 
 equal. 
 
 Is the other proposition equal ? 1 ask the gentlemen who make it, if they think it so 1 
 
 The party in favor of the compound basis in both Houses have declared their con- 
 viction, that there is no equality in the proposition. They at least think it unequal. 
 How can they accede to a proposition as a compromise which they firmly believe to 
 be unequal.^ Do gentlemen of the opposite party think it equal.? If they do, why 
 refuse to take what they offer to us .? 
 
 They consent that the Senate shall be founded on the mixed basis, and the House of 
 Delegates on the white basis. If this be equality, why will they not take the Senate .>* 
 There can be only one reason for rejecting it — they think the proposition unequal. 
 If the Senate would protect the East, will it not protect the West also ? If the pro- 
 position is equal when tlie Senate is tendered by them to us, is it not equal when ten- 
 dered by us to them.? If it is equal, it must be a matter of absolute indifference 
 to which part}' the Senate is assigned. If a difficulty arises, it is because the propo- 
 sition is unequal ; and if it be unequal, can gentlemen believe that it will be accepted } 
 Ought they to wish it .? 
 
 After the warm language (to use the mildest phrase) which has been mingled with 
 argument on both sides, I heard with inexpressible satisfaction, propositions for com- 
 promise proposed by both parties in the language of conciliation. I hailed these au- 
 spicious appearances with as much joy, as the inhabitant of the polar regions hails the 
 re-appearance of the sun after his long absence of six tedious months. Can these ap- 
 pearances prove fallacious? Is it a meteor we have seen and mistaken for that splen- 
 did luminary v/hich dispenses light and gladness throughout creation ? It must be so, 
 if we cannot meet on equal ground. If we cannot meet on the line that divides us 
 equally, then take the hand of friendship, and make an equal compromise ; it is vaia 
 to hope that any compromise can be made. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 563 
 
 Mr. Mercer, after expressing t'ae reluctance wliich he felt at all times to trespass on 
 the time of the House, and the pecuhar embarrassment under which he now laboured, 
 referred to the feelings of good will toward every part of Virginia, which he had 
 brought with him to the Convention, and their still undiminished force. He hoped 
 the asperities of all parties had nearly subsided, and that the Committee had attained 
 that state of tranquillity, so favourable to the exercise of reason. He then expressed 
 toward Judge ^Marshall a filial respect and veneration not surpassed by the ties which 
 had bound him to a natural parent, long since returned to the dust. Yet he was un- 
 able to meet his proposition. He thought complete justice had not been done to their 
 side of the question. All their opponents had conceded that if equal numbers always 
 possessed equal wealth, numbers might be urged as a fair exponent of pohtical power: 
 but the unequal distribution of property rendering this impossible, some protection 
 was needed for it. But did gentlemen ever claim any tiling more than enough of 
 political power.' He adverted to the course which had been pursued in the Legisla- 
 tive Committee — the majoritv which had been for the white basis, and the vote of 
 IVIr. Madison in its favour — the subsequent majority of two in the House. Under 
 these circumstances, they might have at once decided on that principle, and after ar- 
 ranging the Right of SuffraDre, sent both to the people. Then they should have had 
 a Senate based on white population, (arranged in 1>'26.) and a House of Delegates on 
 the same basis. Yet they had agreed to concede so far. as to introduce the principle 
 of the Federal number in the Senate. Hence he argued the spirit of forbearance 
 which had governed the West. He objected to insisting on a security beyond the 
 danger wliich called for it — and from the examples of Xortli and South Carolina, in- 
 ferred that no fears were to be entertained of strife between the two Houses. He 
 went' into a statistical statement to shew that the results of white population, and 
 qualified voters were in substance the same. 
 
 He had risen to shew, that the majority had not been claimed of them which Mr. 
 Marshall said ought to be allowed, only as a defensive guard ; wliile Mr. Madison 
 thou2:ht that security would be given by adopting the whole basis in one House, and 
 the Federal numbers in the other. But now, a principle of exact equality and not 
 merely of defence and protection, was demanded. 
 
 ^Ib.. Baldwin addressed the Chair: 
 
 Mr. Chairman : I certainly should not trespass upon the attention of the Connnittee, 
 especially at this late period of the debate, but for one consideration. Havinsr on a 
 former occasion suggested a plan of compromise substantially the same with that now 
 offered by the gentleman from Frederick. (!Mr. Cooke.) and the merits of which must 
 be weighed in determining the present question, I feel it to be a duty which I owe 
 to myself and my constituents, tliat the motives for my conduct should be distinctly 
 understood. There are some gentlemen on this floor, who. entertaining an enthusi- 
 astic, and no doubt, honest attachment to tlie existing Constitution, do not seem dis- 
 posed to view the course pursued by their adversaries with sufficient induiorence. 
 Hence we have had charges which it becomes those assailed to repel — charges of 
 such a nature, as maybe best repelled by a free and candid exposition of our motives 
 and conduct. 
 
 Though I do not profess. Sir, to have made politics my study, or to have had much 
 experience in pubhc affairs, there is one truth deeply impressed on my mind, which 
 cannot escape the most casual observer. "Whoever acts the part of a statesman, how- 
 ever humble, or however distinguished, is compelled, if he be honest, to make great 
 sacrifices. On this occasion, I feel myself constrained by a sense of duty to make 
 & sacrifice of opinion, of feeling, even of consistency itself. It shall be made, fi-eely 
 made — upon the altar of my country, without hesitating a moment to consider the 
 consequences personal to myself. 3-Iy only answer, tlierefore, to the charge of in- 
 consistency is, that I confes's and justify it. What is my justification .- The peace, 
 the happiness, the safety of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this is a momentous crisis in 
 the destiny of our State. In this Assembly, convened by the highest exercise of 
 sovereign power, the waves of controversy liave risen to a great height — they have 
 extended beyond us in every direction, and threaten to overwhelm the whole Com- 
 monwealth. We are now to determine v.-hether we shall pour oil upon those waves, 
 or permit the storm to rage with reckless and resistless fury. Is this a time to indulge 
 the pride of opinion, the spirit of party, the love of consistency; or does the occasion 
 demand the influence of widely different and far higher motives 
 
 It must now be obvious to all, that if this disagreeable and dangerous controversy 
 is to be happily adjusted, the only practicable means is that of compromise. The 
 parties on this "floor may be regarded as equally balanced. We have a majority of 
 two in favour of the white basis in the House of Delegates, but it is well understood 
 that tliere is an equal majority opposed to a similar basis in the Senate. If both par- 
 ties should remain inflexible, what hope is there of a profitable termination of our 
 labours r Is the contest to be continued throughout the whole of the session, and 
 upon all the details of the subject ? Is this question of relative political power, to 
 
564 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 mingle itself with, and influence the consideration and decision of every proposed 
 amendment in the Constitution ? Shall we exhaust our own patience and that of the 
 people, and finally return home, not the harbingers of reconciliation and peace, but of 
 interminable discord and hatred ? 
 
 These considerations have forced upon my mind the necessity of compromise, and 
 I have yielded to that necessity, though not without great repugnance and difficulty. 
 I act upon my own responsibility, without pledging or committing my constituents 
 in the slightest degree. They will decide for themselves; and are capable of esti- 
 mating the magnitude of the proposed concession on their part, and of the mischiefis 
 which it is intended to obviate. 
 
 I have been much surprised to hear it repeatedly asserted, that we have shewn no 
 spirit of conciliation, on our part, and no disposition to meet the adverse party on 
 middle ground. What, Sir, was the original demand of the Western members, and 
 those associated with them.? They contended for the basis of white population in 
 both branches of the Legislature, as required by justice, sound policy, and the funda- 
 mental principles of our republican system. They were vigorously resisted, on the 
 ground, that property would be rendered insecure, by looking only to numbers, in 
 the apportionment of representation. It was not denied, but on the contrary admit- 
 ted by several of the Eastern members, that as a general rule, the majority ought to 
 have the ascendancy in a Republican Government. But the conflicting interests 
 existing in Virginia, were appealed to as justifying a departure from that rule. I 
 ask, if security for property was not the great and only object declared by those op- 
 posed to the basis of white population; and if that security, by means of representa- 
 tion, is all that is desired, whether it be not furnished by the concession of Federal 
 numbers in the Senate ? 
 
 We have been charged at one moment with inconsistency; and at another, with 
 inflexible pertinacity. These impulations may be retorted, with much more propriety, 
 against those, from whom they have proceeded. Representation, according to Fede- 
 ral numbers, was not, in the first instance, demanded in this Assembly by our adver- 
 saries. It was not proposed, until after strength had been gained here, and with the 
 people, by the powerful efforts made to excite alai-ms for the security of property. 
 At first, nothing more than the mixed basis of white population and taxation was re- 
 quired. I think I may confidently assert, that a compromise might have been had 
 early in the session, by yielding the mixed basis in the Senate — at all events, by 
 yielding the basis of taxation in that branch of the Legislature. The latter proposi- 
 tion, it will be recollected, was offered as a scheme of compromise, by the gentleman 
 from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott.) 
 
 But, even if the Federal numbers for both branches of the Legislature had been 
 originally demanded on this floor, we surely meet our adversaries on middle ground 
 when we offer to yield that basis in the Senate, and insist only upon representation 
 according to white population in the House of Delegates. Gentlemen must not re- 
 gard us as conceding nothing on our part, because they choose to consider our pre- 
 tensions as dangerous or visionary. They will gain nothing by treating all proposi- 
 tions for alterations of the existing system, as the wild schemes of revolutionists and 
 mad reformers. Let every proposition be examined upon its own merits, and adopted, 
 if wise, or rejected, if mischievous. For myself, I can freely declare that there are 
 few members of this Assembly who estimate the existing Constitution more highly 
 than I do. So far from having any thirst for innovation, I have been uniformly op- 
 posed to the call of a Convention, believing the practical operation of the Govern- 
 ment to have been substantially good, and fearing to hazard blessings attained in 
 search of others, perhaps unattainable. I am not disposed, however, to shut my eyes 
 against the defects of the present Constitution ; and there is surely none so glaring 
 as the inequality of representation. On this subject, I would ask if we are not all 
 reformers ? The existing plan of county representation has no advocates in this Con- 
 vention — no one here will raise his voice in favour of a system which gives to one- 
 third of the people the election of one-half the representatives in the most numerous 
 branch of the Legislature ; which places the smallest county on an equal footing as 
 regards political power with others ten times superior in population, territory and 
 wealth. Even my worthy and eloquent friend from Charles City, (Mr. Tyler,) 
 whose constituents have so much reason to be partial to the present system, felt him- 
 self compelled on yesterday to surrender the undue advantages, which they now en- 
 joy, to what he considers the conunon good. 
 
 It being conceded on all hands, that the present plan of Representation is defec- 
 tive, and ought to be reformed, the question has of course arisen, in what mode the 
 object ought to be effected.? A question which necessarily involves the principles by 
 which we are to be governed. I came here. Sir, with the most perfect conviction, 
 which still remains unshaken, that Representation ought to be apportioned, with all 
 practicable equality, throughout the Commonwealth, amongst the qualified voters ; 
 and that no regard to relative wealth or other considerations, can justify the subjec- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CON'VEXTIOX. 
 
 565 
 
 tion of the majorltr to the power and domimon of the minority. In common with the 
 other members from the Western part of the State, I have been induced, for the rea- 
 sons already suggested, and in the hope of quieting the pubhc mind, now so greatly 
 agitated, to'^make a concession, which it was hoped would be satisfactory to most of 
 our Eastern brethren. The compromise proposed by us, while it does not surrender 
 the principles for which we have contended, furnisiies all the security, so much in- 
 sisted upon, which can be derived from the representation of property. On the one 
 hand, while the will of tlie majority will be fully and fairly expressed in the most 
 popular branch of the Legislature, the basis of Federal numbers in the Senate will, if 
 anv plan of property Representation can, present a bcirrier against incursions upon the 
 rights of property, and tJie exaction of partial or excessive contributions. 
 
 °But it has been urged, that if the same basis of P«.epresentation be not adopted for 
 both branches of the Legislature, there will be a contmual warfare between the two 
 Houses — that the Senate will not be able to withstand the assaults of the more nume- 
 rous badv; and will be rendered odious with the people by the cry of aristocracy. My 
 friend and colleague (Mr. Johnson) in his argument just dehvered, has showed very 
 clearly the efficiency heretofore of tlie controlling power in the Senate. Will that 
 efficiency be destroyed by giving to the Senate the basis of Federal numbers? What, 
 then, would be the effect of introducing that basis, either in the whole, or in part, into 
 both branches of the Legislature? Sir, I have uniformly thought and declared, that 
 the scheme of property Representation, instead of affording the protection so anxiously 
 desired, would only tend to impair the security of property. It matters not whether 
 you confine the principle to one House, or infuse it into both; you will equally excite 
 the hostility of those whose political power is thereby diminished. The people are not 
 bhnd — they will see and understand the practical operation of tlie principle, and it will 
 not be more disguised by extending it to both branches, than by commimicating it to 
 one only. The cry of aristocracy might be raised by demagogues in either case, with, 
 the same force and effect, 
 
 Mr. Chairman, there can be no hope of callingr back efentlemen to a calm and dis- 
 passionate consideration of the evil consequences to which their principles lead. They 
 cannot be persuaded, that the best security for property is to be fotmd in the moral 
 sense and intelligence of the community ; in the natural and legitimate influence of 
 %vea!th, talents and learning ; in tlie common interest which all classes have in a just 
 and wholesome course of legislation. But while they ask for power as the only ade- 
 quate means of security, do tliey not perceive how odious it will become if extended 
 beyond the only plausible object for which it can be demanded? The majority may 
 be reconciled to a restraining power in the least numerous and most discreet branch of 
 the Legislature; a power, which will not dictate, but merely protect; but can they be 
 ever reconciled to a surrender of all the powers of Government for ages to come, into- 
 the hands of the minorit}- ? 
 
 It is far. Sir. from my desire, that the protection conceded by the compromise, which, 
 we propose, should prove in any respect illusory. Though extremely averse to the 
 concession, yet having once determined upon it, I am prepared, so far as I am con- 
 cerned, to carry it into effect, fairly, candidly and cheerfully; without chaffering or 
 higgling about petty details. Let the Senate be so organized as to remove all reason- 
 able objections from the other side, to its efficiency in resisting any apprehended in- 
 vasions by the Lower House, of the rights of property. XbusTar I am willing to o-o, 
 in a spirit of conciliation, and for the sake of peace : and upon the supposition that 
 both parties are equally confident in the justice of their original demands, I am at a . 
 loss to perceive how the terms which we offer can be reofarded as inadequate. 
 
 It was urged, !Mr. Chairman, by yourself on yesterday, by way of objection to our 
 terms of compromise, that a fair deduction from 'our own principles would not give the 
 whole white population as the proper basis for the House of Delegates, but only the 
 qualified voters, who alone enjoy the rights of sovereignty. You endeavoured to shew 
 that the Western people, according to the relative proportions of qualified voters, 
 would gain less, than by assuming the whole white population as the standard. And 
 hence you inferred, that instead of requiring the basis of white population for the House 
 of Delegates, we ought to be contented with that of qualified voters. Without goino- 
 into anv examination of your premises, I cannot admit the correctness of your conclu^ 
 sion. 1 would be perfectly satisfied myself with the basis of qualified voters for both 
 branches of the Legislature; but who of the opposite party would be willing to adopt 
 it? And where would be the propriety of introducing it into tlie House of Delegates, 
 if Federal numbers should be the rule for the Senate"? Ton do not propose to make 
 any deduction from the Federal numbers, embracing all the whites and three-fifths of 
 all other persons; then why insist, that any deductTon should be made from the basis 
 of white population? 
 
 If the terms of compromise which we propose be not unjust nor unequal as reo-ards 
 the adverse party, then why not adopt them ? Why do gentlemen insist upon a°plan 
 of Representation inexpressibly odious to the Western people ? We have been told 
 
566 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 repeatedly, with great propriety, in the course of our debates, that in the constructing 
 our fundamental law, not only the rights and interests, but even the prejudices of the 
 people ought to be consulted. We ought not to wound that pride of character, with- 
 out which, the gentleman from Chesterheld will agree with me, there can be nothing 
 estimable. I do most heartily wish that by any exertion of my humble talents. I could 
 impress upon this Committee what are the feelings of the Western people on this sub- 
 ject. I am sure that they are not correctly understood by many persons in this body ; 
 and if properly estimated, would lead to a more calm and deliberate consideration 
 of the question. The Eastern people demand, as we are told, only security — not for 
 their personal rights, but for their property; and it is granted, by conceding Repre- 
 sentation according to Federal numbers in the Senate. They would sustain no pangs 
 of humiliation by yielding to the basis of white population in the House of Delegates; 
 and would soon become reconciled to the compromise. What do the Western peo- 
 ple demand That equal Representation which is to give protection not only to their 
 property, but to their persons ; and place them upon an equality v/ith the other free- 
 men of the Commonwealth. Let the principle of Federal numbers, in whatever de- 
 gree, be introduced into both Houses, and the hardy yeomanry of the West will never 
 be satisfied. They can never consent to be put upon a footing, in the apportionment 
 of political power, with the slave who moves and toils at the command of his master. 
 They will not, cannot, dare not submit to it. They dare not so degrade themselves 
 in their own eyes — in the eyes of the whole world — even in the eyes of their brethren 
 who now require the concession. 
 
 And here, Mr. Chairman, I must notice a topic of the gravest character, which has 
 been several times brought to our view, by Eastern members, in the course of debate. 
 I mean a separation of the State — at one time gently insinuated — at another wrapt 
 up in beautiful rhetorical language, and finally expressed in what has been emphati- 
 cally called plain old English. 1 am not disposed. Sir, to regard such menaces, be- 
 cause I am aware of the extremities of intellectual warfare, and can estimate the effer- 
 vescence of momentary excitement. They would not be iznpressed upon my mind, 
 but for a corresponding sentiment, which I have reason to believe, prevails amongst 
 the Western people. I do not say that if slave Representation should be forced upon 
 them, they will raise the standard of rebellion, or in any wise resist the constituted 
 authorities. Far from it. But within the pale of the (Constitution and laws, they will 
 carry their opposition to the utmost limit ; and the members of this Committee can 
 estimate the feelings of hostility by which it will be accompanied. The final result 
 will be a separation of the State. No one can doubt that if such an event should be 
 perse veringly, though peaceably sought, by a large portion of the State, it would be 
 ultimately conceded. 
 
 I beg. Sir, to be distinctly understood. There is no one in this Committee, to 
 whom the idea of such a separation is more abhorrent than myself. I believe there 
 is no man here, who wishes separation for its own sake, or who could contemplate it 
 for a moment, except as a refuge from greater evils. If there were any such man, I 
 would say to him, in the language of an immortal bard, 
 
 " If thou do'st consent 
 To this most cruel act, do but despah- ; 
 And if thou waut'st a cord, the smallest tliread 
 That spider ever twisted from her womb, ■ 
 Will serve to strangle thee." 
 
 We should look forward to such a calamity, only to deprecate and avoid it. Surely, 
 it will not — must not be. Separate Virginia! Shall she be shorn of her strength, 
 her influence, and her glory? Shall her voice of command, of persuasion, and re- 
 proof, be no longer heard in the National Councils Shall she no more be looked up 
 to as the guide of the strong, the guardian of the weak, and the protector of the op- 
 pressed.? Break in twain the most precious jewel, and the separated parts are com- 
 paratively worthless. Divide Virginia, and both the East and the West will sink into 
 insignificance, neglect and contempt. 
 
 I rose, Mr. Chairman, to make but a few remarks, and have detained the Committee 
 longer than I conteniplated. I am thankful for the indulgent attention with which I 
 have been heard, and regret my inability to do justice to the subject. I would to 
 God, that for this single occasion only, 1 could utter my feelings in 
 
 " Thoughts that breathe, and words that burn." 
 
 1 would kindle a flame, which should find an altar in every heart, which should burn 
 to ashes the prejudices of the hour, and the petty interests of the day, and throw upon 
 our path of duty a strong and steady light, directing us forward to the permanent 
 welfare, safety and honour of Virginia. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 567 
 
 Mr. Leigh, afler noticing some of Mr. B's statements, went on to reply to Mr. 
 Johnson — and complained, that they were constantly called upon to respect the 
 feelinffs of the West, and to make a Constitution that should be acceptable to the 
 VVest,^but nobody seemed to consider the feelings of the East at all, or to care whe- 
 ther the Constitution was acceptable to the East or not. If gentlemen asked for sym- 
 pathy, let them shew it — if they insisted, that their theoretical claims should be con- 
 sidered, let the practical claims of the East be considered also. He insisted on the 
 prejudices which vrould assail a Senate differently constituted from the House of De- 
 legates — it would be branded in its very birth with '• Aristocracy" upon its front — it 
 would be sent forth with the cry of mad-dog," to make its way among the people. 
 He strongly objected to the interpretation which Mr. Mercer had put upon Mr. Madi- 
 son's speech, as advising the Committee to accept, by way of compromise, ditFerent 
 bases in the two Houses. Did Mr. M. forget, that that gentleman had twice., in Com- 
 mittee, voted against that proposition for a white basis in the House of Delegates ? 
 On the question of Federal numbers, they had enjoyed the happiness and honour of 
 receiving his vote. He diifered from Mv. M. entirely, as to the tenor of Mr. Madi- 
 son's speech in the Committee, and stated what was his understanding of the sub- 
 stance of it. He commented with severity on Mr. M's profession of filial respect for 
 Mr. Marshall, accompanied by an entire disregard of that gentleman's advice, and 
 insisted on this as one illustration of the truth of his own remark, that in this country, 
 sons were always wiser than their fathers. From whatever other quarter the spirit 
 of conciliation had proceeded, he never expected to see one scintilla of it from him. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied, that he had not intended to misrepresent the argument of Mr. 
 Madison. He had understood that gentleman as recommending Federal numbers, only 
 so far as they would operate as a protection to the peculiar property of the East. 
 With regard to the venerable gentleman from E.iclimond, he had had the happiness 
 of knowmg him for thirty years. That gentleman was his friend and his father's 
 friend. No remarks of the gentleman from Chesterfield would, he trusted, ever be 
 able to sever that bond ; and he cared for no other consequence that might follow them. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, when he wished to allay irritated feelings, he had found that the 
 best way was never to allude to them. The certain effect of a different course, was 
 rather to exasperate than allay the irritation. 
 
 In reply to a personal appeal of -ilr. Leigh to himself, he bore testimony, that in 
 his opinion, the charge of aristocracy brought against the existing Constitution, was 
 wholly unfounded ; but, he did not believe with Mr. L., that that charge had been the 
 main cause of calling this Convention. It had been used indeed, as a powerful wea- 
 pon in the hands of men, who felt that they were deprived of their just rights. The 
 cry of mad-dog had been raised against the present Senate; but, they had survived 
 the cry, and had had the pleasure of hearing blessings sung by the same lips. The 
 Senates of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and of the United States, had all been 
 quoted in this very light, by gentlemen themselves ; and the Senate of Maryland 
 was an example in point, to shew that a small body could resist with firmness, and 
 maintain the stand it had taken. 
 
 In reply to Mr. M. he urged this consideration, that that could not be called middle 
 ground, where one party surrendered all they had been contending for. to the other. 
 Now, the West had for eight v.-eeks been contending, to secure themselves from a 
 system, which placed the power of the State in the hands of a. rninoriti/ : but, the 
 principle of that gentleman's compromise, was to propose a principle which con- 
 fessedly did this very thing in both branches of the Legislature. To yield this, was 
 to yield the whole they had been contending for. The West had set out with con- 
 tending, that the power should reside with tlie majority in both branches. The East 
 contended, that it should remain with a minority in both branches. If the mixed 
 basis should be adopted in both Houses, the power would be in a minority in both 
 Houses. Was this compromise Or, was it not complete and entire surrender.' 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Johnson's motion to strike out, and the votes 
 stood — Ayes 43, Noes 47. The Chair voting in the negative, made a tie ; and so the 
 motion was negatived. 
 
 So the Committee refused to strike out the word Resolved," in the first clause of 
 Mr. Upshur's proposition for compronuse, thereby leaving it open for amendments. 
 
 [On this motion, Mr. Monroe voted Aye : Messrs. Madison, Marshall, and Plea- 
 sants, No.] 
 
 Mr. Upshur, with a view to test the sense of the Committee on the question, whe- 
 ther the three ratios in his plan should be retained, or only two of them, moved to 
 amend the proposition, by striking therefirom the second of the ratios, viz : wliite 
 population and taxation combined." 
 
 The motion prevailed, and the words were stricken out. 
 
 Mr. Upshur moved a further amendment, changing the number of Senators from 
 *• thirty"' to " thirty-two." 
 
 Tills motion prevailed — Ayes 53. 
 
568 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 [Messrs. Madison, Monroe, Marshall and Giles, Aye.] 
 
 Mr, Powell said, that since the question of the basis seemed now decided, there 
 could be no reason for extending the number of the Senate ; and he therefore moved 
 to amend, by striking out " thirty-two," and inserting " twenty-four." 
 
 The question being taken, the motion was negatived — Ayes 4G, Noes 48. 
 
 [Mr. Madison, Aye : Messrs. Monroe, Marshall and Giles, No.] 
 
 Mr. Scott, considering it impossible at present to fix on any permanent future prin- 
 ciple of apportionment, which would be generally acceptable, moved to strike out the 
 third clause of Mr. Upshur's proposition. 
 
 The motion was opposed by Messrs. Cooke and Upshur, as going to undo all that 
 had been done, and lead only to the call of a new Convention. If the principle was 
 fair now, it would be as fair always. To destroy its permanence, would be to impair 
 the ground of compromise. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, from the equal vote in striking out Mr. Upshxir's proposition, it was 
 plain that the scheme, in its present form, was not acceptable to a majority of the 
 House. He had made the motion, expecting that some gentleman would substitute 
 another scheme of future apportionment. 
 
 The question being taken, it was negatived — Ayes 31, Noes not counted. 
 
 Mr. Mercer now moved to amend Mr. Upshur's proposition, by substituting the 
 following: 
 
 " Representation in the Senate shall be based on the whole number of free persons, 
 including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding indians not taxed, 
 and adding to the aforesaid number of free persons, three-fifths of all other persons : 
 and the Senate shall consist of a number not exceeding , and its term of service 
 and classification remain as at present." 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, the same question had in substance been decided already. He 
 called upon all who were in favour of seeing the two Houses harmonious in their 
 organization, to oppose the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Powell asked tlie mover, if this was not word for word the same proposition 
 once moved by the gentleman from Goochland, (Mr. Pleasants ?) 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied in the affirmative. 
 
 After some conversation as to the effect of the motion between Messrs, Mercer, 
 P. P, Barbour, Johnson and Leigh, 
 
 Mr. Pleasants announced his determination to vote against the amendment. He 
 adverted to his peculiar situation (in relation to his district,) and went into a history 
 of the course of the debate, and then declared his preference to the plan of county 
 Representation. If he could get such a plan, graduated to suit his views of propriety, 
 he would vote for it. He did not hold himself bound by any former vote, and had so 
 stated at the time. Could a good system of county Representation be engrafted in 
 the proposition he had formerly oflfered, and which was now offered by Mr. Mercer, 
 he would support it. He did not fully know the sentiments of his constituents^ — and 
 he believed his course would, in these circumstances, be approved. 
 
 Mr. Mercer disclaimed any intention of involving the gentleman in any difficulty. 
 
 Mr. P. said, he did not believe the gentleman could involve him in any difficulty 
 whatever — He had no fears on that score. 
 
 Mr. Mercer explained the reasons at some length, which had induced him to move 
 the amendment. The Committee had arrived at that point, when such a question 
 ought to be prescribed. They had got to the end of one path — he now presented to 
 them another. He expressed his hope of Mr. Marshall's vote, after what had fallen 
 from him in relation to it. He had hoped for the gentleman's from Goochland also, 
 which would have made the vote stand 50 to 46. The proposition of Mr. Upshur was 
 for a county Representation, and the amendment had no other in view. He hoped, 
 therefore, for the vote of Mr. Pleasants. 
 
 Mr. Gordon moved to amend Mr. Mercer's amendment. 
 
 Mr. Johnson moved, that the Committee rise. The motion was negatived — Ayes 
 42, Noes 50. 
 
 Mr. Johnson suggested to Mr. Mercer the propriety of withdrawing his amend- 
 ment. Let Mr. Upshur's be first modified and amended by its friends. It was not 
 proper to press the gentleman from Goochland, under his present circumstances. 
 
 Mr. Mercer consented to withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said it was manifest, gentlemen thought that by holding out, some of 
 their side would go over. 
 
 Mr. Johnson distinctly avowed that to be the ground on which he suggested the 
 delay. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, this would shew gentlemen what effect their supposed pledge had 
 had. He knew, that those gentlemen would not be influenced by any thing he could 
 say, but would act for themselves. 
 
 He then moved, that the Committee rise : the motion prevailed : (it was now near 
 4 o'clock.) The Committee then rose, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 569 
 
 SATURDAY, December 5, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Parks, of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Gordon moved, that when the Convention adjourned, it adjourn to meet on 
 Monday at 1 o'clock. 
 
 The motion gave rise to desultory conversation on the subject of a place of meeting 
 for the Convention, which resulted in a refusal to take up the report of the Committee 
 on that subject, and an agreement to meet on Monday at 2 o'clock, (allowing time for 
 the Legislature to convene and get through its morning business.) 
 
 The Convention then went again into Committee of the Whole, Mr. P. P. Barbour 
 in the Chair. 
 
 And the question being on Mr. Gordon's amendment to the resolution of Mr. 
 Upshur, 
 
 Mr. Gordon modified it, so as to read as follows: 
 
 " Resolved, That the representation of the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " There shall be thirteen Senators West of the Blue Ridge of Mountains, and nine- 
 teen East of those Mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates one hundred and twenty-seven mem- 
 bers, of whom twenty-nine shall be elected from the district West of the Alleghany 
 Mountains; twenty-four from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge; 
 forty from the Blue Ridge to the head uf Tide-water, and thirty-four thence below." 
 
 Mr. Powell gave notice, that in case the amendment of Mr. Gordon should be re- 
 jected, he would offer another, which he read, and which went, in substance, to give 
 to the Senate the power to amend revenue bills ; with a proviso, that in case of a dis- 
 agreement between the two Houses on such a bill, the revenue, as enacted for the 
 previous year, should continue. 
 
 Mr. Morris said, that this long, and to many, wearisome discussion, must have con- 
 vinced all of one fact, a fact so evident, that none could shut their eyes against it; 
 that, however anxious the Committee might be so to apportion the future representa- 
 tion of the State as to put an end to the confessed inequality which now existed, no 
 general principle that could be proposed, would obtain the vote of such a majority as 
 that it might be carried with any confidence to their constituents. Yet all were 
 agreed, that the obtaining of this object formed one of the leading causes, which had 
 led to the call of this Convention : it was certainly one of the prime considerations, 
 which had induced the people to vote in its favour. He professed himself desirous 
 to establish some rule, on this subject, which might apply not merely to the present 
 moment, but to all future time: but he was satisfied, that, situated as the Convention 
 now was, no permanent arrangement, looking to futurity, could be agreed upon. But 
 the hopelessness of this was no reason why some present arrangement ought not to 
 be made. If they could not do all the good they desired, let them do all that was in 
 their power. The result of the calculations on both sides shewed, that a Hoxise of 
 Delegates constructed on the principle of qualified voters, and one on the compound 
 basis of population and property, would not differ by more than three, perhaps only 
 by two members. As to the objection that unless some permanent rule of apportion- 
 ment should be settled, discontent would again arise and a new Convention be called, 
 he thought the experience the people had had on the present occasion was a pretty 
 good security against any speedy resort to that expedient. But, if such Convention 
 was to assemble, the future rule of apportionment might be lefl to them. Yet, he 
 was willing to lend his aid in the effort to fix it now. His own preference was for 
 the Federal number as a just medium between the ratios of population and taxation. 
 He repelled the charge of aristocracy made against this arrangement, by appealing to 
 the principles and virtues of the founders of the Constitution, and the three venerable 
 men, (two of whom had fought in defence of liberty,) who had given it their sanc- 
 tion on the present occasion. He never could be made to believe that such men 
 were the friends of aristocracy. But, if the time for carrying such a principle as the 
 basis of both Houses was past, still he was in favour of doing what might allay dis- 
 contents for the present. He was utterly opposed to basing the two Houses on dif- 
 ferent ratios of representation, as leading to discord and providing opposite and con- 
 flicting influences which must forever keep the vessel of State from the harbour of 
 the public good. He had no belief in the doctrines so commonly maintained by wri- 
 ters, and advocated here, of the efficacy of checks and balances. In a Government 
 like that of Great Britain, where the source of power was not in the people, but in a 
 monarch, claiming it by divine right and hereditary descent, they might be necessary 
 and were certainly operative; but in a Government like ours, none of the arguments 
 in their favour applied. The true check here was the distribution of power into 
 many hands. This principle would be met by placing the power of Legislation in 
 two different branches — without making the two Houses antagonists. The Consti- 
 
 72 
 
570 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tution provided a Legislative, Executive and Judicial Department, not that they might 
 oppose each other, but act in harmony. It v^^as not the duty of the Executive to op- 
 pose the execution of the Legislative will, but to comply with it: nor was it the ex- 
 cellence of the Judiciary to give an interpretation to the laws, opposite to the purpose 
 for which they were enacted, but conformable to it. In support of the general views 
 he had given, he referred to the authority of the late Mr. Taylor of Caroline. He 
 appealed also to what Mr. Johnson had admitted on the subject of a want of harmo- 
 nious action between the two branches of the Legislature, constituted in so different 
 a manner as was proposed, and his personal preference of Mr. Upshur's plan of com- 
 promise to that of Mr. Cooke. He concluded by expressing his determination to 
 vote for Mr. Gordon's amendment, reserving himself as to its details, which he had 
 not examined. 
 
 Mr. Stanard expressed his view of the proposition to be the same, with that just ex- 
 pressed, and his determination to vote for it. It corresponded with a proposition men- 
 tioned by himself to the Committee three weeks since. He did not mean to pledge 
 himself to all the details, in which he thought there were some errors; but he Mashed 
 to take this step to remove existing difficulties, and if nothing more could be done, 
 leave the future apportionment to be settled hereafter. 
 
 Mr. Cooke rose to compare the details of the two plans now before the Committee, 
 viz : the schemes of Messrs. Upshur and Gordon. According to these plans. 
 By Mr. Gordon's, Senate of 32, 13 West, 19 East. 
 
 Mr. Upshur's do. _ 14 18 
 
 Here is a difference in favour of the West, of l-3d part of the whole Senate. 
 By Mr. Gordon's House of Delegates, of 120, 50 West, 70 EasL 
 
 Mr. Upshur's do 48 72 
 
 Thus the plan of Mr. Gordon is preferable to that of Mr. Upshur, one-sixth } thus 
 in the two Houses, the difference between the two plans is very inconsiderable. But 
 in another respect there is a very important difference. That of Mr. U. contains a 
 principle of future apportionment, a principle of vitality and self-preservation, which 
 Mr. G's entirely wants. He would therefore say it with all due respect, that Mr. 
 G's was a mere shift and temporary expedient, to get clear of present embarrass- 
 ments. Much as he desired to support any plan which came from that quarter — from 
 a gentleman to whom he had been so much indebted as a faithful friend of reform — 
 yet he could not support a plan which settled no principle, and was merely a tempo- 
 rary patch- work of a Constitution, to be torn to pieces some five or seven years hence 
 by the agitators and Jacobins of that day : and this, he said, was with him a vital ob- 
 jection, and such a one as would induce the people of the West, to a man, to reject 
 any such Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Gordon was sorry to hear the gentleman from Frederick apply the word 
 " shift," to his proposition, though from the expression of personal kindness to him- 
 self aftervv^ards, he did not suppose the gentleman meant it in an offensive sense. 
 [Mr. Cooke said, certahily not.'] Mr. Gordon w^ent on to say, that he had sat a silent 
 spectator of the debates on this question, but it seemed to be evident that the Con- 
 vention could not agree upon any future apportionment. What then were we to do ? 
 Sit here in equilihrio, doing nothing — or shall we return home, with a blank piece of 
 paper.'' He had considered this subject well: he was for repoising the Constitution 
 upon its ancient foundations — for redressing the inequalities of the representation — 
 and leaving it to the aged and the wise men of the land to arrange some other Con- 
 stitution. But he could not consent to sit here, waiting till some scheme should be 
 supported by one or two votes thrown into the scale, and making a meagre majority; 
 then sending out a Constitution, so made, and carrying discord and confusion among 
 the good people of Virginia. But, if gentlemen on both sides could agree on any 
 future apportionment, by a large majority, he for one would be most happy to sup- 
 port it. 
 
 Mr. Upshur briefly stated the reasons v^^hy he should vote for the amendment of 
 Mr. Gordon. The distribution of power for the jjrescnt, was nearly the same as that 
 in his own proposition, and would at all events, disembarrass the subject of many 
 difficulties. As to the question of future apportionment, the adoption of the amend- 
 ment would not preclude any arrangements for that object, and he declared it to be 
 his intention, should the proposition carry, to move as an amendment, the same pro- 
 vision for future apportionment, as had formed a part of his own scheme. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved as ari amendment to the amendment of Mr. Gordon the 
 follov/ing substitute : 
 
 After the next Census to be taken under the laws of the United States, and once, 
 at least, in every ten years thereafter, there shall be a new apportionment of Repre- 
 sentation in the House of Delegates, on the basis of white population, and in the 
 Senate on that of the Federal number — and all future enumerations for the purposes 
 of apportionment, may be made, either under the laws of this State, or those of the 
 United States, at the discretion of the General Assembly. And whenever a new ap- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 571 
 
 portionment of Ptepresentation shall be made, there shall be a new assessment of taxes 
 in the State." 
 
 In giving his reasons for moving this substitute, Mr. Doddridge said, that his assent 
 to the Federal number as a basis for the Senate, was given on the hypothesis that the 
 white basis should be adopted for the House of Delegates. This v/as the last step he 
 could take with a view to compromise. 
 
 His objection to the scheme of Mr. Gordon arose from its containing no plan for 
 any future apportionment of Representation. Unless they could agree to a Constitu- 
 tion which should cause Representation to graduate itself a.ccording to some just prin- 
 ciple mutually agreed upon, they had better do nothing at all: a Constitution with- 
 out this feature would create more dissatisfaction than existed at present. He Vv'as 
 fully confident that tlie West would accept nothing short of the white basis in the 
 House of Delegates at least : he believed they might consent with some unanimity to 
 that as a compromise. He declared for himself, and for himself alone, that he should 
 determine between this day and Tuesday next, whether he could farther serve his con- 
 stituents by remaining here any longer. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose to express his sense of what v/as the true amount of Mr. Dod- 
 dridge's amendment, Mr. Gordon's plan of distributing the Representation was based 
 substantially on the white population as exhibited by the Census of lc20 — though not 
 actually so in all the details, but throwing fractions out of view, it is in fact the basis 
 of Vvhite population according to that Census. iNow, said Mr. L. the gentleman 
 from Brooke taking the Census of lb.20, and having respect to the white population 
 exclusively, demands that this shall be established as a rule for all future time, as 
 the basis of the House of Delegates. It is, therefore, precisely the same question we 
 have been discussing for so long a time; it is brought forward again, and will, I sup- 
 pose, be repeated until the repetition shall be considered hopeless ; and then, the gen- 
 tleman tells us, he shall dptermine whether to go home or not. Are we to understand 
 this as a menace, that the Western members vrill secede in a body.? Such an idea 
 lias been suggested out of doors — are we to understand it as nov,- threatened here.'' 
 
 Mr. Doddridge (looking towards the reporter.) I hope my words will be remem- 
 bered : — I said that speaking for myself, and myself alonf.,1 should determine whether 
 I could be of any farther service to my constituents by remaining longer here. 
 
 Mr. Leigh. If the gentleman shall secede, himself, alone, why ihen w^q shall carry 
 our proposition. I am not now to understand him as threatening a secession of the 
 West. If w^e are to remain together, then the gentleman is to be understood as say- 
 ing that they will stand firm," and not advance another step. 
 
 Let me address one word to the Representatives of my Y/estern fellow-citizens (for 
 they are my fellow-citizens, and it is my wish tiaat they m.ay long remain so:) all we 
 ask is a Representation of those interests which we hold and which they do not : but if 
 there is to be the smallest infusion of such a principle, then they say that the West 
 will not adopt such a system. What does this prove ? That their attachment to us 
 is not equal to that of the Northern States toward then* Southern brethren : they do 
 not feel any thing like so warm a regard to a union with us, as the States of the 
 North did to a union with those of the South. For, what is the fact ? When the Con- 
 stitution of the United States was adopted, this very conflict took place : the same 
 claim was advanced by the South as is novv^ advanced by us, and it met the same ob- 
 jections as are now urged by the gentlemen from the West. 
 
 The Federal Convention recommended a compromise. The great objection was, 
 that the proposed Constitution gave too much to the South: yet their attachment to 
 their Southern fellow-citizens overcame all objections, and the compromise was ac- 
 cepted. But here, in Virginia, we are told that their attachment to us is so feeble, 
 and their concern for union so small, that they are willing to sacrifice all for a mere 
 theoretical opinion. Are we to take this as their idtimatuiu ? Are we to understand 
 that unless we give them, and give them immediatel}', complete povrer over our per- 
 sons and property, they wish no farther connexion v/ith us.'' -I can understand it in 
 no other way. To me it is most painful to hear such language. They will give up 
 all connexion with us, unless we yield them all that they ask. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge replied. We have long ago had the idtimatum of the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh.) and a few days since we had the uUimatujii of the 
 gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph.) They have both announced to us that 
 they never will yield us the white basis in the House of Delegates. 
 
 [Mr. Randolph here said, the gentleman is perfectly right — perfectly right — we 
 never will.] I thought I was not mistaken. Well, then, I now say that I can go no 
 farther. This is my ultinuitum. If neither of us is to 3'ield, future discussion can 
 end in no good result. They wull re-organize the Assembly, and apportion the Re- 
 presentation of the East and the West differently from what it now is ; but they will 
 still leave the West to be effectually and absolutely governed by the East, and they 
 will engraft no provision to meet our future growth in population. I now address my- 
 self to the Representatives of the West, and I say to them — we have now, in a House 
 
572 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of two hundred and fourteen, eiglity Delegates. The total white population of the 
 State being- 632,000, and the West containing 319,000 of that number, it is entitled, 
 on equitable principles, to one hundred Delegates. We now, therefore, lose twenty of 
 our fair proportion of Representation. But what shall we lose, if these propositions 
 succeed ? According to the plan of the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) 
 we are to lose twenty-eight : according to that of the gentleman from Northampton, 
 (Mr. Upshur) we are to lose twenty-four : and according to that of the gentleman 
 tirom Albemarle (Mr. Gordon) we are to lose twenty-one. We ought to have more 
 Representation than we have now : this is our grievance : and do they remedy it 1 No. 
 Not at all ; they increase it. They now control us, and they are to continue to con- 
 trol us, unless the force of public opinion shall call another Convention. There is no 
 hope for us, unless we settle the matter now. There can be no need of protracting 
 the discussion, unless the principle of a white basis of Representation is to be allowed 
 us. If the Convention rises, we shall be but where we were before it sat. The ine- 
 quality of which we have hitherto complained, has been the effect of circumstances : 
 it has been induced by time, and the natural progress of our population and improve- 
 ment : but if the grievance is to be fixed by the vote of a majority here, it will be no 
 longer the effect of time, but it will be the deliberate act and deed of our brethren of 
 the East; and it will be, therefore, more irritating, and more intolerable. Procrasti- 
 nating our discussions can serve only to sharpen our own animosities and aggravate 
 the discontent of the people. It must be so. The public uneasiness is aggravated 
 with every week's deliberation of this body. If we can't agree, we can't agree : — 
 and there is an end of the matter. I believe the people of the West, generally, will 
 stop at the point I mentioned : such is certainly my own determination: and, I be- 
 lieve, I have just the same right to announce it, as the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 or the gentleman from Charlotte had to announce theirs, 
 
 Mr. Scott said, that the compromise of Mr. Gordon amounted very nearly to allow- 
 ing the principle of the white basis according to the Census of 1820 : future appor- 
 tionment might be provided for in an amendment ; but if none should be agreed upon, 
 it may be important that the principles on which it rests should be known, that it 
 may not be drawn into precedent hereafter. It rested on neither one of the disputed 
 principles : it was founded neither on the white basis, the mixed basis, or the Federal 
 number. If the great question of fut ure apportionment should not finally be settled, 
 it was not their fault : they had offered to meet the West half way, and the offer was 
 refused : he should not now be inclined to go quite so far. 
 
 Mr. Powell rose distinctly to disclaim, for himself, and on behalf of his Western 
 friends, the imputation cast upon them by the gentleman from Chesterfield, who had 
 said that the question now was, whether they meant to divide the State if the princi- 
 ples of the Eastern portion of it should be forced upon them? 
 
 Mr. Leigh explained. lie had asked, if that was to be understood as the question. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, the gentleman had indeed put it as a question; but it was a preg- 
 nant question, and carried the intimation that such was their purpose. He now ex- 
 pressly disclaimed any such ulterior view. If gentlemen would force a mixed basis 
 upon them, it would be against his consent, and against every wish and feeling of his 
 constituents ; they would reject such a Constitution if they could : but the}^ cherished 
 no purpose of division. But in that event, the table of the Legislature would groan 
 under the mass of petitions for redress which would be presented to it. This would 
 be the result of adopting the measure now proposed. Mr. P. said he should go home, 
 and so far from preaching separation, he should use his utmost efforts to preserve 
 union: but wherever he could make his voice to be heard, he should urge the people 
 indignantly to reject a form of Government which did them such gross injustice. 
 Give us in the House the basis we ask, and we will give you in the Senate that 
 wliich you demand. We shall then hail the moment, (the first in fifty years,) that we 
 enjoy our just rights. Mr. P. then adverted to Mr. Johnson's reply to the Chief Jus- 
 tice, and insisted that his argument had not been answered and never would be. To 
 meet the suggestion of Mr. Leigh respecting a struggle between the two Houses re- 
 specting money bills, Mr. P. had prepared an amendment, which would prevent the 
 Lower House from being ever able to stop the wheels of Government by refusing to 
 send up revenue bills. 
 
 Mr. Randolph begged pardon of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott) for 
 whose sound, manly, practical good sense he had the very highest respect, for sug- 
 gesting that he had really understated their case. The true medium between the claims 
 of the two sides of the Plouse, was not that A'hich the gentleman from Fauquier had 
 stated; but it was the Federal number. That was the half- way-house. But now 
 they had agreed to meet not there, not at the half-way-house, but at a middle point 
 between the half-way-house, and the extreme West. This was in reality giving up, 
 not jifiy per cent, of their claim, but seventy-Jive per cent, of it. Instead of taking a 
 middle point between the half- way-house and their own end of the road, they took 
 one between the half-way-house and the ivestern termination of it. They were not 
 
DEBATES OF THE CON'TEXTIOX. 
 
 573 
 
 insisting on seventy-fire per cent, of their claim, but had consented to take twenty- 
 five per cent, of it< He had risen to put the matter on its proper foot. 
 
 One word more, and he would resume his seat. The reason why the argument of 
 the friend of the gentleman from Frederick, he meant the gentleman from Augusta, 
 (Mr. Johnson) ha^ not been answered was. that all he said had been anticipated. 
 The statement of the argument by the gentleman from Richmond, the Chief Justice 
 of the United States, (Mr. Marshall.) had been such, as to put at defiance all that gen- 
 tleman had said, or, all that any man on earth could say. Where was the necessity 
 of defending the fortress of Gibraltar, against the abortive and puny attacks of the 
 gentleman from Augusta? The Chief Justice had put the argument on ground 
 which never could be shaken; and which had no more been impugned, than the for- 
 tress of Gibraltar could be afi'ected by attacking it with a pocket pistol. He had put 
 it in a licfht — he did not mean any compliment — in which he put every thing that he 
 attempted to place in a clear light. He had shewn that the weak and helpless Go- 
 vernment proposed in the plan of the gentleman frum Frederick was not what it was 
 represented to be, and had shewn them what was a compromise. The gentleman 
 from Brooke (Mr. Doddridge,) had stated him to have said, that he never would be 
 satisfied, with what was technically called the white basis in the House of Delegates. 
 He never could: he never would: the gentleman's constituents were not more Inter- 
 ested in the question than his were ;. and he saw no reason why his own constituents 
 were to give up any more than those of tlie gentleman, (and he did not pretend that 
 they were bound to do so.) Tliis was not a compromise on any just principle : it was 
 one in which the West took the Lion's share, and left to them of the East, as if they 
 had been a parcel of Jackalls, the refuse and off'als of power. 
 
 Mr. Johnson expressed his regret, that Mr. Upshur's proposition had not been finally 
 disposed of before that of Mr. Gordon's had been brought before the Committee. He 
 should have thought it desirable, that 2vlr. Upshur's should first have been made as 
 perfect as possible, before a substitute was received. Other gentlemen, however, 
 who acted with him, had not thought this 'he better course, and he had acquiesced. 
 He did not rise for the purpose of vindicating the argument he had formerly used from 
 the remarks of the gentleman firom Charlotte, or to prove that it possessed a strength 
 which it did not : far less had he intended to represent himself as in any respect, or°oa 
 amy occasion, pretending to be equal to the Chief Justice: it needed no ghost (bowing 
 toward ^vlr. Randolph) to inform the Committee of their inequahty. 
 
 Ish. Randolph said, he had not distinctly heard the gentleman's words: but if they 
 contained any ghostly advice, he was thankful for it, as coming from so reverend a quar- 
 ter. But he could assure the gentleman from Augusta, that whatever he might sup- 
 pose, he (Mr. J.) was the last man in tliat committee, against whom he entertained 
 the least possible degree of personal feeling. His hostility toward that gentleman was 
 political only; but he must be permitted to add, that there had been nothing in the 
 o-entleman's career, during the present Convention, to induce any man, however hum- 
 ble his condition, to regard him as an object of envy. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, in reply, that he had never been, he believed, an object of envy 
 to any one, most certainly not to the gentleman from Charlotte; for, said Mr. J., we 
 cannot envy any tiling while we think there is nothing superior to us. Yet, I cannot 
 take my seat without returning to the gentleman from Charlotte my thanks for the 
 assurance that he cherishes toward me personally, no ill feeling. [Mr. R. None in 
 the world.] If that gentleman had known how entirely devoid my heart was from 
 such a feelinof when he took Iris seat in this Convention, I should have hoped the oc- 
 casion for this seeming colhsion might have been avoided. 
 
 Mr. Madisox now rose, and the members were gathering around Mm as when he 
 last addressed the Committee ; but the Chair having intimated that he considered it as 
 entirely out of order, they resumed their seats. ]Mr. Madison then spoke as follows: 
 Mr. Chairman, — In questions of compromise necessarily requiring mutual conces- 
 sions of opinion, we ought not to be controlled by opinions formerly expressed, whe- 
 ther derived from abstract views of the subject, or from impressions found to be erro- 
 neous as to the state of opinion prevaihng in this body. For myself, I brought to this 
 Convention a disposition to receive from firee discussion all the lights it might furnish, 
 and a spirit of compromise of which I foresaw the necessity ; without losino- siofht of 
 the interests and feelings of my constituents. This view of the trust committed to me, 
 was known to them, when I was honored with it. 
 
 This necessity of compromise is now felt by all ; and I do not despair that it will yet 
 be effected by adequate concessions on both sides. 
 
 The plan proposed by the gentleman from Northampton, freed as it has been from 
 one of its elements (taxation,) appears to be entitled to a favourable consideration : It 
 is not liable to objections which are so decisive with those who oppose the rival plan. 
 The original and real ground of opposition between the two parties, is, that one basis 
 of Representation for both Houses of the Legislature was claimed on one side, and a 
 different basis for both Houses on the other side. 
 
574 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The proposition of the gentleman from Northampton compares the two plans, and 
 divides equal concessions by the difference between them. 
 
 And could there be a case, Sir, where equal, as well as mutual, concession was more 
 reasonable ? For, neither side can say to the other, we out-number you, and you 
 ought, therefore, to yield to numbers. Neither side will presume to say to the other, 
 we have more wisdom than you, more intelligence, more information, more experi- 
 ence, more patriotism, or more of the confidence of our constituents. Yes, Sir, there 
 never was a case imposing more obligation on both sides to relax in their opinions, 
 and by equal as well as mutual surrenders of opinions, to meet on middle ground. 
 
 1 acknowledge that I cannot concur in the expediency of adopting arrangements 
 merely temporary, however I may respect and value the motives prompting them. 
 They would, in my view, be but an anodyne to the public agitation, only to awaken 
 it, after a lapse of ten years, to a more violent state. 
 
 It would be folding up in the instrument of conciliation itself, hidden torches of dis- 
 cord, to be lighted vip whenever the same great subject should be reviewed. On the 
 whole. Sir, I shall give my vote for the plan proposed by the gentleman from North- 
 ampton, as a more equal ground of compromise than the other; and I have thought it 
 proper to make this explanation, lest my course should be supposed wanting in con- 
 sistency. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas thought it due to himself to vindicate the course he should pursue on 
 the present occasion. Like the gentleman from Orange (Mr. Madison,) he tliought 
 that some provision ought to be made for future apportionments ; but tliis was not pre- 
 cluded by the proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle (Mr. Gordon.) No man 
 in the Convention represented a portion of the State that would lose a greater num- 
 ber of representatives by the arrangement, than his own district : and his personal 
 opinion was, that Representation ought to be based on a more numerous House of Dele- 
 gates : but he felt himself placed in a situation where he must sacrifice the local inte- 
 rests of his district, to the general interests of Eastern Virginia. 
 
 He thought it on the whole best to do so. It gave him great pain to be obliged to 
 choose between the two : but he thought he should be best subserving the interests of 
 his constituents, by adopting the proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle. He 
 considered himself as pledged to contribute his aid to the arrangement of a future sys- 
 tem of apportionment. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, he was acting with the members from Middle Virginia, in embracing 
 Mr. Gordon's scheme. 
 
 He would go a step farther: He thought he should be in favour of some schem.e of 
 future apportionment. He would not be one of a lean majority to force any rule re- 
 specting that subject on a minority : but he was prepared to increase any respectable 
 majority in any plan they should be able to agree upon. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Doddridge's amendment, and decided in the 
 negative — Ayes 44, Noes 49. 
 
 (Mr. Monroe voting Aye, Messrs. Madison and Marshall, No.) 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Gordon's amendment, and carried — Ayes 49, 
 Noes 43. 
 
 (Mr. Marshall Aye, Messrs. Madison and Monroe, No.) 
 
 So the Committee agreed by a majority of six, to adopt the following, as a substitute 
 for the scheme of Mr. Upshur : 
 
 Resolved, That the Representation of the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 There shall be thirteen Senators West of the Blue Pudge of Mountains, and nine- 
 teen East of those Mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates, one hundred and twenty-seven mem- 
 bers, of whom twenty-nine shall be elected from the District Vv^est of the Alleghany 
 Mountains; tv/enty-four from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge; 
 forty from the Blue Ridge to the Head of Tide-water, and thirty-four thence below." 
 
 Mr. Upshur now offered the following amendment : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall have power, to re-arrange the Representation 
 in both Houses of the General Assembly, once in every years, upon a fair 
 
 average of the following ratios, viz : 1st, of white population ; 2d, of Federal numbers." 
 Mr. Thompson of Amherst offered the following amendment, to that of Mr. Upshur : 
 " Resolved, That in the year the Legislature shall provide by law for taking 
 
 the Census of the population of the State, and for a new assessment of its lands : and 
 at the next succeeding session after the Census shall be taken and the assessment 
 made, the Legislature shall by law submit to the qualified voters the decision of the 
 question of the basis of Representation in both Houses of the Legislature. If a ma- 
 jority concur in favor of any particular basis, the Legislature shall at their next suc- 
 ceeding session, apportion tire one hundred and twenty-eight Delegates and thirty- 
 two Senators according to such basis, and shall provide by law for all future appor- 
 tionments upon such basis, and for all future assessments — but should the majority 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 575 
 
 fail to combine in any one basis, the Legislature shall adopt the compound basis of 
 white population, taxation and Federal numbers, in one only or both branches of the 
 Legislature, as to them shall seem expedient. And the law so to be enacted for ap- 
 portionment of Representation and for future assessments, shall become and forever 
 thereafter be a part of this Constitution." 
 
 The question being taken without debate, it was negatived — Ayes 44, Noes 50. 
 
 [Messrs. Madison, Monroe and Marshall, jXo.] 
 
 Mr. Claytor offered the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall, in tlie year , make provision for the 
 
 organization of a Convention equally as nearly as may be, on the quahfied voters of 
 this Commonvv'ealth, who shall re-apportion the Representation in both Houses of the 
 General Assembly, upon such basis as they shall think best, and also make provision 
 for future periodical apportionments." 
 
 Mr. Johnson stated the reason why he should vote against all amendments of this 
 character, viz : that the Convention v^'as clothed with no power to pass them. It was 
 called for a specific object, viz : the amendment of the Constitution ; and it had no 
 power to do any thing else. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke moved the following, as a substitute for Mr. Upshur's 
 amendment : 
 
 " Resolved, That when the amended Constitution shall be submitted to the people, 
 the following question, by way of amendment, shall be propounded to the people, for 
 a final settlement of the principle of the apportionment of representation, viz : 
 
 " Shall the basis of Representation in both branches of the Legislature be white 
 population exclusively 
 
 After a few remarks in explanation by the mover, and an objection by Mr. Leigh, 
 
 The amendment was rejected — Ayes 39. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh offered the following amendment : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the year , and in every tenth year thereafter, it shall be 
 
 the duty of the General Assembly to re-apportion the Representation in the House 
 of Delegates, as nearly as possible in proportion to white population : Provided, That 
 in making such apportionments, no county shall be subject to division." 
 
 It was rejected — Ayes 4-5, Noes 49. 
 
 The question being then put on Mr. Upshur's amendment, (see above,) it was 
 carried — Ayes 50. 
 
 Mr. Upshur moved the following proviso : 
 
 " Provided, That the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed , 
 nor the number of the Senate ." 
 It was carried. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved that the Committee now rise. 
 
 Mr. Powell suggested, that it would be better to report progress, and go into the 
 House and get a vote upon it. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said he did not distinctly understand what the progress was : he wished 
 to see and reflect upon it, 
 
 Mr. Mercer contended, that nothing had yet been done; because it. was the under- 
 standing, when J\Ir. Johnson made his motion to strike out the v/ord Resolved" 
 from Mr. Upshur's first proposition, that a vote was to be finally taken on accepting 
 that proposition as it might be amended. 
 
 The Chair said, it should hold it to be its duty to put such a question, should it be 
 moved ; but, it was contrary to the rule, which it understood to have been adopted at 
 the commencement of the deliberations of the Convention. The duty of a Com- 
 mittee was to amend — that was its whole duty — and if it could not amend what was 
 sent to it, to report the same without amendment. 
 
 Mr. Scott was opposed to reporting in part. Let the Committee go on, and settle 
 what were to be all the elements of the new Constitution, and then refer the whole 
 to a Select Committee, to put them into regular form. 
 
 The Committee then rose. 
 
 In the House, the printing of the propositions having been ordered, 
 The House adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, December 7, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 2 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 The report of the Committee appointed to enquire as to another place of meeting 
 for the Convention, was called up ; and after some conversation, was agreed to. 
 
576 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The result is, a resolution of the Convention to remove its sittings to Mr. Arm- 
 strong's Church, where suitable fixtures are to be prepared for its accommodation. 
 
 A motion, authorising the Clerk of the Convention to act by a deputy, was slightly 
 discussed, and for tlie present laid upon the table. 
 
 [Mr. Munford (it ought in justice to be known,) had expressed his willingness to 
 resign, but was persuaded, by many leading members of the Convention, not to do 
 so. He then expressed his willingness to serve without compensation. Entire satis- 
 faction was expressed on all hands, and the resolution was laid upon the table, on 
 motion of Mr. Summers, merely for consideration as to the best arrangement. The 
 name of Mr. Wyndham Robertson (brother of the Attorney General,) was men- 
 tioned as a suitable deputy.] 
 
 The Convention then, on motion of Mr. Powell, adjourned to meet in the Presby- 
 terian Church to-morrow, at 11 o'clock. 
 
 TUESDAY, December 8, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met in the Presbyterian Church at 11 o'clock, and was opened 
 with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 The President laid before the Convention the following letter : 
 
 RICHMOND, December 8, 1829. 
 
 Sir, — With the warmest feelings of gratitude to the Convention, for the honorable 
 office they were pleased to bestow upon me, permit me, through you, to tender them 
 my respectful resignation of that appointinent. The delicacy of my situation will be 
 readily perceived. For the fifth time, I have been elected Clerk to the House of 
 Delegates ; and although it would be highly gratifying to my feelings to retain my 
 present station as Secretary of the Convention, other considerations imperiously re- 
 quix'e me (with whatever reluctance,) to pursue a difi^erent course. So long as the 
 sessions of the Convention and the House of Delegates, would not have conflicted, 
 it would have given me great pleasure to have affi:)rded each of them my services : 
 and I had determined to do so, without receiving double compensation ; but, being un- 
 willing to transact by deputy the duty which it may be supposed I ought to perform 
 myself, I feel constrained to pursue the course I now adopt. It will alford me great 
 pleasure to render any assistance which may be required to enable my successor to 
 understand the present business of the Convention. 
 
 Relying on the liberality of the body over which you preside, for a just appreciation 
 of the consideration, and an indulgent interpretation of the motives that actuate me, 
 I have the honor to be. 
 
 With the greatest respect. 
 
 Your and their very obedient servant, 
 
 GEORGE W. MUNFORD. 
 
 Hon. James Monroe, ) 
 President of the Convention. ) 
 
 On motion of Mr. Scott, the letter was laid upon the table. 
 
 The Convention then, on motion of Mr. Scott, proceeded to ballot for a Secretary. 
 
 Mr. Scott nominated Mr. David Briggs of Richmond, (a member of the Executive 
 Council,) and said a few words as to his character and standing. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge nominated Mr. Thomas P. Ray of Monongalia, and pledged himself 
 for his competency. 
 
 Messrs. Nicholas and Powell supported the nomination of Mr. Briggs, 
 
 When the Convention proceeded to the ballot, which resulted as follows: 
 For Mr. Briggs, . - ... 57 
 
 For Mr. Ray, - - - , - 26 
 
 For Mr. W. Robertson, (no candidate,) - - 3 
 
 86 
 
 The result of the ballot having been reported to the House, Mr. Briggs was de- 
 clared to be duly elected. 
 
 Mr. Venable, referring to the great difficulty of hearing in the present place of 
 meeting, moved that the report of the Committee appointed to enquire as to a suitable 
 place of meeting, be re-committed. 
 
 The President laid before the House the following letter : 
 
 RICHMOND, 7th December, 1829. 
 Sir, — I am requested, by a resolution of the House of Delegates, to advise the Con- 
 vention of Virginia of a disposition on the part of the House, to afford the Conven- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 577 
 
 tion every facility for the convenient and expeditious dispatch of the important duties 
 which devolve on that body, and to offer it the daily use of the Hall of the House of 
 Delegates, after the hour of 12 o'clock. 
 I have the honor to be, 
 
 With great respect, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 LINN BANKS, Speaker H. D. 
 
 James Monroe, Esq. > 
 President of the Convention. ) 
 
 A desultory debate, attended with some confusion, ensued, in which Messrs. Vena- 
 ble, Mercer, Bayly, Goode, Johnson, Leigh, Doddridge, Stannrd, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Cooke and Mason, took part. Various propositions were suggested : some to carpet 
 the aisles of the Churcli; others to remove to the Baptist Church ; others to return 
 to the Capitol ; others to remain and give the present place of meeting a longer trial; 
 but the conversation (for, it scarce deserved the name of a debate.) issued in the adop- 
 tion of a motion made by Mr. Fitzhugh, that the Convention adjourn, to meet in the 
 Capitol this day at 12 o'clock. 
 
 The Convention adjourned accordingly ; [and the members, who had been seen an 
 hour before, streaming down the hill, were soon seen retracing their steps, relinquishing 
 the Church, with its long aisles and lofty ceilings, for the more congenial precincts of 
 the Hall of Legislation, with its convenient seats and easy reverberation.] 
 
 At 12 o'clock, the Convention assembled in the Capitol. 
 
 Mr. Scott announced to the House the request of the President, that his presence 
 might be dispensed v/ith for the rest of the day, and that Mr. Stanard would occupy 
 his place. 
 
 [Mr. Monroe is in feeble health ; and his unremitted attention to the duties of his 
 situation, accompanied by the effects of a severe cold, have greatly prostrated his 
 strength. It is hoped he will be able to resume his seat to-morrow.] 
 
 The House then went into Committee of the Whole, INIr. P. P. Barbour in the 
 Chair, and took up the report of the Executive Committee, (the discussion on which 
 occupied tlie residue of the day.) 
 
 When this report was last under consideration, the first resolution had been pro- 
 posed to be amended by Mr. Doddridge, so as to declare, that the Governor should be 
 elected by the qualified voters of the Commonwealth, entitled to vote for the most 
 numerous branch of the Legislature ; that he should hold his office for three years, 
 and then be ineligible for three years more. 
 
 But Mr. D. had consented, that Mr. Powell should first offer, as a substitute for the 
 first resolution, the following plan : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Executive Department of the existing form of Government, 
 ought to be amended as follows : 
 
 " Sect. 1. The Executive power shall be vested in a Governor. He shall hold his 
 office for years, and be ineligible for the term of years thereafter : and a 
 
 Lieutenant-Governor shall be chosen at the same time, for the same term, and under 
 the same restrictions. 
 
 " Sect. 2. The Lieutenant-Governor shall act as President of the Senate, but he 
 shall have no right to vote, except the Senate be equally divided upon any question; 
 in which case he shall have the casting vote. 
 
 " Sect. 3. No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor or Lieutenant- 
 Governor, except a citizen of the Commonwealth, nor any who shall not have at- 
 tained the age of years, and who shall not have resided years next pre- 
 ceding his election, in the State. 
 
 Sect. 4. The Governor and Lieutenant-Governor shall be elected at the times 
 and places of choosing members of the most numerous branch of the Legislature, by 
 the voters qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly : Provided, That 
 the election shall take place throughout the Commonwealth on the same day. The 
 persons respectively having the highest number of votes for Governor and Lieute- 
 nant-Governor, shall be elected. In case two or more persons shall have an equal 
 number of votes for Governor, or for Lieutenant-Governor, the Legislature shall im- 
 mediately, by joint ballot of both Houses, choose of the persons having an equal 
 number of votes for Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, the Governor or Lieutenant- 
 Governor, as the case may be. 
 
 Sect. 5. The Governor shall be Commander-in-chief of the militia. He shall have 
 power to convene the Legislature on extraordinary occasions. He shall, from time 
 to time, give information to the Legislature of the condition of the Commonwealth, 
 and recommend to their consideration, such measures as he shall judge necessary and 
 expedient. He shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon by the Le- 
 gislature, and shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed. 
 
 73 
 
578 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 " Sect. 6. The Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, shall, at stated times, receive 
 for their services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished 
 during the term for which they shall have been elected. 
 
 " Sect. 7. The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons after con- 
 viction, fur all olfences, except treasons and in cases of impeachment. Upon con- 
 viction for treason, he shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence, 
 until the case shall be reported to the Legislature at its next session, when the Le- 
 gislature may pardon, or direct the execution of the criminal, or grant a farther re- 
 prieve. 
 
 Sect. 8. In case of the removal of the Governor from office, or of his death, resig- 
 nation, or inability to discharge the duties of his office, his powers and duties shall 
 devolve on the Lieutenant-Governor; and in case of the removal, death, or resigna- 
 tion, or like inability of the Lieutenant-Governor, the Legislature may provide by 
 law upon whom the duties of Governor shall devolve, until such disabilities shall be 
 removed, or a Governor shall be elected. 
 
 " Sect. 9. The Governor shall have power to nominate, and by and with the advice 
 and consent of the Senate, appoint Judges of the Supreme Court, or Court of Final 
 Jurisdiction, and Judges of such Inferior Courts as may from time to time be estab- 
 lished by law; all militia officers, from the rank of Colonel exclusive; the Treasurer, 
 Auditor of Public Accounts, Register of the Land Office, and Attorney General. 
 The Legislature may by law vest the appointment of all other officers of the Com- 
 monwealth, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, in the Gover- 
 nor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, or in the Courts of Law. 
 
 " Sect. 10. The Governor shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen 
 during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions, which shall expire at the 
 end of the next session of that body. 
 
 " Sect. 11. The Governor shall have power to require in writing the opinions of the 
 Lieutenant-Governor, and of the Attorney General, upon all matters appertaining 
 to the duties of his ofhce. 
 
 " Sect. 13. No person, whose tenure of office depends on the pleasure of the Gov- 
 ernor, shall be removed from office without the advice and consent of the Senate to 
 such removal. But the Governor shall have power at any time, to suspend such 
 officer, and appoint another to discharge the duties of his office, until the next ses- 
 sion of the Senate, and until their advice and consent to such removal shall be ascer- 
 tained and expressed." 
 
 And the question being now on that amendment, 
 
 Mr. Powell rose and addressed the Committee : 
 
 I beg leave to assure the Committee, that it is not my intention to occupy their 
 time by a protracted argument in favour of the proposed substitute now under con- 
 sideration, at this period of our session, after having expended nine weeks in discus- 
 sion, without having definitely settled a single principle. 1 should regard myself as 
 unpardono.ble in trespassing upon the time of the Committee, for a moment longer 
 than Vv'as absolutely necessary for explanation. I shall content myself with bringing 
 to the view of the Committee, the new and distinguishing principles, which it is my 
 object to infuse into the Executive Department of the Constitution, and the leading' 
 considerations which have influenced my judgment, in presenting the proposed sub- 
 stitute. 
 
 I had hoped, Mr. Chairman, that upon this subject, there could exist no sectional 
 or party feelings — that Vv'e should all concur in organizing the Executive Department, 
 upon settled and acknowledged principles — acknowledging as we all do, that in a fair 
 representative Government, there ought to be three departments : That these several 
 departments ought to be, in the distribution of their respective powers, separate and 
 distinct, as far as practicable, and, especially, that they ought to be independent of 
 each other : but above all, believing that one department should not owe its very ex- 
 istence to another. I had hoped that the Committee vvould promptly have applied 
 these principles to the Executive of the existing Constitution, and reformed it ac- 
 cordingly. If such reform is not required at the present moment, I ask gentlemen to 
 look forward to future times and ask themselves, whether in the course of human 
 events, the time may not arrive when the present powerless Executive may not be 
 totally inadequate to its object. It is painful to look to evil times; but it is wise to 
 provide for such times — to be prepared for the evil day, when it shall arrive. The 
 time may come, when an efficient Executive, founded upon the affection and confi- 
 dence oi^ the people, may be absolutely necessary for our security and preservation. 
 These general considerations proinpted me to propose the infusion of the prefixed 
 new principles, into the Executive Department of the Government. It must be con- 
 ceded that the Executive is now but a cypher — a bye-word at home — an object of ridi- 
 cule abroad ; the mere creature of the Legislature, without a solitary, substantive, 
 independent power — bound to obey their will, and execute their mandates — the very 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 579 
 
 name of the Governor, unknovrn to many citizens of the Commonwealth, during his 
 whole term of service. 
 
 But, Mr. Chairman, I am transcending the limits I had prescribed to myself upon 
 the present occasion. M}^ object was only to present to the consideration of the 
 Committee, the new and discriminating principles, I was desirous of introducing into 
 the Executive Department. I will proceed to this duty. 
 
 I propose in the first place, the creation of a new" officer, with new powers, and for 
 specific purposes, a Lieutenant-Governor. I have proposed this, with reference to 
 what this Committee have ahead}' done, by a most decided vote ; I mean the abolition 
 of the Council of State ; and moreover, with a view to the possible death or disability 
 of the Governor : In the latter event, to supply his place — and in the former, to 
 constitute one of his advisory Council. This ol£cer, Sir, migiit also discharge other 
 and important duties. It is provided, that he is to be the President of the Senate — 
 and, to him, the Legislature would be expected to assign duties of vital importance, 
 under the general superintendence of the Governor: the duty of watching over, and 
 participating in directing the operations of the Literary Fund, and the Fund for In- 
 ternal Improvement, and a general superintendence over the Penitentiary system — 
 duties of sufficient interest and importance, fully to occupy the time, and to require 
 the talents of one qualified to discharge the duties of the Governor, in certain events 
 before alluded to. 
 
 The second principle I proposed to introduce into the Executive Department is, 
 that the Governor is to be elected bv the people, and not by the Legislature as is now 
 provided : In other words, that the Chief Magistrate of Virginia — the head of a dis- 
 tinct department of the Government, is not to owe his official existence to a co-ordi- 
 nate branch of the same Government ; is not to owe his official existence to a branch 
 of the Government, upon whom, in theory, he is to be a check — by whom he is paid 
 for his services, or not, according to its will and pleasure : a branch of the Govern- 
 ment, who may say to him, for every independent exercise of opinion, contrary to its 
 will : We will not only deprive you of your office, at the end of the 3'ear, but will, 
 in the interim, deprive you of your bread." It is to provide a security against such, 
 a state of dependence, I propose the election of the Governor by the people, in pre- 
 ference to the Legislature. I had beheved, that upon tlais principle, there could be 
 no difference of opinion. 
 
 But, ^Ir. Chairman, if the people are capable of self-government, does it not follow, 
 that it is their undeniable right, to elect the Chief Magistrate — a right, of which we 
 cannot, ought not, to divest them, except it can be conclusively shewn, that it vrould 
 be unwise and unsafe, to limit its exercise to them 
 
 It devolves upon gentlemen, opposed to the election of the Governor by the people, 
 to shew, that it is safest and best to elect by the Legislature, rather than by the people. 
 Permit me to depart from the course I had prescribed to myself, for a m.oment, to ex- 
 amine one or two of the most prominent arguments relied upon by gentlemen in op- 
 position. The venerable gentleman from Loudoun, (]Mr. r>Ionroe,) urges upon us, 
 that in the nature of things, if the people elect him, it must be done through the 
 agency of a caucus. Without admittino- the correctness of this proposition, let us 
 examine, for a moment, the character and extent of this objection. 
 
 Does the venerable gentleman believe, that caucus agency will not be employed in 
 the election by the Legislature? What does observation and experience teach us upon 
 this subject.' Do we not all know in elections b}" the Legislature, that caucuses are 
 resorted to by the respective friends of different competitors for office ? That in truth 
 and in fact, the facilities and efficiency of the caucus system is greater in a small than 
 in a very large body. Can we shut our eyes to the fact, that where the Legislature 
 have the power to appoint to office, that a system of log-rolling will occasionally be 
 resorted to ? That interchange of good offices will be made by the respective friends 
 of candidates for different offices ? I will appeal to the venerable gentleman from 
 Loudoun, to say, if the caucus system is inevitable, whether there is not more dan- 
 ger to be apprehended from that system when resorted to in the Legislature, than 
 when individuals are selected and deputed by the people from every section of the 
 State, to meet at some convenient place to nominate a suitable candidate for Gover- 
 nor, for this object alone and with no other or further powers. I do not think, Mr. 
 Chairman, the evil likely to occur ; but, if inevitable, I am perfectly satisfied, that 
 the caucus system, springing directly from the people, for a single and unconnected 
 object, is liable to much fewer exceptions, than the same system in the Legislature, 
 Would gentlemen consent, that the President of the United States should be elected 
 by Congress originally ? Has not experience taught us the evils of electing the Pre- 
 sident ultimately by that body.' Has not the opinion become universal, that the Con- 
 stitution of the United States ought to be altered in that respect ? All the reasons in 
 favour of such alteration, apply in opposition to the election of the Governor by the 
 Legislature. The last alteration which is proposed by the substitute, and to which I 
 shall invite the attention of the Committee, is the transfer from the Legislature, of 
 
580 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the appointment of certain enumerated officers to the Governor, by and with the ad- 
 vice and consent of the Senate. In vesting this power in the Governor and the 
 Senate, I have not been insensible to the evil consequences of giving a large patro- 
 nage to the Executive, and have attempted to guard against them. Our experience 
 under the Government of the United States, while it has evinced the evils of giving 
 unlimited patronage to the Executive, certainly furnishes no argument to shew, that 
 the Executive ought to have no patronage, or that patronage may be more safely 
 confided to the Legislative Department. I beg gentlemen to look to the particular 
 character of tlie several officers, whose appointment I propose to give to the Gover- 
 nor and Senate ; and I beg them, to ask themselves, if in the nature of things, there 
 is any ground to fear the use of this patronage for sinister purposes. He is to nomi- 
 nate, and by and with the advice of the Senate, to appoint the Judges, the mihtia 
 officers over the rank of Colonel ; the Treasurer, Auditor of Pubhc Accounts, Regis- 
 ter of the Land Office, and the Attorney General, and no others. The number of the 
 Judges is small, and they are dispersed over a wide surface of country. Their cha- 
 racter, their habits, their tenure of office, their entire independence, all preclude the 
 idea of their subserviency to party views or party purposes — there can be no fear from 
 this source of patronage. The militia officers over the rank of Colonel, are alone to 
 be appointed by the Executive and the Senate. Can gentlemen seriously apprehend 
 danger from this source of patronage ? I will not delay the Committee by combating 
 so idle and visionary a fear. There is one idea, however, connected with this branch 
 of the subject, which 1 feel bound to suggest. If the militia are to be effectually em- 
 ployed — if such an occasion should ever occur, the Governor is and ought to be held 
 responsible for all results as Commander-in-chief ; and common justice would demand 
 that he ought to have the selection of his agents in the discharge of his important 
 duties. There are many and strong considerations that might be urged against de- 
 positing the appointing power in the Legislative Department. It is the most expen- 
 sive department of every Government. It is the most encroaching department. 
 There is an irresistible propensity in the popular branch of every Republican Gov- 
 ernment, to draw to itself as much power as possible — and above all, if they dis- 
 charge faithfully their Legislative duties, they have no time to devote to other and 
 diffisrent duties. The experience of every gentleman must have satisfied him, that 
 there is great waste of the public money in the exercise of the appointing power by 
 the Legislature of Virginia. Even in the appointment of a Councillor of State, we 
 have witnessed one or two days of the time of the Legislature expended, at the rate 
 of a thousand or twelve hundred dollars per day; and the same remark is applicable 
 to a greater or less extent in all elections by the Legislature. 
 
 I have thus briefly explained, Mr. Chairman, the provisions of the substitute in- 
 tended to vary the existing Executive system. I might debate upon these several 
 subjects, but I forbear — our time is too precious, and the questions have incidentally 
 been often discussed in the progress of our debates. I will now appeal, in conclusion, 
 to honourable gentlemen who have indulged so freely in denunciations of this scheme, 
 as tending to erect a splendid Executive — as calculated to infuse into the Constitution 
 monarchical principles, to point their finger to a single feature, calculated to support 
 these imputations. I leave my scheme to its fate, satisfied whatever that fate may be, 
 I shall in no wise be responsible. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell rose in reply. It was not his intention, at this time, to go at length 
 into the merits of the question. The mover of the amendment, had commenced his 
 argument in defence of it, by stating its chief merit to lie in that feature, by which the 
 election of Governor was given directly to the people. On that feature of it, he should 
 address a few remarks to the Committee. 
 
 Ought the Governor of such a Commonwealth as Virginia, to be elected directly 
 by the people ? 
 
 In discussing this subject, the advocates of the proposition had invariably com- 
 menced, by laying down the doctrine, that on republican principles, the people, and 
 the people alone, are the legitimate source of power : and that, therefore, they ought 
 to elect, to all the offices in the Commonwealth. None, that ever he had heard of, 
 doubted the position, that the people, in this country, are the sole, legitimate source 
 of power. 
 
 The only question, said Mr. T. is, as to the mode in which they shall exercise their 
 power. Shall they exercise it themselves, in ihe first instance, or by agents, whom 
 they appoint for that purpose ? Either of these modes is equally republican. "Will 
 the gentleman contend that the President of the United States is not elected by the 
 people ? Yet the means they employ in electing him, is to appoint Electors to choose 
 him by their votes. The means by which the Governor of Virginia is elected at pre- 
 sent, are of the same kind. The people elect the members of the Legislature, with 
 the knowledge that they are to choose the Governor. The election of these Delegates 
 is the act of all the people. And the only question is, whether they shall call an in- 
 dividual to the Executive office, in their own persons, or through their agents. Like 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 581 
 
 most other questions in politics, it is a question of expediency : to be referred to the 
 condition of the countr}-, and the nature of the duties to be performed by the Execu- 
 tive. The gentleman himself concedes the question, in another view of it. If it be 
 true that all power originates with the people, and that, Lhexefare, they ought to choose 
 their own officers, and the Governor as one of them, why is it not true that the peo- 
 pie oufflit to choose the Judges also? Why deprive them of the power of electing 
 officers of one kind, and admit them to elect those of another? And yet the gen- 
 tleman himself makes this distinction. I heartily concur with him that the Judicial 
 officers ought not to be chnsen directly bv the people : but I contend tliat it is equally 
 inexpedient that they should elect Executive officers. I have many objections to it; 
 to not one of which, the present mode of election is exposed. 
 
 I do not approve of calhng on the people to elect, except in a case where they can 
 act understandincrlv : and that is, in the choice of their own local Representatives ; the 
 members of both Houses of the State Legislature, and members of Congress. They 
 all know this duty, and perform it well ;. but when you give them the choice of officers, 
 consequences result which are fatal in their tendency to the people themselves. 
 
 The first difficulty is this : in summoning them to the polls, you must either con- 
 vene them at the same time that they elect their R-epresentatives, or at a different 
 time, if at a different time, we all know, from experience, that it is impossible to get 
 a full election. They will not, and do not, turn out to the polls at an}' other season 
 of the year than in the Spring. This is not speculation ; it is fact, as all gentlemen 
 who hear me know. When vacancies occur, by death or other causes, in the Dele- 
 gation to the Legislature, and writs are issued for an occasional election, out of the 
 usual season, it often happens that less than half, sometimes that less than a third, of 
 the whole number of voters in the Spring, can be brought to the polls. If the choice 
 of your Governor shall be appointed at any other time of the year than at the Spring 
 elections, the practical result will be, that he will inevitabh- be chosen by a small mi- 
 nority of the voters themselves. You will be compelled to elect all your officers at 
 the same time, and then we know, from what takes place in other States, what must 
 follow. When many officers are to be chosen at one and the same time, the choice 
 of the most important of them will invariably control all the others : the smaller offices 
 will be lost sight of, and swallowed up in the importance of the great one. If you so 
 arrange your system as to make the office of the Governor the most important, then 
 the friends and partizans of the Governor, will doubtless be very glad to see the plan 
 of the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Powell) prevail, and thej' will sacrifice every 
 thing else to secure the election of their Governor. It is so in New York. He who is 
 for the Governor, is sure to get the vote of all other officers in the county : it is the 
 invariable result. But these are not all the consequences that must ensue. By whom 
 is the election of Governor to be made ? by a mojority of the people .' or only by a plu- 
 rality? If it be said, by a majority, I ask whether, if the people are to be left wholly 
 to themselves in this matter, in an empire so wide as this Commonwealth, and with 
 so little intercourse between its opposite extremities, any man can believe it possible 
 that the people will ever elect a Governor at all On this plan there would be twenty- 
 five candidates at the least ; some leading man is best known to each district of the 
 State ; and the people, left to themselves, vrill naturally vote for him ; there will be as 
 many candidates as there are districts, if not more, and there will be no election. Then, 
 I suppose we are to adopt the New England practice, and turn them back to the peo- 
 ple till they shall give one the majority. But in the mean while, the period will have 
 elapsed for which he wa-s to have served. You will never unite a majority of all the 
 people of Virginia on any one candidate in that time. But to guard against this diffi- 
 cult}', you say that 3. jjlurality shall elect. What then.' There will be a diversity of 
 votes, and the largest and most united county in the State, (which that is I do not 
 know) will regularly and invariably give a Governor to the Commonwealth. Which- 
 ever course you pursue, you will come to the same result. You must either get a Go- 
 vernor who is not known to the people, or a Governor appointed by a small minority 
 of the people. A remedy will be brought for such a dilemma, and what will it be ? 
 The members of the Legislature will convene in this Hall, and here they will hold a 
 Caucus to make a nomination of Governor! 
 
 It will happen from the necessity of the case. Then what becomes of the gentle- 
 man's principle.' In its place you will introduce the odious caucus system, in all its 
 vigour, here, at the Seat of Government: and then, you have an election, not by the 
 people, but by a majority of the members of the Legislature, not appointed to the 
 task, and wholly irresponsible for the manner in which they perform it. Is it not bet- 
 ter at once, and openly, to call upon the members to vote for the Governor, and hold 
 them responsible for their act.' 
 
 For this reason it was, that the wise framers of your Constitution gave the election 
 to the Legislature. It is better than to give it to the people directly, who can have 
 little personal information as to the comparative merits of candidates, and who can 
 
582 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 make no choice by a majority for a long period of time ; and who, if electing by a plu- 
 rality, will be thrown into the hands of a caucus. 
 
 Something was said about tJie expense of this election : we were told it was to cost 
 $1,2U0. But has the gentleman calculated the expense of giving the election to the 
 people? the loss that must be sustained by them in order to perform the task? Will 
 % 1,200 or % 12,000, cover this? No, Sir; this is an element he has not considered. 
 Does he think it costs nothing to call out all the people of Virginia to their courthouses, 
 some ten or a dozen times in the course of two years ? On the score of economy, 
 then, the matter is much better as it now stands. 
 
 I am opposed to frequently convening the people in any other manner than is at 
 present provided by the Constitution. Nothing is more likely to dissatisfy the people 
 themselves, than to harass them in this way. We know that even now, whatever 
 their disposition may be on some special occasion, but comparatively few attend at our 
 elections. Get them to begin neglecting to attend the election of Governor, and you 
 will soon have them neglecting the elections of members of their Legislature ; the 
 most calamitous event, in my judgment, of any that can befal the Commonwealth. 
 
 These are the reasons for which I prefer the mode of election now provided by the 
 Constitution; or rather, that which will be provided, if one of the principles be finally 
 adopted vi^hich has received the sanction, I believe, of all, or nearly all the members 
 of this Committee, viz : that all the elections shall be held vita voce. Suffer me, here, 
 to answer one of the arguments of the gentleman, which he grounded on the fear that 
 in the Legislature there will be introduced a system of " log-rolling," as it has been 
 expressively termed. Let me remind the gentleman that there is to be no hallot'hox ; 
 each member will have to record his vote with his name to it. His constituents will 
 know how he has acted, and he will have to explain when he returns to them. This 
 will be a great improvement in the election of Governor. The people will still elect 
 him, but not by irresponsible agents. The Constitution will require every man to 
 act openly, viva voce, under the eye of those who appointed him. But the choice 
 immediately by the people, will be injurious in its efiect, to the people themselves. 
 
 One word on the other branch of his argument ; I mean that part of it relating to 
 patronage. In modern times, all the practical business of Government is confined 
 principally to two subjects, which absorb all its actual power; these are, revenue and 
 patronage. It has been said by one of the wisest statesmen of modern times, that 
 " the revenue of the nation is the nation." I concur in this sentiment: and next, 
 after revenue, comes patronage. In a Republican Government, nothing is so impor- 
 tant ais first to reduce the amount of its patronage, and then to divide the power over 
 what remains. The wise framers of our Constitution hit upon the mode of doing this. 
 They gave to the County Courts a large share of the patronage of this Common- 
 wealth; they gave another large share to the Legislature, and then they allowed 
 the Executive the rest. The effect has been most happy : There has not been, in the 
 course of fifty-four years, a single case, at least my recollection does not now supply 
 me with one single case, of general excitement in the choice of our Governor. There 
 has been no caucus ; no log-rolling. The reason is, the Executive has not enjoyed 
 much patronage. But clothe the Executive power with the patronage of the State, 
 and you will introduce at once conflicting pi-inciples, which it will be impossible to 
 control, and which will have the most dangerous consequences. So far from regard- 
 ing the second member in the gentleman's plan as any recommendation to it, I consi- 
 der it the most objectionable feature of the whole. Let the patronage of the State re- 
 main as it is, and it will produce only good results; but increase it, as is proposed, and 
 you will make the office of Governor po desirable, that you will have cabals and com- 
 motion thi'oughout the community. 
 
 These are the reasons why I am opposed to those two features of the gentleman's 
 plan : and if these two are stricken out, all the residue will be found to have been pro- 
 vided for in the report of the Executive Committee. 
 
 Mr. Wilson required that the question be taken on the several resolutions of Mr. 
 Powell seriatim, as he was in favor of some and opposed to others of them. 
 
 Mr. Stanard called first for a division of the question to strike out and insert. 
 
 It was so divided accordingly : and (on the question to strike out the resolutions of 
 the Executive Committee, as already amended, previously to the offering of Mr. 
 Powell's substitute,) the vote stood, Ayes 34: which being a minority, the motion to 
 strike out was lost. 
 
 So the Committee decided not to prefer Mr. Powell's substitute. 
 
 (Mr. Madison voted in the affirmative.) 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved farther to amend the report of the Executive Committee, 
 as follows : 
 
 " That the Governor be elected by the persons qualified to vote for membei-s of the 
 House of Delegates, at the several times and places appointed to hold elections for 
 members of the General Assembly. The Governor shall hold his office for 
 years, and afler the expiration of his time, shall be inehgible for years." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 583 
 
 And the question being on striking out and inserting, 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, that the report of the Committee had been amended on his mo- 
 tion. The opinions he had then expressed, he held still. If the Constitution was to 
 be so framed, that the election of Governor by the Legislature, would be a fair ex- 
 pression of the will of the people, and would leave the Governor afterwards indepen- 
 dent of the Legislature, he should be in favour of his election by that body. He 
 thought the Governor's independence pretty well secured, as the resolution now stood ; 
 and the question now was, whether his election by the Legislature would be a fair 
 expression of the popular will. But this must depend on a matter yet unsettled, viz : 
 the arrangement of Representation and Suffrage. If this was to be so arranged, that 
 the vote of the majority of the Legislature would express the will of but a minority 
 of the people, then he should be in favour of his election by the people themselves. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that he too adhered to his former view of this subject. He 
 felt so much solicitude on the all-absorbing question of the basis of Representation, 
 that it entered into all subjects connected with it. If the Legislature was not to be 
 made fairly to represent the people, then his solicitude for a popular election of Gov- 
 ernor would be still farther enhanced. They could not stir wisely in this, until that 
 was first settled. 
 
 Mr. Leigh demanded a division of the question on striking out and inserting. It 
 was divided accordingly ; and the question being put on striking out, it was nega- 
 tived — Ayes 42, Noes 49. 
 
 [Mr. Madison, Aye.] 
 
 So the Committee refused to strike out the Governor's election by the Legislature. 
 No farther amendments being offered to the first resolution of the Executive Com- 
 mittee, the second was read as follows : 
 
 2. Resolved, That there ought to be appointed a Lieutenant-Governor of this Com- 
 monwealth." 
 
 No amendments being offered to this, the third resolution was then read, which is 
 in these words: 
 
 3. Resolved, That the Executive Council, as at present organized, ought to be abol- 
 ished, and that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council." 
 
 Mr. Upshur moved to amend this resolution as follows : 
 
 *' Resolved^ That there shall be appointed an Executive Council or Council of State, 
 consisting of a Lieutenant-Governor, and two Councillors, (who shall perform the 
 same duties, and in all other respects hold the same relation to the Governor, as the 
 present Council of State.) 
 
 " The said Councillors shall be elected by the General Assembly, and shall con- 
 tinue in office three years, but may be re-elected from term to term. All vacancies 
 occasioned by death, resignation, removal from the Commonwealth, or other disability, 
 shall be supplied by the General Assembly. 
 
 " Two of the said Council shall form a quoruisi, and in case of an equal division of 
 the Council, the Governor shall have the casting vote." 
 
 Mr. Wilson demanded a division of the question, on striking out and inserting; but 
 withdrew the motion at the request of 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, who wished Mr. Upshur to have an opportunity of explaining and 
 advocating the amendment he had offered ; but who gave notice that if it was adopted, 
 he (Mr. F.) should move to amend it in a manner which he explained. 
 
 Mr. Upshur then rose to address the Committee : 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — It was very far from my expectation, when I offered the resolution 
 before you, that I should involve myself in the discussion of this already exhausted 
 subject. It was my design to submit to an immediate vote, without adding a single 
 remark to the ample arguments, which we have already heard. It seems to be con- 
 sidered, however, that I am renewing a proposition, which has been substantially re- 
 jected already, and of course, that it is incumbent on me to assign some reason for 
 such a proceeding. I shall do so, Sir, with all possible brevity and simplicity, con- 
 tenting myself with a mere exposition of my views, without attempting to enforce or 
 illustrate the conclusive arguments, which have already been urged by others. 
 
 We must all have been struck with the fact, that every scheme which has been 
 presented to us upon this subject, contemplates a Council, in one fcrm or another. 
 In this respect, the coincidence between them is remarkable, and they differ only in 
 the details of arrangement, and the duties to be performed. Let us examine them all, 
 in order that we may select from their number that which will be at once the cheapest, 
 and the most safe and salutary in practice. 
 
 The first to be reviewed, is that of the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Nicholas.) 
 He proposed a Council different from that now under consideration, only in this, that 
 it was to consist of four members, instead of three. I need scarcely say, that it met 
 my entire approbation ; but, it has been rejected by the Committee, chiefly, I am wil- 
 ling to believe, because it was considered unnecessarily numerous, and therefore, un- 
 necessarily expensive. In this respect, and in this only, the plan before us is pre- 
 
584 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ferable. It promises the same advantages as a component part of the Executive, 
 W^hile it removes, to a great extent, the objection on the score of expense. 
 
 Another plan proposes, that the Council shall consist of the Attorney General, and 
 what has been called the Heads of Departments; that is, the Auditors, Treasurer, 
 Register of the Land Office, or some one or more of them. In this respect, gentle- 
 men seek to form the Government of Virginia upon the model presented to us in that 
 of the United States, not remembering that the two Governments are so entirely dif- 
 ferent, both in their structure and in their purposes, as to discountenance all argu- 
 ments from analogy. The very nature and objects of these offices in Virginia, forbid 
 the idea that those who fill them are properly qualified to become the advisers of the 
 Executive head. They all require men of methodical business habits, laborious in- 
 dustry, and a correct knowledge of accounts; and they require nothing more. We 
 have no diplomatic intercourse to. conduct; no foreign connexions to guard ; no in- 
 terest of any sort, with which these officers are connected, requiring that they should 
 be politicians, nor indeed, that they should possess any other qualifications than those 
 of the simple accountant and clerk. To what objects shall the Legislature have 
 regard, in electing them to office ? Shall the Auditor be chosen because he is quali- 
 fied for the duties of Auditor, or because he possesses the loftier qualifications of an 
 Executive Councillor? He who is best suited to the one station, may be least suited 
 to the other; and this indeed, must be the case in most instances, since the duties of 
 the two stations are wholly dissimilar. The same remark applies with equal truth to 
 the Treasurer and Register. By this plan, therefore, we shall be reduced to the sad 
 alternative, either of filling these important departments with incompetent heads, or 
 else of providing the Governor with incompetent advisers. To this view of the sub- 
 ject, which would of itself be conclusive to my mind, may be added the fact, alike 
 fortunate and honourable to us, that we have no offices without official duties. And so 
 far as the officers above mentioned are concerned, it is believed to be strikingly true, 
 that they have already a mass of duties resting upon them, which all their time and 
 all their attention barely enable them to discharge. As to the Attorney General, he 
 is already a Councillor, as far as he can ever be properly made so. He is the law 
 adviser of the Executive. This is his profession, and for this he is fitted. His mind 
 is not turned to the details of Executive business; and he may, and in most cases 
 zvill be found as little qualified for them as any other man in the community. 
 
 There is yet another objection, which is decisive upon this question. According to 
 the scheme of our laws, (and from the necessity of the case, it must always be so,) 
 the Executive exerts a direct supervision over most, and perhaps all of these depart- 
 ments. It must appear to every one extremely absurd, to compel the Governor to 
 take advice of those very individuals, upon whom his power is to operate, and who 
 have, so far as this branch of Executive duty is concerned, a direct interest to mis- 
 lead his judgment. The argument upon this point is susceptible of great amplifi- 
 cation. Gentlemen, however, will not fail to perceive the dangerous and corrupting 
 influences of this sort of official connection, upon official responsibility, and the purity 
 of official conduct. It cannot be necessary to pursue the subject through all its de- 
 tails, nor to point out all the various modes in which these deleterious influences may 
 be exerted. 
 
 The only remaining plan which has been submitted for consideration, or brought 
 to our notice in the course of debate, is that of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. 
 Scott.) He proposes a Council of advice only, possessing no power to control in any 
 respect the discretion of the Governor. In whatever aspect this plan may be viewed, 
 it appears to me to be altogether useless and unprofitable. Will you compel the 
 Governor to consult his Council in all cases, or will you leave this to his discretion ? 
 Let us view the subject in both these aspects. 
 
 According to our present system, it is true as a general rule, that the Governor can 
 do nothing without the advice of his Council. We are informed, however, by the 
 gentleman from Amelia, who now fills that station, that in practice, there are a variety 
 of cases in which the Governor acts alone ; cases which could not be foreseen by the 
 Legislature, and which in their circumstances, demand this departure from the general 
 rule. If we require, by a Constitutional provision, that the Governor shall in all 
 cases consult his Council, we shall run the hazard of destroying the efficiency of that 
 department in a large class of cases, which require the utmost promptness in decision 
 and action, and in which no consultation with Council can ever be necessary. If, on 
 the other hand, we require such consultation in particular cases only, how, I would 
 ask, shall we discriminate ? It is obviously impossible to do so, unless we can look 
 through all futurity, and provide for all exigencies, which time, and the changing 
 relations of the Government may produce. In this view of the subject, we have a 
 clear advantage in preserving the present organization of the Executive. The prac- 
 tice under it is settled, and its powers and duties are ascertained by time, and fixed 
 by the long acquiescence of the country. 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVENTION. 
 
 585 
 
 But, Sir, apart from all these considerations, what benefit can vre promise ourselves, 
 from corapellinor the Governor to consult even the wisest sages of the land, if we 
 leave him at liberty to disregard their counsel ? After all, his own discretion must be 
 his only guide, and our only security. Even if no Co\mcil were provided, he would 
 be at liberty to consult whom he pleased, and we should have the same security which 
 this proposition offers, that he would consult tliose who were competent to advise him, 
 and that he would profit by their counsel. I can perceive no benefit which any one 
 can promise himself, from this proposition, except in this, that the Council, by keeping 
 a record of the measures proposed for their consideration, might bring the conduct of 
 the Governor to the notice of the country, and thereby provide a means of enforcing' 
 the responsibihties of his office. There is danger that we may be deceived by the 
 speciousness of this idea. What vriU. be the real office of tliis advising Council? 
 They cannot compel the Governor to act : they cannot restrain him from acting : 
 thev cannot control him in any respect whatever. Their sole office is to hear the 
 Gorernor. while he announces his purposes ; to express their own opinions, conscious 
 that no one is compelled to respect them ; and to record the transaction for the infor- 
 mation of the country. This is only anotlier name for spies upon the Governor. It 
 seems to me inevitable, that the office of Councillor must soon fall into discredit under 
 such an organization as this, and that it will be impossible te draw to it such talents 
 and qualifications, as to give it either dignity or usefulness. And even if such conse- 
 quences as these should not be the result, in what respect, permit me to enquire, can 
 a system like this secure responsibiUty on the part of the Governor .' Suppose that 
 jou have all the information which this listening and recording Council can o-ive you ; 
 and suppose, if you please, that the Governor has, in hundreds of instances, disre- 
 garded tlieir advice, when in your opinion, he ought to have acted upon it. What 
 then Have you not expressly authorised him to disregard it ; and will you punish 
 him for exercising that very discretion, which your fundamental law compels him to 
 exercise ? It is impossible. Sir — from the very nature of the case, it is impossible, 
 that responsibility can be in any degree secured by such a contrivance as this. 
 
 We are yet to consider this scheme, Sir, as leaving it discretionary with the Gov- 
 ernor, whether to consult his Council or not. This is, in other words, to submit it to 
 his discretion, whether he will hate a Council or not. I will not detain the Com- 
 mittee, by pointino- out the practical absurdities of such a system as this. You allow 
 the Governor to consult his Council or not, as shall seem to him proper ; and if he 
 should condescend to consult them, you allow him to follow their advice or not, as 
 shall seem to him proper. What is such a Council, other than a name.= 
 
 I have endeavoured to shew, that the plan now before us provides no means of en- 
 forcing responsibility on the part of the Governor. It is worthy of remark, liiat it 
 leaves the Councillors themselves equally irresponsible. It is their office to advise: 
 it is the Governor's office to act. It is difficult to imagine how you can punish a 
 Councillor for giving bad advice, when, according to the strict theory of your system, 
 no practical consequences can ever result from that advice. 
 
 If, Sir. it be admitted, that a Council of State in some form or other, ought to be 
 provided. I venture to hope, that none of those which have been reviewed, and which 
 propose to change the character of that body as now existing, will meet the approba- 
 tion of the Committee. I have now but little more to say in favour of the plan which 
 I have felt it my duty to submit. The Committee will perceive, tliat I have not drawn 
 out that plan into details. It is my object to submit the principle only, feeling assured, 
 that if it shoiild be approved, no difficulty can arise in adapting it to practice. I may 
 safely rest the defence of that principle on the arguments we have already heard. 
 No subject has been more ably discussed, nor is there one on which it is now so diffi- 
 cult to advance a new idea.' The arguments of the gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. 
 Giles,) and the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh.) have com,pletely occupied 
 the entire ground, and left to those who may follow them, nothincr but the task of 
 recapitulation. It is a task which I do not mean to undertake ; for, arguments which 
 have been used by them, would lose all their charms, and much of their weight, if 
 detailed by me. I may be excused, however, for reviving in the minds of the Com- 
 mittee some of the leadinof topics of discussion, convinced tliat the able arguments, 
 by which they were illustrated and enforced, will be revived along with them. 
 
 The advantages of a plural Executive, as it has been aptly called, have been so 
 clearly pointed out, that the strongest prejudices upon that subject must have been 
 beaten down. Whether we look to the responsibihties of the office ; to the security 
 which it affords against an abuse of its power and patronage: to the purity of its 
 action, as a simple Executive of the laws; to its peculiar usefulness in retaining 
 always in office some one or more familiar with the history of its transactions, and 
 skilled in the details of its business; to the simplicity of its action, as tested by ex- 
 perience ; to its ample guards against all usurpation of power ; to its pecuhar adap- 
 tation to a system, which professes to surround hberty with every rampart, which ihe 
 
 74 
 
586 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 most watchful jealousy can contrive ; above all, to the fact, that the history of fifty- 
 lour years does not afibrd us one instance of a usurpation of power, and scarcely one 
 of serious abuse. When we consider all these things, as they were impressed upon 
 us by the oemleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) we ought at least to pause, and 
 to pause long, before we exchange such a system for any untried expedient. Let us 
 not forget, that the practice under this system is established and settled. We have 
 seen the machine at work, and we all know that it has worked well. We have not 
 the same security for any other, and our wisest calculations upon that subject may be 
 disappointed by the results. 
 
 We all admit, Mr. President, that it is necessary to provide a Lieutenant-Governor, 
 on whom the duties of the Executive may devolve in case of the death, resignation, 
 or absence of the Governor, or whenever, from other causes, the Governor may be 
 unable to act. We have already felt the difficulty of assigning to this office any du- 
 ties whatever, (when not acting as Governor.) unless we make him a Councillor of 
 State. It is admitted, that he must have a salary, and we do not wish that his office 
 should be a sinecure. The plan before us removes all difficulty upon this subject. A 
 Councillor of State, and generally the ablest and most experienced among them, will 
 be the Lieutenant-Governor. He will succeed to the office of the Governor, with all the 
 advantages of ample information, derived from actual practice in the duties of the 
 station. Here then, is the best material, out of which a Lieutenant-Governor can be 
 made, a material alread}'- shaped to our hands, and one which does not cost the Trea- 
 sury one additional penny. 
 
 Before I entered this body, Mr. President, I partook very largely of the hostility, 
 which prevails so generally in the country, against the present Executive Council. I 
 believe. Sir, that 1 did not duly undei'stand the subject. I acknowledge, that my 
 opinions have been changed by the arguments which 1 have heard in this Committee. 
 I have now no other objection to the existing Council than this, that it is too nume- 
 rous, and consequently too expensive. This objection I have endeavoured to remove, 
 in the sclieme before you. For myself, I am at all times in favour of the most eco- 
 nomical disbursement of the public money ; but, I would not lightly permit conside- 
 rations of that sort to interfere with a wise and safe organization of an important 
 department of the Government. True economy suggests the most liberal ideas upon 
 this subject. 1 shall not fear, that the Treasury will be unprofitably burthened, if it 
 be charged with no more than the necessary expenses of wise, safe, efficient and free 
 institutions. It is not easy to pay too high a price for such blessings as these. Sin- 
 cerely-believing that the measure now before you will contribute its lull share of these 
 blessings to our common country, I commit it, without farther comment, to its fate. 
 
 Mr. Mercer suggested an objection to Mr. Upshur's scheme ; as the advice of the 
 Council was to remain, as at present, obligatory on the Governor, and as it was to 
 consist of a Lieutenant-Governor and two Councillors, any two of whom were to 
 constitute a quorum, if they were to advise him against his ow^n judgment of what 
 was right, he must comply: and thus it might happen that a Lieutenant-Governor 
 and one Councillor, (constituting a majority of the Council.) might rule the Gover- 
 nor and the other Councillor, because the Governor was to have none but a casting 
 vote. Here then, the Governor and one of his Council would be, technically, and in 
 effect, a minoritij. 
 
 Mr. Leigh replied, that the Governor is not bound to do whatever the Council ad- 
 vise him to do ; but is only restrained from doing what they oppose. 
 
 Mr. Mercer admitted the distinction, but insisted that the effect would still be as he 
 had stated ; and added, that the Lieutenant-Governor would be the most unfit person 
 in the world as an adviser of the Governor, as he might have been his rival. He 
 preferred the plan of Mr. Fitzliugh. 
 
 Mr. Wilson now renev.^ed his demand for a division of the question, on striking 
 out and inserting : it was divided accordingly ; and the question being on striking out, 
 
 Mr. Scott expressed his wish to have the Council organized as Mr. Upshur pro- 
 posed, but without giving the advice of Council a binding authority, in any respect, 
 upon the Governor. He gave notice that if the motion to strike out succeeded, and 
 Mr. Upshur's amendment should then be inserted, he should move so to amend it as 
 to produce the etlect he had mentioned. 
 
 Mr. Randolph suggested that the resolution proposed to be stricken out, contained, 
 as now amended, two distinct propositions — the first he wished to retain, the second 
 to strike out, as, according to the best of his knowledge and belief, it was not Engfish. 
 
 The Chair decided that the question of striking out could not be so sub-divided, 
 but the gentleman would obtain his object by m^oving to re-insert one of the clauses, 
 if in connexion with other words. 
 
 The question on strikincr out, was then put, and decided in the affirmative — Ayes 
 47, Noes 46. 
 
 (Mr. Madison and Mr. Marshall, aye.) 
 
 So the Committee struck out the third resolution as amended. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 587 
 
 And the question novr being put on inserting Mr. Upshur's proposition as a sub- 
 stitute, 
 
 ]Mr. Scott moved to amend it, by striking from it the words who shall perform the 
 same duties as the present Council;" his object being to require the Governor to 
 possess himself of tlie advice of his Council in all matters (except these of his mili- 
 tary function as Commander-in-chief.) but not to bind Mm by it. 
 
 Mr. Randolph opposed the motion, on the ground that what the present duties of 
 the Council were, was well known and established ; but what the new duties to be 
 assigned them were, could not be known till those duties had been expressly defined; 
 and no man could tell whether the Government would remain in existence until 
 then. He thought they had had experience enougii to induce them never to depart from 
 the law as adjudged and established. He was for what was sellled and certain, and 
 not for gettino" at ignotum per ignotius. If they said, that the duties of tlie Council 
 were to be the same as they now were, the meaning was known and understood : but, 
 if these words were to be stricken out, the Committee would immediatel}^ be at sea, 
 and a long course of adjudged decisions would be rendered of no value. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax suggested that the Governor was now not compelled to follow the 
 advice of Council, and would be still less if tlieir number should be reduced from 
 eight to two, 
 
 Mr. Scott explained his object to be, to leave the Governor free; and as to the un- 
 certainty of meaning, it would be no greater tlian at present. 
 
 The question was now taken on ]\Ir. Scott's amendment to !Mr. Upshur's proposi- 
 tion for a Council, and decided in the affirmative — Ayes 51. 
 
 (Mr. Madison and Mr. Marshall, aye.) 
 
 INIr. Wilson moved for the rising of tlie Committee, but it was opposed by Mr. 
 Claiborne, and lost — Ayes 34. 
 
 iSIr. Scott moved further to amend Mr. Upshur's proposition, b}- strikino; out the 
 parts in brackets, [see next page.] 
 
 It was agreed to without debate, 
 
 Mr. Scott then moved tlie following amendment : 
 Resolved, That the Governor shall, before he performs any act in his official capa- 
 city other than as Commander-in-chief, take the advice of the Executive Council 
 thereupon ; but he shall be at liberty to adopt or reject the same." 
 
 Mr, Tho.npson was opposed to the amendment : thinking, that if the State were to 
 pay so dearly for having this advice given to the Governor, the least he could do 
 would be to treat it with sufficient respect to be governed by it. 
 
 Mr. Giles, being unable from hoarseness to go at large into the debate, sucrgested 
 to Mr. Scott that the words of his amendment went far beyond what he presumed to 
 be the purpose of the mo%-er. It restrained the Governor from, doing any act what- 
 ever without the advice of Council. !Xow, there were a multitude of matters of form 
 which needed no such advice, such as the authentication of documents, &c. &c. 
 
 He expressed his recrret that the gentleman from Fauquier, would not content him- 
 self with what had worked so well for fifty-four years, but would aim at making it 
 absolutely perfect, and in the effort went to throw cU into uncertainty and embarrass- 
 ment. He thought the remark of Mr. Randolph entitled to more weight than had 
 been given it, when he had spoken of changing long fixed, organic law. ^Nlr. G. 
 again briefly explained the present relations between the Governor and Council, and 
 expressed his fears of the embarrassino- effect of Mr. Scott's amendment. 
 
 Mt. Scott said, that he had come to the Convention persuaded of the propriety of 
 abolishing the Council altoo-ether ; the gentleman from Amelia. (Mr Giles,) had in- 
 duced him to abandon at least one half of his heresies on that subject; but he could 
 not, as yet at least, become an entire convert. It was very possible he had used 
 words too large in their meaning. All he wanted was, to secure the principle of the 
 Governor's entire hberty and responsibility. 
 
 Mr. Leigh referred to his former ariruments in behalf of the Council as now ex- 
 isting. He was astonished that gentlemen, whose objection against it was, that it 
 was a useless body, should propose another still more useless. 
 
 He remonstrated with earnestness against giving the Governor advice which he 
 might disregard : illustrated its practical effect in making of contracts, appointments, 
 and doing other official acts of the Execulive. The patronage of the entire Execu- 
 tive of Virginia was large ; it was not felt, because so much divided ; but if concen- 
 trated in one person, (as it must be, if the Governor was perfectly free.) it would 
 speedily be felt and become an object of intrigue and strife. 
 
 Mr. L. put. in a stroncr light, the consequences of composing the Council of the 
 officers of Government, already loaded with business, and though competent to their 
 own departments, very unsuitable to be counsellors of the Governor. He concluded 
 by declaring iiimself opposed to the amendment of Mr. Scott, and his determinatiouj 
 if notliing better should be sugofested, to vote away the whole Council. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Scott, the~Committee now rose. 
 
588 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Leigh, the letter from the Speaker of the House of Delegates 
 was laid on the table. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Scott, the Convention resolved to meet at 10 o'clock to-morrow, 
 and take a recess during the session of the House of Delegates. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, December 9, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 In consequence of the indisposition of Mr. Monroe, Mr. P. F. Barbour was ap- 
 pointed President of the Convention, pro tcm. 
 
 On taking the Chair, Mr. Barbour delivered a brief address in nearly the follow- 
 ing terms : 
 
 Gentlemen of^ the Convention : 
 
 Whilst I tender you my thanks, for the manifestation of your confidence, in elect- 
 ing me, as President //?*o tempore, I cannot forbear to express my sincere regret, for 
 the cause which has created the necessity of such an appointment. 
 
 In rising to address you, it is not my purpose to detain you, with any thing like 
 a set speech : but only to say, that I promise zeal, fidelity, and perfect impartiality, 
 in the station to which you have just called me. As to my qualifications, I shall say 
 nothing; for as on the one hand, self-commendation would be wholly unbecoming, 
 so on the other, self-disparagement, is almost always regarded as uncandid. 1 pro- 
 ceed, then, to the discharge of the arduous duties which you have assigned me, with 
 such ability as I possess, relying with confidence, upon your support, when I shall 
 be right; upon your indulgent consideration, when I may be wrong, and upon your 
 disposition to do full justice to my efforts, to merit the honor which you have con- 
 ferred upon me. 
 
 The House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Gordon of Albemarle in 
 the Chair; and proceeded again to consider the third resolution of the Executive 
 Committee, wliich is in the following words : " Resolved, That the Executive Council, 
 as at present organized, ought to be abolished, and that it is inexpedient to provide 
 any other Executive Council" — together with an amendment moved thereto by Mr. 
 Fitzhugh, and adopted ; and the question being on the following substitute for the 
 whole, moved by Mr. Upshur: 
 
 " Resolved, That there shall be appointed an Executive Council or Council of State, 
 consisting of a Lieutenant-Governor, and two Councillors, [who shall perform the 
 same duties, and in all other respects hold the same relation to the Governor as the 
 present Council of State.] 
 
 " The said Councillors shall be elected by the General Assembly, and shall con- 
 tinue in office three years, but may be re-elected from term to term. All vacancies 
 occasioned by death, resignation, removal from the Commonwealth, or other disability, 
 shall be supplied by the General Assembly. 
 
 [" Two of the said Council shall form a quorum, and in case of an equal division 
 of the Council, the Governor shall have the casting vote."] 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend it by substituting therefor the following : (being a mo- 
 dification of what he had offered yesterday,) viz : 
 
 " An Executive Council consisting of three members, shall be chosen by of 
 both Houses of Assembly, to remain in office for three years. They shall annually 
 choose out of their own members a President, who, in case of death, inability, or 
 necessary absence of the Governor from the Government, shall act as Governor. 
 Their proceedings shall be entered of record and signed by tlie members present, (to 
 any part whereof any member may enter his dissent) and laid before the General 
 Assembly when called for by them. This Council may appoint their own Clerk, who 
 shall have a salary settled by law, and take an oath of secrecy of such matters as he 
 shall be directed by the board to conceal. At the end of one year after their first 
 appointment, one Councillor to be designated by lot shall go out of office, and the va- 
 cancy shall be supplied by a new election. At the end of the next year, another Coun- 
 cillor, to be designated in like manner, shall go out of office, and the vacancy be sup- 
 plied by a new election : and this rotation shall be continued in due order annually. 
 The Executive Council shall stand in the same relation to the Governor as the Privy 
 Council or Council of State under the existing Constitution, except that it shall ad- 
 vise merely, and not controul him." 
 
 ■Mr. Upshur said, that he should vote against the amendment of Mr. Scott, and 
 against all other forms of a Council, unless based upon the same principle as at present. 
 The argument was exhausted, and he should not attempt to renew it. According to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 689 
 
 the plan now proposed, the Governor was at liberty to ask the advice of his Council 
 or not, and when that advice was given, he was at liberty to follow it or not at his plea- 
 sure. What then was the office of a Councillor? what possible good could arise Irom 
 having such a body, unless, indeed, it might be to keep a record, in order to shew 
 when the Governor had consulted them, and when he had acted contrary to their ad- 
 vice. What was the value of such a record? Cui bono? Was it in order to censure 
 the Governor, although the Constitution would allow him to disregard their advice ? 
 Nay, when that Constitution exacted of him as a duty to follow his own judgment, 
 when tlie advice of the Council happened to coincide with his own will, might he not 
 as well act without it? and if it did not so coincide, he was then bound to go against 
 it. To constitute such a Council, would be feeing three men to sit by the Governor, 
 with no duty on earth to perform but that of spies upon his action. What would 
 such Councillors be r what would be their responsibility ? The Governor would be 
 left as perfectly at large, as if they had no existence. He might perhaps, for form's 
 sake, lay some trivial matters betbre them, which he considered as of little conse- 
 quence, and concerning which there could be but one opinion. But in all cases of 
 serious responsibility, if the Governor had reason to believe that his Council difiered 
 from him in opinion, he would not ask their advice at all. But suppose that the Con- 
 stitution should make it obligatory upon the Governor to apply for the advice of his 
 Council in all cases, the result would be a great waste of time : for, as the gentleman ^ 
 from Amelia had stated, there were a number of cases of the mere forms of office, such 
 as the authentication of papers, &c. in which the Governor acted on his own respon- 
 sibility. But under such a regulation, he could not even sign the commission of the 
 lowest officer, nor authenticate the most ordinary paper, without first calling his 
 Council togetiier. They must advise in all cases whatever, but in many cases it 
 would be but pouring advice into deaf ears. Such a Council he should consider as 
 an absolute nuisance, and should therefore vote against the amendment. 
 Mr. Leigh of Chesterlield. now rose, and spoke nearly as follows : 
 Mr. Chairrnan, — When this subject was before the Committee the other day, I de- 
 livered my sentiments upon it somewhat at large ; and I do not mean to inflict upon 
 the Committee a repetition of what I then said. But, having always regarded the 
 Executive Council as a most wise and valuable institution ; an institution, which has 
 had the rare felicity to accomplish, fully and exactly, the purpose designed by its 
 founders, of weakening the Executive power by division, and thus rendering it in- 
 capable of mischief, without impairing its capacity to do good, and the singular fate 
 to be condemned for the very reason that it has answered its original design — to be 
 chiefly objected to, because it destroys the independent power, and consequently (it 
 is inferred) the responsibility of the Governor — I am bound to make every effort to 
 preserve it. I think there are some views of the subject, which the gentleman front 
 Fauquier (Mr. Scott) has not yet fully considered, and which it behoves him, and all 
 of us, to consider well, before we consent to abolish the principle of this institutioru 
 I am perfectly aware, that what I have to say, will have no weight whatever with 
 those who are opposed to a Council in any shape, and who, on principle, prefer a sin- 
 gle to a plural Executive. To such gentlemen, I have no remarks to offer worthy of 
 their attention. There is a radical diversity of opinion between me and them; and I 
 despair of producing any impression whatever on their minds. I address myself to 
 those, who are of opinion, that to demolish, is not the best way to mend ; who believe, 
 that the work of true reform consists in the correction of abuses, and the prevention 
 of anticipated evils ; and who, in pursuit of those ends, will give their care to the 
 preservation of all that is sound and valuable in our political fabric. W^ith gentlemen 
 of this description, (and I believe there are many such in this Assembly), it is possi- 
 ble what I have now to say may have some influence to save the Executive Council 
 from destruction. 
 
 It must have occurred to every man who has bestowed any thought upon it, that 
 the wise construction of the Executive, is the most difficult problem m forming a Re- 
 publican Government. In a Government like that of Virginia, intended chiefly, if 
 not wholly, for internal purposes, the Executive must be organized on principles al- 
 together different from those that should obtain in a Government designed for the 
 management of foreign affairs — in which, every thing must be regulated with due re- 
 gard to the relation which the nation is to sustain to other nations. It is notorious, 
 that the Convention, which framed the Federal Constitution, found in the formation 
 of the Executive Department, the principal difficulties they had to encounter. Two 
 objects were to be accomplished — both of vital importance — to preserve a Republican 
 form of Government, and therefore to discard every thing like hereditary power; and 
 to provide such an Executive, as should be suited to the management of the foreign 
 relations of the country, in war as well as in peace. For this latter object alone was 
 the President of the United States armed with powers, such as hardly any man in the 
 Federal Convention would ever have thought of giving to the Governor of a State. 
 JVe are not charged with the duty of forming an Executive suited to conduct foreign 
 
590 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 relations — foreign intercourse, negotiation and war: and so long as Virginia remains 
 a member of the Federal Union, we shall wisely (for we can safely) make her Go- 
 vernor a mere agent to execute the laws, without an}^ independent power whatever. 
 We were told, indeed, by the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Powell) that we ought 
 to look forward to a dilFerent state of things — altliough he assured us (and 1 believe 
 him) that none would deprecate such a state of things more than himself^ — that we 
 ought to look to that disastrous state of things, when our Federal Union shall be dis- 
 solved ; in which event, the State Executive ought to be indued with powers to 
 manage affairs with foreign nations, since our sister States will then stand in that re- 
 lation towards us. But, Sir, whosoever shall go to work now, to form an Executive 
 adapted to such a state of things, as cannot happen until the bands of this Union shall 
 be dissolved, and new combinations of the States shall be formed — if all shall not be 
 consolidated into one vast empire, without any reference to existing boundaries — 
 when we may have one Government North of tlie Hudson, another between the Hud- 
 son and the Potomac, another in the South, and another in the West — will undertake 
 that to which no human wisdom is competent. He will attempt to provide for a state 
 of things, which depends wholly on the providence of God, who may save us in his 
 mercy, or punish us in his wrath. As to human agency, when that direful state of 
 things, which gentlemen talk of so familiarly, shall come upon us — when this great 
 political Confederacy shall be broken up, and separated into its original atoms, and 
 new political beings shall rise out of its ruins, give me leave to say, that the exigen- 
 cies of the times must and will dictate the forms of the Executive Government; and, 
 just as surely as man must still remain man, the sword, that most energetic of re- 
 formers, will have a large share in settling the new forms of Government, whether 
 military despotism, or mixed monarchy, or a Republic. As no man can foreknow 
 our condition, so no man can now provide for it; one thing only is certain, that the 
 sword will be, or will essay to be, the principal law-giver. And then, our only hope 
 for the preservation of freedom, will be found in the universal prevalence of the com- 
 mon law, with its open courts of justice, viva voce evidence, and jury trial. In con- 
 stituting an Executive for Virginia, I can only look at her present condition, as one 
 of the members of the existing Federal Union : I will not, because 1 cannot, look to 
 a future and wholly altered state of the Commonwealth. To me it seems, (I mean no 
 disrespect to those who differ from me in opinion), that man could undertake no task 
 more presumptuous, none which lies farther beyond the bounds of human wisdom, 
 than to make provision in 182D, for a dissolution of the United States, supposing it 
 shall happen a hundred, fifty, or even five years hence. No, Sir — our duty is to frame 
 an Executive for Virginia, as Virginia is now; an Executive adapted to the ordinary 
 administration of our laws, and to the conduct of our internal affairs. What sort of 
 an Executive ought that to he? I answer, one possessing the smallest degree of 
 power consistent with the due execution of the laws. If the Executive has power 
 enough for that purpose, we want no more. That is the problem we have to solve. 
 Now I pray gentlemen — instead of exercising their ingenuity, in forming new and 
 untried plans, and calculating the effects of them — plans, concerning which all rea- 
 soning at present must -be mere speculation — plans, which at last can only be proved 
 by experience — to ask themselves, whether we have not a system now, which expe- 
 rience, and long experience too, has approved, as well adapted to our circumstances, 
 and perfectly fitted for all useful practical purposes ? And then I ask them, as states- 
 men — and, especially, I ask my friend from Fauquier (Mr. Scott) for whose practical 
 judgment I have always the utmost deference — whether any prudent statesman ought 
 to be willing to discard the old and tried system for any new project, however plausible 
 This is the true and fair state of the question. Here is the ground on which I take 
 my stand. I find an existing Executive in Virginia, which, under all circumstances, 
 amidst all the difficulties of war, and, in peace, amidst the utmost violence of party 
 contests, has well performed its part — upon wliich all-trying time has passed its judg- 
 ment — which never, in a single instance, has been guilty or even charged with cor- 
 ruption, or usurpation, or attempt at usurpation. I doubt whether more can be said 
 for any Executive on earth : Sir, it is rare praise ; but it is no more than its just due. 
 (I shall not undertake to defend the existing Government — I would not undertake to 
 defend any set of men, either in public or private stations — from the charge of having 
 committed errors). And now we have an amendment offered to our consideration, 
 which proposes to abolish the fundamental principle of this Executive. I trust in the 
 good sense and prudence of this body, that it will not be abolished — that it will only 
 be reformed. Reform is obvious and easy ; and I am ready for reform ; but not for 
 destruction. 
 
 There is a set of gentlemen — the phrase may be offensive, v/hich I do not mean, 
 and I retract it — there are several gentlemen in this House, who are of opinion, that 
 we oug-ht to provide for the Governor an advisory Council — a distinct body so called, 
 whom it shall be his duty to consult, without making it his duty to follow or respect 
 its advice : while others think, that the Heads of Departments should be required to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 591 
 
 advise the Governor, when he shall think proper to ask their advice, leaving him at 
 full liberty to take such-advice or not, as he thinks proper. I suppose there must be 
 some other Heads of Departments than those we now have, which are to be created 
 for the purpose. The gentleman from Fairlax (Mr. Fitzhugh) intimated an opinion^ 
 the otlier day, as the ground of his preference lor this Cabmet Council of Heads of 
 Departments, tliat the Governor ought to be made more independent of the Legisla- 
 ture, than he now is. I migiit possibly agree with the gentleman, if he had assigned 
 any reason, why he wished to have the Executive more independent; if he had shewn 
 any good purpose which would be thereby eflected. This he did not even attempt. 
 There exists, 1 tiiink, a misunderstanding of that principle of the Bill of Rights, which 
 declares that the Departments of Government ought to be kept separate and distinct. 
 It does not mean, that the Executive ought to be wholly unconnected with, and inde- 
 pendent of the Legislature, or that the oliicers of the Executive should not be appoint- 
 ed by the Legislature. It means no more than this — that the same functionaries, who 
 exercise the whole Executive power, shall not at the same time exercise the whole 
 Legislative power. The principle is not new : it was not new, when it was embodied 
 in the Bill of Rights: it is a maxim of Montesquieu; and you will find it thoroughly 
 examined and explained in the 47th number of the Federalist. Why is the Executive 
 to be made independent.'' to enable it to resist the Legislative will.'' to perform any 
 act without the Legislative authority .'' There is not a man here, to whom if you put 
 the question, " Will you have a Governor more independent, in order that he may do 
 any material act without the sanction of iaw.''" who will not at once answer. No. 
 "Why then should tlie Governor be more independent.'' The least reflection must sa- 
 tisfy gentlemen, that they cannot contrive to make hiin more independent of the Le- 
 gislature, unless they give him power to resist the Legislative will, to omit to do what 
 the laws require to be done, or to do what the laws do not direct. I repeat what I 
 have said once before, that to give any such independence to the Governor, as shall 
 enable him to do any official act without authority of law, i.s to mingle a spice of mo- 
 narchy in the Constitution. 1 use the word in its genuine English sense. To con- 
 stitute monarchy , it is not necessary that the ofiice of Chief Magistrate should be he- 
 reditary, or that it should be held for life : wherever he has a rightful power to act with- 
 out authority of law, there is pure monarchy, though he rule but for a single year, or 
 for a day. The Constitution of the Executive of a Government intrusted with the 
 foreign relations of a nation (1 repeat) ought, in the very nature of things, to be widely 
 diiferent Irom that of the Executive of a Government intended to manage the inter- 
 nal concerns of a State. We want an Executive of the latter kind. The other ought 
 to be armed with larger powers. If I were a subject of Great Britain, I should up- 
 hold the monarchy : 1 doubt whether that nation could contend with the military spi- 
 rit of France, without a monarchical Executive. If her form of Government were , 
 like that of Virginia, or of the United States, exposed as she is to sudden attack from 
 a neighbour so near, so powerful, so active, so warlike, she would hardly be able to 
 defend herself in any sudden emergency; and the agitation of every election would 
 expose her to dangers from without, consequent upon commotions within, which would 
 soon end in her destruction. The Government of France has been, at all times (even 
 the republic of France was) a military Government, dangerous to all Governments in 
 the neighbourhood, and particularly dangerous to free Governments. The republican 
 institutions of the United States have been dictated by the character of the people, and 
 the peculiar happiness of their geographical situation. But if I had to form an Execu- 
 tive for the United States, I should not constitute it like the Government of Virginia : 
 I should feel the necessity of giving it more power, in order to fit it to its ends. And 
 here is the difference between the principles I maintain, and those which the gentle- 
 man from Frederick (Mr. Powell.) would have us act on : he does not, I think, pay 
 sufiicient regard to the peculiar functions of the State Government of Virginia, con- 
 sidered as a member of the Federal Union. I hold politics to be the science of cir- 
 cumstances. 
 
 Let us now see what will be the immediate effect of the amendment proposed by 
 the gentleman from Fauquier (Mr. Scott.) There is something equivocal in the latter 
 part of it, which I am sure he does not intend, and I only mention it that he may 
 make it explicit. It proposes a Council, whose wisdom the Governor shall be bound 
 to call to his aid, witliout being bound, v.^hen he shall get their advice, to comply with 
 it. JNow, I ask that gentleman, in the first place, whether he does not perceive that 
 this arrangement would, at the Governor's will and pleasure, place the whole Execu- 
 tive power of the State in the Governor alone 1 Does he not see, that the practical 
 operation of the principle would be to make the character of that entire Department 
 of the Government, dependent on the personal character of the Governor If he 
 should chance to be a modest man, much more if a timid man, (and political courage 
 is much more rare than personal), he will follow the advice of his Council in all cases, 
 and shield himself under it from all responsibility. But if, on the contrary, the Go- 
 vernor should be of a firm and spirited character, and much more if there should be 
 
592 
 
 DEBATES OP THE CONVENTION. 
 
 any obstinacy in his disposition, he may indeed ask the advice of his Council, but 
 when he has received it, he will give it to the winds. And then comes the question 
 put by the gentleman from Northampton (Mr. Upshur), Will you have this advice of 
 Council recorded, only that it may appear that the Governor disregarded it? Would 
 you impeach him for not abiding by it, when you have expressly provided, that he 
 may disregard it, if he pleases to do so.'' 
 
 I ask my friend from Fauquier to consider another thing. There were several valu- 
 able purposes, which the framers of the present Constitution designed to accomplish 
 by this institution of the Executive Council: and one of those objects was, to preserve 
 a continuity of knowledge, in the Executive Department. If, to accomplish this ob- 
 ject, we shall abolish the Council, and provide that the Executive duties shall be dis- 
 tributed among different Departments (which some gentlemen think the most eligible 
 plan), each of the Heads of those Departments may acquire a knowledge of the busi- 
 ness of his particular Department ; but the duties of all will be merely ministerial, almost 
 mechanical ; none of them will be statesmen ; none of them will acquire a general 
 knowledge of the whole business of the Executive. But that is what is wanted. Be- 
 sides, to create Executive Departments, merely to avoid the erection of an Executive 
 Council, were an awkward expedient. Then, as to an advisory Council, as it is 
 called — a Council to advise the Governor, and a Governor bound to ask but not to 
 take advice — it is obvious, that the members of such a Council will lie under little or 
 no responsibility, and will have hardly any motive to apply themselves to the acqui- 
 sition of a general knowledge of Executive affairs ; and that, unless the members of 
 the Council, or some of them, remain in office longer than the Governor, every Go- 
 vernor will have to commence his administration, without any knowledge of the de- 
 tails of Executive business, and with a Council to advise with, as uninformed as him- 
 self. Gentlemen who have not reflected on the subject, cannot form an idea of the 
 inconvenience. If you will ask any man that has ever filled tlie office of Governor of 
 Virginia, whether when he first came into office, he did not rely almost wholly upon 
 his Council, for all the details of business, I venture to affirm, that his answer will be 
 in the affirmative. It must be so in the nature of things. 
 
 Sir, our fathers took it into their heads (very simple heads as some think, very wise 
 ones in my opinion), that, as it would be necessary to confide much patronage to the 
 Executive, the only way to render it harmless, would be to divide it. But if the 
 scheme of the gentleman from Fauquier shall prevail, all public contracts, and all 
 Executive appointments, will depend absolutely upon the will of the Governor, The 
 Council is merely to give advice : it is to possess no actual power or controul : of 
 ■course, the whole patronage of the State will be vested in the hands of the Governor. 
 Look at the amount of patronage, which is now exercised by the Governor and Coun- 
 cil, almost without being felt or known to exist. Not to enumerate the appointments 
 to all the lesser offices, I only desire gentlemen to reflect that the Executive of Virgi- 
 nia lets out all contracts for public works. This building, in which we are now sit- 
 ting, was erected by contracts made by the Executive : so was the Armory : so was 
 the Penitentiary. The plan of the gentleman from Fauquier will, in effect, place all 
 :this patronage in the hands of a single individual. 
 
 Much has been said of Legislative caucuses, got up to dispose of offices : but I never 
 heard of any caucusing about the election of a Governor, for the simple reason that 
 liis office has no emolument to tempt avarice, no power to tempt ambition, no patron- 
 age to give influence. But give him the patronage, which this amendment proposes 
 to give him ; let him be the person to whom alone all must look for profitable employ- 
 ments, and more profitable contracts ; and you will soon see a different state of things. 
 It will make little odds, whether he shall be elected by the people or by the Legisla- 
 ture : the increase of his power and patronage, is the substance of the change. And 
 the first effect of that change will be, that every newspaper in the Commonwealth will 
 be filled with what they call discussions of the merits of the several candidates for the 
 office. Let any gentleman look at the newspapers of Pennsylvania, or of New-York, 
 or of Kentucky, for some time previous to an election of Governor, and note the ac- 
 counts there given of the candidates for the office. If you look at the Pennsylvania 
 papers, (as I have often done out of curiosity), which have been opposed to the candi- 
 dates that have been elected, and take their word for it, you must believe, that, since 
 the time of M'Kean, there has not been a Governor in that Stale, who was not the 
 veriest fool in existence. But look at the papers on the other side, and you will find 
 the same persons metamorphosed into paragons of wisdom. It is a peculiarity of my 
 nervous system, that I loathe all strong perfumes almost as much as stinks, (I can 
 think of no politer word that would convey the thought in its full force) ; and 1 do not 
 know which is the more offensive to my moral sense, fulsome panegyric, or coarse 
 abuse. New-York indeed does not appear to have been so cursed with fools for Go- 
 vernors, as her neighbour Pennsylvania, (I mean according to the newspapers) ; but 
 she seems to have been worse off; for, all her Governors, v/ithout any exception, have 
 been the rankest knaves they could possibly find. Sir, it was the saying of a very 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 593 
 
 wise man, that the Government of these United States was of a kind never yet de- 
 scribed: that it was a newspaper Government. Tiie newspapers not only claim to 
 discuss the merits of all public measures, and all competitors for office, but to dictate 
 measures, and to direct our elections — the only check on their power, consisting in 
 their rival claims — these applauding their favorites to the skies, and those damning 
 them to hell without remorse. If any tliink this an exaggeration, I only ask him to re- 
 member the late Presidential election. I am, Sir, particularly anxious to avoid all 
 newspaper agency in the election of the Chief Magistrate of Virginia; and, with that 
 view (among others) to reduce the power and patronage of that office to the lowest 
 point I possibly can. 
 
 There was published, not long ago, an entertaining work, which pubhc rumour as- 
 cribes to one of your own constituents,^ called ^3 voyage to the Moon; in which the 
 voyaorer gives an account of an election there which he was present at. He saw drawn 
 up on the public square, in opposite confronting ranks, between which the candidates, 
 and their friends, and all the electors, were obliged to pass, a set of little fellows, called 
 Syringe boys : each with a syringe in his hand, and two bottles hanging on either side ; 
 one full of a black liquor, foul and stinking — the other containing a white and highly 
 perfumed liquor, so sweet to the smell as to produce faintness. The syringes were 
 their weapons, and the bottles contained their ammunition. When either candidate, or 
 any of his friends appeared, the syringe boys of the one party, were sure to empty 
 their phials of perfume upon the side of his person next to them, and those of the 
 other to pour torrents of the black liquid upon him — so that the odour in which you 
 would find the party squirted at, depended on the side on which you happened to 
 approach him. If nobody else came in their way, the opposing ranks turned their 
 arms against each otlier, just to keep their hands in. And when the voyager asked 
 why these mischievous boys were tolerated, he was told, that it was an ancient prac- 
 tice, to which the people were wedded, and nobody dared to disturb them. The voy- 
 ager does not (that I remember) note two pecviliarities in the lunar syringe boys, 
 which mark the conduct of our sublunary gentlemen of the squirt — the one is, that, 
 upon the great body of electors, our sj-ringe boys never squirt any but the sweet wa- 
 ter, though they go near to drown them with that — the other, that when they direct 
 their little engines against each other, they generally fill only from the black bottle ; 
 so that approach one of them which side you may, you are almost sure to find him in 
 bad odour. 
 
 I have, in common with the rest of my countrymen, been always in the habit of 
 regarding the freedom of tlie press as the most inestimable of blessings — but there is 
 no good without alloy — the freedom of the press is indeed indispensible ; but the 
 license into which our daily press has degenerated, is an evil almost beyond endu- 
 rance; and, after long observation, and anxious reflection, I find myself at a loss to 
 say, whether its freedom is more a blessing, or its licentiousness a curse. Our press 
 is active and powerful alike in disseminating truth and error. In one view, I am 
 ready to say, that our free institutions could not exist without it ; in another, it seems 
 to me to be the poison of free Government. In my reflections on this subject, my 
 mind has often recurred to those lines of Pope's Homer: — 
 
 " Two urns by Jove's high throne have ever stood ; 
 The source of e^il one, and one of good — 
 From these the cup of mortal man he fills j 
 Blessings to these, to those distributes ills ; 
 To most he mingles both — the wretch decreed 
 To taste the bad unmixed, is curs'd indeed — 
 Pursued by want, by meagre famine driven, 
 He wanders outcast both of Earth and Heaven" — 
 
 I forget the rest; but this is enough for my purpose. To nations, in which the press 
 is enslaved. Providence has filled their portion from the bitter urn. A free press, bold 
 without license, active without being factious, busy without being venal, is meted from 
 the urn of unmixed good. But licentiousness, faction and corruption, in the press, 
 are bitter waters. Every man that loves his country, ought to pra}- Heaven, that they 
 may not prevail to overflowing; every wise Statesman ought to do his utmost, to pre- 
 vent another drop from being mingled in our cup. There is too much already — too 
 much ! Let us be careful not to aggravate the vices of the press, by bringing them 
 to bear on the election of the Chi^ef Magistrate of this ancient and peaceful Com- 
 monwealth; which we shall surely do, if we increase the patronage, the influence, 
 the importance of the office. The Executive power and patronage cannot be annihi- 
 lated : but they may be rendered innocuous by dividing them : the}' have been ren- 
 dered innocuous, under the existing Constitution, by the institution of the Executive 
 Council; an institution, wliich having worked exactly according to the original de- 
 
 * Air. Gordon of Albemarle was iu the Chair. 
 
 75 
 
594 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 sign, has afforded the surest proof of the wisdom of its founders. I know of no other 
 political institution that has proved the same in practice as in theory. 
 
 I have been told a thousand times, since this Convention assembled — I do not mean 
 in open debate, nor do 1 mean that I have been so told by the gentleman from Fau- 
 quier — for he avows himself a convert, in some measure, in respect to an Executive 
 Council — I have been told, that the Council is a useless body, a set of loiterers, whose 
 office is little better than a sinecure. I shall not reflect on the motives of this denun- 
 ciation : I shall only say, that my observation and experience do not justify the truth 
 of it. I shall not affirm, that this Council has always been filled with the ablest and 
 most experienced men in the State : but I do afiirm, that it has always been filled by 
 men competent to their duties; and that those duties have been, in the main, wisely 
 and prudently, and always honestly, discharged. The office has been held by men^ 
 two of whom have since filled the office of President, and one that of Chief Justice 
 of the United States. The ablest men of Virginia have been in the Council : and I 
 shall take occasion to say, that the present Lieutenant-Governor (I mean the gentle- 
 man, v.^ho, being the oldest Councillor, is charged with the duty of Lieutenant-Gov- 
 ernor.) is, in point of capacity, abundantly fit for the management of the affairs of 
 this State, or of any other State in the Union; and, in point of firmness, integrity 
 and virtue, there is not a man in the Commonwealth that would be disparaged by a 
 comparison with him. 
 
 Shall we abolish this institution, and substitute another in its stead, on mere specu- 
 lation, and by way of experiment.'' It does not become the wisdom of the gentleman 
 from Fauquier, to make this experiment upon us. I protest against any experiments 
 being made on me and my children. I regard that whole system of political experi- 
 ments with the utmost horror and alarm. I know that I am now free ; I suffer no 
 oppression : I ask for nothing more. No man has a right to expect more from any 
 Government, than to be left to carve out his own happiness, as best he can, in peace 
 and security. 
 
 I think the Executive Council may be re-modeled to advantage, without touching 
 the principle of the institution. Half the number of Councillors may be dispensed 
 with ; the principal benefit of which will be, that the Legislature will then have it in 
 its power to double the salary of those who remain, without any additional expense, 
 by dividing among four the same sum that is now paid to eight. I would also change 
 the method of removing the members of the Council from office. I have been a 
 member of the Assembly in one of the scratch years (as they are called) when, without 
 offence, or suspicion of offence, two members of the Council were to be removed 
 by ballot : and never have I experienced more pain, than 1 suffered in witnessing, and 
 bearing part, in the scratch. I saw men of honourable feeling and of high worth, 
 subjected to the deepest mortification. I wish to get rid of that painful process. In 
 order to effect this, after reducing the number of the Council to four, and empowering 
 them to appoint one of their own number to act as President of the body, and to be 
 charged with the duty of Lieutenant-Governor, I would have each Councillor elected 
 for four years, and provide that one of them should go out of office every year. I 
 would make the term four years, on the supposition that that of the Governor is to 
 be three years. But if the Governor's term is to be only two years, then I would 
 make the term of a Councillor three. The plan is simple, and will be readily under- 
 stood without more explanation. 
 
 I have an objection to the details of the plans, both of the gentleman from North- 
 ampton, and of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Messrs. Upshur and Scott.) It is to 
 the number, three. The Governor is not to be one of the Council, but is to have three 
 Councillors. Suppose one of these should die, then, if another should be sick, the 
 Governor would be without a Council. Would this be a rare casualty ? Certainly 
 not, when we consider, that a Councillor may often be taken from the top of the Al- 
 leghany mountains and brought to Richmond — to a climate very different from that 
 to which he has been enured. 
 
 I prefer a Council of four to one of three members — but on that point, I shall not 
 be pertinacious. I am chiefly anxious that the Council.may be preserved, with the 
 same relation to the Governor which it bears at present. And I trust and hope and 
 pray, that this body w^ill not, for the sake of change, for a mere chance of bettering 
 our condition, give up an institution, which has been found to answer so well the 
 good purposes for which it was founded. 
 
 It being now near 1 o'clock, the Committee rose on Mr. Fitzhugh's motion, and the 
 House adjourned to give place to the sitting of the House of Delegates. 
 
 At 1 o'clock the Convention again convened, and immediately went into Commit- 
 tee of the Whole, Mr. Gordon in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Scott then rose and went into a vindication of his scheme for a Council, and a 
 reply to the objections which had been urged against it by Messrs. Upshur and Leigh. 
 
 He had had no purpose to bring on such a discussion — and the state of his health 
 forbade him to go very extensively into debate. He adverted to the stage of tlie debate 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 595 
 
 when he had moved his amendment. When the utmost efforts of the friends of the 
 present system, having failed, it seemed that there must, either be no Council, or 
 one wliicfi the Governor might consult or not. as he pleased. Their arguments had 
 gone far to convince him. that there ought to be a Council of some kind, and he 
 sketched out his plan as a middle course. As it seemed agreed on all hands that 
 there must be a Lieutenant-Governor, he thought they might go a step farther, and 
 add two other persons to make a Council. Instead of a Lieutenant-Governor co no- 
 mine. he wished these Councillors to choose one of their own number, who should be 
 so in effect. His plan differed from Mr. L'pshur's in taking away from the Council 
 the veto it now exercises. He was in favor of Driving to the Governor the whole be- 
 nefit of the wisdom and advice of his Council, but not of binding him to be governed 
 by their will. 
 
 Mr. U. he said, had misconceived him in supposing that the Governor was not 
 to be obliged to ask the advice of Council — he was in all cases to ask for. and receive 
 it. But the gentleman from Northampton had asked, why pay so much for advice 
 and then leave the Governor at liberty to reject it.' In reply, ]Mr. Scott asked, if this 
 was not done in the dailv affairs of life .' Did not men pay for the advice of a phy- 
 sician, but were they obliged to take it, even if he prescribed a dose of arsenic t Was 
 advice worth nothing, unles-s a man was imperatively bound to pursue it? Would 
 gentlemen tell a Commander in Chief that he must never summon a Council of W^ar, 
 unless he meant to submit to the opinions of his officers. 
 
 He expressed the pain it gave him to differ fi-ora his worthy friend from Chester- 
 field. But he had come to this Convention, impressed with the belief that the Coun- 
 cil was not only useless, but positively injurious ; and such was the opinion of a large 
 portion of the citizens of the Commonwealth. The gentleman from Chesterfield, had 
 not seen the operation of the Council : he had only been pained by witnessing the 
 process of the ''scratch:" but ]Mr. S. said that his people considered that a mere 
 scratch, indeed, in comparison to the evils which had grown out of this part of the 
 Government. He was about, however, to prefer no bill of indictment; he had prac- 
 tised at home for many years in the character of public prosecutor, and he well knew 
 how hard it was often, to convert, even in the plainest cases, and vrith process in his 
 liands to compel the attendance of witnesses; he should not think of exercising his 
 function in this Committee, when the Governor and Council were to be the prisoners 
 at the bar, and the judges before whom he was to plead were already invincibly pre- 
 possessed in favor of the parties accused. But he might appeal to many members of 
 the House who were acquainted with the inability of tliis part of the State machinery, 
 and how badly it had worked in many cases. It was natural that a gentleman who 
 had entered with all his constitutional ardour into the defence of tlie existing Govern- 
 ment in all its departments, in all its forms, and all its past and present officers, to be 
 very sensitive when the minuest feature of either was assailed : not an excressence 
 could be lopped off but all his fears were excited at once. He (Mr. S.) would change, 
 but only to improve, and he thought tliis Department of the Government did require 
 the pruning, though not the amputating loiife. 
 
 After noticing the irrelevancy of much that ]Mr. L. had said to the question before 
 the Committee — the gentleman had asked whether they would have the Governor 
 without advice .' and if not. whether he was to look to his private friends or official in- 
 feriors and dependants, or to a public and responsible body t He answered, to a body 
 public and responsible; and such an one he had provided. He v.'ould have tlie Go- 
 vernor look neither to those on whom he was dependant, nor on those who were de- 
 pendant upon him : but to a Council obliged to advise him, and responsible for their 
 advice. The recording of the acts of the Governor, and the publicity of all his trans- 
 actions, so pithily adverted to by the gentleman from Cliarlotte pir. Randolph.) 
 whom he was sorry not to see in his place, and who had reminded the Committee 
 that publicity was the safe-guard of virtue, were all secured by the plan now propo- 
 sed. It had the excellfuce of perpetuity too, which had been so well insisted upon 
 by the gentleman from Amelia and his friend from Chesterfield. They had been told 
 by the present incumbent of the Governor's Chair, that the Executive of Virginia was 
 the most responsible Executive in the world : be it so: all that responsibility was pre- 
 served unimpaired by his amendment. All the valuable characteristics of the present 
 system were retained, untouched. But he was told that such a Council as was pro- 
 posed was an anomaly ; but he thought that remark applied rather to a Council like 
 the present; where the advisers were made paramount to the party advised. He was 
 asked if he would put all the power in the Governor J He answered yes : but now it 
 was all in the Council. And the question was, whether it was better to put the power, 
 with a check (thougii not a control) over it, in the Governor, or, to place it, without 
 any check at all. in the Council .' It had been said with great truth that the Governor 
 could now shelter himself from respon:>ibilitv behind his Council. lie had power, it 
 was true in himself to stand still; but if he took one step, he must be shielded by the 
 advice of his Council. 
 
696 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. S. said, his plan appeared to him to strike the golden mean, between a Go- 
 vernor without any Council, and a Governor with a Council who ruled over him. 
 At present, he may submit measure after measure, but till he varies his proposition so 
 as exactly to hit the views of his Councillors, the wheels of Government must stand 
 still. He said, he had heard this complained of by those who had filled the office of 
 Governor, and he had learned from the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Madison.) that 
 one Governor of Virginia had felt the check so severely, as to have remarked that 
 " according to the theory of the Constitution, Virginia had one Governor, and eight 
 Councillors; but practically and in reality, she had eio-/t^ Governors, and one Coun- 
 cillor." The Governor of Virginia now stood, he had often thought, much in the 
 condition of a very worthy and renowned Governor of whom he had read ; he meant 
 Governor Sancho — who had at his table, one Dr. Pedro Positive, native of the town 
 of Snatchaway, who, as soon as the Governor had fixed his eyes upon a favorite dish, 
 would touch it with his wand and cry, " no, not that," till this worthy Governor had 
 been like to lose his dinner entirely, because no dish of which he attempted to eat, 
 happened to please the Doctor. The Governor proposes one plan; the Council dis- 
 approves; he offers another and another and another; and while they are disapprov- 
 ing, the wheels of State stand still. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. Scott's amendment, it was rejected. — Ayes 44, 
 Noes 48. 
 
 (Messrs. Madison and Marshall in the affirmative.) 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh now moved as an amendment, " that the Executive Council ought 
 to be abolished." 
 
 The question being taken, it was carried. — Ayes 50. 
 
 So the Committee have voted to abolish the Council of State. 
 
 The Committee then proceeded to consider the sixth and seventh resolutions of the 
 Executive Committee, which read as follows: 
 
 " Resoleed, That the commissioned officers of militia companies be nominated to the 
 Executive by a majority of their respective companies. 
 
 " Resolved, That the field officers of regiments, be nominated to the Executive by 
 a majority of the commissioned officers of their respective companies." 
 
 Mr. Trezvant said, that as both these resolutions had been adopted on his motion, 
 he would take the liberty of proposing an amendment whicli he thought better calcula- 
 ted to attain the object he had in view. He presented it in the words following: 
 
 " Resolved, That the mode of appointing militia officers ought to be provided for by 
 law : Provided, nevertheless. That no officer below the grade of a Brigadier General 
 should be appointed by the General Assembly." 
 
 Mr. T. accompanied the amendment by a few remarks in explanation, going to 
 shew that some change in the present mode of appointment was desirable, but that 
 if the experiment he proposed should on trial be found to produce worse results than 
 the present system, the step could be retraced. 
 
 Mr. Macrae moved the following amendment to that of Mr. Trezvant : 
 Resolved, That the general officers of the militia shall be appointed by tlie Execu» 
 live, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, upon the nominations of the 
 field-officers of the militia in such districts, and in such manner as shall be prescribed 
 by law. 
 
 " Resolved, That all other officers of the militia shall be appointed in such manner 
 as shall be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. Macrae expressed his concurrence with the views of the gentleman from 
 Southampton, in respect to the inferior officers. He thought the present mode of ap- 
 pointment, judging by its results, as bad as any that could be devised ; and, therefore, 
 he was willing to make the experiment of elective nominations; but, as experience, 
 the only test of human institutions, might demonstrate the latter to be even v/orse 
 than the former, he was disposed to subject the whole matter to Legislative control 
 and discretion. The military elections in Pennsylvania, had resulted in one instance, 
 in the choice of a Colonel Pluck— whilst here, perhaps, it might be retorted, our 
 County Court recommendations had given us many a Colonel J\'o-Pluck, or without 
 •pluck, as the experience of the late war had unhappily manifested. The Constitution 
 of New York, provides for the election of the inferior officers of the militia ; but, dis- 
 trusting this mode of appointment, it authorises the Legislature to substitute any 
 other in its discretion. So that, upon the whole, it seemed to be most expedient to 
 abohsh the present Constitutional restriction, as to the mode of appointment; and to 
 leave it to the Legislature, to provide such as circumstances shall recommend to its 
 adoption. 
 
 As to the general officers, he adverted to the high importance of selecting men of 
 the best military qualifications; and he declared, that he considered the election by 
 the General Assembly, as not adapted to that end, and as resulting in practice, in 
 many exceptionable appointments. He claimed to be a reformer, but he was no theo- 
 rist ; he should go for the principles that would work well"; he would deduce them 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 597 
 
 from facts, supplied by history and experience ; and he would apply them with a 
 view to practical results. He asked, if it was not the tendency and effect of the pre- 
 sent system, to choose politicians rather than soldiers; to prefer civic merit to military 
 endowments ; and to make it tiie most essential qualification, to attain the station of a 
 Virginia general, that he should be a member of the Legislature ? It must be so from 
 the nature of things, and the ordinary workings of hunmn nature : the electors have no 
 opportunity of making a fair comparison of the pretensions of the rival candidates ; 
 and they, therefore, readily yield to tlie influence of the csjjrit dir corps, or of personal 
 friendship or esieem, contracted during tiieir association in public duty. The Legis- 
 lature had proved itself to be wholly incompetent to the due exercise of this elective 
 function, by the appointment of popular men, who, however amiable and respectable, 
 were not recommended by either military service or military talent 3 of men, who not 
 only had 
 
 Never set a squadron in the field, 
 Nor the division of a battle knew, 
 More than a spinster," — 
 
 But were incapable of drilling a sergeant's squad ; and, perhaps, had never even held 
 a commission. In these remarks, he disclaimed any particular allusion. He spoke 
 Tjnly of the general tendency of the system; and he doubted not, that there had been 
 many honorable exceptions. 
 
 But he utterly disapproved of the principle of rewarding military service by civil 
 office ; and he thought the converse equally true, and that civil service ought not to 
 be rewarded by military office. He thought that military men were the best judges 
 of military merit, and that the best depository of the power of nominating our com- 
 manders, would be the field-officers of regiments, who, however deficient many of 
 them must be from the want of experience, will always embody the mass of the mili- 
 tary talent and spirit of the State. The nominating power ought to be lodged in 
 the hands of those having the best capacity and opportunity to judge of the qualifica- 
 tions of those recommended to office ; and he asked whether this function could be 
 properly performed by the members of the General Assembly who are civilians, and 
 not soldiers, and who have no means of comparing the pretensions of the officers 
 from whom in general the selection ought to be made, or other candidates presented 
 for their choice.-' Emulation was the soul of a soldier; and the hope of promotion, 
 the great incentive to military energy; and these he believed would be much more 
 strongly excited among our officers, when they knew that their advancement de- 
 pended upon the estimates formed of each other from personal observation, or certain 
 information, and not upon holding a place in the Legislature. He proposed to give 
 the Governor and Senate, a negative upon the nominations, with a view to the cor- 
 rection, of those instances of erroneous judgment, or personal injustice, which would 
 •occur sometimes, wherever the power of selection might be lodged. He had made 
 the Senate participate in the exercise of that negative at the instance of others : he 
 was content to confide it to the Executive alone ; and he hoped that those who ob- 
 jected to his plan, merely by reason of the action of the Senate, would move to strike 
 out that feature of it. His plan was recommended, too, by its consonance with those 
 great and pervading principles of our Constitution, \vhich had operated so happily for 
 more than half a century ; namely, the division of patronage and local nomination for 
 office, wherever those nominations could be best exercised upon local knowledge. 
 These principles were as a?pplicable to the Legislative, as to the Executive Depart- 
 ment of the Government. The corrupting influence of the patronage of the Execu- 
 tive of the United States over the Legislative Department, had been the subject of loud 
 complaint and open denunciation from high authority ; and it had been proposed to 
 remedy the evil, by making members of Congress ineligible during the term for 
 which they shall be elected to any office in the gift of the President. It has been 
 thought that the same sort of influence might exist where the persons exercising the 
 patronage might bestow it upon themselves ; and, therefore, the Constitutions of some 
 of the States provide that members of the Legislature shall, during the period for 
 which they shall have been elected, be ineligible to any office, the appointment to 
 "which is confided to the Legislature. He was not prepared to go this length : but he 
 doubted whether the disqualification did not in effect, rather enlarge than limit the 
 •field of choice ; and whether the considerations wliich had recommended it to the adop- 
 tion of other States, might not recommend it to ours. Experience, he said, was his 
 guide in all political reforms ; and he referred to the examples of other States, where 
 the plan of elective nominations of the military had prevailed. He referred particu- 
 larly to the militia of Tennessee, who elected their own officers :those gallant militia, 
 who, in so many hard-fought battles, had acquired immortal fame for themselves, and 
 shed imperishable renown upon our arms; who, with their compatriots, in an hour of 
 gloom and despondency, had, on the plains of New Orleans, terminated the late war 
 in a blaze of glory which illuminated our political horizon, and made every American 
 citizen proud of his country : those militia who were led by their own chosen com- 
 manders — a Coffee, a Carroll, and a Jackson ! 
 
598 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr> Trezvant, after stating the difference between Mr. Macrae's scheme and his 
 own, expressed his preference that the appointment of the higher, as well as the in- 
 ferior ofhcerSj should remain witli the Legislature. It was true that that body could 
 not have a personal knowledge of all the candidates 3 but no more could the Gover- 
 nor and Senate. 
 
 Mr. Macrae here explained : His scheme did not leave either to their personal 
 knowledge of the candidates, but provided for recommendations from the commis- 
 sioned officerj. 
 
 Mr. Trezvant replied : If so, he saw no reason why the choice should be confined 
 to one House only : why not give it to both branches of the Legislature ? There 
 would be, he thought, a greater prospect of a good selection. 
 
 Mr. Macrae suggested, that according to Mr. Trezvant's scheme, the Adjutant 
 General would not be chosen by the General Assembly. The nominating body was 
 the best qualified to judge, and there should be a negative in some superior body. 
 He was for putting that veto in the Governor and one branch of the Legislature ; he 
 had precedent for this in the Government of the United States. He thought it better 
 to leave it with the advisory, and more permanent body than in the popular branch. 
 But some might desire that this veto should remain in the Governor alone : on this 
 point he should not be very strenuous, and an amendment to that effect could be 
 made. 
 
 Mr. Trezvant replied, that the case of the Adjutant General could readily be pro- 
 vided for, by striking out " Brigadier," and inserting " Adjutant." 
 
 As to the recommendation of the regimental officers, this would be more of a per- 
 sonal than of a military kind ; for they were not known to each other in their mili- 
 tary character ; they were seldom, in time of peace, brought together to manoeuvre 
 in the same field, and hence had no opportunity of judging of each other's skill and 
 fitness. If the recommendation were left to the officers of regiments, they would re- 
 gularly, certainly and invariably nominate the oldest officer, according to date of com- 
 mission, and then matters would be even worse than at present. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said, he had intended to have amended the sixth resolution: as it now 
 stood, the Legislature were to appoint all the officers above a Colonel or commandant 
 of a regiment. Before the revolutionary war, there were no Brigadier Generals, and 
 only county lieutenants. The election of Brigadier Generals and Major Generals 
 was a measure adopted during the revolution. Although there might be occasionally 
 some hard cases, the present plan had operated well. None of the States, he trusted, 
 had enjoyed a liigher military fame. The amendment he wished, was to insert after 
 the word companies" in the sixth resolution, the words battalions and regiments." 
 Let the officers nominate, and nomination would be nearly the same thing as appoint- 
 ment. The oldest officers would invariably be nominated : because each man respects 
 the age of his own commission. If both the amendment and the amendments to the 
 amendment, should be rejected, and the alteration be made which he had suggested, 
 he was persuaded the system would be found to work well : it had thus far. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell wished to know of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Macrae.) how 
 he proposed to collect the sense of the nominating body.? The State, at present, con- 
 tained, he believed, four division districts; each containing a Major General and 
 field officers of division. They must amount to some hundreds in all. They could 
 not be collected into one spot without great inconvenience and expense, and without 
 so collecting them, how was the will of the majority to be ascertained. 
 
 Mr. Macrae replied, that if this was the only objection to his plan, he anticipated 
 its entire success. His great object was to have a military body for the nominating 
 power : the details of his plan were to be left to the Legislature : as to brigades, there 
 could be no great difficulty. The officers of one brigade inight be brought together, 
 without travelling more than thirty, or at most, more than fifty miles in the Eastern 
 part of the State, and not exceeding seventy in the Western. The sense of the offi- 
 cers might be collected in their own counties. There would be, to be sure, more 
 difficulty as to divisions; but it was not insurmountable, and the principle was very 
 important. As to the objection that the officers of the same division were not ac- 
 quainted with each other's military capacity, surely the difficulty v^^as greater if ex- 
 tended, as now, to the whole State. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, without pretending to be well versed in military matters, suggested 
 his objection to the plan of having officers nominated by tliose whom they were to 
 command. He thought the gentleman from Fauquier, had not removed the objection 
 of the gentleman from Norfolk. And though the details were to be left to the Legis- 
 lature, yet if they presented impossibilities, they formed a valid objection against the 
 plan. Suppose four divisions were to be put together, (for this was a matter for Con- 
 gress to controul,) how could the sense of the officers be collected ? The rule o^ se- 
 niority, too, would always be resorted to. Every military man adhered with invin- 
 cible pertinacity to the principle of seniority. All were alike interested in maintain- 
 ing it. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 599 
 
 How the gentleman's plan might answer in the regular army, he could not say : 
 but, he put it to the gentleman's good sense to say. how it could work among militia, 
 where there was no railitar}^ school and no opportunity for practice r The principle of 
 seniority mig-ht soon raise a sergeant to the command of a regiment — and the com- 
 mandant of a company to the rank of a General. He was opposed to tlie principle, 
 nor could he think it wise to set the ofncers by the ears in the selection and nomina- 
 tion for filling vacancies, nor to set soldiers in the line to elect their own officers — 
 they would always nominate the most lenient. He would never consent to set offi- 
 cers canvassing with their men for all tlie offices in the army. These might be the 
 sucfcrestions of ig-norance. for he professed little knowledge of tlie subject ) but they 
 struck him as olTvious common-sense objections to the plan proposed. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax g-ave notice, that if the present amendments should be rejected, he 
 should move thai all appointments, be in future made by law. He did not intend to 
 enter on the discussion. It was very possible there might have been some abuses, 
 but he believed that all militia Generals were not members of the Legislature. He 
 advocated the reference to future legislation of the mode of appointing all officers, if 
 scay part of the subject was committed to them; that in the event of failure in any 
 experiment, the old mode might be recurred to: for which he expressed a preference 
 to that of elections by the military themselves. He was opposed like the gentleman 
 from Auffusta, to the idea of soldiers selecting their own officers — the effect would 
 be, that instead of training their men, the officers would be treating them to whiskey 
 and electioneering. They would meet, not to improve themselves in military exer- 
 cises, but to eat "barbecues and to drink whiskey : and he who could make the pret- 
 tiest speeches, would stand the best chance to be elected. 
 
 In the case of companies, the County Courts recommend according to the nomina- 
 tion of the company : in that case, it was well known that military merit v.-as the 
 verj" last thing that was thought of. The question was about Adams men and Jack- 
 son men. And above all, whether the man had a hberal heart and a full purse, to 
 buy more whiskey. But tiie whole scheme was idle. jN'o man, he presumed, but a 
 mere theorist, could ever expect an efficient militia system, in the piping times of 
 peace. The best place for the display of such a system was on paper. As to the ap- 
 pointment of the officers by the Governor, with the advice of the Senate, the objec- 
 tions to it were insurmountable. He illustrated the effects of such a plan, by refer- 
 ring to the Government of Great Britain, where, though the King nominally made 
 all the appointments, the ministry controlled them, and they were the subject of bar- 
 gain and sale. He suggested difficulties as to the nomination by officers of very un- 
 equal grades. Were alfto have equal votes ? and if all these details could be arrayed, 
 the effect would be endless heart-burnings. The influence of resentment and jealousy 
 would be felt and unconsciously acted upon. 
 
 Mr. Powell was in favour of Mr. Macrae's proposition, so far as the appointm.ent 
 by the Governor was concerned ; but he vras for excluding the Senate from any par- 
 ticipation. 
 
 Mr. Trezvant replied to !Mr. Brodnax. If his plan were to carry, the time of the 
 Assembly would be wasted in the apppointment of regimental officers — Colonels, 
 Majors and Captains. To this he should be wholly opposed. He was opposed to an 
 unrestricted submission of the mode of appointment to the Legislature, of officers of 
 all grades, for fear they might themselves undertake the appointment of inferior offi- 
 cers. 
 
 INIr. Macrae and ^Ir. Brodnax made a few remarks in reply, vrhen the question was 
 taken on Mr. Macrae's amendment, and negatived : Ayes 40. !Xoes 49. 
 (Mr. Madison and Z\Ir. 3Iarshall in the negative.) 
 
 Mr. Macrae then offered it in a modified shape, omitting the advice and consent of 
 the Senate ; but it was not more successful than before. 
 
 He modified it once more, so as to have the higher officers appointed by the Execu- 
 tive, by and with the consent of the Senate, and the rest by the Assembly. 
 
 But this was also negatived. 
 
 The question being then put on ^Ir. Trezvant's motion to strike out and insert, 
 
 rvlr. Summers called for a division of the question : it was divided accordingly ; and 
 being first on striking out, 
 
 Mr. Mercer, in illustration of the effect of allowing officers to be elected bv their 
 inferiors, quoted the instance of a Pennsylvania regiment on the frontier during an 
 interesting and critical period of the last war, whose soldiers beinrr tried by their of- 
 ficers for dcserLlon. v:ere fined ticelve and a half ccfits a piece. If onentlemen were for 
 giving to the nrihtia of the State such an organization as would render it most effi- 
 cient in war, there ought to be no officers at all appointed above the rank of Colonel. 
 But this was not in the power of the Convention : it belonofed to the General Gov- 
 ernment. He should vote for the strikinar out. 
 
 The question was then put on striking out the sixth and seventh resolutions of the 
 Executive Committee and carried, without a count. And the question recurring on 
 inserting Mr. Trezvant's amendment in lieu of them, 
 
coo 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that with a view to test the sense of the Committee, he should 
 move that it now rise : he was not prepared to vote on this proposition, or any other 
 connected willi the Legislature, until it was first settled how the Legislature was to 
 be constituted. He felt this difficulty touch him at every step, and in the hope that 
 the Coimnittee would to-morrow take up the question of the basis of Representation,, 
 he moved that the Committee do now rise. 
 
 The motion was negatived — Ayes 36. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, if the proposition of Mr. Trezvant should be inserted, the inevi- 
 table result would be, that all militia officers would in fact be elected by the people. 
 
 The question being then put on inserting the proposition of Mr. Trezvant, it was 
 carried — Ayes 45, Noes 4J . 
 
 (Mr. Marshall, aye : Mr. Madison, no.) 
 
 So the Committee inserted in lieu of the sixth and seventh resolutions of the Ex- 
 ecutive Committee, the following: 
 
 " Resolved, That the mode of appointing militia officers ought to be provided for by 
 law : Provided, nevertheless, That no officer below the grade of a Brigadier General 
 should be appointed by the General Assembly." 
 
 On motion of Mr. Powell, the Committee then rose. 
 
 And the House adjourned to meet in the Capitol to-morrow at 11 o'clock. 
 
 THURSDAY, December 10, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr, 
 Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Summers, the report of the Committee charged with procuring 
 a suitable house for the sittings of the Convention was taken up ; and after a conver- 
 sation, in which Messrs. Summers, Powell and Clay tor took part, Mr. Campbell of 
 Brooke was added to the Committee, and they were directed to prepare accommoda- 
 tions for the Convention in the first Baptist Church ; and it was resolved that when 
 the Convention adjourned, it would adjourn to meet in that place at 11 o'clock. 
 
 The Convention then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Gordon in the Chair, 
 and resumed the consideration of the report of the Judicial Committee. 
 
 And the second resolution of that report having been read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That the present Judges of the Court of Appeals, Judges of the Gene- 
 ral Court, and Chancellors remain in office until the expiration of the first session of 
 the Legislature held under the new Constitution, and no longer. But the Legisla- 
 ture may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re-appointed, such sura as, 
 from their age, infirmities, and past services, shall be deemed reasonable." 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved to strike out this resolution. It was incompatible with the 
 doctrine laid down in the seventh and eighth resolutions of the same Committee: the 
 first of which provided for Judges being impeached and removed upon conviction, and 
 the last required a vote of two-thirds of both Houses of the Legislature to exclude 
 them from office. These two provisions covered the whole ground; and why should 
 such a measure as this be thought of? It was at least wholly useless; and if so, why 
 should it be done.'' It was unfeeling and unadvised. He trusted the House would 
 strike it out. He was aware that discontent existed in relation to some of the Judges, 
 and he had himself participated in it to a considerable extent : but he trusted that our 
 Judges would be put on the same footing with other officers : not a justice of the peace, 
 not a constable, could have a hair of his head touched without crime being proved 
 against him : but here, at one sweep, all the Judges and the Chancellors were to lose 
 their offices, and that without any fault being proved or even pretended against them. 
 He trusted, if the Judges had done no wrong, and v/ere capable of discharging their 
 duties, that they would be left where every other officer under the Government was 
 left. 
 
 Mr. Morgan having ascertained from the Chair that such a motion would be in order, 
 moved to amend the resolution, by striking from it these words: " But the Legisla- 
 ture may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re-appointed, such sum as, 
 from their age, infirmities, and past services, shall be deemed reasonable." The clause 
 was unnecessary — as the Legislature would have this power without it. The Con- 
 vention would not assume that the Judges are old and infirm, or to presume that, of 
 course, they would not be re-appointed. As to removing all the Judges from office, 
 they might as well remove all members of Assembly, and all Executive officers under 
 the Government : they have power to re-organize the whole system. He was in fa- 
 vour of retaining the first clause. 
 
 Mr. Morgan consented, for the present, to withdraw his motion, at the request of 
 Mr. Scott, who moved to amend the last clause, by striking out the word may," 
 and inserting the word " shall," so as to make it imperative on the Legislature to pay 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 601 
 
 a reasonable sum to such of tliem as were not re-appointed, and wliose age and infir- 
 mities might require it. 
 
 Mr. Scott saidj he wa.s the mover of the resolution in the Judiciar\' Committee, but 
 not in the shape which it now wears. He had thought, and did still think, that great 
 inconvenience attended the system now in operation : and he was not singular in that 
 opinion. He wished to put it in the power of the Leo;islature to remedy all the evils that 
 grew out of it. While he thought that the Judges might be removed from office as 
 the resolution proposed, he also thought it fair that they should receive some com- 
 pensation. He considered Judges as standing in a very diiierent relation to the peo- 
 ple, from all other public servants ; their offices had been accepted under a contract 
 that they should retain them during good behaviour : and though they v\'ere aj^pointed 
 under the existing Constitution, and when it was abolished their office ceased with it, 
 yet they had had no such evil in view when they accepted tlieir appointments : and 
 tliough the people had, in strictness, a legal right to remove them, yet moral justice 
 required that this should not be done without some compensation being made to them. 
 Unless the amendment should be adopted, he should vote against the resolution. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was rejected. 
 
 (Mr. Madison and Mr. 2>Iarshall voting in its favour.) 
 
 Mr. Morgan now renewed his motion to strike out the latter clause. He said, that 
 Mr. Scott's whole argument had gone to prove eitlier that the Judges should not be 
 removed, or that they should be allowed their whole salary during life. But the Ju- 
 diciary Committee had been of opinion, that the whole Judicial system ought to be re- 
 organized, and the Judges preserved. No attack was intended by him on the inde- 
 pendence of the Judiciary, by making the motion to strike out the words mentioned, 
 nor did he think it could be so construed. It was expected that a new Judicial De- 
 partment, as well as a new Legislative and Executive, was to be established; and it 
 was as proper to remove all the present Judges, as to remove the officers of the other 
 Departments. If, from any cause, some of them should not be re-appointed, certainly 
 the Legislature ought not to be directed to make provision for them. That was a 
 power which properly belonged to the Legislature and not to the Convention. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. Morgan's motion, it was decided in the negative — 
 Ayes 39, Noes 46. 
 
 (Mr. Madison and Mr. IMarshall, No.) 
 
 So the Committee determined to retain the clause which allows (but does not re- 
 quire) the Legislature to compensate old and infirm Judges who lose their office by 
 the adoption of the new Constitution, and are not re-appointed. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to amend the resolution by strildng out the word " held," 
 and inserting the word elected," so as to make it read, " Resolved, that tbe present 
 Judges, &c. remain in office until the expiration of the first session of the Legislature 
 elected under the new Constitution." The effect of which change would be, to defer 
 the effect of the resolution upon the Judges for one session longer. By the law of the 
 last session, it was made the duty of the Governor to convene the Assembly under 
 the old Constitution, in order to put the new, if accepted, into operation. Now, it 
 was usual to elect members to the Assembly in April : and the vote on the Constitu- 
 tion by the people, was to be taken on the same da}- and at the same place. The same 
 inequality of representation which now exists in the Assembly, will continue till next 
 Spring, and the new system of representation will not go into effect until the session 
 after; and Mr. D. thought it not advisable that the new organization of the Judiciary 
 should take effect till then. That object would be effected by his amendment. 
 
 The amendment was adopted. 
 
 The question now recurring on -ilr. Henderson's motion to strike out the whole of 
 the second resolution, 
 
 Mr. Powell opposed it, as oroing to place the Legislature in a most unpleasant situ- 
 ation, should the number of fudges be reduced, b}- compelling them to make a selec- 
 tion among the Judges. It was an invidious and painful task. He thought it far 
 better to let all their offices expire together : nobody could seriously believe they would 
 not be re-appointed, unless infirmity and disease rendered them incapable of service. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas was in favor of the motion to strike out. He saw no reason why 
 Judges should be placed on a dlfierent footing from other officers. It was a mere sub- 
 tilty to pretend they lost their offices by the adoption of the new Constitution. Why 
 they more than other functionaries ? Were all the officers of the Government to be 
 displaced by the change.'' If the principle was true, why not carry it out.'' Why make 
 the Judges alone, the object of a proscription.' He had voted for Mr. IMorgan's amend- 
 ment, not because he sliould not be gratified to see some provision made for old and 
 infirm Judges, who had lost their offices without a fault ; but because he apprehended 
 it to be the entering wedge of a system of pe}i.sion^. He dwelt on the evils of such a 
 system, particularly as felt in Great Britain, and deprecated its introduction here. 
 
 He bore honorable testimony to the present Judges, as men of probity and free from 
 injustice and oppression — inveighed against proscribing the whole class because ob- 
 
 76 
 
C02 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 jections were entertained against a few of the number—and turning them adrift after 
 they had abandoned every other occupation to serve the State, in an arduous and re- 
 sponsible station. If gentlemen wish to get rid of any of the Judges, there was a plain 
 path provided — two-thirds of the Legislature could remove them at any time, accord- 
 ing to the eighth resolution. As to what was said about the certainty that all good 
 Judges would be re-appointed, he had not enough of the gift of prophecy to know 
 that. He hoped the Convention would have more magnanimity, than to take away 
 the offices of all those worthy men, because it was in their power to do so. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, he had thought he was disqualified from voting on this question, 
 being one of the persons implicated : but, he was told, this was not the case. He had 
 voted on Mr. Morgan's motion, because he believed he did not come within the de- 
 scription in the clause, which that gentleman wished to strike out. The clause spoke 
 of such " as from their age." Now he did not consider himself as yet superannuated — 
 " Infirmities !" — he thanked God that this was not his case — he was not past service 
 on that score — but was able to work as hard as any man in the service of the State — 
 As to "past services," he should advance no claim on that score either. He conclu- 
 ded by expressing his wisli to be excused from voting on the present occasion. 
 
 The question being now put on the motion to strike out, it was negatived — Ayes 29. 
 
 (Mr. Marshall, Aye.) 
 
 So the second resolution was retained — [See it above.] 
 
 The Committee next proceeded to the third resolution, which is in the words fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals and Inferior Courts, except 
 justices of the County Courts, and the aldermen or other magistrates of Corporation 
 Courts, shall be elected by the concurrent vote of both Houses of the General Assem- 
 bly, each House voting separately, and having a negative on the other ; and the mem- 
 bers thereof voting viva voce. The votes of the members shall be entered on the Jour- 
 nals of their respective Houses. Should the two Houses, in any case, fail to concur 
 in the election of a Judge, during the session, the Governor shall decide the election, 
 by appointing one of the two persons who first received a majority of votes in the 
 Houses in which they were respectively voted for. But if any vacancy shall occur, 
 during the recess of the General Assembly, the Governor, or other person performing 
 the duty of Governor, may appoint a person to fill such vacancy, who shall continue 
 in office until the end of the next succeeding session of the General Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Wilson moved to amend the resolution, by striking out the word " concurrent" 
 and insei'ting "joint," so as to read " that Judges, &c. shall be elected by the joint 
 vote of both Houses." 
 
 He stated his reason to be, that if there was any difference of opinion between the 
 two Houses on a nomination, it was prosper the House of Delegates should prevail, as 
 being the direct representatives of the people annually elected, and the most nume- 
 rous body. 
 
 Mr. Thompson of Amherst, had moved the resolution in the Judicial Committee, 
 and now defended it against the proposed amendment. 
 
 He considered the question of appointment as one of great difficulty : though the 
 act of appointment being neither an Executive, Legislative nor Judicial act, in strict- 
 ness, the principle of the Bill of Rights, which related to keeping those departments 
 separate, did not apply. The question was, what body was the safest depository for 
 the appointing power ? Certainly not the people ; for they were not in a situation to 
 perform the duty. In what body, then, was the trust to be reposed.? There were 
 objections to each. He had once thought it best to give it (after the example of some 
 other States, and of the United States,) to the Governor and Senate ; but he had 
 heard strong objections to this plan, and recent events in the Federal Government 
 had discouraged such an idea. Then, it must be given to the Legislative body. But 
 jointly, or separately.'' ]f jointly, the House of Delegates becomes the appointing 
 power, having a large majority of the votes. There were objections to this, a priori. 
 The popular branch, without a check, and subject as it is to intrigues and cabals, and 
 the influence of party spirit, and " log-rolling," seemed an improper depository for 
 such a trust. Very bad appointments had been made ; and a man who was on the 
 floor would always have a great advantage over other candidates. 
 
 The resolution as it now stood, provided a check, by requiring the Senate to concur. 
 And if a check in the Lower House was thought so necessary in matters of ordinary 
 legislation, why not in cases of appointment.? But, if they could not agree on the 
 candidate nominated, another candidate was to be taken up, and the two bodies, con- 
 current, were substituted as a nominating power. This gave no patronage to the 
 Executive, but made him merely an umpire : he could not go far wrong by taking 
 either candidate. 
 
 Mr. Wilson replied, no objection had been observed in practice to the existing 
 mode. The gentleman from Amherst had said, to make the election a joint one, was 
 to give the appointing power to the House of Delegates. This would be true, if that 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 603 
 
 House was perfectly and alvrays united : but the reverse was oflen the case. He had 
 never heard of a single instance, where they were thus united. But, suppose each 
 House to be united on their own candidate, and to disagree with each other. This 
 was not an improbable case : and then the Governor would invariably have the ap- 
 pointment of the .Tudges, which was the very evil deprecated by the gentleman from 
 Arnherst himself. 
 
 Mr, Powell called for a division of the question on striking out and inserting, and 
 it was divided accordingly : and being nov- on striking out, 
 
 Mr. Giles rose in favour of the motion to strike out. He was in favour of the pre- 
 sent mode of joint election. It had long been practised; and so far from proving any 
 evil, had been attended with the greatest good that could be looked for in the present 
 state of human nature, which was trail at best. He diifered entirely from the gentle- 
 man from Amherst, as to the House of Delegates being a theatre for intrigue, party 
 spirit, lo0--rolling," &c. His experience (though not great) had led him to a con- 
 clusion directlv the reverse. There was. to be sure, much conversation and much 
 coraparinof of opinions ; but. this was all right and proper, and ought to accompany 
 every election. He thougiit the simplicity and certainty of the present mode were 
 great recommendations of it. He referred to the experience of Pennsylvania, where 
 her influence on a turning question in the General Government, had on one occasion 
 been endangered, if not lost, by the obstinate adherence of two branches of the Le- 
 gislature to opposite candidates. 
 
 But, these reasons were subordinate and collateral. His great and controlling rea- 
 son for wishing the resolution to remain unchanged, was, that it involved the great 
 question of intermediate elections. He questioned the fitness of the people in tlieir 
 original capacity, to elect Judges and Militia Officers, or indeed any other function- 
 aries, except their own Representatives in the State and General Governments. So 
 long as they could perform that duty well, their rights and liberties were secure. It 
 was not necessar\' they should go farther in their own persons. 
 
 But. this was not a mere question of fitness and expediency, such as that respecting 
 the election of 2vlilitia Officers. There were many objections to the people's electing 
 Judges. Tiiey were not able to judge of the legal qualifications which fitted a Judge 
 for his office. 
 
 Mr. G. said, he was one who believed that the principle of intermediate elections 
 must be eventually called in to save this country. The people, in our svstem of Go- 
 vernment, were called on to elect so many officers of difierent kinds, that they must 
 have agents to do for them that wliich they could not do for themselves : and what 
 better agents could they have, than their own Representatives in the Legislature 
 What was the object of appointing these Representatives .' That they might lay 
 down rules of conduct for the community. This was the great security for liberty. 
 But the people had power to say, that they would not take the task of appointing 
 their ministerial officers, because they had not sufficient personal knoyyledge of the 
 qualifications of individuals, but would lay this dut^r upon those who had the know- 
 ledge, and whom they had already entrusted with their dearest interests. Mr. G. 
 here referred to the rapid increase of oar country in population, and insisted on the 
 necessity of knowledcre to a suitable exercise of the right of election. This the people 
 could get to the whole extent necessary for a proper selection of their Pi.epresenta- 
 lives, but not to fit them to select such officers as their Judges and Governors. The 
 moment you place them to act in a matter beyond their sphere, they must of neces- 
 sity depend for knowledge on somebody else ; and that moment they were thrown into 
 the hands of electioneerers — recpular thorough-going electioneerers : and of all the 
 baneful spirits which could infest the community, the spirit of electioneering was the 
 eery worst. 
 
 Mr. G. then went into a detailed description of the manner in which elections were 
 conducted in the House of Delegates ; and contended, that what was called log- 
 rolling," was in most cases but a free interchange of opinions, with a view to en- 
 lightened and united action. He insisted, that instead of tlirowing all elections 
 into the hands of the people, and all the patronage of the Government into the hands 
 of the Governor, let the election be fairly coaducted by the Legislatin-e, and their 
 responsibility to the people would be enhanced and not diminished. 
 
 By keeping the resolution in its present form, Mr. G. thought he was selecting 
 electors to make appointments in his behalf. 
 
 As to the greater numbers of the House of Delegates, the two Houses were amal- 
 gamated into one body for the purpose of the election — they acted as individuals, not 
 as chambers. The amendment would cause them to vote as two chambers, and if 
 they disagreed, the power would be wielded by the umpire between them. 
 
 The question being taken on striking; out the word '• concurrent.'" it was carried. 
 
 [Mr. 3Iadison and Mr. Marshall, Xo^.] 
 
 The question being then on inserting the word - joint."' 
 
 INIr. Mercer wished to defer it until the number and constitution of the Senate 
 should be settled, 
 
604 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Mason thought, after the last vote, that the necessity of the whole resolution 
 was done away with. After some farther conversation between Messrs. Mercery 
 Mason and Coalter, the question was taken, and decided in the affirmative. 
 
 So the Committee inserted the word "joint," deciding that the election of Judges 
 shall be by a joint vote of both Houses of the Legislature. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Wilson, the following part of the resolution was then stricken 
 out : 
 
 " Each House voting separately, and having a negative on the other ; and the mem- 
 bers thereof voting viva voce. The votes of the members shall be entered on the 
 Journals of their respective Houses. Should the two Houses in any case fail to con- 
 cur in the election of a Judge during the session, the Governor shall decide the elec- 
 tion, by appointing one of the two persons who first received a majority of votes in 
 the Houses in which they were respectively voted for," 
 
 The Committee now proceeded to consider the fourth resolution, which is in these 
 words : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals, and of the Inferior Courts^ 
 shall receive fixed and adequate salaries, which shall not be diminished during their 
 continuance in office." 
 
 On motion of Mr. Fitzhugh, it was amended, by inserting after the words "Inferior 
 Courts," these words: " Except justices of the County Courts, and the aldermen, or 
 other magistrates of Corporation Courts." 
 
 The Committee next took up the fifth resolution, which reads as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That on the creation of any new county, justices of the peace shall b© 
 appointed in the first instance, as may be prescribed by law. When vacancies shall 
 occur in any county, or it shall for any cause be deemed necessary to increase their 
 number, appointments shall be made by the Governor, by and with the advice ant! 
 consent of the Senate, on the recommendation of their respective County Courts." 
 
 Mr, Campbell of Brooke moved his substitute for the fifth resolution, prescribing 
 the mode of appointing the magistrates of County Courts, 
 
 After some conversation between Messrs, Campbell and Leigh, the substitute was 
 rejected — Ayes 19, 
 
 The question recurring on the original resolution, 
 
 Mr. Clay tor moved to amend it, by striking out all the latter clause, viz : " appoint- 
 ments shall be made," &c. (to the end,) with a view to submit an amendment, giving- 
 the filling of vacancies to the Legislature. He was unable, from indisposition, to g© 
 into a discussion of his reasons. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh should vote for striking out, but reserved himself as to filling the 
 vacancy. 
 
 After some conversation between him and Mr. Leigh, 
 
 The question was taken on striking out, and rejected — Ayes 44, Noes 48, 
 
 [Mr. Madison and Mr. Marshall, No.] 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, that the fate of the motion just made, shewed it to be very de- 
 cidedly the sense of the Committee, that vacancies in the number of justices were to 
 be filled by the Executive, on the recommendation of the County Courts ; but this 
 mode of appointment could be preserved in its purity and perfection, only by requiring 
 the Executive in nominating, and the Senate in deciding on his nomination, to act on 
 all the recommendations of a County Court, taken as a whole. If this were not re- 
 quired, the Governor might select one, or two, or more of the names recommended, 
 get these persons appointed and commissioned, and thus A^ery materially change the 
 character of the court which m^ade the recommendations, and effect the same thing as 
 by the original power of appointment, without any recommendation by the County 
 Court. By requiring him to take the whole, if any, you retain, said Mr. M., those 
 magistrates which the Court wished to see appointed, and thus give full effect to their 
 nomination. 
 
 If the Executive needs, as is conceded, to be instructed as to who are proper can- 
 didates to be nominated, and who not, from whom is he to ask that instruction, rather 
 than from the County Court magistrates themselves ? They are dispersed through 
 the county : they know when vacancies occur ; and they know better than any one 
 else who are fit persons to fill them. To whom shall the Governor appeal rather than 
 to them ^ If the nomination is to be made by the Executive, all must agree there is 
 no source of information so valuable to him, or which can furnish such correct and 
 certain intelligence. 
 
 Suppose it left in the choice of the Executive to leave out some of the persons re- 
 commended to him, and to retain others, how is he to learn whom to admit and whom 
 to refuse ? All gentlemen feel that it is impossible the Governor, personally, should 
 possess such knowledge of men in the various counties throughout the Common- 
 wealth, and such an acquaintance with all the individuals they may recommend, so as 
 to be able to select such as are the most fit from among them. He must receive in- 
 formation from othersj either privately or publicly communicated to him ; and none 
 
DEBATES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 605 
 
 can make a communication which the Executive can more rely upon than on theirs. 
 It is possible that some individual whom they have recommended, may be unworthy ; 
 he may have been guilty of some offence, even after being recommended. In that 
 case, let the v.'hoie recommendation be returned to be revised and corrected, and let 
 the court strike out such names as they please. The courts themselves can alone 
 know how to select proper individuals, unless indeed the election of magistrates is to 
 be made by the people ; but that is a point not presented by the present proposition. 
 The question now is, on the recommendation by the courts, and the action of the 
 Executive upon that recommendation. Let him be required to act upon the whole 
 recommiendation, and either nominate all or none of the individuals it contains. 
 
 It may be said, that if the Governor recommends the whole, the subject may then 
 be left to the discretion of the Senate, and they may advise the appointment of some 
 and not of others of those nominated. What will be the effect ? The Senate will 
 derive the information on which it acts, from that member of its own body, who comes 
 from the district in whicji tJie appointments are to be made : and will you rather sub- 
 mit the question to him to decide, than to the County Courts? If the Senate reject 
 some of the persons nominated, they must do so on some information, probably that 
 of one of their own members : but dJi know how many various influences may ope- 
 rate on that member, which do not upon the County Courts. He has his supporters 
 and his opponents, his friends and his enemies : but, this can have no influence on the 
 justices of the County Court. They liave no motive to action which is calculated to 
 lead them to make improper recommendations. 
 
 I therefore move you. Sir, to amend the resolution as follows : 
 But the whole number recommended at any one time, shall be commissioned or 
 rejected." 
 
 Mr. Leigh suggested some inconveniences that would attend the plan proposed by 
 the Chief Justice, where counties were distant from the seat of Government. So 
 much time v."ould be occupied in correspondence, that if a recommendation was re- 
 turned, before the County Court could have time to act upon the case, and make a 
 new recommendatiom the Senate would have adjourned. He suggested the very un- 
 pleasant effects that would be occasioned, if tlie reasons were to be assigned why the 
 rejection of the recommendation had been made — the destruction of character, heart- 
 burnings, &c. This vras not the case at present; because when one was rejected, it 
 might be supposed to have been done, lest the bench should become more numerous 
 than the wants of the county rendered necessary, and the same candidate was always 
 recommended again. Thus character was spared. So invariabl}' was this the case, 
 that an individual, when passed over in a recommendation for the shrievalty, was 
 heard by counsel before the Executive Council. 
 
 Mr. Campbell said, the remarks of both the gentlemen had only convinced him, 
 that neither Governor nor Council ought to be troubled in the case at all. Let the 
 County Court who now recomauend, have power also to appoint : for there it ended 
 at last. 
 
 Mr. Giles went into a statement of the manner in which the matter was conducted 
 at present, from which it appeared that though the Governor was held to have a per- 
 fect right to reject any one or more of those recommended to him, from delicacy it 
 had never been done durinfr his term of office. Scrutiny into individual character 
 was rare, though it was sometimes made. He declared on the whole, his purpose to 
 vote in favour of Mr. Marshall's proposition. He could not avoid again going into a 
 general commendation of the existing County Court system, as throwing power into 
 the hands of the middle class of tlie community. 
 
 Mr. Marshall having for a moment withdrawn liis former amendment, after a few- 
 prefatory remarks, moved to amend the resolution b}^ striking out the words " bj-and 
 witli the consent of the Senate." "Whicli Avas agreed to, 
 
 JNIr. Macrae moved as a substitute the following : 
 Provided, Jioiccrer, That if any person be reconnnended tofili any such vacancy, or 
 new appointment, and shall be disapproved b}- the Governor, such person shall not be 
 again recommended to fill the same vacancy, or new appointment." 
 
 He said, it was with great diffidence that he ventured upon any question, and more 
 especially, upon one relating to our Judicial system, to difler from the venerable gen- 
 tleman from Richmond ; but great and virtuous men in this bod}' had differed upon 
 almost every proposition presented for our consideration ; and each individual (though 
 humble as he himself was) must rely upon his own judgment, and could find no guide 
 in authority. He was disposed rather to enlarge, than fetter the veto of the Execu- 
 tive upon the recommendation of the Covmty Courts for appointments to the magis- 
 tracy. The present mode had been regarded by many as anti-republican in theory ; 
 and in some instances, it had been mischievous in practice : and he was disposed to ap- 
 ply a constitutional corrective, if one could be devised likely to be adequate to its end. 
 In matters of Government, he did not profess to be much influenced by mere theory: 
 he should seek the discovery of tlie principles that would work well ; and he would 
 
606 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 apply, as well as deduce them in reference to their practical consequences. He feared 
 that the various schemes of appointment offered in place of that provided by the ex- 
 isting Constitution, would induce more evil than they would remedy. The present 
 mode, he believed, had, in general, filled the magistracy with the best men in every 
 county ; and had, at least, procured as good men as would probably have been se- 
 lected in any other mode. It had, therefore, in the main answered its purpose ; and 
 he was disposed to retain it; but he would subject it to such modification as would in 
 his judgment correct its irregular action. The County Courts had been called a self- 
 elective magistracy ; but they were not : they were a self-nominating body ; and the 
 Executive made the appointments, and exercised a negative upon the recommenda- 
 tion of the coui-ts. He referred to the opinion expressed by Mr. Jefferson ; and he 
 believed instances had occured of favouritism from family influence, and party feel- 
 ings. If a family, or a faction should attempt to perpetuate, or strengthen itself on 
 the bench of a county, in what manner could it be frustrated but by the due exercise 
 of the veto of the Executive ? And how could that veto be made effectual, if, after 
 the rejection of a recommendation by the Executive, the court could renew it? It 
 had been said that the Executive might be misled, and be disposed to recal its disap- 
 proval : but this objection might be obviated by providing, that the rejected nomina- 
 tion might be renewed with the assent of the Executive. It had been said, too, that 
 the amendment would operate a total disqualification of the persons recommended 
 and rejected; but this was a mistake ; it only prevented a renewal of the same nomi- 
 nation to fill the same vacancy, and a perpetual see-saw between the Executive and 
 the court. The gentleman from Richmond had insisted, that the Executive was not 
 as competent to make a due selection of justices, as the courts of the counties where 
 they reside ; but he answered that the Executive must be presumed to be as compe- 
 tent to exercise its veto, as the courts were to prefer their nominations: each acted 
 in a mode, and upon information, appropriate to the particular functions delegated to 
 them. The Executive was competent, or it was not : if competent, it ought to have 
 power to make its veto effectual to the end for which it was given; and, if not, the 
 veto should be taken away from it, and the recommendations of the courts should be 
 without controul. He did not pretend that his amendment would be effectual in all 
 clises ; but he believed it would have a salutary tendency to prevent, or check the 
 evils it was designed to remedy. 
 
 Mr. Marshall opposed the amendment, as going to disqualify forever, a man, against 
 whom any objection was once made. 
 
 The Governor might send back a recommendation, simply because it contained too 
 anany persons: yet, according to Mr. Macrae's proposition, they were all to be dis- 
 qualified, and among them, perhaps the fittest man in the county. 
 
 Mr. Macrae said in reply, that the extent of his amendment has been misunder- 
 stood : it only referred to the same vacancy for which the individual had been recom- 
 mended, and not to any other. He mentioned the dissatisfaction among the people, 
 in respect to these courts, and the desirableness of removing it. As to the objection, 
 so far as it did apply, it could be obviated by a slight alteration of the resolution. He 
 .thought the measure calculated to lead to a different practice in the County Courts, 
 and prevent the present see-saw between them and the Executive. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. Macrae's amendment, it was rejected. 
 
 Being taken on that of Mr. Marshall, it was also rejected. 
 
 (Mr. Madison and Mr. Marshall, aye.) 
 
 Mr. Macrae now offered another amendment, referring, for his justification, to the 
 •earnest interest of a portion of his constituents, in this matter. It was as follows : 
 
 " Justices of the peace shall be commissioned during good behaviour, but may be 
 i-emoved in the manner which shall be prescribed by law, for misbehaviour in office, 
 crime, neglect of duty, removal from the respective counties, or insolvency." 
 
 He said, that as to the first provision, all must agree : the fountains of justice ought 
 not to be polluted by crime. It had been said, indeed, that this case had been pro- 
 vided for by law : but he thought it would be found, upon examination, that the jus- 
 tices of the peace were only removable for misbehaviour in office, and not for offences 
 unconnected with their public duty. He would not say, that a man without property, 
 would not give a fair decision on questions, where property was concerned ; he would 
 not say that a man who did not pay his own debts, was in all cases, an improper de- 
 pository of the power of compelling other people to pay theirs ; but he would say, 
 that a very general impression prevailed, and it appeared to him, not without reason, 
 that such a condition was extremely unfavourable to the impartial and firm adminis- 
 tration of justice, between debtor and creditor. This branch of our polity, was one 
 very peculiar in its constitution ; and it had been found necessary to enforce the per- 
 formance of its multifarious functions, by subjecting its administrators to a pecuniary 
 responsibility, in many important cases. Deprivation of this office was no punish- 
 ment ; for it was an office of labour and expense to the incumbent, and was without 
 (emolument; and hence, the law has considered it necessary to enforce its regular ad- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 607 
 
 ministration, by the imposition of fines — a security, and an important one too, which 
 totally fails, in relation to insolvents. They are required to aid in important Execu- 
 tive functions} and if they are guilty of neglect, they are subject to pecuniary penal- 
 ties. They are entrusted with the administration or disposition of important funds, 
 both public and private, in respect to which, the best pledge of their fidelity, and that 
 relied on by law, is their pecuniary responsibility. They are required to take ade- 
 quate security from executors and ether fiduciaries of estates; and, if they fail to do 
 so, they are made liable out of their own propert3\ AVhat will this safe-guard avail, 
 if the bench be occupied by insolvent justices, as is sometimes the case ? And may 
 not this defect of responsibility, lead to iniquitous combinations to defraud orphans .'' 
 Mischiefs of this sort have happened; and altliough. happily, they have been few in 
 number, owing to the general respectability and responsibility of the County Court 
 magistrates, it had been better to have prevented even those few. The County 
 Courts are invested with a sort of Legislative character ; and in that character they 
 impose, and appropriate the county taxes. This duty is assigned to them by law. It 
 has been often objected to it, that it was performed by men who were not elected b}- and 
 responsible to the people; and the answer has been, that a very sufficient security was 
 afforded in the fact, that the justices participated in the burthens which they imposed. 
 But what security is there in a bench of insolvents ? And, if only a part be insolvent, 
 as is the fact, I believe, in every county, is not the security proportionably diminished? 
 Do we not sometimes see that part only occupying the bench to the injury of public 
 justice, and the great offence of the people ? And ought we not to endeavour to se~ 
 cure to all our institutions, and more especially to our courts of justice, the confidence, 
 and atfections of the people, which are so essential to their beneficent operation ? Ac- 
 tual evils have resulted from this defect. I have heard upon good authority, of one- 
 instance, in which, an insolvent court appointed an insolvent sheriff", and look from 
 him insolvent sureties ; and the report is that the infamous combination divided among 
 them the spoils of their fraud. These remarks, Sir, are intended to be general, and 
 not to apply to any particular county, or any particular individuals. The district 
 which I in part represent, has no peculiar cause of complaint on this subject; al- 
 though a portion of my constituents think the evil of sufficient magnitude to call for 
 redress. I know, too, insolvents who have my most perfect confidence : but there 
 are others who have not ; and as the people have no choice, can make no discrimina- 
 tion, we must adopt a general rule which will exclude all. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that all the cases in the amendment were provided for already^ 
 except that of insolvency. 
 
 Mr. Macrae replied, that justices held their offices during good behaviour, and that 
 was held to refer to their official conduct alone. 
 
 Mr. Joynes moved to strike out the word •■ insolvency." Which was carried. 
 
 Mr. Cla^'tor moved to amend, by adding the words, " or incapacity for tlie discharge; 
 of the duties of their office." 
 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 
 The question being then taken on Mr. Macrae's amendment, it was rejected. 
 (Mr. Madison, aye : ^Ir. Marshall, no.) 
 
 The Committee then took up the remaining resolutions of the Judicial Committee, 
 which were passed without amendment, and are as follow : 
 
 Resolved, That the Clerks of the several courts shall be appointed by their respec- 
 tive courts, and their tenure of office be prescribed by law. 
 
 Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals and of the Inferior Courts, 
 offending against the Slate, either by mal-administration, corruption, or neglect of 
 duty, or by any other high crime or misdemeanor, shall be impeachable by the House 
 of Delegates, such impeachment to be prosecuted before ihe Senate. If found guilty 
 by a majority of two-thirds of the whole Senate, such persons shall be removed from 
 office. And any Judge so impeached, shall be suspended from exercising the func- 
 tions of his office until his acquittal, or mitil the impeachment shall be discontinued 
 or withdrawn. 
 
 Resolved, That Judges may be removed from office by a vote of the General As- 
 sembly ; but two-thirds of the whole number of each House must concur in such 
 vote, and the cause of removal shall be entered on the journals of each. The Judge 
 against whoin the Legislature is about to proceed, shall receive notice thereof, ac- 
 companied with a copy of the causes alleged for his removal, at least twenty days 
 before the day on which either House of the General Assembly shall act thereupon." 
 
 On motion of Mr. Campbell (of Brooke.) the Committee then rose, and the House 
 adjourned. 
 
608 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION* 
 
 FRIDAY, December 11, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met in the First Baptist Church at 11 o'clock, and its sitting was 
 opened witli prayer by the Rev. Mr. Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, from the Committee appointed to procure a House for the sittings 
 of the Convention, made a report in part. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Summers, the Convention proceeded to the appointment of an 
 additional door-keeper, rendered necessar}'^ by its present situation : and Mr. George 
 R. Myers v^^as appointed vidthout opposition. 
 
 The Convention then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Gordon in the Chair: 
 and the report of the Judicial Committee being still under consideration, 
 
 Mr. P. P. Barbour moved to amend the first resolution of the report, by striking 
 therefrom the following words : " no modification or abolition of any court shall be 
 construed to deprive any Judge thereof of his office ; but such Judge shall perform 
 any judicial duties which the Legislature shall assign him." 
 
 Mr. Barbour said, he had no idea of detaining the Committee with any argument 
 at large on the subject of the amendment, being fully sensible that the condition of 
 the Committee and the value of every hour of its time ahke forbade it : he should 
 state concisely two or three of the reasons which had led him to offer the amendment 
 and add a few remarks on the general subject. He was aware that the question was 
 necessarily involved in some difficulty. He took it for granted, the object intended 
 by the clause he had moved to strike out was, to guard against any evils happening in 
 Virginia, which had occurred elsewhere, and which attended the possihility that the 
 Legislature, when it should find itself unable, either by impeachment or by a vote of 
 two-thirds of the members of both Houses to get rid of an obnoxious or unpopular 
 Judge, might attempt to effect the object by abolishing the office which he held ; and 
 the arguments in favour of the provision, had reference to a memorable case which 
 happened about twenty years since, the circumstances of w^hich he should not stop to 
 retrace : but would proceed to remark upon the apprehended difficulties. 
 
 It was certainly true, that there was a jwssibility that the Legislature of Virginia 
 might pursue such a course : he believed it to be true that a course of conduct very 
 like it, had been adopted in Maryland and in Kentucky, and that there was consider- 
 able excitement in the public mind upon the subject. But, if the mere possibility of 
 abuse was to be relied on as an argument in its naked, unmodified, unqualified 
 shape, then no power at all could be conferred by the Constitution ; for, all power in 
 human hands, was liable to abuse. But, if it was only said that this principle ought to 
 govern in the distribution of power, viz: not to give it where there was a strong and 
 reasonable probability of its abuse, if the abuse was only possible and the advantages 
 to be derived from conferring it were great enough to compensate for running the 
 risk, then it ought to be conferred. As to Kentucky, he spoke doubtfully and not 
 from full knowledge, but he believed that after a period of great but temporary ex- 
 citement, the sound sense of the reflecting part of the community had eventually 
 prevailed. In Virginia, however, without claiming any peculiar exemption from evil 
 as peculiar to her citizens over others, he had supposed that there was a sedateness of 
 character and a fixedness of habit, a sense of propriety — a moral sense — a regard to 
 reputation, and a consciousness of responsibility to the people, which would prevent 
 such an abuse from ever taking place. Let me endeavor to shew the Committee 
 what will be the result of retaining the clause in question. It declares that " no modi- 
 fication or abolition of any court shall be construed to deprive any Judge thereof of 
 his office; but such Judge shall perform any judicial duties which the Legislature 
 shall assign him." Suppose that in the progress of our history and experience, it 
 shall be found that certain courts at present recognized by our judicial system are in 
 effect useless, or worse : but that on a re-organization of the system it should be 
 found that there remained more Judges than could be beneficially employed, this pro- 
 vision, if left to stand in the Constitution, will prevent the Legislature from ridding 
 the state of the existing evil. Let me illustrate this for one moment. Let me sup- 
 pose, (I do not say it is my opinion that the Legislature ought, but they might, and 
 it is supposable that they might consider it correct, and might wish to do such a 
 thing,) let me suppose in reference to the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals, that 
 instead of enjoining the Judges to go through the State, performing Nisi Prius cir- 
 cuits and having the causes adjudged in banc at the seat of Government, it should 
 choose to confine its sessions to this plan, and should thereby dispense with the servi- 
 ces of a part of the Judges : or let me suppose that they should undertake, as has been 
 much talked of lately, to unite Chancery and Common Lavv^ jurisdiction: all the 
 Chancellors would at once become unnecessary. I could imagine other cases, but I 
 will not detain the Committee. I quoted these merely to illustrate the position that 
 we ought not, out of fear that the Legislature may do wrong, so tie vip their hands as 
 to prevent them from doing right. If the Legislature in its wisdom, should find that 
 there are more Judges than can be usefully occupied, and wishing to rejnedy the caae, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 609 
 
 this provision puts it out of their power. >'one I presume can intend, that any indi- 
 vidual shall receive the emoluments of an office, which does not exist. If we could 
 bring ourselves to suppose that the Legislature out of mere wantonness, would vacate 
 a Judge by the abolition of his office, it would no doubt be a great evil : but would it 
 not be a greater to say that they shall not abolish the office effectually, because the 
 Judge must still remain in office? I submit to gentlemen whether this would not be 
 the greater evil of the two. 
 
 I believe that no practical danger like that suggested is at all to be apprehended: 
 I believe that the responsibility of the Representative and his regard to reputation, 
 that the character of the people of Virginia and its Legislation, authorise me to say 
 that such a thing is not possible. Surely we ought not, from apprehension of any 
 such dano^er. to encounter a great and positive evil. 
 
 It has been suggested, however, that the end may be attained by what is provided 
 in the eighth resolution. That resolution reads, Resohed, That Judges may be re- 
 moved from office by a vote of the General Assembly: but two-thirds of the whole 
 number of each House must concur in such vote, and the cause of removal shall be 
 entered on the Journals of each. The Judge against whom the Legislature is about 
 to proceed, shall receive notice thereof, accompanied with a copy of^the causes alle- 
 ged for his removal, at least twenty days before the day on which either House of the 
 General Assembly shall act thereupon." It must be obvious to the Committee, frorn 
 an eye glance, that this contemplates the removal of a Judge from an office which 
 exists, and wiiich will continue after his exclusion, and not to the case where the of- 
 fice itself will have ceased, when he no longer occupied it. It speaks of the Judge 
 being *• removed /m?rt, office:"' tliis undoubtedly contemplates that his removal will 
 creafe a vacancy in an office still to continue : but cannot properly apply to the sup» 
 posed case of the abolition of the office itself. 
 
 This idea is confirmed by consulting the context. The Judge against whom the 
 Legislature is about to proceed shall receive notice thereof, accompanied with a copy 
 of the causes alleged for his removal;" causes personal to him, and relating to some 
 offence he is alleged to have committed — but the office still continues readv, to be 
 filled by others, if he shall be excluded from it, but which if he succeeds in repelling 
 the charge, he will continue himself to fill. The two clauses are to be considered to- 
 gether. The one says the Judge may be removed, the other says that this rnay not 
 be done by the abolition of his office. The amount would be, that the Judge shall not 
 cease to be a Judge — and yet, what? that you may remove him from office because 
 you wish to get rid of him. But the Judge is called upon with notice of the causea 
 alleged for his removal, not that he may argue with the Legislative body about the 
 continuance of his office : no; but to repel the charges brought against him. And I 
 say that no Legislature on earth with these two clauses before them, would feel au- 
 thorised to dispose of a Judge by the abolition of his office, when the other clause 
 says that by its abolition he shall not be removed for being a Judge. 
 
 I will now add two or three remarks, and then resume my seat. 
 
 I am well aware the question is a difficult one. The independence of the Judicia- 
 ry — I mean its just and reasonable independence — is what I will never break in 
 upon : but I will not consent to make the office of a Judge continue against the will 
 of the Legislature and of the people. The Legislature will never attempt to abolish 
 the office of a Judge, unless they shall deliberately beheve it to be for the public good : 
 and then they ought to have the power to do it. There is a possibilitij. I grant, that 
 tliey might abolish it for the sake of cretting rid of three letters of the alphabet, and 
 immediately reinstate it for the salie of putting into it three other letters in their 
 room : such a thing is possible : but I will not impute such a purpose to the Legisla- 
 ture of my native State, and from the dread of such a deed, tie up their hands from 
 abolishing an office which they have found to be useless and injurious. 
 
 Mr. Venable said he was in favor of the resolution as it stood, and against the mo- 
 tion to strike out. I have considered this subject, said Mr. V^.. and looked at the evils 
 on both sides: and I am disposed to take that v,-hich I think the best. If the Assem- 
 bly should wish to get rid of some Judge or Judges, they may not, to be sure, be aa 
 infirm as the Legislatures of some of our neighbors: but if they should, it will bring 
 a great stain upon our character: and the moment they shall recover from the tem- 
 porary heat and excitement under which they did the act, they must themselves be- 
 come convinced that they have done very wrong. On the other hand, suppose the 
 chanore or abolition of a particular court should leave a few Judges to spare, what will 
 be the mighty mischief? They will only have to go into some one of the other courts 
 during the remaining period of their fife ; and when they die, there will be an end of 
 the difficulty. 
 
 They will always be valuable elsewhere, if not in the court where they were at 
 first ap'pointed — and where is the great difficulty ? But I should consider it, and my 
 friend from Orange acknowledges^that it would be. a great evil indeed, if the Assem- 
 bly of Virginia should be tempted to abolish a court for tl:e sake of getting rid of a 
 
 T7 
 
610 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Judge. This was the view of the subject which was taken in the Judicial Committee, 
 and I feel confident that the clause ought to be retained. 
 
 Mr. Stanard expressed his surprise that his acute and sagacious friend from Orange 
 (Mr. Barbour,) had totally misconceived the terms and scope of the clause he wished 
 to strike out, and had supposed that the terms of the eighth resolution could in no pos- 
 sible contingency be found a remedy to the case where a honajide honest abolition of 
 one court was desired, and the substitution of another differently organized in its room. 
 Let us look to his general reasoning. He thinks proper to indulge in the pleasing 
 anticipation that so much morality and integrity exists now, and will forever hereaf- 
 ter continue to exist in the Legislature, that he cannot expect it as probable, nay, not 
 as possible, or barely so, that a spirit will be dominant in that body, that will lead to 
 the expedient of repealing a law organizing a particular court, and then to re-enact it 
 for the sake of getting rid of some obnoxious Judge. And he thinks this, in the face 
 of the experience, the very recent experience, of two of our neighboring States, be- 
 sides other examples wliich might be quoted, in total oblivion of what passes under 
 his eyes, and what we all know daily to happen, viz: that when the passions are 
 highly excited, no means that the Constitution allows will remain unemployed to 
 gratify those passions. What v/as the course pursued in Kentucky Under the in- 
 fluence of passion, a majority of the Legislature became embodied against certain 
 Judges of that State : but their Constitution imposed a clog upon their movements, 
 (just such as this eighth resolution of ours proposes to do;) it required two-thirds of 
 both Houses to put the Judges out of office. After an impassioned struggle, they 
 failed to obtain the requisite number ; and frustrated in their plans of vengeance, the 
 majority resorted to the exercise of a power which their Constitution did not forbid, 
 and forthwith passed a law discarding the whole court, and turning every Judge out 
 of his office ; and then immediately re-instated the court with new Judges. Sir, will 
 this never be attempted here ? Will not some inflamed majority, unable under the 
 eighth resolution, to accomplish their object, attempt to do, what the amendment of 
 the gentleman almost invites them to do? I know not why we are to be free from 
 the passions which sway other men. 
 
 The provisions of the clause proposed to be stricken out, are the more necessary, 
 in consequence of that in the eighth resolution. And has the gentleman who pro- 
 fesses (and I doubt not sincerely feels) such friendship for an independent Judiciary, 
 looked to the influence which his measure will give to the Legislature over the Ju- 
 dicial body ? So far as it operates, its tendency is to mould the Judge to the Legisla- 
 tive will. It certainly lays him under the strongest temptation not to go in contra- 
 riety to that will. Here Mr. S. put the case of an unconstitutional law having been 
 passed, and the trying situation of the Judiciary, if liable to have their office legis- 
 lated from under them. But for this provision, ever}'- modification of a Court may 
 incorporate the repeal of the commissions of its Judges, and put every Judge out of 
 office by a stroke of the pen. The Legislature cannot provide for the continuance of 
 a Judge in oflice, by mere act of law. If the law constituting the court is repealed, 
 the Judges will go with it : and this possibility would hang over every Judge in all the 
 Courts of Virginia, from the Court of Appeals down to the County Courts. Besides, 
 clauses may be introduced without observation, and by dextrous management be re- 
 tained till they pass with the rest of the law, and thus turn the Judges out of their 
 office. From the very nature of the case, as soon as the Legislative and Judicial De- 
 partments come into conflict with each other, the power of the Legislature will be put 
 into operation to remove those who are obnoxious to their displeasure : and this in the 
 face of the vain, and (as it will then become) the ridiculous limitation contained in the 
 eighth resolution. Let us be consistent at least. Let us say that a majority of the 
 Legislature may at-any tim.e remove every Judge of all the intermediate Courts, and 
 not put them upon scandalous expedients to attain by indirection wha.t they may as 
 well be allowed to attain openly and without disguise. 
 
 But the gentleman from Orange labours under a total misconception of the terras 
 of the eighth resolution. He supposes, that it does not furnish the means of getting 
 rid of useless Judges, where the Legislature, honajide, and without any enmity against 
 the Judge, abolishes the Court, and re-orgcUiizes, in order to improve it. He supposed 
 that resolution only gives the Legislature power to remove a Judge from an office 
 which continues ; and if the Court is abolished, he then supposes that this cannot be 
 done. He asks, how can a man be removed from an office, if the office itself is de- 
 stroyed But the clause in the first resolution, which he proposes to strike out, pre- 
 vents the abolition of the office, the abolition of the Court notwithstanding. You may 
 have abolished the Court, yet that clause says he is still a Judge. He may have lost 
 his jurisdiction, but he is a Judge still, and retains his Judicial office. Can there be 
 any better cause for the amotion of a Judge, than that the Legislature has ascertained, 
 that the court to which he belonged is of no value ? that it shall be abolished, and its" 
 jjpdiction exercised by some other court, or shall cease to be exercised at all and 
 this bona fide. I say, could there be a better cause for the amotion of a Judge, than 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 611 
 
 this? For such a case, the eighth resolution furnishes an ample remedy ; but it is 
 provided, under this salutar}/ check, that the Legislature is inhibited, under the mere 
 colour of abohshing the court, to do so with the unhallowed purpose of depriving the 
 Judge of his office. If you give the Legislature this power, they may disband the 
 whole of the Judges at pleasure. 
 
 But the gentleman tells us there are dangers in the way. Does he expect, as the 
 country goes on increasing in its population, and the extent of its settlements, that 
 our Judicial establishment is to be diminished Can he look forward to a time, when 
 a less quantum of Judicial power is likely to be needed : But admit it. Where is 
 the danger ; What are the mischiefs which are to grow out of this paragraph ? The 
 only conceivable one is, that in the changes induced by a new organization of the 
 courts, a Judge or two may become supernumerary. Not to insist on what I said 
 concerning the constant progress of society, the eighth resolution provides a remedy 
 even in that case. These supernumeraries, if they become so numerous as to prove 
 a burden, may be removed. But no day is more remote or improbable. In the mean 
 while, the preceding part of the first resolution leaves the courts to the entire power 
 of the Legislature, as to their organization and jurisdiction — these they may re-model 
 at their pleasure. 
 
 I ask the Committee to vreigh the opposite miscliiefs — on the one hand, leaving the 
 Legislature in the possession of power to disband all the Judges the}- dislike, and 
 attack and destroy the independence of the Judiciary, This to be counted against the 
 possibility, and that a remote one, of the existence of one or more supernumerary 
 Judges. They are as dust in the balance. 
 
 Mr. Morris, with a view to remedy the difiiculty apprehended by Mr. Barbour, 
 although not of opinion that such a clause was absolutely needed, but under the per- 
 suasion that it might remove doubt, and produce no evil, moved the following pro- 
 viso to be added at the end of the eighth resolution : 
 
 Provided, hoicever, That if upon the m.odification or abolition of any court, any 
 Judge or Judges should not be directed to perform other Judicial duties, it shall be 
 competent to the General Assembly, tv.'o-thirds of the whole number of each House 
 concurring therein, to vacate the commission or commissions of such Judge or Judges." 
 
 Mr. Barbour thought the amendment, though it obviated what he had urged in re- 
 lation to the eighth resolution, did not remove the difiiculty as to retaining Judges 
 wliose duties had ceased, unless they could be removed hj a vote of two-thirds of both 
 Houses. He w^ould not consent to frame the organic law on the hypothesis, that the 
 Legislature were to do wilful and deliberate wrong. He judged them by his own 
 conscience, and could not believe they ever would. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, he did not intend to enter into the debate at this time. Had the gen- 
 tleman from Orange been content with the amendment, he should have said nothing ; 
 but as he had not seemed satisfied with it, he could not help suggesting to the gentle- 
 man from Hanover, (Mr. Morris,) whether it was proper to press the amendment. 
 There was not the slightest possible necessity for it as an explanation of the resolu- 
 tion: with great respect, said Zvlr. M., for the opinion of the gentleman from Orange, 
 if I can understand his language, he both misquoted and misunderstood the eighth 
 resolution, when he supposed it to require the construction he puts upon it. He has 
 used throughout his argument the word office instead of Court, and it Vi'as that which 
 produced the confusion into which he has fallen, and which alone leads to the slight- 
 est supposable difiiculty. He says that the eighth resolution does not apply to the case 
 provided against in the clause he would strike out, because it uses the term office, and 
 he says the Legislature cannot remove a man from an office, which office does not 
 exist — that no abolition of the ofiice can be construed as a removal of the Judge — and 
 that a Judge cannot be removed from an ofiice that he does not hold, because the of- 
 fice has been abolished. 
 
 Now, the language of the clause in the first resolution, speaks of the abolition of a 
 Court, not of an office : but the abolition of a Court is not the abolition of the office of 
 the Judge. The office of a Judge is his capacity to administer justice: not to adminis- 
 ter it in one Court only. The former Judges of the General Court have been ad- 
 vanced to another Court since : yet the Judge remains, though he was appointed a 
 Judge of the General Court. There is no necessity, whatever, for the proposition of 
 the gentleman from Hanover. It is impossible the resolutions should be misunder- 
 stood so far as that the application of the eighth resolution, to the case provided for 
 by the second, cannot be seen — but if it was possible so far to misunderstand it. the 
 language might be slightly changed. But it is obvious from the two taken together, 
 that change the Courts as you pfease, the Judge remains in office and^is ready to re- 
 ceive any duty which the Legislature may assign to him. I suggest to the gentleman 
 the propriety of withdrawing his proviso. 
 
 Mr. Barbour said, that the gentleman from Richmond had, (not intentionally he was 
 very sure) done him injustice, when he charged him with misquoting. He read from the 
 printed pamphlet in his hand. The argument he had intended to urge was this ; tliat 
 
C12 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 though the Court should be abolished and the office remain, still he questioned whether 
 the removal of a useless Judge was within the scope of the eighth resolution. He 
 would submit another reason for this opinion. By that resolution it was provided, 
 that the Judge was to be served with a copy of the causes alleged against him. 
 
 Now, supposing the Legislature has abolished the Court and wishes to remove one 
 of the Judges. What " are the causes" to be shewn in this case? Are they to say to 
 the Judge, we want your services no longer, and you must come and dispute before 
 Us, whether your office ought or ought not to be continued ^ To my mind the eighth 
 resolution imports the idea, not that the Legislature wish to remove the Judge, but that 
 against A. or B. some imputation has been brought, and that he is to be summoned to 
 answer the charges. 
 
 Mr. Marshall rose in reply. I still say the gentleman has totally misrepresented 
 the meaning of the resolution. He still says that it speaks of charges alleged against 
 him, and asks if the abolition of the office is any charge against the Judge. No, it is 
 not. I did not say it was. But I say, and I say it with great confidence, that as the 
 terms of the resolution are expressed, it does not require that any cause shall be alleged 
 against the Judge : whatever may operate as a cause for his removal comes within 
 the resolution: it may be assigned as such by the Legislature, and it does not imply 
 that he has committed any oftence. We must not confound the clause providing for 
 the impeachment of a Judge with the clause providing for his removal from office : for 
 crimes and offences, he is to be impeached, and the impeachment is to be tried before 
 the Senate. But when the Legislature shall say that he is useless, and that there is 
 cause for his removal, he may be removed. The resolution requires the cause to be 
 assigned and recorded. The Legislature may say, as that cause, that the Judge is 
 useless ; that the number of Judges is too great, and that part of them may be dis- 
 pensed with : and then the resolution applies entirely. It may be a question with the 
 Legislature, whether he has not been rendered useless by themselves in the abolition 
 of his Court; but that is a question for them only, and for nobody else. If they choose 
 to designate it as the cause of his removal, they can act upon it. 
 
 Mr. Morris said, it gave him at all times great pleasure to comply with any request 
 of the gentleman from Richmond, and the more now as he had at first been of the same 
 opinion as that gentleman ; but he had offered the proviso with the hope of satisfying 
 his friend from Orange ; and the gentleman from Richmond had said, he would be con- 
 tent it should be inserted : it was true, the gentleman from Orange was not wholly 
 satisfied, yet owned that it removed his objection to the eighth resolution — he, there- 
 fore, must still insist upon his motion. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he was against both the proviso and the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from Orange, and for a different reason from any that had been assigned. He 
 had yesterday voted against striking out the second resolution — but he wished to sub- 
 stitute a proviso, which he would indicate. The great difficulty of giving the Legis- 
 lature power to re-organize the Courts, grew out of the tenure of the Judges, and from 
 even a seeming attack upon their independence. It was easy to empower the Legis- 
 lature to reduce the number of the Judges in commission, according to a plan which 
 he would submit when they got into the House. Some years since, Mr. D. said, a 
 desire was felt to reduce the number of the Judges of the Court of Appeals from five 
 to three, and others wished that their salaries might be increased. And it was pro- 
 posed that on the first vacancy's occurring it should be left unfilled, and so when the 
 second should occur; and when their number should be reduced to three, the salaries 
 of all the five should be divided among them. The proposal met with minds enough 
 to carry it; but experience had proved that it worked badly ; in consequence of which 
 the number was restored to five, but the increased salary was continued. Now, Mr. 
 D. thought that a plan of this kind might be adopted to get rid of supernumerary 
 Judges, should any be occasioned by the re-organization of the Judiciary system : let 
 them have employment while they lived, and when they died leave their places un- 
 Bupplied. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Morris's amendment, and negatived : and the 
 question recurring on that of Mr. Barbour, 
 
 Mr. Johnson rose in opposition to the amendment. He was opposed to striking 
 out the clause in question, and equally to the object which seemed to be in view by 
 doing so. He did not wish to put it in the power of the Legislature, at pleasure, to 
 remove every Judge from office, whenever they should persuade themselves that some 
 good effect was to follow from it ; yet such would be the certain effect of the motion 
 of the gentleman from Orange. He did not know whether he had correctly under- 
 stood the gentleman from Spottsylvania, who said that the clause only applied to 
 Judges of the Superior Courts. Such was not his interpretation. Its language was 
 universal : " No modification or abolition of any Court shall be construed," &c. But, 
 if the Committee should agree to the first resolution in its present form, what would 
 be the foundation of the Court of Appeals Would it be beyond the power of the 
 Legislature to modify and even abolish that Court ? They could not, to be sure, say 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 613 
 
 there shall not be any Court of Appeals, but they might abolish any particular Courts 
 of Appeals, change it entirely, and give the new court power to issue appeals. Sup- 
 pose the Legislature should say, that the Court of Appeals should be abolished, and 
 that the General Court shall be a Court of Appeals in all civil, as it now is in all 
 criminal cases. Does the resolution restrain them from doing this ? It does not : and 
 if it is adopted, there is no protection whatever to the Court of Appeals as it is now 
 organized — none whatever. Now, he held that the clause, which the gentleman sought 
 to strike out, covered with its mantle the Judges of that Court, as well as of all the 
 rest. The moment it was stricken out, they would have all the Judges at the mercy 
 of the Legislature. Would any gentleman be willing so to subject the Judicial to the 
 Legislative branch of the Government? Did any man, who valued the indepen- 
 dence of the Judiciary, as the very best feature in our free institutions, wish to put 
 every Judge in the land entirely at the discretion of the Legislature ? Yet would not 
 that be the practical effect of the amendment.'' The gentleman from Orange, he was 
 very sure, did not desire such an effect. The gentleman, looking only to his own 
 heart, and his own independent impartiality and exemption from the bias of party 
 feeling, could not indulge the idea, that the Legislature of his State would be go- 
 verned by any but the purest motives of wisdom and patriotism. If this were indeed 
 so, tlien he would agree at once to put all the destinies of the Commonwealth unre- 
 servedly into their hands. He asked for no courts — no Judges. He would commit 
 all the powers of the Government at once to the Legislature. But was that the course 
 of human affairs ? Did the experience of the world authorise such a doctrine ? Did 
 not the gentleman see how readily a Legislative body, influenced even by the purest 
 wishes lor the public good, might be brought to the conclusion, that duty to their 
 country required that every Judge in the country should surrender his commission 
 In the moment of party excitement, a Judge would be considered as but a small sa- 
 crifice, when some favourite measure was to be carried. How little would his fate- 
 or his prospects weigh against some immediate imaginary good to be obtained by hiff 
 removal ? Was the gentleman willing to put the Judges upon the virtue and good 
 intentions of the Legislature, for the security of their offices Would he cast them 
 upon its wisdom as their safeguard It was an idle belief. They never would be 
 insensible to the effect of popular clamour and discontent, nor to the excitement of 
 party politics in high party times. There was besides, a feeling engendered by the 
 mere conflict of opinion between an independent Judiciary, who sought to restrain 
 their excess, and an ardent body pressing for a favourite scheme, which could not but 
 expose the former to danger. What was the object of creating an independent Ju- 
 diciary ? Was it merely to secure the salaries of a few men ? Far from it. That did 
 not even enter into the question. It was to enable the poor and despised man to come 
 on equal terras into controversy with the rich and the powerful. It was to enable the 
 unpopular man to appeal with confidence to the tribunal of his country, against the 
 popular idol of the day. It was to enable the humblest citizen in the community to 
 stand firm and erect before the Commonwealth itself. In a political point of view, 
 it was to enable the Judicial branch of the Government to prescribe limitations to 
 Legislative power itself. But, could it answer these noblest and best of ends, if its 
 functionaries, before they pronounced a decision, were to look at its effect upon their 
 own subsistence, and the comforts of all whom they loved ? Compel a Judge to look, 
 at this, and he could soon find ways and means of justifying any decision which his 
 interest or his safety might require. It took but little trouble to muster up law enough 
 to effect such an end. The late Judge Pendleton used to say, that when a cause had 
 been examined by him, the first question he asked himself was, which decision does 
 justice require.^ And then he set about to find law to sustain that decision. Set a 
 Judge to enquire what does policy demand, and he was a driveller if he could not 
 find law for it. None ought to drive, or wish to drive any Judge to consult such un- 
 worthy motives. How then, would the Judge stand, supposing the clause to be stricken 
 out, as proposed by the gentleman from Orange ? If an unconstitutional law had been 
 passed by a bare majority, he would consider himself as safe against a vote of two- 
 thirds of the House ; but, if the law was known to be very popular, he would have 
 reason to fear. How then, was the power of the Legislature to be exercised against 
 him 
 
 Mr. J. said he would never give his vote for the provision, which went to remove 
 Judges by a vote of two-thirds of both branches of the Legislature, without any crime 
 having been proved against them. If they were to be removed for bodily or for mental 
 inability, he had no objections ; but, he would never consent to give the Legislature 
 a carte blanche to put any Judge they please out of office, if they could muster a ma- 
 jority of two-thirds of their number against him. The Judge might further be sup- 
 posed to ask himself, if they fail to get two-thirds, is there no other way in which 
 they cari get at me ? How do 1 hold my office ? I am not a Judge of a Court, which 
 the Legislature yesterday organized, and which they may to-morrow modify, re- 
 organize or abolish. If I hold my office by the continuation of the court as at pre- 
 sent organized, the Legislature may say, this man by his decision has defeated one of 
 
614 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 our most favourite objects of policy. The Governor, I perceive, takes part with them. 
 He says to them, you made a most wise and excellent law : I entirely approve of it, 
 and I tried my best to put it into execution ; but, that unjust and oppressive tribunal 
 has refused to sanction it. Can I suppose that a hint from head quarters, that the 
 court is not wisely and judiciously organized, will not be sufficient? Does any gen- 
 tleman here, asked Mr. J., believe that the Judge would reason unwisely ? Does any 
 man believe that the Legislature, under such circumstances, would stop for one hour ? 
 No. They would re-organize the court, and thus get rid of the Judge. I have no 
 doubt, said Mr. J. that among the schemes of reform, and we shall have plenty of 
 them, the Judicial office will become to be no more respected by the Legislature than 
 the law of their predecessors. Will you give them this power And do you believe 
 that two or three, or ten, or twenty Judges will stand in their way ? Not in the least. 
 
 Mr. J. observed, that any Judicial duty that could be performed with ten Judges, 
 might be as well performed by twenty. Supernumeraries in that respect, would not 
 be serious impediments. As to the expense, that was already incurred : they must 
 pay them, simply because they had them. Besides, the objection on the ground of 
 economy diminished with every life that fell. And will you, asked he, encounter so 
 serious a danger, on the paltry consideration of the salaries of some half dozen Judges 
 during their remnant of life ? Will gentlemen look at the plans of reform, and tell 
 me which of them contemplates the least diminution in the number of our Judges ? 
 All that I have heard of, contemplate an increase. The objections, then, rest on the 
 basis of a bare naked possibility. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell now moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Barbour, by striking out 
 the words " a Court of Appeals," and inserting in lieu thereof the words " one Su- 
 preme Court." In advocating the amendment, Mr. T, observed, that this at first view 
 might appear to be a mere verbal criticism. He should not stop to enquire if it were 
 so or not, but would go on to observe, that by so altering the phraseology, it would be 
 made to conform in terms to that used in the Constitution of the United States, and 
 then they should have the benefit of the settled interpretation put upon that phrase, 
 which would answer the gi-eat argument of the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. John- 
 son.) Then they would have the one Supreme Court of the State, a Constitutional 
 Court, and the Inferior Courts Legislative ones : and as according to the settled con- 
 struction of the Constitution of the United States, Congress had power to re-model 
 or abolish the Inferior Courts of the Union, so the Legislature of Virginia would have 
 power over the Inferior Courts of Virginia. Then the question as to the operation of 
 the clause proposed by his friend from Orange to be stricken out, would be confined 
 exclusively to courts of the latter description ; and it was a very singular proposition, 
 that while the Constitution gave authority to the Legislature to modify that portion 
 of the Judicial power, which shall be vested in the Inferior Courts, according to 
 its discretion, or to abolish those courts absolutely and vv'ithout any condition, it was 
 yet proposed, that the Judges of those courts after the abolition of them, shall be 
 preserved. He had not understood one remark which had been made on the word 
 " office." He took it to be settled under the words "that Judges may be removed 
 from office ;" that the Legislature had power to abolish and modify Inferior Courts. 
 What then became of the office.? If it remains, said Mr. T., of what sort is it 
 Under the Constitution, or under the law.? If under the Constitution, then, vi^hen 
 the Judge dies the office remains, and there must be a successor appointed, and re- 
 mains a sinecure. If under the law, when you repeal the law you repeal the office. 
 I do not then understand how the office remains. I always apprehended, that the 
 Judge's office pertained to his court, and could not continue after it. There will be 
 a strange anomaly existing in Virginia, which exists no where else, nor can. The 
 Legislature has power to create, modify and abolish an office, and yet the incumbent 
 of the offi-ce is to be saved, though the office may cease. What is the reason of this.? 
 The office of a Clerk and a Marshal is held during good behaviour. Why must not 
 they too retain their office, unless there is something peculiar in the character of a 
 Judge ? Does an independent Judiciary require that the Inferior Courts should be 
 inde'jjendent of the Legislature ? Was ever such a thing heard of upon earth ? It is 
 true, there must be an independent department, but there is no need of but one such 
 department. The Inferior Courts must be subjected to the Legislature. Preserve 
 your Supreme Court independent, and you get all you need. All your provisions are 
 vain. What does it all amount to.? You abolish the court, but do not abolish the 
 office. Your Judo-e is still preserved in posse— not in esse—n Judge without jurisdic- 
 tion— an officer wtthout a place— and why .?— for what .? That he may get his salary. 
 But where is he to get it .? It must be paid him by the Legislature. But, u you are 
 to presume mala fides in the Legislature, the salary of the Judge being under their 
 controul, they may withhold it at pleasure ; and how are you to help yourselves ? It 
 will always be so— it is in the nature of the case, and you cannot change or remedy it. 
 
 If the amendment shall obtain, that the Constitution of Virginia will read as the 
 Federal Constitution does now : you will have one Supreme Court, with its Judges 
 holding their offices during good behaviour, beyond the controul of the Legislature, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 615 
 
 just as the Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, are beyond the reach 
 of Congressional power, while your Inferior Courts, like those of the Union, will be 
 Bubjectlo Legislative controul, and may be modified or abolished at will. 
 
 This is not a speculation : it accommodates the Constitution of Virginia to the 
 terms of the Constitution of the Union, which has received a fixed interpretation, and 
 concerning whose meaning doubt is removed by a long train of recorded decisions. 
 By accommodating ours to that, no difficulty will arise ; it will get aid of the argu- 
 ment of the gentleman from Augusta — and when it is disposed of, I am prepared to 
 vote for the amendment offered by my friend from Orange. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke said, that he should vote for the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell,) for two reasons : first, for the sake of the argu- 
 ment he had given to the Committee, and by which he had satisfactorily proved that 
 the Commonwealth ought to have but one Constitutional Court ; and next tor the sake 
 of the amendment itseTf Mr. C. said he had prepared one of the same tenor, but 
 doubtino- his own judgment, had forborne to offer it. He had always thought there 
 ought to be but one Constitutional Court, and that it ought to have two kinds of ju- 
 risdiction, appellate and original. It was now called a Court of Appeals, and its ju- 
 risdiction of course was appellate only, but if it were denominated a Supreme Court, 
 it might be endowed with original jurisdiction also. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas wished to explain the grounds of his vote. He agreed in part with 
 the gentleman from Norfolk, and should vote for his amendment, but was not in fa- 
 vour of striking out the clause referred to by the gentleman from Orange. 
 
 He had had a doubt whether tlie Court of Appeals was not on the tooting of an 
 ordinary Legislative Court; and that doubt had been confirmed by the late debate on 
 the subject of the County Courts. Here Mr. N. recapitulated what had passed in 
 respect to retaining the word " the" before County Courts, and contended that it was 
 equally necessary before the words " Court of Appeals," should that title be retained. 
 He was, however, in favour of giving it the title of a Supreme Court; then, if Infe- 
 rior Courts should be provided when the court was abolished, the office went with it. 
 He agreed perfectly in that opinion. Here Mr. N. adverted to the well known con- 
 troversy as to the Judges of the District Court retaining their oflices. That was a 
 dispute about interpreting a Constitution already in being ; but now a Constitution 
 was to be formed, and they might put in it such provisions as they pleased ; and so 
 they might declare that the Judge should survive the abolition of his court. He was 
 in favour of such a provision. He professed himself an ardent friend to the indepen- 
 dence of the Judiciary ; yet he would have held the Judges amenable to law and not 
 above law, if the continuance of their office be essential to their independence. But - 
 if the public good required the abolition of their courts, gentlemen asked if he would 
 be for continuing the Judges in office, without any employment.? He answered no: 
 and contended that that case was provided for in the eighth resolution, by which they 
 might be removed whenever the public good required ; but as a safeguard against ca- 
 price, two-thirds of both Houses were required to effect it. 
 
 jNIr. Leigh was opposed to the amendment of Mr. Tazewell. The only effect of it 
 would be, that the court might then receive original jurisdiction. He perceived no 
 expediency in this : He contended that, in order to understand the report of the Ju- 
 dicial Committee, it was necessary to take the whole together. He compared the first 
 and second resolutions v/ith the eighth, and concluded from the whole, that the juris- 
 diction of all tiie tribunals of the State was left to the law ; there the term of the 
 Judge's oflice was fixed — and there provision was made against a manoeuvre to get 
 him out of office by destroying and re-instating his court. The meaning of a Judge's 
 office was his civil capacity as a Judge to receive new Judicial duties. This was to 
 remain, however the courts might be re-modelled or even abolished: then came the 
 test; if the Legislature wished to get rid of a Judge, there was a check upon their 
 proceedings by requiring two-thirds of both Houses to concur. 
 
 Mr. Leigh referred to a case in the historv of the courts of Virginia, when this prin- 
 ciple of a Judge surviving the change of his court was acted on. Before the Fede- 
 ral Constitution had been adopted, there had been in Virginia a General Court with 
 five Judges, a Chancery Court with three Chancellors, and an Admiralty Court with 
 three Judges. The latter was superseded by the powers of the Federal Government. 
 The Legislature left one Chancellor ; and then gave ten Judges to the General Court. 
 The effect of the struggle, was to compel the Judges of the Court of Appeals, to 
 perform nisi prius duty as Judges of Assize. He then went into a history of the 
 creation of the District Courts, and the transfer of the Judges. He contended, that 
 in the present case, if any chancery jurisdiction was to be abolished, the Chancellors 
 could be transferred to the General Court; and if it should prove too numerous 
 the extra Judges could be gotten rid of by the plan suggested by Mr. Doddridge. 
 The difficulty would be of short duration, 
 
 Mr. Marshall now rose and addressed the Committee in nearly the following 
 terms : 
 
616 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield, has understood the language of these resolutions 
 correctly. No doubt was entertained in the Judicial Committee, that the whole sub- 
 ject of the jurisdiction of the courts and the change of their form should be submitted 
 entirely to the Legislature. There was no question on the subject. When I first 
 heard the amendment of the gentleman from Norfolk, I had no objection to it except 
 that this Court of Appeals had been long known to the Constitution of Virginia, and 
 ought to be retained, unless there was some utility in the change. As to the con- 
 sideration that there had been a regular and fixed construction of the Constitution of 
 the United States for a great length of time, that was no reason to change the title of 
 Court of Appeals, because the Constitution of Virginia had been in existence for a 
 still longer time. But though my original objection to the change had been only that 
 it was unnecessary, when I heard the gentleman's argument I felt more. 
 
 1 shall not enter on the question, whether the construction of the Federal Consti- 
 tution by the Congress of the United States is correct, or whether it will be adhered 
 to or not. That question I shall not touch — it is not before the Committee. We act 
 on the presuuiption, that that construction might be adopted, and we have provided 
 against it. The argument of the gentleman goes to prove not only that there is no 
 such thing as Judicial independence, but that there ought not to be no such thing: 
 that it is unwise and improvident to make the tenure of the Judge's office to continue 
 during good behaviour. That is the effect of his argument. His argument goes to 
 prove, not only that there is no such thing, but that it is unwise that there should be. 
 I have grown old in the opinion, that there is nothing more dear to Virginia, or ought 
 to be dearer to her statesmen, and that the best interests of our country are secured 
 by it. Advert, Sir, to the duties of a Judge. He has to pass between the Govern- 
 ment and the man whom that Government is prosecuting : between the most pow- 
 erful individual in the community, and the poorest and most unpopular. It is of the 
 last importance, that in the exercise of these duties, he should observe the utmost 
 fairness. Need I press the necessity of this ? Does not every man feel that his own 
 personal security and the security of his property depends on that fairness The Ju- 
 dicial Department comes home in its effects to every man's fireside : it passes on his 
 property, his reputation, his life, his all. Is it not, to the last degree important, that 
 he should be rendered perfectly and completely independent, with nothing to influ- 
 ence or controul him but God and his conscience ? You do not allow a man to per- 
 form the duties of a juryman or a Judge, if he has one dollar of interest in the matter 
 to be decided : and will you allow a Judge to give a decision when his office may de- 
 pend upon it? wlien his decision may offend a powerful and influential man? Your 
 salaries do not allow any of your Judges to lay up for his old age : the longer he re- 
 mains in office, the more dependant he becomes upon his office. He wishes to re- 
 tain it ; if he did not wish to retain it, he would not have accepted it. And will you 
 make me believe that if the manner of his decision may affect the tenure of that of- 
 fice, the man himself will not be affected by that consideration ? But suppose he 
 is not affected by it: if the mere repeal of a law, and the making some change in 
 the organization of his court, is to remove him, that these circumstances will not re- 
 cur perpetually ? I acknowledge that, in my judgment, the whole good which may 
 grow out of this Convention, be it what it may, will never compensate for the evil of 
 changing the tenure of the Judicial office. 
 
 The gentleman from Orange placed his argument upon this ground, that to impose 
 such a restraint upon the Legislature, was to make an imputation upon the Legisla- 
 ture, which he would not make. He did not suppose it possible they would act in 
 that manner, and he would not provide against it. For what do you make a Consti- 
 tution ? If your confidence is complete, and no provision is necessary against mis- 
 doing, and no imputation is to be cast upon the Legislature, why are we making 
 another Constitution ? Consider how far this argument extends. In the tenth reso- 
 lution of the Legislative Committee, you say that no bill of attainder, or ex post facto 
 law, shall be passed. What a calumny is here upon the Legislature of the gentle- 
 man's native State ! Do you believe, that the Legislature will pass a bill of attainder, 
 or an ex ])ost facto law? Do you believe, that they will pass a law impairing the 
 obligation of contracts ? If not, why provide against it ? Does not the principle of 
 the gentleman from Orange apply as much to this case as to the other ? You declare, 
 that the Legislature shall not take private property for the pubhc use, without just 
 compensation. Do you believe, that the Legislature will put forth their grasp upon 
 private property, without compensation ? Certainly I do not. There is as little reason 
 to believe they will do such an act as this, as there is to believe, that a Legislature 
 will offend against a Judge who has given a decision against some favourite opinion 
 and favourite measure of theirs, or against a popular individual who has almost led 
 the Legislature by his talents and influence. 1 am persuaded there is at least as much 
 danger that they will lay hold on such an individual, as that they will condemn a man 
 to death for doing that which, when he committed it, was no crime. The gentleman 
 says, it is impossible the Legislature should ever think of doing such a thing. Why 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 617 
 
 then expunge the prohibition ? He repHes, the benefit to be obtained is this, that it 
 is possible the Legislature may create Judges whom they afterwards discover to be 
 useless : they discern their error, but if this clause is retained, they cannot retrace 
 tlie step, and abolish their own work. Is this probable ? In the history of this coun- 
 try, Judges are known to be charged with duties they are scarcely equal to. There 
 are no surplus Judges. The office does not descend to the family, and multiply with 
 it. AH the Judges are created by a Legislative act : and they may as well abolish a 
 court to get rid of a Judge, as create a court to make a Judge. There can be no just 
 fear that unnecessary Judges will be created. It is not the tendency of our situation 
 and our Government. The danger that they will be left dependent, is more pro- 
 bable : but if it does arise, it is provided against by the eighth resolution. 
 
 I see no utility in the amendment of the gentleman from Norfolk. It will change 
 the established appellation of the court, long settled in our own Constitution. Be 
 this, however, as it may, nothing can be, in my apprehension, more mischievous than 
 to expunge that clause with the views that gentleman entertains. His design is pro- 
 fessedly and avowedly to leave all the Judges but the Judges of the Court of Ap- 
 peals, (and them too, as I believe will be the fact,) to the power of the Legislature. 
 There is this difference : The removal of a Judge is an unpleasant task — it usually 
 occasions some reluctance : but, merely to take away the foundation on which he 
 stands, and to let him drop, is another thing: this occasions very little compunction, 
 and as little to re-elect others, and leave him unprovided for. 
 
 I feel strongly, tliat this Convention can do nothing that would entail a more se- 
 rious evil upon Virginia, than to destroy the tenure by which her Judges hold their 
 offices. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell rose in reply : 
 
 The gentleman firom Chesterfield, said he, urges as an objection, that the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Court of Appeals is merely appellate, and gives this as a reason why he 
 will vote to change the name of the court. Has the gentleman adverted to the fourth 
 line of the resolution, wliich declares, that the jurisdiction of these tribunals shall 
 be regulated by law ?" If the Legislature is to regulate the jurisdiction of all the 
 courts, and this among the rest, v,'hat becomes of the ground he has taken, that the- 
 present jurisdiction of this court is appellate only It is called The Court of Ap- 
 peals," and ex xi termini it must be appellate ) but, its jurisdiction may be altered by 
 law in any way the Legislature shall direct. I do not know that it is so desirable, 
 that its jurisdiction shall be appellate only. The distinction between original and ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction, is not perfectly clear. It runs into apices juris. I know of no 
 argument to show, that we ought to exclude all jurisdiction, other than appellate. I 
 think there are many cases, where it ought to be original also. I therefore apprehend 
 there is no force in the objection of the gentleman from Chesterfield. 
 
 The gentleman from Richmond tells us, that he is unwilling to adopt the change 
 of denomination proposed by my amendment. First, because it may cause the Con- 
 stitution of Virginia to read totidem verbis, as the Constitution of the United States 
 does ; and the Constitution of V^irginia is older in its date than the Federal Con- 
 stitution, and is more certain in its interpretation. It will be seen by a repetition of the 
 words, that the terms of the Federal Constitution are not repeated — they are changed ; 
 but, if they were identically the same, what interpretation has been put on this Con- 
 stitution, v/hich should induce us to prefer it ? What did the Constitution do ?' Ap- 
 point Judges of the Court of Appeals No. Judges of other Courts were made 
 Judges of the Court of Appeals until 178S, when the District Court s3-stem was 
 adopted. When that system was adopted, the Legislature thought there must be a 
 Court of Appeals, and they then erected a District Court with that name, and so it 
 has remained ever since. So far the Constitution of Virginia has had no settled de- 
 cision which bears upon the subject. The Court of Appeals was composed of the 
 Judges of three other Courts, and a subsequent Legislature pronounced it to be a 
 Constitutional Court. But no such difficulty has ever occurred respecting the Con- 
 stitution of the United States. I am told there may be different constructions of 
 that Constitution. I care not how many different constructions may be put upon it 
 hereafter. If the Convention adopt its language now, it adopts it as noic construed : 
 and after that, I do not care if they shall change the construction fifty times. I am 
 for adopting the words as they are noio understood : and it was for that reason that I 
 moved the amendment. I would take the words " a Supreme Court,"' under the 
 construction held by every Department of the Federal Government — that the Su- 
 preme Court" is a Constitutional Court, and its Judges beyond the reach of Congress 
 itself. If we adopt the term under this construction, we adopt the construction itself; 
 and thus the Court of Appeals becomes consecrated as much as the Supreme Court 
 of the United States. And with respect to the Inferior Courts, change but one word, 
 and your Constitution will be precisely the same, on this subject, as the Constitution 
 of the United States. The construction always was, that Congress may change and 
 abolish them at pleasure ; and tlie construction has been acquiesced in to tlie present 
 
 78 
 
61S 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 time. By adopting tlie same words with the Federal Constitution as to both the Su- 
 perior and Inferior Courts, all difficulty will be avoided for all time to come. This 
 was my sole reason for wishing to have the amendment adopted. 
 
 But, it seems that, because of this, I am supposed to be opposed to the indepen- 
 dence of the Judiciary. Sir, if I know myself, there is no member of this Conven- 
 tion more sincerely attached to that independence than I am. But I have no idea of 
 making the Judiciary independent of the law. I want a constitutional tribunal which 
 the Legislature cannot abolish ; and you get that, when you get a Supreme Court. 
 When it is said that every judgment of your Judicial Department shall, if required, 
 be passed under the revision of this tribunal, you have got all that ought to be desired. 
 If you go beyond this rule, where are you to stop ? If every officer of every court is. 
 not to be declared constitutional, at what point are you to stop ? Create a forum which 
 shall be as distinct and independent a department of your Government as the Legis- 
 lative or the Executive. You then have your three great departments, and that is 
 enough. The Inferior Courts must be subject to the Legislative controul. It must 
 be so. It always has been so in every country in the world but Virginia. Then 1 
 wish to know, whether it is desirable that the Judges should remain free from this 
 controul ? The gentleman is for allowing the Legislature to act on the tribunal itself; 
 but he wants to secure the preservation of the Judge. What Judge.? the Judge of 
 what court.? When you say that he retains the capacity to receive another judicial 
 office, it is saying nothing : because he would have that capacity just as much if he 
 was no Judge at all. It is only to declare that the Judge shall continue to receive his 
 salary. But for what.? for nothing. If this is necessary to secure the independence 
 of the Judiciary, why, in the name of Heaven, let it be so. You can't buy that in- 
 dependence too dear. But you have that, when you said there shall be a Supreme 
 Court. The Constitution of the United States says the same thing, and it has worked 
 well : the independence of the Federal Judiciary has not been impaired. As to the 
 duty which a Judge is called to perform, it certainly ought to influence the Legisla- 
 ture. It always has. The gentleman from Chesterfield is mistaken, when he says, 
 that the Constitution of the United States, sinks the boat under the Judge. Three 
 Judges became useless; but at that precise period, the old system of assize was got 
 up in 1780, and brought in, in 1788 : and then the Legislature appointed the three 
 Judges of the Court of Admiralty, to be Judges of the General Court. They Avere 
 so commissioned, that they might be made Judges of the Court of Appeals. . There 
 was no obligation on the Legislature to elect these particular persons : but they were 
 selected, because they had been Judges : this was the overruling motive, which pre- 
 vailed in their election. I never can agree to introduce into any Constitution, a 
 principle, which virtually declares, that a sinecure shall be created, to support a man, 
 without employment, because he has been a Judge. I never will or can agree to 
 create a band of judicial pensioners, call them what you will. He who performs a 
 duty, should be paid for performing it; and he should not be paid, unless he does 
 perform it. I never will consent to depart from this rule, be the consequences what 
 they may. 
 
 But, how is the independence of the Judiciary affected, by declaring that the Judge, 
 whose court has been abolished, shall stijl retain his office ? It is said, that he " shall 
 perform any Judicial duties, which the Legislature shall assign him." What now be- 
 comes of his independence ? You may not sink the boat from under him, but you 
 may pile up jurisdiction to any extent you please, till you sink the Judge, boat and 
 all. Here is a Judge who resides, say in Accomac : (one of these Judges in posse, 
 not in esse,) and you require him tc hold a court in Lee, or Monongalia, two, three, 
 or four times a year. Is not this striking at his independence, as much as if you took 
 away his office ? You say he shall keep the office ; but, then, you may lay upon him 
 any amount of duty you choose. You have only to suppose mala fides, in your Le- 
 gislature, (and the provisions in your resolution go to the hypothesis of mala fides and 
 profess to guard against it,) and your Judge is just as much at its mercy, as he would 
 have been in the other case. You have only to suppose your Legislature wicked, and 
 they can destroy any Judge they please. 
 
 As to the last clause, moved to be stricken out, by my friend from Orange, (Mr. 
 Barbour,) I would abandon my opinions respecting it, if I could be satisfied, that 
 when I have got a Supreme Court, I have not got an independent Judiciary ; but I 
 know that I have it, for I have seen it in the Federal Constitution for forty years ; I 
 want no more, and no better. 
 
 Mr. Marshall rejoined : 
 
 I trust the great importance of this subject, will be deemed a sufficient apology for 
 my again troubling the Committee. Some observations have fallen from the gentle- 
 man from Norfolk, which I feel it incumbent upon me to notice. The gentleman has 
 said, that it is sufficient for the independence of the Judiciary Department, that the 
 Judges of the Supreme Court be independent : and that there is no country on earth, 
 where the independence of the Judges of the other courts is secured. I will refer 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 619 
 
 him to the country with Vv-hich I am best acquainted — I mean Great Britain. What 
 is the Supreme Court of Great Britain? It is the House of Lords. And are not the 
 Judges of the Court of Common Pleas independent? Do they not hold their ofBce 
 during good behaviour ? Tet these are Inferior Courts. 1 do not know so well the 
 condition of other countries in this respect; but, I believe the independence of the 
 courts is preserved in France. 
 
 The independence of all those who try causes between man and man, and between 
 a man and his Government, can be maintained only by the tenure of their office. Is 
 not their independence preserved under the present system? None can doubt it. 
 Such an idea was never heard of in Virginia, as to remove a Judge from office. You 
 may impose upon him any duty you please. Tou ma}- say, that the Court of Appeals 
 shall sit every day, from the first of January to the last of December. The Judge of 
 a County Court may be called on to perform his duty on the bench for a whole year. 
 Yet he holds his office during good behaviour. 
 
 The Legislature can have no motive to impose unreasonable duties on a Judge — he 
 may be required to do all he can do, and he can do no more. If the Judges in com- 
 mission are incompetent to the duty which is to be performed, the Legislature will 
 create more Judges : it is within the ordinary province of Legislative action. Their 
 independence is not impaued by their being required to do all they can. This is their 
 acknowledged duty. 
 
 We have heard about sinecures and Judicial pensioners. Sir, the weight of such 
 terms is well known here. To avoid creating a sinecm'e, you take away a man's du- 
 ties, when he wishes them to remain — you take away the duty of one man, and give 
 it to another : and this is a sinecure. What is this in substance but saying, that there is 
 no such thing as Judicial independence? You may take a Judge's duties away, and 
 then discard him. W^hat is this but saying, that there is, and can be, and ought to be, 
 no such thing as Judicial independence ? The gentleman says, he is a great friend 
 to an independent Judiciary, and his friendship extends to the Supreme Court only. 
 The whole circuit duty is now in the Inferior Courts : would he be very willing to 
 transfer it to the Court of Appeals ? It is impossible for him to answer but in the nega- 
 tive. He would then have the whole criminal jurisdiction of the State, entrusted to 
 Judges, removable from office by the Legislatm-e at its pleasure. "What would then 
 be the condition of the court, should the Legislature prosecute a man, with an ear- 
 nest wish to convict him ? But more. The great mass of controversy existing in the 
 Commonwealth, must always be decided in the Inferior Courts. We had an exam- 
 ple in the Old General Court. What would be the consequence of giving original 
 jurisdiction to an Appellate Court? Such a mass of causes accumulated in that 
 court, that the great grand-son of no man then living, would have seen the trial of the 
 last cause on the docket. This will be the inevitable consequence : business will ac- 
 cumulate to an extent, that it will be impossible to pass through. The Inferior Courts 
 will, therefore, try the great mass of causes, and reserve an appeal on questions of 
 law. The gentleman would leave all these Judges unprotected by the Constitution. 
 He declares himself a friend to Judicial independence, and gives independence to 
 those only, who have no criminal jurisdiction. I understand by Judicial indepen- 
 dence, the independence of all the members of the Judicial Department, whatever be 
 their situation. He asks, are j'ou to make every petty officer independent? I an- 
 swer, no : but, is that the question ? Are your Judges to be likened to every petty- 
 officer ? W"ould he liken the Judges to them ? 
 
 Will the gentleman recollect, that in order to secure tlie adm.inistration of justice, 
 Judges of capacity, and of legal knowledge are indispensable ? And how is he to 
 get them? How are such men to be drawn off from a lucrative practice ? Will any 
 gentleman of the profession, whose practice will secure him a comfortable indepen- 
 dence, leave that practice, and come to take an office, which may be taken from him 
 the next day ? You may invite them, but they will not come. You may elect them, 
 but they will not accept the appointment. You don't give salaries that will draw re- 
 spectable men, unless by the certainty of permanence connected with them. But, if 
 they may be removed at pleasure, will any lawyer of distinction come upon your 
 bench ? No, Sir. I have always thought, from my earliest youth till now, that the 
 greatest scourge an angry Heaven ever inflicted upon an ungrateful and a sinning 
 people, was an ignoranf, a corrupt, or a dependent Judiciary. Will you draw down 
 this curse upon Virginia ? Our ancestors thought so : we thought so till very lately; 
 and I trust the vote of this day will shew that we think so still. 
 
 The question was taken on the amendment of Mr. TazeweU, and decided in the 
 negative. — Ayes 29, Noes 56. 
 
 (Mr. Madison, no.) 
 
 The question now recurring on the amendment of Mr. Barbour, Mr. Stanard 
 moved to amend, by inserting the word " Supreme" before Court of Appeals. W^hich 
 was agreed to. 
 
620 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Barbour's amendment, and decided in the 
 negative. — Ayes 36, Noes 53. 
 (Mr. Madison, no.) 
 
 So the Committee resolved to retain the follov^^ing clause : 
 
 " No modification or abolition of any court, sliall be construed to deprive any Judge 
 thereof of his office ; but such Judge shall perform any Judicial duties which the Le- 
 gislature may assign him." 
 
 The printing of the various amendments, which had been agreed upon in Commit- 
 tee of the Whole, having been ordered, the Committee rose, and the House immedi- 
 ately adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, December 12, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Lee of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said it was with unfeigned regret, which he was sure would be shared 
 by the Convention, that he rose to announce the resignation of his venerable friend 
 and colleague, (Mr. Monroe,) as President of this body. His present indisposition 
 rendered him unable to discharge the duties of that situation, and he felt it his duty 
 to his constituents to tender his resignation. 
 
 Mr, M, presented to the President p-o. tern. (Mr. P. P. Barbour,) the following letter : 
 
 Sir — My indisposition rendering it impossible for me to perform my duties, either 
 _ as presiding ofhcer, or as a member of the Convention, I owe it to that body, to my 
 constituents, and to the Commonwealth, to resign my seat, to enable my colleagues 
 to devolve on some other person the duties that 1 am prevented from performing. 
 
 I avail myself of the opportunity to express my grateful sense of the generous con- 
 fidence of my constituents, evinced by their election of me to the important trust, and 
 of their support of me in the course that my conscientious convictions have induced 
 me to take in the execution of that trust, though it differed in some degree with the 
 sentiments they had entertained. 
 
 For the distinction with which I have been honored by the Convention, by its elec- 
 tion of me to preside over its deliberations, I have already offered my grateful ac- 
 knowledgments, and I beg again to tender them, and to add, that as a testimony of 
 approbation of my conduct in the many important trusts I have held, under the State 
 and Federal Governments, at home and abroad, it will continue to be a source of con- 
 solation to me to the latest moment of my life. 
 
 In separating myself from the Convention, I cannot refrain from the expression of 
 my ardent and anxious hopes, that the result of its deliberations may correspond with 
 the expectations so fondly cherished before its session commenced ; and that a Consti- 
 tution will be framed that will secure the rights and protect the interests of all, com- 
 mand the public approbation, and promote the happiness and prosperity of the State. 
 
 I beg you to tender to the members of the Convention individually, my most re- 
 spectful salutations, and to be assured of the high esteem with which I am, your most 
 obedient servant, 
 
 JAMES MONROE. 
 
 To Philip P. Barbour, Esq. ) 
 
 President of the Convention. 5 
 
 This letter, on motion of Mr. Mercer, was laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell then observed that the resignation of the late President of the Con- 
 vention rendered it necessary that another should be elected; and he made that 
 motion. 
 
 Mr. P.P. Barbour having relinquished the Chair to Mr. Fitzhugh, 
 Mr. Gordon nominated Philip P. Barbour, as a suitable person to be appointed Presi- 
 dent of this body. 
 
 No other candidate being nominated, it was determined to dispense with the for- 
 mality of a ballot, and the question being put, the nomination of Mr. Barbour was 
 unanimously concurred in, and he was appointed President of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then moved the following resolution : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Convention entertain a high sense of the patriotic zeal and 
 ability manifested by their fellow-citizen, James Monroe, in the various public rela- 
 tions in which he has acted ; and sympathise with him in the dispensation which has 
 deprived them of his services as President of this body." 
 
 The resolution was unanimously agreed to, and so entered on the Journal. 
 
DEBATE5 OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 621 
 
 Tlie House tlien went into Committee of the Whole. Mr. Gordon in the Chair,, and 
 on motion of ^Ir. Taylor of Chesterfield, proceeded to consider the report of the Com- 
 mittee on the Bill of Rights. 
 
 The report, toa-ether with the Bill of Rights itself, having been read, the resolu- 
 tions were considered 5cnof/7n. 
 
 The first resolution is in the followinop words : 
 Re^ohed. As the opinion of this Committee, that the Constitution of this State 
 ought to be so amended as to provide a mode in which future amendments shall be 
 made therein." 
 
 3Ir. Johnson observing, that after much reflection, he had come to tlie conclusion 
 that it was better to leave the amending power in the hands of the creating power, 
 with a view to test the sense of the Committee, moved to strike out the word •• Re- 
 solved." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, speaking for the county in which he dwelt, and with tne sentiments 
 of which he was well acquainted, said that very great disappointment would be ex- 
 perienced there, if the new Constitution should contain no provision for its being 
 amended as the chancfing and prosfressive state of society should demand. He was 
 aware of the extreme^ dehcacy of Ihe subject, but thought it his duty to introduce 
 some provision of amendment. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas thought it was better to let the resolution be passed over for the pre- 
 sent, until they should see whether any new Constitution could be agreed upon. 
 
 Mr. Powell agreed in this view, and opposed the motion to strike out. 
 
 After some farther conversation, at the suggestion of Mr. Mercer, ^Ir. Johnson con- 
 sented to vrlthdraw his motion. 
 
 The second resolution was then read as follows : 
 Resolved, That the first and second sections of the present Constitution ought to be 
 stricken out^ and that an introductory clause adapted to the amended Constitution, be 
 substituted in heu thereof" 
 
 Mr. Leicrh suggested that the propriety of adopting this resolution, must depend on 
 the fact whether an entirely new Constitution was to be submitted, as a whole, to the 
 people, or whether the existing Constitution was to be submitted with amendments. 
 In the latter case, there could be no need of striking out the preamble 3 in the for- 
 mer, it would have an odd and incongruous appearance. 
 
 The preamble of the existing Constitution, was then read at the Clerk's table. 
 
 It was aoreed to pass by this resolution for the present. 
 
 The thir'cl resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 *' Resolved. That the twelfth, twenty-first, and twenty-second sections of the pre- 
 sent Constitution ought to be stricken out, as no longer necessary."' 
 No amendment being proposed, 
 The fourth resolution was read, viz : 
 
 " Resolved. Tiiat the freedom of speech, and of the press, ought to be held sacred, 
 and guaranteed bv the Constitution." 
 Xo amendment being offered, 
 
 The fifth resolution was then read in the words following : 
 
 " Resolved. That no title of nobility shall be created or granted, and no person 
 holding any ofiice of profit or trust under the United States, or under any King, 
 Prince, or foreign State, shall hold any office under this State." 
 
 Mr. Leiffh expressed his concurrence in the general principle of policy now laid 
 down, but could not consent to its universahty. He had supposed that there were 
 few persons more jealous of the influence of the General Government than he was ; 
 but, for this view of the subject, the present provisions of law went far enough. He 
 thought there might be such a tlung as an unreasonable jealousy of tliat Govern- 
 ment and he could not consent to a clause whose extent, as it now stood, would af- 
 fect all justices of the peace and militia ofiicers. so as to render them ineligible to 
 •Congress, and might even raise a question whether counsel temporarily acting for 
 the United States in their professional capacity, would not, in like manner, be dis- 
 qualified. He was in favor of leaving the entire subject to the Legislature. As 
 to that clause of the resolution which had respect to titles of nobility, any body micrht 
 have it for him : he felt perfect indifference whether it was out or irf. 
 
 3Ir. Doddridge moved to amend the resolution by striking out the words ^- United 
 States or." 
 
 Mr. Taylor, after some commendatory remarks on the proviso contained in the Act 
 «f Assembly on this subject, moved that it be inserted by way of amendment. It is 
 in the words following : 
 
 Provided. That nothing herein contained shall be so construed, as to prevent mem- 
 bers of Congress from sitting as County Court magistrates, or from holding ofiices in 
 the mihtia, or so as to exclude any person receiving a pension from the United States, 
 in consequence of any wound received in war, from any office under this Common- 
 wealth, on account of such pension ; or, so as to create any exclusion whatsoever, of 
 
622 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 militia officers or soldiers, on account of the recompense they may receive from the 
 United States, when called out into actual duty." 
 
 Mr. Powell, concurring in the views of Mr. Leigh, moved to amend the resolution 
 by striking out the word " Resolved" (in effect to destroy it.) 
 
 The Chair decided that motions to improve took precedence of a motion to destroy, 
 Mr. Mercer suggested, that few if any of the Constitutions adopted by other States 
 of the Union contained any reference to the United States' Government at all ; but 
 were so framed as to remain entire and unaffected if that Government were to cease 
 to exist. He was as little a friend to the dissolution of the Union, and looked to such 
 an event with as unfeigned and deep-felt a horror as any other man ; but, he never- 
 theless approved of such a form for the State Constitutions. One great end to be at- 
 tained by it, was, to enable a State to sustain itself as a distinct and perfect Govern- 
 ment, even amidst all the anarchy produced by so calamitous an event, as a forcible 
 dissolution of the Federal Union. The definition of the term "office" had been a 
 subject of much discussion in the Legislature. It was not easy legally to distinguish 
 an office" from a " trust," as relating to this subject. It was at one time voted that 
 a situation in the Board of Public VVorks was not an office, and members of that 
 Board were allowed to serve and did serve in Congress. The decision was after- 
 wards otherwise. So of prosecutor for the Commonwealth. The gentleman from 
 Brooke, (Mr. Doddridge,) who had once held that situation while a member of the 
 Senate of this State, had contended that it was an office, and wished to make it a 
 ground of resignation. 
 
 After some conversation as to the point of precedence between the several motions, 
 Mr. Leigh opposed the motion of his colleague (Mr. Taylor,) contending that the 
 resolution left alone, would not go as far as the resolution with the proviso inserted. 
 Tiie resolution spoke of " offices'' only; the statute, of jjlaces" as well as offices: 
 and the latter excluded a man who received any " emolument" from the General 
 Government, whether he held an office under it or not. But if the Constitution once 
 fixed a disqualification, the law could neither increase nor diminish it. He contended 
 that a citizen of Virginia might receive emolument from the United States' Govern- 
 ment, and yet be as perfectly independent of that Government as could be imagined 
 or desired. He referred, for illustration, to temporary mail-contractors : the profit 
 they receive, purged them from the charge of dependence: but those who were per- 
 manently employed as mail-contractors, stood in a different relation. It would not, 
 he believed, exclude counsel acting on behalf of the United States ^ro hacvice. 
 
 Mr. Taylor did not entertain the same opinion with his colleague, (Mr. Leigh). It 
 was with great diffidence that he ventured to differ from him at any time, but the best 
 opinion he had been able to form was, that if the resolution, with the proviso he pro- 
 posed to annex to it, should become a part of the Constitution, the Legislature would 
 not be inhibited from extending the disqualification beyond, though it could not re- 
 trench it within the limit set by that instrument For the same reason that the Le- 
 gislature had a right to create the present disqualification, it might extend it, just as 
 if there were no Constitutional provision upon the subject. They could not confer 
 the capacity of holding office, but they were not restrained from creating an incapa- 
 city beyond what the Constitution declares. He had wished to see the proviso made 
 a part of the Constitution, because he viewed it as important to the perpetuation of 
 the Federal Government, that offices should not be permitted to be held under it and 
 the State Governments at the same time. None could be more sincerely a friend to 
 that Government than he was, so long as it remained within its own legitimate 
 sphere and sought only the ends for which it was estabhshed : and believing as he 
 did, that all the^rich blessings which had been hoped for, would be realized from its 
 operation, he was desirous, as its best safeguard, to prevent its interference beyond 
 its own appropriate limits. As the Legislature had thought, and the people of Vir- 
 ginia, he believed, continued to think, that offices under both Governments should not 
 be in the same hands, and, it was probable, that the Legislature would continue the 
 same incapacity that now existed, he should vote for the insertion of the proviso and 
 its permanent incorporation in the Constitution. He thought that offices under the 
 two Governments, v/ere sufficiently distinct— and as long as they could not be held 
 by the same ])erson, he apprehended no danger that the General Government would 
 accumulate more power than was consistent with a preservation of the sovereignty 
 of the States. He hoped both would exist happily together through all time. _ At all 
 events, from the temper which, at present, seemed to actuate both the Legislature 
 and the people of the State, he was warranted to expect that such might long be the 
 case. Yet it was impossible for human wisdom to foresee what changes of opinion 
 might take place : and the danger to both Governments would certainly be great, 
 should that spirit expire. It was with the utmost good will toward the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, that he offered the amendment, seeking to strengthen, not to impair it, to 
 preserve, not to destroy. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 623 
 
 Mr. Doddridge next addressed the Committee : ... 
 
 1 will briefly'^asslcrn to the Committee, my reasons for opposing the proviso, and in 
 favour of mv amendment. In my opinion, the safest course in all legislation, is, to 
 take care to "have the text of a resolution or section,. so framed, as to admit of no 
 doubt in its meaning, nor ambiguity of construction, so as to render the savings, usu- 
 ally found in a provTso, unnecessary. This course, commonly avoids the doubts and 
 diaiculties of construction, resulting from comparing the text with the proviso, and 
 expounding them together. If tiie proviso should be rejected, and my amendment 
 prevail, the resuh wUl be, that it will, as heretofore, be left to every future Assembly 
 to determine, wdiether, and how far, it is necessary to disquahfy persons Jiolding of- 
 fice under the United States, from holding an office under this State. And this is a 
 power, which may be safely left with Assemblies to exercise or not, as they may think 
 politic' under existing and changing circumstances. 
 
 The opinion I entertain on this head, is that which I have endeavoured to urge 
 from the time this Convention met, and will continue to urge, until its labours shall 
 terminate. That opinion is this, that the exercise of no power should be inhibited 
 to future Legislatures, except such as it would be impohtic and immoral to exercise, 
 at any future time, and under any possible circumstances. Such, for instance, as the 
 establishment of a particular rehgious sect— passing an exjjost facto law, or law im- 
 pairing the obligation of contracts. These powers ought never to be exercised. 
 Their "exercise w^ould be immoral and impolitic, at any time, and under any possible 
 circumstances. I would, therefore, inhibit their exercise forever. Other powers, and 
 among them, the disqualification in question, are not of that character. Public secu- 
 rhy inay require, and sound morahty admit, their exercise at one time, and not at 
 another; and these times and circumstances, may safely be left w-ith the Legis- 
 lature, as they now are. 
 
 The report will then shew, that the proviso was rejected, and the amendment 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. Summers acknowledged that a due degree of jealousy as to the encroachments 
 of the General Government was salutary and proper, but thought it might be carried 
 to very inconvenient lengths, and would then produce mischievous consequences. He 
 could not agree with the'^gentleman from Chesterfield as to the fact, that the present 
 statutory provision w^as approved by the people — it was certainly not the case in his 
 part of the State. It carried that unreasonable jealousy into all the relations of the 
 citizens to the General Government. A contract to carry, or to distribute the mail,, 
 deprived a man of all right to office under the State, from whence great inconve- 
 nience was experienced In the West. The most respectable and trust-worthy men 
 in every county were justices of the peace — all these men were excluded fromhaving- 
 any thing to do in the transportation of the mails, which consequently fell into hands 
 much less worthy of trust, and thus the interests of the Post Office Department, so- 
 vitally important to the whole community, were put at hazard. He was for leaving 
 the matter to Legislative discretion, and they v/ere much more likely to err on the 
 side of extreme caution than the opposite. 
 
 Mr. Coalter was in favour of the amendment in order that the subject might be 
 kept before the Committee. No man could tell how far the Federal Government, by 
 a construction of the Constitution, or by amendments to it, might come to operate on 
 the local concerns of the States. Should the power of carrying on Internal Im- 
 provements within the States be given by an amendment of the Federal Constitution 
 to that Government, there would, he foresaw, be a need of such a clause as was now 
 proposed to be inserted. This would not impede nor hasten the adoption of such, 
 amendment. He did not know, for his part, how far the Genera] Government might 
 be disposed to extend its hands into their houses, and their bed-chambers, and their 
 kneading-troughs, and every where else. A repeal of the existing law would go far 
 to pave a way for them. He was not one of those who believed that all wisdom and 
 all prudence resided in any Legislative body in the country, and he thought that some 
 judicious plan should be interposed to guard against breakers ahead. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, that a few observations would suffice to convince the Committee 
 that the present proposal was an illustration of the principle, that extreme jealousy 
 was often blind, and like ••' vaulting ambition," sometimes " o'erleaped itself and fell 
 on t'other side." He referred to that clause of the Bill of Rights which relates to 
 this subject, and which he said had obviously been the result of extreme jealousy^ 
 lest the interests of the State and Federal Governments should be improperly mingled; 
 in which case those of the stronger Government would always be sure to predominate. 
 He did not find fault with the sentiment, but disapproved of the shape which it now 
 proposed to assume, because the measure proposed, would have the certain tendency 
 to produce the very evil sought to be avoided. There was no proposition which he 
 thought would more readily command the assent of reflecting minds than this, that 
 as far as practicable, it was desirable that the functions of tlie General Government 
 should be exercised through organs appointed by, and pertaining to, the State Gov- 
 
624 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 eminent. This was the most effectual safeguard against the absorbing influence of 
 the General Government: it would cause that power to look to the Governments of 
 the States for its own wholesome and efficient operation, and prevent the vast mass 
 of patronage which must otherwise grow out of the appointment of all the hosts of 
 functionaries that must be spread over the whole country. He here referred to the 
 criminal jurisdiction of the Federal Courts and the obligation upon the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, to seek out, apprehend, try, convict and punish offenders. He then went 
 on to shew that this would be in a great degree impracticable without the aid of jus- 
 tices of tlie peace acting under State authority. Unless they were allowed to issue 
 their warrants for the apprehension of persons accused, crimes against the Union 
 miglit be committed with impunity. But should the extreme rigour of the proposed 
 proviso be introduced into the Constitution, the moment a justice did this, he lost his 
 office, and his office being forfeited, the validity of his warrant was destroyed. The 
 only remedy then would be to call in a host of United States' justices for the purpose 
 of issuing initiatory process and carrying the laws into effect. Mr. S. adverted to the 
 mistaken impression which had for a short time prevailed in the Legislature, where 
 it was at first strenuously insisted on as necessary to withhold this action on the part 
 of State functionaries, by way of guarding against Federal influence and interference, 
 but the delusion had speedily been dissipated. The question, whether under the ex- 
 isting law, a magistrate does not forfeit his office by so far executing a trust under the 
 United States" Government, as to issue process for that Government, had not yet been 
 tried; should it be decided in the affirmative, the greatest degree of private distress 
 must ensue, as the title of much real estate depended on the validity of the act of a 
 justice in taking the privy examination of a. feme covert. 
 
 He had known a case of utter ruin produced by a justice having inadvertently 
 taken such an examination after receiving the appointment of a petty Post Office not 
 worth six dollars a year. The amendment would destroy the existing facilities of 
 giving special bail in the counties, without coming all the way to Richmond. It 
 would prevent the use of any of the jails of the States for United States' criminals, 
 and thus oblige the General Government to expend large sums of money in the erec- 
 tion of prisons, and in providing all the necessary officers to attend them. If a State 
 jailor should take a fee, it would be emolument" under the General Government: 
 so he must guard the Federal prisoners for nothing or not guard them at all. It would 
 prevent the summoning of Federal juries ; for, every juryman, v»'ho should receive a 
 fee from the United States would be incapable of any office under the State. He 
 could go on till night in tracing out such consequences. He hoped the amendment 
 would not prevail : ail that was necessary, was to exclude from State employment all 
 who should hold offices of emolument under the United States' Government. 
 
 Mr. Taylor said, he was far from supposing that the amendment would make the 
 provisions of the Constitution exactly what they ought to be, or the best that possibly 
 could be ; but he wished the subject to be retained before the Committee, subject to 
 the suggestions of gentlemen who would improve it. In replj^ to Mr. Stanard, he 
 thought it a very curious thing, seeing the provisions of the proviso had been passed 
 as far back as 1788, that none of the many formidable consequences enumerated by 
 the gentleman from Spottsylvania had as yet grown out of it. It was now the law 
 of the land, as much as if it were in the Constitution — and yet none of these things had 
 happened. The justices issued their warrants, the jailors took their fees, the juries 
 performed their dut)^, and all tilings went on very smoothly. As to justices profess- 
 ing to act after their office v/as vacated by law, no law nor Constitution either could 
 provide against the consequences. But he could not agree that the issuing of a jus- 
 tice's warrant was exercising any trust under Ihe United States. A justice had a 
 right under 'the common law to apprehend persons charged with crime, and transmit 
 them to the place where they could be tried. He was acting under the Common- 
 wealth and not under the Federal Government. Such was the common sense 
 construction of the law — and why not of the same words, if in the Constitution.'^ 
 But to prevent all doubt, the proviso could be modified. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. Taylor's amendment, it was rejected — Ayes 16. 
 
 The question was then put on Mr. Doddridge's amendment, and decided in the af- 
 firmative — Ayes 41, Noes 39. 
 
 So the Committee agreed to strike out the words Uriited States or,'' confining the 
 prohibition to offices under foreign Governments. 
 
 The sixth resolution, being literally the same as the ninth resolution of the Legis- 
 lative Committee, and which has been adopted (relating to the freedom of religion) 
 was stricken out. 
 
 The Committee then again took up the resolutions of the Executive Committee. 
 Mr. Claiborne moved to strike out the second resolution and insert in lieu thereof 
 the following : 
 
 <' Resolved, That there shall be a Privy Council or Council of State, consisting of 
 four members, to be chosen by joint vote of both Houses of Assembly , to assist in the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 625 
 
 admmistration of Government ; one of whom shall be chosen from the «)mitrT West 
 of the Alleghany Momitains; one from the Talley between the Alleghany and Blue 
 Ridge [Mountains : one from the country East of the Blue Ridge and above the head of 
 Tide- water : a:. ■ ! ^ head of Tide- water and the At- 
 lantic. They = . body a President, who. in case 
 of the death.' : ^rovemor from the Government, 
 s ha ll act as L Tjaxee mem£>ers shall be sufficient to act. and 
 their advice ai- „ - entered of record, and signed by the members 
 present, to any : t _r:r : raay enter his dissent, and to be laid before 
 the General Assembly, v them. They may appoint their own Clerk; 
 who shall hare a salary r.: 1. 11 take an oatK of secrecy in such mat- 
 ters as he 5.1 - Tr ; ■ . : : r : J. A stun of money s ha ll be appro- 
 priated by la~ i:. a a: . :ara ai^i aa!. _ ~ naerabers in -^-^rti on to their ^ten- 
 dance and tliey shall be irca, , : _ - —.ce of sitting in 
 either House of'Asserably. T-ir : : - .lest number of 
 votes shall go out at the er.a :: :l::ee vear-, a:. - .r^e next-, and 
 the remaining two. a: :..r t:.1 :l.ree years thr _ r the same 
 period of three years. Tl-rse aiaajies. as "vTrl. . - . aeath or in- 
 capacity, shall be nlied by nevr elv i.s samenianiier and under the same re- 
 strictions-" 
 
 IMr. Fitzhugh cafled for a divisljn of tl:^ . and it was divided accOTdingly. 
 
 Whereur>on. the question being put on st: :t was decided in the negative — 
 
 Ayes 34'. >'oes 4S. 
 
 On motion of Air. Fitzhugh, the following supplementary amendments to the Ex- 
 ecutive Report, vrere agreed to ; 
 
 First. Tna: f :1.^ G:Ter~ tr s oSce. shall conmience on the first day cji 
 
 January, suce^ _ Ir ; v : :r ::. s ach other day. as the Legislatare may from 
 time to ti:..^ _ - ~ l.e Lieutenant-Governor is to be elected in 
 
 the same .1 for the same term, with the Governor: 
 
 Third, T.. Governor, shall be chosen from such per- 
 
 sons only, as axe nauve ciaizens of ilae Uidted States, shall have attained the age of 
 thirty years, and have been citizens of the State, during the five years immediate^ 
 preceding- tlae elr:a::-.a Frarh, Tlaat - emor and Lieutenant- Go vemor, 
 
 shall rec el Tr ::r ...ri: ^er-riies a : :a::ar:: r determined bylaw, and to be 
 
 neither increased :a:: . : It _ zji which they shall have been 
 
 elected, and they si. 1 removed from office, for treason, 
 
 bribery, or other crla . a? ^^rf '^. That it shall be the duty 
 
 of the Governor to execute cr ca.a5e laws of the Common- 
 
 we^th — to communicate to the Lesaslav - the condition of the 
 
 State, and to recommend to their consider- > deem expe- 
 
 dient. He shall also be Commander-in-:l:: r: :;es of the 
 
 State — shxiU have power to crr.Tene tla-^ Ler-^l " ^ . the rater- 
 
 ests of the State may recv. ; — - - : rs occuziizig during tne recess of the 
 
 Legislature, in oSees. tr.e :a is vested in the Legislative body ; 
 
 and to c: ' ■ - - - - :^ L^i slature may designate, 
 
 all neafo' a . _ " res." 
 
 IMr. AIr . r: . _ _ re;.la.:;n ; ... r .Zried by him, in the fol- 
 
 lowing words : 
 
 Resolred. That all taxes on lands, slaves and horses, shall be founded on a feir as- 
 sessment of their value ; that no one of these subjects shall be taxed separately from 
 the other two, and that when taxed, the same rate shall be charged and levied 
 upon all. " 
 
 Tn a brief explanation of this amendment, Mr. ^Mercer stated his estimate of the 
 present value of lands in the Commonwealth to be ninety millions of dollars : slaves 
 sixty-seven and a half milhons : and horses thirteen and a half miUions, The sup- 
 posed disparitv of taxation between lands and slaves did not exists 
 
 ISIr. Fitzhugh stated his intention to ofier the following as a substitute : 
 " Rtsdrtd. 'Thsit the power of the Legislature to impose taxes, ought to be so 
 limited as to prohibit the imjjosition on properly, either real or personal, of any other 
 than an ad valorem tax : and that, in apportioning this tax, either for State or county 
 purposes, the lands, the slaves, the horses, and aU the other visible property of each 
 individual in the community, (except household furniture, wearing apparel, and such 
 other articles of propertv as may be exempted by law.) ought to be valued and taxed 
 in proportion to their value : Prodded, hoiceter, That no individual, whose taxable 
 property d<3es not exceed in value dollars, shall be subject to any property tax 
 
 whatever : ,ind provided, moreoter, That the Legislatare may impose on all profes- 
 ^ons and >xcupations usoally resorted to for support or profit, such tax as may be 
 deemed reasonable." 
 
 79 
 
C26 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. F. said, his object was to tax the entire capital of the community ; that of Mr. 
 M. to tax only lands, slaves and horses. His plan had been tried in Maryland, and 
 succeeded to entire satisfaction. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, the gentleman had misapprehended his amendment — it did not 
 confine taxation at all, but proposed a certain ratio between these three as present 
 subjects for it; being designed as a guaranty against the disproportionate taxation of 
 slaves. 
 
 After a few further remarks in explanation of his object, 
 Mr. Mercer moved that the Committee rise. It rose accordingly. 
 In the House, Mr. Powell moved to meet on Monday, at 10 o'clock, but it was ne- 
 gatived — Ayes 39, Noes 44. 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, December 14, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Hoerner of tlie Roman Catholic Church. 
 
 The House immediately went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Doddridge in the 
 Chair. 
 
 Mr. Summers offered the following resolutions: 
 
 " 1. Resolved, That each county ought to be divided into wards, so that there shall be 
 not less than three, nor more than seven, in any one county. That there ought to be 
 elected in each ward, by the voters qualified to vote for members of the House of 
 Delegates, one commissioner, and that the commissioners elected in the several 
 wards, ought to form a Board of Police for their respective counties. 
 
 2. Resolved, That the commissioners of police ought to go out of office, one at 
 the end of each year, to be determined in the first instance by lot; and that succes- 
 sors ought to be elected by their respective wards, to serve for a number of years 
 equal to the number of commissioners in such county, so that one commissioner of 
 police may be chosen in each county, at every annual election. 
 
 " 3. Resolved, That the Boards of Police ought to be charged with the superintendence 
 and direction of the fiscal concerns of their respective counties — with power to as- 
 sess, levy, and cause to be collected, all local, county, or ward taxes, and to direct the 
 disbursement of the same, to superintend all provisions and expenditures for the sup- 
 port of the poor ; and that the opening, preserving, and improving of the public roads 
 and other highways, with the erection of bridges, and other public structures, ought 
 to be confided to the boards of police. 
 
 " 4. Resolved, That it ought to be the duty of the several Boards of Police from 
 time to time, or whenever required by the Governor, to recommend to him suitable 
 persons to fill the offices of justice of the peace, and to make any other recommen- 
 dations, and perform such other duties as may be required by law. 
 
 5. Resolved, That the proceedings of the several Boards ought to be recorded and 
 preserved by such officer as the General Assembly shall designate, and that the Com- 
 missioners ought to receive a moderate compensation for their services, to be ascer- 
 tained by law, and paid out of the county funds. 
 
 ^' 6. Resolved, That each commissioner of police ought to be a conservator of 
 the peace within his county, and if holding no office, or employment, incompatible 
 with that of justice of the peace, ought to be included in the commission of the peace." 
 
 In supporting the resolutions, Mr. Summers said, he was one of those who be- 
 lieved that there were certain af/nori principles, which entered into the formation of 
 all just, or free Governments, notwithstanding the arguments, which he had heard in 
 disparagement of this opinion — principles, which if disregarded, must, in a greater, 
 or less degree, mark the tyrannical character of the Government from which they are 
 excluded. One of those principles long concurred in by every friend of rational free- 
 dom, was, that the contributions levied from the people, ought, in all cases, to be re- 
 gulated and controlled by those who pay them. That the taxing power can of right, 
 only reside with, and be exercised by agents, chosen immediately by the people, and 
 accountable directly to them for the exercise of this power. These principles form- 
 ing the very foundation of our political institutions, are entirely disregarded in the 
 imposition of a large portion of the taxes paid by the people of Virginia. In the 
 form of county levies, our County Courts exercise under our present system, a more 
 extensive power of taxation in many of the counties than that exercised by the Le- 
 gislature. 
 
 The repairing of the highways— the erection of public buildings, and various other ob- 
 jects of expenditure placed under their controul, calls into exercise, an authority in 
 relation lo taxation, which, in his opinion ought to be placed in other hands. The 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 627 
 
 County Courts, he said, do not emanate either directly, or indirectly from the people ; 
 they are not responsible to them in any form, and, therefore, cannot be fit agents to 
 decide on the extent of the public burdens, or the expenditure of the public funds. 
 To subject the people to be thus taxed, by agents in whose selection they have never 
 been consulted, was clearly against the Republican maxim insisted upon, where its 
 application was much less obvious; that the taxes of the State, ought to be granted 
 by the people of the State. In looking around for a substitute for the County Courts 
 in relation to this particular power, now exercised by them, he had consulted the ex- 
 perience and example of some of our sister States, and the opinions of one of the 
 most distinguished of our own Statesmen,* and the several conclusions of his mind had 
 resulted in the propositions under consideration. They covered less ground than they 
 probably would have done, had he not witnessed the previous discussions — discussions, 
 which had evinced the reluctance with which any changes were to be made in our ex- 
 isting institutions, and particularly those which proposed any modification of the powers 
 of the existing County Courts. He had listened to all the reasoning which had been 
 offered in relation to those tribunals, without concurring in the animated eulogies 
 which had been pronounced upon them on the one side, or the general condemnation 
 which they had called forth on the other: he regarded them as valuable in many points 
 of view, and was satisfied that they would not be less so, if deprived of some of their ano- 
 malous powers. He, however, took pleasure in bearing testimony to the general respec- 
 tability and integrity of the magistrates of the State, so far as he had had an oppor- 
 tunity of becoming acquainted with them, and particularly of those in that quarter of 
 the Commonwealth in which he was most familiar : he believed as few abuses oc- 
 curred in the exercise of their various powers, as ought reasonably to be expected un- 
 der the circumstances of their creation, and the great diversity of subjects confided 
 to them. With the Judicial powers of the County Courts, he had not the slightest 
 inclination to interfere; those courts, he believed, administered justice as cheaply, 
 and as satisfactorily, in the ordinary and less complicated class of cases, as could rea- 
 sonably be expected from any tribunals, which might be devised to supply their place 
 in the general administration of justice ; and as the power was about to be given to 
 the Legislature to make such alterations and modifications in the jurisdictions of 
 those courts, as experience might dictate, he hoped those would become satisfied who 
 looked to the County Courts with less confidence than he did. 
 
 The power of perpetuating their own body — of making all appointments to county 
 offices, and levying and disbursmg the county taxes, were the anomalous, and incon- 
 gruous pov/ers, v/liich in his humble judgment ought to be lodged with persons elec- 
 ted immediately by the people. 
 
 Our County Courts on the creation of a new county, are usually composed of per- 
 sons recommended to the Governor by the Delegates, or Senators from the adjoining 
 counties, and thenceforward the addition of their members, depends alone on the 
 choice of those already on the bench. The objections to this mode of keeping up the 
 succession, are many, and obvious, and no where placed in stronger points of view 
 than by Mr. Jefferson in the letter before alluded to. As far as his recollection ex- 
 tended, no one had defended this course of appointment as correct in principle, or 
 desirable in practice : the only difference of opinion seemed to be in devising a 
 mode free from objection. Elections by the people of Judicial officers who may be 
 called upon to decide between those who supported, and those who opposed their 
 election^ is, perhaps, among all the modes of appointment, the most objectionable. To 
 
 * " In the Legislature, the House of Representatives is chosen by loss than half the people, and not 
 at all in proportion to those who do choose. The Senate are still naore disproportionate, and for long 
 terms of irresponsibility. In the Executive, the Governor is entirely independent of the clioice of the 
 people, and of their control ; his Council equally so, and at best but a fifth wheel to a wagon. In the 
 Judiciary, the Judges of the highest courts are dependent on none but themselves. In England, where 
 Judges were named and removable at the will of an hereditary Executive, from which branch most mis- 
 xule was feared, and has flowed, it was a great point gained, by fixing them for life, to make tliem inde- 
 pendent of that Executive. But in a Government founded on the public will, this principle operates 
 in an opposite direction, and against that will. There, too, they were still removalde on a concur- 
 rence of the Executive aud Legislative branches. But we have made them independent of the nation 
 itself. They are irremovable, but by their own body, for any depravities of conduct, and oven by their 
 own body for the imbecilities of dotage. The justices of tlie inferior courts are self-choson, are for 
 life, and" perpetuate their own body in succession forever, so that a faction once possessing themselves 
 of the bench of a county, can never be broken up, but hold their county in chains, forever indissoluble. 
 Yet these justices are the real Executive as ^\ eli as Judiciary, in all onr minor and most ordmary con- 
 cerns. They tax us at will ; fill the office of sherifl:', the most important of all the Executive officers 
 of the county ; name nearly all our military leaders, which leaders, once named, are removable but by 
 themselves. The juries, our judges of all fact, and of law when they choose it, are not selected by 
 the people, nor amenable to them. They are chosen bv an officer named by the court and Executive. 
 Chosen did I say ? Picked up by the sherifl:' from the loungin^s of the court yard, atter every thmg re- 
 spectable has retired from it. Where then is our Kepnblicanism to be found ? Not in our Constitution 
 certainly, but merely in the spirit of our people. That would oblige even a despot to govern us Re- 
 publicanly. Owing to this spirit, and to nothing in the form of our Constitution, all thuigs have gone 
 ■well. But this fact, so triumphantly misquoted^by the enemies of reformation, is not the fi-uit of our 
 Constitution, but has prevailed in spite of it. Our functionaries have done M'ell, because generally 
 honest men. If any were not so, they feared to shew iW— Jefferson's Works, vol. 4, pp. 286, 287. 
 
623 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 confide the power of appointment to the Governor, without the aid of a recommend- 
 ing body, might be an unwise extension of patronage, and in most instances, it 
 would leave the appointments to be made on private and irresponsible advice. 
 
 The Boards of Police, he thought, would be free from either class of those objec- 
 tions, and offered a safe alternative, not only for the recommending of justices of the 
 peace, but of many other of the county officers. Elected directly by the people, ap- 
 pointments through their instrumentality would assume somewhat of a popular cha- 
 racter, and would unquestionably, in some measure, reflect the public will, in the se- 
 lection of the public agents. Called into office by the people of their several wards, 
 those boards would be more likely to recommend justices of the peace with a view to 
 the convenience of the people, and to the fitness and qualifications of the persons to 
 be appointed, than can be expected in the present mode of selection. 
 
 It is said, that the taxing power of the County Courts, has its foundation in Legis- 
 lative enactments, and may, therefore, be transferred at the pleasure of that body. 
 That this experiment ought not to be engrafted on the organic law, because, experi- 
 ence may not demonstrate its beneficial character, and if it shall turn out prejudicial, 
 the ordinary Legislature cannot remedy the evil. These arguments, he thought, 
 would lose much of their force by reflecting, that, the power of taxation was among 
 the most delicate of the powers of Government, and which, a free people will always 
 regard v^^^ith the greatest sensibility : those considerations, he thought, strongly re- 
 commended a disposition of this power by the Constitution, in preference to leaving 
 it to the discretion of the General Assembly. Experience, he said, proved the ten- 
 dency of that body to accumulate, rather than diminish, the powers of those courts, 
 and that it could not well be otherwise, from the number of justices of the peace an- 
 nually returned as members of the Legislature. However valuable the services of 
 those gentlem.en, and he felt no disposition to question their merits, the Committee 
 must recollect, that their number varied throughout the State, from two thousand 
 eight hundred, to three thousand four hundred; and, he put it to gentlemen fairly and 
 frankly to decide, whether this body of men, permanent in their offices, and exer- 
 cising great influence over public opinion, and over the persons and property of their 
 fellow-citizens, were likely to lose any of their powers or patronage by the action of 
 the ordinary Legislature. He believed, that if a transfer of the taxing and appointing 
 powers, was ever to take place, it must be through the instrumentality of the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 The objection founded on the unchangeable character of a Constitutional pro- 
 vision, he thought, not entitled to the weight which some gentlemen seemed disposed 
 to ascribe to it, as it would be perceived, that the resolutions under consideration pro- 
 posed to ingraft but the skeleton of this branch of the Government on the funda- 
 mental law, and that the Legislature would be plenary, as to the extent — and the 
 manner of exercising the powers proposed to be delegated, would have entire control 
 in limiting and directing the powers of taxation, and in regulating its exercise in all 
 the details : That while the Constitution would provide for the creation of the agents, 
 every thing else connected with the agency, would be lefl to Legislative provision 
 and modification. 
 
 He begged leave, to anticipate another objection which had been suggested to him 
 elsewhere: That the County Court magistrates, although, not elected by the people, 
 or responsible to them, were safe depositories of the power of taxing, because, they 
 are themselves included in the effect of every tax which they impose. To this argu- 
 ment, he answered, that a large proportion of the justices, were usually appointed in 
 the neighborhoods near their respective court houses, for the purpose of ensuring the 
 regular holding of the courts, and the result not unfrequently was, that both taxation 
 and expenditure were governed by this circumscribed interest, to the serious neglect 
 of more distant sections of the counties : That justices of the peace were frequently 
 contractors for work to be done under the authority of the courts of which they were 
 members, and so became more interested in the imposition of taxes, than was con- 
 sistent with a fair and impartial discharge of the duties of laying them. But the 
 public may suffer as much by the courts' refusing to provide for the erection [of 
 bridges, and other public structures, and the repairs of the highways, ashy an excess 
 of taxation ; and if the justices furnish security against inordinate levies by the por- 
 tions which they must necessarily pay, the same considerations may in many instan- 
 ces, lead to very injurious omissions of public works intimately connected with the 
 best interests of their counties — transfer this pov/er to boards of police elected in the 
 different wards of each county, and you will place the duties and powers in the hands 
 of persons stimulated by the confidence of their fellow citizens, and whose conduct 
 will be regulated by accountability to public opinion, and responsibility to the con- 
 stituent body, which rarely fails to bring into action the best means of effecting the 
 proposed ends. Commissioners so elected, can scarcely fail to bring into the pub- 
 lic service, a more intimate knowledge of the wants, the interests, and abilities of the 
 people of their respective counties, with a greater degree of sympathy in their wel- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 629 
 
 fare and prosperity, than the justices of the peace can be supposed to possess, who 
 are. and ought to be selected without pecuHar regard totliose qualifications. 
 
 Mr. S. requested gentlemen to reflect, that they had the benefit of experience to 
 guide them as to the beneficial efiects of committing the subject of local taxation to 
 ao-ents elected by the people : he reminded the Committee, of the taxes imposed and 
 disbursed for the maintenance and support of the poor, by overseers elected in the 
 different parishes, and appealed to the experience of those who had been most atten- 
 tive to such subjects, if the poor rates were not more judiciously applied, and gene- 
 rally managed with more economy than the county levies. 
 
 In connection with the establishment of Boards of Pohce, Mr. S. said, he looked 
 to more equal distributions of the public burdens; he anticipated the abolition of the 
 poll-tax, which exacted equal contributions from the same number of individuals, 
 whether poor and destitute, or possessed of the greatest affluence, provided they shall 
 be without slaves. This mode of assessing the county taxes, he thought, must shortly 
 give place to a property tax, reqifiring greater care, system and skill, in the manage- 
 ment of its details, than had been heretofore called for by our loose and unequal capi- 
 tation tax — and for the assessment and administration of the revenue of the counties 
 upon such improved principles, the proposed Boards of Police would be found peculi- 
 arly appropriate and convenient. While on this subject, he begged leave to remark, 
 that Dfentlemen, who drew their rules of equality and justice from a state of society 
 wher^ the number of slaves owned by each member gave a tolerable fair rule for the 
 contribution, could not well imagine the injustice of our road laws in their operation 
 on those quarters of the State where there are but few slaves, and much of the land 
 unoccupied, and held by non-resident proprietors. There the poor man is called upon 
 to contribute an equal share of labor and money, with the rich in opening and im- 
 provincf the roads of the country ; there those avenues of intercourse and internal 
 trade are mainly created and sustained by the labor of the settlers, who have 
 comparatively but little interest in their results, while the larger proprietors, whose 
 estates are opened to settlements and sales, and essentially enhanced in value by those 
 operations, most frequently bear no part of the burdens of the improvement. More 
 enlightened legislation, he thought, must very shortly change our sj^stem in those 
 particulars, by transferring the weight of contribution from the persons, to the ^^ro- 
 perty of the country. 
 
 There was another subject of great interest, for the management of which he- 
 thought those Boards of Police would be particularly adapted. He meant the super- 
 intendence of primary education. This was in some measure a complex, and in every 
 point of view, a very delicate and important trust; on the successful management of 
 which, much of individual happiness, and national prosperity must depend. He be- 
 lieved it essential to the success of any system of general education, that the affec- 
 tions of the people should be enlisted in its favour, by giving them some participa- 
 tion and controul in its direction and application. A system of education calculated 
 to carry its blessings equally to the cottage, and the wealthy farm-house ; which shall 
 place the means of instruction equal]}' within the reach of all, and teach those prac- 
 tical lessons of equality which are acquired in common schools, supported at the 
 common expense, were among the most important benefits wliich he hoped from the 
 re-organization of the Government. 
 
 He however disclaimed any wish, or intention, of drawing upon the wealth of one 
 part of the State, to educate the children of another : the imputation of such a design 
 he said was wholly gratuitous, and without the slightest ground on which to found 
 such a suspicion. No man felt more strongly than he did. the injustice of the impu- 
 tation ; his mind revolted as strongly from any such sinister design, as it did against 
 the injustice of exciting local apprehensions, when no reasonable grounds of fear were 
 to be found. The friends of education in the West, he was satisfied, never contem- 
 plated in their most liberal views, any resources for the expense of education, beyond 
 what the Literary Fund may reasonably spare to that purpose, other than contribu- 
 tions within the wards, or school districts, for the support of each particular school. 
 Many, he believed, were prepared to place the burdens of education on the property 
 of the country, by supporting well-organized, and well conducted schools, by assess- 
 ments upon each district, according to the property and ability of the inhabitants; 
 and he hoped public opinion would shortly authorise a fair experiment upon those 
 principles. 
 
 He had adverted to education in part, because of the unspeakable importance of 
 its influence on our Government; resting as it does on public morals and general in- 
 telhgence. Early elementary instruction, he said, was the great preservative, pledge, 
 and safeguard of our free institutions : as to our parchment Constitutions, he regarded 
 them but as pack-thread and paper, unless sustained by morals, intelligence, and the 
 social virtues. Whenever his anxieties rose on the subject of the perpetuity of our 
 representative system, his mind invariably turned to education for all his hopes — ■ 
 here liberty was secured at its source : while tlie fouiatain is pure at its head, occa- 
 
630 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Bional turbidness in the stream can produce no lasting diseases in the body politic. 
 The safety of the Commonwealth, he was persuaded, could only be secured by the 
 knowledge, discrimination, and habits of those who are to be the future directors of 
 its destiny — in their morals and patriotism all must rest. Pie asked the indulgence 
 of the Committee for the time which he had occupied with this branch of the sub- 
 ject, it lay in his way, or he should not have touched upon it ; but having adverted to 
 it, he found it sufficient to restrain his reflection on a topic of so much interest. 
 
 In explaining that part of his plan which proposed to give to the Boards of Police, 
 the nomination of the justices of the peace, Mr. S. said, the abolition of the present 
 mode of recommending those officers, he found encountered the prejudices resulting 
 from long usage, and that the feature of self-perpetuation, would not be yielded with- 
 out great reluctance, if at all. Still, however, he hoped that a majority of the Com- 
 mittee would concur with him in this particular provision, but should he be mistaken 
 in this anticipation, that part of the resolution might be rejected, without materially 
 affecting the general objects for which the scheme was intended to provide, although 
 not without, in his opinion, serious disadvantage ; so also, as to the provision which 
 proposes to confer on the police-commissioners the powers of conservators of the 
 peace. There are many who cannot from incompatible official situations, hold seats 
 on the bench of the County Courts, and yet be of great value to the community as 
 police-commissioners, and as guardians of the public tranquillity. 
 
 The records of those Boards he presumed would be confided to the clerks of the 
 County Courts ; but as some important questions in relation to these tribunals were 
 yet unsettled, he deemed it most expedient to leave the recording officer to be desig- 
 nated by law. 
 
 Mr. S. in conclusion observed, that when he first offered those resolutions, he had 
 entertained strong hopes that the system, at least in its principal features, would be 
 adopted, but that he was now less sanguine. He had heard principles advanced and 
 advocated here, which denied to the people the capacity of advantageously selecting 
 any of the public functionaries, except those who are to enact the laws, or of con- 
 ducting any of the operations of the Government, except through this pecuhar class 
 of agents. To this circumscribed, and very limited range of popular action, he could 
 not subscribe, but that he could perceive the probable influence of those opinions upon 
 the resolutions under consideration. To his mind, the popular character of the pro- 
 posed Boards of Police, would add greatly to their practical value, and he thought the 
 gradual process for their removal, would give ample assurance of steadiness of policy, 
 and of purpose, and amply provide for that continuity of knowledge, and of action, 
 so essential to the preservation of all the public interests. If left to his own reflec- 
 tions, he should never have imagined that any serious objections could arise to this 
 mode of creating the public bodies, to whom the fiscal concerns of the counties are 
 proposed to be committed ; but that opinions had been developed upon other subjects 
 of very opposite tendency. When it was proposed that the people should elect the 
 Chief Magistrate of the Commonwealth, the proposition was resisted on the ground 
 that it was impossible for them to know who was most fit, and best qualified. Appre- 
 hensions of popular excitement — fears of caucuses, and the dread of tumult — the 
 dangers of disorderly assemblies ending in intoxication — the armies of demagogues, 
 and of tavern-politicians, who would take the field ; were all arrayed before us in the 
 most appalhng forms. When it Avas proposed to let the citizens in arras choose those 
 who were to lead their platoons, and bear their standards, and to confer on the com- 
 pany officers, the choice of the commanders of battalions and regiments— the dangers 
 of insubordination, the temptations to electioneering, and the disorganizing tendency 
 of the measure, v/ere pourtrayed in the most vivid colors. With those admonitions 
 before him, he could but anticipate like objections in the minds of many, to the elec- 
 tion of commissioners of police by the people. He hoped, however, that a majority 
 of the Committee would act on principles more in harmony with the character of our 
 Government, and more congenial with the age. The people of Virginia have for 
 a series of years left the purse strings — the law-making power, and the appointment 
 to all the great offices of the State, in the hands of an Assembly, representing a 
 meagre minority of their number. They have left the whole police duties, with 
 the power of imposing and disbursing the local taxes, in the hands of the magistrates, 
 in whose choice they have no agency, and over whose conduct they have no coritroul; 
 but they now claim to reform the Government in those particulars, and they will not 
 be turned aside from their purpose. 
 
 The second, third and fourth resolutions of Mr. Summers' plan were then read : 
 (See page 62G.) 
 
 Mr. Powell, approving the residue of the plan, moved to amend it by striking out 
 the word Resolved" in the fourth resolution, (to destroy it.) He preferred leaving 
 this subject to the Legislature, as the whole scheme was new : it might succeed or 
 not: if not, it was then within reach of a remedy; but if introduced into the Con- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 631 
 
 stitution, it must continue, be its evil effects vdiatthey would, till another Convention 
 w^as called. 
 
 Mr. Summers thought, the omission of this part of the plan would be injurious to 
 it, but still it might work without it ; yet, to meet the gentleman's views, he suggested 
 the middle course : let the magistrates be nominated by the boards of commissioners, 
 and let that nomination be submitted to the County Courts : thus, the nominations 
 would undergo a double filtration. 
 
 Mr. Powell thought that all the objections which applied to nominations by the 
 County Courts, applied equally to this scheme. 
 
 Mr. Summers said, that these commissioners, situated at remote extremities of the 
 county, were less likely to combine to promote family interests and political feuds. 
 
 The question being taken on striking out, it was carried — Ayes 48, Noes 34. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, to test the sense of the Committee, moved to strike the word " Re- 
 solved," from tlae^r^f resolution, (thereby rejecting the entire scheme,) and the ques- 
 tion being taken, it was carried — Ayes 52. 
 
 Mr. Powell moved that tJie Committee now rise, and report its proceedings to the 
 House. 
 
 [This motion gave rise to a long, and by far the most desultory debate, which has 
 yet occurred in the Committee : but which, turning mainly on principles of order, it 
 is unnecessary to present to the public] 
 
 Messrs. P. P. Barbour, Scott, Powell, Mercer, Johnson, Fitzhugh, Leigh, Summers, 
 Stanard, Upshur, and Gordon, severally took the floor. 
 
 The main principle involved was, whether, after a proposition had been voted by 
 one majority of the Committee, and an amendment appended to it by a different ma- 
 jority, any question was necessary, in Committee of the Whole, on the two united 
 together. 
 
 Mr. Mercer, believing there was a majority of the Committee opposed to the pro- 
 position of Mr. Gordon, (which distributes according to certain numbers the repre- 
 sentation in the Legislature, among the four great divisions of the State,) with part 
 of Mr. Upshur's apj)e?ided to it, (which provides a plan for future apportionment,) 
 pressed to have a question taken 07i the vJiole together. 
 
 This was opposed as being not in order in Committee of the Whole, as being use- 
 less, so that it might as well be taken in the House. 
 
 The question being taken on rising and reporting, it was negatived — Ayes 41, 
 Noes 47. 
 
 The debate was then renewed, but ended in a motion by Mr. Mercer, that tha 
 Committee do now rise, which was agreed to. 
 
 It rose accordingly, and thereupon the House adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, December 15, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Me. 
 Hoerner of the Roman Catholic Church. 
 
 Mr. Powell presented the following letter of resignation, which was read and laid 
 on the table : 
 
 RICHMOND, December 15th, 1829. 
 Sir, — Circumstances beyond my controul, compel me to resign my seat in the body 
 over which you preside. The remaining delegates from the district will, of course, 
 supply the vacancy occasioned by my resignation. With the strongest feelings, and 
 most heart-felt desire for the best results from your deliberations for our beloved State, 
 with tlie kindest recollections for yourself and every member of the Convention, I 
 beg leave to subscribe myself your and their friend and fellow-citizen, 
 
 H. L. OPIE. 
 
 P. P. Barbour, Esq. ) 
 
 President of the Convention, y 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that the colleagues of Mr. Opie would select a person to fill his 
 place before the meeting of the Convention to-morrow. 
 
 The Chairman informed the House that he should be prepared to report the pro- 
 ceedings of the Committee after about an hour's farther labour in copying : that when 
 the report was completed, it would astonish any one, to find how few of the subjects, 
 which had occupied the debates of the Committee, would be reported upon to the 
 House : the chief embarrassment arose from the fact, that the resolutions numbered 
 fourteen and fifteen had not been passed upon by the Committee at all. 
 
 [They are as follow : 
 
632 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Resolved, That the representation in the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 There shall be thirteen Senators West of the Blue Ridge of Mountains, and nine- 
 teen East of those Mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates one hundred and twenty-seven members; 
 of whom twenty-nine shall be elected from the district West of the Alleghany Moun- 
 tains ; twenty-four from the Valley, between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge ; forty 
 from the Blue Ridge to the head of Tide-water, and tliirty-four thence below. 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall re-arrange the representation in both Houses 
 of the General Assembly, once in every years, upon a fair average of the fol- 
 
 lowing ratios, to wit : 
 
 " First, of white population : 
 
 " Second, of Federal numbers. 
 
 " Provided, That the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed , 
 nor the number of the Senate ."] 
 
 Mr. Mercer now moved, that the sense of the Committee be taken on these two 
 resolutions, taken together, as an amendment, by way of substitute, for the second 
 resolution of the Legislative Committee ; (he afterwards modified it so as to be a sub- 
 stitute for the first resolution of that Committee.) 
 
 Mr. P. P. Barbour suggested as a preferable arrangement, that the Committee of 
 the Whole should rise ; and in the House be discharged from the farther considera- 
 tion of the subjects referred to them, and then let each member move, in the House, 
 such propositions as had been considered, (or any others,) and let the question be taken 
 directly on agreeing to them, instead of a question of concurring in them as reported 
 by a Committee. This arrangement could produce no public injury or unfairness to 
 either of the parties, or any member of either. 
 
 He moved that the Committee rise ; but withdrew the motion, at the request of 
 
 Mr. Johnson, who objected to the course proposed, as leaving the proceedings of 
 the House without any definite order, or course of succession. After some farther 
 conversation, Mr. Barbour withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved that the Committee rise and report. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh enquired what was then to be reported as to the fourteenth and 
 fifteenth resolutions ? 
 
 Mr. Mercer pressed his motion, and the debate on it occupied the Committee dur- 
 ing the rest of the day. 
 
 He claimed his right to have the question so taken, because there had been an im- 
 plied agreement when those propositions were offered, that a question should so be 
 taken. This was strenuously denied — and after much recapitulation of what had 
 taken place at the time, 
 
 The Chair was asked to decide whether such a motion could be entertained as in 
 ■order 
 
 The Chair decided in the affirmative. Mr. Goode took an appeal to the Committee. 
 The motion was reduced to writing by Mr. Mercer, in the following form : 
 
 Resolved, That the question be put to the Committee, whether the propositions 
 contained in the fourteenth and fifteenth resolutions, being the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Northampton, as amended on the motions of the gentleman from 
 Albemarle and the gentleman from Noi-thampton, be adopted as an amendment by 
 way of substitute for the first resolution of the Legislative Committee, without any 
 motion made that such substitute be adopted." 
 
 And the question of order was debated till near three o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Mercer was asked whether he would move these two propositions himself, as 
 an amendment to the second resolution ? 
 
 This he declined ; but insisted that the sense of the Committee should be taken on 
 them, as one whole : he wanted this, in order to govern his future course. 
 
 The debate was strenuous and spirited ; but turning entirely on questions of order, 
 and Parliamentary usage, we adhere to our usual course, in abstaining from present- 
 ing it to our readers. 
 
 The question was at length taken on sustaining the decision of the Chair, and de- 
 cided in the negative — Ayes 40, Noes 49. 
 
 So the Committee decided that the motion of Mr. Mercer was out of order, and 
 could not be put. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then moved that the Committee do now rise and report. 
 The motion prevailed, and the Committee rose accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge stated, that the report was nearly ready, but wanted some farther 
 copying to complete it. 
 
 It was agreed to be received pro forma, as if actually made ; and it was ordered 
 that it he on the table, and be printed. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 633 
 
 Mr. Gordon moved, that the Committee of the Whole be discharged from all those 
 subjects on which it had not acted. 
 
 After some explanations, this motion was agreed to. 
 
 The Secretary was ordered to authenticate the upholsterer's bill for carpeting a 
 portion of the Church. 
 
 And then the House adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, December 16, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Hoerner of the Roman Catholic Church. 
 
 Mr. Powell announced to the Convention, that the Delegation from his district 
 had agreed in the choice of Mr. James M. Mason, to fill the vacancy, occasioned by 
 the resignation of Mr. Opie. 
 
 Mr. Mercer presented the following letter from Gen. Taylor of Norfolk : 
 
 NORFOLK, December 14, 1829. 
 Sir, — I have been notified this evening, of my appointment as a member of the 
 Convention, to supply the vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Mr. Monroe. 
 Highly as I value this honour, considerations, which I am not at liberty to disregard, 
 forbid me to accept the appointment ; and I take the earliest opportunity of commu- 
 nicating this circumstance, that the least possible inconvenience may result. 
 I have the honour to be, 
 
 Very respectfully. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 ROBERT B. TAYLOR. 
 
 The President of the Convention. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mercer, the letter was laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Henderson announced to the Convention, that the Loudoun Delegation had 
 agreed in the choice of Mr. Joshua Osborne, now a Senator of this State, to fill the 
 vacancy to which Mr. Taylor had been elected. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, the Convention then proceeded to consider the re- 
 port of the Committee of the Whole : 
 
 [The Committee of the Whole Convention have, according to order, had under con- 
 sideration the reports of the several Select Committees, on the different Departments 
 of Government, the Declaration of Rights, &c. together with several resolutions and 
 propositions to them referred, and have made several amendments to the said reports, 
 which they beg leave to submit. These amendments are as follow, viz : 
 
 Amendments to the Report of the Committee on the Legislative Department. 
 
 First, strike out from the word " Constitution," in the third line, of the third resolu- 
 tion, to the end of the resolution, and insert, " and shall be extended, first, to 
 every free white male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein, above the 
 age of twenty-one years, who owns and has possessed for six months, or who 
 has acquired by marriage, descent or devise, a freehold estate, assessed to the 
 value of not less than dollars, for the payment of taxes, if such assessment 
 
 shall be required by law ; second, or who shall own a vested estate in fee, in remain- 
 der or reversion, in land, the assessed value of which shall be dollars; third, or 
 who shall own, and be himself in actual occupation of, a leasehold estate, with the 
 evidence of title recorded, of a term originally not less than five years, of the annual 
 value or rent of dollars; fourth,°or who for twelve months next preceding, 
 has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, borough, or 
 election district, where he may offer to vote, and who shall have been assessed with 
 a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, and actually 
 paid the same : Provided, nevertheless, That the Right of Suffrage shall not be exer- 
 cised by any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non-commis- 
 sioned officer, soldier, sailor, or marine, in the service of the United States, or by any 
 person convicted of any infamous crime." . „ , . 
 
 8. Resolved, That it ought to be provided in the Constitution, that m all elections m 
 this State to any office or place of trust, honor or profit, the votes should be given 
 openly, or viva voce, and not by ballot. 
 
 Amendments to the Report of the Committee upon the Executive Department. 
 First, add to the first resolution the words following, to wit : " to be elected by the 
 General Assembly for three years, and to be ineligible for three years thereafter. 
 His term of office shall commence on the first day of January succeeding his elec- 
 tion, or on such other day as the Legislature may from time to time designate." 
 
 80 
 
634 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Second amendment, add to the second resolution the following : " to be elected in 
 the same manner, and at the same time, and for the same period with the Governor." 
 Third amendment, strike out the fifth resolution. 
 Fourth amendment, strike out the sixth resolution. 
 
 Fiftli amendment, strike out in the seventh resolution, from the word " Resolved," 
 to the end of the resolution, and insert, " that the mode of appointing militia officers, 
 ought to be provided for by law : Provided, nevertheless, That no officer below the 
 grade of a Brigadier General, should be appointed by the General Assembly." 
 
 Sixth amendment, strike out the eighth resolution. 
 
 Seventh amendment, add the following to the report : 
 
 9. Resolved, That the Governor and Lieutenant Governor shall be chosen from such 
 persons only as are native citizens of the United States, who have attained the age of 
 thirty years, and have been citizens of the State during the tive years immediately 
 preceding the election. 
 
 10. Resolved, That both the Governor and Lieutenant Governor shall receive for 
 their services, a compensation to be determined law, and to be neither increased nor 
 diminished, during the term for which they shall have been elected, and they shall be 
 liable to be impeached and removed from office, for treason, bribery, or other crimes 
 or misdemxeanors. 
 
 11. Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Governor to execute, or cause to be 
 executed, all the laws of the Commonwealth; to communicate to the Legislature, at 
 every session, the condition of the State, and to recommend to their consideration 
 such measures as he may deem expedient. He shall also be Commander-in-Chief of 
 the land and naval forces of the State ; shall have power to convene the Legislature, 
 v/hen in his opinion, the interests of the State may require it. or on application of a 
 majority of the members of the House of Delegates : to fill vacancies occurring du- 
 ring the recess of the Legislature, in offices, the appointment to which is vested in 
 the Legislative body ; to grant reprieves or pardons, except where the prosecution 
 shall have been carried on by the House of Delegates, or the law shall otherwise par- 
 ticularly direct; and to conduct, either in person, or by such agents as the Legisla- 
 ture may designate, all negociations and correspondence with other or foreign States. 
 
 Amendments to the Report of the Committee on the Judicial Department. 
 First, in the first line of the first resolution, before the word court" insert " Su- 
 preme." 
 
 Second, in the third line of the same resolution, after the word establish," strike 
 out the word and." 
 
 Third, after the word courts" in the third line of the same resolution, insert and 
 in the justices of the peace, who shall compose the said courts; the Legislature may 
 also vest such jurisdiction as shall be deemed necessary, in Corporation Courts and in 
 the magistrates who may belong to the Corporate Body." 
 
 Fourth amendment, in the second resolution, third line, strike out the word " first" 
 where it occurs, and insert the same word before Legislature" in the same line. 
 
 Fifth amendment, in the fourth line of the same resolution, strike out the word 
 " held," and insert the word elected." 
 
 Sixth amendment, in the fourth line of the third resolution, strike out concur- 
 rent," and insert "joint." 
 
 Seventh amendment, after the word " Assembly," in the fifth line of the same re- 
 solution, strike out to the word but," in the twelfth line. 
 
 Eighth amendment, in the fourth resolution, second line, after the word courts," 
 insert " except justices of the County Courts, and the aldermen, or other m.agistrates 
 of Corporation Courts." 
 
 Ninth amendment, in tlie fifth resolution, strike out the v/ords " by and with the 
 advice and consent of the Senate." 
 
 Amendment to the Report of the Committee on the Bill of Rights, ^c. 
 
 First amendment, in the second report of the Committee upon the Bill of Rights, 
 &c., fifth resolution, second and third lines, strike out the words under the United 
 States, or." 
 
 The Committee of the Whole have further, according to order, had under consid- 
 eration, a proposition submitted to the House, on the 30th day of November last, by 
 Mr. Upshur, of the tenor following to wit : 
 
 1. " Resolved, That the House of Delegates shall consist of one hundred and 
 twenty members, of which, there shall be chosen for the First District, or Dis- 
 trict West of the Alleghany mountain, 26 
 
 For the Second District, or District of the Valley, 22 
 
 For the Third District, or District between the Blue Ridge and the head of 
 tide-water, 33 
 
 For the Fourth District, or District between the head of tide-water and the 
 ocean, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION 
 
 635 
 
 2. Resolved, That tlie Senate shall consist of thirty members, of Vi-hich, there 
 
 shall be chosen for the First District, aforesaid, 7 
 
 For the Second District, aforesaid, 6 
 
 For the Third District, aforesaid, 9 
 
 For the Fourth District, aforesaid, 8 
 
 3. Resolved, That the Legislature shall have power to re-arrange the Representa- 
 tion in both Houses of the General Assembly, once in every years, upon a 
 fair average of the following ratios, to wit: first, of white population: second, of 
 white population and taxation combined : third, of Federal numbers : Provided, That 
 the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed one hundred and sixty, nor 
 the number of the Senate forty." 
 
 To which your Committee beg leave to report the following amendments, by way 
 of substitute, to wit : 
 
 Resolved, That the Representation in the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " There shall be thirteen Senators West of the Blue Ridge of mountains, and nine- 
 teen East of those mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates, one hundred and twentv-seven mem- 
 bers ; of whom, twenty-nine shall be elected from the District Yv est of the Alleghany 
 mountain ; twenty-four from the Valley between the Alieghany and Blue Ridge j 
 forty from the Blue Ridge to the head of tide-water, and tliirty-four thence below. 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall re-arrange the Representation in both Houses 
 of the General Assembly, once in every years, upon a fair average of the 
 
 following ratios, to wit : first, wliite population : second. Federal numbers : Provided, 
 That the number -of the House of Delegates shall not exceed , nor the num- 
 
 ber of the Senate 
 
 Mr. Powell enquired of the Chair, what was to be done, in relation to those reso- 
 lutions of the several Committees, to which there were no amendments.' 
 
 The Chair replied, that after all the amendments had been gone through, the ques- 
 tion would then be put on concurring with the resolutions not amended. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge enquired, whether, after the House should have concurred in any 
 amendment reported by the Committee, that amendment would be susceptible of far- 
 tiier amendment.' 
 
 The Chair replied in the negative : but stated, that any amendment which was pro- 
 posed to a resolution itself, of either of the Committees, would be in order : and even 
 the amendments to them might be amended, if other matter were included in the 
 motion, so as not to involve the contradiction of striking out, what had been agreed 
 to be put in. 
 
 The question then recurring on the concurrence of the Convention with the amend- 
 ments proposed by the Committee of the "Whole to the third resolution of the Legis- 
 lative Committee : 
 
 Mr. Doddridge demanded that the question on concurring be taken by yeas and 
 nays. 
 
 Mr. Tyler asked, that the amendment proposed to the third resolution should be di- 
 vided into clauses, and the question of concurrence be put upon each clause, seriatim. 
 
 Mr. Leigh enquired, whether, after the amendment should have been disposed of, 
 it would be in order to move a substitute 
 
 The Chair replied in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. Stanard demanded, that the question on striking out the several clauses in the 
 original resolution, in order to introduce the amendments in their room, be also divided, 
 and put separately on each clause : 
 
 Which, after some conversation was agreed to. 
 
 The question was then put on agreeing with the report of the Committee of the 
 Whole vrhich recommends that the" following clause be striken out. viz : " Provided, 
 That no person shall vote by virtue of his freehold only, unless the same shall be 
 assessed to the value of at least dollars for the payment of taxes, if such assess- 
 
 ment be required hy law." 
 
 Mr. Stanard moved that the blank in the above clause be first filled : and that it be 
 filled with the sum of twenty-five dollars. 
 
 On this motion, Mr. Powell demanded the ayes and noes, and they were ordered 
 by the House. 
 
 ' Mr. ]Mercer questioned the right of having the question of striking out drawn into 
 clauses. 
 
 The Chair replied, that it was usually conceded as of course ; but the House might 
 refuse to permit it. 
 
 ?vlr. Powell withdrew his call for the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. Thompson now moved to fill the blank with one dollar ; stating, that the price 
 at which the State sold its lands being two dollars for one hundred acres, one dollar 
 would purchase fifty acres of land. 
 
636 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr, Stanard opposed the motion as going to make the proviso ridiculous and pre- 
 posterous. The very extent of the proviso is, to prevent men from voting on mere 
 nominal freeholds ; and to fill the blank at one dollar, w^ould make the freehold nomi- 
 nal merely, and was in fact, the introduction of Universal Suffrage. 
 
 Mr. Thompson said, he should be glad if he could defeat the proviso and make it 
 nominal only. He was one of those who regarded a freehold Suffrage as " ridiculous 
 and preposterous." If there must be any such qualification at all, he was for making 
 it as cheap as possible — and all who thought with him on the question of Suffrage, 
 would consider it their duty to do so. ^ He would tell the gentleman from Spottsyl- 
 vania, (Mr. Stanard,) that there were votes given in the county of Amherst on land 
 not assessed at eight dollars now, at this present time. The existing Constitution 
 said nothing about the quality of the land ; it required a certain quantity only. The 
 Constitution gave the same Right of Suffrage on a freehold of fifty acres, that it did 
 on a freehold of one hundred thousand. That might be called " ridiculous and pre- 
 posterous." While Virginia sold its public lands at two dollars for one hundred acres, 
 to value the freehold at one dollar, (the price of fifty acres) was, in his opinion, 
 neither " ridiculous nor preposterous." 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, he had not affirmed that the motion was ridiculous, but that it 
 would make the proviso appear so. Mr. S. had addressed the friends of a property 
 qualification, and not the opposers of it and friends of Universal Suffrage. If there 
 were freeholds in Amherst not worth more than eight dollars, he had not been aware 
 of the fact : they must be, he presumed, on the declivities of the Blue Ridge. He 
 asked the friends of a freehold Right of Suffrage, whether they would introduce a 
 proviso which was a restraint in one part of the State and not in another } If such 
 was the effect of the present Constitution, it had grown out of the changes produced 
 by time, and ought to be remedied. 
 
 The question was then put on filling the blank with twenty-five dollars, and nega- 
 tived. — Ayes 37, 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to fill it with ten dollars. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax moved twenty dollars. 
 
 Mr. Marshall suggested, that it might save time at once to put the question on 
 agreeing with the report of the Committee first : if the clause were retained, the blank 
 could be filled afterwards. 
 
 The several motions for filling the blank, were thereupon withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas was opposed to requiring any specific value in the freehold. The lit- 
 tle piece of land of the poor man was as dear to him as the estate of the rich. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that the effect of this clause was to disqualify many who were al- 
 ready freeholders, but whose freehold might not come up to the required value : He 
 should vote to strike it out, because he would not consent to take away the Right of 
 Suffrage from any of those who now enjoyed it. He was unwilling to disturb a right 
 once vested, though if consulted, when that right was to be granted, he might possi- 
 bly have refused it. 
 
 Mr. Coalter stated a fact which had come to his knowledge in relation to this right 
 of voting. A man bein^ called to serve as a juryman, was asked whether he was a 
 freeholder.? He replied in the negative. The clerk of the court insisted that he was, 
 and reminded him of a deed recorded six months before which conveyed to him a 
 freehold, on which freehold he had voted at the last election. The man replied, that 
 he knew nothing about the deed : that he disclaimed the deed and the freehold too : 
 and when he had voted, had voted as a freeman, supposing himself to have a right to 
 do so. 
 
 The question was now put on striking out the first clause, (see above,) and was 
 carried, by ayes and noes. 
 
 Ayes— Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, 
 Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, 
 Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, 
 Baxter, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Venable, Holladay,' Mercer,, Henderson, Os- 
 borne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 dleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Morris, Garnett, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Clay tor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stewart, Pleasants, Gordon, 
 Thompson, Massie, Bates, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin. — 75. 
 
 JS'oes — Messrs. Jones, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Leigh of Hali- 
 fax, Logan, Madison, Stanard, Fitzhugh, Taylor of Caroline, Scott, Macrae, Green, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Neale, Rose and Coalter. — 20. 
 
 So the Convention concurred in the report of the Committee of the Whole, recom- 
 mending that this clause be stricken out. 
 
 Mr. Scott, after adverting to the full attendance of the members of the Convention, 
 (one only being absent, and his attendance could be procured,) moved to lay the re- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 637 
 
 port of the Committee of the Whole upon the table, v/ith a view to take up the all- 
 absorbing question of the Basis of Rejjresentaticni. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge opposed the motion as only leading to a needless consumption of 
 time. 
 
 Mr. Mercer suggested, that the gentleman would not obtain that end by pursuing 
 the course he proposed. The proper course would be, to take up first the amendments 
 reported by the Committee. 
 
 Mr. Scott replied, that the course suggested by the gentleman from Loudoun would 
 not accomplish the object he had in view. He sought to obtain a settlement of the 
 all-absorbing question of Representation, wJiich affected so man}^ of the great ques- 
 tions before the Convention. 
 
 He wished to avail himself of the attendance of a full House, and at once to take 
 up the question of " the negro Senate," as it had been called. He was for encoun- 
 tering the spirit which had so long been haunting the path of the Convention and 
 meeting it at every turn, and for laying it. Tliis v^ as his object and he meant to pur- 
 sue it. 
 
 Mr. Summers was opposed to the motion. The question of a negro Senate might be 
 important in the views of many ; but he would not, even for the sake of settling the 
 question as to a negro House of Delegates, depart from the regular order of proceed- 
 ings. The question was absorbing, indeed, (and he feared it was likely to absorb the 
 liberties of the people of the Commonwealth,) but he could not consent to force it at 
 this moment. Two gentlemen had taken their seats in the Convention for the first 
 time that morning ; and it was decorous to allov/ this question to lie at least one day 
 before they were compelled to give a vote upon it. 
 
 The question was taken on postponing the report of the Committee of the Whole, 
 and lost. — Ayes 43. 
 
 The question recurred on concurring with the Committee of the AVhole, in striking 
 out the following clause of the report of the Leo-islative Committee, viz : ''and shall 
 be extended, first, to every free-white male citTzen of the Commonwealth resident 
 therein, above the age of twenty-one years, who owns and has possessed for six 
 months, or who has acquired by marriage, descent, or devise, a freehold estate, 
 assessed to the value of not less than dollars for the payment of taxes, if such 
 
 assessment shall be required by lav/." 
 
 Mr. Green moved to fill the above blank v.'ith two hundred dollars. 
 
 iVlr. Brodnax made an explanation as to the grounds of his former vote which was 
 not distinctly heard by the Reporter. 
 
 jNIr. M'Coy moved to fill the blank with ten dollars. 
 
 Mr. Leigh with fiity dollars. 
 
 Mr. Stanard moved forty dollars. 
 
 Mr. Powell twentj'-five dollars. 
 
 The question was put on two hundred dollars, and negatived. — Ayes 45, Noes 48. 
 The question was put on forty dollars, and negatived.— Ayes 45. 
 It was then put on twenty-five dollars, and carried. — Ayes 52. 
 
 The questi(jn then recurring on concurring with the Committee of the W^hole in 
 striking out the clause, it was"negatived. 
 
 The question was next put on agreeing to strike out the following : " second, or 
 who shall own a vested estate in fee, in remainder or reversion, in land, the assessed 
 value of which shall be dollars." 
 
 Mr. Stanard moved to fill the blank with fifty dollars : which, he thought, preserved 
 a proper ratio between an estate in possession and in reversion. 
 
 xMr. Clay tor moved twenty-five dollars — not seeing any reason why the sum should 
 be increased : the owning of an estate in reversion. "gave a man the same interest in 
 the community. He was governed only by that principle. 
 
 The question being taken on filling the blank with fifty dollars, it was carried. — 
 Ayes 51. • 
 
 On motion of Mr. Mercer, the following clause was inserted, viz : if such assess- 
 ment shall be required by law." 
 
 The question being then put on striking out, it was negatived. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose to offer an amendment, which went not to affect the substance at 
 all, of what had been agreed on, but only to throw it into a more distinct snd definite 
 form. He wished to conform it to the language of the Constitution and laws ; and 
 also to introduce a class, whicli, he was well assured, it was not the intention of the 
 Convention to exclude : he meant, co-parceners, tenants in common, and joint-te- 
 nants, in a freehold, not large enough as to its number of acres, to fall within the 
 Constitutional hmit, but of sutficient value, to entitle it to give a vote, as well as 
 others which were larger. He moved to amend the report, by striking out all from 
 the word " Resolved," to the word Provided," and to insert an amendment, which 
 he read— but which was subsequently withdrawn. 
 
638 
 
 DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 The question then recurred on striking out the following : 
 
 " 3d. Or who shall own and have possessed a lease-hold estate, with the evidence of 
 title recorded, of a term originally not less than five years, ayid one of ivhich shall he 
 unexpired, of the annual value, or rent of dollars." 
 
 On motion of Mr. Stanard, the clause was amended, by striking out the words 
 " have possessed," and inserting in lieu thereof, the words, " be himself in the actual 
 occupation of." 
 
 And, on motion of Mr. Mercer, the words, " and one of which shall be unexpired," 
 were stricken out. — Ayes 54. 
 
 The question now recurring on striking out this clause, 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that being opposed to extending the Right of Suffrage, to tenants sub- 
 ject to distress by their landlords, he should vole to strike out the clause, and against 
 inserting any other, containing that principle. He demanded, that the question on 
 striking out, be taken by yeas and nays; and it was so ordered. 
 
 Mr. Green moved to fill the blank with twenty-five dollars. 
 
 Mr. Claytor moved ten dollars. 
 
 The motion of Mr. Green was negatived. — Ayes 41, Noes 52. 
 Mr. Doddridge moved five dollars. 
 Mr. Stanard moved twenty dollars. 
 
 The question being put on twenty dollars; it was carried. — Ayes 47, Noes 47. 
 The Chair in the affirmative. 
 
 The question on striking out was then taken, and decided in the negative by ayes 
 and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, 
 Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trez- 
 vant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Scott, Tazewell, Grigsby, Loyall, Prentis and 
 Tbwnes— 28. 
 
 Moes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Marshall, Tyler, Anderson, Coffman, Harri- 
 son, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Co)', Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, 
 Madison, Stanard, HoUaday, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Mason of Frederick, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Mil- 
 lan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour 
 of Culpeper, Macrae, Green, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, J^Jranch, Saunders, 
 Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Coalter, 
 Rose, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 68. 
 
 So the Convention resolved (by a vote of two-thirds,) to retain the clause admitting 
 lease-holders to the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 The question was next put on striking out the following clause : 
 
 ^'Fourth, Or who for twelve months next preceding, has been a house-keeper and 
 head of a family within the county, city, borough or election district, where he may 
 offer to vote, and who shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the 
 Commonwealth within the preceding year, and actually paid the same." 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved to amend the clause, by inserting after the words, "the prece- 
 ding year" the words, to the amount of ." 
 
 Mr. Leigh again presenting the case of a freeholder excluded, because his land did 
 not come up to the constitutional limit, while his tenant, paying no tax, was admitted 
 to vote : 
 
 He demanded the yeas and nays upon the amendment, and they were ordered by 
 the House. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, the case put by Mr. Leigh could not happen, as the latter part of 
 the clause reqviired the tenant to pay a tax. 
 
 Mr. Leigh replied, that this was mere verbal criticism ; the tenant might pay a tax 
 of four cents, or ten cents on a horse, and then he could vote, while the owner of his 
 house and land was excluded from the polls. If the Legislature should be possessed 
 with as great a desire to extend the Right of Suffrage as some gentlemen in the Con- 
 vention manifested, they might lay a capitation tax of one cent, or of one mill, and 
 admit every man to vote. The injustice of excluding the landlord, while the tenant 
 voted before his face, was huge and palpable; and the only remedy was to fix an 
 amount of tax to be paid. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied, that he had not meant his remarks, as a mere verbal criticism. 
 He was not himself in favour of taxation as a qualification at all, because it put the 
 extent of the Right of Suffrage into the power of the Legislature, who might indi- 
 rectly contract or extend it, by increasing or diminishing taxation. What attracted 
 him to the resolution was the preceding part of it, viz : " that the man should be a 
 house-keeper and head of a family :" this he thought a much better test of interest 
 in, and attaclmient to, the community, than any landed qualification whatever. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 639 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, that on the preceding portions of the report he had voted with 
 comparative indifference; because, taken together, they formed such a comphcated 
 and unequal system of suffrage, that it could never be adopted. 
 
 Mr. F. said that he had, after much reflection, with great difhculty brought his 
 mind to abandon the freehold Right of Suffrage ; and he had done so mainly out of 
 deference to what he believed to be the opinion and wishes of his constituents. And 
 now, in what way ought the right to be regulated He had thought that the best 
 basis for it was residence, and the possession of property, whether that property 
 were real or personal. He only differed from the gentleman from Chesterfield as to 
 the mode of ascertaining the possession of these requisites. If, said Mr. F. you fix 
 an amount of tax as your test, you create the occasion of a perpetual contest in the 
 Leo-islature, as to raising or lowering the tax with a vie\\ to its operations on the 
 Right of Suffrage. 
 
 r have drawn up an amendment which it is my purpose to offer by way of substi- 
 tute, unless the gentleman from Chesterfield is disposed to avail himself of it and 
 adopt it as his own — I suggest it to the gentleman's consideration : he can offer it or 
 not, as he thinks best. It is in the following words : 
 
 " And to all free male white citizens of twenty-one years of age and upwards, who 
 shall have resided two years within the State, and twelve months within the county, 
 city or borough, where they offer to vote, and shall have been assessed during the 
 preceding year, with any portion of the revenue, and have paid the same : Provided, 
 That no capitation tax shall ever be laid, and that no individual, whose taxable pro- 
 perty is of less value than dollars, shall be subject to any property tax whatever." 
 
 I am aware (said Mr. Fitzhugh.) of one difficulty which attends this plan : it lies 
 in the fact that all property is not assessed ; but only horses and negroes. 
 
 But this difficulty may be removed by the Legislature fixing an average value upon 
 negroes and horses, and then letting them, as well as all other property, be entered on 
 the commissioners' books by its value alone. These books then, being exhibited at the 
 polls, will furnish a true test of every man's Right of Suffrage, so far as property is 
 concerned. His residence must be proved in a different manner. 
 
 I think this will be a less exceptionable plan than fixing a definite amount of tax. 
 I sud-D-est it to him. But if he declines offering it, and his amendment shall fail, I 
 purpose to offer it myself at some future period of our proceedings. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said that he liad expended — rather wasted, much thought and labour on 
 the subject, and he could assure the gentleman from Fairfax, that it would be impos- 
 sible to accomplish his object without entering into specification, and that very mi- 
 nutely : without this there was no way of avoiding Universal Suffrage. If that was 
 desired, the course was the simplest in the world : a few words would answer all the 
 purpose. But if it was intended to fix the limit of suffrage at any point short of its 
 universality, specification must be of the essence of the scheme. He knew, very 
 well, that the moment a definite amount of tax was fixed, the R.ight of Suffrage was, 
 to a certain extent, put within the power of the Legislature, who might give the 
 qualification to almost whom they pleased : but tlien he would be for fixing the point 
 of requirement so high, that the Legislature would not go up to it for the sake of 
 conveying the right. 
 
 He believed, if the blank should be filled with the sum of fifty cents, those whom 
 it was desirable to exclude would not pa}^ that amount for the right of voting. For, 
 though the Right of Suffrage had been represented in this debate as the verv dearest 
 privilege of man, it so happened that there were few in the world who were willing 
 to pay moneij fov it: very few. But JMr. L. added, that if the amendment should 
 prevail, he should nevertheless vote against the whole proposition : for never, while 
 he retained his senses, would he under any name or form, give his vote to confer the 
 Right of Suffrage on house-keepers, which was in effect to give a vote A-o his land- 
 lord, to increase the power not of the poor, but of the rich. Jt always had operated 
 to increase the power of the rich man, and give his property an influence over others, 
 not such as legitimately belonged to it, (for to this he had no objection) but such as 
 worked by direct corruption. If the gentleman from Fairfax would fix upon any 
 form of words which would exclude Universal Suffrage while it admitted house- 
 keepers to vote, he should be ready to go with him in the support of such an amend- 
 ment ; but he could not but believe it to be wholly impracticable. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh asked, if the gentleman did not think, that the amendment he had 
 read, covered the whole ground, except providing for remaindermen ? 
 
 Mr. Leigh replied, that it did not cover such freeholders, as did not reside on their 
 own land. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh replied, that he had intended to have added the word freeholder, and 
 would still do it. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that the controlling argument against fixing an amount of tax, 
 when the question had been debated in Committee of the Whole, was, that it enabled 
 the Legislature, by putting the tax a cent below the constitutional limit, to curtail tlia 
 
640 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Right of Suffrage at pleasure — and they would be inclined, probably in that direction, 
 rather than the other, inasmuch as they were themselves for the most part freehol- 
 ders. Was it not a little extraordinary, that this limitation, which it was said, was to 
 prevent throwing power into the hands of rich men, should be urged by that side of 
 the House, who were for throwing the entire controul of the Government, into the 
 hands of rich men ? They urge the argument — tliey feel the argument. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Leigh's amendment, and decided in the nega^ 
 tive, by ayes and noes, as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Roane, Taylor of Caro- 
 line, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, 
 Prentis, Grigsby, Brancli, Pleasants, Bates, Neale, Rose and Coalter — 42. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Cofxman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, INaylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, 
 Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Baj'ly, Upshur and Perrin — 54. 
 
 Mr. Stanard moved to amend the resolution by inserting, after the words " who 
 shall have been assessed" (see above.) the words, "by a tax on property owned by 
 him." He did this, that the Legislature might not by laying some trifling tax of a 
 cent, or a few cents, introduce, in effect, Universal Suffrage. 
 
 Mr. Summers opposed the amendment. He thought the gentleman's fears unrea- 
 sonable. The resolution confines the Legislature to house-keepers and heads of fa- 
 milies — beyond that limit they could not go : and if they should admit all the house- 
 keepers, and all the heads of families in the Commonwealth, he, for one, should not 
 consider it any instance of their misrule. Such a clause would exclude a useful 
 class of men ; he meant those who hired slaves in performing jobs and contracts. The 
 tax on the slave was for the time being charged upon them ; they were pro hac vice 
 the owners of the slaves; yet they could not vote under this amendment. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that there was anotiier class whom it would exclude, viz : 
 shop-keepers and such as followed any business which required a license. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, it was that class whom he wished to exclude. He wanted to keep 
 out shovv^-men and mountebanks. Why ought the shop-keeper who sells foreign 
 goods to be admitted, while the industrious mechanic who sells his own work is shut 
 out.^ What was meant by the term head of a family ? Did it mean a bachelor who 
 occupied a house ? or must he have a wife.'' Must he have children.'' Would gentle- 
 men go into the question of colour ? It was not an uncommon thing to call a trusty 
 female black a house-keeper. He wished to expel this loose indefinite phrase. The 
 Charter of Williamsburg allowed a house-keeper to vote — and it became a vexed 
 question in that city. He related an anecdote of a student at college who was over 
 twenty-one and had his study in an out-building, who was permitted to vote as a 
 house-keeper. Such a term would prove a mere ball of contention, and would be in- 
 terpreted in one way or in another, just as circumstances at the moment rendered de- 
 sirable. It was a seeming limitation, but would operate in practice as none : it was 
 in fact and in truth, nothing else but Universal Suffrage. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge observed, that whenever any proposal was made to enlarge tlie ex- 
 tent of suffrage, it was seen to be met by a declaration of the danger of fraud: but 
 surely the same danger might as well be urged on the other side against Freehold 
 Suffrage. That was liable to as many and as great frauds as the other plans. 
 
 The question was put on agreeing to Mr. Stanard's amendment, and decided by 
 ayes and noes in the negative, as follows : 
 
 Jyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Pvandolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Plolladay, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, 
 Tazewell, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Bates, Neale, Rose and 
 Coalter— 44. 
 
 A''oes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffraan, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Powell, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Loyall, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, 
 Massie, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 52. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 641 
 
 The question was then put on striking out the fourtli paragraph, and decided by 
 ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — 3Iessrs. Barbour. (President;) Jones. Leicrli of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield. Giles. Brodnax. Droragoole, Alexander, Goode. Marshall. Tyler, 2sichoias, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Tre^vant, Claiborne. Urquhart, Randolph. Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Hoiladay, Roane, Taylor of Carohne, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, ^tlacrae. Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, 
 Prentis, Branch, Bates, -^eale, Rose and Coalter — 10. 
 
 Ab&? — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson. Coffman, Harrison, Willian3son, Baldwin, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne. Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Os- 
 borne. Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, IVaylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendle- 
 ton, George, M'Millan. Campbell of Washington. Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, ^lathews, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridore. Morcfan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Townes." CabeU, Martin, Stuart, 
 Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Bayly. L'pshur and Perrin — 56. 
 
 So the fourth clause, admitting house-keepers to vote, was retained. 
 
 The question now recurring on striking out the proviso, it was put entire as follows : 
 Provided, nexertheless. That the Right of Sufirage shall not be exercised by any 
 person of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, 
 soldier, sailor, or marine, in the service of the L nited States ; nor by any person 
 convicted of any infamous oiience ; nor by citizens born without the Commonwealth, 
 unless they shall have resided therein for five years immediately preceding the elec- 
 tion at which they shall olFer to vote, and two years preceding tlie said election, in 
 the county, city, borough, or election district, where they shall offer to vote (the 
 mode of proving such previous residence, when disputed, to be prescribed by law.) 
 and shall possess, moreover, some one or more of the quahfications above enu- 
 merated." 
 
 On motion of Mr. Claytor, all the latter part of the proviso, beginning with the 
 words nor by citizens born out of the Commonwealth'" to the end, was stricken out. 
 
 The question being put on striking out the residue, it was negatived. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now offered again the amendment which he had previously moved and 
 withdrawn. 
 
 But on some conversation as to its details, he again withdrew it to allow an oppor- 
 tunity to 
 
 Mr. Wilson, who moved the following amendment : 
 
 ''Resolved, That every free white male citizen of this Commonwealth, of the age 
 of twenty-one years, and upwards, who shall have resided in the State two years, 
 and in the county where he proposes to vote one year, next preceding the time of 
 offering such vote : who shall have been enrolled in the militia, if subject to military 
 duty and who shall have paid all levies and taxes assessed upon him. or his property, 
 for the year preceding that in which he offers to vote, shall have a right to vote for 
 members of the General Assembly : Prozided, That no person shall be permitted to 
 exercise the Ptight of Suffrage, who i? a pauper ; who is of unsound mind: who has 
 been convicted of any infamous crime : or who shall be a non-commissioned officer 
 or private soldier, seaman or marine in tlie regular service of the L nited States, or of 
 tills Commonwealth: and the Legislature shall prescribe the mode of trying and de- 
 termining disputes, concerning the said qualifications of voters, whenever the right of 
 a person to vote shall be questioned.'' 
 
 Mr. Mercer had previously moved an adjournment, with a view to the accommo- 
 dation of those who were attending under severe indisposition — but it was lost — 
 Ayes 43, Noes 44. 
 
 'Afler some farther conversation in relation to Mr. Leigh's amendment, and his 
 determination to re-cast it to meet a suggestion, that was made to him, the motion to 
 adjourn was renewed by Mr. Summers and prevailed. 
 The House thereupon adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, December 17, 18:29. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Pvev. Mr. 
 Hoerner of the Roman Catholic Church. 
 
 RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE. 
 And the question being on a resolution, offered by ^Mr. Wilson of Monongcdia, as an 
 amendment to the third resolution of the Legislative Committee, ^ 
 ]Mr. Wilson modified liis amendment, so as to read as follows, viz : 
 Resolved. That everv free white male citizen of this Commonwealth, of the age 
 of twenty-one years and upwards., who shall have remained in the State two years, 
 
 81 
 
642 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and in the county in which he proposes to vote, one year, next preceding the time of 
 offering such vote; who shall have been enrolled in the militia, if subject to military 
 duty ; and who shall have paid all levies and taxes, assessed upon him or his property, 
 for the year preceding that in which he offers to vote, [provided such taxes shall have 
 been demanded of him,] shall have a right to vote for members of the General As- 
 sembly : Provided, That no person shall be permitted to exercise the Right of Suf- 
 frage, who is a pauper ; who is of unsound mind ; who has been convicted of any 
 infamous crime ; or who shall be a non-commissioned officer or private soldier, sea- 
 man or marine in the regular service of the United States, or of this Commonwealth ; 
 and the Legislature shall prescribe the mode of trying and determining disputes, 
 concerning the said qualifications of voters, whenever the right of a person to vote 
 shall be questioned." 
 
 And on this question, he asked the ayes and noes, which were ordered accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Joynes moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Wilson, by striking therefrom 
 the words, " all levies and taxes," and inserting in lieu thereof, the words, a State 
 or county tax," (so as to require some tax to have been demanded and paid.) 
 
 Mr. Wilson acceptejl the amendment as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Claytor suggested the addition of the words, " or Corporation," before " tax." 
 Which was in like manner accepted by Mr. Wilson. 
 
 After some conversation, the question was about to be put on the amendment, as 
 modified, when 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, that it must be obvious, that the proposition amounted in sub- 
 stance to Universal Suffrage : for, all were subject to a capitation tax. He considered 
 this capitation tax, as one of the most injurious, unequal, and oppressive systems of 
 taxation, that ever was devised ; and it had been, from the first, his earnest desire to 
 rid the State of it. With that view, he moved the following as an amendment to the 
 amendment of Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Provided, That no capitation tax, either for State or county purpose, shall here- 
 after be levied — and that no individual, whose taxable property shall be of less value 
 than dollars, shall be subject to any property tax whatever." 
 
 In illustration of the unequal operation of the capitation tax, Mr. F. referred to the 
 case of an individual, in his own county of Fairfax, w^ho was one of the wealthiest 
 men in the Commonwealth, but who owned no negroes. That man's contribution 
 was but eighty or ninety cents under this tax. He wanted to see the State rid of it, 
 once and forever. His desire was that no man should enjoy the Right of Suffi-age, 
 unless he possessed some property, and enough to shew that he was not a vagabond: 
 he had not fixed upon any definite sum — but had left a blank to be filled with what 
 the Convention might deem reasonable. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that the gentleman from Fairfax was mistaken, in supposing that 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Monongalia, amounted to Universal Suffrage. 
 There were returned in 1828, in one single county of this State, between six and 
 seven hundred persons as delinquent, for the non-payment of their county levies, 
 though over twenty-one years of age. Now, if the delinquency extended, in the same 
 proportion, throughout the State, the amendment of the gentleman from Monongalia, 
 would operate to exclude twenty thousand of these insolvents to the public. It could 
 not then be objected to as Universal Suffrage. It would exclude such as he wished 
 to see excluded — all the vagabonds and worthless idlers. He did not mean to be un- 
 derstood as saying, that all those thus returned delinquent, were idlers and vagabonds; 
 but the class of delinquents included those who were of that description. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, that as matters now stood, the resolutions admitted a man to 
 vote, who paid any county tax, of any sort, or to any amount however small. If, in- 
 deed the system of county taxation was to be adopted, and the county taxes were to 
 be of the same kind as are now laid by the Legislature, then he should have no such 
 strong objection to it ; but that was not the fact — and it now fell but httle short of 
 Universal Suffrage. 
 
 Mr. Leigh enquired, to what county the gentleman from Frederick had alluded, 
 when he spoke of six or seven hundred delinquents ? 
 Mr. Cooke answered, the county of Loudoun. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he took it for granted, these seven hundred delinquents could not 
 have been residents of Loudoun. He had, indeed, once heard, that there were eight 
 hundred paupers in that county. It was certainly a very incredible state of things : 
 possibly, there were a number of persons there, engaged in some large pubhc work, 
 (perhaps on the river,) who went off before the county levy had been demanded. He 
 must confess himself very sceptical, as to the accuracy of the statement. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied, that he had derived the knowledge of tlie fact, from one of the 
 members of the Loudoun Delegation. Mr. C. said, he did not know of any pubhc 
 work, going on in that county in 1828, and he did not know why the proportion of 
 delmquents there, was not to be considered as extending to the rest of the State— he 
 should presume so, until the contrary were shewn. All knew what a number of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 643 
 
 young men, without property, there were, who were habitually returned delinquent, 
 for the small amount of a county levy. He took this as prima facie evidence, that 
 they were not good citizens, but idle, worthless fellows. The amendment of the 
 gentleman from Monongalia, would exclude such from the polls ; and, on that ac- 
 count, he was in its favour. 
 
 Mr. Mercer expressed his regret, that the name of his county had become involved 
 in the present debate. He should not himself have introduced it : but circumstanced 
 as he was, he felt called upon, by his duty to the gentleman from Frederick, to avow, 
 that it was from himself, that gentleman had derived the information, in relation to 
 the number of persons returned delinquent in a single year, which he had stated to 
 the House, as having been communicated to him by one ot the Loudoun Delegation. 
 He held in his hand a statement, procured on another occasion, and for a very dif- 
 ferent purpose, which contained an annual return of the number of such delinquents, 
 during eight consecutive years, and w^hich, with the permission of the House, h« 
 would now read. Mr. M. then read the following, viz : 
 
 In 1817, 
 
 359 Delinquents, 
 
 1818, 
 
 454 
 
 1819, 
 
 343 
 
 1820, 
 
 469 
 
 1821, 
 
 572 
 
 1822, 
 
 758 
 
 1823, 
 
 757 
 
 1824, 
 
 831 
 
 1825, 
 
 831 
 
 This list had been furnished to him by the clerk of the overseers of the poor. 
 There had once been a poor-house near Leesburg, in which he had found on particu- 
 lar enquiry, but a single native American, the rest being all foreigners. Yet the poor 
 rates in Loudoun were very onerous. It was easy to account for the fact of this 
 iarge number of delinquents. The persons among whom they were found consisted 
 of titheahlcs from sixteen and upward. It would often happen that a father who was 
 poor, had several sons subject to this levy, and was charged not only with his own 
 tax, but with tiiat of his sons. Another source of the apparently large delinquency 
 was to be found in the fact, that the sheriff did not duly enforce the collection of 
 these small dues. The fees allowed for collection amounted to about seven per cent., 
 and where the tax was small, the fees were so trifling that that officer became remiss 
 in hunting up persons from whose contribution he should receive, perhaps, but seven 
 or fourteen cents; and to avoid trouble, he returned them delinquent. Mr. M. did 
 not believe there were more delinquents in Loudoun than in any other portion of the 
 State containing the same amount of population : he could not believe it; because 
 there was no county in the State in a more prosperous condition — the county was 
 large and wealthy, but the estates were owned in very equal proportions throughout. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that from all he could learn, he was apt to believe that it would not 
 be a possible thing to frame any Constitution whatever, that would be adapted to the 
 residue of the Commonwealth, and at the same time adapted to the county of Lou- 
 doun. It stood certainly, in a most extraordinary situation. One of its Delegates 
 had informed the Convention that there was nobody there able and willing to dis- 
 charge the duties of a justice of the peace. Another told the Convention that it 
 contained seven or eight hundred persons delinquent in the payment of their county 
 dues, and this was owing to the circumstance that there were so many persons be- 
 tween the ages of sixteen and twenty-one, whose parents w^ere unable to pay for 
 them: heads of families that were vagabonds: so it would seem that there must be 
 about six hundred vagabond house-keepers and heads of families in that county. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, tlie gentleman from Chesterfield, if alluding to him, had entirely 
 misconceived his statement. He had not said that all that number of delinquents 
 were of course vagabonds ; but had expressly denied any such opinion : all he had 
 said was, that it included many worthless, idle fellows, to whom he believed he had 
 applied the term vagabond. 
 
 Mr. L. resumed : Very well, the gentleman should be correctly understood. Lou- 
 doun, then, it appeared, had that number of delinquents, and a gentleman from Lou- 
 doun supposed, that many of them were under twenty-one, and over sixteen years of 
 age, w'ho had no means of paying, and could not be forced by the sheriff to pay. 
 Now, he begged gentlemen to observe how this operated in its bearing on the plan 
 of admitting house-keepers and heads of famihes to the right of voting. That class, 
 it seemed, included all the vagabonds. The sheriffs of Loudoun, too, were prone to 
 make false returns : they were in the habit of falsifying their returns, to save trouble. 
 Another peculiarity of this same county of Loudoun, was, that it paid a very heavy 
 poor rate, yet there was but one native American in their poor-house : of course, to 
 absorb all this heavy amount of poor rate, it must have more poor aliens and for- 
 eigners in it, than any county of the Commonwealth, or probably in the Union : 
 
644 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 how else could it require this onerous poor rate ? Taking all these things together — 
 that there were none fit and wiUing to be justices of the peace — that the sheriffs made 
 false returns — that the parents were not able to pay the county levy — that there was 
 a multitude of vagabond foreigners there — so that there was but one American in their 
 poor-house — while they paid a very heavy poor-rate : Putting all these facts together, 
 this Convention were called upon to adopt a provision in the Constitution on the hy- 
 pothesis that such was the state of things in every other county in the State _! He 
 was happy to be able to say from his own personal knowledge, that there was in all 
 this part of the Commonwealth nothing that resembled it in any one particular. He 
 felt very anxious to have a Constitution that would suit Loudoun, but he could not, 
 with that view, consent to take this as a just account of any other county in the 
 State. He was very sure he could not take it as a fair representation of its neigh- 
 bouring counties, Frederick and Jefferson. He judged from his general knowledge 
 of the state of those counties. He was equally sure it was not true of the county of 
 Chesterfield, though that lay between the two cities of Richmond and Petersburg, 
 wliere they were cursed with vagabonds from both. It was not true of Henrico, of 
 Norfolk, of Spottsylvania, of Stafford, of Dinwiddle, or of Prince George : although 
 these, too, were contiguous to towns ; Vvdiere vice usually made its resort, and round 
 the skirts of which it was usual to find some of the worst members of society : those 
 who became house-keepers in the Penitentiary. Such persons were to be found near 
 towns and cities in ten times greater numbers than in any other part of the Com- 
 monwealth : yet even there, nothing existed like the unhappy condition of Loudoun. 
 
 Mr. Leigh concluded by observing, that the gentleman from Fairfax had given a 
 true account of the nature and tendency of the amendment : it went to introduce 
 Universal Suffrage ; and if it did not actually do that, it provided an entering wedge 
 which must open the way to it. 
 
 Mr. Mercer rose in reply. He said that if the gentleman from Chesterfield had 
 correctly represented what he had before said, he should not now have risen to trou- 
 ble the Committee. He had not said there were no paupers in Loudoun, save such 
 as were in the poor-house. Nor did he state that the poor-rates were levied merely 
 to support foreigners. The account of the number of delinquents he had given from 
 a record furnished by the officer he had before named : he held it now in his hand, 
 and it was at the service of any gentleman that chose to examine it. He submitted 
 to the gentleman from Chesterfield, whether it contained any thing that furnished a 
 just argument against the character, principles, manners, or condition of the people of 
 Loudoun. He had not said that the sheriffs of Loudoun were in the habit of making 
 false returns ; but that the small fee of seven or fourteen cents did not operate as an 
 inducement to cause them to use diligence in searching for persons who OAved a tax 
 of one dollar, or possibly two, to the county. It was common when militia fines were 
 collected, as all gentlemen must recollect who had served on court martials, (as he 
 had done as often as ten or twelve times,) for the sheriff" to settle up his accounts; 
 and if gentlemen would go into an investigation of the facts, they would find as many 
 as seven hundred insolvents frequently returned. He believed that the number 
 of delinquents would be found even greater in every other county of the State in 
 proportion to its population than in Loudoun. He was willing to rest the question on 
 that issue. He inferred this from the equal division of property in that county. Fo- 
 reigners were numerous, it was true : they constituted the mass of white laboring 
 poor. Many of them came into Loudoun, as being the first county over the line in 
 their way south from New England and New York. There existed in New York a 
 society for the express purpose of distributing its surplus labour of population into other 
 parts of the Union: that society were in correspondence with various persons on that 
 subject. 
 
 As to public works, there had been none prosecuted in the county of Loudoun, 
 either at the date of those returns, or since : but he had no doubt that the fact he had 
 commented on, would be found to be very common throughout the Commonwealth. 
 He had been led to obtain the paper from v/hich he had read those items, for the pur- 
 pose of shewing the iniquity (he would call it no less) of the prevailing system of 
 capitation tax, for the preservation of the roads, and the maintenance of the poor : of 
 calhng on the poor man equally with the rich, for the contribution of his time and la- 
 bour to improve roads which he trod only with his feet, but over which neither hoof 
 nor wheel of his ever passed. For such a system, thousands receive the stamp of insol- 
 vency. The system was a bad one, and the Legislature ought to repeal it. The fact 
 he had stated was established by record evidence : it could not be questioned — these 
 six or seven hundred persons ought not to be suffered thus to stand as insolvents by 
 the infliction of so unjust an exaction. If gentlemen had any doubts as to what he 
 had stated, he referred them to public records, at not two hundred yards distance 
 from the spot where they were sitting. Let them look at the militia returns (which 
 rested on the same principle,) and they would find that the proportion of insolvents in 
 other counties, was at least as great as in Loudoun. All the poor were not to be 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 645 
 
 found in the poor-house : they stayed the most of them at home, and were partially 
 sustained by their relations, though in part a burden to the State. It was such as had 
 no friends or relatives to take care of tliem, especially foreigners, that were obliged 
 to resort to the poor-house. In Great Britain the paupers, he believed, amounted to 
 two millions : but the greater part of them lived at their own homes or with their re- 
 latives, and received partial aid from the poor rates. 
 
 He had made these statements, because, as a Representative of Loudoun, he felt it 
 his duty to reply to the remarks which had been made. It was certainly painful to be 
 obliged to sit and listen to a course of observations, degrading to the character of the 
 county from v/hich he came, and which seemed intended either to degrade Loudoun, 
 or injure the cause in v/hich she was engaged : but he knew no remedy. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, the gentleman had commenced his remarks by saying, " that if he 
 had correctly represented what he had said, he should not have risen." Mr. L. said, 
 he had perfectly understood the tone and temper in which this had been said, and, if 
 it were parliamientary, should certainly meet it in a similar tone. 
 
 Mr. Mercer here said, the gentleman was entirely mistaken in his impression — 
 nothing had been meant, in tone or in language, to give any just offence. 
 
 Mr. Wilson here observed to the Chair, that he could see no good purpose to which 
 this debate tended. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he did not understand this temper, tone, and manner of treating 
 him, nor should he submit to it in any form whatever. How could the gentleman 
 tell what he vras going to say ? 
 
 The Chair told the gentleman from Chesterfield to proceed. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he had not misrepresented the gentleman from Loudoun, or any 
 fact which that gentleman had stated : but he doubted the accuracy (not the veracity) 
 of the statements which he had made. He v^-as not wholly ignorant of the county of 
 Loudoun, its soil, or the character of its inhabitants — and he doubted extremely the 
 accuracy of the gentleman's information, and I have strangely misapprehended the 
 true state of that county, if it will not be seen that he is wholly misinformed. I was 
 about to shew this. The gentleman says he has record evidence ; he produces a cer- 
 tificate from the clerk of the overseers of the poor ; is that record evidence But no 
 matter. If this is true of Loudoun, it is not true of other counties. It will be easy 
 to get a statistical statement to test this, in the clearest and fullest manner. My pur- 
 pose was to shew that the gentleman from Fairfax was right in the account he gave 
 of the amendment of the gentleman from Monongalia — 1 think he was right, and I 
 shall vote against all such principles, come they from what quarter they may. I 
 would gladly vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Fairfax, if it were pos- 
 sible for me to do so. But he is going into questions of finance, and it requires a 
 vast deal more time duly to consider such a measure, than has been allowed me, and 
 the profoundest consideration, before I can vote upon it. I certainl}' cannot vote for 
 it now. I shall vote against it, because I do not clearly see the consequences to which 
 it may lead: and I shall vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Monon- 
 galia, because I believe it fairly liable to the objections of the gentleman from Fairfax. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh would ask gentlemen if the amendment of the gentleman from Mo- 
 nongalia must pass, whether its evil v/ould not be lessened by adopting as an amend- 
 ment to it what he had proposed ? He invited the attention of the Convention to a 
 single fact whicli existed in his own county, (and he presumed it might be considered 
 as an average county of the State.) In the year 1821, out of |> 3,500 of tax paid by 
 that county, $ 35 30 was paid by five hundred and thirty-five of its inhabitants. This 
 was sufficient to shew the vast inequality in the distribution of property. Yet by the 
 capitation tax all were called to pay alike ; and all who did so pay would be admitted 
 by the proposition of the gentleman from Monongalia. He presumed that such as 
 wished to restrain the Right of Suffrage at all, would vote for his amendment, rather 
 than that gentleman's proposition without it. 
 
 The question being on Mr. Fitzhugh's amendment, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he hoped it vv'ould prevail. He had always been of opinion 
 that no tax ought to be laid on a poor man vvuthout property. He considered, that the 
 military service which every citizen owed to the State, was an equivalent fox its pro- 
 tection of his personal rights, and that taxation was the return he owed for the pro- 
 tection of his property. If he had no property to be protected, he ought, in justice, 
 to pay no tax. He considered the capitation tax not only as very unequal and op- 
 pressive as to those on whom it was laid, but extremely inconvenient in its effects 
 upon all those who employed hired hands in any business whatever. Such an em- 
 ployer was obliged to indemnify his hands against all the county levies of every sort, 
 since he could get the same wages in another State, (lying, perhaps, within sight) 
 where he would have none of these levies to pay. A poor mechanic, just out of his 
 apprenticeship, before he had time enough to earn money to pay for the necessary 
 tools of his trade, was called on for road tax, levies and poor-rates. The road-tax was 
 in its operation, very oppressive upon such persons: it occupied ten, fifteen and 
 
64G 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 twenty days, in some cases, of their time, besides obliging them to travel miles to and 
 from the place where the work was to be done, carrying tlieir tools upon their shoulder. 
 Near where he resided was one of the noblest white glass factories in the United States, 
 conducted altogether by white labor — all the hands had to be indemnified against the 
 capitation, because, at seven miles distance, they could get employment in Ohio at a 
 similar establishment, and at the same wages. It would be very simple to say, that 
 all the impositions of Government for the protection of propertj', should be laid on pro- 
 perty only: while the man who was so unfortunate as by losses, sickness, (and still 
 more unfortunate as by his own irregular habits) to be reduced to poverty, should be 
 subject only to military duty. Mr. D. here referred to the regulations in some other 
 States to exempt the cow, tools, bed, and some few other necessaries of a family, from 
 seizure by the sheriff. He asked how there could be any imposition when the sheriff 
 who collected the tax, and who knew whether it had been paid or not, was himself 
 the presiding officer of the election ; how could paupers and vagabonds be admitted ? 
 He concluded by declaring, that he came to the Convention determined to make the 
 best effort in his power to abolish all capitation tax in Virginia forever. 
 
 Mr. Cooke demanded a division of Mr. Fitzhugh's amendment. He was opposed 
 to the capitation tax as unjust and oppressive, and would, therefore, cheerfully vote 
 for the first part of the amendment, but he could not for the latter part of it, which 
 he considered as an impracticable scheme. 
 
 After some further conversation, the amendment was divided. And the question 
 being on the following portion of it, viz : 
 
 " Provided, That no capitation tax, either for State or county purpose, shall here- 
 after be levied :" 
 
 Mr. M"Coy expressed his hearty approbation of it, and asked for the ayes and noes, 
 which were ordered. 
 
 Mr. Green now moved to amend it by striking out the word " State" before " tax," 
 ibut the motion could not be received, as there was already an amendment to an 
 amendment, and the rules of order did not permit them going to a third degree. 
 
 The question was now taken on the first clause of Mr. Fitzhugh's amendment, and 
 decided in the affirmative by ayes and noes, as follows : 
 
 ^yes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffnmn,Harrison, Williamson, Johnson, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, 
 Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd. Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, 
 Byars, Cloyd, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sunnners, See, Doddridge, Mor- 
 gan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Camp- 
 bell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Massie, Joj'nes 
 and Upshur — 50. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Baldwin, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madi- 
 son, Stanard, Holladay, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Roane, Taylor of Caro- 
 line, Morris, Garnett, Chapman, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Pleasants, Thompson, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Bayly and Perrin — 44. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, concluding from the aspect of things that the second part of his 
 amendment could not succeed, withdrew it.. 
 
 The question then recurring on Mr. Wilson's amendment, to the resolution of the 
 Committee, 
 
 Mr. Stanard opposed it with earnestness, as going to the whole length of putting 
 the Right of Suffrage into the controul of the Legislature, nay of every corporation 
 in the State, For, as the term was indefinite, any company of incorporated persons 
 who chose to lay a contribution on their stockholders in wliich the State had no in- 
 terest at all, could thereby convey to them the Right of Suffrage. He dwelt much 
 on the inconsistency of allowing a man who had taxes from the State and from his 
 county of very unequal amount, to omit paying the larger amount, and be allowed to 
 vote on the very smallest : paying a tax of one cent on a head of cattle made him a 
 voter, though he might be delinquent on other taxes to the amount of dollars. Nay, 
 even the one cent might be paid for him by others, or he might vote if it had never 
 been demanded of him. So if the statement of the gentleman from Loudoun was 
 correct, the sheriff of that county by demanding or not some small county levy might 
 exclude or admit some seven or eight hundred votes. But allowing for such parts of 
 these delinquents as were under twenty-one years, he would reckon them at six hun- 
 dred. These six hundred persons would be voters or not at the pleasure of the sheriff, 
 and would turn any election. If it were right to extend the Right of Suffrage so as 
 to embrace these, still they ought not to be placed so as to depend on the partiality or 
 passions of the officer who conducts the election. 
 
 Mr. Coalter observed, that the high-sheriff usually conducted the elections, but it 
 was not that officer but his deputies who collected the county levies, so that the high- 
 sheriff would Jiot be able to say whether the person claiming to vote had paid his dues 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 G47 
 
 or not. AVhat w uld a candidate have to say to the voters at sncli an election .' 
 •■ Mv 20od fellows, go up to the polls to vote : 'l will see that voux levies are all paid : 
 I can not, offer vou ajiv s^os. but if you go up there, you will see persons drinking and 
 vou will help yourselves. ^ Do you go and vote for such a man, and here is eighteen 
 pence to pay your tax."' He said that thus it would certainly be. should the amend- 
 ment be adopted. It tended to corruption. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge replied, that the State tax and the county levies would have been 
 demanded durincrthe summer preceding. It would, therefore, be immaterial whether 
 the election should be conducted by the high-sheriff or his deputy. The taxes would 
 have been received in the County Court. He thought, there was no more danger of 
 this Rig'ht of Suffrage being abused than the freehold Right of Suffrage : all gentle- 
 men knew the milUons of acres of fictitious land on which freehold votes were given. 
 These titles were proverbially known — and were called tax titles, and sometimes 
 Penitentiarv titles. There would be no more danger in the one case than in the other, 
 
 Mr. Stanard said the delinquents were returned in the fail : there were six months 
 before the election, during v.-iiich these arrearages might be paid up. He denied that 
 the return of the sheriff, that the dues had not been paid, was any evidence that they 
 bad been demanded : it would be set aside by the sheriff's receipt, or the party might 
 have paid afterwards. This, therefore, was no guaranty at all. 
 
 3Ir. Fitzhugh said that he should vote for the amendment as it had been amended, 
 though it did not go as far as he wished. 
 
 Mr. Ciaytor insisted that there was no just distinction to be taken between corpo- 
 ration taxes and others, both being laid by the same authority and for the same ob- 
 jects. They were equally burdensome, and should convey equal rights. 
 
 Mr. Jovnes, with a view to obviate the objection, that the election would be in the 
 liands of 'the sheriff, moved to strike out the words provided such tax shall have 
 been demanded." 
 
 Mr. Wilson accepted this as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Mercer objected to this, and opposed the alteration. The clause had been in- 
 serted in the Legislative Committee by a large majority. He referred to the case 
 of the countv of Tazevrell which was returned on the commissioner's books as con- 
 tain'mg three' millions of acres of land, and by its dimensions could not by possibility 
 contain more than six hundred thousand acres. It was. therefore, made to contain 
 Jive times its real quantity of land. He referred to a case on the same books where 
 the same tract of land was charged three times over, and neither time to the true 
 owners. To rely on such returns would be most xinwise. 
 
 The question being put on the motion of Mr. Joynes to strike out the proviso, it 
 was carried. 
 
 The question being then put on agreeing to Mr. TVHson's amendment, as amended 
 by Mr. Fitzhugh, it was lost by a tie, viz : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson. Coffman. Harrison, "VTilliamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith. Miller, Baxter. Mercer. Fitzhugh, Henderson. Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Ma- 
 son of Frederick. Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George. M'Millan, Campbell of Wash- 
 ington. Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan. Laidley, Summers, 
 See, Doddridge, Morgan. CampbeU of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Clav- 
 tor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Jonyes, Bayly and Up- 
 shur — i7. 
 
 yots — Messrs. Barbour. (President.) Jones. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax. Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode. Marshall. Tyler. ]Sicholas, 
 Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Trezvant, Claiborne, L'rquhart, Leigh of Halifax. Logan, 
 Venable, Madison. Stanard. Holladay, Griggs. Pendleton. Roane. Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris. Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper. Scott, Macrae, Green. Tazewell, Lo} aU, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Branch. Townes, JSIartin, Pleasants, Bates, Neale, Pcose, Coalter and 
 Perrin — 47. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved the following : 
 
 *• Or who shall have resided within the Commonwealth two years, and for the last 
 year within the county, city, borough or district, where lie offers to vote: and 
 who during the last mentioned period shall have actually paid a revenue tax legally 
 assessed on him — and hencefjrth there shall be no capitation tax [except on slaTvesj 
 assessed or collected either for State or county purposes."' 
 
 Mr. Mercer suggested a proviso, " that it had been demanded of him" — which weis 
 accepted by the mover. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he had not been called on to pay this capitation tax in twelve 
 vears — and he doubted not the same thing was frequent throughout the Common- 
 wealth. He had formerly been chairman of the Finance committee in the House of 
 Delegates, and the fact was then, he believed, universally admitted. 
 
 ISIr. Doddridge said, his amendment differed from that of the member from Mo- 
 nongalia, in not admitting the payment of county or corporation tax as a qualification. 
 
648 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Venable admitted that a capitation tax was improper in its principle, but ob- 
 jected to the exception Mr. D. had introduced in relation to slaves. He accepted 
 the principle the gentleman had on a former occasion advocated, that each individual 
 and each county and district, should be required to pay in proportion to its ability. 
 He then put the case of two adjacent counties of equal ability in popuMion and soil, 
 but one of these having half its population consisting of blacks : tJie exception would 
 cause that county to pay double, though their ability to pay was the same. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge struck out that feature in his amendixient. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend the amendment, by adding a clause providing that the 
 tax should not be less than one dollar. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge asked the ayes and noes on this amendment. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas briefly advocated it as necessary to prevent Universal Suffrage. If 
 any tax was to be required, let it have some reality. The very requisition of the Yi'<i-yr 
 ment of a tax went on the idea, that residence alone was not sufficient evidence of at- 
 tachment to the community. 
 
 Mr. Townes said, he had been in favour of an extension of the Right of Suffrage, 
 and had hitherto voted in its favor : but seeing how far it was now attempted to be 
 carried, he should support Mr. Scott's motion. 
 
 Mr. Leigh referred to an effort which had once been successful in the Legislature, 
 to lay a tax on man's antient ally, the dog ; and it had been advocated as going to in- 
 crease the stock of sheep : should the present amendment succeed, it would go to in- 
 crease not the stock of sheep, but the stock of voters. The payment of a dog tax 
 would make a voter at once. 
 
 Mr. L. said, he was now perfectly satisfied that until the great question of the hasis 
 of Representation should be settled, all the principles respecting property which had 
 hitherto been held sacred, would be in jeopardy. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, he should not take any part in the debate. He had risen only to 
 prevent misapprehension. He said he was among those who thought that Govern- 
 ment should be based upon property. Government was meant for the protection of 
 property: this was its chief object: and all who had any share in the Government 
 ought to be possessors of property, being that on which Government was to act. He 
 would lay the foundation of Government in the Right of Suffrage, based upon pro- 
 perty (not wealth,) the best index of this was the payment of taxes — it was the simplest 
 and the easiest proof. He would make the property qualification so small as to in- 
 clude the bulk of society. He should exclude the monied aristocracy from ruling the 
 country : and attain all the just ends of a popular Government. He should then con- 
 sider himself as having gone^ far enough. He considered it as the great secret to 
 know where to stop. On these principles he had voted against those propositions 
 which he thought went too far, in order to secure the popular character of a Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. S. protested against any desire to take the Right of Suffrage from any who now 
 enjoyed it 3 not even if their freeholds were merely nominal. But he was for exclu- 
 ding such persons as were neither freeholders, landholders nor housekeepers. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge withdrew his demand for the ayes and noes, declaring his intention 
 to vote against Mr. Scott's amendment, but still to vote for his own, should that not 
 prevail. 
 
 Mr. Stanard opposed Mr. D's amendment, as going beyond all the northern States 
 in its latitude of Suffrage, and being equalled onJy in the new States where Suffrage 
 was universal. In Massachusetts the payment of a capitation tax of ^ 1 50 was re- 
 quired : that now proposed by the gentleman from Fauquier, did not go so far; it did 
 not require any capitation to filter the community. This was in terms the amend- 
 ment which had been offered by Mv. Summers in Committee of the Whole, and re- 
 jected without a count. It was certainly better to make no requirement of a tax at 
 all, than to hold out these inducements to petty frauds. 
 
 Mr. Mercer was in favour of almost any system of Suffrage which excluded taxa- 
 tion. He corrected Mr. Stanard as to Massachusetts — they had no taxes, except on 
 auctions and bank stock ; the latter a very heavy one, being one per cent, on their 
 capitals. Once in seven years they laid another, merely, however, to secure to Bos- 
 ton its due representation, (which was regulated by this test.) Mr. M. went into a 
 calculation to shew that an individual who paid two cents on land might vote, while 
 he who owned no land was required to pa}^ $ 1. 
 
 Mr. Scott said; there was no congruity to the principles of the Bill of Rights in such 
 an amendment. The Bill of Rights required evidence of permanent interest in the 
 community : twenty-five acres of land was admitted as furnishing this evidence, not 
 from its value, but from the permanence of its nature. So leaseholders had been ad- 
 mitted, but not for the amount of tax they paid; their residence and the nature of the 
 property were the considerations. So of a housekeeper; it was not the tax he paid, 
 but his fixed location was supposed (not by him) to furnish this evidence. But here 
 was an amendment which declared that a man who paid one cent tax on a dog, shmild 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 649 
 
 be admitted to vote. He could never receive this a,s any evidence at all. Such a 
 man might be here to-day and gone to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said, the amendment of Mr. Scott seemed rather m.ore like a restric- 
 tion in principle on the Right of Suffrage, than an extension. [Mr. Scott observed 
 that his amendment would not apply to any of the other qualifications so as to hmit 
 them.] Mr. M. Very well. Then the freeholders are not required to pay a tax before 
 voting, nor the leaseholders either — they vote whether their taxes be paid or not. The 
 housekeeper, who is also a head of a family, may vote after the payment of a tax of 
 one or two cents — indeed of one mill, if it shall be a part of the revenue of the State. 
 But the man whose freehold is not of the value fixed by the Convention, or who shall 
 not be a housekeeper and head of a family, must, by the amendment, pay one dollar. 
 If this sum be agreed to, it will render the amendment almost nugatory. There would 
 be very few persons, not coming within some of the other qualifications, who would 
 own property sutficient upon which to levy so large a sum. It would be confined 
 mainly to merchants and shopkeepers, whose license might be sufficient. Accordino[ 
 to the present rate of taxes, it would require that a man should own ten horses, or 
 three taxable slaves, upon wliich to raise a sum sufficient to get him a vote. This, he 
 thought, too unequal. His object in rising, was to ask for the ayes and noes. They 
 were ordered accordingly, and being taken, stood as follows : 
 
 Ayes — ^lessrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield. Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler. Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Johnson, Trezvant, CFaiborne, Urquhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, 
 Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline. Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Bates, I\eale, Rose, Coalter and Per- 
 rin-^G. 
 
 Xoes — Messrs. Anderson, Cofl&aan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Meore, 
 Beirne, Smith. ]Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson. Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Mason of Frederick, ]\aylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Wash- 
 ington. Byars. Cloyd. Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, 
 Doddridge, Morgan. Campbell of Brooke, ^Vilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Cabell, Stuart. Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Bayly and Upshur — 48. 
 
 So Mr. Scott's amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Bayly now moved to strike out all that part of the amendment of Mr. Dod- 
 dridge, which referred to a capitation tax. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge having thereupon moved to amend his amendment, so as to read 
 *' except on free negroes or mulattoes,"' 
 
 Mr. Bayly observed that the Right of Suffrage being very much extended, he con- 
 sidered that there was no probability of the Legislature laying a capitation tax, except 
 on extraordinary occasions, which in the history of a country might occur : he in- 
 stanced the late war, when Great Britain demanded the Ohio river should be the 
 boundary line between her possessions and the United States, and that all West of 
 that river should be ceded to her. In such a war, every man ought to fight and pay ; 
 and a capitation tax, in such a case, ought to be resorted to. But, as the General 
 Assembly heretofore, when the Right of Suffrage was limited to the freehold, had 
 never resorted to such a tax, there was no dann-er now that they ever would, except 
 on an emergency that would justify it. But there were many men in the country 
 who lived upon their money, stocks, salaries, yearly wages and professions, who 
 would be reached by no other than a capitation tax: and there was another kind of 
 population very expensive to the county and parish revenue— free negroes — who could 
 be taxed only by their person ; but exempt them from taxes, and you give them a pre- 
 mium to remain in the country, and thereby increase the parish and county taxes. 
 He hoped the motion he made would prevail. 
 
 ]Mr. Doddridge's amendment in relation to free negroes and mulattoes, was nega- 
 tived — Ayes 37T 
 
 He then demanded the ayes and noes on Mr. Bayly's motion, and they weie or- 
 dered accordingly. 
 
 Mr. ]\Iercer was in favor of the amendment. He asked, if the gentleman froni 
 Brooke seriously apprehended that the Legislature of Virginia would resort to a capi- 
 tation tax, except in case of some great public emergency and danger? There might 
 be situations of great extremity, when such a measure would be justifiable. Now, 
 the taxes on brown sugar, on coarse teas, on salt, on coarse cottons, and some other 
 articles of general necessity, were in principle capitation taxes : would he wish to pro- 
 hibit taxation on these in case of great emergency In case of invasion, it might 
 happen that the Federal arm would not be strong enough to afibrd the necessary pro- 
 tection : ought the State thus to be trammelled f 
 
 The question was taken and decided in the affirmative by ayes and noes ag fol- 
 lows : 
 
 82 
 
650 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Aijes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dronigoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Baldwin, Miller, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, 
 Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Henderson, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of 
 Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Pleasants, Thompson, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Bayly and Perrin — 53. 
 
 JS'ocs — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coflfman, Harrison, Williamson, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, By ars, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, 
 Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Ma- 
 crae, Green, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gor- 
 don, Joynes and Upshur — 40. 
 
 So the clause was stricken out. 
 
 The question now recurring on Mr. Doddridge's amendment as amended, 
 
 Mr. Stanard moved the same proviso before moved by Mr. Scott, but leaving a 
 blank for the amount of tax. 
 
 The ayes and noes being demanded by Mr. Nicholas, were ordered accordingly, 
 and being taken, stood as follows: 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Johnson, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, 
 Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor 
 of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, 
 Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Bates, Neale, Rose, 
 Coalter and Perrin — 48. 
 
 Koes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Wilhamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Mason of Frederick, 
 Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, 
 Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, 
 Gordon, Thompson, Joynes, Bayly and Upshur — 45. 
 
 Mr. Naylor moved to amend the amendment, by striking out " revenue," and in- 
 serting " county tax ;" but it was negatived. 
 
 7^he question being on the amendment as amended, 
 
 Mr. Johnson moved to strike out the words " if such tax shall have been demanded 
 thinking it a sufficient objection if there were none other, that it opened a subject of 
 perpetual disputes, which there were no means of settling. This motion prevailed 
 without a division. 
 
 The question was now taken on the amendment of Mr. Doddridge, as amended by 
 Mr. Stanard, when it was rejected by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coifman, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Mason 
 of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, 
 Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Dod- 
 dridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, W^ilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saun- 
 ders, Cabell, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Joynes, Bayly and Upshur — 46. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Harrison, Baldwin, Johnson, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Leigh of Hahfax, Logan, 
 Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter and 
 Perrin — 47. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, now moved to amend the resolution of the Legislative 
 Committee, by inserting before the proviso, the following words : 
 
 " And to every free white male, a native of this Commonwealth, and a resident 
 therein, of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, who shall have resided one year 
 within the county, city, borough, or election district, in which he offers to vote, and 
 who shall have been assessed, and shall have paid either county or State tax." 
 
 On motion of Mr. Campbell, the ayes and noes were ordered on this amendment. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy moved to amend the amendment, by striking out " one year," and in- 
 serting in lieu thereof, two years." 
 
 Which was accepted by Mr. Campbell as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that the distinguishing feature of this amendment was, that it gave 
 the Right of Suffrage to native born citizens of the Commonwealth. That point had 
 been fully discussed in Committee of the Whole. Its effect would be to deny to the 
 citizens of our sister States an equal footing with our own citizens, though they re- 
 moved permanently to reside within this Commonwealth. There was one very sin- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 651 
 
 ^ular operatioii it would have on the Southern border of the State. The line separa- 
 ting Virginia and North Carolina was only a " chopped line" as it was called — that is, 
 an imaginary line, being by law a parallel of latitude. This line often ran through 
 the heart of a man's plantation. A citizen of Virginia might ha ve a son born on that 
 ,|>art of his estate lying south of the line, yet this son, being his heir, would be exclu- 
 ded so far as this resolution went, from a right to vote in Virginia. Mr. L. disclaimed 
 the slightest jealousy of the citizens of other States, and thought they ought to be re- 
 ceived (and so should all persons naturalized) as if they had been natives of the soil. 
 
 Mr. Campbell said, that he did not consider naturalized citizens as less meritorious 
 than others, but he had introduced nativity as the strongest of all evidence of attach- 
 ment to the Commonwealth : he could not get the right extended as far as he wished : 
 ■but this v/ould give it some extension. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, that while he could not find words to express his apprehension, 
 arising from the rage he saw prevailing, (if gentlemen would pardon the term — it was 
 really the only appropriate one,) for extending the Pught of Suffrage to universality, 
 he could not but be amused at the progress of those who were under the influence of 
 this rage — (he again begged pardon for the term.) He had observed the scene from 
 ita commencement. One proposition after another had been put down ; and still, with 
 a. perseverance which was truly astonishing, and no doubt very praiseworthy, other 
 ^substitutes were instantly suggested, with the smallest conceivable difference : some- 
 times so small, that he was puzzled to perceive any at all. It seemed as if gentlemen 
 were really running as competitors, and trying their utmost, to see which should get be- 
 fore the other, toward a goal, which he must ever consider as threatening and fatal to 
 the liberties of mankind. He wished to ask gentlemen, if they were not sensible of 
 the force of this competition, and whether it was not really like to drive them beyond 
 their own wishes ? None of those gentlemen avowed any intention to introduce Uni- 
 •versal Suffrage — yet they were striving with each other, in propositions, which went 
 so near it, that nobody could distinguish between them. There was an important ob- 
 jection to the proposition of the gentleman from Brooke. How was this nativity to 
 be proved .'' Must the records be brought up to the polls If not, how was the ques- 
 tion to be tried.'' A voter presented himself, and said, I am a native born citizen of 
 the Commonwealth :" how would it be tried.' Would the gentleman have a jury sum- 
 moned ? 
 
 He had been induced to offer these remarks, with a view to turn the attention of 
 gentlemen, to a great lover of Universal Suffrage — a very great lover of it, and a very 
 great man — he meant the Liberator of Colombia. He had been one of the greatest 
 lovers and admirers of Universal Suffrage. He had made a Constitution, too — and 
 what was it.'' His first act was to liberate all the slaves; his next was to proclaim 
 Universal Suffrage ; then to establish the trial by jury, and admit the slaves to be jury- 
 men ; and then to proclaim the reign of universal liberty. But he had thought pro- 
 per to make one provision for the exclusion of habitual drunkards. He set negroes 
 for the jurors — but the fact never could be proved. 
 
 Mr. Gr. said, it was not the business of the Convention to go into these details ; they 
 were summoned to revise and amend a fundamental law ; and they must rely on the 
 moral tendency of such laws for all subordinate effects^ But where did gentlemen 
 now behold this great lover of Universal Suffrage ? Where all Suffrage was put down, 
 and the people subjected to his absolute will and pleasure. He was the great autocrat 
 of the South. The same course might have the same termination elsewhere : it might 
 yet give a liberator to Virginia. The schemes went to take the property of the State 
 out of one set of hands to put it into another. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun had told the Convention that the freeholders were 
 forty thousand, while the non-freeholders were sixty thousand. Were these forty 
 thousand going to give up the controul of the property of the Commonwealth to those 
 sixty thousand who owned not one foot of land in the world ? Any man who should 
 do so in his private concerns, would be declared a lunatic. Let gentlemen see the 
 issue of such schemes elsewhere : they ended in a despot, a liberator, an autocrat, put 
 up, in the first instance, by those who had no interest in the property of the country. 
 
 Mr. Henderson, referring Mr. Campbell to the fact that the same proposition had 
 been offered before, remonstrated against its repetition, and reminded him in a latin 
 proverb, that the public interest ought to take place of all other and minor interests. 
 
 Mr. Campbell denied that any such proposition had been offered. He had travelled 
 extensively over the new States, and had never seen any of those formidable evils 
 which seemed to haunt gentlemen's imagination in reference to Universal Suffrage. 
 He believed it was owing to the restraints upon the Right of Suffrage, that Virginia 
 was so far behind some of her neighbours in the culture of her soil, and the progress 
 of general improvement. 
 
 The question was taken by ayes and noes, and Mr. Campbell's amendment was 
 rejected by the following vote : 
 
652 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Aijes — Messrs. Anderson, CofFman, Williamson, M'Coy, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Bax- 
 ter, Mercer, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Summers, 
 See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, 
 Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Joynes and Bayly — 36. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Ta3dor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Harrison, Baldwin, Johnson, Moore, Trezvant, Claiborne, Ui-quhart, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Henderson, 
 Griggs, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Laid- 
 ley, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, JNeale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 57. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now renewed his motion, made yesterday and withdrawn, to amend the 
 third resolution of the Legislative Committee, by striking therefrom all after the word 
 "resolved," down to the proviso, and inserting a substitute prepared by him. 
 
 After some explanatory conversation, and the failure of a motion by Mr. Summers 
 to lay it upon the table, the amendment was agi'eed to, nem. con. 
 
 And tlien the House adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, December 18, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and w^as opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Hoerner of the Roman Catholic Chui-ch. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, from the committee on the compensation of officers, made a report, 
 which was read, and laid upon the table. 
 
 The House then proceeded to consider the report of the Committee of the Whole, 
 and concurred in the following amendment to the eighth resolution of the Legisla- 
 tive Committee : 
 
 " Resolved, That it ought to be provided in the Constitution, that in all elections in 
 this State to any ofiice or place of trust, honour or profit, the votes should be given 
 openly, or viva voce, and not by ballot." 
 
 The report of the Committee having been gone through with, the House proceeded 
 to consider the resolutions of the Legislative Committee in order. 
 
 The first resolution was read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard should be had to the white population exclusively." 
 
 On the suggestion of Mr. Leigh, this resolution was postponed for the present, 
 until the House should be full. 
 
 (Mr. Randolph's indisposition had detained him from his seat.) 
 
 The second resolution was read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That a Census of the population of the State, for the purpose of ap- 
 portioning the representation, should be taken in the year 1831, the year 1845, and 
 thereafter at least, once in every twenty years." 
 
 On the suggestion of Mr. Powell, that'this resolution was immediately connected 
 with the former, it also was passed by for the present. 
 
 The third resolution, as amended in the House yesterday, on Mr. Leigh's motion 
 was next read in the words following : 
 
 " Every male citizen of the Commonwealth resident therein, aged twenty-one 
 years and upwards, other than free negroes and mulattoes, qualified to exercise the 
 Right of Suffrage by the existing Constitution and laws — and every such citizen being 
 possessed, or whose tenant for years, at will, or at sufferance, is possessed of land of the 
 assessed value of twenty-five dollars, if such assessment be required by law, and 
 having an estate of freehold therein — and ever}'^ such citizen being possessed as ten- 
 ant in common, joint tenant or parcener of an interest in or share of land, and having 
 an estate of freehold therein, such interest or share being of the assessed value of 
 twenty-five dollars, if such asscbsment be required by law ; and every such citizen 
 being entitled to a reversion or vested remainder in fee, expectant on an estate for 
 life or lives, in land of the assessed value of fifty dollars, if such assessment be re- 
 quired by law, (each and every such citizen, unless his title shall have come to him 
 by descent, devise, marriage, or marriage settlement, having been so possessed or 
 entitled for six months,) and every such citizen who shall own and be himself in ac- 
 tual occupation of a leasehold estate, with the evidence of title recorded, of a 
 term originally not less than five years, of the annual value or rent of twenty dollars; 
 and every such citizen, who for twelve months next preceding, has been a house- 
 keeper and head of a family within the city, county, borough or election district 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 653 
 
 where he may offer to vote, and shall have been assessed "witli a part of the revenue 
 of the Cornrnou wealth within the preceding year, and actually paid the same, and no 
 other persons, shall be qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly in the 
 county, city, or borough, respectively, wherein such land lieth. or such house-keeper 
 and head of a family hveth ; and in case of two or more tenants; in common, joint tenants 
 or parceners, in possession, reversion, or remainder, havinof interest in land, the va- 
 lue whereof shall be insufncient to entitle them all to vote, they shall together have 
 as many votes as the value of the land shall entitle them to : and the Leg-islature sliall 
 by law provide the mode in which their vote or votes shall in such case be given." 
 ^ The question then being on the filling of the blank in the above resolution, 
 Mr. Leigh moved to fiU it with the words three months." 
 
 Mr. L. in advocating this amendment said, that he should not trouble the House 
 with many remarks on the propriety of tliat term. It would be recollected that free- 
 holders, by a resolution already agreed to, were required to have their title for six 
 months before the time they otier to vote ; and the question was, whether the non- 
 freeholder, who certainly had a less interest in the community, ought not to have 
 theirs at least three months before they voted ? The object of botli provisions was to 
 prevent a fraudulent manufacturing of votes with a view to an approaching election. 
 The period of six months in the case of freeholders, though it might not be a perfect 
 safeguard, vrould, under the prevailing temper and habits of Vircfinia, be generally 
 found sumcient. It would rarely occur, that votes would be provided so long as six 
 months before an election. If, indeed, such a practice did at all exist, the mode was 
 to make the fraudulent deed just before the election took place, but to antedate it 
 the law not requiring the deed to have been recorded. He was very much gratified 
 to hear the truth of such an allegation denied, as it applied to the Western part of 
 the State, and in the roundest terms. As to the case of leaseholders, occupation was 
 required, and this he presumed would be sufficient, though he could easily conceive 
 a case in which that seciirity would fail. Suppose a tenant to have rented a tract of 
 land, on which he was employing many free white labourers. All he would have to 
 do, would be to partition out the land and re-let it to these labourers, and put them in 
 possession of their respective shares ; then let them vote ; and immediately after, 
 transfer the land book to the original tenant. He said, he saw no motive to induce 
 any gentleman to desire to leave open a door to frauds of any kind, let the qualifica^ 
 tion be what it might. 
 
 He concluded by moving to fill the blank with three months. 
 
 Mr. Summers said, he was unwilling to countenance frauds of any kind, and very 
 desirous of withholding all facilities to their perpetration, particularly in relation 
 to our future elections : but that he was also opposed to multiplying difficulties to 
 the exercise of the elective franchise. He thought the recording of the lease, with 
 a shorter period of occupancy, would sufficiently guard against irregular voters. 
 It would be a troublesome, and somewhat expensive operation, for a tenant to leave 
 his tenement, and put a sub-tenant into possession, and therefore, not likely to be 
 practiced for the purpose of multiplying votes, and that if this mode of evading the 
 law should ever be resorted to, the pro\nsions requiring all who are challenged to 
 purge themselves on oath, would be found a sufficient security against the species of 
 fraud which seems to be apprehended. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield had expressed his gratification, on learning that 
 no fraudulent or collusive conveyances had been resorted to in the West, with a view 
 to creating votes ; if that gentleman referred to what had fallen from him on a for- 
 mer occasion, he felt persuaded that he would do him the justice to recollect, that 
 while he denied the existence of any such practices within his own observation, 
 he had particularly referred to a striking case which had been reported to him, and in 
 v\'-hich the attempt had proved abortive, from the prompt and correct course pursued 
 by the commissioners appointed to hold the election. He did not wish to be under- 
 stood now, or at any other time, as denying the existence of such frauds; he feared 
 from what he had learned here, that they^were too frequent throughout the State, 
 and while he would take pleasure in extendino- every reasonable guard to prevent 
 their re-occurrence, he could not consent to any unnecessary restraints upon those 
 whom it was intended to admit to the Right of Suffrao;e. 
 
 3Ir. Leigh said, that a gentleman near him had given him a very wood reason for re- 
 ducing the term from tliree to tico months : which was. that the leases usually run from 
 1st January, and were commonly recorded some time during the month of Januar\' : 
 as the elections were commonly held in April, if three months were required, the 
 period would be too long. He would therefore be content with two months. 
 
 [Some explanations passed between ^Ir. Leigh and Mr. Summers, as to the denial 
 by the latter's having been qualified in general.] 
 
 Mr. L. said, all he wished, was to impose the same security in the case of leaseholds 
 as in that of freeholds : he was aware that it was impracticable to attain perfect se- 
 curity against frauds, for all laws would be evaded. 
 
654 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 As to the consideration of expense, though few men would pay much money to 
 give a vote, yet there might be men who would willingly give money to get a vote. 
 
 Mr. Sununers was not satisfied with the term of two months. He referred to the 
 practice existing in some part of tlie State of creating very burdensome leases re- 
 vokable at the pleasure of the landlord. It would be better to give the people their 
 rights, and not force them to indirect means to attain them. It was customary to 
 transfer the possession of leasehold property in April, as the stock of provender was 
 then consumed, and the new crop would have to be put in. If the term was re- 
 duced to one month, he would support the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge explained the great ease with which fraudulent freehold votes 
 might be created by large land speculators ; holding the title of lands which had no 
 • existence, or for which different grants had been issued. He perfectly agreed in the 
 obligation on all honorable men to unite in the prevention of frauds : they were al- 
 ways practised at the expense of honorable men, because they would not avail them- 
 selves of similar means. 
 
 He explained the practice of issuing leases on the 1st of April — in his district it 
 was almost universal, and in Wheeling tlie streets were alive on that day with people, 
 changing their residence and moving their furniture. He apprehended no great dan- 
 ger from removals for the sake of fraudulent taking of possession, to be relinquished 
 after the election was over : such a transaction must become known, and would in- 
 volve the perpetrators in disgrace. He was in favour of a term of one month. 
 
 The question being put, the amendment of Mr. Leigh was agreed to, ayes 53 : bo 
 the blank was filled with the words " two months." 
 
 The question now recurring on the resolution as amended, 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, demanded the ayes and noes, and they were ordered by 
 the House. Being taken, they stood as follows: 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Cloplon, Anderson, Cotfinan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, 
 "Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Filzhugh, Henderson, Os- 
 ;borne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 fdleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 ;thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 iBrooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Townes, Cabell, Martin, 
 ..Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 56. 
 
 JVoc5 — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 jierfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 .Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 sof Halifax., Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris^ 
 jOarnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 jiGrigsby, Branch, Bates, Neale, Rose and Coalter — 40. 
 
 The House being now full, on motion of Mr. Powell, the House returned to the 
 consideration of the first resolution of the Legislative Committee, which was read as 
 ■follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 3.*egard should be had to the white population exclusively." 
 
 Mr. Venable then rose, and addressed the House in nearly the following terms: 
 Mr. President : The question of the basis of Representation has been so ably and 
 fully discussed, in the early part of our session, that on this subject 1 had concluded 
 ■to say nothing ; being fully convinced that my abilities fall far short of those which 
 iliad been already exerted on the side I should advocate. Yet I have been taught by 
 ■experience, that one more intelligent and eloquent than another, may not be able with 
 precision to express the views and opinions of that other on any given subject. I 
 iiave concluded, therefore, to give my own opinions in my own imperfect way; 
 thinking that I may possibly say something, even after all the discussion which has 
 taken place, that ma}^ serve for future reflection, although I have not the remotest 
 hope of producing a change in one vote to-day. In expressing my own views, it may 
 .have a good effect in another way. I may be in an error, obviously so ; and some 
 gentleman may set me right — for, this is what I desire. I wish to aid in laying the 
 foundation of a Government, so that it may be practically beneficial. Whatever form 
 of Government we adopt, it can never be permanent unless it be beneficial and just 
 in its practical operations. In the course of the present discussion, I think I have 
 perceived something in our Western brethren, like prejudice against their fellow- 
 citizens who reside in the slave-holding part of the State ; possibly I have been mis- 
 taken ; but if any do eniertain such feelings, to them I would say, that I have had 
 no more controul of the dispensations, that caused me to be born and raised where 
 part of the population are slaves, or which produced that state of things, than those 
 who dwell among tlie mountains have been able to controul the destiny that made 
 that the place of "their nativity, or located the mountains where they are. Both are 
 evils, but I consider the mixed population the greater evil of the two. — We have seen 
 no practicabJe mode of removing the coloured population, nor have our brethren of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 655 
 
 the West been able to remove the mountains. I would wish to consider this question 
 ■without prejudice. 1 came here with a desire to aid in forming a Government, which 
 should recognize such rights as had been acquired under our present Government; 
 such as wei-e known and acknowledged. Those rights the new Government must 
 secure, or it will not give satisfaction ; it will not work well in practice. 
 
 As to the police of the various counties, that has been no cause of collision. Each 
 county has attended to its own internal concerns, and there is no cause of strife on 
 that ground. As to the present rights of the citizens, they are the same in all parts of 
 the State ; no ditficulty exists in tbat respect. Our whole difficulty in forming a 
 Government is founded in the circumstance, that the East have a large portion of 
 their population coloured, or slaves, whilst the Western half of the State contains 
 almost wholly a free white population. 1 shall endeavour to confine my attention to 
 this part of the subject. 
 
 And first. I would observe, that all representative Governments that ever have, or 
 can be formed so as to be permanent, nuust preserve some proportion between repre- 
 sentation and taxation. 1 say, representation should be in proportion, or if not in 
 exact proportion, should bear a just relation to taxation ; for, if the tux-levijing com- 
 munity be very dilFerent from the tax-paijing community, the power of the former' 
 over the latter will be exercised oppressivelv. The question then arises, how shall 
 we have representation so as to be in just proportion to taxation ? Taxation, whether 
 of an individual or of a community, or county, should be in proportion to their ability 
 to pay. No rule has ever yet been discovered, which in practice would exactly indi- 
 cate this ability to pay. Tnat wbich has been generally adopted as best, is numbers- 
 or population : if then the ability to pay be indicated by numbers, or population, the' 
 tax to be paid by the different parts of the country, will in general bear the same re- 
 lation to numbers, and the representation may be safely based on population ; but if 
 must be the whole population, from whose labour the revenue is derived. These are 
 the opinions which will govern me, and direct to the conclusions to which I shall ar- 
 rive on this subject — Certainly there should be a close connection between thoss who* 
 lay the taxes, and those who pay them. 
 
 In considering this question, our situation has been compared to other States in the- 
 Union, but the comparison will not apply. Virginia has one half of her territory 
 largely interested in a black slave population, while the other half is inhabited by 
 wbite population exclusiveh^, or nearly so. There is no State in the Union similarlvr 
 situated. In the Southern States, where this population prevails, it prevails through- 
 out the whole State, in nearly equal proportions, so that the discussion which oceupiesr^ 
 us here, can have no place among them : there is no one State whose condition fur- 
 nishes a correct analogy; but an analogy does exist, and to the extent, in the condi- 
 tion of the Union taken collectively.. And what was the determination in that Con- 
 vention, which framed a Constitution, to suit such a state of things, only existintr on- 
 a larger scale r What was the expedient hit upon to meet tlie difficultv, and which 
 did meet that difficulty azid remove it.' It was the principle that population and taxa-. 
 tion should correspond to each other ; that the slave States should be taxed only iit 
 proportion to the population enumerated. This principle was supported by Virginia 
 herself, and it was adopted and established by the Federal Government in its wisdom. 
 
 There is another way of considering the subject, ana it is one I am fond of apply- 
 ing to all subjects which 1 am called upon to examine ; that is, to work out the rule ;, 
 to trace the principle out to its practical details. Let us in this way attempt to examine 
 the rule established by the existing Government, and then tr}' that which it is pro- 
 posed to form by placing representation on the white basis. 
 
 To remove from our minds as far as possible all prejudice,, for prejudice I am con- 
 strained to believe has its influence, when I see the individuals of this Convention^, 
 of equal talents and integrity, directly opposed to each other in opinion, and these 
 opinions generally indicating their geographical situation — I say, to free ourselves 
 from this intluence, I will suppose the case of two counties, and suppose that we are the 
 jury which has to try the question as between them : I will take for this purpose the 
 counties of Albemarle and Buckingham ; counties containing the same amount of 
 population, and the same quality of soil, but with this difference between them ; 
 Albemarle has one-half of its population consisting of black slaves ; Buckingham has 
 its population consisting of free white persons only ; how will the Governrnent as it 
 now exists operate on these two counties — I have said they were equal in their popu- 
 lation, and in their soil, and hence equal in their crops and in their capacity to sus- 
 tain taxation; their land tax also equal — how are they represented.' By two repre- 
 sentatives from each. This is very well: here is no inequality or injustice : but Buck- 
 ingham becomes dissatisfied — She says, I will not consent that slaves shall be repre- 
 sented. I will have a new Constitution, and representation shall be based on white 
 population exclusively." The new Constitution is adopted and goes into operation :; 
 and what is the effect.' It is simply this; while the population of Albemarle is the 
 same, and pays the same amount of tax, Buckingham has two representatives, Albe- 
 
656 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 marie but one : this is the effect. The present contest relates to the Treasury ; and 
 here, while these two counties pay the same amount of tax, one of them has double 
 the representation of the other. Plow could Albemarle lay any restraint on Bucking- 
 ham in her future views of taxation ? Is it not plain that Buckingham might levy 
 taxes and appropriate tliem at pleasure. If Albemarle had a prudent regard for her 
 cwn safety, would she not rather say, that she would live without such an associate 
 in Government, and rely on her own strength and importance ? Indeed, were such a 
 Government, formed it could not be permanent; because it does not contain the ele- 
 ments of justice and protection to its several parts. 
 
 Tims far I have supposed the taxation of the two counties to be equal; but now let 
 us extend our views further : Albemarle, long before Buckingham was settled, had a 
 poll-tax on her black population, and as the black population extended through the 
 Vfhole county, there was no material injustice in its operation: it was found conve- 
 nient, and was her own concern. But after a time her white citizens emigrated over 
 James river and settled Buckingham; and now the poll-tacc on slaves is no longer a 
 matter of indilference ; since its pressure is on Albemarle alone, it becomes an impor- 
 tant question. Albemarle has paid an equal tax with Buckingham by way of land-lax, 
 and then pays a poll-tax of equal amount on half her population, so that the tax on 
 Albemarle is double, and yet the ability to pay, was, as before stated, only the same. 
 Thus there is a new difference between these counties; one has to pay a double tax, 
 while it is at the same time but half represented. Thus, the former difference of two 
 to one, has now become a difierence of four to one, tvi^o to one in Representation, and 
 two to one in taxation. 
 
 1 call on gentlemen on this side the mountain to re-consider this subject, and can- 
 didly to say, whether the plan they propose does justice to the counties they repre- 
 sent: to say whether such a basis of Representation is one on which our Govern- 
 ment can be considered as permanent ? 
 
 I say again, that no comparison will hold, as to anyone of the other States, but that 
 it does hold as it respects the two portions of the Union under the Federal Govern- 
 ment. I ask again, what did Virginia contend for v^hen that compact was entered 
 into.? That the black population should be excluded in representing her in the Fede- 
 ral Government.? No, Sir : no such thing. She maintained the principle, that Re- 
 presentation and taxation should go hand in hand; that if the enumeration of her 
 population was to be reduced on account of the slaves, so should her taxation in the 
 same proportion, or she never could be safe. Such was the demand, and such was 
 the decision of the General Government ; and accordingly, her taxation was laid 
 in proportion lo the number of her inhabitants which was allowed in the enumera- 
 tion. But, it may be said, that the case of the two counties of which I have 
 spoken is a supposed case, and may, in some way, be inapplicable and delusive. I 
 will then take the county of Harrison, whose population is ten thousand, and Am- 
 herst, whose whole population is also ten thousand, her white population, four thou- 
 sand four hundred. Here are two counties with the same population : how stands 
 the taxation ? Harrison pays ,*| 1789, Amherst $ 4000. Now basing Representation on 
 the white basis, Harrison gets two Representatives and Amherst only one, (not quite 
 one). Here, then, you have Harrison paying less than ^2000, and Amherst ^4000, 
 a difference in taxation in favour of Harrison of two to one. Again, Harrison lias 
 two Representatives and Amlierst one ; another difference in favour of Harrison of 
 two to one: put the two advantages together, and Harrison by the white basis, and 
 our present mode of taxing, has a.n advantage over Amherst of four to one. Can Am- 
 herst approve of this ? Compare other comities of the East, with the West, and you 
 will find nearly the same result. No Government can be safe or well founded, where 
 the taxation and Representation of its component parts, does not approximate much 
 nearer than four to one, or even two to one. No man can come on my land and de- 
 prive me of the possession. But, what avails this possession, if doubly taxed and 
 half represented. I may be taxed to the amount of its annual value, and the fvmds 
 appi'opriated in a way in which I have no interest or controul. I may complain; but 
 what does it avail? If only half represented, I shall be voted down. If such power 
 be given, we had best not send Delegates to the Assembly at all — it will be but use- 
 less trouble and expense. " But then, we have something consolatory about three- 
 tenths of the black population. This is hable to the same objection. In the case 
 stated of Albemarle, taking this into view, she would have something more ; and fitly 
 counties vinder like circumstances, would be entitled to sixty-five Representatives : 
 whilst fifty counties situated as Buckingham, would have one hundred Representa- 
 tives. Would this be justice to Albemarle or the counties associated with her.? Sup- 
 pose from oversight, or causes such as have been assigned, Albemarle and the coun- 
 ties in like circumstances have not only paid land and other taxes, in proportion to 
 their ability to pay, but also a poll-tax on the slave population, of equal, and in many 
 cases of greater amount. Suppose this poll-tax from the present diversity of the 
 population in the East and West, can be demonstrated to be unjust and oppressive lo 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 657 
 
 the East ; as I think it can most clearly. Should the white basis of Representation 
 be now adopted, what prospect would be offered to Eastern Virginia to resist this op- 
 pressive mode of taxation— this jwll-tax on slaves? In relation to the treasury, all 
 that Western Virginia should ask of the East, is, that the West should sustain no 
 wrong from the condition of the black population of the East; that the East should 
 contrfbute as much as their whole population would, were they white and free. Be- 
 yond this is oppressive and unjust. 
 
 Land to produce revenue must be combined with labour, A land-tax diminishes 
 the value of labour as well as land ; and, although, it may be denominated a land-tax, 
 its operation is a tax on labour as well as on the land ; and this is the case whether 
 the labourers be bond or free ; black or white. A tax on land is a tax on every man 
 who labours on it. Where the labourer is free, it is paid by the labourer in the 
 diminution of wages— where the labourer is a slave, it is paid by the master out of tlie 
 proceeds of the labour of the slave. Had the Federal Government the power, and 
 should levy a poll or other tax on slaves, would it not do injustice to the slave-hold- 
 ing States.' Should they also lay a land-tax, would this remove the injustice ? 
 
 This is precisely the case between Eastern and Western Virginia. Such, Mr. 
 President, have been my reflections, while attempting to form a judgment on this 
 part of the question under consideration. I think the principle adopted by the Fede- 
 ral Government in relation to this subject just and proper : that is, that the number 
 taxed should be represented, and when the whole number is taxed without regard to 
 condition as in Virginia, the whole should be represented. I consider it, therefore, a 
 concession to the West, on the part of the people of the East, when they propose to 
 base Representation on what is called Federal numbers. 
 
 Mr. Summers then rose and addressed the House on the other side : 
 
 Mr. Summers, after inquiring of the President if it would be in order to consider 
 the resolutions offered some time since by the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) 
 and the resolutions offered by the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) in 
 connection with the resolution of the Committee of the Whole, now under considera- 
 tion, and to contrast their relative provisions, and being informed that it would be in 
 order to do so, addressed the Chair in substance as follows : 
 
 Mr. S. said he could not longer observe the silence which he had hitherto imposed 
 upon himself, in relation to the important subject under consideration. The deep in- 
 terest felt by some fifty thousand of his fellow-citizens, in the deliberations of this 
 day, and whom he had the honour in part to represent on this floor, forbid it. The hap- 
 piness and security of their posterity forbid it. He came here, he said, persuaded, 
 that the people of Virginia had the unalienable right to alter and reform their Go- 
 vernment, and to direct its operations when formed : this opinion he had not aban- 
 doned. It was one he never should surrender : necessity, and very imperious neces- 
 sity, could alone limit its influence ; that necessity, he thought, now existed, and he 
 was willing to limit it to ground less exiensive than it legitimately covered. Its en- 
 tire surrender was however demanded, and he was required to adopt the principle, 
 that a minority of the people, under peculiar circumstances, should govern, controul, 
 and direct a majority of their fellow-citizens ; a sacrifice which he could not make, 
 which he never would make. 
 
 Before entering upon the consideration of the subjects before him, he said, he 
 would take leave to correct some errors into which gentlemen had fallen. It had 
 been supposed by the gentleman from Spottsylvania, (Mr. Stanard.) that the West 
 claimed an equal participation in the Legislation of the country, as a debt of gratitude, 
 accruing from the blood and treasure expended in defence of the Eastern frontier du- 
 ring the late war. In this, he said, the Western people were misapprehended; their 
 claim rested on other and stronger o-rounds. Debts of gratitude, he said, were can- 
 celled when claimed : That the West- asked nothing of the bount}- of their Eastern 
 brethren ; they invoked their justice only. The gentleman from Spottsylvania, he 
 said, had, however, kindly pointed us to the beneficent conduct of our Eastern brethren, 
 on two occasions, when he supposed, that as far as gratitude was concerned, the ac- 
 count was settled. The first was the distribution of the Literary Fund, according to 
 white population ; the second, the saving of the West from the pernicious effects of 
 a " splendid scheme of banking," rejected by the Legislature a few years since. 
 
 As to the first, Mr. S. remarked, that the policy of the East forbade the education 
 of their slaves ; and as white children were the only objects of the public bounty lefl, 
 it resulted, necessaril}'. that this bounty should be distributed with reference to the 
 numbers to be benefitted, and without conferring an}' peculiar boon, on any particular 
 part of the Commonwealth. As to the second, he said, all must recollect the perti- 
 nacity with which the Legislature resisted the attempts which were made, to aid the 
 enterprize and industry of the West, by the establishment of a few safe and secure 
 banks; a resistance, wliich brought into existence, those that were founded in infrac- 
 tions of the laws, without capital, and in their ultimate results, most injurious to the 
 country in which they had existence ; that a course of legislation followed, which lell 
 
 83 
 
G53 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 these unauthorised banking institutions, in possession of their ill-gotten gains, with- 
 out any means of recovery for the great variety of debts which they had contracted 
 with the holders of their notes. 
 
 This debt of gratitude paid to the West by saving them from banks, was followed 
 in the East by creating and continuing in operation banks of vast capital, extending 
 their branches from the metropolis to all the principal towns. What was to have 
 been the curse of one quarter of the State, was given as a blessing to another. He 
 would not stop to inquire how much of that property, for which political power is 
 now claimed, had resulted from bank accommodations, bank dividends, or bank sala- 
 ries; but judging from the palaces around us, this source of wealth could not have 
 been inconsiderable. 
 
 Mr. S. said, when the question of equal representation was presented to this body, 
 it was resisted on the ground that the slave property of the East could not be safely 
 confided to Western legislation, because but a small proportion of this property was 
 held in that part of the State. To resist tliis disingenuous objection, the West had 
 referred their Eastern brethren to the alacrity with which the men of the mountains 
 descended to the shores of tlie ocean, to assist in the defence of the persons and pro- 
 perty of their Eastern brethren ; not as forming claims upon their gratitude, but for 
 the purpose of repelhng the unwarranted assumption, that they could not be safely 
 trusted with their just share in the Government of the country. He asked to whom 
 was this distrust directed ? Who are the men you thus hold unworthy of equal poli- 
 tical rights? Sprung from the same common stock, their fathers formed the frontier 
 barrier between your fathers and the savages of the wilderness — the descendants of 
 the Campbells and the Prestons — the Lewises and the Dickinsons— the Lowthers and 
 the Morgans, ask their equal rights at your hands; and are Ihey to be told, that al- 
 though they are the sons of sires who bore your flag triumphant against the Indian 
 hordes at the mouth of Kanawha, and against the no less barbarous enemy on King's 
 Mountain — who stood by you in every peril, and shared with you in every danger, 
 that they must hold a colonial inferiority in the Commonwealth, because they hold 
 fewer slaves than their brethren in the East ! 
 
 The men, whom you cannot now trust with equal political rights, were not distrust- 
 ed during the darkest hour of your danger. When the capital was threatened during 
 the late war, your Governor appealed to the patriotism of the country for its defence. 
 The West scarcely heard tlie alarm, when a corps of cavalry with their intrepid leader, 
 Steenbergen, at their head, left the Ohio shore, for the defence of the Eastern border : 
 Wilson's company of riflemen left the valley of Kanawha for the same destination. 
 The enquiry was not then made, who paid the greatest or least amount of taxes; who 
 owned the greatest or smallest number of slaves. Their common country was in 
 danger, and the only question was, where could service be most efi^ectually rendered. 
 As characteristic of the feeling of tliat country, he begged leave to mention a single 
 occurrence of devotion to the Commonwealth. Two young gentlemen, who had just 
 closed their studies, and about to enter on their professional career, left the Western 
 frontier on foot, and threaded the mazes of your Western mountains, until they 
 reached Jackson's river. Unaccustomed to this mode of travelling, fatigued, but not 
 discouraged, they embarked in a canoe, at the mouth of Dunlap's creek, encountered 
 the perils of the falls and rapids of James river, to which they were entire strangers. 
 At Richmond they reported themselves, and repaired to Norfolk, where they performed 
 a full tour of duty. With pleasure, he added, that this early devotion to their native 
 State had been followed by a life of honor and usefulness, in each of these gentlemen, 
 and that one of them holds a place upon this floor. He begged leave to enquire, if 
 stronger evidence could be given, of the safety and security with which political 
 rights, and equal participation in the Government, could be conceded to any people. 
 Another ground of distrust, however, he said, had been relied upon. It had been the 
 pleasure of the gentleman from Culpeper, (Judge Green.) to suppose, that the people 
 of the West have contracted a passion for internal improvement, and that this passion 
 may prompt them to excessive taxation, to carry into eftect their favorite S3'stem of 
 policy. The tendency to abuse the taxing power, by the people of the West, had 
 also been relied on by other gentlemen, as a source of danger to the East, against 
 which they insist upon security. He said, if this disqualifying mania really prevailed 
 in the West, from whom was it derived? He would call the attention of the Con- 
 vention to the letters of General Washington. The father of his country was scarcely 
 relieved from the toils of the camp, when in writing to the then Governor of Virginia, 
 he urged the necessity of connecting the Eastern and Western waters of the Com- 
 monwealth, at the most practicable points, particularly enforcing the practicability and 
 great importance of drawing the Western trade into Virginia, by the Kanawha and 
 James river. In 1810-11, a lowland Legislature organized a commission, for the ex- 
 amination of those rivers, whose report gave to the country the most flattering ])ros- 
 pect of securing a very important share of the Western trade by that route. Tlie 
 strong and powerful reasoning employed in that report, gave an increased value to the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVLin .0.1 
 
 1)59 
 
 enterprize, in the minds of every one ; and he only felt restrained from speaking of it, 
 with the warm feelings which it produced, by the presence of the distinguished indi- 
 vidual, at the head of that commission. The subsequent reports of the Civil Engi- 
 neers, continued to increase the confidence, felt in the practicability and value of the 
 work. But in tliis, as in many other splendid projects, he feared that a due regard 
 had not been paid to all the elements, which entered into the consideration of the 
 subject. It was then supposed that the use of steamboats could not. under any cir- 
 cumstances, reduce transportation from New Orleans to the mouth of Kanawha, 
 to less than from $40 to §50 per ton ; and upon this estimate of freight, was the con- 
 clusion mainly formed, that the Virginia line of proposed communication, might suc- 
 cessfully enter into competition with that through the Gulf of Mexico. Unfortunately 
 for this hypothesis, he had been assured by merchants of respectabilit}'-, that their 
 goods had been brought from the city of New York, to a point on the Ohio river, near 
 the mouth of the Kanawha, at one dollar and seventy-five cents per hundred, inclu- 
 ding port charges, insurance, transhipment at New Orleans, and drayage at the falls 
 at Louisville. This single fact, had gone far to remove from his mind, the disqualif}'- 
 ing passion, supposed to be felt by the Western people. 
 
 In looking through tliat district of the Commonwealth, but few objects of internal 
 improvement presented themselves, of a character warranting public expenditure. The 
 forming and graduating a few leading roads, comprised the principal benefits, wliich 
 he thought could novi-' be conferred on that quarter of the State, with prcspects of 
 adequate returns to the treasury. The attempts to improve the rivers, had as yet 
 proved abortive, particularly so, in relation to the Great Kanawha. He then adverted 
 to the quarters of the State where public improvements were most required, and where, 
 under any system, having for its object the dev^elopment of the resources of the Com- 
 monwealth, they were most likely to take place. 
 
 In doing so, he ca.lled the attention of the Convention to the connection of the up- 
 per branches of the Roanoke vvith New river, and to the important influence of such 
 a connection upon the growth and prosperity of Norfolk. The Engineers, in the ser- 
 vice of this State, as well as those in the employment of the United States, had con- 
 curred in the reasonable practicability of this connection, without tunnelling or deep 
 cutting — an advantage peculiar to this line. And if, in his humble judgment, any por- 
 tion of the people of the Commonwealth had a deeper interest than their fellow-citi- 
 zens generally, in a liberal and extensive S3-stem of improvement, it was the people of 
 JVorfolk, and those interested in its wealth and extension. 
 
 As to James river, he said, that although no adequate motive may exist, for mingling 
 its waters with the Kanav.'ha, yet it had high claims upon the resources of the State 
 for further improvement. 
 
 The canal of James river, although now comparatively unproductive, would, he 
 thought, produce ample returns. If extended to Lynchburg, its salutary effects upon 
 the trade and commerce of that interesting town, could not be doubted. The Salem 
 turnpike, now languishing for want of funds, might receive an invigoration, which 
 would shortly extend it to the Tennessee line, rendering it a source of much wealth 
 to the intermediate counties, as well as to Lynchburg. The Rivanna and the Rappa- 
 Liannock, he said, also looked to the patronage of the State for the extended benefits 
 which he hoped they were destined hereafter to eoufer on the agriculture of the coun- 
 try. The Valley country, he said, would expect, as the Chesapeake and Ohio canal 
 progressed, some application of the funds of the State, to the improvement of the She- 
 nandoah and South Branch ; but when the whole field of operation was passed in re- 
 view, and the objects of internal improvement fully considered, he thought every 
 mind must be satisfied, that the West could find no motives for favoring a rigorous 
 and unjust system of taxation, to carry into effect objects, in which they could have 
 but a common interest, and in relation to which, the Midland and Eastern District 
 must feel more deeply concerned than their Western fellow-citizens. The various 
 and varying views of gentlemen, in relation to this subject of internal improvement, 
 would furnish, he thought, some illustration of the weight due to the argument, wliicli 
 denied to the Western people their due participation in the legislation of the country, 
 because of their passion for internal improvement. Some few j-ears since, an enter- 
 prize was determined upon, in the town of Baltimore, having for its object the con- 
 nection of that city with the Ohio river, by a rail-road. Among the authors of this 
 enlightened undertaking, was found the venerable Carroll of Carollton, and William 
 Patterson, who might be almost regarded as the father of that city. These gentle- 
 men, with eight others, subscribed about half a million of stock. Their example was 
 followed, and the residue of the capital was taken with avidity by their fellow towns- 
 men. Application was made to the Legislature of Virginia, for permission to conduct 
 the road through her territory. This boon, which was to bring no charge upon the 
 treasury of the State, but which looked to the expenditure of a large sum of money 
 among its citizens, was granted, "but coupled with a prohibition against uniting the 
 xaii-road with tlie Ohio river, at any point below the Little Kanawha. Tliis reserva- 
 
660 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tion, as he understood, was made for the avowed purpose of improving, by Virginia 
 means, and Virginia resources, the line of the Great Kanawha and James river. So 
 strong was the passion for internal improvement with the lowland gentlemen, that 
 they reserved this entire line for their own especial operations. In the course of the 
 succeeding season, reconnoisances were made by the Engineers of the Company, who 
 directed their examinations to the valleys of the Shenandoah and South Branch, as 
 well as to the valley of Greenbrier and Kanawha. Their reports were sufficiently 
 favorable to induce the company to determine to submit the line to a critical survey 
 and examination, if the Virginia restriction should be removed. Petitions from vari- 
 ous quarters were presented to the Legislature, urging the removal of the restriction ; 
 but to the astonishment of every body, the bill introduced for this purpose was re- 
 jected. It was resisted by lowland gentlemen, whose influence had not been suffi- 
 cient to call out the resources of the State on this line, but who satisfied one branch 
 of the Legislature, that this Baltimore connection might weaken the affections of the 
 upper country to the Eastern schemes of improvement, and convert that part of the 
 Commonwealth into the " back country of Baltimore." These, he remarked, had been 
 the wayward notions of gentlemen in relation to their Western brethren. Heretofore, 
 they had denied to them all participation in the benefits of the Baltimore rail-road, 
 lest it might diminish their passion for internal improvement by Virginia. Now, 
 their political rights and equal participation in the legislation of the country, was to 
 be cruelly and unjustly denied to them, because they are suspected of cherishing 
 this passion. He enquired, can wisdom approve, or experience warrant the infusion 
 of a principle into the Government, so unequal and unjust in itself, and upon grounds 
 so slight, and for reasons so fallacious ? 
 
 Having disposed of the debt of gratitude and the passion for inteimal improvemerit, 
 he proposed to consider another ground, upon which it was deemed unsafe to admit 
 the West to full participation in legislation. He said, it had been contended with 
 great earnestness and plausibility, and not without effect on the public mind, that the 
 taxes were so unequal, that when a Western man paid one dollar, an Eastern man 
 contributed from three to four dollars ; and assuming what remained to be proved, it 
 was insisted, that the temptation to exorbitant taxation on the part of the West, and 
 profuse expenditure upon local objects, was so great as to endanger the property lia- 
 ble to taxation in the East. He said, an inspection of the documents from which 
 those results were attempted to be drawn, would at once expose the fallacy of the con- 
 clusion at which gentlemen arrived. He affirmed, that wealth consisted in the quan- 
 tity of labor, which any individual held the means of controlling and directing— that 
 the labour of a country constituted its wealth, and that the products of labour, over 
 and above the consumption of the labourers, constituted the aggregate profits of the 
 community, and that taxation, when properly regulated, was that portion of the pro- 
 fits of labour, which might be required by the exigencies of the Government. Hence, 
 it followed, that taxation to be equal, must take in equal portions from the labour of 
 the country — that testing the taxation of Virginia by this rule, and taking the entire 
 population, both freemen and slaves, as the proper exponent of the labour of the coun- 
 try, the following results, he said, would be fund accurate. 
 
 The several districts pay per head, as follows : 
 
 Western District, 
 Valley do. 
 T^hird do. 
 Tide do. 
 
 Lands and 
 
 Slaves. 
 
 Horses 
 
 and 
 
 Total 
 
 
 lots. 
 
 
 
 carriages. 
 
 heat 
 
 c. m. 
 
 c. 
 
 m. 
 
 c. 
 
 m. 
 
 c. 
 
 m. 
 
 11 3 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 20 
 
 5 
 
 22 1 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 34 
 
 3 
 
 16 8 
 
 14 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 35 
 
 3 
 
 15 9 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 32 
 
 6 
 
 That dividing the State by the Blue Ridge, and placing the taxation of each portion 
 in contrast with the other, the following results would be found : 
 
 Western District, 
 Eastern do. 
 
 Lands and 
 
 Slaves. 
 
 Horses and 
 
 lots. 
 
 
 carriages. 
 
 c. m. 
 
 c. m. 
 
 c. m. 
 
 16 8.^ 
 
 4 2i 
 
 6 5i 
 
 16 3| 
 
 13 3| 
 
 4 3h 
 
 TotaL 
 
 c. m. 
 27 6^ 
 34 Oh 
 
 This exhibition, he said, would shew that the labour of the West is higher taxed 
 than that of the East, in relation to two out of three of the subjects of taxation, and 
 differs inconsiderably in the amount of tax paid per head in the different quarters of 
 the State. That difference, he said, was owing to the apparently diminished amount 
 paid on land by the extreme Western district, and which he thought might be fully 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 661 
 
 and satisfactorily accounted for, by reference to present and past systems of taxation, 
 and their influence on tJiat part of the Common n-ealth. 
 
 Before the year 1~17. the tax on land was assessed upon an arbitrarily assumed 
 average of the vaiae in the several districts of the State. By the operation of this 
 rale the inferior lands of the West were taxed beyond any just regard to their annual 
 product, whether from cultivation or appreciation in the market, and the consequence 
 has been, that a vast quantity of the Western lands have become forfeited for the non- 
 payment of taxes, and are now vested in the President and Directors of the Literary 
 Fund. ISo means, he said, now offered for ascertainincp the number of acres which 
 had been trnsferred by this process from the assessment lists, or of the amount of taxes 
 and damages now due, or annusdly accruing, on lands so situated, or of the amount 
 annually paid into the treasury for the redemption of lands in this condition. Mr. S. 
 said, that an attempt to investigate tliis subject at the Auditor's office had furnished 
 him with a statement of the forfeited lands in one of the Western counties only. From 
 this statement it appeared, that there was forfeited to the Literary Fund, in the county 
 of Cabell, 3.1.30,552 acres, charged -svitli taxes and damages, amounting in the year 
 1>'14, to 8 19,975. He said this singular expose was a melancholy commentary on our 
 land laws of 17S9; under the operation of which, land to nearly double the area of the 
 coimty, while Logan was yst a part of it, had been sold by the Commonwealth, and 
 the evil was daily increasing by new grants from the land office. 
 
 Mr. S. remarked that he had, however, attempted to ascertain what ought to be the 
 probable product of the land tax in the county of Cabell, under a system which as- 
 sessed the" tax upon the land, and not upon the pretended titles which the Common- 
 wealth was daih' fumisliing. He found the area of that county to be 1,033 square 
 miles, equal to 661,120 acres; 154,003 acres only of which were now to be found on 
 the land lists for taxation, and which produced a revenue of S'354. 
 
 Mr. S. then entered into a calculation, shewing, that If the residue of the land 
 actually found in that county, amounting to 507,117 acres, was restored to the tax 
 lists, and charged at the same rate with that already on the Commissioners' books, it 
 would augment the land tax of the coimty of Cabell 1.519 — giving an amount of re- 
 venue from land in that county, beyond the sura derived from the same source, in 
 the large populous countv of Accomac. to whose representative the Convention had 
 been indebted for so much statistical information — information, which however had 
 unfortunatelv tended to mislead the public mind, as it no where furnished the amount 
 paid in the different quarters of the State, in proportion to the labour employed in 
 each — a rule of contribution as generally true, and liable to as few exceptions, as the 
 republican principle, unquestioned by the friends of representative Government from 
 the days of John Locke, to the present time, that the people for whose benefit all Gov- 
 ernments are instituted, hold in themselves the sovereign power, and in equal portions 
 as relates to each other. 
 
 Mr. S. remarked, that he did not intend to follow into detail, the questions of reve- 
 nue presented by that gentleman ; but that he would take occasion to remind him, 
 that if the Eastern peninsula of Virginia contributed more to the treasury than some 
 of the Western counties, it was more than indemnified in its proportion of the expen- 
 diture for the support of the Judiciary. Mr. S. said, that he was satisfied that when- 
 ever the paternal care of the Government should give quiet and repose to the West- 
 ern settlers, they would not be found deficient in contributions, either to the treasury 
 or to the defence of the country. 
 
 Mr. S. said, that on examining the relative merits of the propositions before the 
 Convention, it might not be unprofitable to look into some of tliose which had been 
 heretofore pressed upon its consideration. It would be recollected, that Eastern gen- 
 tlemen had taken their stand upon a proposition vrhich combined white population 
 and taxation as the basis of Representation. He said, that he was accustomed to re- 
 gard himself as not understanding that, of the results of which he was ignorant. He 
 had. therefore, put into requisition his own arithmetical skill, aided by two gentlemen 
 particularly versed in calculations — one of tlaem furnished him with tlie combinations, 
 as follows : 
 
 Western District, - - - - 24 
 
 Vallev District, - - - - 22 
 
 Midland, 39 
 
 Tide-water, ----- 35 
 In a House of Delegates composed of one hundred and twenty members. 
 
 In this computation, men and dollars were regarded as units of the same value, pro- 
 ducing about seventy-seven Delegates from the white population, and forty-three from 
 the taxed property. Its application to the extreme Western and Ea.stern districts, 
 was found to place the inhabitants of each in the following relations to the other : In 
 the Western district, 7,557 white persons, paying taxes to the amount of 1,407 dollars, 
 would be entitled to one Delegate, wliile in the Eastern district, 4,700 white inhabi- 
 tants, paying 4,126 dollars, would be entitled to the same representation. By this po- 
 
662 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 litical arithmetic, an excess in taxation of 2,719 dollars, was to be compensated, by an 
 excess in persons, equal to 2,857, which balances at the rate of 95 cents per head. 
 This combination, although it rated our Western citizens as five franc pieces, and 
 their Eastern brethren as Louis d'ors, was found more favorable to Western equality 
 than was admissible by the principles of combination, avowed and explained by the au- 
 thors of that notable project. Their principles of combination required, that to ascer- 
 tain the number of Delegates to which any particular district would be entitled, it was 
 first necessary to find what number would be given by white population ; and, second- 
 ly, what number the tax paid by the district would entitle it to. The comlsined re- 
 sults divided, or averaged, was then assumed as the proper representation. The ap- 
 plication of the rule thus modified, was found to give to the 
 
 Western District, - - - - 21 
 
 Valley, .... 21 
 
 Midland, .... 41 
 
 Eastern, - - - - 37 
 
 120 
 
 Following out the results of this scheme, Mr. S. said, it would have required eight 
 thousand, six hundred and thirty-seven of the white population of the "West, contri- 
 buting to the treasury $ 1,608, to send one delegate, while in the Eastern district, 
 four thousand, eight hundred and ten persons, paying $ 3,G65, would have been enti- 
 tled to equal Representation. Pursuing the inquiry, he said, that it was found, that 
 the political rights of four thousand, one hundred and sixty-five persons, wDuld be sa- 
 crificed, in each delegate district of the West, to $ 2,295 excess of taxation, in each 
 delegate district of the East. In thvis comparing the measure of political rights, in 
 the two extreme districts of the State, he said, it was found, that four thousand, 
 one hundred and sixty-five white persons in the West, were required to surrender all 
 their rights in the Government on the payment of $ 2,295, beyond the average taxa- 
 tion by an Eastern district. By this scale for ascertaining the relative political weight 
 of men and money, it was found, that the highest attributes of men, the dearest im- 
 munities of freemen, v.^ere to be rated at fifty-five cents per head. This political mo- 
 rality and equality, he said, had been supported by the votes of nearly one-half of the 
 Convention, but happily for the liberties of the country, it had not secured a majority. 
 The next scheme for the security of property, as its friends were pleased to denomi- 
 nate it, but which to his mind, looked to power and power alone, was the proposition 
 of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) to apportion the Senate to taxation 
 alone — a proposition, which if adopted, would have given in that body, equal politi- 
 cal weight to eighteen thousand, four hundred inhabitants of the lowlands, with 
 ninety thousand, six hundred and ninety-two inhabitants of the Western district; and 
 even this scheme, he said, had been rejected by but a small majority. Mr. S. then 
 entered into a comparison of the relative merits of the resolution under consideration, 
 agreed to in Committee of the Whole, and those submitted by the gentleman from 
 Frederick, (Mr. Cooke.) which had for their object, a House of Delegates, founded 
 on white population, and a Senate based on Federal numbers^ He said, that he had 
 used throughout in his computations of the present population of the Commonwealth, 
 the tables furnished by the Auditor ; he did not maintain their entire accuracy, but 
 believed they approximated the truth sufficiently near for general purposes of enquiry 
 and comparison. 
 
 According to those tables, he said, the apportionment of a House of Delegates of 
 one hundred and twenty-eight members ought to give to the 
 
 Western District 34 
 Valley, 26 
 Midland, 37 
 Eastern, 31 
 The proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon,) concurred in by 
 the Committee of the Whole, gave as the present apportionment in a House of one 
 hundred and twenty-seven memibers, the following proportions : 
 
 Western District, 29 
 Valley, 24" 
 Midland, 40 
 Eastern, 34 
 Placing a majority in the hands of the country east of the Blue Ridge, of twenty-one, 
 while the basis of white population, denied to that country a majority larger than 
 eight. It proposed a Senate of thirty-two members, distributing thirteen West of the 
 Blue Ridge, and nineteen East of that range of mountains— while the present appor- 
 tionment of that body, enlarging it to thirty-two members, gives a Representation 
 equal to twelve and twenty. He said, that contrasting this scheme with the results 
 of white population in the House of Delegates, and the present condition of the Se- 
 nate, it sacrifices thirteen delegates in the West, and yields one additional Senator to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION'. 
 
 663 
 
 that district. Should the future Senate be composed with reference to Federal num- 
 bers, the relative apportionment of that body, he said, would undergo no sensible 
 change, as he had found upon computation that the West would be entitled to eleven 
 and a quarter Senators, in the present state of the population. jSIt. S. proceeded to 
 remark upon the effect of the proposed apportionments, upon the district West of the 
 AUeffhany mountains. That country, he said, was divided into twentv-six counties, 
 now sending fifty-two delegates, to a House composed of two hundred and fourteen 
 members, equal to thirty-one in a House composed of one hundred and twenty-eight 
 mumbers; that it now sent four and a half Senators, nearly equal to six in a Senate of 
 thirty-two — and what were the inducements, he asked, for gentlemen representing 
 that country, to reduce its present influence in the House of Delegates, without any 
 acquisition in the Senate; a sacrifice not called for, in support of any principle con- 
 nected with R.epreseatative Government, but on the contrary avowedly supported on 
 the ground, that it was founded on no principle whatever, except tiie equitable no- 
 tions of its author .' If, said he, the Western delegation can be justified, in accepting 
 a present apportionment, so unequal and unjust, in relation to their constituents, that 
 justification must be found in the salutary operations of a future rule of apportion- 
 ment. The gentleman from Albemarie, he said, had given them none to appeal to : 
 that presented by the gentleman from ZS'orthampton , (Mr. Upshur,) as it stands now 
 amended by the Committee of the "Whole, was alone pressed upon the acceptance of 
 the West, by either of tiie gentlemen. 
 
 He said, it came to us recommended by the votes and advice of the most revered 
 and respected members of the House. It was urged as a measure of concihation and 
 compromise, as one that called for equal concession of the different grounds sustained 
 here; that while one side had contended for taxation and populafion combined, or 
 Federal numbers as its equivalent, the other had insisted on white population alone 
 as the true basis of Government : That taking those t wo as the extreme rules, their 
 combination, and the average of both, ought to be occupied as the middle ground : 
 That here equal, and only equal sacrifices of opinion, were made on the altar of concords 
 So strong was this appeal, so ably was it enforced by the highest reasoning powers of 
 this country, that he said he had been for some time in deliberation as to the vote 
 wliich he ought to give. An examination of the whole ground, and a comparison of 
 the concessions required, had been necessary to convince liim of the unequal, and 
 consequently unjust abandonment, which was asked at his hands. 
 
 The principle atHrmed on one side was, that the people were capable of self-go- 
 vernment, and ought to participate equally in its formation, and that a majority ought 
 to give the direction of its action. On the other side it was contended that a portion 
 of the people ought to hold an increased influence in the formation and direction of 
 Government, either in proportion to the taxes paid by the different quarters of the 
 State, or to the number of slaves held in the different portions of the Commonwealth, 
 by the application of which rule a minority of the people from the adventitious cir- 
 cumstances of wealth or situation, might, and probably would, have the Government 
 in their hands, and exercise it independent of, and uncontrouled by, the majority. 
 He denied, that the proposed accommodation attained middle ground, and insisted, 
 that it only increased the numbers of the minority to whom it proposed to confide the 
 Government, and illustrated the effects of the proposed compromise of the question 
 of future apportionments by supposing three hundred thousand free white citizens to 
 reside West of the Blue Ridge, and two hundred thousand East of that Ridge. He 
 said, the slave population in the East exceeded that of the West, three hundred and 
 forty-six thousand, seven hundred and seventy-two, and if three-tenths were intro- 
 duced into the body politic, it would give an increase of political units to the East of 
 one hundred and four thousand; with the aid of which, two Eastern men would 
 balance three Western men, as long as their relative state of the population remained^ 
 and this pernicious element of power continued. Its influence would not, he said, be 
 limited to the controul of the action of the majority, when that action might be at 
 variance with the interests or Vv'ishes of the minority^ but would place the entire law- 
 making power in the hands of the minority, to be exercised independent of the ma- 
 jority, and uncontrouled by tlieir unanimous wishes and entire interests. If it was 
 determined to perpetuate power in lowland hands, and to balance three of his con- 
 stituents, with two of the favoured district, it was of but little consequence on what 
 pretext the injurious and degrading pwlicy was made to rest : no gilding could induce 
 lum to swallow the pill; it must produce nausea in whatever combination it may be 
 given — and cannot long be retained by those upon whom you force it. 
 
 W^ith this view of the subject, he said, he never could consent to the proposed 
 measure of compromise ; he never could aflirm a principle that denied to the people 
 of Virginia the capacity of self-crovernment, and from which resulted tlie repubhcan 
 rule, tliat the interests of society could onl}-- be confided to a majority of its members. 
 He thought, tliat it was fully as objectionable to give one part of tlie State increased po- 
 litical power over another, by reason of its wealth, as it would be to give tlie inliabi- 
 
664 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tants of the same county uneqal portions of political power in consequence of the 
 disparity of their fortunes. On turning his mind to what would be an equal conces- 
 sion by the rival parties, he called to his recollection what had been affirmed by dis- 
 tinguished gentlemen in the past debate, (Mr. Giles and Mr. P. P. Barbour.) By those 
 gentlemen the right of the majority, to give the direction of the Government, was 
 defended : they then only contended, that the rights of the minority ought to be re- 
 spected in all just Governments, and that a sufficient portion of political power ought 
 to be exercised by the minority, to stay the action of the majority, when not directed 
 by the interest of all — A rule so just in itself, so salutary in practice, readily met with 
 his assent : he was desirous of carrying it into effect by restrictions on the Legislative 
 powers of the Government. He had supposed, that restraining clauses would as amply 
 protect property in all its various relations, as the freedom of religion ; the freedom of 
 the press; and the great shield of civil liberty, the writ of habeas corpus ; but so earnest, 
 and so pervading seemed the fears of the Eastern gentlemen, that he had at length come 
 to the conclusion of giving them security on their own principles of controuling power 
 by power. Upon this hypothesis, he had consented to give in connection with the 
 House of Delegates flowing from white population, a Senate based on Federal num- 
 bers. In doing so, he had satisfied himself that the fears of the East, whether real or 
 imaginary, must be buried in a branch of the Government flowing in an eminent de- 
 gree directly from themselves, charged with their peculiar interests and safety, and 
 immediately responsible to Eastern constituents. This principle of security and of 
 compromise had the further recommendation of calling into existence the Legislative 
 part of the Government from two rival elements. To the people it gave the popular 
 branch ; to the slave-holders it gave the supervising and controuling body — it equally 
 denied the powers of the Government to numbers alone, or to the wealth of the 
 country in the hands of its holders. Although it was objected with much force, that 
 this compromise of interests would enable the minority, to paralize the will of the 
 majority, yet, it was unquestionably more in unison with the equal rights of all, that 
 the action of the majority should be stayed, when the consent of the minority should 
 be denied, than commit the Government to a minority of the people, with the power 
 of applying its action to all persons, and all things, regardless of the interests, the 
 feelings, or the wishes of the majority. 
 
 If protection is really the object of Eastern gentlemen, they will not hesitate to 
 accept a Senate so formed — its members returning to Eastern constituents, will pos- 
 sess their confidence in the degree in which Eastern interests have been the objects 
 of their care. The influence claimed for the slave property will be doubled in this 
 branch of the Legislature — one hundred thousand white persons of the East, with 
 their political influence increased in the Senate, by three-fifths of the slaves, may re- 
 ject bills which unite in their favour three hundred thousand of the white population 
 of the West. 
 
 Should this division of the power of Legislation be rejected, can the people of 
 Lower Virginia suppose — can the world believe, that the protection of property has 
 been the object sought for here Will not the disguise be thrown off? Will not this 
 question shew the most determined effort ever made in the American States, to ren- 
 der the many the vassals of the few ? 
 
 For the safety of the State he hoped this lust of power would be abandoned, and a 
 spirit of compromise and conciliation really adopted — a compromise, which giving to 
 one branch of the Legislature, the principles contended for on one side, embodies in 
 the other, the elements attempted to be infused throughout. 
 
 To this spirit of compromise, he yielded his full assent, not because the safety of 
 any part of the country required it — not because the just principles of Representative 
 Government demanded it; but as the price of concord, harmony, and the future tran- 
 quillity of the State. 
 
 Beyond this, he could not go; other or further sacrifices of the just rights of his 
 constituents he could not make. If it should be the pleasure of gentlemen to force 
 upon them the cruel and galling yoke with which they were threatened, he took 
 leave to assure them, that the polls would show its indignant rejection. 
 
 If the rights of the Western people are now to be denied to them, he would do no 
 act to bar their future claims to an equal participation in the Government. He had 
 fully weighed the subject, and was prepared to await the growing influence of 
 wealth, numbers, and intelligence in the West, and a returning sense of justice and 
 equality in the East, rather than take a Constitution affording but a meagre and in- 
 adequate relief, and which might hereafter be holden to release all that is not now ob- 
 tained. He begged gentlemen to consider, that a majority in Convention represen- 
 ted a minority of the people, and how extremely idle and futile it must be, to offer a 
 Constitution for acceptance, which could not be received by those who are seeking 
 reform without placing themselves in colonial inferiority, if not in a state of vas- 
 salage : How vain it was for a Government like ours, to offer, on the demand of re- 
 form, less than the people would accept. They will not be appeased by such an illu- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 665 
 
 sory answer to their claims, they will but reiterate their demands in language which 
 must be heard and cannot be disobeyed. 
 
 He asked, if the protection now oftered in the Senate should be refused, will not 
 even the people of Eastern Virginia perceive that it is the lust of power, and not the 
 protection of property, for which the rights of their fellow-citizens of the West have 
 been sacrificed. Such discovery, he thought, must unquestionably follow the present 
 artificial and groundless excitement, and bring with it that calm sense of justice, 
 which will secure to the people of every part of the Commonwealth, tlieir equal and 
 unalienable rights. 
 
 If, however, these anticipations should not be realized, and the cold-hearted and 
 cruel policy should prevail, which holds the Western Virginians unsafe depositories 
 of equal portions of the political power of the Commonwealth, they may, and I trust, 
 will submit as men who know their duties to their country, although they may feel 
 most sensibly its injustice. 
 
 He said, it had been the pride of the men of the mountains to witness the metro- 
 politan honors of the lowlands. They have contributed freely from a common treasury 
 to the enlargement and embellishment of the Eastern towns — for all the public works 
 of the East, they have voted freely- — they have regarded the genius and talents of 
 Eastern men, as shedding equal glory and renown on every part of the Common- 
 wealth. But what must be their future feelings, under the deprivations of poUtical 
 rights with which the}^ are now threatened ! 
 
 He begged gentlemen to pause before they severed those cords of affection, which 
 had so long and so strongly bound the people of the West to those of the East. 
 
 Mr. Scott now moved that the present subject be laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge enquired for the reasons in favour of such a measure. 
 
 Mr. Scott replied, that no respectable majority could be obtained for the present 
 plan, and that such a majority could be obtained for that of Messrs. Gordon and Up- 
 shur's. 
 
 Mr. Powell remonstrated against so unprecedented a course, as that the avowed 
 enemy of a proposition should lay it upon the table, for the sake of palming upon the 
 consideration of the House, against the wishes of its friends, a proposition to which 
 he was an open enemy. 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, he should vote in favour of Mr. Scott's motion. He should not 
 change his vote upon the subject of the compromise. He thought the Convention 
 had had experience enough to see that the discussion of this white basis could only 
 have a tendency to protract its deliberations to no end. He should vote to lay it upon 
 the table, and take up what Vv^as a practical scheme. He saw plainly that the present 
 discussion would be interminable. If the Convention were to agree on any Consti- 
 tution at all, the period allotted for that work by law, was very short. The subject 
 had already been discussed for two months, and why should more time be wasted 
 upon its discussion? 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he v.'^as now the more disposed to proceed. The gentleman 
 from Albemarle is for laying this subject upon the table, and thus escaping any direct 
 vote upon the question of a white basis in the House of Delegates. The ayes and 
 noes would never be recorded, and the votes of members forever concealed. He de- 
 manded the ayes and noes on the present motion. They were ordered accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that if this motion should succeed, and the gentleman should call 
 up the proposition of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) against the will of 
 the mover, he should vote against that proposition. 
 
 Mr. Gordon disavowed all design of concealing from his constituents or from the 
 world, any vote he should give, or any thought he entertained on the subjects before 
 the Convention. 
 
 Mr, Doddridge said, that that gentleman was one of the last whom he should sus- 
 pect of such a purpose, but such would nevertheless be the effect. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, in reply to Mr. Powell, that if the course was unprecedented, or un- 
 parliamentary, he had learned it from the example of the gentleman from Loudoun, 
 (Mr. Mercer.) who had pursued such a course toward propositions which he had 
 sought to consider against the wishes of all their friends, and had consumed two whole 
 days in the attempt to force a vote upon them. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he wished the gentleman would be guided by his example in 
 some other respects : as to this, he was in an error : what he (Mr. M.) had endea- 
 voured to procure was not the vote on any one proposition against the will of its 
 friends, but on two different propositions combined. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, what his friend from Fauquier probably alluded to was the motion 
 of Mr. JMercer to pass over the proposition of INIr. Upshur, when it had first been 
 moved in Committee of the Whole ; which motion was equivdent to laying it on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. Mercer replied, it was one thing to call up a proposition icith the consent of its 
 mover, and quite another to call it up against that consent. He had had the consent 
 
 34 
 
666 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 of Mr. Upshur before he made his motion. He had called up the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Goochland, (Mr. Pleasants,) out of compliment to that gentleman, 
 whom he considered as prevented by motives of delicacy from making the motion 
 himself. It was altogether from respect to the gentleman from Goochland he had 
 done so, and because he thought the critical moment had arrived for its adoption. 
 
 Mr. Pleasants said, he could not doubt the gentleman had been actuated by the 
 motives he now professed ; but he had thought at the time that before the gentleman 
 offered his (Mr. P's) amendment, he might have asked his consent : the more par- 
 ticularly as the gentleman had two or three days before in a private interview, taken 
 great pains indeed to convince him it was impossible it could pass, and had told him 
 that the Chief Justice himself would vote against it. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he had not asked the gentleman from Goochland, because he 
 could not liave given his consent to have his amendment moved by another without 
 the same breach of delicacy as would have attended the motion, if made by himself. 
 As to the fate of the resolution when the gentleman first moved it, he was not pre- 
 pared to vote for it. He afterwards learned it might get forty-eight votes. He was 
 afterwards informed by the Chief Justice himself, in the presence of the whole Con- 
 vention, that he would vote for it. He had laboured hard to effect a compromise, and 
 had devoted several days to that effect: if it should finally prove abortive, he should 
 still look back upon those endeavours with heartfelt pleasure. 
 
 The question was now put on the motion of Mr. Scott to lay the first resolution of 
 the Legislative Committee on the table, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax. Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Ptlason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 50. 
 
 JVoes — Prfessrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, JNaylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, 
 George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart and Thompson — 46. 
 
 Mr. Scott now moved to take up Mr. Cooke's amendment. 
 
 Mr. Mercer asked the ayes and noes on that motion, which were ordered accord- 
 ingly. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, if the amendment was taken up at this time, it would be utterly 
 against his wishes. 
 
 Mr. Sunnners said, here Avas a proposition, which had been offered at first in Con- 
 vention, and by them had been referred to the Committee of the Whole ; had not been 
 considered by that Committee, nor reported by them to the House, and while on the 
 other hand there was a proposition which had been referred to the same Committee 
 of the Whole: hadheen considered there; had been reported with an amendment 
 to the House ; and which on every ground of fairness ought first to claim the notice 
 of the Convention, and yet the former was now to be forced upon the House, con- 
 trary to the avowed wish of its mover, and of all its friends. Why was this ? What 
 had brought this bantling of the West into such great and such sudden favour with 
 its worst and bitterest foes.' Why did they seize upon it and compel the Convention 
 to take it up Why was it thrust on those who were desirous to reject it ? Could the 
 gentlemen suppose that any votes were to be gained or lost by taking it up now ? He 
 trusted it would be left to slumber in quiet in the arms of its parent. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he could very readily answer the gentleman's enquiry why this 
 bantling was now to be brought forth : the purpose was this : that it might be killed. 
 
 Mr. Scott denied the imputation of unfairness. Though this bantling had not been 
 taken up in Committee of the Whole, its twin brother had been, and voted down. 
 If the gentlemen wished to amend this, the field was open. Where was the un- 
 fairness 
 
 The question on considering, at this time, the proposition of Mr. Cooke was then 
 put, and decided by ayes and noes as follows: 
 
 Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of 
 Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes. 
 and Perrin — 46. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 667 
 
 jVbe^— Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, John- 
 son, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Venable, iVIadison, Mercer, Fitz- 
 hugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Offlesby,' Duncan, Laidley, Smnmers, See, Doddridge, 
 -Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, "Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Cabell, Stuart, Bayly and Upshur— 50. 
 
 So the House refused to take up Mr. Cooke's amendment. 
 
 Mr. Scott now offered to take up the proposition of Mr. Upshur as amended which 
 ■was agreed to. 
 
 It was then read as follows : 
 
 " 1. Resolved, That the representation in the Senate and House of Delegates of 
 Virginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 There shall be thirteen Senators west of the Blue Ridge of Mountains, and nine- 
 teen east of those Mountains. There shall be in the House of Delegates, one hun- 
 dred and twenty-seven members, of whom twenty-nine shall be elected from the dis- 
 trict west of the Alleghany Mountains ; twenty-four from the Valley between the Al- 
 leghany and Blue Ridge ; forty from the Blue Ridge to the head of Tide-water, and. 
 tliirty-four thence below. 
 
 "2. Resolved, That the Legislature shall re-arrange the representation in both 
 Houses of the General Assembly, onee in every years, upon a fair average 
 
 of the following ratios, to wit : 
 First, of white population : 
 
 " Secoiid, of Federal numbers : 
 
 "Provided, That the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed , 
 nor the number of the Senate, ." 
 
 Mr. Powell now moved as an amendment, that all afler the word "Resolved," be 
 stricken out, and the following be inserted in lieu thereof, viz : " That in the appor- 
 tionment of representation in^the House of Delegates, regard should be had to the 
 white population exclusively." 
 
 Mr. Powell said, his object was to give an opportunity for recording the vote on 
 that proposition distinctly, and he therefore demanded the ayes and noes. They were 
 erdered by the House. 
 
 Mr Gordon said, that while his opinions remained unchanged as to the principle 
 en which representation ought to be based, yet his own proposition had been offered 
 as a compromise, and he was reluctantly compelled, since gentlemen would force a 
 vote on the present question in its naked form, to vote against it and in favour of his 
 own : though if at liberty to follow his own feelings and wishes, he should certainly 
 vote for a white basis alone. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then called and recorded as follows : 
 
 jlyes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Os- 
 borne, Cooke, jPowell, Griggs, iSIason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 dleton, George, M jNIillan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart and Thomp- 
 son — 4(5. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, ^ladison, Stanard, Hollada}", P»,oane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, 
 Pr^ntis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, iMartin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 50. 
 
 So the amendment of jNIr. Powell was rejected, (and the question of the W'hite 
 basis settled by a distinct vote in the negative.) 
 
 The question now recurring on the proposition of Messrs. Gordon and Upshur, 
 
 Mr. Gordon moved, that the two parts of the proposition be divided, and the ques- 
 tion first put on the first portion of it : it was so divided accordingly, and the question 
 being first put on agreeing to the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That the representation in the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 There shall be thirteen Senators west of the Blue Ridge of Mountains, and nine- 
 teen east of those Mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates, one hundred and twenty-seven mem- 
 bers, of whom twenty-nine shall be elected from the district west of the Alleghany 
 Mountain ; twenty-four from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge ; and 
 forty from the Blue Ridge to the head of Tide-water; and thirty-four thence below." 
 
 It was decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
668 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin. — 50. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffraan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Os- 
 borne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 dleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart and 
 Thompson — 46. 
 
 The question was then put on the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall re-arrange the representation in both Houses 
 of the General Assembly, once in every J^^rs, upon a fair average of the fol- 
 
 lowing ratios, to wit: 
 
 *' First, white population : 
 Second, Federal numbers : 
 
 " Provided, That the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed , 
 nor the number of the Senate, ." 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he should vote against the scheme with the view of substituting 
 another plan to equalize the representation, should the increase of population be such 
 as to justify it. He should propose some change in the numbers and proportions of 
 the representation from the several divisions of the State. His scheme was bottomed 
 on principles which he could not give up ; but he again assured gentlemen that he 
 should be in a great degree regardless of the details. 
 
 Mr. Leigh then presented to the House the following, v/hich he accompanied with 
 explanatory remarks that would be unintelligible if reported separately. 
 
 " That the House of Delegates shall consist of one hundred and thirty-nine mem- 
 bers, and the representation therein shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " The twenty-six counties lying west of the Alleghany, shall have thirty-two 
 Delegates. 
 
 " The fourteen counties lying between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge, shall have 
 twenty-four Delegates. 
 
 " The twenty-nine counties lying east of the Blue Ridge and above Tide-water, 
 shall have forty-five Delegates. 
 
 ^ " And the thirty-six counties and four towns lying on Tide-water, shall have thirty- 
 eight Delegates. 
 
 " No more new counties shall ever be formed of the country lying east of the 
 Blue Ridge ; but the Legislature may in its discretion, from time to time, a majority 
 of the whole number of both Houses concurring, whensoever the increase of the po- 
 pulation of the country west of the Blue Ridge, and the more convenient adminis- 
 tration of justice and police shall require, form new counties not exceeding ten, out 
 of the territory lying west of the Blue Ridge ; and whenever such new county shall 
 be formed, an additional Delegate shall be allowed to the country west of the Blue 
 Ridge. 
 
 " And the Legislature having respect to the relative state of population of the re- 
 spective counties, cities, towns, and election districts, and a majority of the whole 
 number of both Houses concurring, may, at any time, allow one additional Delegate 
 to any county, city, town, or election district, now existing, or to be formed, and to 
 which only one Delegate shall in the first instance be allowed ; so that not more than 
 two Delegates shall ever be allowed to any county, city, or election district; and so 
 that the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed one hundred and sixty 
 members." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 669 
 
 6 Counties, 2 each, 
 20 do. 1 each, 
 
 Brooke, 
 
 Cabell, 
 
 Giles, 
 
 Grayson, 
 
 Greenbrier, 
 
 Harrison, 
 
 Kanawha, 
 
 Lee, 
 
 Lewis, 
 
 Logan, 
 
 Mason, 
 
 Monongalia, 
 
 Monroe, 
 
 Montgomery, 
 
 Nicholas, 
 
 Ohio, 
 
 Pocahontas, 
 
 Preston, 
 
 Randolph, 
 
 Russell, 
 
 Scott, 
 
 Tazewell, 
 
 Tyler, 
 
 Washington, - - 
 
 Wood, 
 
 Wythe, 
 
 32 
 
 4 Counties, 1 each, > 
 2 each, 5 
 
 10 do. 
 
 Alleghany, 
 
 Bath, 
 
 Berkeley, 
 
 Hampshire, 
 
 Hardy, 
 
 Morgan, 
 
 Pendleton, 
 
 Rockbridge, 
 
 Augusta, 
 
 Botetourt, 
 
 Jefferson, 
 
 Rockingham, 
 
 Frederick, 
 
 Shenandoah, 
 
 24 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 
 24 
 
 33 
 
670 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 20 Counties, 3 Towns, 1 each, 
 5 Counties, 2 each, 
 
 11 Counties, and 1 Town, dis- 
 tricted for 5. 
 
 4 
 40 
 
 Essex, - - 1 
 
 Fairfax, - - 1 
 
 Gloucester, - - 1 
 
 Greensville, - - 1 
 
 Hanover, - - 1 
 
 Henrico, - - 1 
 
 Isle of Wight, - - 1 
 
 King & Queen, - - 1 
 
 King William, - - 1 
 
 Nansemond, - - 1 
 
 New Kent, - - 1 
 
 Northampton, - - 1 
 
 Northumberland, - - 1 
 
 Princess Anne, - - 1 
 
 Prince George, - - 1 
 
 Prince William, - - 1 
 
 Spottsylvania, - - 2 
 
 Southampton, - - 1 
 
 Stafford, - - 1 
 
 Surry, - - 1 
 
 Sussex, - - 1 
 
 Richmond City, - - 1 
 
 Petersburg, - - 1 
 
 Norfolk Borough, - » 1 
 
 Accomack, - - 2 
 
 Caroline, - ■ - 2 
 
 Chesterfield, - - 2 
 
 Norfolk County, - - 2 
 
 Lancaster and Richmond, - 1 
 
 Westmoreland and King George, 1 
 
 Middlesex and Matthews, - 1 
 Elizabeth City, York, Warwick 
 
 and Williamsburg, - 1 
 
 Charles City and James City, 1 
 
 38 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he wished to bring this question up, not for adjustment : no : all 
 hope of that was at an end : after the temper which had been exhibited, it was mani- 
 fest that both sides were unwilling to agree upon any compromise. When a propo- 
 sition in that character was offered to the gentlemen from the West, they rejected it, 
 he was about to say, with disdain. He did not, of course, speak of the motives of 
 gentlemen, but only of their course, though he thought this very unjust : but he 
 should not enter into the question which appeared indeed to be interminable, and 
 which if pressed to its extremes threatened to divide the State. Mr. L. said, that if 
 sinking that question entirely, if it were possible to sink it, the proposition he now 
 offered should be acceptable to the West, and they would go with him for the promo- 
 tion of perpetual harmony by destroying forever the principle and cause of discord 
 between them, he was prepared to abide by it. But if this should be rejected by 
 them with unanimity, and they persisted in standing firm on what they called their 
 strict rights, all motives for compromise would be gone, and sorry, heartily sorry was 
 he to add. that every hope of real and substantial union with them would be gone too. 
 
 Earnest, zealous and sincere as they were, they might rest assured that with equal 
 honesty, sincerity and perseverance he, for one, should adhere to what he regarded as 
 essential to the existence of the country : For, property was necessary to existence. 
 To live as a freeman was indeed a great good : but in order to live in freedom, it was 
 necessary to live ; and in order to live, it was necessary to have property, and to have 
 it at a man's own disposal. He cared not whether they were few or many, whether 
 it was a monarch or his fellow-citizens, he was equally unwilling that any should 
 have the disposal of his property. He was anxious, most anxious, if possible, to sink 
 the question forever. He offered what in his own judgment, (he was going to say 
 
 13 Counties, 1 each, ) 
 16 do. 2 each, 5 
 
 Ameha, - - 1 
 
 Amherst, - - 1 
 
 Charlotte, - - 2 
 
 Cumberland, - - 1 
 
 Dinwiddle, - - 2 
 
 Fluvanna, - - 1 
 
 Franklin, - - 2 
 
 Goochland, - - 1 
 
 Henry, - - 1 
 
 Louisa, - - 2 
 
 Lunenburg, - - 1 
 
 Madison, - - 1 
 
 Nelson, - - 1 
 
 Nottoway, - - 1 
 
 Orange, - - 2 
 
 Patrick, - - 1 
 
 Powhatan, - - 1 
 
 Prince Edward, - - 1 
 
 Albemarle, - - 2 
 
 Bedford, - - 2 
 
 Brunswick, - ^ - 2 
 
 Buckingham, - - 2 
 
 Campbell, - - 2 
 
 Culpeper, - - 2 
 
 Halifax, - - 2 
 
 Mecklenburg, - - 2 
 
 Pittsylvania, - - 2 
 
 Fauquier, - - 2 
 
 Loudoun, = .= 2 
 
 45 
 38 
 
 83 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION* 
 
 671 
 
 his impartial judgment, but he could not know it to be so) would more contribute to 
 their interest in all respects, than any that had yet been presented to them. It was 
 because he thought so, that he was induced to offer it. He had done his best to 
 shake off the influence of prejudice and of passion, though he knew it to be impossi- 
 ble to do this entirely. He offered this as a compromise. Its merit would be gone 
 if it failed of that end, and all that could possibl}^ recommend it to the acceptance of 
 gentlemen from the south-east part of the State, would be gone too. 
 
 After some conversation as to the proper course to be pursued ; 
 
 Mr. Upshur moved to lay his amendment for the present upon the table. He said 
 he had ofiered it as a compromise, and as likely in its practical operation to be bene- 
 ficial to the Western interest; and it was possible it might yet be accepted by them. 
 It was not at once to be taken for granted, that the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Chesterfield would be preferred to it. As an Eastern Delegate he should prefer hisy 
 or indeed any of those which had been offered to his own : but he was afraid the 
 other might not be adopted, and none other be substituted, and then the State would 
 be left without any scheme of future apportionment at all ; a result he deprecated. It 
 was not probable the West would be satisfied with any Constitution, which deprived 
 them of the benefits of their growth and improvement. Should the question on his 
 amendment be pressed now, he should himself vote against it, but he preferred laying 
 it on the table in reserve. 
 
 Mr. Gordon pressed for a vote on the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that so far as it depended on him, and in this he spoke the 
 mind of all the Western members, he never could consent to accept of that scheme, 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that if the House would agree to end here the discussion which 
 had lately engrossed it, he should ofter as a substitute for the amendment of Mr. Up- 
 shur, the following: 
 
 ^\ Resolved^ That it shall be the duty of the Legislature to cause an assessment to 
 be made in tlie year 1839, or 1840, of all the lands within the Commonwealth sub- 
 ject to taxation ; and, as soon as may be after the year 1840, to re-apportion, through- 
 out the Commonwealth, the representation of the people in both of the Legislative 
 bodies." 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, the principle of this measure was very simple ; and if tlie House 
 should view it as a fair and honorable compromise, he should have no objection to 
 leave the future re-apportionment to the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Upshur said, tliat as the opinions of the West had, he presumed, been correctly 
 stated by the gentleman from Brooke, he Vv'ould now heartily concur in voting his 
 amendment out of the House. 
 
 The question was then taken by ayes and noes ; when it appeared that Mr. Madi- 
 son alone voted in tiie affirmative. 
 
 So the amendment of Mr. Upshur was rejected. 
 
 The printing of Messrs. Leigh's and Cooke's propositions having been ordered, the 
 House adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, December 19, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr, 
 Hoerner of the Roman Catholic Cliurch. 
 
 The question which came up in order from yesterday, was on the adoption of Mr. 
 Upshur's resolution as amended by Mr. Gordon — (in substance, the plan of Mr. Gor- 
 don, nothing of Mr. Upshur's being retained but the word "Resolved;") but the 
 House not being yet full, it was suspended for the present : and the Convention pro- 
 ceeded to the consideration of the sixth resolution of the Legislative Committee, 
 which is in the words following, viz : 
 
 " Resolved, That no person ought to be elected a member of the Senate of this 
 State, who is not at least thirty years of age." 
 
 Mr. Gordon moved to amend the resolution by striking out " thirty," and inserting 
 " twenty-five." 
 
 On this motion, Mr. Chapman demanded the ayes and noes. They were ordered 
 by the House, and being taken, stood as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brod- 
 nax, Dromgoole, Alexander", Goode, Marshall. Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, 
 Harrison, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Claiborne, Urquhart, Rnndolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Henderson, Osborne, Griggs. JNIuson of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Campbell of Washington, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Morjran, Tazewell, Lo}' all, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Saun- 
 ders, Cabell, Stuart, Gordon and Bayly — 15. 
 
672 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 jVbc5— Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Coffman, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Trezvant, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mer- 
 cer, Fitzhugh, Cooke, Powell, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Byars, Garnett, 
 Cloyd, Mathews, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Claytor, Branch, Townes, Mar- 
 tin, Pleasants, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Upshur and 
 Perrin — 51. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. And the resolution as reported was agreed to. 
 
 The House next took up the seventh resolution which is in the following words : 
 
 "Resolved, That no person ought to be elected a member of the House of Delegates 
 of this State, who is not at least twenty-five years of age." 
 
 The question being put without debate, the resolution was agreed to. — Ayes 55. 
 
 The House being now full, on motion of Mr. Fitzhugh, the Convention returned 
 to the " all absorbing question" of the basis of Representation : and the question being 
 substantially on the following plan, (moved by Mr. Gordon as an amendment to Mr. 
 Upshur's by way of substitute), viz: 
 
 " Resolved, That the Representation in the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " There shall be thirteen Senators West of the Blue Ridge of mountains, and nine- 
 teen East of those mountains. 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates, one hundred and twenty-seven mem- 
 bers, of whom, twenty-nine shall be elected from the district West of the Alleghany 
 mountain ; twenty-four from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge ; and 
 forty from the Blue Ridge to the head of tide-water, and thirty-four thence below." 
 
 A question of order arose as to the proper course to be pursued, in order to get at 
 the consideration of the proposition offered yesterday by Mr. Leigh. It could not be 
 moved as an amendment to the proposition of Mr. Gordon by way of substitute, be- 
 cause Mr. Gordon's amendment had yesterday been agreed to by the House and 
 "Could not be stricken out without a vote to reconsider. It could not be added to Mr. 
 Gordon's amendment, because it was inconsistent with it, and contained a different 
 Ulan. And it could not be taken up and considered as an original substantive propo- 
 sition, because a rule of order adopted by the Convention required all such proposi- 
 tions to go first to a Committee and be reported on. 
 
 After some conversation had taken place, and Mr. Stanard had moved to lay the 
 proposition of Mr. Gordon on the table, with a view to rescind the rule above refer- 
 red to, and thus to arrive at the discussion of Mr. Leigh's proposition : 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, he was at a loss to conceive how the friends of Mr. Gordon's 
 g)lan could consent to lay it on the table with a view to consider that of Mr. Leigh, 
 which was obviously more hostile to their views. He then went into a comparison 
 of the operation of the two propositions upon Western interests and came to this con- 
 clusion, that while the plan of Mr. Gordon secured to Eastern Virginia a majority of 
 twenty-one, that of Mr. Leigh gave them a majority of twenty -seven. The first he 
 considered a great inroad on the rights of the Western portion of the State ; but the 
 latter was a still greater. 
 
 Mr. Gordon addressed the Committee as follows: 
 
 Mr. President, — I greatly regret the excitement, either of expression or manner, 
 apparent in this debate. 1 shall endeavour to avoid either, in what I may say. The 
 :proposition I submitted for the consideration of the Convention, was made in the 
 hope of sinking the discussion on the basis of future apportionment of Representa- 
 tion. My own opinion was, and is, that the white population, gave a fair criterion 
 for a just arrangement of power among the several parts of the Commonwealth. We 
 have, however, found the Convention equally divided in opinion; each positive and 
 pertinacious, in opposing any plan of Representation founded in the views of the 
 other. This discussion had greatly agitated our councils, distracted our deliberations, 
 and disturbed the quiet of the country. We had nothing to hope from prolonging it: 
 nor can there now be any other purpose in continuing it, unless to rupture the Con- 
 vention and send us home to a distracted and dissatisfied community, divided by a 
 geographical line, into two great hostile parties. Sir, it was in the hope of healing 
 these divisions, that I ventured to propose to this Convention a plan for the present 
 division of Representative power in the State. 
 
 condition of the Commonwealth, drawn from statistics within my reach. Sir, the 
 proposition which I have submitted, was not guess toork ; much less was it a scheme 
 to give to one part of the Commonwealth a disproportionate and unjust power over the 
 rights and interests of any other. It was proposed in a spirit of conciliation and com- 
 promise, violating no principle deemed correct by myself, and those with whom 1 had 
 thought and acted ; and, above all, in strict regard to what I considered just to every 
 part of the State. 
 
 I made various calculations on the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. ' 6 73 
 
 1 found by calculations on the Census of 1820, the only authentic document of 
 population within our power,, that the present apportionment of Representation in the 
 House of Delegates was greatly unequal throughout the State, and among its seve -al 
 parts: That in a House of Delegates of two hundred and fourteen members, tie 
 twenty-six counties West of the Alleghany mountains, composing the first Weste n 
 district, had fifty-two delegates, when, by 'the white numbers of 1S20, they were en- 
 titled to only forty-seven : That the section of the State, below tide- water, with thirty= 
 six counties and Your towns, had seventy-six delegates, whilst they were entitled to 
 but fifty-nine : That the Valley or second Vv estern district, with fourteen counties and 
 twenty-eight delegates, was entitled to forty-two, and that the middle country from 
 which I come, with twenty-nine counties, had fifty-eight delegates, and was entitled to 
 sixty-six : That the two last mentioned sub-divisions of the State, the Valley and 
 middle sections, had a majority of seven thousand, seven hundred and forty-two 
 white population, of twenty-two thousand, five hundred and sixty-two slaves, and 
 paid of the taxes of 1828. S 17,926 more than the other two, or the extreme West and 
 Eastern divisions : That these two central contiguous districts of country , containing 
 a majority- of whites, a majority of slaves, and paying greatly more than half the re= 
 venue of the State, had a vote in the House of Delegates, as eighty-six is to two hun- 
 dred and fourteen. Sir, the glaring inequality of Representation, has not, and can- 
 not be met by any argument, and challenges universal assent to its injustice. Do 
 gentlemen suppose that I, as one of the Representatives from one of the largest and 
 most populous districts in Virtrinia, both as to white and Federal numbers, was insen- 
 sible of its true interests, or was disposed to abandon them.' I assure gentlemen the 
 proposition I have submitted for their consideration, was not a leap in the dark. My 
 first proposal was to reduce the House of Delegates to one hundred and twenty. (I 
 added seven members to satisfy the wishes of some of the Convention.) I made va- 
 rious estimates on the different propositions for apportionment, suggested to the Con- 
 vention by others, or that presented themselves to my own mind. I found that if 
 taxation alone was the basis of Representation in a House of one hundred and twenty 
 members, the twenty-nine counties composing the first Western district, would have 
 eleven and a half. The second Western or Valley district, seventeen and a half. The 
 first Eastern or Middle district, forty-si.x and a half. The second Eastern or Lower 
 district, forty-four and a half If the Federal number, the first district, twenty; the 
 second, nineteen ; the third, forty-three and a half; and the fourth, thirty-seven and 
 a half. If the combined ratio of numbers and taxation, the first district, nineteen; 
 the second, twenty and three-quarters; the third, forty-two ; the fourth, thirty-eight 
 and a quarter members. On the Federal numbers of the Auditor's estimate of the 
 present population, the first district would have twenty-four ; the second, twenty-one; 
 the third, forty-four ; and the fourth, thirty-eight members. Sir, I made other esti- 
 mates from the Auditor's statement of the taxes of 1628. Dividing the whole amount 
 of taxes or revenue, by the whole number of delegates in our present House of Dele- 
 gates, I found that if all parts of the State paid equally, the average for each member, 
 should be $1,872. I then made a comparative estimate of the taxation and Repre- 
 sentation of each section of the State — I found that the first Western section paid 
 $ 751 per member; the second Western or Valley District, paid S 2.233 per member; 
 the third or middle district. 82,830, and the fourth or second Eastern district, paid 
 $1,684 per member. Sir, I give these estimates in no spirit of reproach to that 
 Western district, for the small contributions to the Treasury, in proportion to their 
 actual Representative power in the Government, but to admonish gentlemen who 
 complain that my proposition does injustice to their country, that they should not for- 
 get, that in Committee of the Whole, forty members of this Convention rose in favour 
 of a proposition to base Representation on taxation alone. Sir, when it is conceded 
 on all hands, that without a spirit of temperance and moderation, no good can result 
 from our deliberations, I ask what injustice my proposition can do to the West.' On 
 the contrary, is it not fair and liberal .^^ It gives to the whole country West of the 
 Blue Ridge, within a very few members of what it would be entitled to upon the pre- 
 sent uncertain estimate of the Auditor of the white population of the State ; and it 
 gives to the Valley all, all it claims for the present on any scheme of Representation, 
 and to the Trans-AUeghany country, three more than it would be entitled to by the 
 Census of 1820, on white population alone. Sir, is not this a fair and liberal estimate 
 for the West.' Does it not give all that it may fairly claim for the present.? What 
 do gentlemen ask : that we should give a rule of future apportionments : without fix- 
 ing the Representation for the present? Can our brethren of the West think it would 
 be right or reasonable in us of the East, who represent a country containing nearly 
 half a milhon of bondsmen, whilst they have, comparatively but few, to return to our 
 constituents the masters of these slaves, without being able to tell them what will be 
 tlie actual state of their Representation in the Legislature ? What will be the actual 
 and relative power of each section of the State in regard to this great and delicate in= 
 terest.' Sir, the people of Virginia would ratify no Constitution, looking to a pro= 
 
 85 
 
674 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 spec five Census, which did not fix the present Representation of its respective dis- 
 tricts. The very anxious suspense and uncertainty on that subject, after the agita- 
 tions whicli have been excited here and elsewhere, would make them reject any Consti- 
 tution you can propose, and content them to live under the present Constitution, une- 
 qual as the distribution of power under it, undoubtedly is. Sir, when I first presen- 
 ted my plan of Representation, I thought it would be acceptable to the "West, be- 
 cause, I was sure, it did them ample justice, and was not subject to be criticised, from 
 containing- in its principles any element peculiarly objectionable to them. In pre- 
 senting it I looked to the rights and interests of the whole State — acknowledging as 
 I always do, my peculiar obligations and duties to my immediate constituents. 1 feel 
 and have felt that their interests will on this occasion be best subserved by looking 
 with an enlarged view to tiie rights and interests of the whole, rather than to a per- 
 petuation of sectional strife, in which they, nor any who love their country, can take 
 delight. "With tiiese views, the proposition was submitted and has been sustained. 
 The first proposition was the result of an estimate of the white population of 1820 — 
 Tnodified from one hundred and twenty members to one hundred and twenty-seven, 
 to accommodate the views and to endeavour to sink the debate on that vexed question. 
 iSiY, one great objection I alwaj^s had to bringing this Federal number or mixed basis 
 under discussion, was an anticipation of tlie heat and unhappiness it would engender ; 
 and a strong objection to fixing it in the Constitution, was, that it would be an ele- 
 ment of faction; a seed of discord; fatal to the permanence of the Constitution. If 
 you do put it in the Constitution, cannot the non-slave-holding part of the State, ex- 
 cite you on this subject whenever they may have a purpose to answer by it — and 
 you may iiave a Missouri question, of perpetual recurrence in the heart of your insti- 
 tutions. Sir, no Constitution you can form, situated as Virginia is, can endure with 
 such a provision in it. 
 
 The non-freeholders and non-slave-owners, who are excluded from the Right of 
 Suflrage, w'ill be the lever to wrench your institutions from such foundations — they 
 will not be insensible to the appeal, that this fair domain of Virginia, was conquered 
 by their fathers in manj^ a battle bravely won — that they established a republican form 
 of Government, leaving its adnfmistration in the hands of the freeholders — that after 
 fifty-fonr years of possession of this exclusive power, they delegated their men of age 
 and wisdom, who met in council to liberalize their institutions and fix the foundations 
 of future Government, but that such had been the influence of long submission to un- 
 equal power, that they not only refused to extend the Right of Suflrrage to the free- 
 men of the country, but they infused a new element of power — they made their slaves 
 the basis, in part, of representation, whilst those who guard them in their subjugation, 
 are denied a voice in their councils and in elections. Sir, I will not pursue this subject, 
 but ask gentlemen to reflect. Can a Government so based, be permanent? "Will it not 
 contain within itself the fatal germ of its own destruction, after years of strife and con- 
 futnon Sir, is it wise in a slave-holding community to keep up this discussion.'* If 
 we do not put this ingredient in our cup, ma}' we not fairly appeal to the just sympa- 
 thies of our Western brethren Not from any apprehension of danger personal to our- 
 selves. Those who have commanded slaves, can never become so themselves ; the 
 spirit of command endures through life. But when they reflect tliat we are hereditary 
 masters of men born in slavery ; that our condition is unalterable at present ; that theirs 
 is every day more and more assimilated to ours ; that their interests and ours equally 
 combine to allay this excitement and look to Virginia as one great united Common- 
 wealth, I am sure the appeal will not be in vain. Sir, we ought to meet on this mid- 
 dle ground of the Census of 1820, notwithstanding the "West sets up a Ingher claim. 
 But, Sir, whatever may be the result, I shall have the consolation to reflect, that I 
 have discovered no narrow selfishness in the plan I have submitted, as my own gives 
 to that portion of the Commonwealth from which I come, a just, but smaller portion 
 of power than has been offered by others, and that true to my principles and my coun- 
 try, 1 have made an honest effort to advance her peace and honor. I hope the Con- 
 vention will give to the proposition of the gentleman from Chesterfield, a candid con- 
 sideration. 1 am not vain enough to believe I have proposed a perfect plan, but think 
 it better calculated to combine a majority of the Convention than any other. 
 
 Mr. Massie made an explanation as to his course in voting for Mr. Gordon's amend- 
 ment yesterday, which he understood to be referred to in some of the remarks of Mr. 
 Doddridge. He had voted against the amendment of the gentleman from Frederick, 
 (Mr. Powell.) because it directlj' presented the first resolution of the Legislative Com- 
 mittee, which had been previously laid \ipon the table b}'- a vote of the Convention, 
 in which he concurred, for the purpose of taking up the subject of compromise. It 
 was now certain that no basis of Representation could be ^igreed on by any majority 
 respectable in point of number, and the proposition in question was not so great a de- 
 parture from the principle contended for here, as the scheme proposed of a white basis 
 in the House of Delegates, and a Federal basis in the Senate. His constituents had 
 a deep interest in the compromise of this agitating controversy, lying as they did, be- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 67S 
 
 tween the conflicting parties ; and he had voted iu the spirit of compromise and in 
 none other. 
 
 Mr. Johnson was in favour of laying the present proposition upon the table, in or- 
 der that that of Mr. Leigh might be fairly considered. As to the rule which stood in 
 the way, it had been adopted at liis motion, had now done all he intended it to do, and 
 might be dispensed with. 
 
 The proposition of Mr. Gordon was then laid upon the tible for the present. 
 
 The rule requiring every orioinal proposition offered in Convention to be referred 
 to a Committee and reported upon, was then, after some opposition from Mr. Mercer, 
 rescinded. 
 
 Mr. Leigh's proposition was then read from the Chair, as follows : 
 " That tne House of Delegates shall consist of one hundred and thirty-nine mem- 
 bers, and the representation therein shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " The twenty-six counties lying West of the Alleghan}- , shall have thirty-two De- 
 legates. 
 
 The fourteen counties lying between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge, shall have 
 twenty-four Delegates. 
 
 " Tlie twenty-nine counties l3dng East of the Blue Ridge and above Tide-water, 
 shall have forty-five Delegates. 
 
 " And the thirty-six counties and four towns lying on tide-water, shall have thirty- 
 eight Delegates. 
 
 " No more new counties shall ever be formed of the country lying East of the Blue 
 Ridge ; but the Legislature may in its discretion, from time to time, a majority of the 
 whole number of both Houses concurring, whensoever the increase of the population 
 of the country West of the Blue Ridge, and the more convenient administration of 
 justice and police shall require, form new counties not exceeding ten, out of the ter- 
 ritory lying West of the Blue Ridge ; and whenever such new county shall be formed, 
 an additional Delegate shall be allowed to the country'- West of the Blue R.idge. 
 
 And the Legislature having respect to the relative state of population of the re- 
 spective counties, cities, towns, and election districts, and a majority of the whole - 
 number of both Houses concurring, may, at any time, allow one additional Delegate 
 to any county, city, town, or election district, now existing, or to be formed, and to 
 which only one Delegate shall in the first instance be allowed; so that not more than 
 two Delegates shall ever be allowed to any county, city, or election district: and so 
 that the number of the House of Delegates shall never exceed one hundred and sixty 
 members." 
 
 Mr. Leigh then rose in explanation and defence of his proposition. He premised, 
 in the outset, that all he was now solicitous about, was the principle of the plan, with- 
 out insisting on its details, or attempting to present, with exact precision, all the re- 
 sults to which it would lead : he only meant to shew its modus operandi — how it would 
 work generally. He repeated, (what he had declared when he first offered it,) his 
 entire and perfect indifference as to the details, so far as they might affect his own dis- 
 trict. 
 
 He assured the Convention, that he never went to any work, with more reluctance 
 in his life, than to that of tendering this plan of compromise, in his own person. No 
 consideration, short of the absolute necessity of the case, should have induced him to 
 do it. If any other gentleman, holding his opinions, would have undertaken to pre- 
 pare and present this, or any similar plan, the House should not have heard one word 
 from him : he would have been well content to give it only his silent support. He 
 knew, perfectly well, that there was a portion of" the members of the Convention, 
 who, without indul0:ing any personal hostility or ill will towards him, felt, neverthe- 
 less, an extreme jealousy of any propositions he might offer, merely for being presented 
 by him. Some, because they asserted an exclusive claim to republicanism, and thought 
 it necessary to suppose, that his mind was possessed with anti-republican principles; 
 others, from a belief that he was actuated by a strong jealousy of Western interests — 
 but, from whatever cause, he knew that such a prejudice did exist, just as well as if 
 gentlemen had avowed it to him : he only desired to look into a man's face, to know 
 how he felt afiected towards him, and measures coming from him. He would have 
 avoided incurring this obstacle to the success of his present proposal, if it had been 
 in his puwer, to tlie end that it might get fair play, and stand or fall by its own merits 
 alone; but that being impracticable, he had ofiered it, to take its fate. He should 
 now, as briefly as he could, explain it to the House. 
 
 Nothing had filled him with more surprise, than to find, that gentlemen of the Val- 
 ley should prefer the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon,) to that he 
 now offered. He said, gentlemen of the Valley: because, after the speech which the 
 House had heard yesterday, (Mr. Summers's,)\nd this morning, (Mr. Doddridge's.) 
 he saw that there was a feeling in the Trans-Alleghany country, which, he should 
 think, gentlemen from the Valley would be quite as^much alarmed at, as gentlemen 
 from Eastern Virginia : but that was a question for them, and not for him to judge of. 
 
676 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The substantial difference between his plan, and that of the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle, lay in two points only : first, there was a shght difference in the proportions of 
 representation assigned to the four great divisions of the State respectively — (he should 
 not speak of the shght difference as to the whole number of the House of Delegates ;) 
 and secondly, that the gentleman's proposition contained within it, no provision for 
 settling this vexed controversy hereafter; though it did, (what alone it professed to 
 do.) provide for settling that controversy for the present. The gentleman, out of a 
 House of Delegates consisting of one hundred and twenty-seven members, assigned 
 to the West very nearly the exact proportion to which it v/ould be entitled on the 
 principle of the lohite basis, (so called,) according to the Census of 1820 : probably not 
 varying as to the number of representatives, more than a unit, in either of the four divi- 
 sions of the Commonwealth. Now, this near approach to " the principles of justice," 
 (as the gentleman from Brooke, (Mr, Doddridge,) always called them — assuming that 
 all other principles but his own, are unjust and oppressive,) was his principal objection 
 to that arrangement. The gentleman from Albemarle was, he knew, of the same 
 opinion with the gentleman from Brooke, as to the justice of the principles of the 
 white basis : he had avowed that opinion. Mr. L. was not now going into that ques- 
 tion : but he was going to discuss this question, viz : what is the best practicable mode, 
 (if any mode be practicable,) to sink that controversy forever.' If he could shew the 
 gentleman from Albemarle, that his (Mr. L's) plan was more likely to accomplish this 
 object than his own, he hoped, from that gentleman's candour, that he should have 
 his support. 
 
 He concurred entirely with that gentleman in the opinion, and in the feeling he 
 had expressed on that subject: sound policy required of every statesman to sink that 
 distracting controversy then and forever. And he was greatly mistaken if there was 
 a gentleman in the House, who would not acknowledge that the very agitation of it 
 had not, already, of itself, produced a greater amount of evil, than could be compen- 
 sated by any possible good, which any conceivable amendment of the Constitution 
 wh ch this Convention could make would ever produce. 
 
 Supposing the proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle to be adopted, its dis- 
 tribution of representation, as between the four great divisions of the State, was to be 
 unchangeable, fixed, permanent. Could that gentleman suppose, that he sank the 
 controversy in question by that provision Could he expect that those who were so 
 extremely anxious for the establishment of what they considered as the only true re- 
 publican basis of Government, would make no effort to get a new Conventi(m for the 
 purpose of establishing such a basis ? If the gentleman hoped this, he must be far more 
 sanguine than he was. Or did he hope, that any Constitution, in any conceivable 
 shape, would not, in its actual operation, engender discontents, which those gentle- 
 men could use as an instrument to effect a new Convention ? Could he imagine, that 
 any Constitution could be devised by this Convention, or by the wit of man, that 
 would exenjpt this connnunity from evils, and sore evils too If the gentleman knew, 
 as he must know, that every v/ork of man was necessarily imperfect, he could not but 
 own that many and great evils must exist under any possible form of Government, 
 and that the question concerning the merit of every Government under the sun, was 
 only this — whether the sum of good it produced was the greatest practicable, instead 
 of the greatest desirable.? Any Constitution that could be devised would cause some 
 discontents, reasonable or unreasonable discontents, which might be inflamed at any 
 time, when any great question of geographical and political interests was to be de- 
 cided. 
 
 Mr. L. said he would be content to take the apportionment of the gentleman from 
 Albemarle, if that gentleman could shew him that it could be fixed as a permanent 
 rule of apportionment. His great objection to it was, that it could not be made so. All 
 that it did, or could do, was to settle it for the present — for the present in that sense 
 of the word, in which, while we are yet speaking, present has passed away. The rule 
 would be overturned, the very moment the question could be submitted to the people, 
 whether it should continue ; instantly. Both sides would unite against it. It settled 
 nothing : it left us just where we were. It left the great basis question to agitate the 
 community, till all the community shall be dissolved between the disputants. 
 
 Mr. L. said he now prophecied, that that struggle, if persisted in, would end in the 
 dissolution of the Commonwealth. He went on this principle, established by long 
 experience, that whenever men have a controversy on matters of interest, that con- 
 tinues for a long time, it is sure to end in a separation. He was for avoiding this, if 
 it were possible to avoid it by fair and just means. 
 
 The gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) had presented a different proposition. 
 He was for taking the proportions of representation, assigned by the plan of the 
 gentleman from Albemarle, as a present arrangement, and providing for a new ap- 
 portio nment after the year 1840, to be entrusted entirely to Legislative discretion. 
 He, M r. L. had given this plan as full a consideration as the time would enable him. 
 At the first view of it, he had been strongly disposed to give it his assent. As the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 677 
 
 proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle gave to the cis-montane country a ma- 
 jority of twenty-one in the lower House, and six in the Senate, he had supposed that 
 the future apportionment might be left with safety to a Legislature thus constituted. 
 But. on farther reflection, he^found that there was one reason operating so strongly 
 against its adoption, he was compelled to reject it : that reason was, that it defeated the 
 
 freat end he had in view, which was to sink the controversy between East and West, 
 'or, supposing representation in botli Houses to be distributed according to the pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Albemarle, and the prospect to be held out of a new 
 apportionment in 1S40, and no principle settled as a rule for that apportionment, it 
 was only makingf provision for a party war to last as long as the siege of Troy, to be 
 prosecuted for ten long years, with the utmost zeal and ability that could be furnished 
 bv both sides. He asked gentlemen if they did not feel and see this consequence.'' 
 The moment such a plan should be submitted to the West, they would be told " yes, 
 accept this for the present — for in ten years the Legislature will have ' came to a sense 
 of justice.' — and we shall then have representation based upon the white population 
 exclusively.'' The leaders of that party would keep that idea constantly before the 
 minds of the people. And did they suppose, that the other party would remain per- 
 fectly silent.? Did any one persuade himself, that if pamphlets and newspaper essays 
 were resorted to and multiplied in the West, that essays and pamphlets would not be 
 written in the East, with at least as much fluency and zeal, if not the same ability.? 
 [Looking toward Mr. Cooke.] For one, he promised gentlemen, that if God should 
 spare his life, the question should be met with as much earnestness and diligence, on 
 this side the mountains, as on the other — and if success depended on zeal, earnest- 
 ness and sincerity, he thought he should stand as good a chance for success as any 
 one — they had no more zealous advocate for their principles than he was for his, and 
 should be (he believed) to the day of his death. Though (said he) I have changed 
 many of my opinions since you. Sir, and I were together at college, I do not expect 
 after arriving at my time of life to change them again. 
 
 Mr. L. again insisted, that the proposition of Mr. Cooke, was the proclamation of a 
 Trojan war between the two great parties of the State. This was his objection to it: 
 That war he wished to end now, and avert hereafter. But the proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from Albemarle, renewed it at once — immediately; while that of the gentle- 
 man from Frederick, would keep it up, without decision, till 1640. What new feuds 
 or flames might arise in that period of time, it was not for the wisdom of man to fore- 
 know. The war had endured now since lc24: and who could be ignorant, that in 
 the course of its prosecution, many who had once been bound by the strongest at- 
 tachment, had become entirely alienated Some, who reposed unbounded political 
 confidence in each other, had found all bonds dissolved, and hostility planted, where 
 nothing but peace and harmony once reigned. He knew this to be the fact ; and it 
 was impossible that others could be blind to -it. His own temper was to fight as hard 
 as he could, while the battle raged, and to forget all, as soon as it was over. Give 
 him a short war, as hard as they pleased : only, in the name of Heaven, let it be 
 short: and then, when peace comes, let it be sincere and hearty peace. He was for 
 no ten years war. He preferred that the controversy should be decided at once, at 
 the point of the bayonet, (the bayonet he referred to. was the vote of the people : votes 
 were the only bayonets he hoped ever to see employed in this contest.) let it rather 
 be decided at once, upon the question of accepting or rejecting the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Albemarle. He had rather have that, than the plan of the gentle- 
 man from Frederick, with that ten years war to follow it. That of the gentleman 
 from Albemarle, brought them first to the charge ; and if they must come to it, the 
 sooner the better, always. 
 
 As to the plan he had submitted, he said, he did not address himself to any who 
 thought that the best way to reform was to begin by demolition ; nor to any who 
 thought there was a best in Government which applied to all mankind, in all times, 
 places, and circumstances ; nor to any who thought that they were bound to any certain 
 set of abstract principles, as being the only republican principles which did or could 
 exist, or who were of opinion, that the particular circumstances of Virginia ought not 
 to be regarded. He spoke to those only who thought that they ought to suit our in- 
 stitutions to our condition. All those who thought that one who did not advocate 
 the white basis" could not be a republican, of course, thought him an aristocrat, 
 and were ready to fix the name mad- dog upon him accordingly ; and to keep clear 
 of all communication with him, for fear of a bite. 
 
 But, he asked the consideration of his proposition, upon its own merits alone. Let 
 it be separated from its author, and judged by itself. 
 
 It was his opinion that in the trans-Alleghany country, there ought, in a short time, 
 to be a farther division of counties, for the more convenient administration of justice 
 and for the purposes of internal pohce. He was willing to give them a Republican 
 Government in reality ; so that the representative should be personally known by his 
 constituents, and they by him, and that he might truly represent their views and 
 
678 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 wants in the Legislature, He therefore provided for tlie erection of ten new coun- 
 ties to the west of the Ridge, which would reduce the majority on this side the moun- 
 tains to seventeen. Did he do nothing else? Should tlie counties in the Valley in- 
 crease in population and improvement, and the trans-Alleghany country also, to the 
 extent of their own most sanguine hopes and calculations, or should they even attain 
 to one-half of who.t was so confidently predicted, he had provided that the Legisla- 
 ture should have power to assign to any of them one additional representative, so that 
 it should thenceforth have two. Or he had no objection to extend this to three, should 
 the proportional increase of population require it, and their representation might be 
 equalized as far as practicable; and in this case, he would allow one hundred and 
 eighty, as the maximum number of the House of Delegates. The Legislature, having 
 respect to popn' 'ion and increase, might increase the representation in all parts of 
 the State. He u- not confined this provision to the West only. 
 
 Let gentlemen trom that portion of the State say what they pleased, so long as he 
 looked at the face of the country, such as the hand of God had made it, he must ever 
 be of opinion, that the greatest increase of Virginian population must take place in 
 the middle country until it should become very dense; and then it would naturally 
 seek the Tide-water country, where the waters teemed with subsistence for man. This, 
 however, was looking forward to a remoce period indeed. But the chief increase 
 would, at all times, happen in the Valley and in the midland district. Mr. L. said, he 
 had no objection, that that portion of the State should hold the balance of power. He 
 told gentlemen from the West, that he hoped they might increase in population to 
 the utmost extent of their desires; and he had accordingly provided to meet that 
 growth by a proportionate increase of power He was perfectly content with this. 
 He had no objections in the world to their obtaining power in this way ; because they 
 would then be compelled to pay their share of the taxes of the Commonwealth : as 
 soon as they were compelled to tax themselves as well as us, they might tax him and 
 welcome. That was all he asked. That was all the safegum-d he should ever require. 
 
 Mr. L. observed, in conclusion, that these views were perttictly plain and simple. 
 Had such propositions come from Western members, he should have hailed them 
 with the sincerest joy. Ana lie was persuaded that nothing but the interminable 
 contest about the " Vv'hite basis" had prevented such an event. Yet he made no com- 
 plaint on that subject: he uttered no censure on the course gentlemen had thought 
 it right to pursue : they were certainly the best judges of their ow^i course. He 
 lioped he should not be left alone in the support of the scheme he had proposed; but 
 that it would receive the co\intenance of those who possessed, in so large a degree, 
 wliat he did not — he meant, weight of character. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, that the question under consideration was a question concerning 
 the retative merits of the schemes for apportioning representation offered by the gen- 
 tleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh), and the gentleman from Albemarle, (Gen. Gor- 
 don ;) and the positive merits of the former. With the positive merits of the latter 
 scheme, (said Mr. C.) we have at present nothing to do. I learn from the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, that his scheme is offered in the spirit of conciliation and compro- 
 mise, and in that spirit I will frankly consider it. 
 
 And I beg that gentleman to be assured, that his schemes are not received by 7ne, 
 at least, with jealousy and distrust. For, however formidable his hostility to Westei-n 
 interests, it has certainly the merit of being open and manly. So far from considering 
 his various propositions as having any thing covert or insidious in them, I am ratlier 
 inclined to admire the naivete and frankness with which he uniformlj'^ proposes to the 
 people of the West to surrender themselves, bound liand and foot, to those of the 
 East. Such is, invariably, tlie dist:!ictive and peculiar feature of his plans. No, Sir, 
 I do assure him that I expect nothing insidious from Jiiin. 
 
 Let us briefly examine his new plan for organizing the Legislative bodies, and ap- 
 portioning representation among the people of Virginia, in comparison with that of 
 the gentleman from Albemarle. I heard him, I confess, with no small surprise, ex- 
 press his astonishment that any member from the Valley should prefer the scheme of 
 the gentleman from Albemarle to that just offered by himself. I should suppose that 
 a very slight examination of the two plans would have disclosed very obvious rea- 
 sons for such a preference. Li a House of Delegates, consisting of one hundred and 
 twenty-seven, the gentleman from Albemarle offers to the Valley twenty-four mem- 
 bers. In a House of one hundred and thirty-nine at least, the gentleman from Ches- 
 terfield allows to the Valley hut twenty-four. He increases the numbers of the HotisCj 
 without increasing the number of the Valley Delegates. If the House of one hun- 
 dred and twenty-seven, proposed by the gentleman from Albemarle were increased to 
 one hundred and thirty-nine, his principle or rule of distribution would allow to the 
 country west of the Ridge fifty-eight members, while the rival proposition of the 
 gentleman from Chesterfield allows it but fifty-six. The three additional members 
 which, out of his enlarged House of Delegates, he allows to the whole country west 
 of the Blue Ridge of Mountains, are all bestowed on the trans-Alleghany country. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 67a 
 
 He swells tlie representation of that country beyond its due proportion, (on the basis 
 of white population,) of the whole number allowed by his plan to the West ; and of 
 course robs the Valley of its just and equal share of the pittance which he bestows 
 on the two united. Whereas the scheme of the gentleman from Albemarle divides 
 what he allows to the West fairly between its two sections, according to the most 
 correct estimate of the white population of the two districts at the present time. And 
 yet the o-entleman from Chesterfield is astonished that any member Irom the Valley 
 should prefer the scheme of the gentleman from Albemarle to his ! 
 
 Having thus disposed (said lUr. C.j of the relative merits of the two propositions, 
 I will briefly consider the positive merits of that of the gentleman from Chesterfield, 
 as a measure of conciliation, addressed to the calm good sense of the western pet pie 
 in general. He proposes a House of Delegates, consisting of one hundred and thirty- 
 niiie members, whicii may be augmented, at the discretion of tlic Legislature, to the 
 number of one hundred and sixty. JNow, one objection, which the ]^,o\)\e of Wes- 
 tern Virginia, in common with their fellow-citizens of the East, would have to the 
 plan in question, is, that it unnecessarily swells the whole number of Delegates, and 
 thus increases the expenses of the Government, and consequently the burthen of 
 taxation. But this objection is a trivial one, compared with others which stare us in 
 the face, on the very presentation of his scheme. 
 
 He proposes a House of Delegates consisting of one hundred and thirty-nine mem- 
 bers. He axdhorises the Legislature, at its discretion, to create, from time to time, ten 
 additional Western counties, requiring it, should it exercise the power so given, to 
 beslow on the country'' West of the Pcidge ten additional members. He moreover 
 authorises the Legislature, at its discretion, to increase the power by the addition of 
 twenty-one members in all, so as to swell the total number to one hundred and sixty. 
 And then twenty-one members may be given, at the discretion of the Legislature, to 
 amj tw^enty-one counties having each, according to his first distribution, but one re- 
 presentative. In other words, the Legislature niay , or may not, at its discretion, create 
 new counties in the West, and consequently may, or may not, as it pleases, give to 
 the Western country any additional representation. And it may, if it chooses, at its 
 very first session, add twenty-one members to the House of Delegates, and distribute 
 them all among the small counties between the City of Richmond and the Capes of 
 the Chesapeake. And the Legislature, invested with these extraordinary powers, is 
 divided between the two great sections in the prr.prrtion of fifty-six to the West, and 
 eighty-three to the East. An Eastern majority liien, and the East enjoys under his 
 scheme an overwhelming majority, may at an}' moment, at its uncontrolled will and 
 pleasure, augment that majority to such a point that the existing inequality of repre- 
 sentation, the great grievance of the West, is absolutely justice compared with that 
 which he enables the Legislature to create. And this is a scheme of conciliation and 
 compromise offered to the grave consideration of the sober-minded people of the West ! 
 
 I concede to this scheme fair and honest purposes, and that is all that 1 can concede. 
 I admit, that the proposed Legislature may add ten representatives to the Western di- 
 vision of the State, if so disposed. It catinot add more than ten out of the twenty-one 
 additional members, no matter how liberal its views. 
 
 Now, Sir, I put it to the candour of the gentleman from Chesterfield to say, how 
 far such a scheme of representation accords with his own views of human nature, and 
 his own estimate of human motives and conduct. How often and how emphatically 
 has he told us that selfishness is the great master-spring of human action. That no 
 man of common sense, would put his property, or his interests, in the keeping or un- 
 der the control of another, unless it was the interest of that other to discharge the trust 
 to his advantage ! If he be correct in his theory of human nature, and in his estimate 
 of the motives which commonly actuate men, how can he exyect the people of the 
 West to accept of such a proposition ? How can he expect that they will accept a 
 scheme \n\\\c\\ commences vvitli giving them a weight in the Legislative bodies far be- 
 low that which they claim as their just and undoubted right, and believe to he their 
 right, with a provision annexed, enabling their fellow-citizens in the East, whenever 
 they shall think proper, at their arbitrary will and pleasure, to reduce the pittance of 
 power at first granted to them, to absob^te insignificance. How can he for a moment 
 beheve that the Western people will consent thus to temijt their fellow-citizens in the 
 East to so gross an abuse of power 
 
 Has he not told us, in the most pointed and ernphatical manner, that the Constitutional 
 provision, offered at the commencement of the session, by the people of the West, to 
 those of the East, prohibiting the Legislature from imposing undue burthens of taxation 
 on the slave-property of the Eastern people, was " a mere paper guarantee.^"' Has he 
 not treated the idea of relying on such a guarantee v.-ith absolute contempt and derision ? 
 And does he still expect the people of the West to accept of a scheme, which contains 
 not even the poor security of di paper guarantee, against an abuse of power utterly sub- 
 versive of their interests and their rights. I am, I confess. Sir, utterly amazed at the 
 haracter of this compromise plan for the security of Western rights. I hazard 
 
680 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 nothing in saying that the Western members of this body would vote, to a man, 
 against an?/ Constitution containing a provision so odious, and that the universal voice 
 of all the West would at once denounce it, were it to receive the sanction of this 
 honourable body. 
 
 One word, Sir, in regard to the resolution which I yesterday laid on the table, au- 
 thorising the Legislature, as organized and distributed by the scheme of the gentle- 
 man from Albemarle, to re-apportion in 1841, the Representation of the people of 
 Virginia in the Legislative bodies. That was no scheme of mine, it was offered at 
 the suggestion and request, of a respectable member of this body from the Trans- 
 AUeghany country. He thought that even such a plan of^re-apportionment would be 
 better than none, and requested me to submit it to the consideration of this honorable 
 body. It is not now under consideration, and 1 am little solicitous about its fate. 
 
 I do not believe, however, with the gentleman from Chesterfield, that such a pro- 
 vision would ??;3cessarily produce a ten years' war of faction, if the Constitution, to 
 which it should be annexed, were accepted by the people of Virginia. I do not be- 
 lieve that such a state of things would immediately ensue under any Constitution, 
 sufficiently equitable to unite in its favour a majority of the people. I believe, that 
 under any such Constitution, the people would remain quiet, until provoked by injus- 
 tice, or a gross neglect of their rights. If, under such a Constitution, or any Consti- 
 tution, the Government should continue, as heretofore, to act like a step-mother to 
 the Trans- Alleghany people, and little better to those of the Valley, the people of 
 those regions would be, as they now are, clamorous for a redress of grievances — and 
 not until then. I believe, that if under such a Constitution, the Government were 
 to be administered liberally and fairly, with equal and exact justice to all the different 
 sections of the Commonwealth, the people of Virginia are not made of such com- 
 bustible stuff as to blaze out into factions, and run after change merely for the sake of 
 change. Under such a Government, the ten years' war which he speaks of would 
 turn out to be a mere figment of his lively imagination. I repeat, Sir, that as to the 
 scheme of re-apportionment alluded to, but not now under consideration, 1 am not 
 its sponsor. 
 
 The animadversions which I have made on the compromise scheme of the gentle- 
 man from Chesterfield, however plain and unvarnished, are made, not in the spirit of 
 polemical debate, but with a direct view to a friendly compromise, if such can be 
 made, of our conflicting pretensions, and with a view to convince him that the peo- 
 ple of the West never will or can accept that which to him appears so v;ell calcu- 
 lated to attract their favourable consideration. 
 
 The question being about to be put on Mr. Leigh's proposition, Mr. George de- 
 manded the ayes and noes, and they were ordered by the House, 
 
 Mr. Scott said, he did not see any good reason why no new counties were ever to 
 be formed East of the Blue Ridge. He could not vote for the proposition in its pre- 
 sent form, and wishing to give it his support, he moved as an amendment, to strike 
 out the clause making that provision. 
 
 The motion was negatived — Ayes 23. 
 
 Mr. Stanard proposed to amend the proposition so as to allow to each county three 
 Representatives when the increase of its population would render it proper. 
 Mr. Leigh accepted this as a modification. 
 
 But Mr. Henderson objecting, the question was taken on Mr. Stanard's amend- 
 ment, and decided in the negative. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Leigh's scheme, and decided by ayes and noes, 
 as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, BrodnaX, 
 Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Nicholas, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Clai- 
 borne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Coal- 
 ter, Joynes and Bayly — 30. 
 
 JS'oes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Marshall, Tyler, Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, 
 Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Bax- 
 ter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason 
 of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell 
 of Washington , Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott, Macrae, Green, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, 
 Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, 
 Upshur and Perrin — 66. 
 
 So the proposition of Mr. Leigh was rejected. 
 
 The question now recurring on Mr. Gordon's plan, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge offered the following amendment : 
 After the next Census to be taken under the laws of the United Slates, and every 
 ten years thereafter^ there shall be a new apportionment of Representation, and a new 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 681 
 
 assessment of land-taxes — each apportionment of Representation shall be made in the 
 following manner and on the following basis, viz : the number of free white inhabi- 
 tants in the House of Delegates, and the Federal basis in the Senate." 
 
 Mr. Powell moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Doddridge by striking there- 
 from the words " after the next Census,"' and inserting in heu thereof, " after ihe year 
 1840." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge accepted this as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Thompson moved to i-nsert lfc^50," instead of " 1840." 
 
 Mr. Doduridge then rose and addressed the Convention nearly as follows: 
 
 Mr. President, — I again submit, and perhaps for the last time, the proposition under 
 consideration The delegation of which I am part, cannot assure the House that 
 their constituents will adopt a Constitution founded on it. We believe they will, if 
 the other provisions are acceptable. This is all that we can say, and our consolation 
 is, that they are not bound by our act unless they choose to adopt it. 
 
 I agree with the gentleman from Chesterfield, in most of the remarks with which 
 he introduced his plan of apportionment just rejected. I agree with him, that should 
 the proposition of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) be adopted with that 
 of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon,) the siege of Troy will soon com- 
 mence. It will have begun as soon as we can see our constituents, and perhaps be- 
 fore. That war may be of longer continuance than the siege of Troy. It will cer- 
 tainly continue until it will have subdued the injustice proposed to be inflicted by 
 those propositions. 
 
 The gentleman from Chesterfield supposes, that unless some rule for future appor- 
 tionment shall be established, or some permanent regulation that will render future 
 popular appeals unnecessary — in short, should tlie proposition of the member from 
 Frederick prevail, those seeds of interminable discord v.-ill be scattered tlirough the 
 country, which nothing but another Convention or a division of the State can eradi- 
 cate. 1 agree with the gentleman perfectl}-. I agree that nothing short of a perma- 
 nent provision for future apportionment can avert the calamity deprecated. But, to 
 produce the beneficial effects of averting discord or division, the rule of future ap- 
 portionment must be just. It-must secure the rights and accord with the common 
 sense of the great body of the people. Had the proposition of the gentleman pre- 
 vailed, the war would have begun instantly — and would have commenced, not only 
 against the present assumed basis, but against the gross injustice, in my opinion, of 
 its prospective operation. ' The gentleman supposes, that no good can result from the 
 rule proposed by the member from Frederick, because it settles no governing princi- 
 ple ; and while 1 concur in this opinion, will oppose it for another — the inequality of 
 its present basis, and the total want of security for the fair exercise of the power to 
 be conferred. 
 
 Mr. President, — although not strictly in order, I will bestow a few remarks on the 
 proposition of the gentleman from Chesterfield, just rejected, in order the better to il- ■ 
 lustrate my objections to the amendment of the gentleman from Albemarle, consider- 
 ing the latter as an entire whole, or as carried out by the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Frederick. 
 
 The amendment of the gentleman from Albemarle, looks to the state of population 
 in 1820. It reposes on the Federal Census of that 3'ear. Had there been no relative 
 change of population since, and were we satisfied that none is likely to happen, that 
 amendment might be acceptable. It would work no great injustice ; but the efi'ect of 
 adopting it now, either with or without its proposed adjunct, can only be illustrated 
 by a statistical view, which I beg leave to present, much as I dislike this species of 
 labour. 
 
 In 1810, the white population was distributed thus, viz : 
 
 East of the Blue Ridge, 338,837 
 In the Valley, 108,355 > 91979^ 
 
 West of the Alleghany, 104,377 5 ^^^'^^'^^ 
 
 Whole population , 551,553 
 In 1820, population was distributed thus, viz : 
 
 East of the Blue Ridge, 348,875 
 In the Valley, 121,196 
 West of the Alleghany, 133,112 
 
 254,308 
 
 Whole population, 603,081 
 And in 1829, the white population, as estimated by the Auditor, stood thus; 
 
 East of the Blue Ridge, 362,745 
 
 In the Valley, 138,134 ) ^-^r,K^^^ 
 
 West of the Alleghany, 181,384 5 ^^^'^^^ 
 
 Whole population, 682,261 
 86 
 
682 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 It thus appears that in nineteen years, white population East of the Blue Ridge, be- 
 ginning witii 338,837, has increased to 362,745, or to the amount of 29,908. The in- 
 crease in the Valley having in 181U, 108,345, has been 29,779: making in 1829, 138,134. 
 These data shew that the increase in the Valley and in the whole East are nearly equal : 
 that in the Valley being the smallest only by a difference of 129. As the Valley has 
 kept pace with the v^'hole East for nineteen years past, so it probably will hereafter, 
 and therefore, a permanent apportionment which would do justice to the present 
 Valley and Eastern population with reference to each other, might probably suit them 
 in all future time ; yet, the same apportionment might operate the utmost excess of 
 cruelty and injustice to the Trans-Alleghany country. To concur in such an one, 
 would be a treachery in the Valley, of which we have not the least apprehension. The 
 extent of this injustice will be manifested by comparing the increase of that popula- 
 tion during the same period of nineteen years. In 1810, we commenced with a popu- 
 lation of 104,377, which, in 1829, is 181,384, having increased 77,007, or four times 
 as much as either the Valley or all tlie country East of the Blue Ridge mountains. 
 
 I have already observed, that the plan of tlie gentleman from Albemarle rests on 
 the Census of 1820. To sum up its unquestionable injustice, I will, for the present, 
 assume the general correctness of the Auditor's estimate. I will presently allude to 
 that estimate more particularly, and for a different purpose. The increase of Western 
 population since 1820, is 51,336, after deducting from the Western the whole Eastern 
 increase. According to the Albemarle plan, 51,336 white people residing West of 
 the Blue Ridge, are to go unrepresented from the present moment, and they, with all 
 future relative increase in the Vv^est, are not only excluded now, by the amendment 
 of the gentleman from Albemarle, but will be forever by the adjunct of the gentle- 
 man from Frederick, should that, also, be adopted. 
 
 Mr. President, — I will now expose numerically, the injustice offered by the gentle- 
 man from Albemarle, under the name of compromise. This I will do first, and then 
 follow this scheme into its SLd^nnct j^roposed,! should say not offered by the gentleman 
 from Frederick. 
 
 First, then, let me observe, that if the present w^hite population are to be represen- 
 ted by one hundred and twenty-seven members in the House of Delegates, each 
 delegate will represent 5,379 white people — or, in other words, every section of 
 5,379 white people ought to elect a delegate in this same House of one hundred and 
 twenty-seven members. The proportion East, being deducted from the proportion 
 West, leaves a difference equal to six and a half members. This may be thus demon- 
 strated : According to the Auditor's estimate, the whole white population amounts 
 to 6b2,261 — of which the V/ estern population amounts to 319,516. The gentleman 
 from Albemarle proposes an House of one hundred and twenty-seven members. The 
 nuaiber to which the West are entitled by their population is thus proved : 
 
 Whole white population 682,261 — entitled to members one hundred and twenty- 
 seven. 
 
 To what number the West ? 
 
 First, whole West, 682,261 :127::319,516:59 325133 
 
 682261 
 
 Of which fifty-nine members, and a half, the Valley and Trans-Alleghany country, 
 are entitled as follows, viz : 
 
 First, Valley, 682,261 :127:138,124||25 M 
 
 West of Alleghany, ' 682,261:127:18l,384||33 « 
 
 So far I have calculated by the estimate of the Auditor. If population had not re- 
 latively changed, the gentleman's amendment is not far from what is right. By the 
 Census of lb20, we were entitled to fifty-three members and a fraction, and the East 
 to seventy-three and a fraction. This would give a majority to the East of twenty 
 members; but the gentleman from Albemarle turning these fractions to the best ac- 
 count, takes them all to the East, and makes out of them an unit, and thus gives 
 the East a majority of twenty-one members. 
 
 Mr. President, — When we stood on the whole basis in this House as fort3''-nine to 
 forty-seven members, we represented 402,000, and you 280,000 white people. This 
 great majority was very encouraging. I admit, it is now considerably lessened, having 
 lost part of the Albemarle delegation. The majority is yet great enough to be re- 
 spected. My friend from Albemarle overlooks all changes of population since 1820, 
 because we have no official tabulars of it since then — in doing this, the gentleman 
 takes from the West six and a half members to which they are now entitled, and adds 
 that number to the East, which makes a difiFerence of thirteen members. Then ta- 
 king to the East its rightful majority of members according to present population, and 
 making a judicious application of fractions, he adds eight more members, and thus 
 acquires his majority of twenty-one members. 
 
 The power thus to be conferred on the East by taking from the West six and a half 
 members, and adding-'-them to the East, is immense. It is irresistible. But then it 
 
DEBATES or THE CONVEXTIOX. 
 
 683 
 
 is not professedly taken as a slave or other property Representation, and therefore, is 
 can be voted for by those whose consciences will not per:;.:': ^h^^i.i to sustain a pro- 
 perty basis of any kind. On what basis then does the _ Albemarle rest 
 his apportionment ? Certainly not the />resr£?2^ white . - -ad ti.ouj^ht we 
 both came here to maintain. But. it is said to be fou; r v. iiite basis of 
 and that we have no regular table of population sine- Mr. President, might 
 do if we were ignorant of the fact. The gentleman t„:r= ,. . cr trom us to give it to 
 the East. This is not done on the mixed. Federal, or any other basis of property what- 
 ever: but it is done. It is oo'.ver that is taken, and power, after ail. /5 power, and is 
 the very thing demi:. - " East, by every basis they have proposed. 
 
 The gentleman fr ; ..- l . r - -ineld. and" his friends, admonished us very early in this 
 debate, that interest is a r, iMiit passion not to be controulled in political transactions 
 by all the restraints of power, religion, duty, or even of oaths;, and that, indeed, there 
 was no security against its influence but in the possession of power to resist it. Our 
 present struggle has shewn that there is too much truth in this lesson, at least where 
 perpetual p:-.ver is the object in view. 
 
 Knowi::_ T e late increase of Western, over Eastern population, I foresaw last 
 winter tii^ - of a Census of it to be laid before this Convention. I had the 
 
 honor to oiier a mecisure for it in the late House of Delegates. That measure was 
 supported by those, who I beheve, represented a majority of tlie people. It was re- 
 jected, but by whom.- A majority who represented a minority, and who would not 
 permit an oificial table to be laid before this body. They had the power to shut 
 out tills light, and they exercised it because they had it, and because it suited their 
 purposes to conceal the truth from our eyes. The consequence is, that when I com- 
 plain of the inequality of the proposed apportionment, 1 must rely on the present 
 state of population, and on the Auditor's statement of its probable condition. But al- 
 though this is relying on an estimate. L think I will satisfv everv man v. ho understands 
 the rule of three, tliat tills esliaiate may be relied on as sufnciently at' urate rcr ti e 
 present purpose. I will assume it as a fact, that those paying a tax - r :i 
 
 property, bore about the same ratio to tlie whole white population in 1 ' i - . 1 i J 
 and 1S20, that they did in 1529. In each of these years there v - ^ ~ - : p pu- 
 latioD taken, and in each, the Auditor's office will shew the nui;.. - vir.g 
 
 a land tax, and the number payina- a property tax. The prcpd y tax 1: . li is tlie 
 safest document, because those paying that tax are residents. What difiiculty is there 
 in ascertaining what ratio the number of those paying a property- tax in any county, 
 bore to the v^-iiite population of the same county' in 1790, in 1800. 1810, and 1820.? 
 And, as the Auditor possesses the tax books for lt29, what danger is there of iall.ng 
 into any~great error by assuming that the tax-pavers of 1829. bear the same proportion 
 to the present white population that they did in the several years when a Census was 
 taken I have tried this on the tables of several counties, and there is no difitculty 
 in it. There is a dificulty, not in arrivino- at a knovriedae of the fact, but in the 
 proof. "SMien we assert that which ever;- man may know to a reasonable certainty, il' 
 he will, we cannot maintain our assertion by record proof. 
 
 I trust I have proved, satisfactoniy, that the plan of the c^entientan from Albtrnaile, 
 is to create an House of Delegates of one hundred andtwe - ^ ^. members. T?nd in 
 which the East is to have a majority of twenty-one, bei: _ : . cn, or at the very 
 least, thirteen more than the East are entitled to by any lair p:::-C4-iie: An House of 
 Delegates, in which the East is to possess uncontrollable power in the first instance. 
 To such an House of Delegates it is, that the gentleman from Frexierick proprses to 
 give power to re-apportion representation, after 1840, or 1841, v.ithcut compelhng 
 them to observe any particular ratio, principle or basis. 
 
 ill such an House of Delegates part with their power.' Does my friend hope, 
 inuch less believe it .' Before we can believe tiiese people will impair their own autho- 
 rity willingly, we must absolutely forget what happened so short a time ago as last 
 winter, and all that we behold here every day with our own eyes. 
 
 This would be perpetuating power to' be sure ; but then it 'will be an unequal and 
 oppressive power, and it would only differ in degree from that just view proposed by 
 the gentleman from Chesterfield, whose plan of^power, present and future, has just 
 been rejected. 
 
 The gentleman from Albemarle, proposes an House of Delegates of one hundred 
 and twenty-seven members. fil\v-three of whom are to be West of the Blue Ridge, 
 and of these fifty-three, twenty -nine are to be West of the Alleghany, and twentv- 
 four in the Valley. The gentleman from Chesterfield, proposed the "whole number 
 of the House of Delegates to be one hundred and thirty-nine — that is, to add to the 
 number of the gentleman from Albemarle twelve. Of "these, he proposed to 0-iye to 
 the country West of the Alleghany three, making their number thirty-two — fifivinff to 
 the \ alley notliing in addition. Now. in his proposed House of Delegates of one hun- 
 dred and thirty-nine members, the thirty-two he proposes for the extreme West, bears 
 the same relative proportion to one hundred and thirty-nine, as the number twenty- 
 
684 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 nine did to the other whole number one hundred and twenty-seven. The difference, 
 then, between the two plans, was precisely this: The gentleman from Albemarle, 
 would commence with fifty-three West and seventy-four East; and the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, with fifty-six West and eighty-three East — giving to the East at the 
 commencement, a majority of twenty-seven, instead of twenty-one. 
 
 But, the gentleman from Chesterfield, allows ten new counties to be created in the 
 West, and on that account, ten additional members to be granted to the West. Even 
 this he refers to the discretion of the pov. ers that be — to be exercised by a majority of 
 the members of each House. By his sclieme, this whole power might be exhausted, 
 by one legislative act of the first Legislature under the new Constitution. Suppose, 
 then, the most favorable result — that ten new counties should be made, and ten addi- 
 tional members given to the West: then the West would have sixty-six members; 
 and if eleven should be added to the East, that would give the East ninety-four mem- 
 bers, and thus there would be an House of Delegates of one hundred and sixty mem- 
 bers — the largest number he would allow — in which the East would have, in all fu- 
 ture time, a majority of tw^enty-eight, if even the Eastern population should be station- 
 ary, and the West increase to a million. 
 
 1 am satisfied, Mr. President, that if a Constitution should be offered to the people, 
 on either of those plans, it would, nay, must be rejected by the people. And, as I 
 before said, I would infinitely prefer to do nothing. 
 
 Mr. Leigh observed, that he had nothing to say in relation to his own~ proposition. 
 He considered its end as defeated the moment the gentleman from Frederick declared 
 that all the West would vote against it; because he presumed him to speak from cer- 
 tain knowledge. He had only presented it as a scheme for conciliation ; it failed of 
 its^end, and from that moment all its value was lost. But now, they had a proposi- 
 tion by which the property of the East was secured to ii for ten years, with a reversion 
 in favor of the West after that time. A gentleman from Amherst, (Mr. Thompson,) 
 seemed to think the East would surely be content if they had that possession extended 
 to twenty years ; they would not certainly repine if they were allowed a life estate in 
 their property. But, for one, he preferred the simple proposition of the gentleman 
 from Albemarle without any addition whatever, to any scheme which should contain 
 the admission that sooner or later the property of the East was to pass over into the 
 possession of the West. 
 
 Mr. Thompson said, he had offered the amendment with a view to making the pro- 
 position more acceptable to gentlemen from the East. He had understood it to have 
 been admitted all along, that the period would arrive when the balance of power 
 would pass into the hands of the "W est. That period, if he recollected right, had been 
 fixed by the gentleman from Chesterfield himself at about the year 1855. 
 
 Mr. "Leigh replied, that he had said if the Auditor's calculations were correct, and 
 the mixed basis should be adopted in both Houses, the increase of population and 
 taxes to the West might give them the balance of power about that time. 
 
 Mr. Thompson said he was by no means tenacious — he would withdraw his amend- 
 ment. And he withdrew it accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Johnson, adverting to the expense of taking an assessment of all the lands of 
 the State, thought that once in ten years was too frequent, and that once in twenty 
 years would be sufficient. His view would be to fix an apportionment of representa- 
 tion among the great divisions of the State, and then to let the county representation 
 be made as equal as possible among the large counties. He moved every twenty yezxs, 
 instead of every ten. 
 
 Mr. Powell, with the consent of Mr, Doddridge, varied his amendment, so as to 
 read 1841, instead of ] 840. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge could not accept as a modification the suggestion of Mr. Johnson, 
 as to increasing the interval between the assessments from ten to twenty years. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that with the deepest solicitude any human being could feel, he 
 had turned his attention to the proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle, with a 
 view to find v/hether it contained any thing that would warrant him in voting for it. 
 Pie regarded the peace and good feeling of the West as of vast importance, and was most 
 desirous to secure it ; but he really could not bring himself to vote for the plan, unless 
 some additional provision should be appended to it, having respect to future apportion- 
 ment He hoped something of this kind which he could approve, would be united 
 with it, and then it should have his support. 
 
 Mr. Scott, in reply to Mr. Doddridge, observed, that it seemed the gentleman who 
 moved the present amendment, had changed his opinions on the subject of Govern- 
 ment. The House had heard from that gentleman and from others who acted with 
 him. very able and ingenious discussions on the principles of republicanism: They 
 had laid downi, a priori, what were the distinctions between a republic and an aris- 
 tocracy, and an oligarchy: and this proposition or that, had been pronounced accepta- 
 ble to them, according as it squared with these fixed, unalterable, a priori principles, 
 derived from nature and the fitness of things. They, on his side of the House, had 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION". 
 
 655 
 
 contended for opposite doctrines : they had insisted that in establish in g a Gk)vemment, 
 respect must be had to the interests of the goTemed : that men were always swaved 
 by interest: that it was dangerous to trust to their passions — and that there must be 
 a check and controul founded in their interest, to counterl a^-nce those passions, 
 ^ow. it appeared, the gentleman had at length, become a c :.eir sentiments. 
 
 For, his main objection to the plan of the gentleman from ' d was this. Lhat 
 
 the onlv guaranty it contained for the security of the West . the members of 
 
 an Eastern Legislature would be (royerned hy principle, ^ow. it seemed, men were 
 very prone to be goyemed by interest, and all that had been said about cor.sci-:. :e. 
 and a moral sense, »S:c. was not to be reoarded. The gentleman had for:; -: i 
 the Conyention, that the representation of slaye property was utterly odic , ... 
 and to all in that portion of the State trom wiiich he came. But the gentleman was 
 a conyert on this subject also : and now be was the man who proposed to engraft on 
 the scheme of compromise, that yery principle of the representation of slaye property. 
 The sreulleman had addressed himself to Eastern Virginia, and yery successlully. So 
 successfully, that he had induced them, out of magnanimity; to forego the interests 
 of that section of countr}-, for the sake of principle, pure principle, and in pursuance 
 of the true doctrine of republicanism. But, now. the gentleman said to those yery 
 men, I ask you to defeat and oyertum those doctrines which you belieye to be the 
 a priori truths of genuine republicanism : and 1 ask you fmther, to enoraft upon the 
 plan of compromise a principle which I haye declared before the world to be unjust 
 and odious : and to do this in such a way as to prostrate the interests of your own consti- 
 tuents, for tlie sake of those of a gentleman from Brooke. "When the gentleman had 
 said he was wUling to meike this sacrifice for the sake of compromise, diey had asked 
 him why he would not consent to encrraft the same principle on the House of Dele- 
 gates ? The ingredient was the same in either House. The answer was furnished 
 by his present course. It now seemed tliat the principle by which he had been go- 
 verned, and the only principle, was a regard to Western interest. Xow. the o-entle- 
 man avowed the principle that men are goyerned by tlieir views of interest. ^ And, 
 thus situated, the gentleman hoped to preyail with Eastern Virginia, to induce her to 
 defeat his own favorite principle, and that to the injury of her own peop-e S : 
 was Mr. S. from regarding tlie Federal number in the Senate as a protect::: . .e 
 esteemed it even worse than the white basis alone. He had rather accept tiie vrLite 
 basis in both Houses. To organize one House on one basis and the other on the other, 
 would be to provide for a perpetual war between them. 
 
 The feature was avowedly odious to the people of the West, yet the gentleman 
 pressed to have it inserted. He would not say that this was done because tliat princi- 
 ple was odious to the West : but this was obvious, that if tlie gentleman wished to 
 render the new Constitution distateful and odious to the West, this was a direct mode 
 of ejecting that object. 
 
 Why not accept of the compound ratio r Its effect would be almost exactly the 
 same. He would not answer the question. How easy would it be to expel tliis prin- 
 ciple from the Constitution : The people of the East began already to be presented in 
 an unfriendly manner to their Western brethren. They were called ■• the Eastern 
 Dons." The terms black Senate"' and negro Senate"- were already heard. And 
 with this spirit prevailiog, the West were to have the entire controul of the House of 
 Delegates. Who so dull' as not to anticipate the process The lower House send up 
 a popular bill. The Senate reject it. the West complains of the rejection. Xext year, 
 the same bill is sent up again. The Senate again reject it. The clamour, the odium 
 is increased. Other bills are got up — for the very purpose : so framed as to insure 
 their rejection. These are sent up in succession, and one aiter another are rejected 
 in the Senate, and this is repeated, until at length the people of tiie West are told, 
 and made to believe it. that they are despised and trampled on. The next step is to 
 pass a bill in the lower House for the calling of a Convention. That bill is rejected 
 in the Senate. The tumult is now heightened. Next session another bill for a Con- 
 vention is sent up : it is rejected again. And what is the next step r It is this — to 
 call a Convention by resolution of the House of Delegates, the Convention meets 
 and the obnoxious principle is expelled from the Constilntion. 
 
 I now ask. said Mr. S. if this purpose has not been formed, and been aroiced since 
 this Convention has been a.^sembled ? >»othing, certainly, is more easy of accomplish- 
 ment. This aristocratic feature, branded in its very birth with the' most odious of 
 names, what chance has it to contend with popular commotion and cabal For my 
 own part I had much rather surrender the whole orround at once. 
 
 Mr. Scott concluded by moving to amend the amendment of !Mr. Doddridcre. by- 
 transposing the terms Senate and House of Delegates, so that the House of "Dele- 
 gates should be based upon Federal numbers and the Senate on white population ex- 
 clusively. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy spoke in reply : The gentleman from Fauquier has said that a plot has 
 been formed, and avowed, to blow up this negro Senate. I teU him, that if there is 
 
686 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 such a plot, I have never heard of it. The gentleman from Fauquier may hear what 
 I do not. But, I have never so much as heard of the plot he attributes to the whole 
 body with whom I act. He charges us with inconsistency. This charge I do not 
 take to myself. I have never denied that the people of Virginia, met in Convention, 
 may base their own Constitution in whatever pleases them best. But throughout the 
 whole of my political life, I have always thought that Government ought not to be 
 based upon property. It is my belief that wealth will always take care of itself : and 
 that it has too much interest and influence in controlling society already, without 
 giving it more by Constitutional provision. I agreed to introduce the Federal num- 
 ber in the Senate for two reasons. I am not for surrendering the principle contended 
 for by the slave-holding States in the Federal Government. The Federal Constitu- 
 tion gives to one half of Virginia a representation based on that number. And this 
 Convention has no right to fix on the State a principle of miserable discord. The 
 people of the East will have a security in such a Senate that will protect this slave 
 property from all unjust legislation. None can disturb them in the quiet possession 
 of it. This was the inducement with me to consent to a comproiTiise. I found no 
 difficulty in it, because on this plan they would not have their property held at the 
 discretion of those who, they say, have got no property themselves. Now, we have 
 some little property to the West. But, we are very poor, very poor : and I think our 
 Eastern friends are not very rich. They have, to be sure, this species of property, 
 which is the cause of all this distress ; and which all admit is a curse. Now, I want 
 to have them protected in it. I cannot vote for the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Albemarle, unless it is to have some provision for the future. But, I am willing to 
 go on for ten years without disturbing the question, and twenty years after that ; but not 
 to all time. If I can't get something better than this, I had rather go back to the old 
 Government. I shall vote against adopting the Constitution unless something better 
 than this is to be put into it. I have listened with great patience to the debates, (and 
 I am of a very irritable temper) and said nothing ; and for the very best reason. I 
 have no abilities for debate : I am not a talking man. I make no pretensions to be so. 
 But, now, I am pretty well weary ; and I think it is time we had done. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose to state a matter of history ; but one which had a bearing on the 
 argument before the House. It was, that a gentleman had called on him that morning 
 and informed him, that the gentlemen from the Valley had assured that gentleman 
 that they were ready to take the compromise of the gentlen)an from Albemarle as it 
 stood, and would recommend a Constitution with that feature in it, to the adoption of 
 their own constituents : and this statement had been made to him (Mr. L.) with a view 
 to regulate his conduct in reference to his own proposition. 
 
 The interview had the effect to render him less zealous than he otherwise should 
 have been in advocating the proposition : and it explained to him the votes which 
 had been given against it, and which he had expected to have been given in its favour. 
 He stated that fact to shew its influence on his own course. The experiment was 
 now about to be made, (he was going to say for the last time,) to see whether the 
 East would be content to agree to a compromise in which they were to accept a ten 
 years lease, and give up the fee simple of their property. 
 
 Whether the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell.) was one to whom he alluded, 
 he could not tell. But now was the time, as he supposed, when this question of the 
 basis was to be definitively settled. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that when he had been last on the floor, he gave the Convention 
 a solemn and most sincere assurance that he could not vote for the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Albemarle, in conscience. And no individual had any right to say 
 that he was prepared to vote for that proposition against his conscience. He never 
 had said to any one that he was prepared to vote for it as it stood ; and from whatever 
 source his information was derived, there was no truth in the author's statement, so 
 far as he was concerned. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said, it was very probable he had said that if he was reduced to the 
 dilemma of taking one or the other, he should prefer the plan of the gentleman from 
 Albemarle to that of the gentleman from Chesterfield ; but he could take neither, un- 
 less there was added some principle of future apportionment. Either would suit him 
 very well for the time present, but he did not come here, and the people did not send 
 him here, to agree to any temporary expedient. He wanted something that should 
 last through time. He had no objections to the propositions in the plan of the gen- 
 tleman from Albemarle, or even of that of the gentleman from Chesterfield : but to 
 me it seems that no man could cast his eye upon the last, and not see that if that is 
 to be adopted, the East must rule through all time. No matter where the population 
 shall be, or what shall be the growth of the Western country, the East is to rule them 
 through all time. 
 
 Mr. Mason of Frederick, now addressed the Convention as follows : 
 Mr. President : By those with whom I have the advantage of personal acquain- 
 tance, I shall never be suspected of being influenced in rising by the petty ambition 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 687 
 
 of hearing my voice sound within these walls. Could I he thus actuated, I should be 
 admonished to silence by the attitude in which I stand to this Assembly. I am here 
 as the humble successor of one. who was honoured as the pe^-ple's choice — tlieir con- 
 fidence was not given to me: for my seat I am indebted to liie kind estimate ot those 
 who are now my coheagues. 
 
 "Were more wanting to repress me. 1 should be further and sternly admonished, by 
 the august presence of this Assembly. But, Sir, the time has come, when to remain 
 silent might be to betray — Coming as I do more recently from the people. I may per- 
 haps bear with me a fresher impression of their ietlings on this momentous question, 
 and though by accident their representative, they shall find me not less true to the 
 trust. 
 
 Though not present at your deliberations, I have been not an unmindful observer 
 of all that has passed on this much vexed question of representation. Tbrough the 
 faithful medium of the press, I have attentively heard and maturely 1 hope, considered 
 all that has been urged on either side — and have taken a view of this controversy dif- 
 ferent from any that I have seen presented. "Tis true, Sir, as has been avowed on 
 this floor, that it is a struggle for power — but not as I imagine, a struggle between the 
 East and the West. It is^one of those fearful contests, of which all history is full, 
 in which the Government is on one side, and the jjeople are on the other. 
 
 Instances almost innumerable might be adduced, when at periods more or less fre- 
 quent in the history of every Government, (I care not what its form) this controversy 
 has arisen between the people and tlie ridincr power. 
 
 The people demand the restitution of an usurped authority — the Government re- 
 fuses to accede — the people persist — the Government stand firm in their refusal — an 
 issue is feartully made up — most generally the momentous trial of right is avoided by 
 a compromise — when that fails, there is left but the narrow choice, between an abject 
 submission, or the most spirited resistance. I^am afraid, Su', we are now brought to 
 that point in our deliberations. 
 
 Let us briefly review the liistory of this Convention. I shall make no laboured 
 exposition from the statistical tables with which we have been furnished, to shew that 
 it has been called hy a large majority of the white population of the State — I am war- 
 ranted in that assertion, it was loudlv a^ain and again demanded at the hands of 
 the Government, before it was extended — in ItlT, the popular clamour was for 
 the time appeased, by a new arranorement of the Senatorial districts, so as to accom- 
 modate that branch somewhat nearer to an equal representation of the white popu- 
 lation. 
 
 The douceur had its eflect, and the evil day for the time postponed. But it could 
 not last — the thing was wrong in itself — the people would never be satisfied so long as 
 they were held in a}l things obedient to the will of a confessed minority. This, Sir^ 
 was the grievance. The Government was called to retribution in this — a Convention 
 was demanded ah*nost for this alone — I speak. Sir, for the people whom I am here to 
 to represent in part, and for the whole adjacent country. I speak the voice of the 
 entire West when I sa}-, that to equalize the representation — to place the Govern- 
 ment where of right it ought to be, in the hands of the majority of the political com- 
 munity, was the controihng motive wliich impelled them to a Convention. 
 
 Other objects may have been in view, but they were of far minor consideration — 
 compared with this, they were but as a feather in the scale. A minority, and a very 
 small minority, wielded' the whole power of the State. The foundations of our in- _ 
 stitutions were subverted, and the grand eflibrt was, to restore the power where it 
 rightfully belonged, to the majority of the people. I speak. Sir, of the only majority I 
 ever knew — a majority of the political community — of the free white population. 
 Much refined and able reasoning has been adduced' to shew, that this is not the true 
 majority — I have neither time now, nor perhaps ability to reply to the argument, but 
 permit me to say in part, to tlie gentleman on the other side, who has attacked this 
 republican fortress v.-ith most eflect, in the language of a pithy poet, " addidit rohur 
 intalidm facundia causa." ° 
 
 1 never can acknowledge but one majority in our country — and those whom we 
 represent here, expect us to keep this steadily in view. 
 
 Again, by our brethren of the East, the right of the majoritv to rule, is denounced 
 as an abstract principle. If any principle, apart from practice, i's worthy to be denoun- 
 ced, it must be, because such principle is not only in practice, inapphcable, but ought 
 not to be applied. When such principle is found in the abstract, and is ascertained 
 impracticable, I agree that it ought to be denounced— but if the principle in question 
 be such, surely all popular Goverament resting upon it, is included in the denuncia- 
 tion. To thi^s, gentlemen are inevitably brought — and if their denunciation be right- 
 ful, what a farce is your whole scheme of popular Government. If it be righfful, 
 put aside at once all your popular forms, and assume some other rule of power. Only, 
 we entreat you, let your people know what their Government in truth is. Do not 
 announce it in your Bill of Rights in one breath, and violate it in your Constitution 
 
688 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 in the other, Speak boldly forth and let the people know that power is no longer 
 their's — don't " keep the word of promise to the ear, and break it to the hope." 
 
 But, Sir, we are told on the other side, in further answer, you require of us by 
 your scheme of Representation, to surrender up our property to your absolute con- 
 troul. Though I should rely much on the strong sound sense which pervades the 
 people, I have no overweening confidence in public virtue- — 1 know well that under 
 that mask, much and cruel injustice has been done. Jt is seldom safe, to trust one 
 man, or a set of men with the property of another. But the supposition that we re- 
 quire this, is clearly gratuitous. Property, as the subject of taxation, is diffused 
 through the whole State. Though you of the East may have much, we of the West (as 
 we have been just told by the venerable gentleman tirom Pendleton.) have some little 
 too. In a question of taxation, or of confiscation, he who has little is as deeply con- 
 cerned as he who has more. 
 
 The rich argosie which bears abroad a nation's wealth, takes with it too the sea- 
 man's humble venture — if dash'd upon a rock, or plundered by pirates of the sea — the 
 merchant is dispoiled of his gains — whilst the seaman's all has perished. Does not 
 the figure illustrate.? 
 
 "Where then is the disparity found The grain-grower of the West may have an 
 humble competency — whilst his more favored neighbour of the East, mayjiave that 
 which commands the luxuries of the Indies — tax them both equally — they both feel 
 it equally — and though the Eastern man pays more, he in fact feels its loss far less. 
 This argument will apply throughout, as far as property is homogeneous. 
 
 But an objection is drawn from the fact that there is to the East a peculiar species 
 of property of which the redundancy is there so great, that there is no correspondent 
 sympathy to the West. I give to this, Sir, its full weight. Not that I believe there 
 is any real ground of apprehension, that it may be unjustly taxed ; but its character 
 is so peculiar, that I can well appreciate the anxiety, which would place it beyond 
 the reach of harm. It is the peculium of the South, unfortunately there, we believe; 
 yet so long as it remains, it should be sacred in their hands : In its careful manage- 
 ment, and delicate conversation, those who possess it, have a deeper stake, than the 
 mere right of property : it is natural they should be sensitively alive to all that affects 
 it, and far be it from me to advise any profane approach. 
 
 But, Sir, having made this acknowledgment, is it not asking too much in return, 
 that for the sake of that, we should surrender to them our birth-right.? That w^ should 
 hand over to them an absolute dominion over ourselves — or rather should I not say, 
 submit to their exaction.? for as such is it required. 
 
 Mr. President, — To quiet this apprehension, v/e have offered to concede mnch — 
 at least, so we have fondly thought. We offer it now, and I fear for the last time, 
 by the amendment in your hands. We offer a guarantee in the Senate, by infusing 
 there the Federal numbers. But the popular branch must be pure. Distant as we 
 are from our constituents, we cannot say how far they will sanction this concession. 
 I for one, am willing to assume the responsibility ; and if wrong, to look for my ac- 
 quittal in that generous confidence, on which the Representative principle is founded. 
 The gentleman from Brooke, who offered the amendment, and my colleagues, nay, 
 the entire West, will go thus far. But, Sir — I speak it not in anger, nor as menace — 
 when I say, farther I cannot go — farther (I think I may speak it for them,) they will 
 not go. Take it then as our ultimatum. So far as I know the will of those whom 
 I represent, every principle of obedience forbids it. Though now a minority in the 
 Government, they have become so by the fortuities of time and accident. To remain 
 such by their own act, as they would do, b}^ taking the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Albemarle, without the amendment of the gentleman from Brooke, would rivet 
 their chains, and conclude them for ever. 
 
 As to what has been said by the gentleman from Chesterfield, of a communication 
 to him, that many of the Valley members would unite on the plan of the gentleman 
 from Albemarle, if his was abandoned, it must have been founded in misconception — 
 
 [Here Mr. Neale interposed to explain, &c.] 
 
 The gentleman from Richmond, is not the man to misrepresent, but he may have 
 misapprehended — 
 
 Mr. Neale here again interposed, and said: 
 
 Mr. President, — 1 rise to state, that it was to me the gentleman from Chesterfield 
 alluded, when he said, that a member of this House, had this morning made a com- 
 munication to him, as to the probable vote of the Western members on the proposition 
 of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon.) I had not intended to have noticed 
 the allusion, knowing that in the course of the debate, the whole matter would be ex- 
 plained by others; but the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Mason,) has again refer- 
 red to the subject, and I feel bound to put this matter upon the ground it should rest. 
 
 Two gentlemen of honorable distinction in this body as elsewhere, who will, I 
 doubt not, at a proper time, confirm what I am about to state, were conversing with^ 
 me last evening on the subject of the vote given yesterday in favour of the plan of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOX. 
 
 689 
 
 Representation proposed by the gentleman from Albemarle, 50 to 46. They expressed 
 an opinion in which I fully concurred, that it was the final opinion of the House, and 
 that the Western plan was irretrievably lost. Tlie}^ expressed great apprehension 
 that the new scheme of the gentleman trom Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh.) might be car- 
 ried by the Eastern gentlemen. The}^ stated that such a result would prove fatal to the 
 last hope of forming a Constitution which would be accepted by the people of Virginia: . 
 That they could not vote for a Constitution so obnoxious and injurious to the West, and 
 the people of the West would vote against it to a man, and so would many of the East: >. 
 That if that scheme, so odious to the West, could be defeated, they had sanguine hopes, 
 and were of opinion, that twenty or more of the Western members, now that their 
 favorite plan was lost, would unite with the East in voting for the plan of the gentle- 
 man from Albemarle, which in their opinion, was in fact, more beneficial to the West 
 than their own favorite plan: That if the Eastern gentlemen would be satisfied with 
 the proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle, (JSh. Gordon,) they would advocate 
 it, (as all their own schemes had failed.) and that they thought, that gentlemen from 
 the West (in which I certainly understood that the Valley was included.) would very 
 probably to the number of more than twenty, unite with them — and if I concurred, I 
 might, if I thought proper, communicate the same to my friends. That their own 
 schemes had failed; and that of the gentleman from Chesterfield, they deemed ob- 
 noxious and injurious; and they were willing to take the plan voted for as presented 
 by the gentleman from Albemarle, it being the best which they thought could be got. 
 
 I this morning made the communication to many of my political friends, among 
 whom, was the gentleman from Chesterfield, to the effect of which I have stated, and 
 expressing always, that I believed, that the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle 
 would be voted for by members from the West : That 1 had great reliance in the 
 opinion and discretion of those with whom I had conversed, witliout even having 
 named the gentlemen to my friends. 
 
 I considered the information which I gave as important, if we wished to frame a 
 popular Constitution — and to my mind, as good a compromise of the question of Re- 
 presentation as it was practicable to obtain. 
 
 I was well convinced that the plan of the gentleman from Chesterfield could not go 
 down; and I voted against it, in the hope, that the prediction of the gentlemen, with 
 whom I conversed last night might prove correct, as to the fate of the scheme of the 
 gentleman from Albemarle. In all this matter I laboured sincerely, to put at rest for- - 
 ever, (if I could) this much agitated and agitating question of Representation. 
 
 Mr. Mason — If the gentleman is right in his apprehension, I am entirely ignorant 
 to whom there is allusion — certainly not to me. 
 
 I have finished, Sir, all that I had to say. I feel — deeply feel — interested in the 
 fate of the amendment ; for on it hangs, I fear, the peace — the peace — if not, the in- 
 tegrity of Virginia. 
 
 The question was then put on the amendment of Mr. Johnson, (proposing an in- - 
 terval of twenty years between the assessments of the lands of the State,) and it was 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. Summers moved to insert the words at least" before the words "twenty 
 years:" but it was lost. 
 
 Mr. Scott now moved to amend so as to give the Federal number as a basis of Re- 
 presentation in the Lower House, and the white basis in the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, moved an adjournment, but it was lost. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge demanded the ayes and noes on Mr. Scott's motion, and they were 
 ordered by the House. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. Scott, (to reverse the two 
 Houses, putting the Federal number in the Lower House, and the white basis in the 
 Senate.) and decided in the negative by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,)' Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, "Goode, Manshall, Nichnlas, Mason 
 of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart. Randolph. Leigh of Halifax. Lrgan, 
 Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Carohne, Morris, Garnett, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prenlis. Grigsby, 
 Branch, Townes, Bates, Neale,Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrm — 44. 
 
 J\'oes — Messrs. Tyler, Clopton, Anderson. Cofiinan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, 
 Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitziiugh, Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, iSaylor, Donaldson, 
 Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chap- 
 man, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers. See, Doddridge. Morgan, 
 Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, CamplDell of Bedford. Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, 
 Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson and Massie — o2. 
 
 So Mr. Scott's amendment was rejected. 
 
 The question next recurred on Mr. Doddridge's amendment, when 
 
 87 
 
690 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend it so as to give the Senate a basis on Federal numbers, 
 and the Lower House a basis on population and taxation combined." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge asked the ayes and noes which were ordered and taken accordingly, 
 and stood as follows : 
 
 £t/es — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and 
 Perrin — 45. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, John- 
 son, M'Cov, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, 
 Odborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 dletoa, George, M'MiUan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan. Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, 
 Pleasants, Gord(m, Thompson and Massie — 51. 
 
 So the amendment of Mr. Scott was rejected. 
 
 Mr Martin now moved to amend by striking out <^ 1841," and inserting " 1850," 
 (for the time of re-apportionment of the Representation in the Legislature.) 
 
 This amendment was also rejected by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 ^^t/es — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, 
 Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason 
 of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Vena- 
 ble, Stanard, Hf)lladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Cul- 
 peper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Martin, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly and Perrin — 43. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Jones, Goode, Anderson, CotFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, 
 Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Logan, Madison, Mercer, 
 Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Cabell, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Neale and Upshur — 53. 
 
 The question was at length taken on Mr. Doddridge's amendment as amended by 
 Mr. Johnson, viz: 
 
 " After the year 1841, and every ticenty years thereafter, there shall be a new ap- 
 portionment of Representation, and a new assessment of land taxes — each apportion- 
 ment of Representation shall be made in the following manner and on the following 
 basis, viz : the number of free white inhabitants in the House of Delegates, and the 
 Federal basis in the Senate." 
 
 When the vote stood as follows : 
 
 Aijes — Messrs. Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, 
 Miithews, Ooflesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell 
 of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thomp- 
 son and Massie — 48. 
 
 Koes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby. Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 48. 
 
 So the amendment not having a majority in its favour was lost. 
 
 [The Convention therefore, have, a second time, rejected the proposition to base 
 Representation in the House of Delegates on the white population exclusively.] 
 
 Mr. Cooke now rose, and spoke as follows : 
 
 He said, that he felt himself impelled by so strong a sense of duty to state his 
 views of the subject under the consi;leration of the House, that even at that late hour 
 of the day, v/hen the {(atience and the physical strength of his auditors had been worn 
 out by a protracted and agitating session, he was induced to throw himself on the in- 
 dulgence of that honourable body. And if, (continued Mr. C.) in the remarks which 
 I propose to make, I shall subject myself to the charge of egotism, I rely with confi- 
 dence on the kindness of the House, and shall expect their forgiveness ; not only be- 
 cause it is my first offence, but because it vi^ill be seen that the peculiar position in 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 (591 
 
 which I stand, renders egotism indispensable — absolutely essential to the exposition 
 of my views. 
 
 Without further preamble, then, I say, that from the year 1816, and I might safely 
 say from a much earlier period, I have been a firm and zealous, and am accused of 
 having been, an uncompromising friend of reform. I am one (if three persons, all 
 at this time present, and members of this honorable bod\' — I allude to the two gentle- 
 men from Berkeley, (Gen. Boyd and Mr. Pendleton.) who in the month of February, 
 1816, gave the first decided impulse to the cause of constitutional reform among the 
 people of Western Virginia. At the period just mentioned, we caused a circular let- 
 ter to be addressed to gentlemen in various parts of the Commonwealth, who in con- 
 sequence of the invitation contained in it, assembled, to the number of some twenty 
 or thirty, in the month of May following, in the town of Winchester. At tliat Con- 
 vention, the grievances of Middle and Western Virginia, and the most efficient means 
 of obtaining redress, were the topics discussed and considered. It resulted in an ear- 
 nest appeal to the friends of reform, throughout the Commonwealth, urging them to 
 assemble in their respective counties on the 4th of JuU* following, for the purpose of 
 electing Delegates to a Convention, to be held at Staunton, in the month of August 
 following. 
 
 The avowed purpose of assembling that general Convention of the friends of re- 
 form, was to devise means for effecting a full and free Convention of the people of 
 Virginia, for the reform of her institutions ; a Convention which should enforce, by a 
 new, or amended Constitution, the equal rights of all the people of Virginia ; a Conven- 
 tion which should give practical effect to the great political principles announced in 
 the Declaration of the Rights of the people of Virginia, which do pertain to them 
 and their posterity ;" to the principles, that '* all jmiccr is vested in, and consequently 
 derived from, the people.'" and that '• a majority of the people have an indubitable, un- 
 alienable, and indefeasible right." to controul the affairs of the Commonw'ealth : 
 Principles wholly disregarded in the actual Constitution of Virginia. 
 
 A Convention of the friends of reform was held at Staunton in consequence of this 
 appeal. The result is known ; and I will not weary you by pursuing further the 
 liistory of that popular movement which at lengtii resulted in the assembling of this 
 Convention. 
 
 But I will say. and I say it proudly, that, from the time of that first movement to 
 the day on which I address you, I have been a fi.rm, an undeviating, a zealous, aye, 
 Sir, an ardent friend of the rights of the people. The promotion, the enforcement, of 
 those rights, by constitutional reform, has ever since been, and still is, an object near 
 and dear to my heart. Notwithstanding the vicious principle of representation under 
 which this body was elected — notwithstanding that provision of its organic law, which 
 gives to fifteen thousand citizens, near to tlie line of North Carolina, the same repre- 
 sentation with sixty thousand who dwell in a trans-Alleghany district, I did not 
 " despair of the Republic." I did not abandon the hope, to which I had clung so 
 long, that a Constitution would be formed, b}'^ which the equal representation of the 
 people of Virginia, in both of the Legislative bodies, would be carried into full effect. 
 To that hope I clung till my reason told me to despair of its accomplishment. After 
 a protracted, an obstinate, and I may almost say, a fierce contest in this Assembly of 
 several weeks duration, it was but too apparent that victory had deserted the banner 
 of the friends of reform — that they had not numerical strength in this Assembly to 
 carry into full effect the principles of their political creed — that the effort to obtain an 
 equal representation of the peojjle of Virginia in the Government of Virginia, must be 
 abandoned as hopeless. ' 
 
 But still, much had been gained. The rnmparts of the old Constitution had been 
 defended, it is true, with a zeal, an ability, and a gallantry, that must extort praise 
 even from an enemy. Our ranks had been thinned, and many of our attacks had 
 - been repelled. But we were neither routed nor dismayed. Thus much, at least, we 
 had attained : It was given up on all hands, that the actual distribution of political 
 power through the territory, and among the people of Virginia, under the existing 
 Constitution, was too grossly unequal to be longer endured, and that a more equitable 
 plan of distribution was indispensably necessar}^ The disfranchised class of the 
 non-freeholders, too, had found favour in the eyes of a majority of this Assembly ; 
 and it was ascertained, that a Constitution would receive its assent, by which four 
 additional classes, to wit: small freeholders, reversioners and remainder-men, lessees 
 for years, and house-keepers paying taxes, should be admitted to a participation in the 
 sovereignty of the country. It had also been ascertained to be the sense of a majo- 
 rity of this body, that our unwieldy House of Delegates should be reduced in number, 
 and the expenses of the Government diminished. Other useful and oeconomical re- 
 forms, it was known would receive its sanction. It w^as ascertained, in short, that 
 thoiigh the equal representation of tlie people could not be carried, a great approxi- 
 mation towards it was attainable. 
 
692 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Under these circumstances, the alternative was presented to the friends of reform, 
 on the one hand, of abandoning the contest, and dissolving this Assembly, without 
 forming any Constitution, or, on the other, of endeavouring to effect something like 
 a fair compromise on the great and vexed question of the basis of Representation. 
 
 I contemplated, as was my duty, with a steady eye, the alternative thus presented. 
 I saw on the one hand the continuance, for an indefinite period, of that gross ine- 
 quality of Representation which has kept Virginia, for thirteen years, in a state of 
 turmoil and confusion: I saw the hopes of my disfranchised fellow-citizens blasted, 
 and their passions aroused and excited. I knew that a large majority of the people 
 of Virginia considered themselves iniquitously held in a state of political bondage. I 
 knew that threats had been uttered, within the last eighteen months ; not loud and braw- 
 ling menaces, but threats, which, by the manner in which they were uttered, manifes- 
 ted a cool, stern, deep, and determined purpose — threats, " that if the non-freeholders 
 did not obtain justice, in the Convention then anticipated, they would no longer submit 
 to the laws and the constituted authorities : that they would refuse to labour on the 
 roads," (a rank and palpable grievance) — " that they would refuse to pay county le- 
 vies and taxes — and to perform militia duty; that if the constituted authorities at- 
 tempted to enforce the payment of the taxes, levies, fines, and penalties, they would 
 resist force with force." 1 knew, by the result of a private Census, that in the county 
 of Frederick alone, there were no less than tioo thousand tioo hundred of these dis- 
 franchised citizens — men of full age — and that they bore to the freeholders the pro- 
 portion of nearly nine to five. 
 
 I shuddered at the probable result of a conflict, begun by a stubborn refusal to obey 
 the constituted authorities — proceeding next to an attempt, by those authorities, to 
 enforce obedience by the posse comitatus — then a tumultuary and successful resistance, 
 ripening fast into organized insurrection — a military array for its suppression — the 
 passions of the oppressed and disfranchised classes at length aroused to frenzy — and 
 then — a civil war with all its concomitant horrors — houses, villages, and towns redu- 
 ced to ashes, and many a stricken field strewed with the mangled corpses of our citi- 
 zens, and drenclied with the best blood of Virginia. 
 
 Believe me. Sir, this is no rhetorical war; no fancy picture. I tell you, Sir, for I 
 knoio it, that so sure as God is in heaven, the separation of this Assembly, without 
 redressing, in some measure at least, the grievances of the non-freeholders, will be 
 the signal for resistance, passive at first, to the constituted authorities. And he has 
 read in vain the history of past ages and other times — and the history of our own 
 revolutionary struggle more especially, who does not see that eyen passive resistance 
 must and will produce an attempt, on the part of the Government, to enforce obedi- 
 ence — that that attempt will arouse the passions of the oppressed, and that civil war 
 will be the result. 
 
 This, Mr. President, was one of the alternatives, carried out to its results, presented 
 by the refusal of a majority of this Assembly to recognize the equal rights of the people 
 to Representation in the Legislative bodies. The other, as I have said, was the aban- 
 donment of long cherished hopes — the sacrifice of a great principle — a principle coe- 
 val with the R.epublic itself, and endeared to us by its association with all those early 
 feelings of enthusiasm inspired by the story of the Revolution. But in abandoning 
 those hopes, we did but bow to the supreme law of necessity — in sacrificing that prin- 
 ciple we offered it up on the altar of the public safety. The choice was painful but 
 not difficult. 
 
 The friends of reform in this Assembly, unanimously determined that it was due to 
 the country to attempt, at least, to negotiate a compromise basis of Representation. 
 
 The first attempt of the sort was made on the 18th of November, by the worthy 
 gentleman from Goochland, (Governor Pleasants.) As one of the friends of reform, 
 and of conciliation too, he proposed, in effect, that preserving the equal Represen- 
 tation of the people, in the most numerous branch of the Legislature, we should ex- 
 tend the number of the Senate to thirty-six, in deference to the expressed wishes of 
 our political opponents, and distribute the Representation in that body, throughout 
 the Commonwealth, on the basis of Federal numbers. A manifest improvement in 
 the temper of the body was produced by the proposition itself, but more especially by 
 the manner in which it was announced, and by the patriotic feelings by which it was 
 evidently dictated. 
 
 That pi-oposition was still on the table, undisposed of, when, on the 25th of Novem- 
 ber, a second plan of a compromise-basis of Representation was offered to the con- 
 sideration of the House by the gentleman from Albemarle, (General Gordon.) He 
 avowed it to be his purpose to conciliate both parties, by throwing out of view, alto- 
 gether, the vexed questions concerning the basis of Representation, which had agi- 
 tated for weeks, not only this Assembly, but the whole people of Virginia, and which 
 had led to no result, save only the absolute certainty, that a majority of this body 
 could not be brought to unite in any one principle of representation which should be 
 the common basis of both of the Legislative bodies. He recommended an arbitrary 
 
DEBATES or THE C ONTEXTIOIS". 
 
 apportionment of representation, in which no express reference shonld be had, either 
 to the principle of the equal representation of the white people, or to the principle of 
 the representation of Federal numbers, or to the principle of the compound ratio of 
 white population and tasation. or to any other of the debateable. and long debated 
 propositions which had disturbed the harmony of the body : an apportionment, in 
 which the sole object should be an equitable compromise, so far as any compromise 
 can be equitable, of the conflicting pretensions of the East and the West, with a tacit 
 sating of the principles on which those pretensions were founded, and a postpone- 
 ment~of their discussion till some fhture period more auspicious to their harmonious 
 adjustment. 
 
 The actual distribution of power contemplated by his proposition, was. that in a 
 House of Delegates of one hundred and twenty members. twenty-six should be 
 elected from that part of Virginia lying west of the Alleghany ISIountains : twenty- 
 four from the Valley between the Alleghany and the Blue Ridge thirty-seven from 
 the Blue Ridge to the head of Tide- water ; and thirty -three from the country below 
 the falls of the rivers." And that, in a Senate of twenty-iour. there should be ten 
 Senators from the connfry west of the Blue B.idge of Mountains, and fourteen from 
 the country east of those Mountains. He has since niodiiied his proposition by 
 changinof the number of members in both bodies, without changing materially the 
 distribution of power. His proposition, now under consideration is. that the House 
 of Delegates shall consist of one hundred and twenty-seven members, of whom 
 twentv-nine shall be elected from the district west of the Alleghany 3Iountains ; 
 twenty-iour from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge : forty from the 
 Blue Ridge to the head of tide-water, and thirty -four thence below." And that the 
 Senate shall consist of thirty-two members, of whom there shall be thirteen west 
 of the Blue Ridge of AIotLntains, and niaeteen east of those Mountains."" 
 
 I have said. Sir. that the resolution of the gentleman from Albemarle was offered 
 to the House on the '2-5th of 2vovember. I had previously examined, in concert with 
 my friend from Londoun, (Mr. Henderson.) that of the gentieman from Goochland, 
 by comparing its results vrith those of the white population basis, which we consi- 
 dered the true standard whereby to measure, by the extent of their aberration from it, 
 the feasibihty of all plans of compromise whatever. We now instituted a critical and 
 laborious examination of the compromise-basis proposed by the gentieman from Albe- 
 marle. We took next a relative or comparative view of both of Siese plans, in all their 
 bearings and eispects — in their operation on each section of the State , and on the whole 
 State — in their principles, so far as any principle was involved, and in their practical 
 results — ^in their probable effects on the various and apparentiy coDiiicting interests of 
 the different parts of the Commonwealth at present, and on the same interests, when 
 the relative situation of those parts should be changed, as it probably would be, by the 
 unequal ratios of the increase of their population. The result of this esamination 
 was a dehberate and well considered preference for the plan of the gentieman from 
 Albemarle, in regard to the present or actual distribution of political pouer. We con- 
 sidered it. however, a great defect in the plan, that it provided no rule for future ap- 
 portionment, so as to adapt itself, from time to time, to the varying population of the 
 different sections of the Commonwealth ; the attempt to frame such a rule havinor been 
 abandoned, or rather never made by its author, because he considered that the very 
 attempt would bring into instant conflict the discordant pretensions of the contending 
 parties, which it was the main object of his plan to keep in a state of quiescence. But! 
 even in this respect, we considered his plan a more acceptable compromise to the West 
 than that of the gentieman from Goochland, because we deemed it the interest of that 
 comparatively non-slave-holding part of the Commonwealth to have no principle at all 
 of re-apportionment rather than a principle, which, in all time to come, icould make 
 every fire slaves iri the East equal to three citizens in tJie West i7i the organization of the 
 Senate, a body i7ivcsted icitli poa:er to negative every act of legiMation proposed hy the 
 House of Delegates, hoicever vital in importance to the people of Western Virginia.'^ 
 
 Impressed with these views of the character of the two plans of compromise, and 
 deeply impressed, too, with the critical, it not dangerous, state to which the dissensions 
 of this Assembly had brought the best interests of our country, we resolved to make 
 an effort, at least, to foster that spirit of conciliation then so recently manifested. We 
 resolved to commence v.ith an attempt to unite the friends of reform in some scheme 
 of compromise to be afterwards tendered to our fellow-citizens from the East and the 
 South. We accordingly effected a meeting, on the 27th of November, of the fortv- 
 nine members, or a great portion of them, who had voted for the first resolution of the 
 Legislative Committee, recommending that representation in the House of Dele- 
 gates should be apportioned with regard to white population exclusivelv." The dis- 
 cussions which took place at that meeting disclosed the fact that a considerable num- 
 ber, at least, of the Wester-n members, felt a decided preference tor the scheme of the 
 gentleman from Goochland. The meeting resulted in the appointment of a Commit- 
 tee, consistiag of a gentieman from the Trans- Alleghany district and myself, to con= 
 
694 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 fer, on the following day, with those members of the forty-nine who represented the 
 districts lying East of the Ridge — to ascertain whether tliey could unite in any scheme 
 of compromise which would be acceptable to the Western members, and to report the 
 result to a second meeting of the forty-nine members, to be held on the following 
 evening. The Committee which I have mentioned did accordingly confer, in the 
 course of the following day, with all the members before alluded to, East of the Ridge, 
 except the venerable Ex-JPresident of this body, who had not attended the meeting of 
 the evening before. The result was, that the members of the forty-nine residing East 
 of the Ridge, concurred in recommending to their political friends of the West, a com- 
 promise scheme of representation exactly according in the actual distribution of pov^er 
 with that of the gentleman from Albemarle. The scheme proposed by those gentle- 
 men was, a House of Delegates of one hundred and twenty members, and a Senate 
 of thirty-six : the members of the House of Delegates to be distributed, fifty to the 
 West and seventy to the East; those of the Senate, fifteen to the West and twenty-one 
 to the East : " this apportionment of representation to remain unchanged till the year 
 1841, when, and at the expiration of every ten years thereafter, a re-apportionment of 
 representation maybe made by law in regard to the House of Delegates." The gen- 
 
 \- tlemen in question also desired the Committee to report that " they were not to be 
 
 considered as peremptorily pledged, in any and all events, to vote for the final adop- 
 tion of the scheme recommended, but merely as offering a plan, which, as then ad- 
 vised, they were determined to support, should it prove acceptable to their political 
 friends of the West." 
 
 The report was made to a second meeting of the forty-nine, or a considerable part 
 of them, held on the evening of the 28th. At that meeting the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle attended, and explained his scheme of representation. But a still more decided 
 preference was by this time manifested for the scheme originally proposed by the 
 gentleman from Goochland, to wit, the zvhtte basis, as it is called, in the House of De- 
 legates, and Federal numbers in the Senate : So decided a preference, that, when the 
 opinions of all the gentlemen were ascertained seriatim, it was found that the scheme 
 of the gentleman from Albemarle had no advocates except himself, my friend from 
 Loudoun, and myself That gentleman and myself still retained, and distinctly ex- 
 pressed, our decided preference for the scheme of the gentleman from Albemarle: but 
 we frankly stated to our political friends, that, as the great object in view was a har- 
 monious co-operation of all the friends of reform in one plan of compromise, in order 
 that it might, on that account, attract a more respectful consideration when ofJered to 
 our fellow-citizens in the Convention from the East and the South, and as we had no 
 .insuperable objection to the plan in which they had thus united, we would, in defer- 
 ence to their opinions, and to promote the great cause of Constitutional reform, waive 
 43ur opinions, and concur with them in supporting their favorite plan, to the extent of 
 noting for it, and giving it a fair trial in the Convention. The gentleman from Albe- 
 marle did not join in this promise — a promise which we had afterwards cause to regret. 
 
 . For, by this gratuitous promise, made in the spirit of conciliation, and with the sole 
 
 purpose of promoting the great object we had so much at heart, we alone were pledged, 
 or so considered ourselves, in the first instance at least, to vote against the scheme 
 we preferred, and in favor of that which we thought the worst of the two, while it was 
 distinctly understood that the other members were not pledged to adhere to the opi- 
 nions then entertained and expressed. It is proper. Sir, that I should here remark, 
 that the meetings in question were held with open doors, and that there were specta- 
 tors present at one or both of them. I will add, that the gentleman from Albemarle, 
 who had failed in his attempt to make his plan acceptable to the meeting, was under 
 , no sort of pledge, express or implied, to conceal the fact that the gentleman from 
 Loudoun and myself preferred his plan to that proposed by the gentleman from Gooch- 
 land. I have not the smallest doubt that he mentioned the fact, as he had a right to 
 do, to all with whom he conversed on the subject. And in fact. Sir. our opinion, from 
 the publicity of the meetings, and the circumstance I have just mentioned, was as no- 
 torious in this body, from the very time of those meetings, in the last week in Novem- 
 ber, as if it had been published in the newspapers of Richmond. This fact 1 state, 
 without the hazard of contradiction. And I state it. Sir, with reference to a most ex- 
 traordinary and most groundless opinion, which some of the gentlemen of our party 
 have ventured to express, that their strenuous efforts to carry their favorite plan of 
 representation had been frustrated by our indiscretion in letting it be understood by 
 the gentlemen of the opposite party, that though we meant to vote for that plan, and 
 give it a fair trial, we would eventually vote for that of the gentleman from Albemarle, 
 if the Western plan should be defeated. Sir, the idea that we had it in our power to 
 conceal our opinion, after it had been so openly expressed before the adoption of the 
 Western plan as a party-measure, is utterly ridiculous, and the imputation thrown on 
 us is gratuitous and unfounded. 
 
 Moreover, Sir, I will take leave to say, that however wise and profound the scheme 
 of attracting to a great political measure the support of its enemies, Avho are the ma- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 695 
 
 joritv. by the obstinate adherence to it of its friends, who are the minority — hp-vrever 
 justifiable it mav seem to veteran politicians to hold out a false and delusive impres- 
 sion, in a conthct like this, which is not a conflict of principle, but a question of pre- 
 ference between tico plans, both of them at war with true principles, that they mean 
 to adhere to their own favorite scheme, even to the point of breaking up the Conven- 
 tion or rendering it wholly abortive — however justifiable it may se-em to them to sport 
 with the patriotic fears of their opponents, and turn their very virtues against them — 
 I, for one. have not been accustomed to such projects, and practices, have had no part 
 in them, emd icill have none. I vrill not consent to practice against my countrymen 
 and fellow-citizens, if they are my political opponents, the tricks and devices of hos- 
 tile diplomacy. And I will add, before I dismiss this unpleasant subject, that the 
 gentleman from Loudoun and myself could not, even if we had been inclined, from 
 the circumstances of the case, have aided in the prosecution of such schemes and 
 devices. 
 
 But to return to the promise given by that gentleman and myself to vote for the 
 compromise-basis proposed by the member from Goochland, and adopted by the Wes- 
 tern members. On the 30th of ^Vovember,! offered the plan in question to the consi- 
 deration of the Convention, as a plan adopted by the Western members, in the spirit of 
 compromise, and in the hope that it icoidd be acceptable to the East. It had not that good 
 fortune. My friend from Loudoun and myself considered its fate as sealed on the 5th 
 of December, bij tico successive votes. First, by a vote of 50 to 45, adopting the plan 
 of the gentleman Irom Albemarle, providing a present, apportionment of representation ; 
 the West em plan then lying on the table, and fully understood. Second, and more deci- 
 sively, if possible, bv a vote of 50 to 45, rejecting a resolution offered by the gentleman 
 from Brooke, pir. Doddridge.) by which it was provided that representation should 
 hereafter be apportioned on the Western plan, to wit : in the House of Delegates on the 
 basis of white population, and in the Senate on the basis of Federal numbers. This 
 wouid seem to have been decisive enough. And by voting as we did, with the mi- 
 nority, on both of these occasions, the gentleman from Loudoun and myself, had fully 
 performed, and had a right to consider ourselves released from, our promise to give 
 the Western plan, v%-hich we disapproved, a fair trial in this body. Moreover, after 
 those votes it ceased to be a plan of compromise, and as a plan of compromise alone 
 had we promised it our support. But operated on by the solicitations of our political 
 friends, who were now heartily embarked in it as a party-measure, and who did not 
 consider the votes I have just mentioned as decisive, we reluctantly consented to o-ive 
 it another trial, expressly announcing our determination to abandon it and vote for 
 ■what we considered the preferable plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, when the 
 former should be again rejected. 
 
 In compliance with that promise we again voted on yesterday, against the plan of 
 the gentleman from Albemarle, when it was perfectly well understood that the vote 
 was a test of the relative strength of his plan and that of the Western members. His 
 plan was again sustained by a vote of 50 to 46, and the Chair was understood to de- 
 cide, expressly, that by that vote the resolution of the gentleman from Albemarle was 
 finally adopted, and that tlie resolution of the gentleman from Chesterfield, proposing 
 a new plan of representation, offered immediately after, could not be considered, and 
 that it was not in order to offer it till the House had first agreed to re-consider the re- 
 solution then recently adopted. The resolution of the gentleman from Chesterfield 
 was then laid on the table, and the House adjourned. 
 
 The gentleman from Loudoun and myself having thus thrice voted for the Western 
 plan, and having seen it thrice defeated, and each time by the same vote of 50 mem- 
 bers, considered it as finally disposed of. and did not imaoine that its warmest friends 
 indulged the hope of resuscitating it, or meant again to "try it. We considered our- 
 selves, therefore, fully at liberty to support tlae plan v.-hich we original!}- preferred, 
 and still continued to prefer, to that which had just been lost. We considered the 
 plan alluded to, that of the gentleman from Albemarle, as imperilled by the new pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Chesterfield, which we feared would"^be broua-ht on 
 and supported by an Eastern majority, by means of a successful motion to re-consider 
 the plan adopted yesterday. We had procured a manuscript copy of this new plan, 
 after the rising of the House, and had critically examined it. We considered it utterly 
 inadmissible — utterly- destructive of the rights and interests of the West — and one 
 which a majority of the people of Virginia would inevitably reject. Knowino- the 
 high standing of the gentleman from Chesterfield with his party, we entertain ecf seri- 
 ous apprehensions that it would unite the voices of a majority of this body. To pre- 
 vent a result so calamitous to Virginia, so destructive of all our hopes, we stated our 
 views to tlie worthy member from Richmond, (3Ir. Xeale.) whom we knew to be sin- 
 cerely desirous to effect a fair and honorable compromise — told hira how odious the 
 plan in question would be to the people of the West, and earnestlv requested him to 
 have it withdrawn, if possible, stating our belief that if it were withdra^^-n, man3' of 
 our Western friends, having now finally lost their favorite measure, would unite with 
 
696 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the East in sustaining the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, which we told him, 
 as indeed he knew before, we preferred, ourselves, to the Western plan which had 
 been lost. 
 
 He promised to comply with our request, and he performed his promise; but was 
 Xinable, it seems, to prevail on the gentleman from Chesterfield to withdraw his reso- 
 lution. That resolution has been this day rejected, to my no small satisfaction, by a 
 decisive majority. 
 
 The friends of the Western plan, hoping against hope, have to-day subjected it to 
 another test, by moving it in the shape of an amendment to the plan of the gentleman 
 from Albemarle. The gentleman from Loudoun and myself, governed more by a 
 punctilio of honour, than by any obligation to perform again the promise, already 
 thrice fulfilled, twice on the 5th of December, and once yesterday, have again on this 
 day fulfilled, for the last time, the gratuitous and ill-judged promise which we gave 
 to the friends of that measure, because they were also our political friends. With 
 our assistance it has at length obtained the votes of half the body, and has just been 
 rejected by an equal division of the House. 1 trust that it is at last disposed of. I feel 
 that I have pushed my fidelity to a gratuitous promise to an extreme, and I rejoice 
 that I am released from it. 1 have paid the debt which I owed to my party, I pro- 
 ceed to pay that which I owe to my country. The resolution of the gentleman from 
 Albemarle which I thought had heen finally adopted by the vote of yesterday, is now 
 on its final passage. 
 
 I have said that my friend from Loudoun and myself prefer that scheme to the 
 compromise plan of representation which we have thus far supported. I have sug- 
 gested, already, one of our reasons for that preference. I proceed to state other rea- 
 sons which have led us to this conclusion. 
 
 Before I do so, however, I must premise that the critical investigations which I 
 have been compelled, by a sense of duty to make, respecting the relative population 
 in 182.9, of the four great sections into which the State is divided, have led me to the 
 conclusion that the conjectural statement made by the Auditor is far from being accu- 
 rate. Indeed, he himself states, that " the white and slave tythables have been in 
 some instances supplied by conjecture, the returns being imperfect, or altogether 
 wanting." And again, that there -are so many probable errors in the data upon 
 w^hich the population of 1829 is estimated, that he entertains considerable doubt of 
 its correctness." A conclusive proof with me, if further proof were wanted of the 
 inaccuracy of his estimate, is, that he reports the county of Loudoun, one of the most 
 prosperous in the State, as containing some four thousand fewer people in 1829 than 
 it contained in 1820. Other results might be mentioned, equally erroneous; but it is 
 superfluous. 
 
 Piejecting his estimate, then, as clearly erroneous, I made an estimate, for myself, 
 of the population of the four great divisions of the Commonwealth, by comparing the 
 Census of 1810 with that of 1820 ; and having thus ascertained the actual increase of 
 population in each division, between those periods, I assumed that they had respec- 
 tively continued to increase at the same rate from 1820 to 1829. Having calculated 
 the increase in each division in this mode, which I venture to assert presents a nearer 
 approximation to the truth than any other which can be resorted to, short of an actual 
 Census, I arrived at these results : 
 
 The Auditor estimates the actual white population of the State to be 682,261. 
 " By my calculation it is but 671,017. 
 
 This variance would not be very material as to the results we have in view, if the 
 excess were distributed among the four divisions with any thing like equality. But 
 it so happens, that of the whole excess, amounting to eleven thousand two hundred 
 and forty-four, he has given to the trans- Alleghany district the benefit of no less than 
 ten thousand six hundred and seventy-six. The error would, therefore, have a very 
 injurious effect on the Valley country in the distribution of representation either ac- 
 cording to Federal numbers or white population. The following statement presents a 
 relative view of the two estimates, in regard to the white population of the country 
 west of the Ridge. 
 
 The trans- Alleg-hany country contains, according to the Auditor's estimate, 181,384 
 
 The same country by my estimate, 170,708 
 
 Difference, as before stated, 10,676 
 
 The Valley country contains, by the Auditor's estimate, 138,132 
 
 The same country contains, by my estimate, 137,041 
 
 Difference, only, 1,091 
 
 The whole country west of the Ridge contains, by the Auditor's estimate, 319,516 
 
 The same country contains, by my estimate, but 307,749 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 697 
 
 I will further remark, that in making to the trans- Alleghany country the conces- 
 sion that it has increased in population, during the last nine years, as fast as it in- 
 creased between ISIO and 1620, 1 have done it ample justice, and probably more than 
 justice. 
 
 It is a new country; and, like all new countries, it is increasing fast in population. 
 But like all new countries, the nearer it approaches to a full population, the more 
 slowly does it increase. On this subject we are not left to conjecture. For the gen- 
 tleman from Augusta. (Mr. Johnson.) in the able argument which he delivered, a few 
 weeks ago, in the Committee of the Whole, on the subject of the apportionment of 
 representation, presented to us the actual rate of the increase of population, in the dis- 
 trict in question, in three periods of ten years each. On his calculation, the fullest 
 reliance may be placed. And he told us, that by comparing the Censuses of 1790, 
 1800, 1810, and 1820, he had arrived at the following results : The population of the 
 trans- Alleghany country increased, 
 
 Between 1790 and 1800, 83^ per cent. 
 
 Between 1800 and 1810, 47 per cent. 
 
 Betv/een 1810 and J 8.20, 27^ per cent. 
 Thus it appears that during those three periods, of ten years each, the population of 
 that country increased in a rapidly decreasing ratio. If the ratio of increase has con- 
 tinued to sink in the same proportion, the actual increase of the last nine vears is 
 probably not more than fifteen per cent. I say probably, because I have not taken the 
 trouble of making the calculation. But the Auditor estimates the increase, I think 
 ai, about forty per cent. I have said enough, I presume to show, that in my estimate 
 of the population of the trans-Alleghany district, I have done it ample justice, if not 
 more than justice. 
 
 Taking my estimate, then, of the relative population of the four great districts as 
 correct, (for I have made an estimate of ali. though I have not stated the precise 
 number of the two Eastern districts.) and applying to the actual popjalation, in 1829, 
 so ascertained, the two plans of apportioning representation between which I am in- 
 stituting a comparison, we have the following results in a House of Delegates of one 
 hundred and twenty-seven, and a Senate of thirty-two, the numbers assumed in the 
 plan of the gentleman from Albemarle. 
 
 Western Plan. 
 
 According to tlie Western Plan, to wit: the white basis in the House of Delegates, 
 and the Federal basis (or all the free persons and three-fifths of the slaves) in the 
 Senate. 
 
 The country west of the Ridge is entitled, in the House of Delegates to members, 
 
 58.25 or 58 
 
 The country east of the Ridge to members, 68.75 or 69 
 
 Eastern majority, 11 
 
 The country west of the Ridge is entitled, in the Senate to members 11.19 or 11 
 
 The country east of the Ridge to members 20.81 or 21 
 
 Eastern majority, 10 
 
 Plan of the member from Mbemarle. 
 
 According to the plan of the member from Albemarle, (which proposes, as I have 
 
 said, an arbitrary distribution of representation) in the 
 
 House of Delegates, 
 
 The country west of the Alleghanj' is allowed, members 29 
 
 The Valley country is allowed, members 24 
 
 The whole country west of the Bidge, 53 
 
 The country east of the Ridge, 74 
 
 Eastern majority, 21 
 
 In the Senate, 
 
 The country west of the Ridge is allowed members 13 
 
 The country east of the Ridge, members 19 
 
 Eastern majority, 6 
 
 In a Senate of thirty-two, distributed according to 2chite pojn'Jaiion alone, 
 
 The country west of the Ridge would be entitled to members 14| or 15 
 
 The country east of the Ridge to members 17J or 17 
 
 88 
 
698 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 It seems, then, that by the Western Plan the Eastern majority in the House of Dele- 
 gates is ten members, or about one-thirteenth of the whole body, less than by the plan 
 of the gentleman from Albemarle. And that by the same Western Plan the Eastern 
 majority in the Senate is four members, or one-eighth of the wliole body, greater than 
 by the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle. In other words, the West gains more 
 in the Senate, by the plan of tiie member from Albemarle, compared with the Western 
 Plan, than it loses in the House of Delegates, by *a comparison of the same plans. The 
 plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, therefore, confers more poiver on the West than 
 the plan tohich is so strangely jn-eferred by the Western members. I apprehend that this 
 statement alone would justify the preference which I, as a Western member, bound 
 by duty and led by inclination to obtain as much power as I can for my constituents, 
 within the limits of justice, entertain for the plan of the member from Albemarle. 
 The weight allowed to the West, by his plan, in the Senate, is only one and two- 
 thirds, or two members less than that to which it is entitled on the true, but unat- 
 tainable basis of white population. According to the Western Plan, to carry any bill 
 in the Senate, no matter how vitally important to Western interests, the West must 
 invoke the aid of six out of the twentj^-one Eastern Senators. A matter 1 should 
 apprehend in some cases, of no easy attainment. Whereas, according to the other 
 plan, a Western measure can be carried in the Senate, by the aid oi four Eastern 
 Senators only — a thing, I conceive, always attainable, having reference to obvious 
 circumstances, provided the measure be jast in itself. The obvious consideration, 
 that the Senate will be invested witli the power to negative all hills ^vhatever sent to it 
 by the House of Delegates, lies on the surface of the subject, has been already ad- 
 verted to, and need not be further insisted on. 
 
 Entertaining these views of the subject, I have been at a loss to conceive the 
 grounds of that strong and decided preference manifested by the Western members 
 for the plan of representation which they have supported. 1 have heard but one rea- 
 son in favour of it, which I think even a feasible one. It is, that at some future and 
 far distant day, (which they believe, however, to be not so distant,) the comparatively 
 rapid increase of population west of the mountains will counteract the inequality in 
 the Senate which they are willing to submit to at present. What changes may be 
 wrought by time in the relative population of the Eastern and Western country, no 
 man can tell. But I, for one, am more than sceptical in regard to their sanguine cal- 
 culations of the rapid and sastained increase of Western population. The rapid de- 
 dine of the ratio of i?icrease West of the Alleghany Mountains, and the natural and 
 permanent causes of that decline, have been already adverted to. The increase in 
 the Valley daring the last twenty years, has been exceedingly small, and I see no 
 reason to expect any favourable change, which does not apply with equal force to a 
 large portion of the country east of the Ridge. The mistake in the Auditor's esti- 
 mate, already noticed, has given a temporary countenance to these sanguine calcula- 
 tions ; but this illusion will be dispelled by the approaching Census. 1 may be mis- 
 taken in these views, but they are sustained by the able argument of the gentleman 
 from Augusta, to which I have already adverted. The number and extent of sterile 
 and inarable mountains in the West, and the comparatively unbroken surface of the 
 Eastern country, are elements in any sound calculation of the future population of 
 the two regions, too obvious for comment. 
 
 On the whole, Sir, I think it may be reasonably doubted, whether under the disad- 
 vantage of the gross inequality in the Senate, created by the Federal numbers, the 
 West would ever attain to a majority in that Legislative body. The present loss is 
 certain, in the comparison of the two plans ; the future gain is at best doubtful. On 
 the score of the relative pojccr conferred on the West, present and future, by the two 
 plans under consideration, I have nothing further to add. 
 
 But another consideration, of an entirely different nature, has operated on my mind 
 with no small force, in the comparison which I have instituted between the plans in 
 question. I entered this Assembly with a political creed which all the eloquence of 
 our able opponents has not shaken, and which will continue to be my creed so long 
 as life and consciousness remain. It is, that frecyncn are the sole elements out of 
 which a republic should be formed, and that equality is the only just rule for the dis- 
 tribution of power among them. And while I bow to the necessity which places the 
 enforcement of this creed, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, beyond the power of 
 the friends of reform, I would at least avoid the express recognition of a principle of 
 representation diametrically opposite to that which I am compelled to give up as un- 
 attainable. I cannot Iring myself to relish a rule of apportionment, which counts 
 slaves in the East against freemen in the West. I might submit to it, too, as a mat- 
 ter of cruel necessity, but I feel an inexpressible repugnance to the voluntary, and 
 unforced recognition of a principle so odious to my feehngs, so repugnant to all my 
 notions of Government. The more I reflect on it, Sir, the more odious to me does 
 this principle of negro representation seem. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 699 
 
 There is slill another view. Mr. President, wliich I have taken of the comparative 
 merits of these two plans of the basis of Representation, and tiie apportionment of 
 power. The interests and the feelings of the East and West are surely discordant 
 enough already, without adventitious aid. Why. then, should we stek to render the 
 Government more discordant than it must inevitably be, under the most favourable 
 circumstances, by infusing fresh elements of discord into the very Constitution to 
 which it is to owe its birth ? Why create an Eastern Senate and a Western House of 
 Delegates, for such, to a considerable extent, would be the effect of one of the plans 
 under consideration — to wage a perpetual war — to disturb the peace of the Common- 
 wealth and sacrihce its best interests by their inevitable dissentions : I cannot per- 
 suade myself to think, that such a constitution of the Legislative bodies comports 
 with sound and statesman-hke views of the true interests of Virginia. 
 
 I have thus endeavoured, Sir, to explain the views of policy and principle which 
 have separated the gentleman from Loudoun and myself from the crreat body of our 
 pohtical friends, witb whom it is oar happiness still to agree, on every other important 
 subject whicn has come under the review of this honourable bod}-. Tou may well 
 conceive, that it has been to us a subject of no small regret to sever from our Iriends 
 on a subject of so grave and important a nature. 2so man, we persuade ourselves, 
 can be so imjust as to beheve that, in taking this bold and highly responsible step, 
 we have been actuated by any other consideration than a deep sense of the duty 
 which we owe to our constituents and to our country. 
 
 Sir, we know the consequences of taking this high, and, in the view of those who 
 differ with us, presumptuous ground — and 1 say proudly, we are ready to meet them. 
 We know the odium which attaches, in a time, like this, of great party excitement, 
 to any deviation by the member of a party, from the measures of a party. Proudly 
 conscious of the rectitude of our motives, of our undeviatinor fidehty to the cause of 
 popular rights, we look with serenity on the approach of that storm of popular delu- 
 sion, perhaps even now brewmg over our heads. 
 
 I speak not. Sir, of those generous constituents who invested me with the dignified 
 station which I have sought worthily to fill. From them I fear no wrong. They sent 
 me thither to protect their interests and to assert their rights, not in the mode that 
 should be dictated to me by others, but accordincr to the best hghts that God has given 
 me — the dictates of my conscience and my reason. If they shall be of opinion that 
 I have erred in tliis matter, they will consider it an error of judgment, and not the 
 result of unworthy or interested" motives. Sir, I say it with honest pride — they know 
 me well. They will know that I have acted honestly, and perhaps I may be able to 
 convince them that I have acted icisely. 
 
 Mr. Henderson rose and stated, that if he had rightly apprehended the Chair, it was 
 not in order farther to debate the question before the House: upon which the Presi- 
 dent announced that it was in order. 
 
 ]Mr. H. continued : I do not rise. Sir, at this hour, to enter into the debate, but simply 
 to declare, and, Mr. President, it is unnecessary to make the declaration, that the nar- 
 rative of my friend firom Frederick is strictly accurate ; and that I agree with him, 
 most cordicdly, in every opinion that he has advanced. Yes, Sir, I unhesitatingly 
 pronounce that tiie plan presented by the crentleman from Albemarle, is better than 
 the project of a House of Delegates on the v%"hite basis, with this Federal Senate, not 
 for my immediate constituents "only, but for the whole Commonwealth. It is purer 
 in principle, and in its effects it will prove more salutary. This opinion. Sir, is not 
 lightly or hastily formed ;. it is the fruit of much study, of long continued, anxious, and 
 laborious investigation. I confidently hope to be able to convince my immediate con- 
 stituents that my judgment is correct ; at least that I am animated by motives worthy 
 of the station with which they have honored me. If I fail in both, still, Sir, I feel 
 that I am a man ; I feel the prc;id consciousness tliat I never sought place, with the 
 fiillest conviction that I have no earthly claim to distinction. I am well aware tliat 
 independence is the fruit of the sweat of the brow ; or, Sir, if you will have it so, of 
 the toil of the brain. All that an honest man can claim is an open theatre for Ms ex- 
 ertions. Gentlemen have talked here of having planted their standards ; and amongst 
 them an honorable friend of mine, turning to Mr. Doddridge, my superior in years, 
 and more, much more, my superior in intellectual endowments. !\Jr. President, these 
 declarations penetrate me with profound regret. I boldly declare, Sir, in the face of 
 this body, and of the ancient Commonwealth which it represents, that 1 will foUow no 
 sectional standard : but, that wherever the banner of Virginia floats, there, and tliere 
 only will I be found. 
 
 Sir. we have been told of the " justum et tenacem propositi virum and that he fears 
 not the ardor civium prara Jubentium.'' 
 
 This is the test to which I am wiihng to be brought. I, in common with my friend 
 from Frederick, held with the respectable gentleman from Richmond county, the con- 
 versation which he has detailed. The plan of the gentleman from Chesterfield was 
 exliibited to us. I felt for it aversion, I had almost said abhorrence. The project for 
 
700 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the white basis in the House of Dele2;ates, and three-fifths of the slaves, mixed, with it, 
 for the Senate, liad distinctly and repeatedly failed in Committee of the Whole, and 
 in the Convention. A g-entleman with whom I had acted politically here, had de- 
 clared in his place, that loc icere beaten. In these circumstances, we felt it our duty 
 to uro-e the gentleman from Richmond county, not to sustain the proposition of the 
 member irom Chesterfield, assuring him, that in our opinion, many members from the 
 Valley, and a portion of the Trans-Alleghany delegation, would vote for the scheme 
 of the gentleman from Albemarle. This was conjectural on our part. Seeing that , in 
 our humble estimate, the public weal required it, we had just ground for the impression-. 
 We hoped that gentlemen would take this course rather than peril the peace, the hap- 
 piness, the gior/ of the State by separation or civil war. If in this we err, it is a delu- 
 sion of the understanding. The wise and distinguished gentleman from Augusta, 
 (Mr. Johnson,) announced in his place, that the plan which we advocate was better 
 for the interests of the West, than that v/hich it opposes. Allowing, for the sake of 
 the argument, that it is not better, any dispassionate man will admit it to be nearly as 
 good. And then. Sir, no principle whatever involved, for this difference between 
 tweedle dum and tweedle dee, we are to " cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war !" 
 Sir, I v/as asked the other day to testify the sincerity of my attachment for my native 
 State bj^ my acts; to shew, otherwise than by words, that I venerated an honorable 
 member of this body. Here, Sir, this day, before this assembly, I tender my proofs. 
 This is the offering that I bring, little as it is, to the altar of our common and beloved 
 country. Happy, thrice happy had I been, had the honorable individual to whom I 
 take the liberty to allude, had gone before me in this race. I did anticipate it ; and 1 
 feel disappointment, deep and painful disappointment. For myself. Sir, allow me to 
 say, in that which vi'ally concerns my country, no consideration shall ever induce 
 me. humble as I am, to violate tiie dictates of my conscience, so help me God. 
 
 Mv. Johnson rose in explanation. When what had been called a pledge by the 
 Western members to take a certain course had been given, he had expressly stated it 
 to be his understanding tliat nothing which passed should bind any body. No pledge 
 had been given by him. Ki liad bound himself to advocate no one measure in pre- 
 ference to another. He had said, thai the object of the meeting was simply enquiry; 
 a frank comparison of opinions, to ascertain not w^hat was best, but what was practi- 
 cable, and then to leave each individual to pursue the course recommended or not, 
 just as he should think fit. He had felt himself at no time bound to vote for the pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Albemarle; and the suppcithe should now give it was 
 the result of no pledge to any human being. 
 
 Mr. J. said, he should vote for the plan of that gentleman, viewing it as a compro- 
 mise. But not with any view whatever that it was to sink the questio7i which had been 
 so much debated. That question never could be sunk till interest should sink in the 
 view of men. He should vote for this as a part of that whole w^hich he had from the 
 beginning endeavored to attain : of tha.t whole which he yet trusted the wisdom of 
 this Convention would be adequate to devise. If they were to be finally driven from 
 any scheme of future apportionment, he could not help it : but his vote was given with 
 no view to put an end to the question as to the just basis of Representation. Two 
 schemes had been presented to the House ; one by the gentleman from Frederick, 
 (Mr. Cooke,) the other by the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) for a sys- 
 tem of future apportionment. He would vote for either. He would willingly assume 
 that responsibility, should no other or preferable plan be presented to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Thompson said, it was certainly not his purpose at this late period of its pro- 
 ceedings, to detain the Convention v/ith a speech. He rose merely for the purpose 
 of explaining, and that very briefly, the vote he was about to give. He had been a 
 silent voter on this deeply interesting and agitating qiiestion of the basis of Represen- 
 tation, during the whole progress of its discussion up to the present moment, notwith- 
 standing the frequent allusions, direct and indirect, made in the debate, to the district 
 he had the honor in part to represent on this floor. It was evident from the character 
 of tiiose allusions, that by the effect or accident of local circumstances, the attitude he 
 was placed in, and the relation he bore to this question, was one of high importance 
 and weighty responsibility. These considerations he was sure would constitute a suf- 
 ficient apology for his trespassing a short time upon the attention of the Convention, 
 jaded and exhausted as he w^as sure it must be, and he assured the Convention it 
 should be a very short time. He meant to say no more than was absolutely necessary 
 to guard his course and conduct from misconstruction from any and every quarter. 
 Mr. T. said, he came to this Convention with the settled and deliberate conviction 
 that free white population was the only true basis of Representation in a representa- 
 tive democracy ; and he came pledged to his constituents to act upon that conviction 
 in the votes he should be called on to give here. That conviction had not been in the 
 slightest degree shaken by any thing he had heard in debate, and by his votes he had 
 as faithfully redeemed his pledge to his constituents as he had obeyed the honest dic- 
 tates of his conscience and his best judgment. He had foreseen, however, at an early 
 
DEBATES OF THE CO^'VENTIO^^ 
 
 TO] 
 
 period of the session, tliat concession and compromise were necessary to bring cnr 
 labors to an harmonious and happy termination. The fears and apprehensions of his 
 Eastern brethren, which he had hoped could be allayed by a Ccnstitutional gnaranty 
 against unequal and oppressive taxation and partial appropriations, had rather been 
 augmented than allayed by the temper and spirit of the debate. Those fears and ap- 
 prehensions he had heretofore and still considered imaginary, but they were not on 
 that account tiie less entitled to respect and consideration — and so soon as the idea of 
 a guarantv was repudiated, as it seemed to be, on one side, if not on both, Mr. T. said^ 
 he^had made up his mind to go for the compromise of the white population basis in 
 the House of Delegates, and Federal numbers in the Senate. This, he beheved most 
 conscientiously to be the true and the only middle ground between the panies — it 
 placed the popular branch in its legitimate hands, the majority of free whites — this 
 was made the guardian of persons and personal rights — it gave to the slave-holders 
 the Senate for their protection — and if protr : : r d security be really the object of 
 the East, here was a protection and safe-gv. md complete. 
 
 Here was the siiielJ f^r v.-]ii:h they hr To concede the House of Dele- 
 
 gates also, would be : - ra, not for defence, but which might 
 
 be employed ofiensiv- '-i2r these opinions, he had earnestly 
 
 hoped this comproinisr . : :.:r . ... : ^ ren his •■ first love," since he had been 
 
 impressed with the necessity ci compromise, and he had uniformly voted for it in 
 Committee of the Whole, and in Convention. By the vote just taken, however, it 
 had been lost by an equal division of the body ; and the only remaining proposition 
 now, is that of my worthy colleague, (Mr. Gordon.) upon which we are about to vote. 
 
 Of the merits of this proposition, ZSIr. T. would say nothing, as they had already 
 been fuEy developed by the mover and other gentlemen pro and con — though the 
 scheme was no favourite with him, he had assured his worthy colleague, and had al- 
 ways intended to vote for it as a compromise, after failing in his first choice, provided 
 in the meantime no proposition less objectionable was presented. He preferred it in- 
 finitely to the projeis of the gentleman fi-om Northampton, (Mr. Upshur.) and the 
 gentleman fi-om Chesterfield, Qtlr. Leigh.) ]Mow, indeed, Eilter rejecting all othersy 
 we were reduced to this single proposition : and objectionable to him as he would 
 candidly confess it was. he could not hesitate to prefer it to the alternative of making- 
 no Constitution. As a present and temporary apportionment, he had no serious ob- 
 jections to it. The great defect was, that it contained no satisfactory proA-isicn for fu- 
 ture apportionments of power. The object of the mover he had avowed to be to 
 sink that vexed question — this !Mr. T. beheved to be a vain efibrt — it could not be, it 
 must be met and must be decided and adjusted sooner or later : and the sooner the 
 better lor the repose of the Commonwealth ; and hs, Mr. T.. believed the only prac- 
 ticable and satisfactory adjustment that could take place, since the constitutional 
 guaranty was repudiated, was to adopt the white basis in the House of Delegates, and 
 the Federal or mixed basis in the Senate. This would satisfy a majority of the com- 
 munity and nothing else would. The West were now willing to yield it, and it was 
 to him matter of astonishment that the East would not close with tiie offer. Sir. T. 
 said, whilst he held these opinions, and whilst he feared that the adoption of the pro- 
 position of his colleague, would defeat the passage of the Constitution in this Con- 
 vention, and if not its ratification by the people, he could not, so far as his vote was 
 concerned, be instrumentxd in its rejection now — ^for peradventure the scheme might, 
 contrary to his anticipations, unite a respectable majority here, and a Ciajoritv of the 
 people. He felt it, therefore, to be his duty under present circumstances, to orive the 
 experiment a fair trial, and should it receive the sanction and support of a majority 
 here and elsewhere, as a republican he should feel it his bounden duty, to acquiesce 
 cheerfully in their decision. For these reasons, he should record his vote in favour of 
 the proposition of his colleague, now under consideration. 
 
 Mr. Mercer went into an explanation of his course. He considered it due to himself 
 to say. that like the gentieman from Augusta, he had not viewed himself Jis compro- 
 mitted by any thing that passed at the meeting alluded to. It was the first of the 
 kind, which he had ever attended in the course of ids short political fife. The meet- 
 ing was not held in private ; other gentlemen were present besides the members of 
 Convention. Some gentlemen whom he did not personally know : the door had 
 been always open to the intrusion of any one. He supposed that the object had been 
 to ascertain whether any compromise could be sustaine d. He was himself in favour 
 of the plan of the gentleman from Goochland, (Mr. Pleasants.) and had made a cal- 
 culation, according to which he reckoned a majority of sixteen votes in its favour. 
 When he discovered that they had a majorit)^ of twenty-four thousand of the citizens 
 of the Commonwealth in favour of the white basis, exclusive of Albemarle, he had 
 felt much encouraged. Delicate as was his situation, he should persevere in voting 
 against any other scheme than that of the white basis in the House of Delecrates. He 
 thought t'lis was the very last moment in which any friend of that cause^ought to 
 despair. The vote which had been given rather filled him with hope. He Siould 
 
702 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 vote against the proposition of the gentleman from Albemarle. He had understood 
 the gentleman from Goochland, had consented to vote for his own proposition. 
 Mr. Pleasants denied having given such an assurance. 
 
 Mr. Cooke made an explanation, corroborating the statement of Mr. Pleasants. 
 
 Mr. Pleasants said, that he had declared, that if he could not get a graduated sys- 
 tem of county representation to suit him, he might possibly accept of the other ; but 
 that he was so situated wath respect to his district, that he did not know if it would 
 have been in his power. He had expressly said at the meeting, that he would bind 
 himself to nothing. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that he had so understood all the other gentlemen : he never had 
 been any where that he would consent to be bound. He had the public assurance of 
 the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) that he was not satisfied with a 
 Senate of thirty-six, and that if forty was moved, he should sustain it. He had, 
 therefore, counted upon that gentleman's support. He had also reckoned upon the 
 venerable gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Madison,) and very confidently on the sup- 
 port of the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Marshall.) He had now, however, wit- 
 nessed one equal division of the House on a Senate based upon the Federal number, 
 and a House of Representatives upon the white basis. And this was the moment 
 gentlemen had chosen to despair — on him it had a very different effect. 
 
 If, indeed, he could believe with his friend from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) and his 
 colleague, (Mr. Henderson,) who had conjured up such frightful phantoms before their 
 own imagination and that of the Convention, then, indeed, he would give gentlemen 
 a carte bianche, and they might write any Constitution that they supposed would re- 
 medy the evil ; but he could believe in no such thing. In his country, certainly he 
 had never heard of such an idea. There had been, he believed, some meetings of the 
 non-freeholders, but nothing was to be apprehended of a violent character. The 
 question was to be settled, not by alarm, but by sound judgment. The gentlemen 
 seemed to suppose, that they were not fixing on any basis of Representation, because 
 this apportionment was called an arbitrary one. It was not arbitrary — a principle of 
 apportionment was at the bottom of it. And if it was intended to sink the question 
 in dispute, it certainly failed of its object. Where must the resort be made, to dis- 
 cover the principles on which it was founded.? To the Census of the State. And 
 did gentlemen suppose, that their constituents would not or could not resort to the 
 Census too.? They had gained nothing on that score. He granted, that when the 
 Constitution should come before the people, it would be hard to say on what basis it 
 was founded. 
 
 It was not on the white basis, nor on the black basis, nor on a money basis. But 
 did they suppose this would satisfy the people ? Were they likely to remain con- 
 tented .? He said no ; and he believed that gentlemen deceived themselves, if they 
 thought that the great question would be settled by the present Convention. 
 
 Mr. Upshur then spoke as follows : 
 
 Mr. President, — I should not trespass on the patience of the Convention at this late 
 hour, if it were not for the direct allusion which has been made to me, by the gentle- 
 man from Loudoun, (Mr. Mercer.) That allusion renders it proper, if not absolutely 
 necessary, that 1 should ask your attention for a few minutes. The gentleman, after 
 having assigned reasons for calculating with certainty on tlie support of the gentle- 
 man from Richmond, (Judge Marshall,) and the gentleman from Goochland, (Mr. 
 Pleasants,) concluded his remarks with an intimation, that / also had brought myself 
 within the reach of his reasonable hopes. He founds these hopes upon an expres- 
 sion which escaped me some three weeks ago, while this subject was under conside- 
 ration in Committee of the V/hole, an expression not used in the course of argument, 
 but incidentally only. The gentleman, however, has never lost sight of it, and he 
 has just told us, that he considered it as authorising him to calculate on my support 
 of the measure which we have just rejected, under all possible circumstances, and in 
 every conceivable condition of things. With what justice or reason he has che- 
 rished these hopes, a very brief review of the facts of the case will enable you to 
 determine. 
 
 It is needless to advert to the efforts which were made by me, to bring about a com- 
 promise of our differences with reference to this question, before the strength of par- 
 ties should be tested by any direct vote. Suffice it to say, that my wishes were met, 
 and my efforts were of course unavailing. By a majority of two, the free white po- 
 pulation was adopted as the basis of Representation in the House of Delegates. But 
 the question was still unsettled as to the Senate, and it was extremely doubtful, whe- 
 ther or not the East would be able to carry its principle into the organization even of 
 that House. I was myself extremely anxious to succeed in this measure. Beheving 
 that the House of Delegates was forever lost to us, I was eager to grasp at any thing 
 which promised security, even though imperfect and precarious to those Eastern in- 
 terests which we all considered to be most in danger. I believed it to be better to 
 gain a little — however little — than to lose all ; and I am of the same opinion still. In 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 703 
 
 the mean time, however, the views of parties had begun to change. The gentleman 
 from Goochland, (Mr. Pleasants.) who had all along voted with the majority, had be- 
 come uneasy at the distracted state of our councils, and had brought forward his pro- 
 position for a Senate arranged on Federal numbers, as a measure of compromise. 
 But it was now too late. The East had looked warily into the subject, and it had 
 become a serious question with a large majority of that delegation, whether they 
 ought to accept of such a Senate or not. A few of them, and myself among the 
 number, thouoht that we ought, for we considered it wiser, in the present state of 
 public feelinir, to submit even an exceptionable Constitution to the people, than to 
 dissolve the "Convention without doing any thing. But we all contemplated not 
 merely a Senate on the basis of Federal numbers, or some other basis equally favora- 
 ble to us, but we looked also to additional guards and securities. The gentleman 
 from Fairfax, (Mr. Fitzhugh.) had submitted his guarantees against unequal taxation, 
 which were still undisposed of, and which were in the contemplation of every Ecistern 
 member who had reconciled himself to such a Senate at all. In this state of things, 
 the question came up for consideration. The gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) 
 proposed a Senate of forty-eight, based on taxation alone, and possessing concurrent 
 Legislative powers with the House of Delegates. This, it is believed, would have 
 been acceptable to every Eastern member, but it was lost, the 2inivcrsal Western vote 
 being against it. We then proposed a Senate of thirty-six. upon a different basis, but 
 it was lost, the universal Wesicrn vote being against it. A Senate of thirty or thirty- 
 two was then proposed, and before the question was taken, the gentleman from 
 Brooke, (]Mr. Doddridge.) gravely proposed the number of the existing Senate, 
 twenty -four ! That gentleman knew, as ever}^ other gentleman knew, that no Eas- 
 tern member would agree to accept of a Senate organized upon any principle what- 
 ever, without a considerable increase in the number of that House. But this was not 
 all. That same gentleman had declared on that occasion, or a few days before — the 
 time is of no consequence — that his votes on the question of suffrage had been given 
 with express reference to this subject. Such a Senate as we asked was odious to 
 him, and he had voted for the least limited extension of the Right of Suffrage, with 
 the express view of rendering that Senate useless and unavailing. This object was 
 to render it either inoperative in practice, or very short in duration. Sir, when things 
 of this sort were acting before my e^yes, by gentlemen who professed to be in search 
 of fair compromise, and who calculated on my support to their measure, I thought it 
 high time to undeceive them. It was then that I told them, that all these attempts 
 were worse than idle ; that although they did not mean to moclt us, yet that we should 
 assuredly regard their offers as the worst of mockery, if they did not indicate some 
 desire to render those offers acceptable to us, and that the course they were pursuing 
 would have the certain effect of driving from them even those among us, who were 
 then best disposed to their measures. 1 added also, with very little of the caution of 
 tlie diplomatist, I admit, for I have no concealments, neither in Parliament nor out of 
 it, that so far as I myself was concerned, I would prefer a Senate of forty -eight, but 
 that I might agree to one of thirty-six, and would not agree to any less number. This 
 is the remark alluded to by the gentleman from Loudoun, and these the circum- 
 stances under which it was made. The gentleman now offers us a Senate of thirty- 
 six — he gives us one number, but he loses sight of that increase of Legislative power, 
 which was contemplated in the proposition of the gentleman from Fauquier, and of 
 the equally valuable guarantee of the gentleman from Fairfax ! An expression of my 
 willingness to accept a Senate of thirtj^-six, but with a reference irresistibly implied 
 to all the guards and securities which were then before us, and considered in direct 
 connection with it, has been construed into something like a pledge, that I would ac- 
 cept of a Senate with that number oJiJij, tcithovt either guard or security ! ! 
 
 But, there is yet another part of the history of this subject, which deserves to be 
 mentioned. Even after the declaration above alluded to was made, no farther vote 
 was taken upon the question. No Western gentleman ever announced his willino-. 
 ness to vote for a Senate of thirty-six, either with or without guards and securities, 
 but the Committee rose, without coming to any resolution in regard to it. The sub- 
 ject was not again taken up for many days, nor until Western gentlemen had held no 
 less than three meetings of their friends, in order to determine whether they would 
 go even as far as they no2v propose, or not. In the mean time, the attention of Eas- 
 tern members had been turned to other plans of compromise. The gentleman from 
 Albemarle had submitted the scheme now before us — the gentleman from Chester- 
 field had submitted another — I had myself submitted a third, and the gentleman from 
 Richmond had presented calculations for a fourth. Each and every one of these 
 measures was more acceptable to the Eastern delegation, than the House of Dele- 
 gates on the white basis, and the Senate on every other basis that could be devised • 
 measures which we had carefully prepared, and committed ourselves to support, while 
 the gentleman from Loudoun and his friends were deliberating whether they would 
 give us a feeble and inefficient Senate of thirty-six members, or not. They finally 
 
704 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 determined that they would make us the offer, but never until it was fully ascertained, 
 that we could get all that they offered us and more, without any assistance from them. 
 And yet under all these circumstances, after the backwardness and reluctance of Wes- 
 tern gentlemen to meet us on the terms of compromise, proposed by the gentleman 
 from Goochland, had forced us upon other expedients, after we had committed our- 
 selves to our friends, and to the country at large, to advocate and sustain those expe- 
 dients with all our powers. While those very expedients were yet before us undis- 
 posed of, the gentleman from Loudoun has flattered himself with the hope, that we 
 should consider ourselves under a pledge to retrace our steps, to abandon all our own 
 favourite projects, and to accept another, which we had never looked to but as a last 
 alternative, and which was never offered to us, until it could no longer be withheld ! 
 Whether the gentleman, in entertaining this extravagant expectation, has deceived 
 himself, or been deceived by others, you. Sir, and others who hear me, may determine. 
 
 But, Sir, whatever may have been the favour with which we at first regarded the 
 measure to which the gentleman is now so anxious to bind us, he has himself, given 
 us the best possible reasons for looking more narrowly into the matter. If we have 
 become somewhat more distrustful than we were at first, we owe our additional cau- 
 tion to the gentleman's own admonitions. Remember, Sir, that this measure is offered 
 us under the name of compromise ; an agreement founded upon mutual, if not equal 
 concession. None of us have forgotten the masterly argument of the gentleman 
 from Richmond, (Judge Marshall,) upon this subject. He endeavoured to shew, that 
 to give the Senate to the East and the House of Delegates to the West, was not an 
 equal compromise, and that the very gentlemen who offered it, did not consider it 
 equal. " If they do consider it equal," (said he) " why will they not take the Senate 
 and give us the House of Delegates The gentleman from Loudoun, in reply to 
 this question, no Sir, not in reply to it, for it is one of those home questions which 
 admit of no reply, in endeavouring to evade the force of it, told us that equality was 
 not what we asked for ; that protection and security were the utmost that we had 
 ever demanded. The same idea has been reiterated by the gentleman from Brooke, 
 (Mr. Doddridge.) 
 
 Now, Sir, will gentlemen be pleased to tell me, whether they believe that we 
 should be " secure" or not, if both branches of the Legislature were based on white 
 population ? They may answer the question as they please. If they think that we 
 should not be " secure," then they meant us injustice when they so strenuously con- 
 tended for that basis, and of course we were riglit on that question. If on the other 
 liand, they think that we should he " secure," then what do they concede to us, when 
 Ihey offer us the Senate.? They will doubtless disclaim, as they may truly disclaim, 
 all idea of intentional injustice, and then, the conclusion is inevitable, that in offering 
 •as the Senate, they offer us no more than they themselves believe, we fully enjoyed 
 before. Is not this a perfectly original idea of a compromise.? a compromise which 
 neither concedes nor abandons any thing whatever ! ! Nay more. A compromise 
 which proposes to give us, as an equivalent for a total abandonment of our political 
 principles and pohtical power also, security for our property, against unjust or unv/ise 
 legislation ; a compromise which exacts every thing from us, and gives us no more 
 than belongs, of absolute right, to every human being in the world.? It is from this 
 view of the subject, that I have repeatedly refused to debate the terms of this propo- 
 sition. I can never recognise it as a compromise at all. And surely. Sir, no better 
 reason can be required than is here presented, for refusing now, a measure which ap- 
 peared so plausible, before its own friends had stripped it of its disguise. When we 
 claimed the Senate and struggled to gain it, we considered it of value, because we 
 believed that it would give us political power ; and then it was refused to us. And 
 now it is offered to us, and it is insisted that we are bound to take it, after gentlemen 
 have proved to us that it gives no power at all ; that they never intended that it 
 should give any thing more than " security," and that even in point of " security," 
 it gives us no more than we had without it. Under these circumstances the gentle- 
 man from Loudoun may measure the reasonableness of his expectations, by his own 
 estimate of our intelligence and watchfulness. 
 
 The final question was now, at length, put on agreeing to Mr. Gordon's compro- 
 mise, and decided in the affirmative by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 j2ycs Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leio-h of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Henderson, Cooke, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, 
 Green^ Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, 
 Martin', Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, 
 Bayly, Upshur and Perrin— 55. 
 
 JVoe^— Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldv/m, M Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, Griggs, Mason of 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 705 
 
 Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of 
 Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Cabell and Stuart— 41. 
 
 So the Convention, by a majority of fourteen votes, decided to adopt the following 
 arrangement on the subject of representation in the Legislature, viz : 
 
 Resolved, Tiiat the representation in the Senate and House of Delegates of Vir- 
 ginia, shall be apportioned as follows : 
 
 " There shall be thirteen Senators west of the Blue Ridge of Mountains, and nine- 
 teen east of those Mountains : 
 
 " There shall be in the House of Delegates one hundred and twenty-seven mem- 
 bers, of whom twenty-nine shall be elected from the district west of the Alleghany 
 Mountains ; twenty-four from the Valley between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge ; 
 forty from the Blue Ridge to the head of tide- water, and thirty-four thence below." 
 
 The Convention then adjourned — (at near five o'clock.) 
 
 MONDAY, December 21, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr- 
 Welsh of the Baptist Church. 
 
 The Convention returned to the consideration of the report of the Legislative 
 Committee. 
 
 The first resolution was read as follov\' s ; 
 Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, 
 regard should be had to the white population exclusively." 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to lay it on the table, (the plan of Mr. Gordon having been adopt- 
 ed on Saturday, which in effect supersedes it.) 
 
 Mr. Doddridge demanded the ayes and noes, and they were taken as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of 
 Chesterfield, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter, Jojmes, Ba3^1y, Upshur and Perrin — 49. 
 
 Aoes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddrido-e, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell and Stuart — 44. 
 
 The second resolution was then read as follov»'s : 
 
 " Resolved, That a Census of the population of the State, for the purpose of appor- 
 tioning the representation, should be taken in the year 1831, the year 1845, and 
 thereafter at least once in every twenty years." 
 
 Mr. Stuart of Patrick, moved to amend this resolution by substituting the following : 
 
 " That in order to provide for the future equalization of representation, the Legis- 
 lature shall, in the year 1840, and every ten years thereafter, make provision by law 
 for ascertaining the whole number of qualified voters within the Commonwealth; 
 and shall apportion the representation among the four districts following, to v/it : 
 First, The country west of the Alleghany. Second, The country between the Alle- 
 ghany and the Blue Ridge. Third, The country between the Blue Ridge and tide- 
 water ; and Fourth, The country thence below, according to the number of qualified 
 voters contained in each district respectively: and shall, in distributing the members 
 to which each of said districts shall be entitled, secure, as far as possible, at least one 
 member to each county: Provided, That the number of the House of Delegates shall 
 never exceed one hundred and forty, nor that of the Senate, thirty-six." 
 
 Mr. Stuart, not wishing to bring on the discussion at this time, moved to lay this 
 amendment on the table. He had offered it, he said, as presenting a scheme for fu- 
 ture apportionment ; and he hoped that other gentlemen, having propositions intended 
 to effect the same object, would bring them forward, that the Convention might have 
 the Avhole field before them. 
 
 Mr. Scott said he should vote to lay the gentleman's resolution on the table, but 
 candor required him to apprise the mover, that he should vote against taking it up 
 again. If the gentleman had not made the motion, he should have made it himself. 
 
 89 
 
706 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 After the very decided vote of Saturday, any attempt to bring up that subject agaiiij 
 could tend only to mischief. 
 Tiie motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Summers said he had voted to lay the resolution on the table, but he should 
 vote to take it up whenever the mover should think it advisable. He expressed his 
 hope of some arrangement yet being gone into, in relation to a future apportionment 
 of representation. When that hope should forsake him, all expectation of good from 
 this Convention would depart witli it. 
 
 He moved the printing of the amendment, which was ordered accordingly. 
 
 The 3d, 4tli, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th resolutions v\^ere then read as follows : 
 
 ^' Resolved, That the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who 
 now enjoy it under the existing Constitution : Provided, That no person shall vote by 
 virtue of his freehold only, unless the same shall be assessed to tire value of at least 
 dollars, for the payment of taxes, if such assessment be required by law ; and 
 shall be extended, 1st, to every free white male citizen of the Commonwealth, resi- 
 dent therein, above the age of twenty-one years, who owns, and has possessed for six ' • 
 months, or Vv^ho has acquired by marriage, descent or devise, a freehold estate, as- 
 sessed to the value of not less than dollars, for the payment of taxes, if such 
 assessment shall be required by law : 2d, or who shall own a vested estate in fee, in 
 remainder or reversion, in land, the assessed value of which shall be dollars : 
 3d, or who shall own, and have possessed a leasehold estate, with the evidence of title 
 recorded, of a term originally not less than five years, and one of which shall be un- 
 expired, of the annual value or rent of dollars : 4th, or who for twelve months 
 next preceding, has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, 
 borough or election district, where he may offer to vote, and who shall have been as- 
 sessed wit4i a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, 
 and actually paid the same : Provided, nevertheless, That the Right of Suffrage shall 
 not be exercised by any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non- 
 commissioned officer, soldier, sailor or marine, in the service of the United States, nor 
 by any person convicted of any infamous offence, nor by citizens born without the 
 Commonwealth, unless they shall have resided therein for five years immediately pre- 
 ceding the election at whicla they shall offer to vote, and two years preceding the said 
 election, in the county, city, borough or election district, where they shall offer to 
 vote, (the mode of proving such previous residence, when disputed, to be prescribed 
 by law,) and shall possess, moreover, sonie one or more of the qualifications above 
 enumerated. 
 
 " Resolved, That the number of memJoers in the Senate of this State ought to be 
 neither increased nor diminished, nor the classification of its members changed. 
 
 " Resolved, That the number of members in the House of Delegates ought to be 
 reduced, so that the same be not less than one hundred and twenty, nor more than 
 one hundred and fifty. 
 
 " Resolved, That no person ought to be elected a member of the Senate of this 
 State, who is not at least thirty years of age. 
 
 Resolved, That no person ought to be elected a member of the House of Dele- 
 gates of this State, v/ho is not at least twenty-five years of age. 
 
 " Resolred, That it ought to be provided, that in all elections for members of either 
 branch of the General Assembly, and in the election of all officers which may be re- 
 quired to be made by the two Houses of Assembly jointly, or in either separately, 
 with the exception of the appointment of their own officers, the votes should be given 
 openly or viva voce, and not by ballot." 
 
 These resolutions having been already acted upon, were passed by. 
 
 The 9th resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious 
 worship, place or ministry whatsoever ; nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested or 
 burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious 
 opinions or belief ; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to main- 
 tain their opinions in matters of religion ; and that the same shall in no wise diminish, 
 enlarge or affect their civil capacities. 
 
 " That the Legislature shall have no power to prescribe any religious test what- 
 ever, nor to establish by law any subordination or preference between different sects 
 or denominations, nor confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any one sect 
 or denomination over others, nor pass any lav/, requiring or authorising any religious 
 society, or the people of any district v/ithin this Commonwealth , to levy on them- 
 selves or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house for public worship, 
 or the support of any church or ministry ; but that it be left free to every person to 
 select v/hom he pleases as his religious instructor, and to make for his support such 
 private contract as he pleases : Provided, hdzoever, That the foregoing clauses shall 
 not be so construed, as to permit any Minister of the Gospel, or Priest of any de- 
 nominationj to be ehgible to either House of the General Assembly." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 707 
 
 The question was taken on the first paragraph, and decided unanimously in the 
 affirmative. (And it was so recorded.) 
 
 The question being then put on the second paragraph, 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved to rtrike out the proviso, (which inhibits the election of 
 Priests and Ministers of the Gospel to the Legislature.) 
 
 Mr. H. put his motion on the ground of principle. Jt was a conviction of his mind 
 which he could not yield even to the views of his constituents. He considered such 
 exclusion directly at war with the principles laid down in the previous part of the 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. Clopton demanded the ayes and noes, which were ordered. 
 
 Mr. Giles, in a short speech, pressed those two points, that ministers were taken 
 from among the people by the possession of two important privileges : 1st, the license 
 to preach ; and 2d, the exemption from military duty. This made them a peculiar and 
 privileged order. If those privileges were taken away, it might be more fair to admit 
 them to political privileges, thoug-h on that point he gave no opinion. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke suggested, that tliese objections applied with equal force 
 to justices of the peace, and nobody contended for excluding them. 
 
 The question was then taken by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Madison, Mercer, Henderson, Cooke, Donaldson, Pendle- 
 ton, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Claytor and Saun- 
 ders — 14. 
 
 ■Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Anderson, CofFmaii, Harrison, V/ilhamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Ran- 
 dolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Osborne, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Boyd, George, M'Miilan, Campbell of Washing- 
 ton, Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Iilorris, Garnett, QloyA, Chapman, Matliews, 
 Ogiesby, Duncan, Laidley , Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Taze- 
 well, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsb}^, Campbell of Bedfoi'd, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, 
 Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, 
 Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 81. 
 
 So the Convention refused to strike out the proviso, which excludes ministers of 
 the Gospel from the Assembly. 
 
 The last paragraph of the resolution was agreed to without debate. 
 
 The 10th and llth resolutions were then agreed to as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That no bill of attainder, or ex post facto law, or law impairing the ob- 
 ligation of contracts, ought to be passed. 
 
 " Resolved, That private property ought not to be taken for public uses, without 
 just compensation." 
 
 The 12th resolution being read as follows : 
 
 ^'Resolved, That the members of the Legislature shall receive for their services a 
 compensation to be ascertained by lav/, and paid out of the public treasurj^ ; but no 
 law increasing the compensation of members of the Legislature, shall take effect until 
 the end of the next annual session after the said law may have been enacted." 
 
 Mr, Claytor moved to amend it, by striking out the word end," and inserting the 
 word " commencement." But on a suggestion by Mr. Coalter, that the object was to 
 prevent the Legislature from being under the bias of an increased salar^^, when they 
 gave their vote. 
 
 He withdrew his amendment, and the resolution was agreed to. 
 The 13th and last resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That no Senator or Delegate shall, during the term for which he shall 
 have been elected, be appointed to any civil onice of profit under this State, which 
 shall have been created, or the emoluments of which shall have been increased during 
 such term, except such offices as may be filled by elections by the people." 
 
 The House agreed to the resolution, and thus completed its action on the report of 
 the Legislative Committee. 
 
 Mr. Scott now moved the following : 
 Resolved, That no member of the Legislature shall, during the period for which 
 he shall have been elected, be appointed to any office, the appointment to which is 
 made by the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. Morgan said he was opposed to the amendment of the gentleman, (Mr. Scott,) 
 because he believed its obvious tendency would be injurious. If the Assembly be 
 prohibited from appointing its own members to office in all cases, or, in other words, 
 if the members shall be rendered incapable of being so appointed, they will be induced 
 by law to give the appointment to the Governor, of all the great officers of State, 
 whose appointments shall not be fixed in the Constitution. This would very much 
 increase the Executive power, and from hope of office, directly tend to make the mem- 
 bers of Assembly subservient to the Governor, which ought to be avoided. He thought 
 
708 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the power of appointment much safer in the hands of the Assembly, than of the 
 Executive. 
 
 Mr. Summers was opposed to the resolution, and asked for the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. Leigh suggested two objections to the measure: It would keep all persons 
 ambitious of the leading offices of the State, from entering the Legislature at all, and 
 it would injuriously narrow the ground of choice to fill them. 
 
 Mr. Scott did not admit the force of these objections. He thought the Legislature 
 was, in general, the road to political honors, and that nothing would deter ambitious 
 men from entering it. Though the latter objection might be true in theory, yet in 
 practice, he thought the rule would work the other v;ay. 
 
 Mr. Bayly opposed the resolution. He said he was not disposed to restrict the Ge- 
 neral Assembly in any manner, so as to prevent them from filling the civil or military 
 offices of the State, by the appointment of the most capable men. If, however, no 
 man was to receive an appointment to an office, during the period he should be elected 
 a Legislator, such a restriction might induce citizens, well qualified to be chosen to 
 make laws, from accepting a seat in the House of Delegates, or Senate. For, al- 
 though honorable men will not often seek office, yet it ought not to be expected that 
 they should be willing to disqualify themselves from holding offices of honor, trust or 
 profit, for no other reason than that the people, without solicitation, should honor them 
 with their confidence to be a member of the General Assembly, and that they should 
 accept and aid in making laws. By the institutions of Maryland, the Senate is elected 
 by electors, for five years, and during that period they cannot receive any other ap- 
 pointment under the State. The consequence is, that resignations often take place, 
 and one-third or one-half of the Senate have not been elected by the electors of the 
 people ; for, all vacancies in that body are filled by the Senators themselves. He had 
 often heard the exclusion of the Senators from office, during the period of their elec- 
 tion, complained of in Maryland, and he did not wish to see such restriction intro- 
 duced in the Constitution of Virginia. 
 
 The question being taken by ayes and noes, the resolution was rejected as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Moore, Beirne, Madison, Stanard, Mercer, 
 Henderson, Cooke, Pendleton, Duncan, Scott, Macrae, Tazewell and Rose — 14. 
 
 J^oes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brod- 
 nax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, 
 Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Smith, Miller, Baxter, 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Taylor 
 of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Green, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Branch, 
 Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 81. 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, moved the following: 
 
 " Resolved, That no incorporation for any ecclesiastical or religious purpose, shall 
 ever be granted, or have validity in this Commonwealth." 
 
 The resolution gave rise to a debate almost the counterpart of that which took place 
 in Committee. The resolution was supported by the mover, on the ground that re- 
 ligious incorporations tended to build up religious establishments, and had produced 
 those establishments in miniature : that religion needed no external aid, and was in- 
 jured by the alliance of wealth, &c. &c. 
 
 It was opposed by Mr. Marshall, Mr. Naylor, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Brodnax and Mr. 
 Stanard, as going a great deal too far in the extent of its terms ; as depriving reli- 
 gious societies of the means of securely holding their own property ; as making a 
 needless and unjust distinction between them and other associations; as being utterly 
 needless from the light of the age, and the utter averseness of every American Le- 
 gislature to do any act tending to build up religious establishments or confer exclu- 
 sive privileges on religious sects, &c. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas observed, that he agreed to a considerable extent, with the gentleman 
 from Brooke, (Mr. Campbell,) in his views on this subject, but he thought his resolu- 
 tion went farther than he could go with him. He said, that he had an unfeigned 
 respect for religion, though he feared he did not possess as much of it as he ought. 
 He agreed with the gentleman from Hampshire, (Mr. Naylor.) that religion was 
 founded on virtue, and that both combined, were essential to the prosperity of a na- 
 tion — Government should not give any preference to one sect over another, and the 
 true way of managing sects was to let them alone, so far as the Government was 
 concerned. Each ought to be protected in the undisturbed exercise of their religion. 
 
 He would, if a member of the Legislature, be wilhng to incorporate societies, so as 
 to enable them to hold, and protect their property in their churches, and the necessary 
 appurtenances thereto ; but would not consent to grant such incorporations for holding 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVENTIOX. 
 
 709 
 
 property generally. He thought there were strong objections to such a comprehen- 
 sive power. At present a discretion was vested in the Legislatvire on this subject, 
 and they had shewn no disposition to abuse it. He was disposed, therefore, to leave 
 the subject as it was placed by the present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax was induced to move by way of amendment, what he had offered in 
 Committee, in relation to the incorporation of theological seminaries, with a proviso 
 for re-modeling or revoking their charters at pleasure. His amendment was as fol- 
 lows -. 
 
 The Legislature shall have the power of incorporating by law. trustees or direc- 
 tors of any theological seminary, or other religious society, or body of men umted 
 for charitable purposes, or the advancement of pietT," and learning, so as to protect 
 them in the enjovment of their property and immunities, in such cases, and under 
 such resrulations'as the Legislature may deem expedient and proper. But the Legis- 
 lature of this State, during all futxire time, shall possess the power to alter, re-model, 
 or entirely repeal such charters or act of incorporation, whenever they shall deem it 
 expedient.'" 
 
 The debate was terminated by a motion of Mr. Stanard, that the resolution, toge- 
 ther with the amendment, be indefinitely postponed. 
 This motion was carried by ayes and noes, as follows : 
 
 .%e5— Messrs. Barbour, (Pres'ident.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield. Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Dromgoole. Alexander. Marshall. ^Nicholas, Anderson, Coffinan^ 
 Harrison, Baldwin, Johnson. Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Melsou of Southamp- 
 ton, Trezvant, Claiborne, L'rquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, 
 Stanard, Holladay. Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson. Osborne, Powell, Griggs. Mason 
 of Frederick, ]^«aylor, Donaldson, George, MTvIillan, Campbell of "SYashington, 
 Byars, Roane. Taylor of Caroline, Morris. Garnett. Cloyd, Chapman, Alathews, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, "Laidley. Summers, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, TazeweU, 
 Lovall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor. Saunders. Branch. Townes, 
 Cabell, Martin. Stuart, Pleasants, Thompson, Massie, Bates, ^Xeale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Joynes, Bayly and Perrin — 77. 
 
 Abes — Messrs. Brodnax, Goode, Tyler. Clopton, Williamson, M Coy, Baxter, 
 Madison. Cooke. Boyd, Pendleton, See. Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Macrae, Gordon and Lpshur — 19. 
 
 The House then proceeded to the consideration of the report of the 
 
 EXECUTIVE com:siittee. 
 
 The first resolution, as amended in Commitee of the hole, was then read as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 '* Resolzed, That the chief Executive omce of this Commonwealth ought to be 
 vested in a Governor, to be elected by the General Assembly for three years, and to 
 be ineligible for three years thereafter. BQs term of office shall commence on the 
 first day of January succeedincf his election, or on such other day as the Legislature 
 may from time to time designate." 
 
 „ ■ -^I^^^'cer nioved to amend it, by striking therefi-om the words General Assem- 
 bly," and inserting in lieu thereof, the words, - qualified voters for the most nume- 
 rous branch of the State Legislature." 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to lay the resolution and amendment upon the table. 
 
 He said he had come to the Convention determined to give the election of Gover- 
 nor to the Legislature; but the question of future appor^onment of representation 
 had a bearing on his final determination : if no plan for future apportionment was to 
 be permitted, then he should go for giving the election of Governor directly to the 
 people. " " 
 
 The question of laying the resolution on the table was taken, and decided in the 
 negative: Ayes 47, >oes 4S. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment of ^Nlr. Mercer, and decided in the 
 affirmative by ayes and noes, as follows : 
 
 .iye^ — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison. Williamson. Baldwin, 
 M'Coy- Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh. Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick. >avlor. Donaldson. Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, :NI":Millan, Campbell of Washington. Bvars. Clovd. Chapman, 
 Mathews, Oglesby, Dimcan. Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridore. Morgan. Campbell 
 of Brooke ,_"\Vilson, Claytor, Saimders, Cabell, 31artin, Stuart^ Gordon. Thompson 
 Bayly and L pshur — .50. ' ' 
 
 Aoe^-— :Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander. Goode, Marshall. Tyler. Mcholas 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant. Claiborne,' Urquhart! Randolph. Leigli 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Roane,' Tavlor of' Caroline. Morris, 
 Garnett. Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green. Tazewell. Lovall. Prentis' 
 Grigsby. CampbeU of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Neale' 
 Rose, Coalter, Joynes and Perrin— 46. 
 
710 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The question then recurring on the amendment of the Committee, as amended on 
 motion of Mr. Mercer, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge demanded the ayes and noes, and they v/ere taken accordingly as 
 follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Os- 
 borne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 dleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, 
 Bayly and Upshur — 50. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, P4arshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh 
 of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Joynes and Perrin — 46. 
 
 The question, finally, recurring on the resolution as thus amended, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge again demanded the aj^es and noes. They were taken and stood as 
 follows : Ayes 50, Noes 46. [Vote same as above.] 
 
 The second resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That there ought to be appointed a Lieutenant-Governor of this Com- 
 monwealth, to be elected in the same manner, at the same time, and for the same 
 term with the Governor." 
 
 The Committee's amendment was agreed to : Ayes 50. 
 
 Mr. Scott now moved to strike out the whole resolution as amended, and to sub- 
 stitute the following: 
 
 " An Executive Council, consisting of three members, shall be chosen by joint 
 vote of both Houses of Assembly, to remain in ofiice three years. In case of the 
 death, inability, or absence of the Governor from the Government, the eldest member 
 of the Council shall act as Governor. Tvv^o members shall be sufficient to form a 
 quorum. Their proceedings shall be entered of record, and signed by the members 
 present, (to any part whereof any member may enter his dissent,) and lay it before 
 the General Assembly when called for by them. This Council may appoint their . 
 own Clerk, who shall have a salary settled by law, and shall take an oath of secrecy 
 in such matters as he shall be directed by the Board to conceal. At the end of one 
 year from their first appointment, one Councillor, to be designated by lot, shall go out 
 of office, and the vacancy shall be supplied by a new election. At the end of the 
 second year, another Councillor, to be designated in hke manner, shall go out of of- 
 fice, and the vacancy be supplied by a new election : and this rotation shall be con- 
 tinued in due order annually. The Executive Council shall stand in the same rela- 
 tion to the Governor, as the Council under the existing Constitution, {except that they 
 shall advise merely, and 7iot controul him.) 
 
 Mr. Scott very briefly stated the leading principles of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Leigh opposed its adoption. He made some remarks on the very extraordi- 
 nary situation of the Convention, when the members of a single district (that of Al- 
 bemarle) held the fate of every measure in their hands, and by inclining to one side or 
 the other of the House, could give an affirmative or negative vote of the Convention 
 at their pleasure. Yet, gentlemen seemed just as willing to recommend a Constitu- 
 tion, if its provisions were carried by a m.ajority of one, as if the whole body had 
 voted for them. He expressed his astonishment, that gentlemen who agreed with him 
 and his friends, in voting against the white basis, should so far play into the hands of 
 their adversaries on that great question, as to enable them to take all other measures 
 they desired, and none of which they could carry by their own unaided strength. He 
 contended, that the argument for such a Council as Mr. Scott proposed, was, if not 
 wholly changed, greatly impaired by the vote which had given the election of Go- 
 vernor to the people. Such a Council would only embroil the proceedings of the 
 Executive. He should have hoped his friend from Fauquier would have been the last 
 man to propose a mere advisory Council, after that vote had so materially changed 
 the state of things. He must, with whatever hesitation or reluctance, vote against 
 the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas moved to amend the amendment, by striking therefrom the words 
 " except that they shall have power to advise merely, and not to controul him." 
 
 Mr. Scott declaring, that he would be the last man to break the ranks that were 
 opposed to the white basis, consented, though with an expression of reluctance, to 
 give up the veto, (the words in Italics,) and accept of Mr. Nicholas's amendment as 
 a modification. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 711 
 
 Mr. Claytor demanded a division of the question, on striking out and inserting, and 
 it was divided accordingly. 
 
 And the question being on the motion to strike cut the 2d resolution, as amended 
 by the Committee of the \Vhole, 
 
 Mr. Stuart, in reply to Mr. Leigh's expression of surprise at the votes of gentle- 
 men on minor questions, who were opposed to the white basis, expressed in turn his 
 surprise, that no vote could be given . without incurring the imputation of drilling. 
 The srentleman had not, indeed, ^et pointed out who was the Sergeant, nor had he 
 particularised the troops. Mr. S. vindicated the vote he had given to put the election 
 of Governor into the hands of tiie people. He had been driven into that measure, 
 because all efforts to crive the people" tlieir due representation in the Legislature, had 
 been steadily resisted : and unless that was done, he had told gentlemen he should 
 never vote to ffive the Legislature the election of Governor. The gentleman had no 
 rio-ht to expect, that the white basis question was to carry all other questions along 
 with it. He spoke this, not in his own defence, for he was no deserter from that gen- 
 tleman's side, but he spoke in behalf of others, who had given independent votes. 
 All who had agreed with the gentleman from Chesterfield, on the question of the 
 basis, were not therefore bound to vote witii him on every point in the whole Consti- 
 tution. Many wiio advocated a mixed basis, had nevertheless always been in favour 
 of the election of Governor by the people. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, that the question was not varied by having been divided : for, as 
 the provisions in the resolution were incompatible with those in the amendment of 
 Mr. Scott, all who were in favour of the latter, would of course vote to strike out. 
 The election of a Lieutenant-Governor by the people, varied the question as to the 
 Council. All who wished for a Council, would be for striking out that feature of 
 course. Mr. N. then went into a comparison of the expense of the two plans, and 
 expressed his decided preference for tliat of Mr. Scott. 
 
 Mr. Mercer contended, that the present motion should be considered as in effect a 
 motion to strike out and insert, and as involving, in fact, a comparison betvreen the 
 two plans proposed. Much had been said about tactics and management, but he saw 
 no evidence of it. He claimed no power over the opinions or course of others, nor 
 did he recognize any such right as existed in any one over his own. He was for abol- 
 ishingr the CouncU altogether, and for electing the Grovemor by the people. He was 
 of course opposed to striking out. 
 
 Mr. Tyler said he had, after much reflection, brought himself to vote in Committee 
 of the Whole, to abolish the Executive Council. He had not at that time explained 
 his motives, behevin? he was able satisfactorily to account for his course to his own 
 constituents. But when he had given that vote, it was on the hypothesis tliat the 
 Governor was to be elected by the Legislature. He saw no danger attending the 
 plan — he had apprehended nothing from the effect of patronage in the hands of such 
 an Executive. But, the moment the election of Governor was to be thro'VNTi into the 
 hands of the people, he was led to a very different course. Under such circumstan- 
 ces, he was opposed to increasing, by one iota, the power and influence of that officer. 
 If there was the slightest infusion of what had been denominated, by an eloquent 
 member of this body, ••' a spice of Zvlonarchy," into the nature of the Governor's 
 office, his election would cause violent throes and convulsions in the State. - The 
 plan became an object worth striving for — competitors would start up in all parts of the 
 Commonwealth, and great pohtical excitement must be the unavoidable consequence. 
 
 ]VIr. Leigh would add one word more on the subject of tlie Council, and he hoped 
 it would be the last he should have to utter there on tliat subject. When he had first 
 begun to examine the Constitution of Virginia, he had had great objections aorainst 
 tills feature of it ; but, more experience had convinced him, that instead of bemo: in 
 practice pernicious, it was a most valuable provision of political sagacity. It was this 
 experience which had overcome his early prepossessions, and the Council had been 
 growing on his esteem to the present day. 'He should not say any more in favour of 
 it — he had already said all he knew, and all that he was able to say of it, when in 
 Committee of the Whole. After having bestowed long, he would not say profound 
 reflection, but certainly long and very anxious reflection upon the subject', he was at 
 a loss to imagine how the Governor was to get along without a Council. He sup- 
 posed he was to be edded by Heads of Departments, ehgibie by others, and indepen- 
 dent of tlie Executive. He asked gentlemen to observe the consequence that must 
 follow, after the Council should have been abolished, and the Executive power should 
 be exercised by the Governor alone. There must be revision, imjnediately. of almost 
 every law in the Code — all the laws passed since the revolution, would have to be 
 revised. The magnitude and difficulty of such a task, were obvious to all. If there 
 were to be Departments, then, during the first year after any Governor should have 
 been elected, though he micfht be called (Governor of the State, the mind of a Gover- 
 nor would not be there. The moment he got into office. "the first task he must per- 
 form, would be to muster all the papers pertaining to the office, and how long did 
 
712 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 gentlemen suppose it would take any man to get through with such a work as that ? 
 The worthy gentleman from Goochland, (Mr. Pleasants,) knew the truth of this re- 
 presentation. But, he was to have Departments to help him. There was to be a Se- 
 cretary of State, a Secretary of the Treasury — and what others.^ A Secretary of the 
 Navy, he presumed; and a Secretary of the Board of Works, or of Internal Im- 
 provements, probably. And gentlemen were willing to create all these, for the sake 
 of getting rid of the Council. In reply to Mr. Tyler, he said, that he had observed, 
 to his intinite surprise, that that gentleman did vote in Committee of the Whole for 
 the abolition of the Council. He was never more surprised at any thing, after the 
 experience that gentleman must have had upon the subject. There was one thing 
 attending the existing Council, which was worthy of a thought — he meant no dis- 
 respect to any gentleman, who had ever filled the office of Governor, when he made 
 the remark — it was this, that if the Governor happened to be of mind superior in 
 vigour to that of his Council, his mind would of course practically direct every thing ; 
 but, if it should so happen, that there were in the Council men greatly his superiors, 
 then the strongest mind in the Council would govern. This was the inevitable course 
 of things. Now, in a Council of eight members, there was a greater chance of having 
 some able mind in the Executive office — and be the strength of that mind what it 
 would, the office gave it power for good only, and none whatever for evil. 
 Mr. Claytor withdrew his call for a division of the question. 
 
 And the question being then put on striking out, the second resolution of the Exec- 
 utive Committee, and inserting the amendment of Mr. Scott, it was taken by ayes 
 and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 48. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffinan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson, Joynes and Bay- 
 ly-48. 
 
 So the motion was lost. 
 
 The question was then taken on agreeing to the second resolution as amended by 
 the Committee of the Whole, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Cofiiman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborrre, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor. Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathev/s, Oglesby, Duncan, Laid- 
 ley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of 
 Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson Joynes and Bayly — 47. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Pvoane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, 
 Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 48. 
 
 So the Convention refused to agree to the resolution. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, December 22, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Kerr of the Baptist Church. 
 
 The question being on agreeing to that amendment reported by the Committee of 
 the Whole which proposes to strike out the word " Resolved" from the fifth resolution 
 of the Executive Committee, (which resolution reads as follows, viz :) 
 
 " Resolved, That the Sheriffs of the diffijrent counties in the Commonwealth shall 
 hereafter be elected by the voters qualified to vote for the most numerous branch of 
 the Legislature." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 713 
 
 Mr. Trezvant asked for the ayes and noes; they were ordered by the House, and 
 being taken, slood as follows : 
 
 .4 (/e5— Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Bfodnax, Drouigoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyier, Isicho as, 
 Cloptoa, Baldwin, Joiiason. Miller, Mason or' Southampton, Trezvant. Claiborne, L r- 
 qunart, Randulph, Leigh of Hahlax, Logan, \'enable, Madison, H> liaaay. Merger, 
 i'ltzhugh, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Tay lor of Caroline, Mc.rris, Garnett, Clo\ d, 
 Cnapaian, Mathews, Barbour of CuJpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Gnasby, Campbell of Bedford, Brancn, Townes, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Massie, 
 Bales, JVeale, Rose, Coalter, Upsliur and Perrin — 57. 
 
 .Voes — Messrs. Anderson, Corfiuan, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Baxter, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Mason of Frederick, JNaylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Ciaytor, Saunders. Cabell, Gordon, Thompson, Joynes and Bayly—&7. 
 
 So the House rejected the fifth resolution of the Executive Committee. 
 
 They also concurred in the amendment which strikes out the word '■ Resolved," 
 from the following (sixth) resolution, viz : 
 
 Resolved, Thai the commissioned ofiicers of militia coropanies be nominated to the 
 Executive by a majority of their respective companies." 
 
 The House also agreed v.-ith the Committee of the Whole in amending the seventh 
 resolution, which reads as follows : 
 
 Resoired, That the field ofiicers of regiments be nominated to the Executive by a 
 majority of the commissioned officers of their respective regiments." By striking ont 
 all after the word Resolved," and inserting in lieu thereot the following, viz : " That 
 the mode of appointing mihtia officers ought to be provided lor by law: Provided, ne- 
 vertheless, that no officer below the grade of a Brigadier General should be appointed 
 by the General Assembly." 
 
 The House further agreed to strike out the word " Resolved" from the eighth resO' 
 lution, which WiS in the words following, viz : 
 
 " Resolved, That no pardon shall be granted in any case, until after conviction or 
 judgment." 
 
 The following additions having been reported by the Committee of the Whole to 
 the report of the Executive Committee : 
 
 " Si:cT. 9. The Governor sh;ili have power to nominate, and by and with the ad- 
 vice and consent of the Senate, appoint Judges of the Supreme Court, or Court of 
 Final Jurisdiction, and Judges of such Inferior Courts as may from time to time be 
 established by law, all railitia officers from the rank of Colonel inclusive, the Trea- 
 surer, Auditor of Public Accounts, Register of the Land Office, and Attorney Gene- 
 ral. The Legislature may by law vest the appointment of all other officers of the 
 Common wealTh, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, in the 
 Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, or in the Courts ol' Law, 
 
 " Sect. 10. The Governor shall have power to fiJl up all vacancies that may hap- 
 pen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions, which shall expire at 
 the end ot tlie next session of that body. 
 
 Sect. 11. The Governor shall have power to require in writing the opinion of 
 the Lieutenant Governor, and ol' the Attorney General, upon all matters appertaining 
 to the duties of his office." 
 
 Mr. Claiborne moved to strike out all in the above resolutions which referred to a 
 Lieuten;ait Governor, (the House having yesterday stricken out the resolution which 
 provides for such an officer.) 
 
 But before any determination was had on this motion, the resolutions were, at the 
 motion of Mr. Upshur, laid for the present upon the table. 
 
 The Ci)nvention now returned to the consideration of the third resolution of the 
 Executive Committee, which reads as follows, viz: 
 
 " Resolved, That the Executive Council, as at present organized, ought to be aboI= 
 ished, and that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council." 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to lay the resolution upon the table. 
 
 The motion was opposed by Mr. Powell, Mr. Henderson, and Mr. Fitzhugh ; the 
 latter gentleman stating that if it did not carry, he should offer the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 " There ought to be appointed a Secretary of State, and an Attorney General, who, 
 besides being the Constitutional advisers of the Governor, shall discharge such other 
 duties, as ma}' be assigned them hy the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. Scott insisted on his motion, being persuaded that a majority of the House were 
 in favor of having a Council in some form : and if those who were for an Advisory 
 Council, would unite with those who preferred a veto on the Governor, they could 
 carry a Council that wotxld be better than none. Alter some farther conversation b«- 
 
 90 
 
714 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tvveen Messrs. Scott, Powell, Fitzliugli and Doddridge, the question on laying the re- 
 solution upon the table, was decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Droingoole, Alexander, Goode, Tyler, Nicholas, Johnson, 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Plolladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Joynes, Upshur and Perrin — 47. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Marshall, Clopton, Anderson, Coffinan, Harrison, Williamson, Bald- 
 win, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, 
 Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pen- 
 dleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, 
 Thompson and Bayly — 4.9. 
 
 So the House refused to lay the resolution upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh now moved to amend the resolution by striking out the words " and 
 that it is inexpedient to provide any other Executive Council," and insert as follows : 
 There ought to be appointed a Secretary of State, and an Attorney General, who, 
 besides being the Constitutional advisers of the Governor, shall discharge such other 
 duties as may be assigned them by the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. Scott demanded a division of the question on striking out and inserting; and it 
 was thereupon divided accordingly : and being first put on striking out, 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, that his former prediction was now verified; for a plan was pro- 
 posed, which, while it was not so efficient as that of the existing Council, was equally, 
 if not more expensive. The Attorney General was at present the Constitutional ad- 
 viser of the Governor, on all law questions: if he was to do more than this, he must 
 be paid for it; and besides, his official duties occupied his whole time. As to the Se- 
 cretary of State, he could not speak with certainty, as he did not know what his func- 
 tions were to be. If he was to be a mere subordinate of the Governor, a sort of clerk, 
 whom the Governor could command, he would be the last person fit to be entrusted 
 with the duty of being his official adviser. 
 
 This officer must have a salary ; and here was more expense to be encountered. 
 Besides, there must be a Lieutenant Governor. What was to be done should the 
 Governor die or be sick .'' Gentlemen would have that case provided for by the Legisla- 
 ture : Here, then, was to be an organic law, which provided no certain means of car- 
 rying on the Government. The Constitution was to omit, altogether, an officer, es- 
 sential to the continuance of any Government at all. When was the Legislature to 
 make this provision.? When the emergency happened the Legislature might not be 
 in session. They must at last have a Lieutenant Governor; and he must have a salary, 
 and no small one. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh declined arguing a question, which had been already so fully discussed. 
 As to the duties of the Secretary of State, it was sufficient to say, that he meant him to 
 do the duty of the present eight Councillors. And in relation to filling the place of 
 the Governor, in case of his death or inability, that duty might be devolved, on either 
 the President of the Senate, or the Speaker of the House of Delegates; or the Secre- 
 tary of State might act as Lieutenant Governor, pro Lem. 
 
 Mr. Summers said, that this feature of the Constitution had been sustained, with 
 an earnestness of perseverance worthy of a better object. Since the pleasure of this 
 body had been manifested to be, to look to the people, as the source of the Executive 
 authority, this effi^rt had been renewed with fresh vigour. But, he begged gentle- 
 men to recollect, that if a Governor, appointed by the Legislature, could be entrusted 
 without a controlling Council over him, a Governor, coming directly from the bosom 
 of the people, might surely be. The change, in this respect, so far from furnishing an 
 argument for retaining, was the strongest argument for abolishing, the Council alto- 
 gether. 
 
 In reply to the argument that a Council was indispensable to a new Governor, un- 
 acquainted with the details of office, he quoted the example of the General Govern- 
 ment, and referred especially to the present Executive, who had no Council around 
 him that had been for years in their places to instruct him, yet whose administration 
 was proceeding with alacrity and with the general satisfaction and confidence of the 
 people. It had not been found necessary to have a permanent Council to teach the 
 incoming President his duty ; and yet that was a far more arduous and extensive duty 
 than that of a Governor of Virginia. Experience, then, on which gentlemen relied 
 so absolutely as a guide, was here all against them : and went to shew there was not 
 the least necessity for this incubus upon the State. The proposed Council would retain 
 the present services of the Attorney General, to which, of course, gentlemen would 
 not object : and it gave the Governor an additional officer to do the duties now per- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 715 
 
 formed by the eiglit Councillors and their Clerk. If the Governor needed still more 
 light, the Commonwealth was open to him : all the intelligence of the State could be 
 consulted : and if that were too little, after all, as a last resort, Shockce Hill remained 
 ready to direct his course, as he presumed it had done heretofore. 
 
 Mr. Alexander said, that he found himself compelled to change, on this occasion, 
 the vote he had given when this subject was before under consideration. Through 
 all the course of his Legislative experience, he must be permitted to say that he had 
 Rever witnessed such proceedings as had marked this body, especially during the last 
 two days. He firmly believed that no political body had ever done more to destroy 
 the principles of free Government than this Convention. (Here Mr. Alexander was 
 reminded by the Chair that it was not in order to reflect upon the course pursued by 
 the body.) Mr. A. said he meant no injurious reflection; but what, said he, do we 
 find.? On one day propositions that have been maturely considered, are deliberately 
 <3ecided on ; and the very next day the decision is wholly reversed. Yet it was said 
 there were no tactics — no management — no manoeuvre. He had come to the Con- 
 vention not for the purpose of acting with any party, or advancing any mere party in- 
 terests ; he had come to be governed by what was wise and just, to make a Constitu- 
 tion that would prove acceptable to the people by its own merits. With the gentle- 
 man from Loudoun, he could say, if there were any objects which he had come to ob- 
 tain in preference to others, they v/ere these two — to continue the election of Gover- 
 nor as it was provided for by the existing Constitution, and to abolish the Executive 
 Council. But since it had been determined that the Governor was to be elected by 
 the people, he felt it his duty to resort to every means of counteracting an abuse of 
 Executive power. He had thought that while the general provisions of the Consti- 
 tution exhibited the wisdom of their forefathers, in distributing power so as to render 
 it capable of effecting good only, and not evil, that in the very difiicult problem of an 
 Executive, they had partially failed. He had wished for an Executive that could do 
 ^o more than fulfil the legislative will and further the legitimate ends of the Consti- 
 tution, and thought that such a Governor needed no Council to control him, but 
 should be left to his naked responsibihty. But now a new aspect was given to the 
 ^guestion. 
 
 There was a remark made by one of the wisest of statesmen, which had always 
 impressed him with great force. When that gentleman was asked how it happened 
 that in the early formation of the Federal Government, gentlemen from the South 
 <5btained such an undue degree of influence, he replied that there was no secret in 
 the matter nor any mj^stery about it : the solution was easy : the Southern members, 
 generally, had eome to that Convention acting on virtuous principles, and that so 
 iong as that continued to be the case, they preserved a moral force and power, which 
 was strongly felt ; but that it would he lost, so soon as they cam.e to act on local and 
 selfish considerations, regarding only the geographical lines, which separated them 
 from others. The trutii and wisdom of his remark, had for some time been verified 
 by the state of things, in the General Government ; and it seemed likel}', in a short 
 time, to be verified by the condition of their own State. 
 
 Mr. A. said, he had not risen to make a speech; but merely to explain the princi- 
 ples on which he should act, and with a view to justif}^ himself to the House and to 
 his constituents, who knew the sentiments with which he had left them. 
 
 Mr. Mercer, after expressing his great respect for the gentleman who had just taken 
 his seat, regretted that he should have insinuated that any management or tactics had 
 been resorted to in obtaining the vote of yesterday giving the election of Governor 
 to the people : nothing was easier than to account for that vote. The parties at first 
 had been nearly equally divided in sentiment on that point : but some changes had 
 taken place in the body by the resignation of members, among these his venerable 
 colleague, (the cause of v/hose withdrawal from that body, he felt assured every mem- 
 ber of it united with him in deploring) and their successors in some cases differed in 
 their views. 
 
 Mr. M. then referred to the doctrines of the Federalist, as to placing the Legislative 
 and Executive bodies on the same foundation, and keeping them independent of each 
 •other in their own sphere. He was surprised that no gentleman had availed himself 
 of the masterly argument on the subject of a plural Executive which was contained 
 in the 70th number of Publius : it was perfectly conclusive, and had led to the aboli- 
 tion of an Executive Council in New York, by an almost unanimous vote. It was 
 easy to explain the vote of 5"esterday — all the propositions which had been considered 
 were in some degree dependant propositions; and the remark of the gentleman from 
 Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell,) who never uttered a thought that had not great weight, was 
 perfectly correct, when he had insisted on this very ground, that the whole of those 
 propositions should be placed within the view of the Committee at the same time. If 
 any machinery had been employed in effecting the vote in reference to the election 
 of Governor, he was ignorant of it. He never had (he declared it before Heaven,) 
 voted at any time with a view to make any proposition odious to its supporters. When 
 
716 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONTENTION. 
 
 he was pressed to vote in Congress for adding the molasses tax to the tariff, with a 
 view to make the bill odious to New England, he had utterly refused to do so : and 
 such should ever be his course. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that for some time past, he had every day lieccme more and 
 more convinced, tliat, from whatever cause, this body was utterly incapacitated for 
 the performance of the duty, which had been devolved upon it by the people. 1 have 
 seen, said Mr. R. with pain and grief, that our proceedings are — in my view — discre- 
 ditable to ourselves, and injurious to the best interests of the Commonv/ealth. [Here 
 the Chair reminded Mr. R., that it was a violation of order to make any reflections 
 on the proceedings of the body.] Mr. R. resumed. I do not reflect upon the body : 
 I have all proper respect for it: but I will take leave to say — (under the correction, 
 always, of the Chair, and of the House) — that if the various schemes and projects — - 
 (I speak of them as in their present inchoate state) — which have been brought for- 
 ward in this Assembly, and there are more, I believe, now in embryo, shall be finally 
 resolved upon — a deeper wound will have been inflicted on the cause and principles 
 of free Government, than has been given to that cause and those principles smce the 
 days of the French National Convention. I say it deliberately. J was in hopes that 
 before now some gentleman would have moved an adjournment sine die. Sir, what 
 have we seen What a mass of projects has been offered — considered — rejected — - 
 re-considered — re-adopted, and then scouted. If you had gone through the Com- 
 monwealth, parish by parish, and taken the proposals of every old-field school, you 
 could not have collected such a heterogeneous mass — such a monstrous farrago, as we 
 see gravely proposed to us, by those, who, if they are statesmen, should better have 
 digested their own thoughts, and not presented them, in their crude, undigested state, 
 for our adoption. 1 thought it right to say thus much by way of giving the right hand 
 of fellowship to my old friend and fellow-labourer from Mecklenburg, (Mr. Alexan- 
 der.) Sir, we are daily losing the confidence of the people : and deservedly losing it. 
 What did we hear about the shocking anomaly of the County Courts filhng their own 
 vacancies When we allow two of our members to return a third — and then a fourth — 
 and then a fifth — till not a shred will be left of the body chosen by the people : we 
 shall become a self-created Assembly, which neither possesses, nor has a right to 
 challenge the confidence of the people. In every respect in which I look at the cha- 
 racter and composition of this bodj', it is obvious, the people cannot confide in it. I 
 declare it openly : and the sooner we return to those who sent us, re infectu, the bet- 
 ter. I will agree, before we take such a step, to remedy those evils which are most 
 complained of. I will consent to reduce the number of the House of Delegates one- 
 half, and let each county send one Delegate, instead of two. I will consent to re- 
 duce the Executive Council to half its present number. I will vote to relieve the 
 Commonwealth from a burden, by removing unworthy, slothful, and incapable Judges 
 from their seats. This will satisfy the public. But, going on as we do, it is impossi- 
 ble — with this lean, staggering, rickety majority — tunjbling from side to side, ever to 
 concoct any thing which will commend itself to the good sense of the good people 
 of this Commonw^ealth. 
 
 The question on striking out was now put, and carried without a count. 
 
 So the House struck out the words, " it is inexpedient to provide any other Execu- 
 tive Council." 
 
 The question then recurring on Mr. Fitzhugh's amendment, 
 Mr. Summers asked for the aj'es and noes. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, in reference to the remarks of Mr. Nicholas on the salaries of the 
 proposed officers, observed that there seemed to be something in the atmosphere of 
 this city, which occasioned great alarm on the subject of salaries. As long as the old 
 Council was sustained, with its eight salaried Councillors, not a word was heard on 
 the subject. To meet, in part, the difficulty about expenses, he suggested the adop- 
 tion of a plan long practised in Pennsylvania, by devolving the duties of the Gover- 
 nor, in case of the death of that officer, on the President of the Senate, and let the 
 salary continue to the end of M'hat would have been the Governor's term. In the 
 course of forty years, but one such case had occurred in Pennsylvania ; which was 
 on the death of Governor Mifflin, when the oflfice was filled by Mr. Word of Pitts- 
 burg. A similar case had once happened in Ohio, when Othniel Lucar filled the 
 vacancy. Mr. D. explained the duties of Secretary of State, to consist in registering 
 all the official acts of the Executive Department, in preserving the papers, and offer- 
 ing the seal of State, &c. So fir as expense was concerned, the proposed plan would 
 be a relief to the Treasury, while the duties of the department would be simplified. 
 
 Mr. Leigh suggested to Mr. Fitzhugh, that if the Attorney General was to be made 
 the Constitutional adviser of the Governor in all matters of State, it would be ne- 
 cessary to add a Solicitor General, or a Deputy Attorney General, to perform the 
 duties of his offi-ce. The new Secretary of State was to be merely the present Clerk 
 of the Council, with a new name. He submitted the question, whether the Clerk of 
 the Council was a proper Constitutional adviser for the Governor.? The very quali- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOX. 
 
 717 
 
 ties which made him a good Clerk, unfitted him to be a good Councillor, and tice 
 
 zersa he would either be a bad Clerk or a bad Councillor. The business of a Se- ' 
 
 cretary of State was to think — not to write — not to fold and endorse and file papers. 
 The same argument, to a certain extent, applied to the Attorney General. If he de- 
 voted himself to affairs of State, he must give up his professioucJ duties. Mr. L. 
 scouted the idea of any saving of expense by the new arrangement — ways and means 
 would always be found to dispose of the revenue. If the whole debt of the United 
 States was paid, the same revenue would still be exacted from the people, and spent 
 in some shape. The Governor's salary must be increased with his duties — so must 
 those of the Heads of Departments. If gentlemen would command mind, they must 
 pay for mind. They did not want a mere right hand, with a pen in it, and an ink- 
 stand before it. He expressed surprise, that ^Ir. Mercer should have alluded to the 
 abolition of the Council in 2s ew York. Was it possible that gentleman did not know- 
 that they had had two Councils in New York — a Council of revision, and a Council 
 of appointment And could he suppose they had any analogy to the Executive 
 Couucll of Virginia r Their name was the only point of resemblance. The Council 
 of appointment had been abolished, because it was corrupt — and the Council of re- 
 vision, because it had rejected some popular law. He denied, that the argument in 
 the Federalist had any application at all to such a Council as that of Virginia. It 
 contained general reflections merely. The gentleman had called that book his poli- 
 tical bible, and said it was almost the only book on politics he had ever read, (a short 
 catalocrue indeed ;) but, he would remind the gentleman of what he had himself said 
 of that work — that it was written in the spirit of an advocate, not of a judge — being 
 intended to persuade the people of the United States to adopt the Federal Constitu- 
 tion. But, would any have the Executive of Virginia like that of the United States.? 
 Kentucky had made the experiment, and tasted the consequences. Was Virginia 
 seeking to form an Executive adapted to manage the foreign relations of a great na- 
 tion.' Was an instrument to be formed in the same way, no matter what end it was 
 to answer .' Would they attempt to shave a gentleman with a broad-axe, or with the 
 guillotine.'' It might, indeed, be the very best mode, as tlie gentleman would never 
 want sliaving a^ain. So these gentlemen were for applying the axe to the neck of 
 the State Government. 
 
 Mr. L. said, I am not going to say any thing more about the Executive Council. 
 God help me ! I sometimes think I am labouring under a partial insanity, and that 
 this must be one of the subjects in which it runs. I hear the evils of this Council 
 talked of, and that not by the enemies of the principle — not by those who are infusing 
 a spice of JNIonarchy into the Government — but by men, for whose judgment I have 
 the highest respect, and who draw their notions from observation and experience. 
 What those evils are, I have yet to learn — errors there Avill be — occasional instances 
 of the prevalence of passion — this I am not going to deny. But, when we shall get 
 a Government that is exempt from all error in every one of its acts, then we shall be 
 in that happy condition, which nofle ever expect to see but the Utopians — and they 
 only when they shall have made men different from w^hat they are — and then they 
 will find that they are as inferior in their schemes of Government, to those who 
 framed our Constitution, as they will find themselves in remodelling the nature of 
 man to God Almighty, who made the human heart and mind. Sir, I am reminded of 
 what the devoted Griffith said to Catherine, the Queen of Henry 8th — men"s evil 
 actions live in brass — their virtues we write in water"' — and when the Executive 
 Council shall be dead and gone, and cold in the grave, the gentleman from Loudoun — 
 no — but the gentleman from Fauquier will wish it to have such a Chronicler of its 
 living actions as poor Griffith. 
 
 Mr. Upshur now moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Fitzhugh, by substituting 
 the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That there shall be appointed an Executive Council or Council of State, 
 consisting of four Councillors, to be elected by joint ballot of both Houses of the 
 Legislature. One from the district west of the Alleghany; one from the district of 
 the Valley ; one from the district between the Blue Ridge and the head of tide water, 
 and one from the district betv.-een the head of tide water and the ocean; who shall 
 choose annually, out of their own number, a President, who shall act as Lieutenant- 
 Governor; and in all respects hold the same relation to the Governor, or perform 
 the same duties, as the existing Council of State hold and perform. Two members 
 shall form a quorum, and in case of an equal division of votes, the Governor shall 
 have the casting vote." 
 
 Mr. U. said, the scheme was not yet carried out into all its details — but he offered 
 it, to try the sense of the House as to its important features. 
 
 Mr. Mercer expressed his regret at seeing the great natural divisions of the State 
 brought into any plan as connected with political arrangements. He feared the prac- 
 tical effect of this w^ould be to confirm forever those local divisions, and produce a 
 spirit of separate and rival interest among the people inhabiting them. Ke objected 
 
718 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 to a Council, which would sink the Governor so far, as to leave liim less power tliaii 
 a high Councillor. He denied the charge of wishing to form a Government without 
 any guide of experience — and he appealed to the example of seventeen States, which 
 were without any Council, in contrast to seven, which had this feature. He denied 
 having ever called the Federalist his political bible, or having said it was the only po- 
 litical book he read ; but, he contended, that its language was always to be received 
 cum grano sails, remembering for what end they were written. Preferring to the doc- 
 trine maintained there, that an Executive ought to possess energy, and not be tram- 
 melled by a Council, Mr. M. quoted, as being much better than any thing he could 
 say, the entire argument in the 70th number of the Federalist, on the subject of a 
 plural Executive, accompanying it by occasional comments, shewing its apphcabiUty 
 to the present measure. 
 
 Mr. M. observed, that he had read this long extract for the purpose of shewing that 
 the Executive Council was a vice in the Constitution. As to the argument, that it 
 preserved a record of the motives of the Executive acts, it was false in fact. Those 
 motives could be judged only by the acts themselves — and for his acts, the Governor 
 was responsible, and liable to impeachment. 
 
 He expressed his apprehension of an undue influence of the Legislature over th« 
 Executive — referred to several instances to shew the disposition to encroachment in 
 that body, and concluded by reference to the 55th number of the Federalist, (written 
 by the very venerable gentleman in his eye,) to shew the danger of placing all the 
 power of the State in the hands of a popular Assembly. 
 
 Mr. Claytor asked for the ayes and noes, which were ordered. 
 
 Mr. Giles asked to know, whether the Governor was to be elected by a majority, or 
 hj a mere plurality of votes ? In the former case, there would be caucussing — in the 
 latter, a multitude of candidates, and a Governor elected by a little faction in one 
 corner of the State. Now, there was another project — for a Secretary of State. By 
 whom was he to be appointed ? By the Governor.? By the Legislature? Or by the 
 people ? And in the last case, by a majority or a plurality ? All this was left blank ; 
 ■so all his duties were left blank. If the Convention proceeded in this style, it would 
 .at length be reduced to the necessity of making an open declaration of its incapacity 
 to form a Constitution, and of then giving a general carte hlanche to the Legislature. 
 After some reflections on the inchoate state in which projects were presented for de- 
 liberation, Mr. G. said, that any impartial person, after reviewing what they had been 
 doing for some days past, must be led irresistibly to the conclusion, that the less this 
 t)ody did the better. He had come to this; that the more projects were presented, the 
 more mischief was likely to ensue — yet he had all respect for the virtue and the talents 
 of gentlemen who offered them. He knew of but one circumstance which entered 
 into the case, and that was, that if they did nothing, they should still have done a 
 great deal. They would then have let alone what wiser men had provided. Their 
 forefathers had done moi-e for them than they seemed capable of doing for themselves. 
 
 The gentleman last up, (Mr. Mercer,) had come out with the true object in view : 
 It was to form an energetic Executive. That had been obvious for some time. Not 
 content with an Executive that could do no harm, they were seeking one who could 
 do a great deal of harm. An energetic Executive" was one of the cabalistical 
 phrases, of which the nation had scores — it meant, when translated, power — power 
 in the hands of one man, and uncontrolled. As to the doctrines of the Federalist, 
 which had been read, they had no application to the condition of Virginia; but it was 
 his belief, that that very number of Fublius had introduced into the General Govern- 
 ment an Executive with energy enough to destroy the liberties of this nation — and it 
 was now busily engaged in cutting up those liberties as fast as possible. What was 
 all the complaint as to the present Executive ? Was it not for the exercise of this 
 very energy ? And those who complained so loudly of the exercise of this power in 
 the Federal Government, were for paving the way for its introduction into Virginia. 
 The difference between such an Executive as that of the United States and that of 
 Virginia, was in fact the difference between Monarchy and Republicanism. 
 
 Mr. G. here went again into an exposition of the constitution of the present Coun- 
 cil, and its operation in respect to the Governor ; but, as we have fully reported it on 
 a former occasion, we omit it here. 
 
 He referred to the last Executive of the United States, and to the sentence of the 
 people, that instead of having done no wrong, he had done all wrong. They had 
 turned him and his all out by the board ; and now a minority were endeavouring to 
 do the same by the present administration, all for the exercise of this energy. 
 
 He referred to the multitude of schemes proposed — thought the Convention was 
 afflicted with too much light, and overburdened with talents — all their difficulties 
 arose from indulging an ignis fatuus, in the shape of the old doctrine of human per- 
 fectibility — but concluded with this comfort, that if they had done nothing, they would 
 have done a great deal. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 719 
 
 The debate was further continued by Mr. Moore of Rockbridge, who opposed the 
 amendment of Mr. Upshur, as calculated to defeat the object of electing the Gover- 
 nor by the people. AVhere was the use of this, if a Council was to be placed over 
 him b}^ the election of the Legislature r The argument seems to rest on the incom- 
 petency of the people to choose a proper Governor — and so guardians must be put 
 over the lunatic. He was in favor of Mr. Fitzhugh's plan — believing that a Secre- 
 tary of State, by employing one-fourth of his time, could do more than the Governor 
 and Council now did. He was ignorant of what they did, unless it was to take bad 
 security in a contract about negroes. Ke had been here for tv>'0 months, and he 
 could scarcely swear that the Council had any existence — two of the members were 
 gone, and one was here as Clerk — yet all went on as well as usual. He believed 
 them to be utterly useless. As to the Governor, he had been here at the last elec- 
 tion, and did not know till the morning on which he was chosen, that he had been 
 named as a candidate. Instead of being chosen by "a little faction in one corner of 
 the State,'" he was cliosen by a little faction in the Legislature — that was all the dif- 
 ference. If the Convention should do nothing, the people would judge where the 
 blame was to lie. It was a conflict between the people and those in power — and the 
 issue had yet to be decided. The charge of vacillation did not touch him. He had 
 always voted one way on the question — and if some who were opposed to the white- 
 basis, had voted to give the election of Governor to the people, the reason was to be- 
 fbund in the sentiments of the districts from which they came. 
 
 Mr. Coalter considered the gentleman from Rockbridge, as having pronounced one- 
 of the greatest eulogiums that ever was uttered on any Government He was here 
 during an election of Governor, and did not hear the name of the candidate till the 
 day of the election! How long would this be the case, after the election should have 
 been given to the people ? The gentleman said he scarcely knew there was such a 
 thing in being as the Governor and Council. No more did not the gentleman feel 
 the Sow of the blood in his veins — and it was a proof of his health that he did not^ 
 But let the gentleman be seized with a fever, and then he would soon feel that he had 
 a pulse. It was all Mr. C. desired, to live, and not be conscious how his life was kept 
 up. Political health was the same thing. iNIr. Coalter denied that the Attorney Ge- 
 nera] (on whom he pronounced a warm eulogium) could be induced to become Et 
 lackey to the Governor, and leave his practice, without a large and adequate salary. 
 They must provide a sinecure for him when he left the office — as he would never 
 leave his lucrative practice, to seek his bread upon the commons. As to the Secretary 
 of State, if he was fit for his place, he must have a Clerk under him. Would he fold 
 papers and wait on every countryman, who came in with apples and wanted some pa- 
 per certified.' Mr. C. insisted on the value of having the advice of Council recorded 
 and all the Executive acts supervised. 
 
 He was in favour of the plan of Mr. Upshur. It might limit the range of selection^ 
 but it would secure local knowledge, and when strangers came to town from the 
 country, if they had a Councillor for their own district, they would feel less embar- 
 rassment in applying to him respecting their business. A raw country lad felt timid 
 in entering the Governor's mansion. One whose shoes were highly polished had en- 
 tered without rubbing them on the gravel at the door — and treading on waxed floors^ 
 found himself in a dangerous situation — took to skating — cut high-dutch'' — and es- 
 caped, after throwing down a waiter of tea things. As to the example of New York^ 
 if ever he heard a book read containing such charges against Virginia, as had led to 
 the abolition of the New York Council, he should be for°quitting the State, and look- 
 ing out for his safety elsewhere. 
 
 The question on Mr. Upshur's amendment, was now taken by ayes and noes as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marr>hall, Tyler, Nicholas,. 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampto^n, Trezvant. Claiborne. Urquhart. Randolph, Leigh of 
 Hahfax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladav, Koane. Tavlor of Carohne, 
 Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae. Green, Tazewell, Loyall, 
 Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coaher, Upshur and Perrin — 48. 
 
 .Aot.?— Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffman. Harrison.Williamson. Baldwin. M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, :\Illler, Baxter, fiercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson. Osborne, Cooke^ 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Navlor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton. George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Clovd, Chapman. Mathews. 'Odesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridufe, Morgan. Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 C=ii^P^^«li of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, C^abell, Stuart, Thompson, Joynes and Bay- 
 So the amendment was not adopted. 
 
 The question now recurring on that of Mr. Fitzhugh, it was modified by the mover, 
 so as to provide lor the election of the Secretary of State by a joint vote of both Houses 
 ot the Legislature. 
 
720 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The question was then decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coftman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laid- 
 ley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of 
 Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Thompson, Joynes and Bayly — 47. 
 
 JS'oes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor oi Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, JNicholas, 
 Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, Mas^on of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, 
 Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 49. 
 
 So the amendment of Mr. Fitzhugh was rejected. 
 
 The resolution was then agreed to in its original form, as reported by the Executive 
 Committee, (see above,) by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Cofflnan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloj'd, Chapman, 
 Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell 
 of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, 
 Thompson, Joynes and Bayly — 50. 
 
 jYoes — Messrs. Birbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart. Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Upshur and Perrin — 4G. 
 
 The fourth resolution of the Executive Committee was then read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That in case of the removal of the Governor from office, or of his death, 
 resignation, or inability to discharge the duties and powers of his office, the said poir.ers 
 and duties shall devolve on the Lieutenant Governor, and the Legislature may provide 
 for the case of removal, death, or similar inability, of the Lieutenant Governor.'' 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to amend it by striking out " Lieutenant Governor," and in- 
 serting " the President of thei Senate for the time being." 
 
 Mr. Randolph, after ascertaining from the Chair that he understood the motion, 
 said : And this we are to do on the principle that we are so outrageously republican, 
 that we cannot trust the Legislature to do by joint ballot what they have been doing 
 for more than half a century. I have always remarked, ever since I have been in 
 public life, that extremes beget each other. We can't trust the whole Legislature to 
 elect by a joint ballot — but we can trust the Senate to elect — acting by themselves. 
 
 The Speaker of the Senate — that aristocratic body — and i suppose, if the white basis 
 is to succeed, it will be the negro Senate — he, forsooth, is to be Governor, in case of 
 the death, resignation, or inability to serve, of that officer, Vvhich may happen the first 
 month after his election — he is to exercise all the functions of the office. Now, in the 
 name of God — (I ask pardon for taking the name of God in vain — the name of God 
 ought never to be mentioned in this House — it is not a fit place) — if these outrageous 
 theories are to prevail, why not take the Speaker of the House of Burgesses or why 
 not let them both be Governor? and sit like two Kings of Brentford, in the same 
 chair, smelling to the same nosegay ? We have example for it. The Romans chose 
 two Consuls — let one attend to domestic affairs, the other conduct the grand foreign 
 correspondence, of which we have heard, and which is to be carried on by a Secretary 
 of State — thank God he is as yet but a future in rus. Sir, this whole project carries 
 contradiction and absurdity — yes — absurdity on its face. In other terms — in plain 
 English — it says, that we can't trust both Houses — but we can trust a Senate of 
 twenty-four men, to elect tins Governor that may be — without having his fitness for 
 that office before their eyes — but choosing him as their own President. Sir, is it 
 necessary to hold up a candle to the noon day sun.'' It is only needful to hold this 
 up for what it is — an object of ridicule and scorn. 
 
 After some remarks by Messrs. Mercer and Doddridge, the proposition was with- 
 drawn, at the request of 
 
 Mr. Powell, who offered the following : 
 
 " The General Assembly shall provide by law, upon whom the powers and duties 
 shall devolve." 
 
 The question being put on Mr. Powell's amendment, it was adopted — Ayes 52. 
 The question then recurring on the resolution as amended, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 731 
 
 Mr, Tazewell opposed the amendment; as involving a diiliculty in its terms. The 
 Legislature could not appoiat either the President of the Senate or Speaker of the 
 House of Delegates — because their offices expired with the session. If one of the 
 Judges, was his judicial function to be suspended ? 
 
 The debate was farther continued by Messrs. Powell, Coalter, Mercer and Taze- 
 well — but before any decision was had, on motion of Mr. Fitzhugh, the House ad- 
 journed. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, Dbcxmber 23, 18-29. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rer. Mr. 
 Taylor of the Baptist Church. 
 
 The question pending, was on agreeing to the fourth resolution of the Executive 
 Committee, as amended by Mr. Powell. 
 
 Mr. Scott rose and said, tliat he had some hopes of seeing the Convention relieved 
 from the state of embarrassment under which it had been labouring, and of getting 
 back to that point in its deliberations at which it had resolved that the Governor 
 should be elected by the people. As a means to that result, he moved to lay the pre- 
 sent resolution and amendment, for the present upon the table : hoping that some 
 friend who had voted in the majority on that question would move for a re-considera- 
 tion of the vote. 
 
 Mr. Gordon enquired whether laying the present resolution on the table must of 
 necessity precede the motion to re-consider .' 
 The Chair replied in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. Gordon then- said, tliat if the present resolution should be laid upon the table, 
 he would then move a re-consideration. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that since the object in view had been distinctly avowed, he 
 should ask for the ayes and noes on the motion to lay the resolution upon the table. 
 
 They were ordered by the House, and being taken, stood as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches= 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander. Goode, ^Marshall. Tyler, ^S^icholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart. Randolph. Leigh of 
 Halifax, Loffan, Venable, Stanard. Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline. Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scolt. Macrae. Green, Tazewell, Loyall. Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes. Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale. Pwose. Coalter, Joynes, Upshur and Perrin — IS. 
 
 S\'oes — Messrs. Ciopton, Anderson, Coffman. Harrison. Williamson, Baldwin, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, ]Madison, Mercer. Fitzhusfh. Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs. ]Mason of Frederick, !Xaylor, Donaldson. Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, ^I'lMillan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, 
 Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley. Summers. See. Doddridge, Morgan, Camp- 
 bell of Brooke. Wilson. Clavtor. Saimders. Cabell, Martin. Stuart, Thompson and 
 Bayly— 48. 
 
 So the motion to lay on the table did not prevail. 
 
 The question was then taken on the fourth resolution as amended, and decided by 
 ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 .iyes — Messrs. Ciopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Bald^-in, 
 M'Coy, IMoore, Beirne, Smith. Miller, Baxter, Madison. Mercer. Fitzhugh. Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke. Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick. ^S^aylor. Donaldson. Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington. Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, 
 Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley. Summers, See, Doddridge, Morsran, Campbell 
 of Brooke. Wilson, Campbell of Bedford. Claytor, Saunders, Cabell. Mcirtin, Stuart, 
 Thompson, Massie, Joynes and Bayly — 51. 
 
 .Xoes — >Iessrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall. Tyler. ]!sicholas, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant. Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard. Holladay. Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae. Green. Tazewell, Loyall. Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Gordon, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Upshur 
 and Perrin — 15. 
 
 The ninth, tenth and eleventh resolutions of the Committee of the Whole, were 
 then considered. The eleventh read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Governor to execute, or cause to be 
 executed, all the laws of the Commonwealth ;. to communicate to the Legislature, at 
 every session, the condition of the State, and to recomm.end to their consideration, 
 such measures as he may deem expedient. He shall also be Commander-in-chief of 
 
 91 
 
722 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the land and naval forces of the State ; shall have power to convene the Legislature, 
 when in his opinion the interests of the State may require it, or on application of a 
 majority of tlie members of the House of Delegates. To fill vacancies occurring 
 durino- the recess of the Legislature, in offices, the appointment to which is vested in 
 the Legislative body ; to grant reprieves or pardons, except where the prosecution 
 shall have been carr.ed on by the House of Delegates, or the law shall otherwise par- 
 ticularly direct ; and to conduct, either in person, or by such agents as the Legisla- 
 ture may desio-nate, all negociations and correspondence with other or foreign States." 
 
 Mr Filzhugti moved to amend the eleventh resolution, by striking therefrom the 
 followinn- words, viz : To fill vacancies occurring during the recess of the Legisla- 
 ture, in offices, the appointment to which is vested in the Legislative body," and to 
 insert in lieu thereof the fi)l]owing : 
 
 To appoint persons to fill the vacancies, occurring during the recess of the Legis- 
 lature in offices, the appointment to which is vested in the Legislature ; provided, 
 that such persons, unless re-appointed shall continue in office, only until the end of 
 the next succeeding session of the General Assembly." 
 
 This aaiendinent'^was agreed to, and the question being put on agreeing to the three 
 resolutions, it was carried. 
 
 So the Convention had now gone through the report of the Executive Committee. 
 Mr. Stuart of Patrick, now moved to take up the resolution he had oifered a day or 
 two since, and which, at his own motion, had at that time been laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. S. expressed bis surprise at what had fallen from Mr. Scott, who, when thia 
 resolution had been laid upon the table, had declared he should vote against ever tak- 
 ing: it up again. He contended that as the resolution had been oifered by way of 
 compromise, and had never been considered either in Committee of the Whole or in 
 the House, it ought, at least, to have an opportunity of being considered. 
 
 Mr. Scott disclaimed any want of courtesy : if the amendment had contained any 
 new matter, or was llkey ever to be made acceptable to the House, he should not be 
 for refusing to consider it : but as the question on the basis had been settled by a de- 
 cided majtmty oi' the House, to call it up again was worse than useless : it could end 
 in no good. No respectable majority could be obtained for the scheme, and he could 
 not believe the gentiemm from Patrick could desire, by a majority of one or of two, 
 to force it upon a reluctant minority. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge contended for the obligations of courtesy and gentlemanly demeanor 
 toward each other as equals — and asked what could be the cause of the fear of taking 
 up the resolution, and of having a vote recorded upon it.^ Was it that gentlemen 
 would be exposed to inconvenience from thus having their votes made known ? 
 
 [Here the Chiir reminded Mr. D. that it was out of order to insinuate any unwor- 
 thy motives for the conduct of members of the House.] 
 
 Mr. D. said he wished to record every vote he had given or should give in relation 
 to every proposition for a compromise. Was he not to be indulged in so doing.' He 
 disrjlaimed all intention of bringing on an argument on the subject of the basis of 
 Representation : but he thought the gentleman from Patrick ought to be allowed to 
 explain and defend his own proposition. 
 
 Mr. Stuart said, that he did not agree with Mr. Scott in the opinion that the ques- 
 tion of representation had been settled by a decided majority, or settled at all. The 
 question on future apportionment had failed, not by a decided majority, but by an 
 equal vote : and though the plan of present apportionment had been carried by a 
 considerable majority, yet the votes which constituted that majority had been given, 
 most of them, under an expectation that some plan of future apportionment was to be 
 appended to the scheme : and if that expectation was to be taken, the majority in its 
 favour would not exceed two at most : and what eloquence had they not heard ex- 
 pended in denouncing lean majorities.? Let the resolution have the chance of a con- 
 sideration ; and if not acceptable in its present form, possibly, it might be modified, 
 (even to the introduction of freeholders only.) so as to command a respectable majority. 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, he should vote against taking up the resolution. He was actuated 
 by no want of courtesy toward the gentleman from Patrick, for wliom he had tlie 
 greatest respect : but it was obvious to all, that the mere mention of the subject of the 
 basis of Representation, produced excitement in all parts of the House. The ques- 
 tion of future apportionment, was one which had been got up in this Convention. 
 He had never so much as heard the idea broached in his district. The only question 
 there was as to the equalizing of representation : the other question had never been dis- 
 cussed, and it was most plain that it was a subject which never could be agreed upon 
 in th s body. The two sides of the House were equally divided, and he was not go- 
 ing to throw himself into the scale of either, to enable it to saddle the other with 
 wh it was unwelcome and grievous. Let us, said Mr. G. go back to the people, wlio are 
 our m.asters — let them either accept or reject the Constitution as they think fit, and 
 if by any change in population, it becomes unequal in its operation, they would be 
 eompet€nt to counteract it through tjie Legislature. But surely that House wa.8 not 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIO^T. 
 
 723 
 
 to eit there from month to month in angry disputation. For fear of such a result, he 
 should be for keeping the resolution where it was, upon the table. He greatl}- ques- 
 tioned whether it was the interest of a slave-holding community, to agita'e the ques- 
 tion of power every ten years : it always would tend to excitt-ment, and while this 
 lasted, all bonds of brotherhi)od, between East and 'West, were too apt to be f rgotlen. 
 
 Mr. Johnson expressed a hope tint his friend from Patrick, would not n(;w press 
 his motion. He, (Mr. Johnson.) would vote to take it up in due time : but he pre- 
 ferred at present to go through the Executive and Judici.;l reports: and when they 
 were gone through with, he should be prepared to take up the other resolution. 
 
 Mr. Stuart acquiesced, and the motion was withdrawn. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to t!ie consideration of the Judicial Committee— 
 and concurred with the Committee of the Whole, in the smaller amendments to th» 
 first resolution. 
 
 The first resolution as thus amended, reads as follows : 
 
 ^'■Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such 
 Inferior Courts as the Legislature shall Irom time to time ordain and establish, and in 
 tJie County Courts, and in tkc justices of the pence, icko shall covipose the said courts." 
 
 Mr. Bayly moved to amend the resolution, as thus amended, by striking out these 
 words, and in the County Courts, and in the justices of the peace, who shall com- 
 pose the said courts." 
 
 Expressing his purpose to forbear debate on a subject which had been so fully dis- 
 cussed, he asked for the ayes and noes, and they were ordered by the House. 
 
 Mr. Henderson now moved to amend the amendment by striking out the word 
 " th-e" before the words County Courts." On this question Mr. Leigh demanded 
 the ayes and noes. A debate ensued, in which Messrs. Campbell of Biooke. Powell, 
 Doddridge, Mercer, Leigh, Giles, Stanard, Bayly and i^iaylor took part: but the sub- 
 stance of which has already been more than once rt-poi ^od- 
 
 The merits of the County Court system were incidentally, thcu^^. Pot extensively 
 discussed : none proposed directly to abolish them, but the desire was avowed to pjp.cc 
 t'hem, like the other Inferior Courts of the State, under Legislative controul. Mr. Mer- 
 cer suggested that the system, though highly benertcial, in its present form, in one por- 
 tion of the State, required modification in the West, where a small salary ouoht to be 
 allowed sufficient to cover tlie expenses to which respectable farmers were subjected 
 in traveling very considerable distances to attend their duty as magistrates. This 
 idea was warmly reprobated hy Messrs. Leigh and Giles, as going to mar the system, 
 and revolutionize its whole chiiracter. 
 
 Mr. Bayly said, the gentlemen who opposed the motion did not display their usual 
 candour. They had treated the question as if it v^'as to destroy County Courts ; no 
 gentleman that he had heard, avowed any sucli intention in debate. We must have 
 County Courts, but whether the}' are to be held by justices of the peace filling up 
 their own bod}'- when vacancies occur, or with the extensive multifarious powers they 
 now possess, w^as a question for the people of the State to determine by their Legis- 
 lature ; and all that was now desired, was to put these courts under the c( nlrrui of 
 tlie General Assembly : for to continue them as they now are, or to modify, chjinge 
 or abolish them, as the interests of this great State may, Irom time to time rtqmie. 
 The Convention was not making a Constitution for ten or twenty years, but he 
 trusted they would make one tliat the people would oe contented with much longer. 
 It was, therefore, proper to remedy the evils wliich now exist, and tliyse which W(.u!ci 
 probably hereafter exist. Perha))s at this time a majority of the people of the coun- 
 ties might be satisfied with the County Court system, but it would not he denied that 
 one-third of them were opposed to it. If so large a number were hostile to the sys- 
 tem now, in a few years it was at least possible that a majority of the pt-ople of the 
 counties in the State might wish a change; and if so, vriiere would be the great in- 
 convenience to allow the power to a future Legislature, so to modify these courts, 
 that justice might be dispensed to the people of the State according to their wishes. 
 However I may wish a change to be made in these courts. I now only ntk the Conven- 
 tion to place them in the same situation as the General Court, the District Courts of 
 Chancery, and the Superior Courts of Law. I desire none to remain Constitutional 
 Courts but the Court of Appeals. 
 
 It has been said, thfit if this motion shall prevail, the County Courts must imme- 
 diately be re-organized. I do not believe that this would he the C( nsequence ; they 
 would be left precisely in the s:ime situation, as the other cour!s of the State : if it 
 should be necessary to re-organize the other courts, so it would the County Courts,' 
 and not otherwise. But, he believed all the courts wculd go on as they now do, until 
 the General Assembly should believe it necessary for the interest of the State, to make 
 a change. And if the County Courts were such great favourites with the people, as 
 some seemed to suppose, and they are considered as the great machine, by which the 
 republicanism of the State is to be preserved, where is the danger of leaving them 
 to be cherished by the representatives of the people r If they were such paramount 
 
724 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 blessings, the people would not readily abolish them, and no danger would threaten 
 them. 
 
 If gentlemen had been sincere in the opinion they expressed, the Convention would 
 not have seen them so extremely sensitive, whenever this subject was approached. 
 [Here the Chair reminded the gentleman from Accomack, that it was not in order to 
 attribute a want of sincerity to members of the House.] Mr. B. continued : Perhaps 
 it would have been as well, if I had not used that expression. I will suppose that 
 gentlemen are sincere : and if so, then they do believe, that these courts are the dar- 
 lings of the people. Why are they so much afraid they shall be left to the power of 
 the people, acting in their Legislature 
 
 Gentlemen have argued this question, as if we are the Legislature, and are now, 
 for the first time, organizing these courts : and the gentleman Irom Chesterfield, (Mr. 
 Leigh,) fears the danger of having some little petty-fogger on the bench. The gen- 
 tleman cannot despise these characters more than I do; and I have no dread, that 
 such characters will ever find favour with a Virginia Legislature. Other gentlemen 
 say, divide the magistrates of the counties, and let them alternately hold the courts, 
 and pay them for their services. To all this, I say we are not now legislating these 
 courts into existence ; and it will be the duty of the General Assembly, to consider 
 these different projects, when they come to act upon these courts, and we give thern 
 a power to do it. It is to give the authority to the Legislature, that I have proposed 
 the motion. If Virginia shall ever be so unfortunate hereafter, as to put improper 
 men on the bench, or to establish an arbitrary and tyrannical court, she will, I trust, 
 eoon retrace her steps. 
 
 Sir, it was not my intention, when I made the motion now under consideration, to 
 discuss this question, which has so often been introduced in debate ; and when it was 
 under consideration in the Committee of the W^hole, was so fully debated, that no- 
 thing now can be said on the subject. And all I ask is, that the Convention will put 
 the County Coi-rtS with the other Inferior Courts, under the countroul of people as- 
 ZZZio\eQ. m General Assembly. 
 
 The question was taken on the amendment of Mr. Henderson, to strike out the 
 word " the," (the Chair, for greater convenience, permitting it to be put in that form,) 
 and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 ^yfs — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Gordon, Thompson, Joynes, 
 Bayly and Upshur — 40. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, 
 Mathews, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, 
 Coalter and Perrin — 50. 
 
 Mr. Bayly then modified his amendment, so as not to touch the justices, but to strike 
 out the words in the County Courts," and also the words " who shall compose such 
 courts." 
 
 This question was decided in the negative by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Moore, Smith, Baxter, 
 Mercer, Henderson, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, M'Millan, Ogles- 
 by, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Campbell 
 of Bedford. Saunders, Cabell, Thompson, Joynes and Bayly — 27. 
 
 Jfoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Beirne, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trez- 
 vant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, 
 Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Pendleton, George, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, Mathews, See, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, 
 Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Branch, Townes, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gor- 
 don, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 68. 
 
 The amendments proposed by the Committee of the Whole to the second resolu- 
 tion, (substituting "held" for "elected," and transposing the word "first,") were 
 agreed to, and caused the resolution to read : 
 
 ^' 2. Resolved, That the present Judges of the Court of Appeals, Judges of the Ge- 
 sierai Court, and Chancellors, remain in office until the expiration of the session of 
 ike first Legislature elected under the new Constitution, and no longer. But, the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 725 
 
 Legislature may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re-appointed, such 
 sum as, from their age, infirmities and past services, shall be deemed reasonable." 
 
 The amendment to the third resolution, viz: to strike out " concurrent," and insert 
 " joint," and also to strike out the words " each House voting separately, and being a 
 negative on the other, and the members thereof voting vita voce. The votes ot the 
 members shall be entered on the Journals of their respective Houses. Should the 
 two Houses in any case fail to concur in the election of a Judge during the session, 
 the Governor shall decide the election, by appointing one of the two persons who 
 shall first receive a majority of votes in the Houses in which they were respectively 
 voted for;" were agreed to by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 ^yes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, iSicholas, 
 Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton. Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Ran- 
 dolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitz- 
 hugh, Hen'clerson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Do- 
 naldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Calnpbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Can)pbeli of Brooke. Barbour of Cul- 
 peper, Macrae, Tazewell, LoyalL Prentis^ Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Saunders, 
 Branch, Townes. Cabell, Alartin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coal' 
 ter. Bayl}^, Upshur and Perrin — 8^'. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Clopton, Scott, Green, Claytor, Thompson, Massie and Joynes — 7. 
 
 The resolution, as amended, reads : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals, and Inferior Courts, except 
 justices of the County Courts, and the aldermen, or other magistrates of Corporation 
 Courts, shall be elected by the concurrent vote of both Houses of the General As- 
 sembly." 
 
 The amendment proposed by the Committee of tlie Whole in the fourth resolution, 
 is as follows : 
 
 The original resolution read : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judges of the Court of Appeals, and of the Inferior Courts, 
 shall receive fixed and adequate salaries, which shall not be diminished during their 
 continuance in office." 
 
 The amendment proposed to insert the words except justices of the County 
 Courts, and the aldermen, or other magistrates of the Corporation Courts." 
 
 The amendment was opposed by Judge Marshall, on the ground that County Courts 
 and Corporation Courts, not being included within the term Inferior Courts, by any 
 just construction, to except them was improper, because the exception would imply, 
 that they were in their nature included in tliat phrase, and would be so in fact, if not 
 taken out of it by this exception. 
 
 After a few words from Mr. Giles, the amendment was not concurred in. 
 
 The next amendment, striking out the words " by and with the advice and consent 
 of the Senate," from the fifth resolution, which gives the power of appointing the 
 magistrates, was agreed to. 
 
 The House having gone through all the amendment;? reported by the Committee of 
 the Whole to the report of the Judicial Committee, returned to that report as amended, 
 and took up its several resolutions seriatim. 
 
 The first resolution having been read as follows : 
 The Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such Inferior Courts 
 as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish, and in the County 
 Courts," &c. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge, with the view of trying the sense of the House, moved to strike 
 out the article a," and insert the" before the words Supreme Court of Appeals." 
 The motion was negatived. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke moved to amend the resolution, by inserting the words 
 organization and," before the word ''jurisdiction," so as to make that part of the 
 resolution read, The organization and jurisdiction of these tribunals shall be regu- 
 lated by law." 
 
 This amendment was rejected by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore 
 Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Mason of Frederick^ 
 Naylor, Donaldson, Bo3^d, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington. Byars, Chap- 
 man, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson, 
 Joynes and Bayly — 40. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart^ 
 
726 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Carohne, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Ma- 
 thews, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigs- 
 by, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Upshur and Perrin — 56. 
 
 Mr. Thompson moved to amend the resolution, by striking from it the last clause, 
 which declares, No modification or abolition of any court, shall be construed to de- 
 prive any Judge thereof of his office ; but, such Judge shall pei-form any Judicial du- 
 ties, which the Legislature shall assign him." 
 
 Mr. Campbell asked for the ayes and noes, and they vi^ere ordered by the House. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, that he vi^as not sure that he rightly understood the clause, but if 
 he did, it was in his opinion highly objectionable, and involved an anomaly. 
 
 It seemed to be the purpose of the clause to provide, that after a court should have 
 been abolished, the Judge should still hold his commission, and continue to enjo}' his 
 former emolument. If that was its true meaning, (as he judged from no Oiher ex- 
 planation being now offered.) what would be the situation of the Judge and of the 
 country ^ Suppose the General Court to be abolished — the Judges had been commis- 
 sioned as Judges of the General Court — and it was intended that the Judge, as a 
 Judge of that Court which had been abolished, should still be a Judge, and receive 
 compensation. There v/as no General Court ; that had been abolished — 3'et he was to 
 hold his commission as a Judge of a Court not in existence, and by virtue of that 
 commission to draw his salary. If such was the purpose, Mr. Giles declared himself 
 utterly hostile to it. 
 
 There was no gentleman in the Convention more disposed for the maintenance of 
 the independence of the Judicial office than he was. He was decidedly in favour of 
 tenure during good behaviour, but it must be the tenure of an office which continued 
 to exist, and not tenure of a Judge's office when the court of which he was a Judge, 
 was no longer in being, and as a mere apology for paying him his salary. But it was 
 provided, that he should " perform any Judicial duties which the Legislature shall 
 assign him." And what, asked Mr. G., what in the name of Heaven, may these be ? 
 Can he be by commission Judge of one Court, and by the duty he performs, the Judge 
 of another.'' It was most strange to think of holding an office, after the court, to 
 which that office was an appendage, had been abolished. Yet by the very next reso- 
 lution, the Convention abolished all the offices of the existing courts, though not the 
 courts themselves — and then leaves it discretionary with the Assembly to pay thera 
 
 such sums as, from their age, infirmities and past services, should be deemed reason- 
 able." To this he had no objection. But would not gentlemen be content, that when 
 thei court was discontinued, the Judge should be discontinued, when such a provision 
 was made for his situation 
 
 Should this clause be omitted, Mr. G. said he had an amendment to add to the se- 
 cond resolution, which was intended to put the independence of the Judges beyond 
 doubt. [It provided, that in the modification or abolition of any court, the Legisla- 
 ture should pay to the Judge such sum as to them might appear reasonable.] 
 
 Mr. G. said, that there was a great diffijrence between the independence of the 
 Judges, and the independence of the Judicial Department; and he took an illustration 
 from the condition of the Judiciary in England. There the Judges were deemed to 
 be perfectly independent, because their compensation could not be diminished during 
 their continuance in office. We had borrowed the term independence as applied to 
 the Judiciary, from that country, whence we derived our Judicial system. Indepen- 
 dence related to the Judge, not to the Department. The British Parliament was held 
 to be omnipotent, and might re-organize the Department at pleasure. But, to go as 
 far as this resolution proceeded, was nothing less than to establish a privileged corps 
 in a free community. The resolutions provided no responsibility for a Judge to any 
 human tribunal. The worthy and learned gentleman from Richmond, (Judge Mar- 
 shall,; had said that a Judge ought to be responsible only to God and to his own con- 
 science. Now, he (Mr. G.,) said that the Judge ought to be responsible to another 
 tribunal— to a human tribunal. As the Convention was now forming a new Govern- 
 ment, it was proper it should have some guide, some compass to steer by. In all other 
 parts of the Constitution, they had gone on the principle of responsibility, and in his 
 judgment, they ought to do the same thin^ in this case. They ought not to convert 
 the'judicial office into an office absolutely independent, by stripping the Judge of all 
 responsibility. But, if they admitted the principle of responsibility, why clog it, so 
 as to prevent its action ? One of the first objects in viev,^ in calling this Convention, 
 was to make the Judges responsible— not nominally, but really responsible. If the 
 Convention should frame a Constitution, containing the establishment of a prixilcged 
 order of men, they mioht rely on its being objectionable, if not odious to the people ; 
 but, this clause went to the whole length of creating such privileged order. What was 
 the independence of a Judge ? How long did gentlemen ask that it should continue ? 
 Surely, it was neither more nor less than this — his security of receiving his salary 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 727 
 
 durino- the continuance of his oiSce. He did not. surelv, want to receire it after his 
 ofnce "ceased. He was not to be paid for good behaviour — that was not the quid pro 
 QUO he was paid for doinop his duties, not for his good behaviour. In the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States. In every part of it, in order to avoid sinecures, compensa- 
 lion and service were invariably connected. If these were to be inseparably cou- 
 pled, when the service ceased the compensation should cease. Go(.d behaviour was 
 the mere condition of tenure — it was not the service, and could claim no compensation. 
 
 When the ofnce was abolished, let the Judge receive a douceur; but, not for his 
 good behaviour — it was for his former services and sacrifices. He could not find tbe 
 term independent" in all the Federal Constitution. Jt was neither in the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States, nor in the Constitution of "\'irginia, nor in lhat which was 
 now to be proposed for adoption. AH that was necessary to Judicial independence, 
 was that the Jud2:e should be independent of ail improper influence when he gave his 
 decision. Independence, as applied to a Judge, was a borrowed term. He v, as wil- 
 lins' to ffo as far as they went in England, but no farther. 
 
 When he had spoken of establishing a privileged order, he had reference to the 
 eighth resolution. 
 
 ~'' 8. RtsoLzed. That Judges mav be removed from ofnce by a vote of the General 
 Assemblv : but, two-thirds ^f the whole number of each House must concur in such 
 vote, and the cause of removal shall be entered on the Journals of each. The Judge 
 aoninst whom the Legislature is about to proceed, shall receive notice thereof, accom- 
 panied with a copv of the causes alleged for his removal, at least twent}' days before 
 the day on which either House of the^General Assembly shall act thereupon." 
 
 Here they found in the first part of the resolution, the responsibility of a Judge to 
 an earthly tribunal: but in the latter part, that responsibility was destroyed, by being 
 clocr^ed and shackled. There could be no need of urging the necessity of an earthly 
 tribunal : it was before their eyes : the Judge was hable to impeachment — but in cer- 
 tain verv limited cases, where he had been guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. 
 But in the present resolution, provision was made, or attempted to be made, for of- 
 fences less in size, but more frequent in recurrence : non-feasance in office, non-user, 
 or mis-feasance out of ofiice. Impeachment might provide for crime, though in prac- 
 tice, it was a cumbrous and circuitous mode of securing responsibility ; but here was 
 a provision which declared, that at any time a Judge might be removed, but two- 
 thirds of both Houses must concur. Tiiiis was inserted, for what .' For the very thing 
 he wished to avoid. He wished to allow the Legislature power to remove a Judge, 
 whenever his conduct had been such, that he became unpopular and odious to the 
 people. He would give a tribunal, which might in such case remove him. But not 
 onlv must two-thirds of both Houses concur : the Judge must receive twenty days no- 
 tice ;. then farther days, he presumed, must be allowed him for appearance : then he 
 miffht employ a lawyer, and thus the object in view would be almost sure to be de- 
 feated. 
 
 What more was necessary to render a Judge completely independent, than to de- 
 clare, that his compensation should neither be increased nor diminished, duringf his 
 continuance in office.- that he was to gain or to lose nothing by the decision he should 
 give .' When he spoke of the independence of a department, IMr. G. said, he referred 
 to its possessing the means of organizing itself. The Legislative Department pos- 
 sessed this pov.-er ; the Judicial Department did not — it was in that respect dependent 
 upon the Legislature for its organization. He was for having nu Judges so inde- 
 pendent as to constitute a privileged order in the Commonwealth. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, he should regret to renew the debate, were he not pleased 
 with the opportunity of saying, that in casting his eyes over the last debate on this 
 Eubject, as it had been reported by the Press, he felt displeased with one expression 
 which had fallen from himself on that occasion. A word had escaped hirn. which 
 might be understood as derogating from the high respect he entertained for the cha- 
 racter and talents of a gentleman, (Mr. Barbour.) who had been opposed to him. He 
 hoped that gentleman and the Convention would believe him incapable of having in- 
 tended to insinuate any thing that might have such a bearing. He well knew^that 
 gentleman to be entirely incapable of intentionally misquoting or misrepresenting any 
 resolution that miglit be the subject of discussion. ° 
 
 With respect to the argum.ent the House had now heard, he did not mean, in any 
 notice he should take of it, to utter one sentiment respectinor what had been done in 
 Congress in the removal of any Judge from office, nor on the provision reported by 
 the Judicial Committee, for the removal of Judges by two-thirds of the Legislature. 
 When the Hpuse should direct its attention to that clause, he thouL^ht he sliould find 
 little difficulty in satisfying it that that provision was abundantly sufficient for the end 
 it had in view. But that was not now the question, 
 
 Mr. M. said, he felt so much difficulty in delivering his sentiments on the subject, 
 that he should be compelled to confine himself to the straight and narrow path that led' 
 
728 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 directly to the object before him, witliout departing from it to notice any of the sub- 
 jects which had been incidentally presented by the gentleman from Amelia. 
 
 The question was, whether that clause of the first resolution of the Judicial Com- 
 mittee should be stricken out, which declares that no modification or abolition of any 
 Court shall be construed to deprive any Judge thereof of his office ; but that such 
 Judge should perform any Judicial duties which the Legislature should assign him. 
 To that single question he should confine himself in what he had now to say. 
 
 The gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. Giles,) had referred to the office of a Judge, and 
 the Court in which he sat, as being, for some reason, indissolubly united. Are office 
 and Court, asked Mr. M., synonymes.? Is it impossible to separate them.? Can 
 they, by no effiart, be sundered? And if it be possible, is it not done in the present 
 case The resolution makes office to depend on good behaviour ; and it expressly de- 
 clares that the court may be abolished, and yet the office remain. Why cannot lan- 
 guage separate them.'' 
 
 The Constitution means to declare, that though the court may be abolished, the 
 Judge shall continue to hold his office, and shall still perform the duties of a Judge. 
 In what does the office of a Judge consist ? I have always understood that it consists in 
 his constitutional capacity to receive Judicial power, and to perform Judicial duties : 
 that he is brought into office in the manner prescribed by the Constitution, and can 
 perform the duties of his office, however the court may be changed. Whatever may 
 be the situation of the court — however it may be named, still he holds the office, and 
 if the Constitution shall declare that when tlae court is abolished, he shall still hold it, 
 there is no inconsistency in the declaration. The gentleman says, that if a person be 
 commissioned as a Judge of the General Court, and the General Court shall be abo- 
 lished, his office is abolished with it — and he is the Judge of nothing. But the General 
 Court, under the present system, is a Constitutional Court, and cannot be abolished. 
 We know that Judges who were Judges of the General Court at one time, became Dis- 
 trict Judges, and then Judges of the Superior Court in the county. Should the General 
 Court be abolished, and by consequence, the office with it, the question would occur, 
 whether the Judges would perform any other duties ; but if you declare in the Constitu- 
 tion that they shall be thus capable, the difficulty is removed. And will gentlemen say, 
 that this is impracticable ? But the difficulty does not arise under the Constitution as it 
 shall be, but as it is : the Constitution now declares that there shall be a General Court. 
 The Legislature can no more abolish the General Court than the Court of Appeals. But 
 the Constitution we are now engaged in making, does not say there shall be a Court 
 of Appeals and a General Court: it says that the Judicial power shall be vested in a 
 Court of Appeals, in such Inferior Courts as the Legislature shall from time to time 
 ordain and establish, and in the County Courts. 
 
 How will the commission of the Judges be made out.'' as Judges of the Inferior 
 Courts — and if so, the Legislature may declare in which of the Inferior Courts they 
 shall discharge their Judicial duty. Does, then, a change of that particular court, 
 affect the office in any way What creates the office .? First, an election by the Legis- 
 lature as the Constitution directs : Second, a Commission by the Governor, or in such 
 other form as the Constitution enjoins. When these acts have been performed, the 
 Judges are in office. Now, if the Constitution shall say that his office shall continue, 
 and he shall perform Judicial duties, though his court may be abolished, does he, be- 
 cause of any modification that may be made in that court, cease to be a Judge of the 
 Inferior Courts ? 
 
 Suppose that the present Constitution had appointed Judges of the Inferior Courts, 
 instead of the General Court, and their District Courts had been abolished, and Su- 
 perior Courts of counties had been established in their place, would the Judge of the 
 District Court thereby go out of office ? You diversify his duties, and, therefore, his 
 office is to be abolished ! If I understand the Constitution a-right, the Legislature 
 cannot, by law, create the office of a Judge. It can create Courts, and may change 
 them at will : it may give them one name or another name, it may assign them one 
 Judge, or two Judges, or three Judges: it may order them to sit here, or to sit there 
 — it may give them a district of several counties, or may direct them to sit in every 
 county : still they will continue to be " Inferior Courts," and the Judges must perform 
 any duties the Legislature shall assign them. 
 
 Where is the difficulty .? 
 
 The question constantly recurs— do you mean that the Judges shall be removable 
 at the will of the Legislature The gentleman talks of responsibility. Respon- 
 sibility to what ? to the will of the Legislature can there be no responsibility, unless 
 your judges shall be removable at pleasure ? will nothing short of this.satisfy gentle- 
 men Then, indeed, there is an end to independence. The tenure during good be- 
 haviour, is a mere imposition on the public belief— a sound that is kept to the ear— and 
 nothing else. The consequences must present themselves to every mind. There can 
 be no member of this body who does not feel them. If your Judges are to be re- 
 movable at the will of the Legislature, all that you look for from fidelity, from know- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 729 
 
 ledge, from capacity, is gone and gone forever. All chance of bringing men upon 
 the bench, who know as much as lawyers at the bar, must be given up : there is an 
 end to it. No respectable lawyer will come to the bench, if, for the slightest cause, 
 so soon as he has separated himself from the bar — so soon as he has incapacitated 
 himself to earn a comfortable support for his family there, he may be thrown out of 
 an office he had been told was to be permanent, and driven away to poverty and all 
 the humiliating consequences "that must ensue. 
 
 Mr. M. said, he was well assured this was not what the Convention wished to do. 
 But will it not, asked he, produce this state of things, if by any change or modifica- 
 tion of the court, the Judge may be put out of office? "What necessity can there be 
 for this Do gentlemen believe that the duties of the Inferior Courts will diminish.'' 
 That there will not always be as much Judicial duty as you will have Judges to per- 
 form it. If this is the fact, and surely it is, if we may reason from past experience, 
 v/hy make a mere transfer of duties to work a removal from office 
 
 Can any gentleman say that the Legislature will never act in this manner .'' Look 
 at what we are doing. This Convention is removing every Judge from office at one 
 sweep. Are gentlemen sure the Legislature will never do the same thing.' Is there 
 any call directed to us which will not sound as loud in the ears of the Legislature ? 
 Can we, while at one blow we are dashing every Judge in the State fromliis office, 
 say that the Legislature will never remove them in like manner hereafter ? Sir, we 
 should soon see realized the fears which are entertained by some amongst us. 
 
 I cannot sit down without noticing the morality of the course recommended by 
 this measure. Gentlemen talk of sinecures, and privileged orders — with a view, as 
 it would seem, to cast odium on those who are in office. You seduce a lawyer from 
 his practice, by which he is earning a comfortable independence, by promising him a 
 certain support for life, unless he shall be guilty of misconduct in his office. And 
 after thus seducing him, when his independence is gone, and the means of supporting 
 his family relinquished, you will suffer him to be displaced and turned loose on the 
 world with the odious brand of sinecure-pensioner — privileged order — put upon him, 
 as a lazy drone who seeks to live upon the labour of others. This is the course you 
 are asked to pursue. 
 
 Some allusion has been made to the tenure of office during good behaviour in Eng- 
 land ; and to the power of Parliament. In England they have no written Constitu- 
 tion ; and yet the Judges consider themselves quite as secure as they are here, where 
 we have one. Parliament Avill always maintain their independence, in order to save 
 the people from the power of the crown. The crown is the source of apprehension: 
 and the Legislature will never unite with it in removing the Judges from their office. 
 
 We have been told this arrangement will destroy all responsibility in the Judges. 
 Are there no other means to make a Judge responsible, but to make him removable 
 from office at the will of the Legislature ? If the provisions of the seventh and eighth 
 resolutions are not sufficient to secure responsibility, we can make them so when they 
 shall be the object of our attention. They are not at present before us. I believe 
 they are now sufficient for that end ; if not, they can be made so. But is it not new 
 doctrine to declare, that the Legislature by merely changing the name of a court or 
 the place of its meeting, may remove any Judge from his office ? 
 
 The question to be decided is, and it is one to which we must come, whether the 
 Judges shall be permanent in their office, or shall be dependent altogether upon the 
 breath of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Giles again rose, and after an apology for troubling the Hoilse, said, that if he 
 had had any doubts before, of the impropriety of the clause, the gentleman who had 
 just taken his seat had relieved him from them all. He felt fo" the learning and 
 standing and personal excellence of that gentleman so high a degree of respect, that 
 he was willing to throw himself into the back ground, as to any weight to be attached 
 to his own opinion, and rely exclusively on the merits he could shew pertained to it, 
 and this he would endeavour to do so plainly, as not to be misunderstood. The gen- 
 tleman from Richmond had told the Convention that an off.ce during good behaviour, 
 was an office for hfe. This he denied. There was no such word in a Judge's com- 
 mission. 
 
 No such pledge was given him : was that the real tenure of his office ? No, it was 
 good behaviour and the continuance of the office. So long his salary was to be sure, 
 and no longer. 
 
 He thought the gentleman had not succeeded in showing that it was not an 
 anomaly to have the court out of being, and an office pertain to the court in being. 
 The gentleman had asked if there were no terms by which this could be done ? He 
 answered, no : it was an anomaly in terms. He had, however, such high respect for 
 that gentleman's standing, that he always doubted his own opinion when put in op- 
 position to that of the gentleman. The gentleman had undertaken to show that a 
 man m.ay be a Judge of the District Court after the General Court, of which he had 
 been a Judge, should be at an end. He told the Convention that the General Court 
 
 92 
 
730 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 was a Constitutional Court ; but was it not surrendering the argument to go back to 
 the old Constitution? By the Constitution now proposed, the Legislature was not to 
 be trammelled. The gentleman had asked whether Judges of the General Court 
 would not perform District Court services ? 
 
 Judge Marshall here explained : he had, he perceived, been totally misconceived. 
 He had said, that under the existing Constitution the General Court was a Constitu- 
 tional Court and could not be abolished : but that under the new Constitution the 
 Judges of the Inferior Courts would continue to be such, though some change might 
 be made in their sphere of action — and he had asked whether, because they should 
 cease to perform District Court service, they must, therefore, cease to hold their 
 office ? 
 
 Mr. Giles resumed : He was very sorry he had misconceived the gentleman : but, 
 after listening to the explanation he had now given, the impression on his mind re- 
 mained the same still. He insisted that they were not to reason from the General 
 Court existing under a former Constitution, to a Constitution containing no such 
 court within its provisions ; and one great object of forming which Constitution, was 
 to get rid of that court. He denied that a Judge could perform duty in any other 
 court but that to which he was commissioned. He could not have his commission to 
 one court and his duties in another. Supposing the Judge to be incompetent, (as was 
 known to be the case, and long to have been the case with at least one Judge whom 
 he should not name,) could the Legislature assign such a Judge duties to perform in 
 another court — duties to an incompetent Judge What duties Could he receive any 
 at all ? None ; then his office was vox et 'prcBterea nihil. 
 
 He begged to call the attention of the House to what was the real genuine inde- 
 pendence of a Judge in Great Britain. It was the security that his compensation 
 should not be diminished during his continuance in office. Judges in England were 
 deemed to be very independent even before the reign of William and Mary, when 
 their offices expired with the demise of the crown. The law had since been changed, 
 and they now survived — but it was perfect independence to be assured of an undi- 
 minished support during the continuance of their office. This was the true indepen- 
 dence of a British Judge. Strike out the present clause, and a Judge in America 
 would still be in a better situation than those of England. 
 
 But as the gentleman had spoken of hardships should the clause be stricken out, 
 he would offer the amendment he had before read. It was no great favourite of his, 
 but he was willing to go that far, and it was farther than any provision had ever gone 
 on this subject under the sun. 
 
 The gentleman seemed to think that he had used terms calculated, if not intended, 
 to throw reproach upon the Judges in office. He was not conscious of having used 
 any terms that reflected in the least degree on their honour and integrity. But it 
 did seem to him, that by the resolutions taken together, responsibility was rather 
 avoided than sought to be secured. Had the gentleman told the House in what it 
 consisted Where was it.? If there was such a thing, he presumed it v/as describable. 
 For himself he could not see even a shadow of it. The gentleman had insisted that 
 there was the same responsibility in this, as in other cases : and here was the greatest 
 point of difficulty between the worthy gentleman and himself. When a representa- 
 tive returned to his constituents, did they cite him .? did they give him twenty days 
 notice to appear and answer ? No such thing. They told him at once — Sir, we don't 
 like you. And that was enough — they turned him out forthwith, and held themselves 
 bound to assign no reason to him for so doing. But, in the case of a Judge there 
 must be a majority of two-thirds of both Houses of the Legislature, and sixty days 
 notice ; and by the time the Judge appeared, the session would be over. The resolu- 
 tion first laid down a principle and then defeated it. But in the case of a representa- 
 tive, the responsibility was real — and its operation prompt and efficient. The voter 
 might say to the representative as Tom Brown said to Dr. Fell, 
 
 I do not like thee, Dr. Fell, 
 The reason why I cannot tell : 
 But 'tis a fact I know full well, 
 I do not like thee, Dr. Fell. 
 
 He was willing to risk his liberty thus far — (and if a human being existed, who was 
 more jealous of it, he had yet to see- him,) if a Judge became odious to the people, 
 let him be removed from office. 
 
 Mr. G. concluded by this remark, that the House had exhibited on the other side 
 the very acme of Judicial talent in the country ; and yet it had produced no convic- 
 tion in his mind, and, he believed, would not in theirs; on the contrary, it had but 
 rivetted all the impressions he had previously entertained. 
 
 The question was then put on striking out^ and decided by ayes and noes as fol- 
 lows ; 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 731 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Giles, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, 
 Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, 
 Baxter, Claiborne, Randolph, Osborne, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, 
 Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, See, Morgan, Camp- 
 bell of Brooke, Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Cabell, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson and Bayly — 44. 
 
 JVbc5— Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnax, Marshall, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Baldwin, Johnson, Miller", Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Ur- 
 quhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, 
 Fitzhugh, Henderson, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, INaylor, Donald- 
 son, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Summers. Dod- 
 dridge, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Prentis, Branch, 
 Townes, Stuart, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Upshur and Pernn — 52. 
 
 So the Convention refused to strike out the clause providing for the continuance 
 of the Judge in office after his court should have been modified or abolished. 
 
 Mr. Johnson threw out the suggestion for the reflection of gentlemen, whether the 
 resolutions they had adopted, had not an effect, not contemplated or intended : would 
 not the acceptance of the Constitution by the people, at once, ipso facto, abolish all 
 the courts of the State, but the Court of Appeals, and the County Courts ^ This ought 
 to be provided against. 
 
 Mr. Cabell proposed to amend the resolution by striking out the word office, and in- 
 serting the word salary. 
 
 But it would not be received, as all the words of the resolution had been adopted, 
 bj a refusal to strike them out. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, December 24, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Kerr of the Baptist Church. 
 
 The question before the Convention, was on agreeing to the first resolution of the 
 Committee on the Judiciary, as amended the day before. 
 
 The first resolution of the Judicial Committee came up, when Mr. Thompson 
 moved to amend the following clause: 
 
 " The Judges of the Court of Appeals, and of the Inferior Courts, shall hold their 
 offices during good behaviour, or until removed in the manner prescribed in this Con- 
 stitution ; and shall, at the same time, hold no other office, appointment, or public 
 trust; and the acceptance thereof by either of them, shall vacate his Judicial office." 
 Mr. Thompson moved to insert after the word " Constitution," the following: " But 
 no person who shall have arrived at the age of years, shall be appointed to, or 
 
 continue in, the office of Judge in this State." 
 
 Mr. Thompson said, he should content himself with a very brief exposition of the 
 reasons upon which he rested the merits of his amendment, if merits it had, and its 
 claims to the favourable consideration of the Convention. He doubted not that the 
 question it presented, had been considered by every member of the body, and perhaps 
 every one was prepared to vote upon it. It was considered and discussed in the Ju- 
 diciary Committee, of which he, Mr. T. had the honour of being a member, but had 
 not as yet been agitated in Committee of the Whole, or in the House. This con- 
 sideration could alone induce him, at this late period of this protracted session, to de- 
 tain this body with a single observation. Mr. T. said he was well aware that weighty 
 objections might be urged to the amendment. He had well considered, felt the full 
 force of and duly appreciated these objections. By the adoption of this provision, it 
 was most true we should sometimes be deprived of the services of a competent and 
 meritorious officer, and as otlen as we were so deprived, should subject to privation 
 and hardship, the disbanded officer himself, should he chance to be in straitened cir- 
 cumstances, and bereft of the means of a livelihood; but, said Mr. T. these are the 
 unavoidable consequences of any general rule. He was willing to encounter these 
 inconveniences, these evils, for the positive good which he believed the amendment 
 would accomplish. In most situations it w^as the office of human prudence to choose 
 between evils, and this was one of those occasions. All would admit, that without 
 this provision we were exposed to the evil of superannuated Judges. We had ex- 
 perienced it and were suffering under it at this very moment. This would not be 
 denied by any one. And for his part, Mr. T. considered the removal by age of twenty 
 good Judges a lesser evil than the retention for the shortest time of one rendered im- 
 becile and incompetent by age for the duties of the station. The evils which the 
 latter might do, in the sacrifice of the dearest rights of one citizen, the sacrifice of 
 
732 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 his life, liberty, reputation or property, were irremediable : the judgments by which 
 these were to be affected, perhaps irrevocable or irreversable. The evils of the re- 
 moval of even competent Judges, were of a different kind. They were not remedy- 
 less. A good officer, if not the best, or so good as the removed, might be found to 
 supply his place. It surely would not be said, Virginia was so poor in judicial talent, 
 that there was at any time an impracticability in getting men between the age of ma- 
 turity and sixty, sixty-five, or seventy, competent to hll the Judicial offices of the 
 State. Mr. T. said he mentioned these several ages, because he hoped the blank 
 would be filled with some one of them, if the amendment were adopted. Mr. T. 
 thought in the general, that men after passing either of these periods, were incompe- 
 tent to the profitable discharge of the active duties of life, and for public station : he 
 thought that period of our lives should be devoted to repose, to the enjoyment of the 
 otimn cum dignitate. So far from feeling any irreverence for age, it was because of 
 his reverence for it that he wished to withdraw the declining years of mortal exis- 
 tence from the busy, bustling^ scenes and the cares and turmoils of official station. 
 The sequestered shade of retirement was congenial to the feelings of an old man, and 
 to such emphatically, " the post of honour is a private station." ~Mr. T. said he could 
 readily anticipate another objection to his amendment, and that is, that it was un- 
 necessary — that we had by another provision armed the Legislature, two-thirds of each 
 house concurring, with the power of amotion from office, and that in the event of 
 the case occurring, the Legislature would remove a superannuated Judge. Mr. T. 
 thought that power an inefhcacious remedy for the evil, because it involved the exer- 
 cise of so invidious and so delicate a duty, that he feared its inexecution on the part 
 of the Legislature. To remove an aged Judge, whose only crime was age and infir- 
 mity, visited in his declining years with " want and incurable disease," would require 
 the exercise of that Roman virtue, that would stimulate a father to sacrifice a son for 
 the good of the republic — that virtue which we may admire in story, but we cannot 
 expect to pervade the actions of men in these latter times. Mr. T. believed, that 
 with the Legislature the softer and more amiable virtues of compassion and sympathy 
 for suffering and distress would prevail over a sense of public duty, and over the 
 public interests. The vital and paramount interests of a speedy and faithful admin- 
 istration of justice would yield to the moving considerations of individual hardship. 
 Mr. T. believed the power of amotion referred to, would only be resorted to and ef- 
 fectually exercised, when the Judge was guilty of some fault or transgression below 
 the degree of an impeachable offence — such as slothfulness, inattention, 4&c. ; that is, 
 was guilty of some wilful mis-user or non-user of his office, and would not be effica- 
 cious for the reasons just assigned to the purposes sought to be accomplished by this 
 amendment. Mr. T. said many reasons could be offered in support of the amend- 
 ment. He would not detain the House with them all, but would content himself with 
 one, and in conclusion with a reference to the example and experience of other 
 States, which were entitled to respect, if not to imitation. The reason to which he 
 alluded, was this : He believed the limit of age, would have a happy effect upon the 
 Judge himself, whilst in office. The present tenure being for life, no matter how 
 protracted, had a tendency to render the incumbent careless of improvement in that 
 science which was to qualify him for the station. Mr. T. said, it was certainly true; 
 it could not have escaped the notice of the most casual observer ; he believed it 
 would be confessed by all, that most of our Judges commenced the retrograde march 
 of intellect so soon as they were elected : to this remark there were but few excep- 
 tions. There must be some reason for it. Mr. T. thought it worthy of the serious 
 consideration of this Convention, whether this life-estate in the office, had not the 
 direct tendency to produce this effect. Mr. T. said, if he knew himself, he yielded 
 to no man in veneration for Judicial excellence — if any thing earthly could be an ob- 
 ject of idolatry with him, it was the spotless ermine of the able, the urbane, and the 
 impartial Judge. He would be the last man to advocate a periodical election of the 
 Judiciary, or to do any thing knowingly to imj air their independence : I mean a pro- 
 per and just independence — but not irresponsibility. Mr. T. would submit to this 
 Convention, if by fixing this limit, this good effect would not be produced. The un- 
 certainty of the limits ever applying, surely would leave his independence unim- 
 paired — yet the possibility of its application, to each and every case, would create an 
 incentive to mental industry and exertion — an inducement to improvement in legal 
 attainments, and a laudable emulation to build up a reputation for talents and for 
 worth : for the Judge would reflect, that the day might arrive, when he would again 
 be thrown back upon professional exertions for support, or what would be a more pro- 
 bable, and I confess, to me as well as to the Judge, more agreeable anticipation, when, 
 if he needed the aid of his country, he would appeal to its gratitude, (and if he de- 
 served it, would never appeal in vain,) for permission to serve that country in some 
 other station, where he could render the quid -pro quo, for the means of subsistence. 
 
 Mr. T. said, we had the example of other States in favor of this amendment. The 
 provision had prevailed in New York from the foundation of the republic. It was en- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 733 
 
 grafted on her first Constitutiou, had abided the experience of more than half a cen- 
 turv. and has received the most decided approbation of the Convention of 1821. by its 
 incorporation into the New Constitution. The Judicial term is there limited to the 
 ao-e of 60, and so has been from the beginning of the Commonwealth. True it is, 
 that Kent, Spencer and i;thers; were the victims of this constitutional ostracism True, 
 the State was deprived of their services in their Judicial capacity; but it is not true, 
 that the citizens of New York have ever repented of the consequences of tliat provi- 
 sion of their Constitution, nor was any serious evil suffered in their Judicial establish- 
 ment — their places were well supplied, at least to the satisfaction of the public, which, 
 after all. is the most important consideration in a Government — which, like ours, rests 
 upon public opinion. And, so fai- from the State's losing their services wholly, the 
 one is now serving her in the Councils of the Nation, and the other, perhaps, as use- 
 fully in private station, as on the bench. The Convention will understand the last 
 allusion to be to Chancellor Kent, and to his Commentaries, the fruit of his retire- 
 ment. So. in Virginia, if the existence of such a rule, had prematurely deprived us 
 of the useful Judicial labours of a Wythe, a Pendleton, or a Roane, their services in 
 other stations could not have been lost, and we should have been well compensated 
 for their removal, by an escape from the sore evil of superannuated Judges. To de- 
 sio-nate the instances would be as invidious as it is unnecessary, as tiie cases are 
 known to every member of this body. The example of New York, said Mr. T., has 
 been copied in'the Constitutions of at least three other States, if no more. In Mis- 
 souri, the limit is sixty-five ; in Alabama, seventy, and in Mississippi, sixty-five. Mr. 
 T. would be satisfied with either of these ages, or he would take sixty-three, the grand 
 climacteric of the ancients. He concluded, by expressing a hope, that the amend- 
 ment would prevail. 
 
 Mr. Henderson moved to amend the amendment of Mr, Thompson, by adding the 
 words : 
 
 Unless he shall be re-elected by the Legislature, in which event, he may serve 
 for years more, and no longer." 
 
 ISlr. Leiffh suggested a^ different collocation of the words, so as to make the whole 
 resolution Intelligible as amended. 
 
 After some conversation on this subject, and a modification in consequence, 
 Mr. Powell suggested to the mover of the amendment, whether the case he wished 
 to provide for. was not capable of complete remedy under the eighth resolution. If a 
 Jud<re, whether from age or any other cause, was notoriously incompetent to the right 
 discharge of his duty, the Legislature had power, under tliat resolution, to remove 
 him from office. 
 
 Mr. Thompson replied, that that view had occurred to himself; it was very true 
 the Legislature might remove such a Judge : but it would be an invidious and odioua 
 task, and one they would always approach with reluctance. He wished to shield the 
 Legislature from such an unpleasant situation, and let the Judg-e go out by the expi- 
 ration of his oiE.ce, and his Constitutional disability. This would save the feelings of 
 ail parties. 
 
 Mr, Henderson said, that the observation of the gentleman from Amherst weis wor- 
 thy of great consideration. -Aiter sixty or seventy years, the intellectual faculties 
 usually began to be impaired : 3-et there were men v,-ho retained them in their fullest 
 vigour to a much later period. The illustrious Judge Pendleton, that ornament of the 
 Virginia bench, was an instance in point. Such men would be removed by the un- 
 sparing amendment of the gentleman from Amherst : but by that which he had of- 
 fered, provision was made for retaining their services to the State. It was calculated 
 to retain those rare and higlily-gifted men. whose mental power seemed never to be 
 exhausted while even a shred of that which was physical remained : of whom it might 
 with truth be said, 
 
 The soul's dark cottage battered and decayed, 
 
 Liets in more light through chinks which time has made. 
 
 Mr. Thompson was opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from Loudoun, 
 (Mr. Henderson.) because its effect would be in a great degree so to qualify the rule 
 as to destroy, if not altogether, very materially, its efficacy. It was an exception in- 
 compatible with the principle of the amendment; and was, moreover, obnoxious to 
 all the objections of a periodically elected Judiciary. He, therefore, trusted it would 
 not be adopted. 
 
 Mr. Leigh opposed the amendment. He said, it was an attempt to introduce, in. 
 Viro:inia, an expedient, which was (he believed) first devised in the State of New 
 York, but which has since been adopted by some one or two of the new States — why,, 
 if resrard were had to the lights of experience, he was utterly unable to comprehend. 
 It is "certainly true, that the faculties of men decay with extreme age — but it is equally 
 true, that the point of time in their lives, when this takes place, is as various, in dif- 
 
734 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ferent men, as the colour of tlieir eyes. Lord Mansfield was born in 1705 ; he was ap- 
 pointed Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench in 1756 ; and he resigned his seat 
 in 1788, being then eighty-three years old. I pray the gentleman from Amherst, (Mr. 
 Thompson,) to read, or rather (supposing he has read it,) to remember, the judgment 
 of the Court of Exchequer Chamber, in the case of Sutton and Johnstone, in the 
 first volume of the Term Reports ; which is said to be the only Judicial opinion ex- 
 tant written by that great Judge ; all the others having been taken down by reporters, 
 and composed from their notes : that is an opinion written by Lord Mansfield himself, 
 a short time before his resignation : and if the gentleman can find on the record of Ju- 
 dicial proceedings, in any age or country, a more able, more lucid, more eloquent, or 
 more classical composition, I shall be obliged to him to point it out to me, that I may 
 have the pleasure of reading it. It is, so far as I can judge, one of the finest speci- 
 mens of Judicial eloquence, as well as ability, any where to be found, in ancient or in 
 modern learning. Lord Mansfield resigned his seat, as I said, in 1788 — not, if I am 
 rightly informed, because of any decay of his mental powers — but from a defect of 
 sight, such as no glasses could remedy, so as to enable him to discharge the duties of 
 his office. His mighty stream of thought, bound by the frost of eighty winters, was 
 as full or fuller than in the summer of his life, though not so flowing. To me it seems, 
 from a careful observation of his ofiicial history, that he was as able in 1788, as in 
 1756. At the time of the argument and discussion of the famous case concerning the 
 reversal of the outlawry of John Wilkes (in 17()8 or 9, 1 think, 1 am pretty sure it was 
 before the first of the letters of Junius appeared) he himself mentioned, that he was 
 then turned of sixty. Now, according to the New York rule, he would have been 
 compelled to leave the bench in 1768 ; and tlie world would have been deprived — I 
 do not say England, but the world — the civilized world would have been deprived 
 of the benefit of the last twenty-eight years of his Judicial life, and especially of that 
 system of commercial law, which he was then building up and lived almost to perfect; 
 which will bear comparison with the Civil Code, or the new Imperial Code of France, 
 or any other on earth, for the justness of its principles, and even for its symmetry ; 
 which, in short, in all its parts, bears the impress of a vast and various and beneficent 
 genius. 
 
 I have been at the pains, since this Convention question was started, or rather re- 
 vived in 1824, to examine the chronological lists of the English Judges. The mass 
 of business despatched by those twelve Judges of England, almost surpasses belief. 
 It certainly transcends beyond all comparison, the mass of Judicial business in the 
 Commonwealth of Virginia. (I do not say in the United States, for we are a more 
 litigious people in proportion to our wealth, than any other in the civihzed world.) 
 They have jurisdiction of all causes, where the value in controversy exceeds forty^ 
 shillino-s. They generally, I believe, take their seats on the bench at nine o'clock iri 
 the morning, and continue sitting till late in the afternoon. They then take their 
 places in the House of Lords, as a sort of "advisory Council," (as we should phrase 
 it) in cases in which law questions may be involved : and really, Sir, from the days of 
 Holt to this time, it is astonishing to see what a large proportion of them have been 
 over seventy and even seventy-five j'ears of age. These old men transact such a 
 mass of business, as seems unaccountable — especially to us, who look at the mode in 
 which business is done here ; who reflect on the tardiness of our Judicial proceedings, 
 owing to reasons well known to the bar, at least to some of them, or, if not, well 
 known to the bench. A great part of the blame certainly rests on the bar. I give 
 this as my experience, and take my full share of the blame. 
 
 But let us proceed farther. Suppose the New York rule had been the rule in Vir- 
 ginia : how would it have worked ? At what period would Wythe have been expelled 
 from the bench? I know, it was supposed, that the force of his mind was much im- 
 paired by old age ; but I have heard those who knew him best, and were most com- 
 petent to judge, say, that age had only unfitted him for the drudgery and details of 
 the station he held — (let it be remembered, that that station, till shortly before his 
 death, was that of High Chancellor of all Virginia,) and that much, very much, of 
 the power of his mind still remained: and, to the day of his death, that remained, 
 which, if it does not supply the place of understanding, contributes, above all things, 
 to enliofhten and direct its action — that which is one, and the most essential ingre- 
 dient of true wisdom — I mean benignity of heart, unsullied purity, and all the firm- 
 ness of Roman virtue. And his decrees, to the very last, though they exhibited 
 much of quaintness, and some inattention to, or oversight of details, and the slow- 
 ness of old age, aggravated in his case by the loss of the use of his right hand, 
 owing to which he must have lost not a little time in noting details, yet displayed, 
 always, a heart which never swerved from pure and impartial justice, and a judgment 
 which seldom strayed, and never far, from the eternal principles of truth and right. 
 
 If we had had the provision which prevails in New York, Pendleton would have been 
 removed from the bench, twenty-four years before his death — for he died at eighty- 
 four, I ask any gentleman, acquainted with the facts, was the business of the Court 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 735 
 
 of Appeals conducted with less despatch in his latter years ? Did he display less ad- 
 dress, less power of mind, in directing the deliberations of the court, and in bringing 
 younger Judges to habits of diligence by his presiding influence ? The direct re- 
 verse was the fact. As he advanced in years, his influence continued to increase— it 
 never ceased to be felt. The power of his mind, the controlling influence of his 
 hoary wisdom, was felt and acknowledged by such men as Spencer Roane. 1 derive 
 my information from the fountain head — it was given me by Roane himself. Of 
 Judge Roane, I could speak from personal knowledge — I knew his private and otS- 
 cial character perfectly well — but he belonged to our own times, and the place he 
 filled in the public confidence is known to us all. He, it is true, died at the age of 
 sixty-three — but the New York rule would have anticipated the hand of death in re- 
 moving him from the bench. I say, in the name of all the bar of the Court of Ap- 
 peals, and I might venture to say in the name of all the people of Virginia, that it 
 was precisely at the period of his death, that his understanding was the strongest; 
 that there was no want of every faculty adapted to the able discharge of all the du- 
 ties of his station. 
 
 We have, then, a series of instances of English Judges, retaining the f\ill vigor of 
 their minds, to seventy, seventy-five, and even eighty years — and we have a history 
 of the Virginia bench confirming a like state of facts. Gentlemen will draw their 
 own conclusion. 
 
 Turn now, I pray you, to New York, from whose institutions we are to borrow this 
 improvement. It is a mistake to suppose, as the gentleman from Amherst does, that 
 Kent and Spencer were both removed by the limitation of age. It was not the Con- 
 stitutional provision, but a revolutionary decapitation, by which Spencer fell. He 
 was Conventionized out of office. We are going to Conventionize all of our Judges. 
 The New York Convention had the grace not to abolish the Court of Chancery; and 
 thus Kent was left to die a political death at the age of sixty. He is a superannuated 
 Judge ! The man remains in full possession of a first rate capacity, peculiarly adapt- 
 ed to Judicial station. 
 
 Does the gentleman fi'om Amherst ever read the New York Reports.'' Perhaps, he 
 has seldom had occasion to consult them ; but those who have to discuss questions of 
 commercial law, must necessarily refer to them. I venture to recommend them to 
 the gentleman : he will find great profit from the perusal, whatever may be the point 
 of law-learning, on which he may want information. I must say, that to me nothing 
 seems more apparent, than that the younger Judges, of whom the gentleman spoke 
 as so ably supplying the place of those said to be superannuated, are in every way 
 inferior to them. In my poor opinion, there is a manifest deterioration in the bench 
 of that State. For my own part, I attribute it, mainly, to certain new principles intro- 
 duced by their late Convention, but, whatever be the cause, the fact is so, or, at least, 
 generally believed to be so. 
 
 Yet it must be admitted, and I freely admit, that there is a period of life, at which 
 the strongest minds become impaired: but I deny that it is always, or even generally, 
 at seventy, or at seventy-five. But there is a period somewhere. Let us see, whether 
 there is any necessity to fix that period in our Constitution. 
 
 A provision has already been agreed on, for the removal of any Judge by a vote of 
 two-thirds of the Legislature. Let age then, or let disease (which is a much more 
 frequent agent in producing such an effect.) impair the intellectual powers of one of 
 our Judges, and that in so great a degree that it shall be apparent and undeniable; 
 this provision is a remedy for the mischief. It is unquestionabl}^ true, that it will be 
 a task of extreme delicacy to remove a Judge for such a cause, and that the feelings 
 of the Legislature strongly revolt at the thought of turning out an aged public ser- 
 vant on account of his age alone. There was truth and good sense in the remarks 
 of the gentleman on that part of the subject. But then it must be remembered, that 
 you cannot contrive any system of human law, which will alwaj^s work well, which 
 will not sometimes be productive of evil. All we have to do, and all we can do, is, 
 to adopt such measures, as will be most apt to produce the most good and the least 
 evil. If we establish a fixed period, we shall surely encounter the very serious evil 
 of expelling from the bench, some, nay many, who at the very time most adorn it. 
 The question, then, comes to this, whether the adoption of the proposed principle 
 will not, in all probability, oftener remove matured wisdom from the bench, or the re- 
 jection of it, retain imbecility or dotage in the judgment seat. In my opinion, it is 
 more prudent to take the risk of the latter mischief. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, said that the Convention had now arrived at the period 
 of its debates when a long discussion could not be agreeable, though conducted with 
 the eloquence of Demosthenes and Cicero. All he wished was, to ask a question. 
 Was the fundaiiiental rule, in any country, established upon exceptions? If it was, 
 and ought to be, then he admitted that various instances might be produced of men 
 who retained their powers to a late period of life. The gentleman from Chesterfield 
 might have gone further back. He could, indeed, have found but one Moses, who 
 
736 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 was one hundred and twenty years old when he died : his eye was not dim, nor his 
 ^^atural force abated." But he might find thousands over four score who kept the 
 vigour of their minds. Bat was this the great law of nature.'' How many more 
 were there who lost their vigour before they passed the grand climacteric ? And ought 
 the rule to have respect to the few exceptions, or to the multitude of ordinary cases? 
 On the gentleman's principles the same difficulty would occur in fixing a period for 
 mature age. It was fixed by our laws at twenty-one : but how many thousands might 
 be found, whose minds were as mature, and their bodies too, at eighteen ? Yet who 
 would change the law.-* In the present case he should think the more broad and uni- 
 versal it could be made, the better : and there were certainly more who lost their pow- 
 ers before seventy, than who kept them till after eighty. He thought the public good 
 would be a gainer and not a loser by the exclusion. 
 
 Mr. Venable said, this was one of those questions on which he had reflected witfai 
 much anxiety: the more, because he had not entire confidence in his own opiniom 
 respecting it : for he found, in conversation with those whose judgment he m«&t re- 
 spected, that they differed from him on this point. He should not trouble the Con- 
 vention with all the reflections he had indulged, but would offer one or two remarks. 
 Let us suppose, said Mr. V., that we do not set any such limit as is proposed : what 
 then ? When a man becomes old, and his powers begin to decay, you subject him to 
 the Legislature too, to what must be equally painful to both. For he will generally 
 be the last to discover when his mind gives way: and if he is removed, though with 
 the best cause, he will consider his country as ungrateful, and will suppose that those 
 who have brought forward the measure have been influenced by motives of personal 
 hostility. He cannot see his own imbecility : he cannot, therefore, anticipate its con- 
 sequences; and whenever they do come, they will be sure to take him by surprise. 
 Let us now look on the other side, and suppose an age to be fixed by the Constitution 
 when he must go out of office. He then accepts the office with this knowledge — 
 he can anticipate the consequence, and he shapes his course accordingly. When he 
 returns to private life, he does so with feelings uninjured, and he continues to enjoy 
 the same respect as he did before. His removal implies in it no imputation on has. 
 understanding. Thus far as it respects the individual himself. 
 
 We have had examples both from Europe and this country to shew that men some- 
 times retain their powers to a great age. I admit all the force of these examples. I ac- 
 knowledge that it may happen that a Judge will be quite as valuable after he has passed 
 the prescribed limit as before. But how difficult will it be to determine this: and to 
 what an extremely unpleasant situation does it reduce the Assembly. For myself, I 
 believe the faculties decay between sixty-five and seventy. I will not go to England 
 for cases to settle this question, I will look round me, on those who were the com- 
 panions of my youth : and where are they ? Several of them are in the Judiciary. 
 Are they able to do their duty there ? I wish they were. I wish it for the sake of 
 the country, and for their own reputation. Some few of them are competent. But 
 would it not wound my feelings most sensibly to see an aged Judge turned out of 
 office, and incompetency openly avowed as the cause of his removal.'' We are not 
 to judge from extreme cases. We do know there is a time when the mind decays, 
 when its powers begin to sink. I know it by my own experience, and by observiBg 
 those whom I knew in youth. But unless some definite time be fixed, how can they 
 look forward and anticipate the time when they are to retire : when old age arrives 
 they ought to retire: it is fit and becoming: and I do not wish to see them elec- 
 tioneering with the members of Assembly to be retained in office. If a man is honest 
 and loves his country, his feelings will be tender: but if he is one who has always been 
 hunting after office, the case will be far different. Mr. V. concluded, by declaring 
 his willingness to vote for filling the blank in the resolution with the age of seventy. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that he was opposed both to the amendment of the gentleman 
 from Amherst, and that of the gentleman from Loudoun : and he would detain the 
 House but a few minutes, while he briefly stated the grounds of his objections. He 
 was opposed to the latter amendment, because he considered it as inimical, in its ef- 
 fect, to the independence of the Judiciary. If a Constitutional period should be 
 fixed, at which all Judges were to vacate their office, and then the Legislature should 
 be clothed with power to re-appoint such as they considered peculiarly able and me- 
 ritorious, the inevitable effect would be, that all Judges would be under a tempta- 
 tion to court the Legislature for their continuance in office. Supposing a man to be 
 placed upon the bench at fifty, if he must return to the Legislature for a re-appoint- 
 ment at sixty or sixty -five, the plan carried all the evils of an election of Judges for 
 a term of years. 
 
 He was opposed to the first amendment, because he believed it would operate most 
 injuriously upon the interests of the Commonwealth. He could not, however, speak 
 with certainty as to its effects, until the blank should have been filled. If it was to 
 be filled with ninety, there might as well be no amendment at all; or if with eighty, 
 it would be of little consequence. But, he was to presume^ that the blank would be 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION'. 
 
 737 
 
 filled vrith some age, that would give the rule a practical operation. A rule that 
 would touch but one man in a century, would be of little moment: he supposed it 
 was to be such a rule, as would often take effect. Suppose the blank filled with sixty 
 or with sixty-five, and what would be the consequence? One consequence had been 
 already pointed out. in a manner so clear, in language so eloquent, and wilh referen- 
 ces so imposing, that he need add notljinj to enl' rce it. Its operation would sweep 
 from the bench its brightest ornaments, and deprive the Commonwealth of its best 
 security in the wisdom and experience of those who administered the laws. They 
 had been told, that this could only happen in those few rare instances, which an in= 
 dulgent Heaven sometimes permitted to bless a country. True : and these were the 
 very men. whom, above all others, they ought to take every means to retain. It was 
 this rare talent, which they should be the most anxious to cherish. What was not 
 the value of such a man as Pendleton and Roane, in guiding the deliberations of the 
 Judicial tribunals of the country .' One such Judge, was worth all the youno- athletic 
 men from thirty to sixty, vrhom you could bring upon the bench. They oucrht not 
 lightly to adopt any regulation. v\-liich would banish the services of such rare and 
 gifted men, precisely at the time when their services were of the most value. 
 
 There was another operation of the rule, which would prove not less deleterious. 
 It was on all accounts desirable, to fill Judicial stations with the best legal talent that 
 could be obtained. Xow. such talent would or would not be likely to be obtained, accord- 
 ing to the value of the reward which was held out, as an inducement to go upon the 
 bench. When a lawyer, on being ofi'ered a commission as Judge, was to be told, that 
 he could not hold the office more than ten or fifteen years, and must then be turned 
 adrift, it stripped the otFer of more than half its value. Unless they meant to make 
 up for this, by cfiviug their Judges such a salary, as to be a sufficient temptation, by 
 enabling him. in that time, to lay up a enough to provide for his old age — (and he 
 well knew, that Virginia meant to do no such thing) — the temporary duration of the 
 office, took away more than half its value. 
 
 What was the ex-Jud^e to do - Turn his thoughts to some other employment .- To 
 what purpose Must he go back to his practice To his practice at the bar, at sixty- 
 five .- His practice was gone ; all connexion with his clients had been cut off"; sur- 
 rounded too. with competitors in the meridian of Jife. and in full possession of the 
 bar ; to plunge into all the turmoils and strife of the bar, at the age of sixty-five 1 
 
 But. it was said, that he rnijht keep a private school, and thus be more useful to 
 his country than ever. A noble prospect, indeed, to be offered to the first talents in 
 the country : to be turned off" the bench at sixty-five, and go to keeping a school i 
 
 The gentleman from Amherst seemed to tliink that the knowledge o?this prospect 
 would Save a tendency to cause the Judge to keep his faculties whetted, and ready 
 for action, and thus he would not relax, but rather increase his exertions. He would 
 not forget what little law he knew, and grow worse from year to year, as at present. 
 Now, his opinion was, that the knowledge of such a prospect would operate directly 
 the other way. Tell a man that, at all events, his office must be taken from him after 
 a few short years, and what would he do .- devote himself to its duties and whet his 
 faculties for'future exertion.- Xo : but he would -withdraw all the time and all the 
 exertion that could at all be spared from its duties, that he might occupy it in making 
 a provision for the future wants of his family : his temptation would be, to necrlect 
 the service of tlie public, that he might improve his private fortune. He would say 
 to himself — I have got this situation but for a few years ; the wants of my family 
 will require all I can make in the mean while." If the confidence tliat he was pro- 
 vided tor during life would have a tendency to relax exertion, what would the know- 
 ledge of the opposite produce .' It might make a good farmer — a good merchant — a 
 keen speculator ;, but certainly not a good Judge. 
 
 Why fix a limit, where thev had already a provision allowing the Legislature to re- 
 move a Judge whenever they mi^ht deem it expedient.' The Convention had been 
 very properly told, that it was not'old age alone that incapacitated men for mental ex- 
 ertion : disease often produced that effect long before. It would often do so, even be- 
 fore the Constitutional period should have arrived. What tlien Certainly the Le- 
 gislature would be most reluctant to exert its power, when a few years would accom- 
 plish it. A Judge becomes paralytic at sixty : five years more would rid them of the 
 burden, and they would be unwilling to remove him beforehand. He put it to every 
 gentleman who "heard him to say, whether the imbecile Judges now on tlie bench (if 
 there were anv such) had become so by the hand of old age merely ? or whether they 
 did not owe it rather to the hand of disease.- But. that provision putting it in the 
 power of the Legislature to turn out a Judge who was unable to do the duties of his 
 office, would operate as a warning to the Judge him.self and to his friends: and be- 
 fore the Legislature could act on the case, they would be anticipated by the prudence 
 of the individual or the advice of liis firiends,'and he would himself resign his office. 
 His friends would feel the necessitv of the case, if the man himself did not. 
 
 93 
 
738 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. J. concluded by declaring his preference for a Constitution without such a 
 limitation as was proposed by the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Thompson said, he had listened with much delight to the able and eloquent re- 
 marks of the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) and the gentleman from Au- 
 gusta, (Mr. Johnson.) The first gentleman had certainly presented in formidable 
 array, the evils which such a provision would have produced in Virginia and England, 
 and liad produced in New York, where it had been tried ; but after all, the gentleman's 
 examples were but exceptions to a general rule, and exceptions of which he had made 
 the most, by a most interesting narrative of Judicial history and Judicial worth, a 
 most beautiful eulogium, and just as beautiful on the Judges to whom this provision 
 would have or had applied. The gentleman had, by no means, transcended the limits 
 of just panegyric in the tribute of praise he had paid to the names of Mansfield and of 
 Holt, of Wythe, Pendleton and of Roane, of Spencer and of Kent. Mr. T. was sen- 
 sible of the justice of the eulogium — he heard it with delight, and as a lover of living 
 and departed worth, he was glad the gentleman had undertaken the task, and had 
 performed it with his wonted felicity of thought and expression, and he acknowledged 
 the force of the argument bottomed upon it. Mr. T. said the strong views of both 
 the gentlemen, though they had produced doubts in his mind, had not convinced him; 
 and he would, with the indulgence of the House, attempt in a short reply to sustain 
 and vindicate the amendment and the views he had submitted when first up. Mr. T. 
 said, he had frankly admitted in the outset, that the rule would sometimes work evil; 
 as what general rule would not He had endeavoured to shew that the good would 
 preponderate in the scale. Such, said Mr. T. is the constitution of man and of hu- 
 man aftairs — good and evil are so mixed up and blended, that we are reduced continu- 
 ally to the choice between evils, and this more especially, as we have been informed 
 by sapient statesmen, in the foundation of Government and the enactment of all ge- 
 neral IsiVJs, rules and regulations whatever. There is, perhaps, no unmixed good, 
 nor unmixed evil. One thing is certain as it seems to me, said Mr. T. there is no 
 general provision of Constitutions or of law, without its particular hardships, and such 
 is the character of the amendment in your hand ; but shall cases of individual hard- 
 ships or inconvenience be put in competition with the public interests ? Shall the 
 paramount consideration of a speedy, able and satisfactory administration of justice, 
 that incomparably most important function of all Governments, yield to individual 
 convenience or inconvenience ? Mr. T. trusted not. The remarks of the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, (Mr. Leigh,) only proved what was not denied, that some men re- 
 tained their faculties to a very advanced age, and the names he invoked were truly 
 illustrious examples. He might have added another to his catalogue. He might have 
 vouched the authority of Tully in proof of the fact, for he had informed us in his 
 treatise de senectute that Cato, as well as I remember, retained his faculties in full vi- 
 gour to the last day of an unusually protracted life, and he continued to improve to 
 the day of his death, and that he was exempted from that almost universal infirmity 
 of life's " last scenes," second childhood. But Mr. T. would ask again, if this were 
 the common fate of the species ? or were these instances only rare exceptions Every 
 man's own experience or observation would furnish him with the answer. 
 
 The propriety of a general rule as to age, in defiance of the exceptions that might 
 be urged against it, was illustrated by a provision we have already adopted almost 
 without objection. We have provided, that no man shall be eligible to the House of 
 Delegates before the age of twenty-five, nor to the Senate before the age of thirty; 
 to say nothing of the provision of the United States Constitution, that requires a per- 
 son to be thirty-five, before he is eligible to the Presidency, and the provision in the 
 code of all nations fixing a period of maturity, in some one, some another, and in ours 
 the age of twenty-one years. Now, said Mr. T. I would ask gentlemen if there are 
 not as many and more instances of precocious intellect, than of persons beyond the 
 age of sixty or seventy years retaining the full possession of their mental, to say 
 nothing of their physical faculties .'' They must answer in the affirmative — need I il- 
 lustrate this by example ? I might cite the younger Pitt, who, before the age of 
 twenty-five, was, perhaps, the greatest prime minister that ever ruled the destinies of 
 England, and with them almost those of the world. Lord Byron at an age but little 
 more advanced, an age at which the generality of mankind are but commencing their 
 careers of glory or of usefulness, had finished his ; and a more brilliant one has sel- 
 dom, if ever, been run by any votary of the muses : but would it be fair to conclude 
 from these and other like instances that might be cited, that thirty was not the pro- 
 
 ?er age of eligibility for Senator, or thirty-five for President of the United States ? 
 f it would not, as little will the extreme cases put by the gentleman from Chester- 
 field, (Mr. Leigh.) oppugn the principle of the amendment. 
 
 It was true, said Mr. T. that the English Judges were generally old men ; many of 
 them, indeed, as had been properly remarked, had presided to very advanced ages. 
 They could not in the nature of things be very young men, when they ascended the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 739 
 
 bench, afler having dragged out their probation and rode out their quarantine of th« 
 " Vigenti annorum lucubrationes f but was it not also true that the KngUsh nation, at 
 this time^, was not altogether satisfied of the correctness of their ancient prejudice in 
 favour of ancient Judges The question whether or not it was a blessing or a curse, 
 had been agitated there and discussed with freedom ; he was not certain, but he be- 
 lieved, in the Ediuburg Review. In wJiatever periodical it was, this he remembered 
 about it, that the prejudice in favour of very old Judges, was assimilated to that 
 which prevailed in Europe, and. perliaps. every where m favour of old generals, un- 
 til it was exploded by the genius and tiie successes of Napoleon. I'hat there was 
 some, if not an entire analogy in these prejudices, Mr. T. said, he could not doubt. 
 But advanced age is a less objection to an English Judge than it is here ; because 
 ours, except the Judges in the last resort, require to discharge their duties well, the 
 possession of more of physical energv tiian do the English Judges. The reason of 
 the distinction was apparent to every "lawyer, at least; it was to be found m the ditfer- 
 ent organization of our Judicial establishment. 
 
 Mr. T. said, the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson.) had foreseen several evils 
 in, and pointed out several objections^'to, the amendment. He thought them rather 
 imaginary than real. That gentleman and himself had certainly drawn directly op- 
 posite conclusions from same premises. He apprehended the greatest evil from the 
 very features from A-hich he, Mr. T.. anticipated the greatest good. The gentleman 
 thought it would impair the independence of the Judge — that it would prevent com- 
 petent persons from accepting the office ; that it would divert the mind of the Judge 
 from duty while in office, and set him to electioneer by anticipation for a new office, 
 wiiich he might never live to occupy ; and that should the Judge chance to live be- 
 yond the term of limitation, deplorable would be his condition — a lawyer without cli= 
 ents, and an aged man set adrift in his old age to starve, or to subsist upon the stinted 
 bounty of an unfeeling world. Of the loss of clients, said Mr. T., the complaint was 
 really groundless — for, said he, I never have yet seen a lavryer in practice over the 
 age of seventy ; though doubtless such have been — but the cases are too rare to form 
 the foundation of an argument. There was no danger of men well qualiiied not ac- 
 cepting the office, and he could not possibly conceive how it could impair the inde- 
 pendence of the Judge or serve to turn him aside from the path of duty. If he, Mr. 
 T. was not mistaken in his estimate of the nature of men, the consequences and ef- 
 fects would be directly the reverse, and such as he had before pointed out, and he 
 could not, therefore, now repeat. Mr. T. said, it was his deliberate opinion, that it 
 was a far greater evil to have even one superannuated Judge upon the judgment seat 
 than to exclude many good ones for age, for the reasons he had before assigned. Mr. 
 T. said; the pertinent and common sense view, that had been taken of this subject by 
 the gentleman fro.u Prince Edward, i^Mr. Venable.) and the gentleman from Brooke, 
 (Mr. Campbell.) who had preceded him in its favour, seemed very much to confirm him 
 in the opinion that the amendment would prove salutary. Their views had doubtless 
 rendered much of what he had said unnecessary, perhaps repetition — and he was sure 
 would render any thing more from him tiresome to the Convention. He was himself 
 fully prepared to record his vote in favour of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Stanard thought it most extraordinary, that the gentleman from Amherst, while 
 conscious as he coiiiessed himself to be of one sort of influence likely to be exerted 
 on the Judiciary from fixing a limit to their period of service, should yet be so blind 
 to another sort of influence equally obvious. Was it not surprising, that while draw- 
 ing his precedents from the State of Xew York, and with the recent history of that 
 State before his eyes, he should make no allowance for this obvious tendency of hia 
 plan.' The next evil to a dependent Judiciary, was a political Judiciary. He viewed 
 such a Judiciar}' as one of the ofreatest curses that could befall any community. To 
 have tlie seat of justice invaded by party passions and political partialities, and to have 
 its course moulded by them ! Who could contemplate such a state of things without 
 grief and alarm.' The gentleman from Amherst had said that a Judge, should his 
 faculties remain unimpaired beyond the Constitutional limit, might look forward from 
 the favour of his country to be placed in some other situation by way of requital for 
 his past services. He granted that he might do so : and more : he certainly would do 
 BO : he must. But, what public favour could any one hope to gain, in the state of this 
 country, if attached to none of the party combinations of his day ? "Who could hope 
 for such a thing.' Who believed it possible The consequence was inevitable — the 
 tenant for years would make his situation subservient to the reversion : and if he did 
 not, his old age must be left without any provision. But were they left to a priori 
 conclusions on this subject.- Was not the fact before the gentleman's eyes.' and in 
 that very State from which he had draum his precedent and his argument to support 
 it.' Look at the state of political parties in New York — was not the gentleman sure 
 tliat party had influenced this limitation of office .' The expectation of a reversion 
 had had there the most pernicious eflect. The bench of that State had become a band 
 of political missionaries, The Convention in New York had had its origin solely in 
 
740 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 this connexion of the Judges with the party politics of the day. That was the whole 
 cause of it. It had been called for the purpose of inflicting the vengeance of a domi- 
 nant party on those who, when they were dominant, had used the Judicial station for 
 party ends. 
 
 And yet, with these conclusions of reason and experience before their eyes, it was 
 gravely proposed to this body, thus to contaminate the Judiciary, and make it politi- 
 cal in its character. In the sober and discreet judgment of the Convention, he should 
 suppose that this view alone was sufficient to condemn the plan. 
 
 The gentleman had said, that all general rules worked some indirect mischief, which 
 could not be avoided, and to object to his proposition was to object to general rules. 
 But, he asked, why must we have any general rule in the matter.^ "Why have a ge- 
 neral rule, which, as the gentleman confessed, must work some mischief with its 
 good, when they had already a provision that met the case, and produced the good 
 witliout the evil He was for no general rule where he could get one adapted to 
 the particular case. He would venture to say, that under the eighth resolution, (which 
 provides for excluding Judges at any time by a vote of two-thirds of the Legislature) 
 there would not be found upon the bench of Virginia for six months, any Judge who, 
 by disease or age, liad become imbecile and useless. Every such Judge would be ta- 
 ken from the bench, not by the Legislature, but by his own friends, who never would 
 run the risk of exposing him to Legislative enquiry. Mr. S. concluded that there 
 was no necessity of any such limit as had been proposed, and he should therefore vote 
 against it. 
 
 The question was then taken, and the propositions of Mr. Thompson and Mr. Hen- 
 derson were rejected. The former by ayes and lioes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — 'Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Williamson, M'Coy, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, 
 Venable, Henderson, Cooke, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Camp- 
 bell of Bedlbrd, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Thompson and Upshur — 27. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Harrison, Baldwin, Johnson, Moore, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trez- 
 vant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Madison, Stanard, 
 Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Taze- 
 well, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Branch, Townes, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, 
 Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly and Perrin — 69. 
 
 The question then recurring on agreeing to the first resolution as amended, 
 
 Mr. Doddridge moved to lay the first and second resolutions upon the table, under 
 the assurance that a proposition would be substituted in lieu of them, which would 
 unite the views of both sides of tlie House. 
 
 After some conversation, in which Messrs. Doddridge, Cabell, Scott, Coalter and 
 Leigh took part. 
 
 The two resolutions were for the present laid upon the table. 
 
 The third and fourth resolutions were then agreed to. 
 
 The fiftli resolution was read : 
 
 " Resolved, That on tlie creation of any new county, justices of the peace jihall be 
 appointed in the first instance, as may be prescribed by law. When vacancies shall 
 occur in any county, or it shall from any cause be deemed necessary to increase their 
 number, appointments shall be made by the Governor, on the recommendation of their 
 County Courts." 
 
 Mr. Upshur proposed to strike out the latter sentence of the resolution, and insert 
 as follows : 
 
 " Before any justice of the peace shall be appointed to fill any vacancy which may 
 hereafter occur, or to increase the number of justices, in any county of this Common- 
 wealth, it shall be tlie duty of the county court thereof, to lay off and divide the said 
 county into as many wards or districts as may be deemed proper. Every justice now 
 in office,, and each one who may hereafter be appointed, shall be assigned to some one 
 of the said wards, but shall, nevertheless, exercise his functions throughout the said 
 county. Whenever a justice shall hereafter be nominated, it shall be the duty of the 
 court making such nomination, to cause the same to be advertised at least 
 days at the door of their courthouse, stating the name of the person nominated, and 
 the ward for which he shall be nominated, before the same shall be sent on to the 
 Executive. And if the qualified voters of said ward shall disapprove of said nomina- 
 tion, such voters shall have power, a majority of them concurring, to nominate some 
 other person for said office, which nomination shall be returned to the County Court, 
 and be sent on to the Executive, together with the nomination made by said court; 
 and the Executive shall appoint either of the persons so nominated, as may be deemed 
 proper : Provided, That the person so to be nominated by the County Court or by any 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 741 
 
 ward, shall be a resident citizen of the county, but need not be a resident of the ward 
 for which he shall be so nominated." 
 
 Mr. Upshur briefly explained and supported his proposition. He owned that he 
 had, himself, no objection to the County Courts in their practical operation : but as 
 some were dissatistied greatly with their theory, and he did not himself wholly ap- 
 prove it, he offered this plan as going to remove in a great degree those objections, 
 and yet preserve the benefits of the system. 
 
 Mr, Jones of Chesterfield opposed the amendment in a neat and succinct speech, 
 the principal aim of which was to shew that this scheme, in its substance and practi- 
 cal effect, amounted to giving the election of justices of the peace to the people, there- 
 by keeping up party and neighbourhood strife, and jeopardizing the impartial admin- 
 istration of justice. 
 
 Mr. Powell objected to a single ward's having power to elect an officer whose power 
 extended over the county. And as the Governor was to be elected by the people, he 
 would be prone to lean toward the popular nomination in preference to that of the 
 court. 
 
 Mr. Upshur replied at length to these objections, denying that the people would elect 
 the justices in any other sense than the County Court would. Neither had they any 
 thing more than the power of nomination. He repudiated the idea of a Judge being 
 biassed by partiality to those who had nominated him. As to a nomination by a ward, 
 it did not bind the county — they might unite with the ward-nomination or that of the 
 County Court. 
 
 Mr. Coalter opposed the amendment, and told an amusing anecdote about a portion 
 of the people of Giles county living for a time without the laws of the Commonwealth, 
 and establishing a log-rolling Government of summary justice. 
 
 Mr. Gordon supported the amendment, and Mr. Scott opposed it, giving a codicil 
 of the anecdote related by Mr. Coalter. 
 
 The question was then taken by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jiyes — Messrs. Goode, Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, "Williamson, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Henderson, Osborne, Naylor, Donaldson, 
 George, M'Millan, Byars, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, See, Dod- 
 dridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saun- 
 ders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Neale, Joynes, Bayly, Up- 
 shur and Perrin — 43. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Baldwin, 
 Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Boyd, Pendleton, Campbell of Washington, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Summers, Barbour of Culpe- 
 per, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Pleasants, Bates, Rose and Coalter — 53. 
 
 So the amendment of Mr. Upshur was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Thompson moved to strike out the following words from the last clause of the 
 fifth resolution, viz: " by the Governor, on the recommendation of their respective 
 County Courts," and insert " in the following manner, that is to say, the County 
 Court shall, at the term thereof, next preceding the day of the annual elec- 
 
 tion of the members of the General Assembly, enter of record the fact of the occur- 
 rence of such vacancy or vacancies, or that in their opinion other justices ought to be 
 added to the commission of tlie peace in such county, and how many. Whereupon 
 it shall be the duty of the sheriff, at the election of the county Delegates next suc- 
 ceeding, to open a poll or polls, for the number of justices which shall have been de- 
 signated by the said County Court — and to make return to the Governor of the per- 
 sons that shall receive the greatest number of the qualified votes of the county. The 
 Governor shall within days commission the persons, all or any part thereof 
 
 so returned, unless in his opinion the public interests should justify his refusal. And 
 in the event of his refusal to commission all or any part, he shall without delay trans- 
 mit to the County Court the reasons of such refusal — but upon a second election by 
 the qualified voters, of the person or persons so rejected in the first instance by him, 
 the duty of the Governor to commission shall be imperative." 
 
 Mr. Powell moved to divide the question — and on that of striking out, the motion 
 was lost, by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Donaldson, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, See, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, 
 Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Joynes and Bayly — 38. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 
742 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Randolph, Leigh of HaUfax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Hender- 
 son, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, 
 Taylor of CaroUne, Morns, Garnett, Cloyd, Summers, Doddridge, Barbour of Culpe- 
 per, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Pleasants, Bates, JNeale, Rose, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 58. 
 Mr. Claytor moved in place of the fifth resolution the following : 
 " Resolved, That justices of the peace shall hereafter be appointed in such mode as 
 shall be prescribed by law — provided, that no law altering the present mode shall be 
 enacted, except by the concurrence of a majority of the members elected to both 
 Houses, and the ayes and noes on all such laws, shall be entered on the journals of ^ 
 both Houses." 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. Claytor, Chapman, (who made an explana- 
 tion as to the anecdote about Giles county,) Mr. Campbell, Mr. Scott, Mr. Giles, Mr. 
 Jones, Mr. Claytor, Mr. Stuart and Mr. Naylor. 
 
 Mr. Dromgoole moved a division of the question, upon striking out first. And the 
 question being taken, was decided b}' ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jltjes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coff'man, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Nay- 
 lor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Chap- 
 man, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, 
 Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stu- 
 art, Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Bayly and Upshur — 44. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Powell, Griggs, 
 Mason of Frederick, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter and Per- 
 rin — 52. 
 
 Mr. Wilson, with a view of testing the question about the County Courts, moved 
 to strike out from this clause of the fifth resolution, the words " on the recommenda- 
 tion of their respective County Courts;" which was lost — Ayes 23, Noes 73. 
 
 The question then came on, upon the adoption of the fifth resolution as amended, 
 and was agreed to, without division. 
 
 The sixt.h resolution was then read as follows: 
 
 *' Resolved, That the Clerks of the several Courts shall be appointed by their respec- 
 tive Courts, and their tenure of office be prescribed by law." 
 Mr. Morgan moved the following substitute : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall provide by law for the appointment of Clerks 
 to the several Courts, and for their removal from office : but no Clerk shall be appoint- 
 ed lor a longer term than years at any one time." 
 
 In explaining and supporting the amendment, Mr. Morgan said — 
 
 That the public offices of the State were never intended for private emolument 
 or means of wealth — they were instituted for the public good. But it is well 
 known that the several clerks' offices of Virginia, have been, and still are made 
 sources of great wealth. Many of them are considered fine fortunes to the clerks. 
 Some of these officers discharge tlieir duty faithfully, while others make their 
 offices subserve the purposes of wealth and power, and that too, without regard 
 to honesty or duty. The object of the amendment is to place them completely 
 in the hands of the Legislature, so that they can be- made responsible for their 
 conduct and be removed when it is proper. If the resolution be agreed to without 
 amendment, the Legislature will not have power to remove the evils complained 
 of. There is no provision in it for tlie trial and removal of clerks for corruption in 
 office; and if the General Court be continued and no such provision made, the clerks 
 of county courts at least, must hereafter, (as heretofore) be tried in that court for cor- 
 ruption. This mode of impeachment, or, more properly speaking, of prosecution and 
 trial in the general, is a very ineffijctual remedy against dishonest clerks, and never can 
 correct the existing evils. The clerks of the other courts, may be removed in such 
 manner as the Legislature may prescribe. But the resolution provides the courts 
 shall appoint their own clerks — the Legislature can never divest them of this power ; 
 the law can only fix the tenure of office, and it will be in vain to make it an office 
 for a term of years to get rid of dishonest clerks. The courts are to be independent, 
 almost of all human power, and can, and no doubt will, re-appoint their clerks as 
 often as they shall think proper so to do. 
 
 The amendment which he proposed would give the Legislature full power over 
 the whole subject, excepting that no clerk could be appointed for a longer term than 
 five years at any one thne. If it was proper for the courts to appoint the clerks, 
 they would be permitted to do it — if not, it would be done in some other form. The 
 remedy against the abuses to which the people are exposed, will not be sufficient to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 743 
 
 secure correction, unless the Legislature shall have power to take the appointment of 
 these officers out of the hands of the courts altogether. The courts will not regard 
 the complaints of the people. They being in office for life, are independent of the 
 people, will keep their clerks so too, if they can, and there is nothing in the resolu- 
 tion to prevent it. 
 
 These officers annually fleece the people of the State, and, indeed, too frequently 
 put in the shears before the fleece is half grown, and they are so independent and 
 powerful in their offices, that it is almost impossible to make resistance against their 
 demands. The fees are regulated by law it is true, but the clerks determine the con- 
 struction of the law themselves — they determine the price of their own labour — ren- 
 der their own judgments — issue their own executions, and enforce payment at discre- 
 tion. The remedy against them for taking unlawful fees is ineff'ectual. It is in the 
 hands, mainly, of the justices of the peace, who know very little about fee-bills, and 
 who are not qualified to decide on them. It is a remedy which does not extend to re- 
 moval, and is seldom resorted to, and there is so much difficulty and uncertainty in 
 prosecuting them before the General Court, and so many modes of getting rid of con- 
 viction, that they are almost independent of all power : they can do right or wrong at 
 their own discretion, with very little danger of their ever being removed. 
 
 The clerks exercise no little influence in the election of members of Assembly in 
 all the counties. There are two clerkships, and very frequently, two clerks in each 
 county, and, by their constant exertions, they are able to wield elections in very many 
 instances. They are permanent — their exertions constant — and their weight will be 
 felt in every election. If men of independence and patriotism, attempt to reform the 
 law in relation to their fees, these same clerks are the first to strike their fangs into 
 the character of such representatives of the people, and raise opposition to their fu- 
 ture elections. They are the chief politicians in many counties, and have something 
 to do with almost every office ; and while they exercise the influence and power they 
 now enjoy, the people cannot hope for a revision of the fee-bills. He said, as he had 
 before stated, if independent courts have the appointment of their own clerks secured 
 to them, the clerks will be independent too. He hoped the amendment would be 
 adopted. It would give the Legislature full power over the subject, except that 
 clerks could not be appointed for life as they now are. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, that all the resolution declared, was, that the clerks should be ap- 
 pointed by the court: all other things in relation to the office were left absolutely to 
 the disposal of the Legislature. They might provide for the prosecution of these of- 
 ficers — their exclusion from office — the punishment of their oflfences — the regulation 
 of their emoluments — all was left with the Assembly, except their appointment. And 
 where could that be better lodged than in the courts, whose officers they were } How 
 else would gentlemen have them appointed.'' elected by the people by the Legisla- 
 ture by the Governor None of these modes, he presumed, would be contended for. 
 How then the gentleman had not suggested any better mode. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said he would beg leave to amend his amendment by striking out the 
 word " five," so as to leave a blank to be filled hereafter. Some gentlemen preferred 
 a different term — he was not particular as to the length of time, but did not wish the 
 Legislature to have power to give the clerks life estates. 
 
 He said it was not necessary to say what mode of appointment he preferred. If the 
 Legislature shall think proper to confer the power upon the courts, and they shall exer- 
 cise it judiciously and properly, they will be permitted to keep it ; but if they should 
 act improperly and make bad appointments, the Legislature can find some other 
 power which will give satisfaction. 
 
 He would remark, in addition to what he had before said, that no man could 
 doubt that the clerks' fees in Virginia exceed the whole land-tax of the State. 
 They greatly exceed the whole slave-tax — and yet the Convention is about to con- 
 fer the appointment of all these officers on the Judicial branch of the Government — 
 a branch wholly independent of the people, who pay so great a sum of money. 
 The Convention has been engaged more than two months in the discussion of the 
 basis of Representation in connexion with taxation and responsibility; and here is a 
 class of officers to be made independent, with power to fleece the people of as much 
 money as would be necessary for the support of the Government hereafter ! The 
 duties of a clerk, are mainly mechanical, and are generally performed by under 
 clerks, boys, or mere scriveners. They are not such as require independence in of- 
 fice ; but to the contrary, they require responsibility. There was one other considera- 
 tion he would suggest. Tlie Legislature might provide that offices should be given 
 out to good and responsible men, who would pay into the treasury for the support of 
 Government, such sums as would be just and right, for the accruing fees. In large 
 counties, where much business is done, the fees make great estates for the clerks, but 
 in small ones, they are a mere competence. The fees cannot be regulated, so as to 
 be larger in some counties than others. They must be uniform through the State ; 
 but it is possible that some part of the revenue might be drawn from them, with ad- 
 vantage to the public. 
 
744 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke asked for the ayes and noes, and they were ordered by 
 the House. 
 
 Mr. Neale then addressed the House as follows : 
 
 Mr. President, — I rise to make a single remark. The character which the gentle- 
 man from Monongaha (Mr. Morgan) has given of the clerks of courts, of his part of 
 the country, has struck me with astonishment. He says, they make large fortunes 
 by dishonest means — they fleece the people — that their shears are at work before the 
 fleece be full grown. This to me is most extraordinary — and for fear that people at 
 a distance may really believe that this is the true character of the clerks generally in 
 Virginia, I ask of you and this Convention to bear me out, when I declare that they 
 are among the most careful and honorable men any where to be found. Most sin- 
 cerely do I deplore the condition of the people from among whom the gentleman 
 comes, in having such rogues for their clerks. 
 
 It is certainly not the case in those parts of Virginia with which I am acquainted, 
 and I trust that the gentleman has mistaken the character of the clerks with whom 
 he is acquainted. 
 
 Mr. Leigh rose to inform Mr. Morgan that where a clerk was guilty of malfeasance 
 in his office, the court were now bound by law to turn him out. 
 
 Mr. Cabell testified to the honorable character of the present incumbent of the of- 
 fice in his district; but observed, that such might not be the character of his successor. 
 He thought it important that there should be a way of reaching justices of the peace 
 and clerks of the county courts through the Legislature. As matters now stood, no 
 man could be elected to the Legislature, if either the bench or the clerk were oppo- 
 sed to his election. 
 
 Mr. Morgan said, he did not impute wrong to the clerks of any peculiar part of the 
 State ; nor to those who do their duty and act honestly. Every person knows how 
 the duties are performed. It is not unfrequent for boys to discharge them, and col- 
 lect fees, which are afterwards charged and collected when the principal sends out 
 his annual fee bills. Men would rather pay small fees a second time, than go to the 
 trouble and expense of having them corrected. They will sustain a loss rather than 
 go to law with a clerk," as it is said. Mistakes will occur with the best of clerks, 
 but if they can be put under a just responsibility, these mistakes will not be so fre- 
 quent hereafter as they have been. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, tliat he had resided within the district where his home now 
 was for thirty-three years ; he had known every clerk of the court within that period 
 of time ; and he would state in his place that he had never known a race of more 
 honorable men. Not one within that time had to his knowledge fleeced the people, 
 or sheared them, in season or out of season, or permitted boys to issue fee tickets; 
 bxit had properly attended to the duties of their office. 
 
 The question was now taken and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ajes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffinan, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Miller, Baxter, Oglesby, 
 Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Saunders 
 and Cabell— 15. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, Smith, Mason of Southampton, 
 Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madi- 
 •son, Stanard, Plolladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, Mathews, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, 
 Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Branch, Townes, Mar- 
 tin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, 
 Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 80. 
 
 So Mr. Morgan's amendment was rejected, and the original resolution was adopted. 
 
 The Chair then proceeded to the next resolution, which provided for the impeach- 
 ment of Judges before the Senate ; when Mr. Johnson rose to offer an amendment 
 calling to the aid of the Senate, a portion of the Judiciary, to constitute a court of 
 impeachment. 
 
 The hour being late, on motion of Mr. Stanard, the amendment was for the present 
 laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Stanard moved, that when the House adjourned, it should adjourn to meet on 
 Saturday, (to-morrow being Christmas Day.) 
 
 After some conversation on this subject, and a motion by Mr. Upshur being lost to 
 extend the adjournment to Monday, Mr. Randolph remarked that he hoped the anni- 
 versary of the Prince of Peace, of Him who came to bring peace on earth and good 
 will to men, would not be kept by their wrangling there. 
 
 The motion was then agreed to, and the House adjourned to Saturday, 11 <? 'clock. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 745 
 
 SATURDAY, December 2G, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened vrith prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Taylor of the Baptist Church. 
 
 The question was on the seventli resolution of the Judicial Committee, which is in 
 the following words : 
 
 ''Resolved, That tlie Judges of the Court of Appeals and of the inferior courts, of- 
 fendino- aofainst the State, either by mal-administraticn, corruption, orneg-Iect of duty, 
 or by any high crime or misdemeanor, shall be impeachable by the House of Dele- 
 gates, such impeachment to be prosecuted before the Senate. If found guilty by two- 
 thirds of the whole Senate, such persons shall be removed from office. And any 
 Judge so impeached shall be suspended from exercising the functions of liis office 
 until his acquittal, or until the impeachment shall be discontinued or withdrawn." 
 
 To which Mr. Johnson had proposed the following amendment, viz : to strike out 
 the word Senate," and insert a court, constituted in the manner following, that is 
 to say — if a Judge of the Court of Appeals be impeached, the court for his trial shall 
 consist of at least two-thirds of the Vv-hole number of Senators, and a majority of the 
 Judges of the inferior courts — and if a Judge of an inferior court be impeached, the 
 court for his trial shall be composed of the same number of Senators and a majority 
 of the Judges of the Court of Appeals" — and instead of " Senate" in the following 
 line insert court." 
 
 After some conversation as to laying the resolution on the table and adjourning 
 (the heavy rain having detained infirm members from their seats,) it was at length 
 concluded to proceed with the consideration of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Johnson spoke thus : 
 
 I would very willingly, Mr. Chairman, were I capable, give to the House the in- 
 formation which the member from Frederick has supposed me desirous to give, in re- 
 lation to the amendment I have offered — but I am not — and I feel very little anxious 
 for the fate of that amendment. I have risen, not to vindicate it by argument, but 
 very brieily to explain the simple grounds on which it rests. 
 
 The Judicial Committee prefer, that the Senate of the State shall be the tribunal for 
 the trial of impeachments against Judges ;. these impeaclmients being preferred and 
 prosecuted by the House of Delegates. I propose that this tribunal shall consist not 
 of the Senate alone, but of two-thirds at least of the Senators, and a portion of the 
 Judiciary — that when a Judcre of the Court of Appea,ls shall be impeached, a majority of 
 the Judges of the Inferior Courts shall be associated with the Senators ; and when a 
 Judge of an Inferior Court shall be impeached, a majority of the Court of Appeals shall 
 unite with the Senators in forming the court for his trial. 
 
 The obvious purpose of this amendment is, to assure legal talent and legal informa- 
 tion to the court charged with the trial of the highest legal prosecutions : and I should 
 suppose that an advantage so manifest could not fail to recommend itself to favour, 
 unless it brought with it some countervailing evil. 
 
 The Senate will no doubt, in time to come, as it has heretofore, and does now, pos- 
 sess in general, a respectable portion of legal learning and ability. But the constitu- 
 tion of That body does not necessarily require, that any of its members should belong 
 to the profession of the law, and occasions may occur, when there will be little if any 
 professional ability in it ; whatever there may be. it will always belong to the bar, aH*d 
 for the most part not to the most experienced part of the bar; and I respectfully sub- 
 mit it to the good sense of the Convention, whether that is the kind of legal talent 
 to which we can most safely refer the important duty of expounding the law, and ad- 
 ministering justice in those State trials, which may enlist the feelings and involve the 
 interests of the whole Commonwealth. 
 
 There is a well-known and wide distinction between the operations of that mind, 
 which is habitually engaged in forensic discussion,. in controversial debates indiffer- 
 ently on the one side or the other of any question, and of that which is led by duty, 
 carefully to guard against all improper influences, to search diligently and impartially 
 for truth and justice, and firmly to apply their doctrines, whether popular or unpopu- 
 lar ; whether agreeable to the prosecutor or favourable to the accused. The former is 
 seldom at a loss for plausible reasons, to persuade it to follow its own predilections, 
 while the latter rarely fails to disabuse itself of prejudice, to find the path of duty 
 and to follow it. We all know, too, that the habit of defending criminal prosecutions 
 begets in the members of the bar, a strong prepossession in Tavour of the accused; 
 and that it is one of the first fruits of the Judicial office to correct that prepossession. 
 It is to the impartial, well-informed and well-balanced minds of the Judiciary, to men 
 long in the habit of administering justice, that I would look for aid to the court of im- 
 peachments in the discharge of their duties. 
 
 What is to be feared from introducing the Judges into this tribunal? Is it, that the 
 esprit du corps will give to their minds an improper bias in favour of an accused bro- 
 ther This fear, I tliink. cannot be well founded. Remember, that the Judges of one 
 
 94 
 
746 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 corps, are to preside at the trial of those of another — that the Judges will vote only 
 in. common witli the Senators, and will constitute, in tlie general, a small minority of 
 the court — that their province will be, not to controul, but to enlighten the judgment 
 of their associates — that their judgments will be subject to the criticism of the coun- 
 sel, in whose presence they are, and that to be efficacious, they must be recommended 
 by reason and justice. Remember too, that these Judges, who will not have the fate 
 of the accused in their hands, will be surrounded by the intelligent, honest, and firm 
 representatives of the people, ready to detect and expose the indulgence of any im- 
 proper partiality — And can there be any reasonable fear indulged, of the influence of 
 the esprit du corps? It seems to me that nothing is to be feared, and that something 
 valuable may be gained from the assistance of the Judges. 
 
 It should not be forgotten, that impeachments generally originate in the dissatisfac- 
 tions of the people — sometimes in party spirit — and may sometimes grow out of con- 
 troversies between the Legislative and Judicial departments, and that they are always 
 preferred and prosecuted by the House of Delegates, the immediate representatives of the 
 people. If, then, they are to be tried by the Senate alone, also the representatives of the 
 same people, is there not some reason to fear, that this tribunal, though somewhat 
 farther removed from the people, than the Delegates are, and more independent, be- 
 cause of the tenure of their office, would yet be often partakers of the public discon- 
 tent, subject to the same part}' influences," which animated the prosecution; parties, 
 in the strictest sense, to the controversy, out of which the prosecution may have 
 grown — and, therefore, strongly prejudiced against the accused And might not the 
 grave counsels of the Judiciary, in such cases, serve the valuable purpose of temper- 
 ing a misguided zeal, correcting the errors of prejudice, and holding up to the consti- 
 tuent body, the light of truth, by which the judgment of this tribunal should be re- 
 judged ? 
 
 The framers of our Constitution, were so little jealous of the Judiciary, and so little 
 apprehended the influence of the esprit (hi corps, that they made all impeachments 
 cognizable before the ordinary courts of justice, and our early legislation seems rather 
 to have guarded against the undue influence of the House of Delegates, than against 
 the partiality of the Judges. An impartial jury, for the trial of the facts put in issue, 
 was provided, the right of challenge reserved to the accused; and it was expressly 
 provided, that, unless at his request, the impeachment should not be tried, during the 
 session of the Legislature. 
 
 Happily, we have had no experience of the operation of these laws in Virginia, 
 there having been no instance of an impeachment, since the foundation of our Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 In the Government of the United States, where the Senate is the tribunal for the 
 trial of impeachments, there have been two such prosecutions. William Blount, a 
 Senator of the United States, was impeached, after he had been expelled from that 
 body. But, his case was not tried on the merits; it went off", on a plea, that he was 
 not amenable to the prosecution of impeachment, not being a " civil officer," within 
 the true construction of the Constitution. Judge Chase's impeachment was tried and 
 decided on its merits. I do not quote it, for the purpose of criticising the trial — 
 though I believe, that the incidents attending it, left very few under the impression, 
 that the Senate of the United States was the most fit tribunal for the trial of im- 
 ppeachments. I mention this trial, principally for the purpose of impressing on the 
 minds of the Convention two truths. 
 
 The first is, that the impeachments of Judicial officers, sometimes arise from the 
 conflicts of party politics — as this unquestionably did. I have nothing to say of the 
 merits of the prosecution or the accused — but it is very manifest, that the spirit 
 which maintained, and that vrhich defended this prosecution, was just as likely to find 
 a place in the bosom of the Senate, as in that of the House of Representatives. 
 
 The next is, that in the trial of impeachments against a Judicial officer, it is often 
 of the last importance to have the law correctly expounded. Judge Chase was accused 
 among other things, of violating the law of Virginia and perverting it to the unwor- 
 thy purposes of a party prosecution. He had certainly interpreted a Virginia statute 
 against the opinion of the Virginia bar, and contrary to the practice of some of the 
 Virginia courts. The first important question, therefore, which arose under this 
 charge was, whether he had correctly interpreted the Virginia law — and it was found 
 upon careful examination, that a Judge belonging to another State, who had never 
 before administered justice in Virginia, had given the correct interpretation to a Vir- 
 ginia statute, though Virginia lawj^ers and Virginia Judges had before thought other- 
 wise. This should be a lesson to us, of the value of legal talents, in the trial of im- 
 peachments. 
 
 I have been reminded of another impeachment, before the Senate of the United 
 States, that of Judge Pickering — who was convicted of intoxication, while in the dis- 
 charge of his official duties, and removed from office — but the incidents of his prosecu- 
 tion threw no light on the question we are considering. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 747 
 
 I have explained my views in offering this amendment; and willingly leave ii to be 
 disposed of by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas stated, that since the amendment of the gentleman from Augusta, 
 (Mr. Jolmson.) was announced on Thursday, he had given to it the best consideration 
 in his power, and that too. under the influence of the deference which he was always 
 disposed to feel for the judgment of the gentleman who proposed it. But the result 
 of his best reflections on the subject, was. that it would be inexpedient to alter the 
 resolution of tlie Judiciary Committee, in the manner pointed out in the amendment. 
 The Judiciary Committee proposes to constitute the courts of impeachment for the 
 trial of a Judge, and requires the assent of two-thirds to convict. 
 
 The amendment recommends that a portion of the Judges should be added to the 
 Senate, to make up that court. The question is not a new one in the United States. 
 It was discussed during the time that the Constitution of the General Government 
 vs^as under consideration, in the numbers of the Federalist. This celebrated work, 
 ■which has been frequently referred to in this House, was written, to recommend the 
 adoption of the Constitution of the United States, by gentlemen who had assisted in 
 its formation, and who. of course, believed that it was calculated to promote the public 
 happiness. I do not consider this work as binding authority, but entitled to high con- 
 sideration and respect, not only as being the production of great and enlightened 
 Statesmen, but as containing very able and full examinations of every topic which it 
 professes to discuss. In the sixty-fifth and sixty-sixth numbers, an enquiry is made 
 into the propriety of having established the Senate of the United States as the court 
 for the trial of impeachments. In the course of the discussion, the writer contrasts 
 with the plan recommended by the Constitution, several others that might be sug- 
 gested. Amongst these, he considers the propriety of uniting the Supreme Court 
 with the Senate, in the formation of the court of impeachments, and the result to 
 which he comes, is. that such an union would be unwise and impolitic. The reason- 
 ing employed by this writer, combined with my own reflections, has brought me to 
 the same conclusion. I do not mean to state in detail, the arguments used by ihe 
 Federalist — I will mention one which appears to me to have great weight. But, by 
 the Constitution of the United States, and that of this State, on conviction by im- 
 peachment, the party is liable to the sentence of removal from oSice. and disqualifi- 
 cation for future ofiice. But punishm.ent does not terminate here — he is still liable to 
 prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. 
 
 If the Judges are to be his triers in. the court of impeachment, there would be a 
 peculiar injustice and impropriety in the same Judges sitting on the same cause when 
 tried in a court of law. and bringing with them to that trial pre-conceived and pub- 
 licly declared convictions of the guilt of the accused. But there are other considera- 
 tions, which have greater weight with me, applicable to the amendment. It is pro- 
 posed to unite the Judges with the Senate, for the trial of a Judge. Does not this 
 violate first principles, and all the opinions which we form on this subject ? The uni- 
 versal sentiment seems to require that all causes, both civil and criminal, should be 
 referred to triers who are impartial and disinterested. It is a good exception to a 
 juror, that he has an interest in the matter. But it may be said that it is no excep- 
 tion to a juror, that he has an interest in a similar question to that under trial, unless 
 he is interested in the matter in issue. This may be technically true — but no man 
 would like to have his cause tried by a juror who had a similar question unsettled. 
 
 In the formation of this court of impeachment, we are not tied down by technical 
 rules — we are to look to the substance of things, and ought to guard against latent 
 and probable influences, as well as those which are palpable and immediate. Viewed 
 in this light, can there be a doubt, that all Judges must be more or less interested in the 
 questions which will erise in the trial of a particular Judge .' 3Iust not they settle 
 principles and rules, in which they are interested In these enquiries must be 
 frequently involved the powers of the Judges. They must decide what amounts to 
 misbehaviour in ofiice, in the extended sense of that word. In short, they may be 
 called upon to examine and define the whole range of Judicial duties, and to pro- 
 nounce what acts constitute a violation of them. It is not consistent with human 
 nature, that the purest and firmest Judge should be free from all bias, sitting in such 
 a case. It is unwise and improper, to expose any Judge to such a trial of his forti- 
 tude and his virtue. It is highly important, that the tribunals of the country should 
 possess the public confidence in their justice and impartiality. This is particularly 
 true, in relation to this court, which is to investigate the conduct, and punish the de- 
 linquency of men high in station and authoritv. The Judges of such a court should 
 not only be free from bias or interest, but, like Caesar's w^ife, they should be unsus- 
 pected. 
 
 But it is urged by the gentleman from Augusta, that it is important that the Judo-es 
 should constitute a part of the court, that it may possess within itself that knowledo-e 
 of the law. which is necessary to a correct decision. I do not think this a sufiicient 
 reason. Tlie Senators are chosen from large districts of country, and we have a right 
 
748 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 to suppose that they will generally be men of intelligence. In point of fact too, 
 many of them always have been, and always will be lawyers; and after hearing a 
 cause ably discussed by eminent counsel, (who will generally be engaged,) there can 
 be little doubt, but that the Senate will be enabled to decide it with propriety. It is 
 also worthy of remark, that the kind of offences for which impeachments are brought, 
 are frequently in their nature political, and are more dependent on general principles 
 than strict technical learning, as is explained in one of the numbers of the Federalist 
 alluded to. The Senate, it appears to me, will be a competent tribunal, and I can see 
 no motive which it can have to pronounce an unjust sentence against a Judge ; and 
 the requisition of two-thirds to convict, is a sufficient security against the influence 
 of the spirit of party, or of those sudden impulses to which public bodies are some- 
 times exposed. 
 
 The gentleman from Augusta endeavors to obviate the objection to a supposed bias 
 in the minds of the Judges, by saying that they would be restrained by the presence 
 of the Senators, and of the able counsel who can scan their decisions, and by their 
 sense of dignity and responsibility to public opinion. This argument is not inconsis. 
 tent with, but rather pre-supposes an inherent bias in the minds of the Judges. It 
 supposes that this tendency is fenced round by guards and securities, which will dis- 
 arm it of its mischief. But to me, it seems better to take a tribunal originally disin- 
 terested, than to select one, which can only be rendered so by counteractions to its 
 natural infirmities. 
 
 This part of the Constitution has never been acted on ; and it is a remarkable proof 
 of the purity of those concerned in the administration of our laAvs,that in fifty-four 
 years not one individual has been prosecuted by impeachment. 
 
 Mr. N. said it always appeared to him, that the Constitution of Virginia was more 
 defective in regard to impeachments, than in any other respect — and amongst other 
 objections, is the provision which directs, that the Judges shall be triers of their 
 brethi'en. 
 
 Mr. N. said he was decidedly friendly to the independence of the Judiciary, in the 
 sense he understood that term. His votes in this body would prove this. He was for their 
 tenure being during good behaviour, and he was against the removal of Judges without 
 cause, as is proposed in some resolutions before this House. But whilst such was his 
 opinion, he was equally opposed to their being irresponsible, or being above the law. 
 It cannot be disguised, that considerable dissatisfaction prevailed in the public mind, 
 as to the organization of the Judiciary Department. He trusted he was not more 
 liable than others to be influenced by mere popular clamour ; but in all countries, par- 
 ticularly in free ones, much respect is due to public sentiment; and it should have an 
 influence, when we are called upon to revise our public institutions. The proper re- 
 sponsibility of Judges is called for by public opinion. To it, as well as that of every 
 other public functionary, an efficient court of impeachment is essential — the people 
 ask it at your hands. " If they ask for bread, will you give them a stone I an- 
 swer, no. It is proper to guard their tenure of office from invasion, but to interpose 
 no shield against just responsibility. I consider the Judicial Department as one of 
 the most important in our Government ; and I will give no vote which shall impair 
 its independence, and I consider myself as acting as its real friend, when I wish to 
 avoid placing it in a situation, in which, if it does not incur well-merited censure, it 
 may be exposed to suspicion. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, asked for the ayes and noes, which were taken accordingly 
 and stood as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Johnson, Duncan, Pleasants and Rose — 4. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Brodnax, Droragoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Nicholas, Anderson, 
 Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Bax- 
 ter, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of^ Frederick, 
 Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, 
 Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Garnett, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour 
 of Culpeper, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bed- 
 ford, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, 
 Bates, Neale, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 83. 
 
 The seventh and eighth resolutions were for the present laid upon the table. 
 
 Mr. Henderson announced his intention to move, on Monday next, the re-conside- 
 ration of the vote of the Convention touching the mode of electing the Governor ; and 
 in the event of the success of the motion, that he should move two resolutions, which 
 he held in his hand, as a substitute for the first, second and third resolutions of the 
 Executive Committee. 
 
 Mr. H. stated that he came to the Convention holding the opinion that the people 
 of the Commonwealth ought to elect their Chief Magistrate^ in their proper charac- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 749 
 
 ter ; but that it tvas a part of his plan to clothe the Executive with a mass of power 
 which it was now clearly ascertained this body was not willing to confer on him. 
 This discovery, Mr. H. remarked, had greatly diminished his interest in the mode of 
 election. He further said that, if the Legislature itself were a fair representation of 
 public opinion, it must be obvious, as had been observed in his place the other day by 
 the gentleman from Patrick, that the Governor elected by it would be, substantially, 
 the Governor of the people themselves. For those reasons, Mr. H. remarked, that, 
 although he still preferred the popular election, he was ready to yield his preposses- 
 sion, provided any great object could be attained by it. He observed that cool reflec- 
 tion would satisfy gentlemen, that nothing in the way of reconciling the unfortunate 
 differences of opinion which prevailed in the body upon the leading subject of its de- 
 liberations, could be effected without a spirit of frankness and manly concession. In 
 this spirit, and in the persuasion, that the projet which the worthy gentleman from 
 Richmond county would present, was fair and mutual, he, Mr. H. had the honour to 
 announce his intention to make the two motions which he adverted to, and which 
 were a constituent part of the plan of the gentleman from Richmond county. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Cooke, these resolutions were laid upon the table and ordered to 
 be printed. 
 
 Mr. Neale said, that believing a spirit of conciliation and compromise now pre- 
 vailed in the Convention, and beginning to hope that they should frame such a Con- 
 stitution as would be acceptable to the people, and such as he should delight to see 
 perpetuated, and trusting that his motion would be followed by others in the same 
 spirit, he would offer the following resolutions, and moved that they lie on the table 
 and be printed : 
 
 " 1. Resolved, That the Senate shall consist of thirty-two members ; nineteen shall 
 be assigned east of the Blue Ridge } and thirteen west thereof. This arrangement 
 to be permanent. 
 
 "2. Resolved, That the rule to re-apportion representation in the House of Dele- 
 gates, shall be upon the resident freeholders of the Commonwealth : each freehold to 
 be of an assessed value of not less than twenty-five dollars. 
 
 " The application of this rule, first to take place in the year 1835, and every twenty 
 years thereafter. Provision to be made by law for ascertaining in 1834, the number 
 of freehold voters possessing freeholds of the assessed value of not less than twenty- 
 five dollars in the several towns and counties of this Commonwealth." 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, he had been aware that such a resolution was to be offered, and as 
 at present advised, it was his purpose to vote for it; but he should i-eserve himself to- 
 take such course as circumstances might in his judgment render proper. He thert 
 OiTered the following : 
 
 "1. Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Supreme Court of Ap- 
 peals, in a General Court, in such Superior Courts as the Legislature shall from time 
 to time ordain and establish, in the County Courts, and in the justices of the peace 
 who shall compose the said courts. The Legislature may also vest such jurisdiction 
 as may be deemed necessary, in Corporation Courts, and in the magistrates who may 
 belong to the corporate body. The jurisdiction of these tribunals shall be regulated 
 by law. 
 
 " 2. The Judges of the Court of Appeals, of the General Court, and of the said 
 Superior Courts, sliall hold their offices during good behaviour, or until removed in 
 the manner prescribed in this Constitution; and shall, at the same time, hold no other 
 office, appointment or public trust; and the acceptance thereof by either of them shall 
 vacate his Judicial office. The said Judges shall be bound to perform any and all Ju- 
 dicial duties imposed on them from time to time by law, whether as Common Law 
 Judges, or Chancellors, or both. 
 
 3. The Judges of the Court of Appeals, of the General Court and of the Supe- 
 rior Courts, offending against the State, either by mal-administration, corruption, or 
 neglect of duty, or by any other criine or misdemeanor, shall be impeached by the 
 House of Delegates; such impeachment to be prosecuted before the Senate. If found 
 guilty by two-thirds of the whole Senate, such persons shall be removed from office. 
 And any Judge so impeached shall be suspended from exercising the functions of his 
 office until his acquittal, or until the impeachment shall be discontinued or withdrawn. 
 
 "4. That Judges may be removed from ofiice by a vote of the General Assembly, 
 without the assignment of any cause whatever; but two-thirds of the whole number 
 of each House must concur in such vote." 
 
 Mr. Claytor moved that the resolution lie on the table and be printed. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge submitted the following, which he wished should for the present lie 
 on the table : 
 
 " Resolved, That all the resolutions adopted by this Convention, and proposed in it^ 
 be referred to a select committee of members, to prepare and report, either a 
 new Constitution, or amendments to the existing one." 
 
750 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 On motion of Mr, Stuart it was ordered to be printed, 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke submitted the following, which also was ordered to be 
 printed : 
 
 " Whereas republican institutions and the blessings of free Government originated 
 in, and must always depend upon, the intelligence, virtue and patriotism of the com- 
 munity ; and whereas neither intelligence nor virtue can be maintamed or promoted 
 in any community without education, it shall always be the duty of the Legislature 
 of this Commonwealth to patronize and encourage such a system of education, or 
 such common schools and seminaries of learning, as will in their wisdom be deemed 
 to be most conducive to secure to the youth of this Commonwealth, such an educa- 
 tion as may most promote the public good." 
 
 Mr. Stanard now moved the consideration of the report of the Committee on the 
 Bill of Rights, 
 
 The first and second resolutions of the report having been read, after some further 
 conversation, it was agreed, on motion of Mr. Doddridge, to lay the report upon the 
 table. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, December 28, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Armstrong. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved the consideration of his amendment which he had oifered to the 
 second resolution of the Legislative Committee, 
 
 Mr. Gordon opposed taking up the amendment at all, as going uselessly to renew 
 the discussion upon the basis. 
 
 Mr. Stuart did not intend any prolonged discussion, but wished to have his propo- 
 sition considered, and to record at least his own vote. 
 
 Mr. Gordon, thinking it impossible the House could ever agree on any plan for fu- 
 ture apportionment, thought they might as well make this a test question. 
 
 Mr. Powell asked, if the gentleman meant to apply the same remark to all the 
 questions on the subject of representation ? 
 
 Mr. Gordon would not pledge himself on this subject, but should vote on each 
 question as it came up in such mode as he might judge right. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, the declaration of the gentleman from Albemarle was rather 
 alarming. He did not conceive that the gentleman could have authority for declar- 
 ing that no future plan of apportionment could command a vote of the House, and if 
 the gentleman was disposed to affirm that nothing but his own proposition could be 
 agreed to, it was possible he might find members in that House who would say that 
 his proposition should not be agreed to. The gentleman from Patrick had brought 
 forward this proposition some time ago; and it was due to him, in courtesy, not to 
 suflTer it to be nailed to the table. 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, that the assumption of the gentleman from Bx-ooke, was wholly 
 gratuitous, and unfounded in any remarks which had fallen from him. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge thought the gentleman had said so, at least by implication. He had 
 said that no plan for future apportionment could ever carry, and his own proposition 
 pointed to present apportionment only : it seemed to follow that no proposition was 
 to be adopted but his. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. Stuart having been read from the Chair, 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that as this was to be a test question, he should ask the ayes and 
 noes ; and they were ordered accordingly. 
 
 The question on consideration was then put, and decided by ayes and noes.: Ayes 
 47, Noes 38. 
 
 So the House agreed to consider it, 
 
 Mr. Stuart expressed much discouragement when he saw so large a number of re- 
 spectable men voting against any future apportionment. He considered it one prin- 
 cipal object of the Convention to equalize representation : the people would not be wil- 
 ling to give up the county system, unless in the prospect of putting the power of the 
 State into the hands of a majority. But Mr. Gordon's proposition he considered as a 
 mere enlargement of the system of county representation, and justly liable, in princi- 
 ple, to all the objections which applied to the latter. The question now was, not whe- 
 ther women, children, day-labourers and vagabonds were to be represented ; but, whe- 
 ther after the line had been drawn and qualified voters determined, they should be put 
 on a level with each other ? whether they should have an equal or an unequal share 
 in the Government of the Commonwealth.' He greatly preferred his scheme to that 
 of Mr, Neale, which he thought would operate very unequally in practice. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 751 
 
 Ke professed himself a friend to rational reform : and though he did not anticipate 
 the same bloody result as the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) in case of a 
 failure of the new Constitution — yet he apprehended a state of much confusion, and 
 he believed, unless some principle for future apportionment of representation was in- 
 serted in the Constitution, it would certainly be rejected by the people. 
 
 Mr. Neale dechned interfering with the vote on this proposition, by advocating his 
 own at this time. 
 
 Mr. Stuart observed, in explanation, that it was not his purpose, where the number 
 of counties and of representatives chanced to be the same, that one representative 
 should be given to each county; but only to the average counties. 
 
 The question was then taken on agreeing to Mr. Stuart's amendment and decided 
 in the neo-ative by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — 5lessrs. Anderson, Coffman,Harrison,Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith. 3.1iller. Baxter, ^Nlercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke^ 
 Powell, Griggs, Xaylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, McMillan, Campbell of 
 Washington, ~Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Summers, See, 
 Doddrido-e. Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor. Saunders, Cabell and 
 Stuart— 42. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, ^Marshall, rvicholas, Clopton, Mason 
 of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urqubart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, 
 Venable, jNladison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby,. 
 Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Ba3'ly, Upshur and Perrin — 49. 
 
 The question then occurred on agreeing to the second resolution of the Legislative 
 Committee, 
 
 But on motion of Mr. Gordon, it was laid for the present upon the table. 
 After some conversation as to the next subject to be taken up, it was at length agreed 
 to consider ]Mr. Neale's proposition: wliich was thereupon read from the Chair. 
 Mr. Neale rose and said : 
 
 Mr. President, — I little thought, when I submitted the resolutions in your hand, 
 that it would be expected from me to support them by an argument ; but I am told 
 that I owe it to this body, and told this morning that it is expected from me. Surely, 
 Sir, the propositions are of a character so naked, that discussion is not necessary to 
 explain them in this enlightened assembl3^ 
 
 In taking up the subject, I feel at once the awkwardness of my situation. If I ad- 
 vance arguments provino; the scheme will be beneficial to the East, I shall lose sup- 
 port in the AYest : on the otlier hand, if I prove that benefits are to accrue to the West, 
 1 shall be abandoned by the East. No sea-tossed mariner, who ever attempted to 
 pass a strait like that of Scylla and Charybdis, was ever in greater difficulty. So that 
 my propositions must either break down among the mountains, or must sink in the 
 Atlantic. In this view of the subject, prudence admonishes me to silence — yet it is 
 said that silence will not comport with the demands of Parliamentary decorum. So 
 the peril must be encountered. 
 
 Mr. President, I am informed, that although my proposition has both Eastern and 
 Western friends, yet it will have to resist more difficulties from the East. Then I 
 briefly endeavour to prove, that the operation of the rule for re-apportionraent of re- 
 presentation will be peculiarly beneficial to the East, and fair throughout the State. 
 
 Members of the East have argued, that the Right of Suffrage should attach exclu- 
 sively to the landed qualification — this doctrine was adhered to as long as from adhe- 
 rence they hoped for success. SulFrage, however, has been extended to other classes 
 as well as freeholders of the community ;. and in these several classes of sufiragants is 
 now lodged the political sovereign power of the Commonwealth — Consequently, they 
 are to elect the members of the Legislature. The question then naturally arises, what 
 shall be the future apportionm.ent of representation, and to what shall it apply.? It 
 appears to me that no better rule can be adopted, than to measure representation by 
 the whole number of the resident freehold voters, whose freeholds shall be of a hoiia 
 fide value. In them mainly reside and abide the strength, the wealth, and the intel- 
 ligence of the whole community. In looking to this subject, my mind is struck with 
 the fitness, the beauty, the symmetrv^ and the justice of the rule. 
 
 But my scheme is objected to by some, because I propose to have the Senate a per- 
 manent body. From this objection permit me to vindicate it, by a comparison of it 
 with the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon.) His plan proposes 
 to have both the Senate and the House of Delegates fix:ed and permanent. 
 
 Now, unless it can be proved that a half is equal to a whole, or that the exercise of 
 a vicious principle in one branch of the Legislature, is equal to the exercise of a vicious 
 principle in both branches, I shall not beheve that my scheme is justly obnoxious to 
 the objection, so long as the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle shall be considered 
 
752 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 as a happy hit by a majority of this Convention — at least the objection should not 
 come from any of the supporters of that plan. 
 
 Mr. President, I am not particularly anxious for the adoption of a rule for re-appor- 
 tionment of representation, but for the hope that it would unite in harmony and peace, 
 the conflicting materials of this Convention, and by consequence to render the amend- 
 ed Constitution, (provided it shall be a good one) to the willing acceptance of the 
 people. 
 
 I believe, Sir, that the best rule which could be fixed upon, ought to be founded in 
 white population and taxation combined — and were we to have another Convention, 
 I think I may safely prophecy that the people would so direct it. But we have in 
 vain attempted to establish that rule ;. and in its absence, I sincerely believe that my 
 rule in the House of Delegates, associated with a permanent Senate, approximates 
 very nearly, if not equally, to the excellence and fairness of that rule which is founded 
 on population and taxation. 
 
 1 promised to prove to gentlemen of the East, that by the operation of my plan, no 
 ill would accrue to the East. I will endeavour to redeem that promise. 
 
 Although there are six or seven millions of acres of land West of the Blue Ridge 
 more than the East, yet a single glance at the geography of the Western region in- 
 contestibly proves, that there cannot be more, if as much land there, as there is in the 
 East, calculated for the profits and purposes of agriculture. It is true that the assessed 
 lands of the West exceed those of the East in quantity, according to the Auditor's ta- 
 bles. But who does not know that a very great quantity of that assessed land, is wholly 
 unfit for human use, and not desirable as haunts for wild beasts.? But let us assume 
 that there is an equal quantity East and West, fitted for the habitation and enjoyment 
 of man, and this is very fair for the West, can you then doubt, Mr. President, that 
 from the very face of the Eastern country, and the character of its soil, it is capa- 
 ble of, and will necessarily be cut up into smaller freeholds in the progress of time, 
 much greater in number than the lands of the West .? 
 
 Again : The lands in the East are assessed for taxes to the sum of ^ 74,000 more 
 than those of the West. This fact indicates the conclusion, that the Eastern lands 
 .are more valuable : and consequently, capable of containing a denser population. 
 
 Let us now see what relation the whole white population of the West bears to 
 that of the East. To 1829, the white population of the East is stated by the Audi- 
 tor to be 362,000, that of the West to be 319,000 — and the difference between East 
 and West as to the white males above the age of sixteen years, is 12,000 in favour of 
 the East. Now, Sir, what is to become of these white males Will they not neces- 
 sarily, from all the advantages at hand, soon become freeholders, and thereby aug- 
 ment the existing majority of the East ? 
 
 It is a fact somewhat curious to know, (and I believe contrary to ordinary opinion,) 
 that the ratio of freeholds to the white population of a slave-holding community is 
 much greater, than to a community of white population. I acknowledge that my im- 
 pression was, that freeholds would multiply faster in a non-slave-holding community. 
 But the fact is not so. 
 
 On the West side of the Ridge, there are 319,000 white people, and 35,887 freeholds : 
 On the East side there are 362,000 white persons, and 56,846 freeholds. If the ratio 
 of freeholds were equal, the "West should contain about 49,000 instead of 35,887 — so 
 that the slave-holding community is gainer upon the existing population East and 
 West, nearly 14,000 freeholds. This fact is important, to test what will be the proba- 
 ble future operation of the rule to re-apportion representation. 
 
 How stands the fact, if the rule were applied at this time to all the freeholders of the 
 Commonwealth ? In a House of Delegates to consist of one hundred and twenty- 
 seven members, the West would be entitled to forty-nine and a half members and the 
 East to seventy-seven and a half members. 
 
 It may be asked, what would be the probable result, if the rule was applied to the 
 particular class of freeholders contemplated to be embraced by it A calculation has 
 been made ; and it may be proper to state the data upon which it was made. A few 
 land lists of counties East and West were indifferently taken, and carefully examined : 
 upon that examination, it appeared that there were more small freeholds under the 
 value of $ 25 to the West, than in the East. So, that upon any scheme applied now 
 to a House of one hundred and twenty-seven members, the West would get forty- 
 eight and the East seventy-nine, leaving a majority of thirty-one members to the East, 
 and by the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, there is a majority of twenty-one 
 only. Favorable as my plan seems to the East, it would be still more so, if an accu- 
 rate Census was taken of the bona fide resident freeholders, whose freeholds are of the 
 value of $ 25 each : for. Sir, it must be admitted, that there are many more non-resi- 
 dents of the West, entitled to land there, than there are non-residents of the East, 
 owning land in the East. 
 
 It may not be amiss to state, that the operation of the Statute of Descents will have 
 the inevitable tendency to augment the number of freeholds in a ratio greater in that 
 portion of the State where the population is greatest. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 753 
 
 In apportioning representation upon bona fide landholders, the hardy yeoinanrv of 
 the country, the absolute owners of the soil, the rule omits to cover tlie labouring 
 classes of the West and of the East: and this consideration surely, is v*e\\ worth}- the 
 reflection of the Eastern delegation. 
 
 It has been said, Mr. President, that the increase of white population is such to the 
 West, that in the course of some twenty or thirty years, it will exceed that of tlie 
 East. Let us examine whether this conjecture be founded on facts. 
 
 From 1790 to 1500. West of the Blue Ridge, the average increase was 51^ per 
 cent.: from ISOO to 1510, the average increase was .24 1-5 per cent.; from 1810 to 
 15.20, the average increase was 19^ per cent. — We have no Census since 1520. But 
 let us pursue this decreasing increase of population from the facts presented — and I 
 will premise that to the West, as in every other country, the increase of population 
 will gradually lessen as the country fills up. But suppose the increase for the last 
 nine 3-ears to be 13 per cent. — by the same average of decreasing increase, ten years 
 from this period will make it 7 per cent. ; and ten years more will reduce the increase 
 of the West to what it now is in tlie East, and probably less — for, such is the nature of 
 the soU and its surface, that a much denser population may inhabit the Eastern region 
 than in that of the West. In this view of the subject, the white population of the V/est 
 even in the gross (and never v.-hen counted as freeholders) vnli hardly ever exceed 
 that of the East. Then, ISIr. President, why should the East object to this rule for 
 re-apportionment.- We should refuse to adopt a rule, and thereby lay the foundation 
 of the call of another Convention. I hope we shall not, Sh : For, if the amended 
 Constitution be a good one, let us unite to render it as perpetual as human wisdom 
 can devise. 
 
 But, Mr. President, suppose in the lapse of some eighty or one hundred years, the 
 political power in the. House of Deleo-ates should, upon my rule, pass to tlie West — we 
 shall have no cause to complain — for, with the increase of the number of their free- 
 holds and population, there will be a correspondent increase of the amount of taxes 
 paid by them; and in the mean time, the jealous and censorious passions of the whole 
 community, will be hushed into harmony and fraternal love. If it be true that this 
 state of political quietude and happiness shall endure no longer than some eighty or 
 one hundred years to come, let us be satisfied : for, unhappily for mankind, few Go- 
 vernments of the world have had the good fortune to endure for a term of years so 
 long. 
 
 Mr. President, it has been further objected to my plan that frauds will be practised' 
 in the West in the creation of the freeholds, owing to the great quantity of waste 
 lands in that region. I do not feel the weight of this objection. The freehold is to 
 be owned by a resident freehold voter, and its value is to be not less than twenty-five 
 dollars. The Legislature is to provide by law for ascertaining the number of such 
 freeholders, and will surely guard against fraudulent practices. I can more easily 
 imagine that in the annual general elections, much excitement in favour of par- 
 ticular candidates, might and has produced attempts to create votes for the particular 
 occasion. This rule of re-apportionment is to apply only once in every twenty years ; 
 and I cannot believe that the expense of writing and recording of deeds will be en- 
 countered with a view to the increase of political power, at a time greatly remote ; 
 when, in all probability, the actors in this fraudulent combination might reasonably 
 calculate, that before the fruits of their iniquity could be gathered, they themselves 
 would cease to exist. Sir, frauds of this kind, to be effectual in the increase of 
 political power, must be very general: and consequently a great number of persons 
 engaged in them. Could such a state of things escape public detection and would 
 not that detection be followed up bv public scorn and by public punishment .' 
 
 It is to my mind very sinofular "that objections should come from the East to my 
 plan. For, Mr. President, suppose after all. in the course of many years to come, 
 it should be found that vmder-the operation of the rule which I have proposed, the 
 majority of the House of Delegates should come from the West of the Blue Ridge ; 
 have we not safety and a guarantee in the permanency of the Senate I am satisfied 
 from my best reflections that the East, from the nature of things, will continue to re- 
 tain the power in the Lower House, and from my scheme, tliey can never lose it in 
 the Senate. 
 
 From the arguments ofl'ered.I should think that my scheme will be accepted by the 
 East, if the West will agree to take it. 
 
 1. Because the lands East of the Ridg-e are more capable of being divide"' and sub- 
 divided into small freeholds than the lands of the West : and that there is land assessed 
 in the East to the sum of 8 74,000 more than land to the West, from which fact we 
 may infer its superior capacity to contain a dense population. 
 
 2. That there are 12,000 males above the age of sixteen yeai's, more than in the 
 West, most of whom will sooner or later become freehold voters. 
 
 3. That freeholders multiply faster in a slave-holding community than in a non- 
 slave-holding community upon the same amount of wliite population. The East has 
 jnore population now bv 50.000, at least. 
 
 95 
 
754 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 4. That the decreasing increase of population in the West is such, that in a short 
 time, if it be not less than the increase of the East, it will not be greater. 
 
 Mr. Presideat, before I conclude, permit me to put this question to you, and 
 through you, to my Eastern friends of this body — and I put the question emphatically. 
 Suppose, Sir, some few weeks past our Western brethren had offered to give to us a 
 permanent Senate with a majority of six members, provided, we would give to them 
 a rule of re-apportiomnent, such as I have proposed — think you, we would have refu- 
 sed it ? No, Sir — we should have thought it fair and honorable then, as I think it fair, 
 honourable and just at this moment. 
 
 You will remember, Mr. President, that when I offered my resolutions, there were 
 two others offered at the same time, one by the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. 
 Cooke,) and one by the gentleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson,) on the subject 
 of the Judiciary and Executive Departments of Government. By my resolution a 
 fair rule for re-apportionment was contemplated — by Mr. Cooke's, the degradation and 
 injustice to the Judiciary were intended to be avoided, and by that of Mr. Plender- 
 son a small Council was to be preserved, an<J the election of Governor to be given 
 to the Legislature — and these several propositions were intended by the movers to be 
 dependent propositions. 
 
 Mr. President, if my resolutions are lost, it must be because the West think them 
 unfavorable to their interests, and the East consider them injurious to their political 
 power — and if each apprehends ill, all may reasonably anticipate good. 
 
 Mr. Scott then rose and addressed the House as follows : 
 
 I had hoped. Sir, that this agitating question was settled, so far as it can be settled 
 by a vote of this House, if it is again to be disturbed, I know not what we can con- 
 sider as settled, until the final vote is given, and the Convention has adjourned. 
 
 When the various departments of the Government were referred to the select 
 Committees, this question stood foremost, and engaged the attention of all. When 
 the House went into Committee of the Whole on the reports of the select Commit- 
 tees, this all-absorbing question was first taken up, and debated week after week, with 
 all the ardour and ability which the deep interest which it involves was so well cal- 
 culated to bring forth. The Convention was divided into two almost equal parts, and 
 the people became agitated and inflamed ; when my friend from Albemarle, to use 
 his ov^n words, in order to sink the discussion," laid upon the table his plan for a 
 present apportionment of representation, without looking to the future. After it had 
 been in possession of the Committee of the Whole for some time, and several fruit- 
 less attempts had been made to agree upon another scheme embracing both a present 
 and future apportionment, it was taken up and adopted by a more decided majority, 
 than we hoped could be united on any proposition, connected with this all important 
 question. A rule of future apportionment, presented by the gentleman from North- 
 ampton, was engrafted upon it; but was disagreed to by the House by an almost 
 unanimous vote. Various other schemes for future apportionment, were proposed 
 from both sides of the Plouse, and all of them rejected, and finally the plan of the 
 gentleman fi'om Albemarle v/as agreed to by a decisive majority ; and the Convention 
 passed to the consideration of other subjects. If this question, therefore, is not to be 
 considered as settled, it cannot be said that we have settled any thing. I, for one, 
 have so considered; and I regret that my friend from Richmond county should have 
 disturbed it. [Mr. Neale explained.] I am not ignorant of the motives which led 
 my friend to take this step — although not stated to the House in the remarks which 
 he submitted in support of his proposition, he had explained them to me. I duly ap- 
 preciate them ; yet 1 regret that he has felt it his duty again to agitate the Convention 
 by bringing up this subject. 
 
 Mr. President, — The plan before us does not profess to provide for a present appor- 
 tionment. It is designed to engraft it on that of the gentleman from Albemarle. It 
 must, therefore, be considered in connection with that plan. It is objected to that 
 plan by gentlemen from the West and from the East also ; and amongst the latter is 
 my friend vvlio sits near me, (Mr. Leigh.) that it is defective in not providing a rule 
 for the future apportionment of Representation ; that this defect will generate discon- 
 tent amongst the people, and so far from sinking the question of the basis of Repre- 
 sentation, it will keep it alive ; that hostilities will immediately re-commence, and 
 will result in a new Convention, or a separation of the State. I ask the gentlemen 
 from the East, in what part of the State is it that they expect these discontents to 
 arise From what quarter is this war to be v/aged ? They answer, from the West. 
 I will ask them if they would be willing to adopt our own favourite basis of Repre- 
 sentation, the Federal number, or population and taxation, as a rule of future appor- 
 tionment, if such a rule would not be more objectionable to our Western biethren 
 than no rule whatever, and by consequence produce greater discontent, and have a 
 stronger tendency to bring about another Convention, than the plan of the gentleman 
 from Albemarle. I would ask gentlemen from tlie West, if they could succeed in 
 adopting their favourite, the white basis, if it would produce no discontent in the East.'' 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 755 
 
 If it is expected, that we of the East would not make war on a Constitution, contain- 
 ing such an obnoxious principle — one which we think is opposed to the best settled 
 principles of Representative Government, and subversive of our dearest interests ? 
 Sir, we should be more or less than men. if we did not. There is yet a majority of 
 white population East of the Blue Ridge. We should for a time have the command 
 of both Houses of the Legislature on any basis. We could wield that povrerful en- 
 gine to effect our purposes — we could use it as the legitimate means of securing our 
 safety, by expelling the odious principle from the Constitution ; and in my judgment 
 we should act unwisely if we did not do it. Sir, the difference between the East and 
 West would be this — the West could do nothing without a revolutionary movement 
 of the people, whilst we of the East could effect our pm-poses, by the very means 
 which organized this Convention. 
 
 These reflections have brought my mind to the conclusion, that in the present ex- 
 cited state of this House, and of the people, it is better to provide no rule of future 
 apportionment, unless, indeed, we could hit upon one which would unite a large ma- 
 jority of the House and tranquillize the public mind. I confess, I see no prospect of 
 such a result. Let us examine the operation of the plan of the gentleman from Al- 
 bemarle, upon the different divisions of the State, and see whether it is likely to pro- 
 duce the effects which are apprehended. 
 
 The causes which led to this Convention v.-ere various. The unequal representa- 
 tion in the Legislature, was one of them. Great as that inequality is, it would not 
 of itself have been sufncient to overcome the opposition to the call of a Convention." 
 A desire to extend the Right of Suffrage, complaints against the Judiciary, whether 
 well or ill-founded ;. but their aid and their united force was barely sufficient to over- 
 come the repugnance of the people of Virginia, to a change of their fundamental law. 
 On the subject of Suffrage and the Judiciary, we have gone far enough to satisfy the 
 most ardent friends of reform. And the apportionment of representation proposed 
 by the plan under review, does substantial justice to every section of the State. 
 
 The complaints of unequal representation came from the Valley, and that part of 
 the Middle country which borders on the Blue B,idge, comprising the counties which 
 touch the mountain and the counties of Henry, Pittsylvania and Campbell. The re- 
 maining counties composing the Middle section have little cause of complaint on this 
 score, and were generally opposed to a Convention. Let us then compare the situa- 
 tion of the Valley and 3iiddle country and the counties just mentioned in particular 
 under the existing Constitution, with their situation under the proposed plan. The 
 representation of the Valley in the present House of Delegates, is about one-eighth 
 of the whole number ; by the proposed plan, it will be increased to about one-fifth. 
 That of the whole Middle country is about one-fourth ; it will be increased to one- 
 third. The representation of the fourteen counties immediately below the Ridge, is 
 about one-eighth ;. it will be increased to about one-sixth. These counties, by uniting 
 with the West, will give a majority against the East of twenty-three. By uniting 
 with the East, they will give a majority of twenty-one against the "^Vest. In the pre- 
 sent House of Delegates, the trans- Alleghany country by uniting with that below the 
 head of tide-water, will give a majority of forty-two against the Valley and jNIiddle 
 countr}' united. L^pon the proposed plan, the "Valley alid IMiddle country will have 
 a majority of one. We may, therefore, well hope that this great accession of strength 
 to that portion of the State which extends from the head of tide-water to the Alle- 
 ghany mountains, will, when the excitement which the discussions in this House 
 have produced, shall have subsided, when the salutary effects of this change on the 
 local interests of that region shall be felt, cause the people who inhabit it to be con- 
 tent. The people of the fourteen counties forming the upper division of the Middle 
 country, must be satisfied. In their hands will be placed the balance of power be- 
 tween the East and the West. It was by the union of these counties with the West, 
 that a majority was obtained for the call of a Convention. Ample justice is done to 
 the country West of the Alleghany. If complaints are heard from that quarter, tliey 
 will be without a cause. Unaided by the Valley and IMiddle country, they never can 
 disturb the repose of the State. 
 
 Neither has the extreme East any cause of complaint, or just ground of apprehen- 
 sion. Their own favourite basis of Representation would place the balance of power 
 in the same hands. The numbers which it would assign to the East and West re- 
 spectively, would indeed be somewhat different. But Ihe counties at the Eastern 
 base of the Blue Ridge, would still hold the balance between East and West. In 
 their hands it may be safely placed. They pay as large a proportion of taxes, and 
 hold as large a proportion of slaves, as any other parts of the State. When they tax 
 their neighbours, they tax themselves also. They have a deep interest in all the laws 
 concerning slaves. On the subject of Internal Improvement, they have an interest 
 common to the East and to the West. The amount of their contributions to the public 
 pmrse, will prevent them from embarking in what we consider the wild and extrava- 
 gant schemes of the West. Their distance from market, and the value of their pro- 
 
756 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ducts, make it necessary for them to construct roads, and improve the navigation of 
 their streams. Single-handed, they can do nothing. They can control the East, 
 only by uniting with the West. They will, therefore, necessarily be led to unite with 
 the West in a moderate system of improvement, alike beneficial to every part of the 
 State. 
 
 Sir, you have the best, the only safe guaranty against the abuse of the power con- 
 fided to them — the guaranty of their interest. I have thought it proper to lay before 
 the Convention what I consider the advantages of the scheme of the gentleman from 
 Albemarle, before I examine that of my friend from Richmond county, which is in- 
 tended as an appendage to it. Permit me now. Sir, to call the attention of the Con- 
 vention to that scheme. His first resolution proposes, that out of thirty-two Senators, 
 thirteen shall be assigned to the country West of the Blue Ridge, and nineteen East; 
 that this apportionment shall be permanent. All the objections urged against the 
 scheme of the gentleman from Albemarle, apply to this feature of that now under 
 examination. The rule of future apportionment, which is proposed for the House 
 of Delegates, will either increase the preponderance of the East in that House, leave 
 things as they are, or transfer the preponderance in that House to the West. If it 
 operates no material change, it will render the plan to which it is to be appended, in 
 no respect better. If it increases the preponderance of the East, it will increase the 
 discontent of the West. If it transfers the preponderance to the West, it will intro- 
 duce the elements of discord into the Halls of Legislation, and prove fatal to the re- 
 pose of the State, and ultimately wrest from the East the protection which is proposed 
 to be given by the permanent Senate. 
 
 Upon what is this proposed rule of future apportionment founded ? It is not founded 
 on population, nor wealth, nor taxation. It is said to be based upon land. Will its 
 operation be effected by the quantity of land in the several counties ? No. On the 
 value ? No. By the taxes paid on land No. What then? Why, it will depend 
 on the number of resident freeholders owning freeholds worth twenty-five dollars. 
 In other words, the number of Representatives v/hich a county will be entitled to, 
 will depend on the number of divisions of the value of twenty-five dollars and up- 
 wards into which accident may have cut up its territory, and the tenure by which 
 those divisions may happen to be held. They will bear no proportion to its popula- 
 tion, black or white — none to the extent or value of its territory, nor to the taxes paid 
 by its inhabitants. It will depend on circumstances purely adventitious. Sir, such 
 a scheme is at war with all former notions of Representative Government, and if ap- 
 plied in practice, be the most variable in its results of any that has ever yet been 
 dreamed of. In support of these remarks, let me ask the attention to a survey of a 
 few of the counties in the different sections of the State. If we compare Western 
 counties with the Valley counties, and with each other. Eastern counties with Wes- 
 tern counties, and with each other, we shall find the results equally variable and un- 
 satisfactory. We are furnished by the Auditor with a statement, shewing the number 
 of persons charged with tax on lands, in parcels not less than twenty-five acres, in 
 the several counties, and in lots and parts of lots, in the several cities and towns. 
 Their value is not stated, but I learn from a gentleman in my eye, (Mr. Joynes,) that 
 he has examined the commissioners' books, and the number which falls short of the 
 value of twenty-five dollars, is so inconsiderable, as not to be worth notice. Those 
 of less than twenty-five acres, and of the value of twenty dollars, will probably not 
 materially vary the result. From that document it appears, that the county of Ka- 
 nawha, with a white population of 7,593, and 1,527 slaves, and paying a tax of 
 $ 1,735, has but 615 freeholders ; whilst the county of Cabell, with only 4,772 whites, 
 485 slaves, and paying a tax of $ 934, has 804 freeholders. The county of Randolph, 
 with 4,372 whites, 234 slaves, and paynig a tax of $614, has 978 freeholders; while 
 Ohio, with 15,588 whites, 274 slaves, and paying $ 3,438, has 1,026 freeholders. The 
 county of Jefferson, with 10,327 whites, 4,248 slaves, and paying ^5,778, has 856 
 freeholders; whilst Randolph, with less tlaan half the white population, about a twen- 
 tieth part of the slaves, paying one-ninth of the taxes of Jefferson, has 976 free- 
 holders. Morgan, with less than one-fourth as many whites, one-thirtieth as many 
 slaves, and paying one-tenth as much tax as Jefferson, has nearly half as many free- 
 holders. The county of Campbell, including the town of Lynchburg, has 10,362 
 whites, 9,751 slaves, pays $9,771 in taxes, and has about 1,400 freeholders. Wood, 
 with half the white population, one-fifteenth of the slaves, and paying one-tenth of 
 the taxes of Campbell, has 1,054 freeholders. 
 
 The county of Fauquier, with 13,226 whites, 11,301 slaves, and paying $ 8,317, 
 has 1,123 freeholders. The neighbouring county of Culpeper, with 11,166 whites, 
 9,226 slaves, and paying .f 6,585, has 1,433 freeholders. And the county of Patrick, 
 with about one-third as many whites, one-eighth as many slaves, and paying one- 
 ninth as much tax as Fauquier, has 944 freeholders. Jefferson, with 10,357 whites, 
 4,248 slaves, and paying $ 5,776, has 856 freeholders. Princess Anne, with 5,382 
 whites, 3,944 slaves, and paying $ 2,754, has 1,047 freeholders. It is unnecessary to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION 
 
 757 
 
 pursue the comparison farther. Before quitting the subject, however. I beg leave to 
 call the attention of the House to the pecuhar condition of the country West of the 
 Alleghanv. and the materials which were afloat for the manufacture of fteeholds, 
 real and fictitious. 
 
 Mr. President. — It is not for the purpc-se of institutiug any invidious comparison 
 between the East and the West, that I invite this esamination. I judge of men on 
 the same principles, whether they be planted on the plains of the East, or amidst the 
 mountains of the West. It is our duty to guard against the evil tendencies of our 
 nature. 
 
 We are taught by the lessons of Divine Wisdom, to pray that we be not led into 
 temptation. 
 
 The county of Kanawha contains, accordicg to Eoye"s Map. 1.337.600 acres. There 
 are assessed for the payment of taxes in that ccnanty, 2.990.566 acres of land. The 
 countv of Lee. by the same Map. contains 327.650 acres. There are assessed for the 
 payment of taxes in that county. 1,510.5.57 acres. E.andolph contains by the Map, 
 1,319,040 acres. 1,639,331 acres are entered on the commissioners' books. B-usseU 
 contains 576,810 acres. 1,265,275 acres are assessed. The county of Scott contains 
 399,360 acres. 609,644 axe assessed. Tyler contains 547,200 acres. 935.517 acres 
 are entered on the books of the assessors. The lands in this region, to use a familiar 
 phrase, are shingled with patents. Tlie quantity of land in these six coTinties alone, 
 according to the 3Iap, is 5,207.650 acres. The quantity on the commissioners' books, 
 is 8,^1,456, mEiking an excess of 3,053. :^06 acres of land patented and classed, over 
 and above actual acres of the counties. We have been told, both in and out of this 
 Honse, that for the mere purpose of turning a county election, freeholds have been 
 manufactured by the hundred out of the wild lands of this mountain region. The 
 pages of your statute book shew us. that it has been deemed necessary to enact laws 
 to prevent frauds of this character in all parts of the State. If such frauds are com- 
 mitted for tlie trivial purpose of electing a member of the House of Delegates, what 
 mav we not expect when they are to decide the contest for power between the East 
 and West .- 
 
 3tlr. President. — The best rejection which 1 have been able to bestow on this sub- 
 ject, has confirmed me in the opinion, that in the existing state of things, it is best to 
 adopt the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, and leave the future to take care of 
 itself. I consider it a happy feature in that plan, that it does not look to the future. 
 I feel well assured, that any attempt to amend it with that view, can onlv serve to 
 divide and distract us. 'So body of men can ever be in a worse temper to perform 
 that important task, than we are. The people cannot well be in a more infiaraed 
 state. I trust and believe, that after those heats have had time to subside, the people 
 will be satisfied. The knowledge, that the present arrangement is unchangeable, ex- 
 cept by a revolutionary movement of the people, will go far to preserve us in quiet. 
 If the House shall diner with me in opinion on this point, and determine to adopt 
 some rule for the future, I think it perfectly clear, that the plan of my fi-iend from 
 E.ichmond coxmty, should not furnish that rule. 
 
 Mr. Cooke insisted that most of the objections of 3Ir. Scott were founded on a Eiis- 
 apprehension of the meaning of the proposition which contemplated not all. fi-ee- 
 holders, male, female, minors. &c.. but only such freeholders as were entitled to vote : 
 and he sugge-sted to Mr. 2\eaie a modification of his amendment, so as to avoid am- 
 biguity on this subject. 
 
 Mr. Xeale accepted the modification. 
 
 Mr. Scott insisted that all the objections he had urged, apphed still and. even with 
 additional force. 
 
 After some farther remarks by way of explanation from Mr. JNTeale, 
 
 ^Ir. M'Coy declaring himself fi-iendly to the general principles of the proposition, 
 wished to see it modined and extended to the Senate. He accordingly moved to 
 amend it so as to read : 
 
 ■• Resolved. That the rule to re-apportion representation in the Senate and House of 
 Delegates shall be upon the resident freeholders of the Commonwealth." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said he had reason to beheve that in this shape tiie proposition 
 would be acceptable to some gentlemen from the EcLstem part of the Slate, provided 
 it was so modified as to require not constructive but actual possession of the freehold. 
 
 The question then being about to be put on 3Ir. M' Coy's amendment to the amend- 
 ment, 
 
 When ISIr. Marshall rose, and enquired of the Chair, whether it would not be in 
 order to move to lay the resolution and amendment on the table.' 
 Being answered in the affirmative by the Chair. 
 
 He said he shoiild make that motion. 3Ir. M. observed, that he should be 0-reatly 
 reheved, if he thought with the gentleman fi-om Fauquier, that the vexed question of 
 representation, had been settled to the extent that gentleman seemed to suppose, and 
 that the plan which went no farther than a present apportionment, had received the 
 
758 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 support of so decided a majority, and as he believed would continue to receive it. It 
 would remove much of the difficulty which attached to the general subject, and would 
 seem to convey the assurance, that the body would be able yet to agree upon some- 
 thing. He did not, at this time, feel as if this had been so far settled. The vote in 
 favour of the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle — (and to which he presumed the 
 gentleman from Fauquier alluded) — had been given, while another proposition, pro- 
 viding for future apportionment, was still before the House. The gentleman seemed 
 to take that vote as an expression of the opinion of a very decided majority, that 
 there should be no future apportionment provided for : but he did not so consider it. 
 And when the proposition of the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur,) was 
 afterwards voted out, he considered that, not as a vote, declaring that the Convention 
 would lay down no plan for future apportionment, but only as rejecting that particu- 
 lar form of it. No vote whatever, as he understood, had yet been given, directly on 
 that point; nor had the plan, proposed by tlie Legislative Committee itself, yet been 
 rejected by the Convention. 
 
 The question, in relation to a future apportionment of representation, was, there- 
 fore, yet undetermined. And he could not say, that any proposition, containing a 
 proposal on that subject, would certainly be rejected by the House, 
 
 While that question remained open, he felt great difficulty in saying how the 
 House might vote on the present proposition, should some plan for future apportion- 
 ment be finally agreed upon. Should such plan be adopted, it must of course be 
 looked to in all other measures on the general subject ; but if it was to be taken as 
 certain, that no plan for the future was to be admitted, then the House could act upon 
 that knowledge. He had no such knowledge, and could not act upon it. He did 
 not know but he might prefer the present proposition to any which had been offered, 
 if a plan was to be agreed upon respecting the future : but if none was to be agreed 
 to, then he might vote against this as a present arrangement. In the one case he had 
 to compare one plan for the future, with another plan for the future, and to choose 
 between them: but in the other case, he had to choose between a proposition for fu- 
 ture apportionment, and rising without doing any thing. He should act very differ- 
 iently in the one case from what he should in the other. It was impossible to look 
 without extreme reluctance, and extreme mortification and apprehension to the rising 
 •of the Convention without having been able to effect any thing. It behoves them 
 all to consider the situation in which they were placed. The eyes of the world, (that 
 <was, of so nmch of the world as cared for matters of this kind,) were turned in a 
 •considerable degree toward that Convention. The question whether men were capa- 
 ble of framing a form of Government for themselves in some measure depended for 
 its solution upon the decisions of that body : certainly the general opinion on that 
 question must be affected by them. But were the eyes of the Union alone fixed upon 
 them, it was a serious subject of reflection. Those eyes looked at them with great 
 •solicitude. The eyes of Virginia with an anxiety still greater, as was manifest from 
 her. having placed in this body men in whom she had long reposed her utmost confi- 
 dence ; and which must be the result, should such a body rise and do nothing. It 
 <;ould not be because there was nothing to do. There are none who pretended to say 
 that — all admitted that great changes, or at least considerable changes might be made 
 in the Constitution for the better. All seemed to think there was much to do. If 
 they rose, therefore, having done nothing, it would be manifest and undeniable that 
 it was because they were unable to agree on any thing. How humiliating ! He re- 
 peated, therefore, that if the question were put to him, " Shall the Convention rise 
 without adopting any thing, or shall it adopt any plan of future apportionment V he 
 should be very differently situated from what he would be if asked " whether this 
 plan or that plan of future apportionment were to be preferred V 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he had nothing to do with what disposition the House might 
 make of the question; but he rose as one individual, the humblest member of the 
 body, solemnly to deny that he ever had admitted, or ever could admit that the Gov- 
 ernment of Virginia as at present existing, required great changes. He admitted 
 that it might need some very small" cYmnges — and had so declared more than once. 
 He had now risen to take himself out of the general and sweeping assertion of the 
 gentleman who had just taken his seat. He had never, at any time, made the ad- 
 mission which the gentleman had ascribed to all the members of the body. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said he must have misunderstood the gentleman from Charlotte — and 
 he certainly had misunderstood him, as to the meaning of the terms great and small. 
 He should not have ventured to include that gentleman in any general declaration, 
 unless he had understood him as so expressing himself. The gentleman had said he 
 was content to strike off one-half the number of the Legislature : he had also said 
 that he was content to make changes, which he had not defined in the Judicial De- 
 partment. Now, said Mr. M., I confess that when I said there was no gentleman 
 who did not admit that great, or at least considerable changes ought to be made in 
 the Constitution, I did understand the gentleman from Charlotte, as having proposed 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 759 
 
 very considerable changes. If he did not so understand them, then I attached to the 
 changes an importance which he did not. I have no doubt there is no member of 
 the body unwilHng to make what I consider very considerable changes in the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he rose to express his concurrence with the gentleman from Rich- 
 mond, in the views he had expressed, and to confirm them, if indeed they needed 
 any confirmation, by the statement of two facts, one of which had occurred on that 
 day, the other on the Saturday week previous. The vote had been given that day on 
 the question, whether they should endeavour to fix upon some future arrangement as 
 to the basis of P»,epresentation, and which had been expressly taken as a test question^ 
 And on Saturday week the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson,) had declared 
 that while he should vote in favour of the proposition of the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle as a present arrangement, he was not to be considered as being precluded from 
 voting afterward in favour of a plan for future apportionment. As well as he recol- 
 lected, the gentleman over the way, (Mr. Stuart,) had voted with the gentleman from 
 Augusta. Mr. M. said, he could not regard the question of the basis as settled : if it 
 was settled, it had been settled on no principle at all ; or if any, it was on the white 
 population of 1820 : could any one believe that after the lapse of nine years the same 
 basis existed at this day 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that nothing but the high respectability of the gentleman from 
 Richmond, and the great weight justly attached both there and elsewhere to whatever 
 he might say, could have induced him to have risen, to have taken himself out of the 
 general and sweeping remark, that gentleman had made. He wished to stand rectus 
 in Curia. Whether his having been willing to reduce the number of the House of 
 Delegates to one-half of what it now stood at, was consenting to a great alteration in 
 the Constitution or not, it certainly involved no change in the princijjles of the Con- 
 stitution. For, that gentleman was too good a reasoner, and too good a mathematician 
 not to know that if from equals, equals be taken, the results will still be equal.. So as; 
 to reducing the Executive Council to one half its present number, it still left that 
 body in its full vigour, and bearing the same relation to the Governor and holding- 
 the same place in the Government of the State, as it now did. 
 
 There was, however, another point in respect to which he had been and still was 
 willing to change the jninciple of the Constitution — he meant that principle of it, 
 which related to the tenure of the Judge's office. As God shall judge me, said Mr» 
 R., I do believe that if the pillars of the Constitution are to give way and the whole 
 edifice to come down, it is by the Sampsons of the Judiciary : Sampsons omnipotent 
 for mischief, but impotent as to good. I see with pain that the clause proposed to be 
 stricken out, is still retained. The complaint of the people is, that the Judges are all 
 willing to receive their salaries, but not to perform their duties — and that the hire is 
 as worthy of the labourer as the labourer is worthy of his hire. It is in this point 
 only, that I am willing to change the principle of the Constitution. I was as muck 
 wedded, shall I say ? What shall I say As much higotted to the independence of the 
 Judiciary as man ever was — but the Judges themselves have forced open my eyes — 
 and while I hold him to be a bigot in politics, who, after an evil has been shewn to 
 exist, and to be a great evil, and the remedy for it has been proved to be effectual, 
 will still refuse to apply the remedy, so he is the wildest and most reckless of inno- 
 vators who acts on the converse of the principle, and adopts the proposition I ob- 
 ject to. 
 
 Mr. Giles rose to explain to the worthy gentleman from Richmond the principles- 
 he had contended for himself. He was as content to avoid innovations as any mem- 
 ber of the Convention. But he had said he was w^illing to go into them to a certain 
 extent: and the question, whether that was a small or a great extent, must depend ort 
 the ideas gentlemen might entertain as to the importance of the changes he was willing 
 to make. 
 
 He had been willing to commence with a modification, but not with the destruction 
 of the Executive Council. He was prepared to lessen the number of that body. He 
 had also been willing to reduce the number of the members of the Assembly — though 
 on that point he vv^as not so solicitous as some. He also desired to see some changes in 
 the Judicial Department. But what he had risen to remark was, that he htid jjledged 
 himself to go farther than this, if thereby he could produce any approach to unanimity. 
 
 He had very early given this deliberate and well considered intimation. But he 
 hoped and trusted that he should not be urged to go to lengths which were improper. 
 Let us not, said Mr. G. tear down the noble fabric, lest, after all, we should go home 
 and do nothing more. He was alarmed at that idea : let them be cautious lest they 
 pushed their reforms to the destruction of the fundamental merits of the Constitution. 
 Yet, as he had once before said, there was a peculiar and to him a very great consola- 
 tion in the reflection, that if they should have done nothing, they would thereby 
 have done a great deal : they would have refused to pull down that which had ap- 
 peared excellent to better judges than they seemed to be. 
 
760 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 He was not so much alarmed at the idea of doing nothing as some gentlemen were : 
 and they ought not to let that fear carry them too far. He concluded by declaring 
 that he felt a strong and an increasing spirit of conciliation ; which he hoped would 
 be reciprocated by others. He should vote to lay the resolution and amendment on 
 the table for farther consideration. 
 
 iVIr. Coalter said, that he was one of that Judiciary against whom it had been said 
 that they were willing to receive their salaries, but not to labour for them. He rose 
 to state that he was one of the men of tJiat Judiciary against whom that charge could 
 not be made good. 
 
 [Mr. Randolph here interposed and said, he believed there was a majority of them 
 in that situation.] 
 
 Mr. Coalter resumed. The charge ought to rest rather on the Legislature than on 
 the Judiciary. He had long wished and sought to be brought before the Legislative 
 body with his papers. He had been a Judge of the Court of Appeals now for ten 
 years. During a great part of that time he had risen regularly at three o'clock in the 
 morning and worked till night: and during the residue he had worked from Court 
 hours till three in the morning, (as long as he could see any light in the chambers of 
 the representatives, who were no doubt busy in their rooms on the public concerns.) 
 He had worked every Sunday : the hardest on that day : and he had picked out the 
 causes of the widow and the orphan, because he considered that as God's work. The 
 whole Legislature, with a committee as an overseer, never should have driven him 
 to that : but he saw that ruin was likely to ensue from bad legislation, and he had vo- 
 lunteered to do what no man should have compelled him to attempt. The Legisla- 
 ture sent to the Court of Appeals matters on which he would get better judges on 
 Carey street than he was. He knew nothing of book-keeping. The utmost extent 
 of his skill in that way was to charge fifteen shillings on his book for a fee, and credit it 
 if ever he chanced to get the money. They sent there cases which engrossed three- 
 fourths of the time of the Court, in which there was no question of law involved : 
 matters of fact to be ascertained. One case had been sent there by the Legislature, 
 the decision of which produced a greater delay of the Judicial business of the Com- 
 monwealth, than if the doors of the Court of Appeals had been shut up for twelve 
 months; and yet all the law points involved, would not have occupied the Court thirty 
 minutes. A stout negro man could not carry his papers from one Judge's chamber 
 to another, and he had to use a wheelbarrow for the purpose; and not a point of law 
 in the matter. He thanked gentlemen -for relieving that Court from such outrage as 
 this ; for, he understood they were going to be relieved by the Legislature : the busi- 
 ness was going to the Superior Court of each county, where it was likely to sleep 
 forever. There had been a great cry against the Judiciary : but if they would give 
 them back the good old Circuit Court system, and send up the law questions to the 
 Court of Appeals, they would be able to discharge the whole of their duty in four 
 months of every year. Mr. C. said he could not, and would not sit there, and liave 
 that body, of which he was a member, openly trampled upon. He had long been anx- 
 ious, that the Legislature should send for him to their bar. He was willing to receive 
 liis salary ; but he was also willing to do four times the work for which it was intended 
 to be a compensation. He had all the papers still by him, ready to produce, from the 
 first day he went upon the bench, and he defied any man to shew that he had not done 
 his duty. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, he was at a loss to understand the object of the gentleman from 
 Richmond, (Mr. Marshall,) in wishing to lay this subject on the table. If the gentle- 
 man desired farther time to consider it, he was most willing to accord it to him. Or 
 if it was to have any question thereby settled, he should not object to it ; but it could 
 lead to the settlement of nothing, so far as he could perceive. If the worthy gentle- 
 man had any proposition of his own to offer, Mr. F. would listen to it with ail plea- 
 sure. But the moment the question should be finally settled, that there was to be no 
 principle of future apportionment in the new Constitution, that moment his mind 
 would be made up to vote against any Constitution that might be agreed upon. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, that nothing was more obvious than that the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Richmond county, (Mr. Neale,) would not at present receive the 
 support of any part of the House. He thought it was not difficult for any one to say 
 that it would be decided in the negative. Now, he was not willing it should be nega- 
 tived until he should better know what would be the future course of the Convention ; 
 he wished it to he on the table until that could be determined. If obliged to vote 
 now, he should vote against it: at a future moment he might be willing to vote in its 
 favour, 
 
 Mr. Scott said, he was sure he could not have been misunderstood when he had 
 said that he considered the question as to a basis for both Houses as settled. He knew 
 the House had not given any direct vote upon the naked question, whether tJiere 
 should be any future apportionment or not. But lie considered the question as to an 
 arrangement for present apportionment as having been settled directly, and the other 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVE.NTION. 
 
 761 
 
 substantially and in effect : because the deliberations of the House had been directed 
 to both. Scheme after scheme for future apportionment had been offered ajid as regu- 
 larly failed ; and it had appeared to him that any attempt to settle a rule for the future 
 must prove abortive ; and therefore he thought the question substantially settled. 
 
 He was glad to hear liis worthy friend from Richmond say that if they stopped at 
 present apportionmentj he should still consider them as having done something. He 
 should deplore an adjournment of the Convention vdthout doing any thing ; and would 
 be williug to take up this subject, did he not fear the evils of a prolonged and useless 
 debate. He would appeal to the venerable gentleman from Pdchmond himself, whe- 
 ther much tune had not been lost already in fruitless efforts on this subject. 
 
 Mr. Powell said, that if the object of the very wortliy gentleman from Richmond, 
 in makmg his motion, was to give himself time for further consideration, he should 
 cheerfully vote for it; but that object was disclaimed by tlie gentleman, and he feit 
 free from any obhgation on that score. If the gentleman had any object in view that 
 would be gained, he would vote for the motion ; but there was no other scheme for fu- 
 ture apportionment proposed. Why then should tliis be laid upon the table .' to get 
 another and a better plan If so, he would gladly assent to the motion. But if it were 
 laid on the table now, it would be caUed up to-morrow, and all the effect would be a 
 day"s delay. Or, did the gentleman wish it to he on the table till the Special Commit- 
 tee should be appointed to draught the Constitution, and then consider it afterwards 
 If so, the sooner the Committee was appointed, the better. But believing the only 
 effect would be delay, he felt strongly inclined to vote against the motion. He was 
 willing to remain upon the ground twelve months longer, if he saw the least rational 
 hope of forming a Constitution v\'hich would be acceptable to the people ; but believing 
 that any Constitution based upon the principle of the gentleman from Albemarle, 
 would be rejected by the people, he was himself determined to vote against any which 
 should have this principle within it. 
 
 3Ir. Leigh said, he should prefer tlie plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, taken 
 alone, to the same with any plan appended to it for futine apportionment, except two, 
 both of wliich had been rejected. If he could add either the plan of the Federal num- 
 ber, or of the mixed basis (which was nearly the same thing.) he should prefer it: or 
 if the Legislature was to be left at hberty to form new counties, and thus increase the 
 representation of the West, as its population should grow, and be allowed to do the 
 same to other counties on the same principle, according to any fair and just scheme, 
 he was wilhng to support the measure. As to uniting tlie present amendment to the 
 plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, he was utterly opposed to it; the results to 
 every part of the Commonwealth would be highly injurious, and indeed some of the 
 oddest and most exti-aordinary that could welTbe imagined. As he was resolved to 
 vote against the resolution, he could not vote to lay it on the table. ?yo future exam- 
 ination of the proposition could remove, but would, on the contrary, only confirm the 
 objections he felt. The plan had not been offered on its own merits, but in connec- 
 tion with two other schemes which had been offered at the same time ;. and the gen- 
 tleman from Frederick, pir. Cooke.) had said that he would vote with them on the 
 question of the election of Governor, as part of the plan, while he had himself offered 
 a proposition in relation to the Judiciary, and another had been proposed by the gen- 
 tleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Henderson*!) and these were the considerations which had 
 been urged to induce them to vote for the proposition. Mr. L. said lie had weighed 
 these propositions, and found nothing in them which induced him to accept of the 
 plan now offered. Taking voters of any kind would lead to the strangest results that 
 could be conceived. The only defect in the representation had occurred in the Valley 
 and in tlie Middle country; and yet this scheme took three from the Valley. Mr. L. 
 said, he considered it as no part of his duty to take care of the interests of the Valley, 
 and he doubted, exceedingh-, if gentlemen from that part of the State would be wil- 
 ling to receive him as a co-adjutor ; he knew they regarded him with infinite distrust, 
 yet he would take the hberty to declare that he was un-^nlhiiof to do injustice to that 
 part of the Commonwealth, and being assured such would be the result, he could not 
 but oppose the proposition. It was true, the scheme was not to go into effect till 
 1635 — but in other words, this was tempting the Vrest, with all the raw material of 
 freeholders, that is, free wliite citizens and vacant lands, to manufacture freeholders, 
 and thus manufacture power, until that p^iod should arrive. He meant to make no 
 charge of corruption, or to hnpute to the West any vice of which he was not himself 
 conscious : but there was no man's virtue which he would trust under such circum- 
 stances : nor would he ask others to trast him in the like case. 
 
 Mr. L. concluded by saying, that (if it vvould not be construed into disrespect to 
 the venerable gentleman from Pdchmond.) he would enquire of the Chair, whether a 
 motion to postpone indefinitely, would not take precedence of the motion to lay on 
 the table .' But if such a motion should be held to imply the least possible want of 
 respect to the feehngs of the worthy gentleman from P.ichmoud, he should not 
 make it. 
 
 96 
 
762 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The Chair replied, that according to the rules of the House of Representatives, 
 there was a precedence among privileged questions, but not by the House of Dele- 
 gates ; and therefore, the motion for indefinite postponement, would not be entitled to 
 precedence. 
 
 Mr. Marshall consented to withdraw his motion. And thereupon, 
 Mr. Leigh moved that the subject be indefinitely postponed. 
 
 Mr. Naylor opposed the motion. So long as a ray of hope remained, he should 
 vote against it. Should the Convention form a Constitution, without any principle 
 of future apportionment, it would prove an abortion. 
 
 The Chair said, that the indefinite postponement could only affect the proposition 
 before the House, and would leave the subject still open. 
 
 Mr. Neale now withdrew his amendment. 
 
 After two motions had been made and successively withdrawn, for considering other 
 subjects, 
 
 Mr. Cooke moved the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That it is expedient that some rule or principle should be adopted for 
 the future apportionment of representation among the people and throughout the Com- 
 monwealth of Virginia." 
 
 Mr. C. said, it was worse than idle to consume time on propositions for future ap- 
 portionment, if a majority of the House were resolved that no such plan should go 
 into the Constitution. In order to test the sense of the House on that question, he 
 had made his motion in its present form. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend it by adding " provided such rule shall meet the appro- 
 bation of a large majority of this Committee." 
 
 The debate on this question was desultory in its character, and conducted by 
 Messrs. Scott, Claytor, Nicholas, Randolph, Cooke and Stanard } and resulted in the 
 following vote, and decided by — Ayes 51, Noes 45. 
 
 After an ineffectual attempt to take up the Judiciary report, 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, December 29, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Douglas, of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, that he had some days since given notice, that he should move 
 a re-consideration of the vote, which placed the election of Governor in the hands of 
 the people ; but it would be recollected, that such a motion formed part of a plan, in 
 which several measures were to be united — one of which consisted of the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Richmond county, (Mr. Neale.) That amendment having 
 been withdrawn, and the plan, in consequence, not acted upon, he now declined 
 making the motion he had formerly intended. 
 
 Mr. Cooke then moved, that the Convention take up the report of the Committee 
 on the Judiciary. 
 
 The motion having been agreed to, the first resolution of that Committee was then 
 read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Judicial power shall be vested in a Court of Appeals, in such 
 Inferior Courts as the Legislature shall from time to time ordain and establish, and in 
 the County Courts. The j.urisdiction of these tribunals shall be regulated by law. 
 The Judges of the Court of Appeals, and of the Inferior Courts, shall hold their 
 offices during good behaviour, or until removed in the manner prescribed in this Con- 
 stitution ; and shall at the same time hold no other office, appointment or public trust; 
 and the acceptance thereof by either of them, shall vacate his Judicial office. No 
 modification or abolition of any Court, shall be construed to deprive any Judge thereof 
 of his office ; but such Judge shall perform any Judicial duties which the Legislature 
 shall assign him." 
 
 Mr. Cabell moved to amend the resolution, by adding at the end of it the following 
 words : but if no Judicial duties shall be assigned to him by the Legislature, he shall 
 receive no salary in virtue of said office." 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, that if the amendment had declared, that if there were no Judi- 
 cial duty, which the Legislature could assign to the Judge, none which he could per- 
 form, that then he should receive no salary, he should feel no objection to its adop- 
 tion ; but, it was impossible not to see, that the amendment in its present form, revived 
 the old question, as to the dependence of the continuance of a Judge's office, on the 
 will of the Legislature. Whenever it should be the will of the Legislature to take 
 away the employment of a Judge, by abolishing the court in which he served, and to 
 take away his support, by assigning him no other dutieSj it was perfectly in their power 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 763 
 
 to do so. If the amendment had required no more, than that a Judge should receive 
 no saiarT; when there were no Judicicii duties to be done, which might be assigned to 
 him, he' should be content: but. if it rested on the will of the Legislature, to assign 
 him any duties or not. undoubtedlr, the tenure of such a Judge's office, was a tenure 
 during pleasure merely. 
 
 3Ir. Cabell said, he should not be so presnraptuous, as to oppose himself in argu- 
 ment to the venerable gentleman from Richmond : nor was it necessary for him to 
 do so. He had been induced to offer the amendment, by a sacred regard to his duty 
 to his constituents ; and he was perfectly confident, that if the Constitution was even- 
 tually to contain such a feature in it as the first resolution contained, and which it 
 was the object of his amendment to strike out, it would not be voted for by thirty 
 men in all the District from which he came. They wfttfld regard such a clause as 
 evincing an attempt to establish a band of civil pensioners: and he was well assured 
 they never would tolerate it. So long as an officer performed his duties, they were 
 very willing he should receive his salary : but when, for any cause, physical or moral, 
 that officer should be unable to perform the duty he had covenanted to do, they would 
 not consent that he should receive the emoluments of office. Mr. C. insisted, that 
 his amendment in no degree attacked the independence of the Judiciary Department. 
 He should certainly be the last man in that Assembly, who would offer to do any thing 
 that would have such a tendency. But, he tliought if the Judiciary DepEirtment was 
 secure, they who presided in it must be sufficiently so. When the public interest 
 should require the abontion of a court, the Legislative body, coming from all parts of 
 the Commonwealth, and being acquainted with the interests and feelings of the whole 
 State, would soon discover the necessity of the case, and would abolish it accordingly. 
 And when a Judge was discharged from the necessity of performing any work, he 
 could not conceive that he was entitled to receive his salary? The idea that his office 
 remained after his court was abolished, was so very metaphysical, that he was really 
 unable to comprehend it. He had always presumed that the office of a Judge was 
 incidental to the court of which he was a Judge, and when the court was abolished, 
 it fell of course : that the office of a Judge ceased as soon as the things he was to 
 judge of, were withdrawn. But, he should not attempt to pursue the argument, or 
 amplify the ideas he had suggested. 
 
 Mr. Clavtor asked, that the question should be taken by ayes and noes, and they 
 were ordered by the House. 
 
 Mjt. Madison said he availed himself of the remark of the gentleman from Rich- 
 mond, to enqmre whether it would not be proper to vary the amendment, so as to say, 
 that if there were no duties properly assignable to the Judge by the Legislature, that 
 then he should receive no salary. He believed this would meet the distinction which 
 the gentleman had sugcfested ; and if no body else moved it as an amendment, he 
 would himself do so. 
 
 !Mr. 31. accordingly moved as an amendment to the amendment of 3Ir. Cabell, to 
 strike out the words •'• if no duty shall be assiarned him," and insert in hen thereof, 
 ••'if there shall be no duties properly assignable^to him." 
 
 Mr. Johnson rose to enquire, how, should the amendment be adopted, it was to be 
 determined whether there were any duties thus '-properly assignable," or not.' If 
 the Legislature should ever be induced to abolish a court with a view to get rid of a 
 Judge, and then it was to be referred to the same body to say, whether there were 
 any duties properly assignable to him, on the performance of which his salary was to 
 be continued, it was not possible there could be any other than one decision of the 
 question. The Legislature, which had taken the first step in abohshincr his court, 
 would assuredly cake the second, and declare there were no duties which it could with 
 propriety assign to him. In such a case, there was no umpire between the parties, 
 and thus the amendment would leave the case just where it was. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that the gentleman from Augusta looked only to the rare and 
 very extreme case, where a court should be abolished for the sake of disposing of an 
 obnoxious Judge ; but he seemed to forget that it might often happen, that that body 
 might abcUsh a court lona f.de, because it was useless, and could be dispensed with. 
 He hoped the amendment of the gentleman from Orange would prevail. 
 
 3Ir. Nicholas opposed the amendment of Mr. Cabell, as putting the Judge at the 
 mercy of the Legislature. It could rarely happen, that tlie modification of a court 
 would render the services of the existincr Judofes unnecessary : and if there even 
 were one or two surplus Judges, to maintain these would be far better than putting 
 the whole corps into the power of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, he wished to submit to the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Madi- 
 son.) for whose opinion he need not say that he entertained a very profound respect, 
 some reasons which he thought would satisfy him that it was morally impossible such 
 a state of things could occur, in which there should be no Judicial duties, which could 
 with propriety be assigned to a Judge thrown out of employment by a modification 
 or abolition of one of the courts. Supposing such Judge to belong to the Court of 
 
764 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIONa 
 
 Appeals, or to the Inferior Courts between that Court and the County Courts, was it 
 possible sucli a state of things could arise, in which there would be no duties pro- 
 perly assignable to either? 1st, Take the Court of Appeals. When could the case 
 occur, when there should be no Court of Appeals ? Would the original courts ever 
 be made final as well as original ? Would any man leave that discretionary with any 
 body whatever ? Would any gentleman say, there should be no Court of Appeals ? 
 That there should be as many expositions of law as there were Inferior Courts ? 
 There were upwards of one hundred Inferior Courts in Virginia. Would any man 
 say, there ought to be an hundred and odd constructions of law in the Common- 
 wealth ? He was satisfied there was none who would say so. There must be then a 
 Court of Appeals. And if so, could the time ever come, when there would be no 
 Judicial business for the Cburt of Appeals ? Modify that court as they pleased, there 
 must be appellate duties to perform. 
 
 Then as to the Inferior Courts : He prayed gentlemen to consider what he had at- 
 tempted over and over to impress upon their attention, that the question would no 
 longer occur as to a man who had been commissioned as the Judge of a particular 
 court. Should the resolution be agreed to as it now stood, Judges could be commis- 
 sioned as Judges of the Inferior Courts of the Commonwealth, and their commission 
 would extend to every court between the Court of Appeals and the County Courts — 
 courts which exercised among them all the criminal jurisdiction of the country, and 
 all of the civil too, which did not come before the County Courts. Could this busi- 
 ness ever cease Could the time ever arrive, when there would be no such duty to 
 perform No gentleman could loolt at the dockets of these courts, and possibly think 
 that there ever could occur such a state of things as was provided for by the last 
 amendment. That amendment stated an impossible case — a case where there should 
 be no controversies between man and man, and no crimes committed against society. 
 It stated a case that could not happen — and would the Convention encounter the real 
 hazard of putting almost every Judge in the Commonwealth in the power of the Le- 
 gislature, lor the sake of providing tor an impossible case ? He hoped not. But were 
 it even possible that such a case could arise, would it not be more wise to pay a Judge's 
 salary for a short time, than to leave it at the mere pleasure of the Legislature, to say 
 whether a Judge should retain his office or not ? But the case was impossible ; and 
 therefore, he saw no reason for adopting either of the amendments. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell said, that if it was indeed true that the amendment provided for a 
 case which never could occur, that would be a strong objection to its adoption, but he 
 confessed he was unable to see that length — on the contrary, said Mr. T., I think that 
 the case will frequently occur, and that it must be provided for. At the outset, I must 
 be permitted to repeat a suggestion I formerly threw out, and Avhicli has been over- 
 looked by the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Marshall.) The gentleman speaks of 
 the Legislature's abolishing the Court of Appeals — but that cannot be done. It is a 
 Constitutional Court — the Supreme Court of Appeals stands to Virginia in the same 
 relation as the Supreme Court of the United States stands to the Union.__ Congress 
 might as well attempt to abolisli the latter, as a Virginia House of Assembly to abolish 
 the former. You have said by your Constitution, lhat there shall be a Court of Ap- 
 peals. You can neither abolish that court nor the County Court. 
 
 The Inferior Courts are subjected to Legislative authority, and it is in them, if at 
 all, that such a measure will be attempted as has been supposed. The words in the 
 report have been literally copied from those in the Constitution of the United States ; 
 the words of which have received a settled interpretation. Suppose the case to have 
 occurred, that the Legislature has improvidently adopted a system for the Inferior 
 Courts which works badly in practice — suppose they have agreed on a system that as- 
 signs to a population of 5 or 000,000 white persons a corps of fifty or sixty Judges — 
 they become sensible of their error, and find that reformation is absolutely necessary — 
 they accordingly reform the courts, and instead of sixty Judges they resolve to have 
 but fifteen. What is to become of the remaining forty-five The amendment comes 
 in and provides for such a case. As the resolution now stands, these forty -five Judges 
 must all continue to receive their salary during life. This, if I understand it, was the 
 objection of the gentleman from Pittsylvania, (Mr. Cabell.) Would gentlemen in- 
 troduce into this Commonwealth a band of civil pensioners ? For what does a Judge 
 receive his salary ? For the performance of his Judicial duties. But when his court 
 is abolished he is no longer a Judge. He cannot be. There is no court in which he 
 can pronounce judgment. Do gentlemen mean to continue to him his salary for 
 nothing ? This is an objection which strikes the mind so strongly, that in order to 
 meet it beforehand, the resolution is made to say, that there are potential duties 
 which the Judge may at so'me future time be called upon to perform, but he must re- 
 ceive his pay in the mean while — we are to pay him now — and assign him duties 
 hereafter. The amendment of the gentleman from Pittsylvania holds a different lan- 
 guage—it says, that when he performs these duties, he shall receive his pay, but not 
 before- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 7m 
 
 But it is suggested, tliat this goes to sap the independence of the Judiciary, be- 
 cause it is possible, that the Legislature may modify or abolish a court, merely for 
 the purpose of getting rid of a Judge, and I must vote against this amendment, lest 
 the Legislature should be so mischievously inchned. as to be guilty of this unworthy 
 act. But, I ask, is there not a Scylla on one side, quite as dangerous as this Charyb- 
 dis on the other ? Is there not another consideration vrhich may operate on the Le- 
 gislature, as well as dishke to a Judge ? May there not be such a thing as partiality 
 to a Judare ? or to some other individual wholly unfit to be a Judge, but whom the 
 Legislature wants to pension ? and may they not with a view to effect this object, first 
 appoint him a Judge, and then abohsh his court ? In that case he will receive his salary 
 for life, and have no duties to perform. The case, I grant, is not a very probable one, 
 but it is quite as probable as the other. If we are to reason on tlie supposition of 
 frauds by the Leo-islature, we must take into our view, frauds of all sorts — frauds in 
 one direction as well as in another. A Legislature who would abohsh a court to get 
 rid of a Judge, would not be too good to abolish a court to pension a Judge. 
 
 I cannot concur with the venerable gentleman from Riclnnond, (3rlr. Marshall,) in 
 the other branch of liis argument. He supposes that all the Judges, except those of 
 the Court of Appeals vriLl be commissioned as •'• Judges of the Inferior Courts." I 
 do not think so. The Constitution declares, that a portion of the Judicial power of the 
 State shall reside in such Inferior Courts as the Legislature shall from time to time 
 estabhsh. When these courts shall have been thus estabhshed, and the Executive pro- 
 ceeds to fill the office of Judge, the commission of the Judge will agree with the 
 terms of the statute creating his comt. The statute wiU give a name to the court, 
 and in that name the commission of the Judge will run ] if not, we shall have a cu- 
 rious state of things. The Judges in the (Tourt of Appeals, and in the County 
 Courts, being perpetual, as Judges of Constitutional Courts, the remaining Judges, 
 will be' Judges of the Inferior Courts of Common Law: and all Judges in Chancery, 
 will also be" Judges of Inferior Courts, and both being commissioned accordiugly, it 
 will come to pass that all our Chancellors may sit as Judges of common law, and all 
 our common law Judges may sit as Chancellors, But if the terms of the resolution 
 mean, that the Legislature may establish such courts, and with such jurisdiction as 
 they see fit, the natural course of things will be, that as soon as the law has passed 
 creating any court, the Judge will be commissioned according to the title of his court. 
 He will be a Judge of the General Court, or a Judge of the District Court, or a Judge 
 of the Superior Court of Law, or a Judge of the Superior Com-t of Chancery, "if 
 the Legislature give a name to the Inferior Court, he will of course be commissioned 
 according to the specific description of that court. 
 
 Then fhe question arises, whether the amendment of the gentleman from Orano:e, 
 (Mr. Madison.) ought to be adopted or not. I oTant, that if when the Legislature 
 perceiving that the good of the commimity so requires, and the Constitution shall at 
 the same time declare, that the Judge shall receive his salary, till some other Judicial 
 office shall be provided for him. If this is the mind of the Convention, then all the 
 propositions for amendment should be rejected. But if this Convention subscribe to 
 the principle of^ — no duty, no salary — then the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Orange ought to be adopted. When you give tlie ex- Judge his new duties, tlien give 
 him his salary : but, if you assign him no duties, let him receive no compensation, 
 on the broad and general repubhcan ground of — no labour, no pay. 
 
 Mr. Stanard next addressed the Convention : 
 
 The objects proposed are these : It is contended on the one side, by those who are 
 in favour of the resolution as reported by the Judicial Committee, that it is neces.sary 
 to except the Judges from the caprices of the Legislature, and exempt them from a 
 dependence on the mere will and pleasm-e of a majority of tliat body. In maintain- 
 ing this proposition, these gentlemen do not ground themselves merely on an argu- 
 ment a priori, but on matter of fact and experience — experience of a recent date, and 
 facts which have occurred in several of the States. But for some such provision, it 
 would be in the power of a bare majority of the Legislature, mider the excitement' of 
 strong pohtical feelings, or of any other violent excitement, at any time to undermine 
 the independence of the Judiciary. They have but to repeal the law, creating a 
 court, and then to re-enact it, and aU the former Judges of that court are. of course, 
 dismissed. I enquhe, to know of the gentleman firom Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell.) 
 whether, without some such provision as is now proposed, this will not be in the 
 power of the Legislature ? whether they may not thus create places for the favourites 
 of the day ; the ready tools of a dominant faction .- Such a power, as must be most 
 manifest, is lUteriy destructive of the independence of the Judiciary. But does the 
 evil stop there .- Does not such a state of things go to make the Judges the subser- 
 vient tools of the most pernicious pui-poses r And are such purposes never enter- 
 tained by the Legislature r Have we not seen a sister State convulsed to its very 
 foundations, by questions between power and property ? between the vice and the vir- 
 tue of the State ■ And are we prepared to leave our CorLstitution and our Common 
 
766 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 wealth exposed to such tempests of faction ? Surely it is desirable to avert them if pos- 
 sible. The question is, can this be done, while we avoid other mischiefs of equal if not 
 greater magnitude ? Gentlemen may make different estimates of mischief. Accord- 
 ing to my estimation, no very serious mischief can arise to the State, even if it should 
 happen, that we have for a time a few Judges upon salary to whom no duties have 
 been assigned. Is such an evil worthy even to be named, in comparison with the evil 
 of a dependent Judiciary But the gentleman tells us, that there is an evil on the 
 other side — it is, that an unprincipled Legislature may be willing to pension their ac- 
 tive agents, by giving them an office from which they cannot be turned out by their 
 successors ; or if turned out, the salary of v/hich shall remain sure to them. I need 
 not, I will not, enquire as to the extent of such a mischief as this. If fairly weighed, 
 it must be admitted that this is a case in the very utmost extreme of improbability — 
 it is such a case as never has occurred, and never will or can occur, until the Con- 
 stitution shall have become of little value. But suppose it does occur. Suppose that 
 a faction hitherto dominant, but about to part with power, shall exercise the last mo- 
 ment of its authority, in providing for its agents, by encumbering the State with an 
 army of Judges, is there no guard provided against such a case ? - Must these use- 
 less Judges of necessity retain their office and salary Does not the eighth resolu- 
 tion give the Legislature full power to remove them ? and can there be a better cause 
 of removal, than that they had been put into office, not to serve the public, but to 
 live upon it as a band of civil pensioners? Here then is a complete remedy against 
 the evils on one side, while against those on tlie other, we are to have no remedy at 
 all. I shall, therefore, offer the following as an amendment, when the other amend- 
 ment should have been disposed of, viz : 
 
 To strike out from the word " but," in Mr. Cabell's amendment, and add these 
 words : " When a court shall be abolished and no new court substituted in its place, and 
 the duties which had been assigned the abolished court shall be transferred to other 
 courts, without providing other Judges than those belonging to such other courts, the 
 offices of the Judges of such abolished courts, may be abolished with the courts of 
 which they were Judges. And when a court shall be changed or modified, and new 
 or different duties assigned to the Judges of such courts, the commissions of such 
 Judges may, in the discretion of the Legislature, be changed to adapt it to the change 
 or modification of the courts." 
 
 Mr. S. did not consider it as indispensably necessary, but was willing it should be 
 inserted by way of explanation, to remove all difficulty as to the latter clause of the 
 first resolution. 
 
 This, said Mr. S., will leave it in the power of the Legislature, to abolish courts 
 when they become useless, while at the same time, it checks the irregular exercise of 
 their power against Judges, who, perhaps, by the very virtues of their station, may 
 have become objects of party hatred. Without this check, or something equivalent 
 to it, what is the safeguard for the Constitution ? 
 
 Mr. Scott thought the amendment would fail of its object— as a Legislature deter- 
 mined in its purpose might easily evade it by transferring the duty of the obnoxious 
 Judge to another existing court ; and afterwards at a subsequent session, organizing a 
 new court and re-transferring the duties to a new Judge. 
 
 The question being now put on Mr. Madison's amendment, it was not agreed to. 
 
 The question then recurring on the amendment of Mr. Cabell, 
 
 Mr. Stanard offered the amendment he had read. [See above.] 
 
 This amendment gave rise to a long and animated debate, in which the merits of 
 the original amendment were occasionally mixed in the discussion. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell opposed the amendment as being against other parts of Constitution, 
 which provided for the appointment of Judges. To make a man a Judge of a par- 
 ticular court by changing the form of his commission, would be inconsistent with the 
 mode the Constitution prescribed for his becoming a Judge of that court. He could 
 not conceive how a Judge as such could survive the court. 
 
 Mr. Stanard insisted that names did not alter things— and if the same duty, sub- 
 stantially, was performed, it mattered not what was the name of the court — the same 
 Judge might continue to perform it. The Legislature might require a Chancellor to 
 perform duties of Oyer and Terminer — his being called Chancellor would not prevent 
 his performing thern, and rightfully. Else, how could a Judge of the General Court 
 perform duties in the District Court ? 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Chesterfield did not think Mr. Stanard's amendment would answer 
 its intended purpose. He was opposed to the amendment of Mr. Cabell, as it went 
 in his judgment to impair the independence of the Judiciary. Yet the resolution in 
 its present form would not enable the Legislature to remove a Judge when his court 
 was really unnecessary. While he opposed both amendments, he should, if they 
 were rejected, offer another, which he read. 
 
 Mr. Giles went at length into the general subject, with a view to show that it was 
 impossible for a Judge to retain his office as Judge, after the court in which he had 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVEXTION. 
 
 767 
 
 performed Judicial duties had been abolished. He repeated the profession of his at- 
 t-achment to the independence of tlie Judiciary — but thought it ought to be kept re- 
 sponsible. To continue a Judge's salary after his court, and with it his office, was 
 gone, was favoritism and introducing a privileged order. 
 
 Mr. Marshall declined entering inlo the argument — but briefbr assigned his reason 
 for voting against -Sir. Stanard's amendment. 
 
 The question was then taken on 3Ir. Stanard's amendment, and decided in tlie 
 negative by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — 3iessrs. Stanard and Upshur — 2. 
 
 yoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Gdes, Brodnax, iDromgoole, Alexander, Goode, 3Iarshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Anderson, Conman. Harrison, Williamson, Baldwm, Johnson, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith. 3Iiller, Baxter. INIason of Southampton. Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart. Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, ]\ladison. HoUaday, Mercer, 
 Fitzhuofh. Henderson, Osborne. Cooke, Powell, Grigsfs. Mason of Frederick, Naylor, 
 Donaldson. Boyd, Pendleton. George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, 
 Roane. Tavlor'of Caroline, ALrris. Garnett, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Ogjesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summer;. See. Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott. Green. Tazewell. Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of 
 Bedford; Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Townes. Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gor- 
 don, Thompson, Massie, Bates. ]Neale, Rose. Coalter, Joynes, Bayly and Perrin — 93. 
 
 3Ir. Stuart now moved the following amendment : 
 Where a re-organization of the Judiciary shall be made, the Judges in office shall 
 in the first place be assigned to perform the Judicial duties which may arise under 
 such re-orsranization : and if there should be more Judges in office than may be re- 
 quired under the re-orgaxuzation, the Legislature by joint vote shall designate which 
 of such Judges shall be considered supernumeraries ; who shall upon such designation 
 cease to receive their salaries. And no new Judges shall be appointed under any re- 
 organization so long as there are a sufficient number of Judges in office to perform 
 the Judicial duties under such re-organization." 
 
 The question being put it was negatived. 
 
 The question then recurring on the amendment of IMr. Cabell, it was decided by 
 ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 " Ayes — Alessrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Giles, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, 
 Clopton, Anderson, Coffinan, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, 
 Baxter, Alason of Southampton, TrezTant, Claiborne, Urquhart. Randolph, Madison, 
 Osborne. Mason of Frederick. Zvaylor, Donaldson. Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell 
 of Washington, Byars, Roane, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, 
 See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson. Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, 
 Pleasants. Gordon, Thompson, Massie and Bayly — 59. 
 
 Xoes — Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnas, Marshall, 
 Tyler, ]^sicholas, Baldwin. Johnson, Miller, Leigh of Hafifax, Logan, Venabje, Stanard, 
 Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Cooke, Powell, Grigo-s, Pendleton, Taylor 
 of Caroline, Morris. Garnett, Summers, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Townes, 
 Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Lpshur and Perrin — 36. 
 
 So the Convention adopted tlie amendment of ]Mr. Cabell, declaring that when ft 
 Judge, by the abohtion or modification of a Court, should have been thrown out of 
 employment, he should receive no salary until new duties were assigned him. 
 
 The question was then put on agreeing to the first resolution of the Judiciary Com- 
 mittee as amended, and was agreed to. 
 
 The second resolution was tlien read as follows : 
 Resolved, That the present Judges of the Court of Appeals, Judges of the Gene- 
 ral Court and Chancellors, remain in office until the expiration of the session of the 
 first Legislature elected under the new Constitution, and no longer. But the Legis- 
 lature may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re-appointed, such sum 
 as from their age, infirmities, and past services, shall be deemed reasonable." 
 
 Mr. Claiborne moved to strike out the word Resolved," (in efiect to destroy the 
 resolution.) 
 
 He contended that this was not reform, but revolution — remonstrated with warmth 
 against the injustice of removing men against whom no charge was pretended, 
 merely because there were a few imbecile members of the body to which they be- 
 longed. Such a measure was without a parallel in the history of civilized society*. He 
 adroitted the existence of complaints, but thought that in most cases they were rather 
 made than proved. Virginia might vie with any of her sister States in'the respecta- 
 bility of her bench; and he trusted there was still some veneration felt for it among 
 her own citizens. He denied there existed such corruption or such fruitlessness as 
 needed that the axe should tiius be laid to the root of the tree. And if one part of the 
 State laboured under the evil of an incompetent or uiifaitiiful Judge, this ought not 
 
768 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 to deprive other parts of the State of Judges who had earned and enjoyed the favour 
 of the people. 
 
 Mr. C. objected to the last clause of the resolution as heing at war with the first. 
 
 Mr. Cooke took the same ground. He was aware how strongly the current was 
 setting against the Judiciary in Virginia — and that it required some share of moral 
 courage to stand up and resist it. He adverted to the compact made by the Common- 
 wealth with twenty-four of her distinguished, intelligent and learned citizens ; in 
 consequence of which, they abandoned a lucrative practice for a place of high honor, 
 and permanent, though very moderate emolument. He owned that the occurrence 
 of the Convention intervening might put an end to the contract : they had the phy- 
 sical power, but not the moral right to do so. The re-organization of the interme- 
 diate Courts might be effected without this ostracism of the Judges. If any were 
 slothful or incompetent, there was a provision for their removal. But he thought the 
 representations on that subject greatly overcharged ; and bore honourable testimony 
 to the laborious and most faithful discharge of duty by all the Judges under whom he 
 had practised for twenty-one years : he knew not a single exception. 
 
 Mr. Morgan now moved to amend the resolution, by striking out the last clause, 
 viz : " But the Legislature may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re- 
 appointed, such sum as, from their age, infirmities and past services, shall be deemed 
 reasonable." 
 
 On this question Mr. George demanded the ayes and noes, and they were ordered 
 by the House. 
 
 Mr. Giles thinking the measure proposed by the resolution as very harsh, and not 
 to be resorted to unless the most imperious necessity should demand it, said he should 
 vote for the latter clause as presenting some mitigation. But he hoped the whole 
 might be dispensed with. 
 
 Mr. Claytor was opposed to the clause — not seeing how the sum could be needed, 
 or given, as a compensation for services which had already been compensated by sa- 
 lary. As to the removal of the Judges, they must fall with the abolition of the courts 
 to which they belonged ; and none of which were retained except the Court of Ap- 
 peals. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that if such were the fact, and by the adoption of the Constitution, 
 all the courts, with the Judges were to fall, ipso facto, the case ought certainly to be 
 provided for. The Commonwealth would be deprived at once of the administration 
 of criminal law, and a pardon before had to be provided for all crimes, until the new 
 courts should have been organized. He hoped the gentleman from Augusta would 
 offer the amendment he had some days since provided on this subject. 
 
 Mr. Powell, differing in his views from his colleague, expressed the motives which 
 would induce him to vote for the resolution, and against the amendment. He denied 
 there was either a legal or moral obligation on the Commonwealth to retain the 
 Judges in office. Not a legal obligation, because the liability to be removed by a 
 Convention was known when they accepted their offices, and was by some expected 
 fully as an event near at hand ; not a moral, because though removed for a moment, 
 they would all be immediately re-instated by the Legislature with the exception of a 
 few who were incompetent to their duty, or neglectful of it. Such as were disabled 
 by age and infirmity, would have their feelings saved by such an arrangement, and it 
 was due to them thus to soothe their feelings. He insisted on the justice and pro- 
 priety of retaining the last clause ; for, what was to become of those disabled Judges 
 who should not be re-appointed to office ? 
 
 Mr. Brodnax, now addressed the House nearly as follows : 
 
 That he could not but be sensible that the period for debate had passed by in that 
 body long since, and that impatience of all discussion existed to a degree which but 
 few of its members could now subdue. That this was particularly true of those sub- 
 jects which at different times, and under various aspects had already engaged the ela- 
 borate consideration of the Convention. But, Mr. President, (said he,) it is surprising 
 that this important project of annihilating by one touch of the wand every Judge in 
 Virginia — this act of confiscation — this constitutional attainder — should have hereto- 
 fore been permitted to work its way through the various Committees, and the House, 
 with so little comparative observation or attention. I was not a member of the Judi- 
 cial Committee, and am ignorant of the grounds on which it was originally reported, 
 and all of us recollect that it received the approbation of the Committee of the Whole 
 almost sub silentio. The reasons for its adoption were not discussed. That plausible, 
 perhaps conclusive reasons exist, we are bound to presume. The importance of the 
 principle involved, seems to require that they should be assigned. For one, I am anx- 
 ious to be able to bear to my constituents, some reason for the adoption of a plan in 
 reference to our Judges, which at present strikes me as amounting not to reform but 
 to revolution. The only argument with which we are to-day favoured, that of the 
 gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell,) has not satisfied me of the propriety of this 
 measure ^ and as it is my misfortune to differ not only from ray highly valued col- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 769 
 
 leagues on this question, but from many distinguished gentlemen here, for whose 
 opinions I entertain the most profound respect, and with whom it is usually my pride 
 and pleasure to act, I hope 1 may be indulged in suggesting some of the objections 
 which to me have appeared insuperable. Wliile I can promise nothing better. I will 
 at least engage to detain the House but for a/eic minutes. 
 
 Sir, this scheme of shoving in one group all your Judges ^ - by the board," without 
 crime on their part — without even the imputation of otfence, appears to me as not 
 only unjust to them as individuals, but impolitic in us as statesmen, from its inevitable 
 tendency to invade the independence of the Judiciary, and present a dangerous pre- 
 cedent to future times. A thought or two, Sir, on each. 
 
 Its injustice to the present incmnbents results from its palpable violation of an ex- 
 press contract between themselves and the Government. What was the original un- 
 dertaking between the contracting parties Is it not strange that there should be a 
 difference of opinion among us, when the commission itself indicates the terms ? 
 Terms, too, hterally and substantially coincident with the received theories of the 
 ablest political writers in Europe and America r And yet the gentleman from Frede- 
 rick, (3Ir. Powell) has just informed us that no compact, express or implied, existed, 
 when the Judges accepted their commissions, inconsistent with their dismissal, on the 
 adoption of a new, or amended Constitution. And the gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. 
 Giles.) has more than once, in reference to another branch of this subject, expressed 
 the opinion, that " the Judicial tenure was not for life, but during the continuance of 
 the office itself.'' Sir, I cannot but distrust the correctness of any opinion I may have 
 formed, when I see among its opposers, gentlemen deservedly standing so highly as 
 these. But, I had always supposed, and such surely is the icritten evidence itself, the 
 record of the terms, which it is not competent for either party to deny, that the con- 
 tract is, indeed, neither one nor the other ;. but during good behaviour — dum se bene 
 gesserit." l^ot during the continued existence of the office, surely; for a breach of 
 
 good behaviour" would properly operate the removal of the Judge from his office, 
 when it might be very inexpedient to abolish the office itself. The real undertaking 
 is, that the Judge on his part shall faithfully render all the services he can in tire dis- 
 charge of his official duties, and the State engages that he shall continue to occupy 
 the office, so long as he continues to •'■'behave well."' And by another provision of 
 the Constitution, on the faith of which he contracts the engagement, '•' his salary shall 
 not be diminished duiing such continuance in office." So long then as he is able and 
 willing to discharge the Judicial functions to which he was appointed — or in the tech- 
 nical language which time has consecrated, and wiiich imports precisely the same, 
 so long as he behaves well, the State on its part, has neither the right to dismiss him 
 from office, nor abate any portion of his salary. ±Vow, all the world would cry out on 
 the bad faith — the gross injustice of diminishing his salary one-half; but only take 
 away all, by disixdssing him from the station which you engaged he shouVd occupy 
 during his good behaviour, and then there is no injustice in the proceeding. This, 
 Sir, cannot be a legitimate induction. The State constitutes one of the contracting 
 parties — the Judge the other. We ha ve the physical povrer it is true, but is it morally 
 proper that one party should rescind the contract without the consent of the other ? 
 As between individuals, there is not a code of laws on earth which would not repro- 
 bate it. 
 
 But, the gentleman from Frederick, (3Ir. Powell) assures us, that the present Judi- 
 cial incumbents will, \^-ith few exceptions, no doubt, be re-elected by the Legislature. 
 So far as tins consideration — this uncertain expectation — is to afford a motive of action 
 to us, I beg that it may be examined for a moment. That it has. and will greatly in- 
 fluence the course of many gentlemen in this body, we are not left to doubt. We 
 make all the Judges walk the plank," offending or unoffending, under the expecta- 
 tion, that when we have plunged them all in the ocean, the Legislature will send out 
 safety boats, and pick them up I Some, they no doubt will pick up — some, lh.e\ cer- 
 tainly will not. But, I pray you. Sir, as far as ice are concerned, is not tlie principle 
 we are called on to adopt, in expunginfj all of them from the roll of our officers, pre- 
 cisely the same as if we knew in anticipation, that not one would be re-instated t What 
 more could ice do to destroy them? It would, indeed, be a most persecuting and vin- 
 dictive disfranchisement, which would go the leno-th of destroying their capacity 
 for all future office. In this respect, we are to leave^them exactly in the same condi- 
 tion with every other person. If re-appointed by the Legislature, they will hold un- 
 der their new commissions only. They will have no higher constitutional or legal 
 claim to selection, than every other citizen of Virginia. There will be no obligation 
 on the electing body to provide for them. There are other lawyers in the State, equcil 
 in legal abilities to any Judges, and we have no doubt, many young lawyers among 
 us, who. in their own judgment at least, are very well qualified to ffil the seats of the 
 present Judges. And if the Legislature shall re-elect most of the present incumbents, 
 it will mainly be ascribable to that moral sympathy, which ever induces the generous 
 to elevate those, whom they regai'd as having been uniustly degraded. So that, in 
 
 97 
 
770 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 truth, we look to the Legislative re-appointment of those Judges whom we are about 
 to cashier, with a confidence, inspired by the belief, that they will see and feel that 
 we have done them injury, and will repair it. We do icrong, that the Legislature 
 may do right. Sir, this cannot be morally or politically correct. 
 
 Mr. President — I said that this appeared to me not a reforming'^ but a revolutionary 
 movement. It is xdovsc than revolution. Where has the most thorough and radical 
 revolution ever occurred among a people pretending to civilization, in which the con- 
 tracts and disabilities of the old Government were not recognized and respected by 
 the new ? Even in absolute monarchies, where the Government itself resides almost 
 exclusively in the person of the King, and the revolution has resulted from the ejec- 
 tion from the throne of an acknowledged pretender, are the national debts and engage- 
 ments of the previous reign cancelled ? Certainly not. Sir. The principles of inter- 
 national law, as well as of moral propriety, prohibit it. The United States at this 
 very time, if I am not greatly mistaken, have claims of that character, in negociation 
 with more than one foreign Court. Who has forgotten, that after our revolution, and 
 when every tie wliich bound us to the mother country had been severed, (except the 
 ties of universal justice and benevolence, which should alike obtain in every region 
 and in every age,) that the inspired eloquence of the immortal Henry himself, was 
 vainly exercised, in this very city, to persuade the proper tribunal to refuse the pay- 
 ment of the British debt? And can that which would be morally wrong between na- 
 tions, or between individuals, be rigJit between a Government and one of its own citi- 
 zens ? The only difterence must be, that in regard to nations, the parties are co-ordi- 
 nate in dignity and power. A treaty or a war secures the right or affords the remedy. 
 In the latter case, one of the parties is an individual, dependent on the other for pro- 
 tection — a worm under our heel, whom we have power to grind to dust, if such be 
 our pleasure. 
 
 Sir, many of these Judges have been long in office, and it may be thought that the 
 duration of their tenure has already transcended their own most sanguine expectations 
 when they accepted commission ; that at least there will be less of injustice in dis- 
 charging these ancient servants without even their " six months pay in advance," as they 
 have so long drawn salaries from the public treasury. It may. Sir, for aught I know, have 
 been less in mercy than in vengeance, that the Almighty Providence has thus pro- 
 tracted their existence, in a cold-hearted, changeable, and ungrateful world. Of this 
 I say nothing. But suppose. Sir, for illustration, that your existing establishment in- 
 cluded Judges recently commissioned, appointed within the last year or two. Whe- 
 ther the fact accords with the supjwsition, I leave with the House — and suppose that 
 these Judges in accepting office, had to abandon a lucrative profession. If they had 
 not, they were not fit for Judges. A profession, on which themselves and their fami- 
 lies were dependent, more lucrative greatly than the offices of which they are now 
 incumbents, but exchanged for those offices in consideration of the superior perma- 
 nency and certainty of the annual avails. You have seduced these gentlemen from 
 their practice, and kept them from it exactly long enough for them to have lost it all. 
 Exactly long enough for all hopes of usefulness — of distinction — nay. Sir, of support, 
 to be barred against them in that direction forever. Every observer must have re- 
 marked the extreme difficulty of any professional gentleman, once in possession of an 
 extensive practice, but who has temporarily abandoned it, ever regaining it. Why 
 the fact should exist, I shall not pretend to account for, but we have all seen it, and^ 
 know that he does not set out on his new career even with equal chances with his 
 new and inexperienced competitors. Sir, will this effect of the proposed resolution 
 he just? Is it morally defensible ? It has long been said, that republics are fickle and 
 ungrateful; let it not hereafter be added, that they are unjust also. 
 
 Sir, the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell,) predicts to us that those Judges 
 only will fail of re-election by the Legislature v/ho ought to be turned out, and it has 
 on repeated occasions, not more frankly, but more distinctly been intimated to us that 
 it was necessary to get rid of one or two particular disabled or obnoxious Judges, to 
 whom a reference sufficiently intelligible has been made by some general provision, 
 not personal to these individuals. We are so given to delicacy, that we must decapi- 
 tate all — sacrifice the innocent and worthy together v/ith the offending one, to keep him 
 in countenance — as if to displace all, and then re-appoint all but one, would not as ef- 
 fectually wound his feelings, as if he had been disbanded alone in the first instance. 
 But, Sir, is it not cruel and unjust to punish the aggregate corps for the imbecility or 
 offence of one 1 Are principles to be sacrificed to remedy partial and short-lived evils.? 
 The reason is one which cannot be avowed publicly, and therefore, should not be acted 
 on privately. 
 
 The object avowed by some of the friends of this resolution elsewhere, at least, is to 
 sink all the present Judges, that we may have " a clear sea" — to enable the new Go- 
 vernment to get under way without embarrassment — the Legislature to be unfettered 
 in organizing its Judiciary ; while others advance a step further, and hail this as a hap- 
 py opportunity of abating what they regard as a nuisance, and selecting an abler 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 771 
 
 bench. But, Sir, what is the difficulty which is to embarrass the Legislature, by the 
 retention of the present Judges, in any new organization of the Courts, which in these 
 days of upturning reform may be attempted ? I defy them to prescribe any new plan 
 which will notre'quire at least as many Judges, as those now in commission. Every 
 projet which we have heard spoken of, will require more. Let them give to your in- 
 termediate courts both equitable and legal jurisdiction — and assign two Judges to hold 
 conjointly these courts of assize. Examine, Sir, any other plan you have heard spoken 
 of, (let it have been ever so wild.) and see if any diminution of the numher of your 
 Judges is to be the probable result. But suppose, Sir, that in the felicity of modern 
 invention, some expedient should be discovered, hy which justice, both at law and in 
 chancery, could be administered, with all the pre-requisites of promptitude — contiguity 
 to every man's door — faithful impartiality and luminous ability — that all this could be 
 done without time for the Judges to reflect, much less to read, and compare authori- 
 ties — without the possibihty of liny Judge ever becoming sick or ever growing old ; but 
 on the contrary, ahvays being able to ride with the celerity of one of Porter's express- 
 es — and that all this could be effected by feicer Judges than we have at present — so 
 that we should have on our hands one or two supernumeraries. What then ? In a 
 short time they would themselves die, or be called on to fill the vacancy of some other 
 who had died. For, Sir, contrary to what appears the general opinion, my own belief 
 is, that Judges, like other men, do sometimes die. But suppose they never would 
 die, what then would be the character of the objection ? One, Sir, simply and exclu- 
 sively of expense. 
 
 Mr. President, — I will not enquire whether you have ever looked into the subject 
 of the relative expense of the difterent departments of our Government. Every mem- 
 ber of this Convention is conversant with the subject, and need only be reminded of 
 it. The cost of the whole of our Judiciary establishment — that department of Go- 
 vernment which comes nearest home to the observation, the feelings, the interests of 
 every community — that institution which protects our property, our persons, our re- 
 putations, and our lives — that part of Government which is alone visible and tangible 
 to the humblest citizen — the operation of this immensely important system in our 
 political machinery, costs comparatively nothing : a mere drop to the ocean — a frac- 
 tion of a cent to every individual in the State — while our Legislature costs more than 
 one hundred thousand dollars annually, in enacting statutes one vrinter, and repealing 
 them the next. The body over v.-liich you preside, together with the Legislature now 
 in session, involves an expense to the Commonwealth, of nearly ^ 2,()'00 every clay. 
 And yet we are exceedingly apprehensive of the expense of one or two supernume- 
 rary Judges for a very short time ! And to obviate so dreadful a contingent evil, we 
 are willing to overturn all the principles of justice and moral propriety. Surely eco- 
 nomy and retrenchment have become the order of the day with a vengeance. And 
 to minister to the sickly, fastidious taste of the times, we are to adopt constitutional 
 attainders and confiscations. 
 
 But it was urged the other day, by the gentleman from Amelia, (Mr. Giles.) that 
 viuthout this general abolition, the once highly respected and respectable, but now 
 aged and infirm Judge, v\'hom lie indicated might be called on to perform Judicial du- 
 ties in soine assigned station ; and though unable to act, he must of necessity be re- 
 tained on the list, wliile the duties allotted to him would remain undischarged. Sir, 
 if this fear were well founded, and another more efiicient Judge had to be appointed 
 to his place, is it not obvious that it still resolves itself into a question of the expense 
 to the State of a salary to a Judge t But the difiiculty cannot occur even by possi- 
 bility. If any supernumeraries are left out in a new organization, they scarcely will 
 be of those least qualified for service — the old and infirm. Whether they are wanting 
 or not at first, whenever called on to render official services, for which, from age or 
 infirmity, they are disqualified, they can at once be removed from office under the 
 provision of that resolution, which confers on the Legislature the power of amotion, 
 by a vote of two-thirds, without even assigning the reason. 
 
 As to the particular section of this resolution, now moved to be stricken out, I re- 
 gard the course of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell.) as correct — that its 
 discussion necessarily involves the whole subject — in itself, it is a matter of little mo- 
 ment. The permissive, not comjndsory authority to the Legislature to pay to such 
 Judges as might not be re-appointed, such sum as, from their age, infirmities and 
 past services, shall be deemed reasonable," would be worse than useless. Who is to 
 judge The Legislature — and they only in cases of age and infirmity, as v.-ell as long 
 service. But suppose your Judge, though long in service, labours under the misfor- 
 tune of yet possessing a vigorous constitution and an unimpaired intellect, he is to 
 be turned adrift with the implied prohibition that any relief shall be extended to him. 
 But, if cases to abide this partial relief would be strictly applicable, is it not surprisincr 
 that it should be advocated by the very gentleman who so powerfully reprobates what 
 he calls a p)^nsion system ? Sir, this scheine of Judicial pauperism would in practice 
 be futile. The Judge who accepted it, would go forth to the world with a brand on 
 
772 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 his forehead, and it would be rejected with indignation by every individual of feeling 
 or honor. 
 
 Sir, our labours thus far on this subject, appear to me to have operated a most in- 
 congruous result. We have, by a large majorit}^, refused to strike out the previous 
 resolution, which provides, that no abolition or modification of an existing court, shall 
 deprive the Judge of his office, &c. ; and most correctly, as I think, have we decided. 
 If we had not, then the Legislature, whenever for political or other considerations, 
 they desired to get rid of an obnoxious Judge, would only have to abolish his court, 
 and he would have fallen with it. This, too, by a bare majority of the Legislature, 
 when we require two-thirds to displace him arbitrarily. And yet. Sir, after retaining 
 that provision, the one now under consideration, and which in order immediately suc- 
 ceeds it, proposes to eject every Judge from his office, without the abolition of any 
 court. The inevitable inference is, that what would be icrong hereafter, is rigid now. 
 That as to all Judges in general, it would be incorrect to discard them arbitrarily, or 
 under colour of abolishing their court ; but, as to the present Virginia Judges in par- 
 ticular, it would be very right and very j^roper. 
 
 But, Mr. President, these objections to the resolution before us, are referrible prin- 
 cipally to tlie rights and interests of the Judges themselves. Regarded in this aspect 
 alone, the subject is of diminished relative importance. As was admirably remarked 
 the other day by the gentleman from Richmond, (Judge Marshall,) it is not on ac- 
 count of a few individual Judges, that the principle of an independent Judiciary has 
 been consecrated by the wisdom of ages — it is because the interest of the State is in- 
 volved in it — the best policy of the whole community requires it. 
 
 Let us then examine the second objection which I have intimated. Has not this 
 provision a direct tendency to invade the independence of the Judiciary — not only 
 now, but to all future time ? 
 
 Sir, after the animated, instructive, and transcendantly able discussion on the ge- 
 neral subject of the independence of our Judges, of either Legislative, Executive, or 
 people, with which we were the other day favoured, I hope it will not be imagined 
 that I now intend to offer a single remark in recommendation of the principle. 
 
 No, Sir — We have already on this part of the subject, had " Moses and the pro- 
 phets" with us; and he who was then unconvinced of the value, the inviolability of 
 this principle, " would not be persuaded, though one should arise from the dead." Be 
 mine then, the humbler task of pointing out one or two aspects, in which this inde- 
 pendence will be impaired by this resolution. 
 
 In the very outset of the plan, every Judge in the State is to be dismissed, with 
 permission, however, to be re-elected by the Legislature, if he can : Yes, Sir, if he 
 can. That is, if he can command interest or influence enough with the Legislature, 
 to effect a favourable consideration of his pretensions. And this ostracism, this ordeal, 
 this walking among the burning plough-shares, is to occur some year or two hence. 
 Sir, does not this, of necessity, at once throw all the Judges of the State on the elec- 
 tioneering arena, from this time until that event shall have passed ? Will not every 
 interest, every feeling, every prejudice, even of the human heart, invoke their most 
 active exertions ? Will it not occur to them, that the possible loss of office, now that 
 they are too old to resume previous, or attempt new occupations, threatens them with 
 ruin in a pecuniary point of view.? And will they not feel still more keenly, that 
 the reproach — the stigma of Legislative rejection, will be the pronunciation of a judg- 
 ment of condemnation of their previous official conduct, from which there can be no 
 appeal and no redress ? Do you expect them to look on the approaching scuffle for 
 office, (and now all offices are sought by crowds with morbid avidity.) with calm in- 
 difference Will they not, even unconsciously to themselves, mingle in the strife 
 I entertain no idea that the particular gentlemen who now ornament the Virginia 
 bench, are marked by any proneness to the servility and intigues of electioneering, 
 above other persons who might be in their situation. But I regard them merely as men, 
 with like passions and feelings with others. And indeed, if we choose to offer to our 
 Judges an extravagant compliment, at the moment in which we immolate them 
 by the supposition of their superiorit}' to such temptation, 1 would ask why erect 
 any barrier at all around their independence.? If we can, with good reason, calcu- 
 late on the purity of public functionaries under similar exposure, why provide any 
 checks or restraints ? In fine, why ordain any written Constitution ? But prudent 
 Statesmen have ever found it necessary to insure the virtuous and beneficial dis- 
 charge of public trusts, by walling them around, so as to exclude the temptation and 
 the opportunity to err. This resolution breaks down this wall, and from a ■priori 
 reasoning we are left to infer, that the fearful interval between this time and the ma- 
 nufacture of your new bench of Judges, will be a jubilee to the lawless — 
 
 " While sin holds carnival, and wit keeps lent." 
 
 But, Sir, this is not all. You not only destroy the independence of the Judiciary, 
 during this tumultuous interregnum, but you exhibit a precedent of dangerous ten- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 773 
 
 dency, as long as our Government shall endure. You settle the principle, that when- 
 ever a Convention shall be called in Virginia, one effect is to be, that all the Judges 
 are to be turned out. Indeed, it has been distinctly contended, that the present in- 
 cumbents accepted their commissions under the implied understanding, that their 
 Judicial functions were of course not to survive the then existing Constitution. Con- 
 nect all this with the reiterated public assurances of several distinguished gentlemen 
 on this floor, on a former occasion — gentlemen, who, no doubt to considerable extent, 
 lead public opinion in their respective districts, and who are eminently qualified to 
 act as prophets, inasmuch as they possess the power of bringing to pass the events 
 which they predict, that if the Constitution, which we have now on the stocks, shall 
 not be brought out in a shape congenial with their tastes, that your table, in one year, 
 will groan with petitions for anotlier Convention. Sir, if they had not told us, we 
 know that this fever for Constitution-making, has become a mania in many parts of 
 our country. When the first written Constitution was prepared in America, it was 
 regarded by the rest of the world as little less than a miracle ; but, we have gotten 
 our hands in now. The people, with no practical oppressions, but as if hunting for theo- 
 retical grievances, have become unsettled and dissatisfied with the old Government, 
 under the shadow of which they had so long lived happily, had they only known it. 
 And now, Sir, proceed in this work of innovation as far as you please — still you must 
 stop some where — and stop where you may, all beyond your barrier will complain — 
 new Conventions will be attempted — and every pettifogger in the State, who cannot 
 write a declaration in debt, without the aid of a form, will consider himself qualified, 
 at a moment's warning, to draft you out a new Constitution, in neat form, and ac- 
 cording to the latest fashion. And if most of us — many at least — dread that this un- 
 stable, unsettled state of things, will lead to other and repeated Conventions, is it 
 improbable, that your new batch of Judges will also calculate on it, and constantly be 
 looking ahead for breakers ? That they may look to prospective Conventions — Con- 
 ventions to be called by facilities to be granted by the Legislature — one effect of which 
 will be the election of a new set of Judges by that same Legislature : a Convention 
 to be called probably for the very purpose (if they do not walk so as to please their 
 masters,) of operating a dismission of the Judges. Would it, I ask, wath this appre- 
 hension before them, be strange, that they should all this time try to keep well with, 
 to propitiate this same Legislature? Suppose, in this state of things, a man of great 
 influence in the Legislature, has a cause in court opposed to an obscure individual : 
 Suppose the constitutionalit}'' of some favourite enactment to come in question — or 
 suppose a prosecution by the Legislature, of some obnoxious or unpopular individual, 
 whom they were anxious to destroy : this too, in times of high excitement, pending 
 before a Judge, who knew that another Convention would probably soon occur, with 
 its concomitant, the power of discharging him for his contumacy. Where, Sir, is the 
 man so simple, or so innocent himself, as to confide in such a tribunal ? Where is the 
 Judge, imbued with the infirmities of our nature, who could raise his head erect above 
 the storm, while round his breast the rolling clouds are spread," and shield the per- 
 secuted and innocent accused, when the whole community demanded the sacrifice 
 Without such Judges — Judges who could stem such a torrent, no Government is worth 
 a rush — and such Judges you cannot have, without rendering them co-ordinate with, 
 and not subservient to, the Legislature — not dependent on the breath of popular ap- 
 plause, more fickle than the winds. Such Judges we have seen. Sir — such I hope 
 long to see. In this State, at least, we have all read a lesson on this subject, which 
 on my mind has left an indelible impression — it has been lost, I apprehend, on none. 
 We have seen an individual prosecuted, with all the weight of the United States Go- 
 vernment — the entire influence of the State of Virginia — and last, not least, the spirit 
 of a dominant party, excited by recent conflict, and flushed with recent victory — a 
 party constituting a majority, which looked down all opposition — all exerted in com- 
 bination to crush the accused. Not one found to sustain him — and when the indivi- 
 dual, who would have presumed to say a word against his conviction, w^ould have been 
 politically denounced — perhaps torn to pieces by a mob ! The Judge, whose firmness 
 of purpose and integrity of motive, would not permit him to mould or fabricate laws 
 to compass the conviction of the accused, (morally guilty, as he no doubt was,) he. 
 Sir, we all recollect, was at the moment universally execrated, and his decisions as- 
 cribed to corrupt motives, and favouritism to the accused. What 7ioid, Sir, is the opi- 
 nion of all the ablest jurists and best men in this Union, who, since the storm sub- 
 sided, have examined the report of this celebrated trial ? Is it not without an excep- 
 tion, that the Judge who then presided, adjudicated every legal question which came 
 before him, with a felicitous accuracy, almost without parallel in Judicial history ? 
 
 And how, Sir, could any Judge, however physically firm, and morally correct, (but 
 dependent on the daily will of the Government) have ridden out such a storm in 
 safety ? Sir, I regard this trial, as one of the brightest spots in the history of the liber- 
 ties of man. This is the kind of Judges we want. One who dares interpose the 
 sliield of the laws between an infuriated Government, and the humblest individual. 
 
774 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 And such we never can have, in my poor judgment, should this resolution be engrafted 
 on the new Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, that, as to the last clause, he should not vote, because he was per- 
 sonally interested ; but on striking out the resolution he should vote, and in the affir- 
 mative. As to the Judiciary generally, if the Legislature should continue the same 
 Judicial system twenty years, they would get no better Judges; no, nor so good, 
 though he was one of them. He should take no steps during the interregnum to 
 operate on the Legislature. He was no electioneering Judge. 
 
 Mr. Johnson made an explanation on the subject of his amendment, providing 
 against a suspension of the courts. He presumed a general clause would be added 
 including other matter together with this ; and the whole would go to the Select Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 As to the resolution itself, he had nothing to say : it was apparent to his mind, that 
 the independence of the Judiciary itself, together with the whole corps of Judges, 
 was to be offered up as a sacrifice to popular clamour ; and so strong Vv^as the current 
 against them, that he had not the vanity to suppose he could do any thing to prevent 
 it. He would not waste the time of the Convention in vain and unacceptable debate. 
 
 Mr. Marshall made an explanation to Mr. Johnson, relative to an omission of his 
 to reply to a quere of Mr. Johnson on the subject of his amendment, and gave his 
 reasons for believing that there would be no suspension of Judicial duties on the 
 adoption of the Constitution. As the second resolution provided the time when the 
 Judges were to go out of office, he presumed the implication was, that they were to 
 retain their office until that time. The Constitution would change nothing but what 
 was expressly changed. 
 
 Mr. Clay tor said, he had not been one of those who were so wild as to suppose 
 that the Convention would deprive the country for one moment of the Judiciary es- 
 tablishment — nor was he so wild as to imagine that when Inferior Courts were esta- 
 blished by the Constitution, the Judges of the old courts could claim the right of pre- 
 siding in the new. 
 
 Mr. Stanard opposed the resolution as transcending the powers conferred in the 
 Convention by the people. They were sent to amend the elementary law of the 
 Commonwealth; that was their plain and proper function, and any rightful exercise 
 of the power must be confined to that. The Convention, if it had power to disband 
 the Judges, had power to declare them ineligible : if it might attaint them in their 
 office, it might in their estates. This would be exercising all the power of condem- 
 nation after an impeachment, but without having had their judgments enlightened 
 by evidence. All would shrink from an attempt to send for persons and papers, in 
 order to decide whether a Judge ought to be ostracised, and yet it was gravely pro- 
 posed to go to judgment without any inquiry as to his conduct. A large majority 
 were of opinion that the Judges had faithfully discharged their duty, yet they were 
 -called to pass sentence of eviction. He could not suffer an act to pass without re- 
 cording his public renunciation of all participation in it — almost every State in the 
 Union had amended its Constitution, vv'ith the exception of Rhode Island, and yet 
 such a measure never was proposed or thought of, except in New York ; and there, 
 ■only because the duties of the Judicial office had been blended with the most delicate 
 political trust. The effect| of which was, that as the Judges were appointed under 
 political views, so they incurred the most vehement resentment of a victorious and 
 dominant party. Hence the Convention of 1821, in which the first measure was to 
 ■divorce the Judicial office from this connexion with the politics of the State. Yet 
 «ven here, reckless as the spirit of party was supposed to be, such a measure as cut- 
 ting off the Judges by proscription, was never so much as proposed or thought of. 
 They preferred the administration of justice to the gratification of personal vengeance, 
 and they suffered the Chancellor of the State to discharge his duties until the Con- 
 stitutional restriction as to age compelled him to retire from office. And as to the 
 Judges of the Supreme Court they were getting rid of by a new modification of that 
 Court, but not by a naked act of power turning them out of office. Mr. S. bore 
 honourable testimony to the assiduity and talent displayed by the Court of Appeals, 
 and remonstrated warmly against the idea of turning off all the Judges without a 
 charge against them. He thought the violence of such a proceeding equalled only 
 by the weakness of the reasons given in support of it. He took up the arguments of 
 Mr. Powell, and argued to shew that they furnished no excuse whatever for so arbi- 
 trary an act. As to the hope that they would be re-appointed by the Legislature, it 
 was only saying, that they would perform an act of flagrant injustice in the hope that 
 the Legislature would redress the wrong. 
 
 He denied that those who were infirm or disabled, whose situation claimed sympa- 
 thy and tenderness, would have their feelings soothed by being dismissed only in 
 company with all the rest : because an omission of them when the others should be 
 re-appointed, especially after the ground had expressly been avowed, that all who 
 were competent and worthy Judges would certainly be re-appointed, would wound 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 775 
 
 them quite as much as if they had been excluded wmle others were retained. But 
 suppose the effect to be different, where was the morality of doing an act of flagrant 
 injustice to all, for the sake of shielding the feelings of a few ? 
 
 Mr. S. concluded by recapitulating the ground he had taken, and presenting them 
 in one final appeal to the Convention, against what he conceived so flagrant an out- 
 rage on duty and propriety. 
 
 Mr. Green asked and obtained leave to omit gi^-ing his vote. 
 
 i\Ir. Scott then addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 It is with infinite reluctance, at this late hour of the day, when so much impatience 
 is manifested by the House, that I ask its attention for a single moment. The pecu- 
 liar relation in which I stand to the resolution under consideration, makes it a duty 
 which I owe to myself and to the House, after the strong appeals of its opposers, to 
 throw myself on the indulgence of the Hoase for a few moments. I do not pro- 
 pose to attempt a laboured argument, much less a reply to those which have been 
 urffed against the resolution; but will explain, very briefly, some of the reasons which 
 have influenced me. 
 
 I was the mover of the resolution in the Select Committee. I am nevertheless one 
 of those who estimate the value of an independent Judiciary above all price. Sir, I 
 will vote for any Constitution which any portion of this House may propose, with an 
 independent Judiciary, in preference to any Constitution which any other portion of 
 this House can propose with a dependent Judiciary. It has long been my settled 
 opinion, that the blessings of free Government, the safety and happiness of the peo- 
 ple, and especially of the middle and lower classes, cannot long be secured by any 
 form of Government without an able and upright bench ; and that such an one can 
 only be obtained by making the Judges independent. I do not mean an indepen- 
 dence of the ordinary appointing power. 
 
 We are assembled here as the representatives of a people having an existing social 
 system, consisting of a body of lavrs. fundamental and ordinary, and a set of func- 
 tionaries to carry those laws into operation. Our task is to recommend to that people 
 such changes in their social system as we think conducive to their happiness. We 
 may recommend it to them to change their fundamental law, their ordinary laws, or 
 to dismiss the whole, or any part of their servants. I think it expedient to recommend 
 to them to dismiss their Judges. I am not one of those vrho think, that under the 
 existing Constitution, or any Constitution which declares that the Judges shall hold 
 their office dining good behaviour, a Judge can be deprived of his office by abohshing 
 his court. I cannot perceive the distinction between taking the man from the office, 
 and taking the office from the man. The consequence, to my apprehension, is the 
 same in either case. Mr. President, it would be a violation of order, if I were to 
 take you out of that Chair, and I cannot perceive how I should be less guilty of a 
 violation of order, if I were to take the chair from under you. This view of the sub- 
 ject, rendered it necessary, if it be proper that tiie present Judges should be removed, 
 that their removal should be effected by a constitutional provision. Such a provision 
 is no longer necessary, after the adoption of the amendment to the first resolution : 
 under that provision, the Judges may at any time be legislated out of office. It is 
 under a faint hope, that that amendment may not receive the final sanction of this 
 House, that I am induced to say any thing on the resolution under consideration. 
 
 Mr. President, it is agreed on all hands, that our present Judicial system has not 
 accomplished the end proposed — a speedy and satisfactory administration of justice. 
 This failure must arise either from a defect in the system, or fi'om the fault of the 
 Judges, or both. If it be attributable to the defects of the system, then it is desirable 
 that the Legislature should have free scope to amend it. We should not impose upon 
 them the necessity of suiting the sj'stem to the Judges, but enable them to select 
 Judges to suit a system, which, in their wisdom, shall seem best. If it arises from 
 the fault of the Judges, then they ought to be removed. Sir, if I believed for a mo- 
 ment, that party spirit or faction, or a personal dislike to the Judges mingled in this 
 matter, or would enter into the question of their re-appointment, I should be the last 
 man in the Convention to propose such a measure, i believe that all of them who 
 are worthy, will be re-appointed. It is because I believe the public good requires it, 
 that I proposed the resolution under consideration. But whilst I feel it my duty to 
 make this sacrifice, of individuals to the public good, for such I consider it,'^I am for 
 making compensation to such as shaU not be re-appointed, so far as money can com- 
 pensate. I prefer an amendment which shall make it obligatory on the Leo-islature 
 to make that compensation, and in the Committee of the Whole, voted ag-ainst the 
 resolution because that amendment failed. Subsequent reflection induces me to vote 
 for the resolution, provided the latter clause of it be retained. I consider that clause 
 a declaration of the opinion of this Convention, that tlie Legislature ought to make 
 compensation ; and relying tliat a recommendation from such a quarter will not be 
 unheeded, I am content, though reluctantly, to take the resolution as it stands. But 
 if that clause be stricken out. I shall vote against the resolution. Such a provision 
 
776 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 can have no tendency to introduce the much dreaded pension system. As a removal 
 of the Judges on the one hand, by an exertion of the primary sovereign power of the 
 people, does not impair the independence of the Judiciar}^, so on the other, a com- 
 pensation allowed by the same power to those who may not be re-appointed, can fur- 
 nish no precedent to the ordinary Legislature for the establishment of pensions and 
 sinecures. 
 
 The question was at length taken on striking out the clause which declares that 
 " the Legislature may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re-appointed, 
 such sum as, from their age, infirmities and past services, shall be deemed reasonable." 
 
 And decided as follows by ayes and noes : 
 
 Aijes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Taylor of Chesterfield, Dromgoole, Alexander, 
 Goode, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, ColFman, Harrison, Wilhamson, Baldwin, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, 
 Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Fitzhugh, Mason of Frederick, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Laidley, Summers, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Tazewell, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin^ Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, 
 Thompson and Bates — 50. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, Marshall, Tyler, 
 Johnson, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, 
 Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, "Pendleton, 
 Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Chapman, Duncan, See, Doddridge, Wilson, Barbour of 
 Culpeper, Scott, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Massie, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, 
 Bayly and Perrin — 43. 
 
 So the clause was stricken out. 
 
 The question was then put on destroying the whole resolution by striking out the 
 word " Resolved," when, 
 
 Mr. Summers observed, that his opinions had been in harmony with the resolution: 
 That he came to the House intending to vote for it, and notwithstanding the argu- 
 ments which he had heard, his opinions remained unchanged, although not entirely 
 unshaken ; he however felt much deference and respect for the example of the gen- 
 tlemen over the way, (Judge Coalter and Judge Green,) and had determined not to 
 vote on the question, should it be the pleasure of the House to excuse him. Where- 
 upon he was excused. 
 
 The question was then taken, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, Mar- 
 shall, Nicholas, Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne^ 
 Urquhart, Logan, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Henderson, Cooke, Griggs, 
 Naylor, Pendleton, Roane, Morris, Garnett, Scott, Prentis, Grigsby, Pleasants, Bates, 
 Neale and Rose — 32. 
 
 jVbe5 — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Tyler, 
 Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, 'Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, 
 Miller, Baxter, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Venable, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, 
 Mason of Frederick, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, 
 Byars, Taylor of Caroline, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, 
 See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Taze- 
 well, Loyall, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, Cabell, 
 Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Bayly and Perrin — 59. 
 
 So the resolution was retained, except the last clause. It reads as follows : 
 But the Legislature may cause to be paid to such of them as shall not be re-ap- 
 pointed, such sum as, from their age, infirmities, and past services, shall be deemed 
 reasonable." 
 
 The third resolution was then agreed to without amendment as follows : 
 Resolved, That the present Judges of the Court of Appeals, Judges of the Gene- 
 ral Court and Chancellors, shall remain in office until the expiration of the first ses- 
 sion of the Legislature elected under the new Constitution, and no longer." 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now moved the consideration of his resolution for the appointment 
 of a Select Committee. 
 
 Mr. Giles moved an adjournment, but it was negatived. 
 
 Mr. D. having withdrawn his motion, 
 
 The eighth resolution of the Judicial Committee was then read as follows : 
 " Resolved, That Judges may be removed from office by a vote of the General As- 
 sembly : but two-thirds of the whole number of each House must concur in such vote, 
 and the cause of removal shall be entered on the journals of each. The Judge against 
 whom the Legislature is about to proceed, shall receive notice thereof, accompanied 
 with a copy of the causes alleged for his removal, at least twenty days before the day 
 on which either House of the General Assembly shall act thereupon." 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to amend the resolution by striking out the following words, " and 
 the cause of such removal shall be entered on the journals of each. The Judge againat 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 777 
 
 whom the Legislature is about to proceed, shall receive notice thereof, accompanied 
 with a copy of the causes alleged for his removal, at least twenty days before the day 
 on which either House of the General Assembly shall act thereupon." 
 
 The motion was negatived without a count. And the resolution was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge's resolution was now taken up, and after having been amended at 
 the suggestion of Mr. Summers, by striking out the words " and proposed in it," was 
 agreed to. The blank for the number of the Committee, was hlled with the word 
 " seven." And the House then adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, December 30, 1829. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Armstrong of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The following gentlemen were announced as composing the Select Committee ap- 
 pointed to draught the neio Constitution, and submit it to the Convention, viz : 
 
 Messrs. Doddridge, Madison, Marshall, Johnson, Leigh of Chesterfield, Tazewell 
 and Cooke. 
 
 Mr. Stuart of Patrick called up the resolution he had some days since offered, and 
 which had been laid upon the table : and said, that at the suggestion of a friend, for 
 whose judgment he entertained the highest respect, he had modified his resolution so 
 as to read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the Legislature have power to provide by law, that no person shall 
 be capable of holding or being elected to any post of profit, trust or emolument, civil 
 or mihtary, under the Government of this Commonwealth, who shall hereafter fight 
 a duel, or send or accept a challenge to fight a duel, the probable issue of which may 
 or might be the death of the challenger or challenged, or who shall be a second to 
 either party, or shall in any manner aid or assist in such duel, or shall be knowingly 
 the bearer of such challenge or acceptance : and every person who shall be elected or 
 appointed as aforesaid, shall, before he enters upon the duties of his office, take such 
 oath as is or may be prescribed by law, declaring that he has not violated the provi- 
 sion of the Constitution ; but no person shall be so disqualified by reason of his having 
 heretofore fought such duel, or sent or accepted such challenge, or been second in 
 such duel, or been the bearer of such challenge or acceptance." 
 
 Mr. Stuart observed, that the good effects of the existing anti-duelling law were 
 universally admitted, and were to be attributed to the fact that it addressed itself to 
 the ambition of that class of persons who were most frequently engaged in this prac- 
 tice. _ The reason he had so modified the resolution as to include seconds as well as 
 principals, was this, that many a high-minded man would disregard any evil conse- 
 quences interposed in his way, if they extended to himself alone, while the same man, 
 under the^sarae provocation, might hesitate at involving a friend in the punishment of 
 disfranchisement, by asking him to accompany him to the field. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that in one part of the object sought to be attained by tlais resolu- 
 tion, he most fi-iUy and heartily concurred : it was that clause which went to extend 
 an amnesty to those, generally very young and inconsiderate men, who had become 
 disfranchised by the operation of the act of 1810. But he was opposed to the other 
 part of it, wliich referred to that act (now in the power of the Legislature and liable 
 to be repealed) and made it a constitutional provision, disqualifying those on whom it 
 had taken effect for all time to come. Pie considered this in utter contrariety to all 
 correct notions of political justice, which required that there should be no crime, for 
 the pardon of wluch some provision should not be made by law. 
 
 Even treason, a crime which aimed at the existence of Government, and of society 
 itself, was not placed beyond the scope of this principle : for, the Constitution of the 
 United States, and indeed the Government of every civilized nation in the world, had 
 provided some authority by which it might be pardoned. And it must necessarily be 
 so. For, as the purpose of punishment was in no case the mere infliction of pain, or 
 gratification of personal vengeance, but alone the public good, by the prevention of 
 crimes, it might often be as essential to the public good that treason should be par- 
 doned, as that it should be punished. Punishment, when inflicted deliberately by ra- 
 tional and reflecting men, and pronounced by a Judge, as the organ of the law, was 
 intended as an example and warning, to deter others fi-om the commission of the hke 
 offences. This was its object, and the whole of its legitimate object: and there was 
 not a crime in the decalogue, whether treason, murder, arson, or any other heinous 
 offence, to which there was not authority in the Government to extend the hand of 
 pardon. Yet this single crime was to be made an exception ! The pursuit of notions 
 of honor, (false honor, and mistalven notions, if gentlemen would have it so,) to which 
 
 98 
 
778 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 the young, the inexperienced, and the high-spirited, were the most naturally exposed; 
 this was to be pronounced an offence for which no mercy was to be provided by any 
 authority in the Commonwealth. Mr. L. said, he was not going to impeach the policy 
 of the anti-duelling law. He had on that subject his own fixed opinions ; but they 
 were so dissented irom by most of his friends, that he should not intrude them on the 
 Convention, as probably not more than two or three would be found to concur with 
 him. He went on the supposition that that law was politic, just and wise. It had, in 
 its practical operation, prevailed in a great degree to discourage tiie practice of duel- 
 ling, and its operation would probably continue to do so, until all these notions of false 
 honor were obliterated from the human heart and understanding. But Mr. L. de- 
 manded to knov/ on what principle it was just and right, that a boy of eighteen, or a 
 youth of twenty or tv/enty-one years old, who felt that he had been aggrieved, who 
 was sensitive to the disgrace of an insult, (to him the strongest feeling in the world,) 
 and had under such feelings called for what he had been taught to consider as 
 honorable satisfaction — whether he had shed one single drop of blood or no — must be 
 disfranchised? called off from all the paths of honorable ambition, from all hope of 
 distinction in the service of his country, and no reserve allowed for the possibility of 
 pardon ? He could conceive of a case, nay, he knew of many cases, where youths of 
 the first talents, of the highest integrity, of the truest honor, of the warmest patriotism, 
 yes, and of the xeiy finest feelings of humanity that ever inhabited the human breast, 
 had been deprived by the existing law of all place in the public confidence, and all 
 hope of public employment. He was not for abolishing the law. Let that act remain 
 in the code ; its effects, though they might be severe, were not remediless : a pardon 
 might be granted after a term of years. Let the man, v/ho in his heedless youth had 
 committed such an offence, but who had afterward, by diligent application, and an un- 
 stained course of conduct, prepared himself for every department of the service of the 
 State, be left to the mercy of the Legislature, and let the hand of pardon at length be 
 extended to receive him. They were taught, on the highest of all authority, that re- 
 pentance won the favor of Almighty God ; and that the penitent criminal might be 
 met by that favour, even at the very moment he was expiating, with his life, his of- 
 fences against the laws of both God and man. But this crime, arising from an excess, 
 or a misapprehension of true honor, was one on which none could look with such hos- 
 tility as to believe its punishment ought to be absolute, irremediable, unending disfran- 
 chisement. Mr. L. said, he was very sure the gentleman from Patrick could not, and 
 did not, concur in his own personal feelings, with the tone and aspect of the resolu- 
 tion he had offered. That gentleman saw and felt, he was well persuaded, the justice 
 and propriety of extending mercy to those who had heretofore been guilty of this of- 
 fence. And feeling thus, how could he think it right to enact an endless exclusion 
 to all others who should in like manner offend, though they might afterwards atone 
 for the crime by ten, twenty, or thirty years of the most useful and exemplary life 
 and deportment All he asked was, that the State should act in the same manner, 
 whatever that might be, toward those who should offend thereafter, as toward those 
 who had offended theretofore. The number, thus far, was not large : it was, compa- 
 ratively, very small — very small, indeed. He knew of but three or four persons so 
 situated ; and in every instance, they were persons who stood now in such a relation 
 to society, that every body — every body — without hesitation, would say, that the pun- 
 ishment ought to be withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. L. said, that his attention had been drawn to the subject, when he was in the 
 Legislature of the State. A young gentleman, than whom, none ever possessed a 
 kinder heart — a temper less disposed to injure any one — nay, than whom, none ever 
 possessed more of the milk of human kindness, toward the whole race, was insulted 
 grievously. He had himself been present, when the insult was given, and a more 
 unindurable one, he had never witnessed in his life ; and he had resented it by chal- 
 lenging the offender. He would not say, that it was right to do so : but this he would 
 say, that at that young man's time of life, he should have acted precisely in the same 
 way, or even worse. The consequence was, his exclusion from all public affairs : and 
 the exclusion had embittered the residue of his life. (He was now no more.) Why 
 was such a young man denied all hope of serving his country ? What crime had he 
 committed .'' He had sent a challenge. That was his whole offence. 
 
 Mr. L. concluded, by expressing his hope, that an amnesty would be extended to 
 all past offenders, and that the Legislature would be left at liberty to grant a similar 
 amnesty, when it should, on the whole, judge it to be expedient. That was the true 
 and just ground on which to place the matter. Let it not be, that in Virginia, the 
 offence of sending a chaUcnge, was the only one which could receive 710 pardon on 
 earth : while murder, treason, perjury, and every other possible crime, were placed 
 within the reach of mercy. 
 
 Mr. Leigh then moved to amend the resolution, by striking out all that part of it, 
 which had a prospective operation c 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 779 
 
 Mr. Naylor said, that the object of the gentleman could easily be obtained, by an 
 amendment which he held in his hand, and which he should presently offer. He 
 felt great anxiety, that such a provision as was proposed, should be introduced into 
 the Constitution. His reasons were simple and obvious. He should be very willing 
 to leave the subject to Legislative controul } but he had often trembled for the exis- 
 tence of the present law, which was, in its operation, so efficient and so salutary, and 
 which had, he was confident, preserved already many valuable lives to the Republic. 
 He would call the attention of the House, to the very different state of things, which 
 had taken place since that law had been passed, as contrasted with that which had ex- 
 isted previously. Formerly, hardly a post arrived, that did not bring the intelligence 
 of the fall of some promising young man, the hope of his friends and of his country. 
 These were the very class most exposed to be sacrificed to a false and imaginary 
 honour. Yet, every Session, the most powerful efforts had been made to repeal the 
 law, all founded on the plea, that it was unconsUhdional. It was to remove that plea 
 forever, that Mr. N. wished to see the provision in the Constitution. The most pow- 
 erful talents had been brought to bear on the question, and he feared lest some day 
 they might succeed. Make the law constitutional, and put an end to all doubt on 
 the subject. The law was founded in the necessity of the case. The evil had before 
 remained without restraint. The laws against murder were virtually repealed : and 
 no remedy seemed possible, till they resorted to one strong passion to counterbalance 
 the force of another. The passion which led men to pursue the phantom — honour — 
 (not always a phantom, but such, certainly, in the bloody field of the duellist) — could 
 only be met and counteracted by that equally strong passion, which led men to seek 
 distinction in public life : and, happily, both passions usually inhabited the same breast. 
 Few fell in duels, but such as looked forward to the possession of office in some form: 
 and many such were eminently fitted to serve their country in public stations. 
 
 Mr. N. offered his amendment, but withdrew and m.odified it, so as to appear in the 
 following form : 
 
 Resolved, That a provision ought to be inserted in the Constitution, declaratory of 
 the constitutionality of the act of the General Assembly, entitled an act to suppress 
 duelling;" but extending a general pardon to all offenders ag?anstthe provisions of the 
 act, up to the present period." 
 
 Mr. Leigh, who had at first agreed to withdraw his motion to strike out, after the 
 amendment had been modified, renew^ed it. His object was to secure an amnesty, up 
 to the present time, and to leave the entire subject to the Legislature as to the future. 
 
 ^Mr. Stuart said, that he believed it to be universally agreed, that duelling was a per- 
 nicious and barbarous practice, and ought to be suppressed. He united in the opinion 
 which had been expressed, as to the salutary operation of the statute on the subject; 
 and believed, that but for the doubt which had been started, as to its constitutionality, 
 that law would, by this time, have succeeded in wholly suppressing the practice. But, 
 so long as the Legislature should be clothed with power to pardon'^duellists, the prac- 
 tice would continue to prevail. He wished to shut the door eftectually against it. 
 The object of his resolution was prevention, not punishment. His hope was, that 
 public opinion would gradually be corrected. If children were to be educated under 
 the idea that to send or accept a challenge would disqualify a man for all objects of 
 ambition, they would be free from much 'of the temptation of committing that offence. 
 But they had formerly been tauglit that they were bound to resent an insult, and that 
 fighting a duel set a seal on them as men of honour and men of courage. No won- 
 der, that such a persuasion should exert a powerful effect on young and ardent minds, 
 Mr. S. said he saw no necessity for any constitutional amnesty. If that was all that 
 to be left in the resolution ; he should prefer leaving the whole subject to the Le- 
 gislature. _ If pardon was to be provided by the Constitution, each offender would be- 
 lieve that if he fought he should certainly be pardoned, because the circumstances of 
 his case were so strong that the Legislature never could resist them : and thus the 
 salutary effect of the statute v/ould be destroyed. There Avould be danger, too. of 
 favoritism : young men of family, personally known to the Legislature, and allied to 
 some of the members, would readily be excused, while others more obscure, though 
 not more guilty, would fall under the full operation of the law. He wished to see all 
 put upon one level ; and let all know that if they would thus offend against society, 
 they must be forever excluded from its employment in any public station. He could 
 not agree to either of the amendments proposed ; he thought they would provide no 
 effectual check to the evil. He was opposed to allowing any amnesty, unless the 
 residue of his resolution should also be adopted. 
 
 Mr. M"Coy said, that he felt reluctance at voting for any constitutional provision 
 on this subject. He believed much good had been done by the law. But it seemed 
 to him that unless the neigbouring States, and other nations too, would all agree to 
 niake similar provisions in "their Constitutions, it would be placing the people of Vir- 
 ginia in a very humiliating condition. They would be liable to be insulted with im- 
 punity by the citizens of all the neighbouring States and of all surrounding nations. 
 
780 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 He thought the matter ought to be left to tlie Legislature. Let them repeal their 
 statute, if they pleased. Let them grant pardons, if they pleased. It seemed hard 
 that Virginians must bear the insults of all that chose to insult them, and have their 
 hands tied. He liked to see the citizens of their State put upon an equal footing with 
 the citizens of other States. He could not vote for the resolution. The law had 
 done good at home ; but it had had an unhappy effect on the citizens of Virginia else- 
 where. He knew that some gentlemen had felt its effects in a very painful manner 
 as it related to the citizens of other States. He was for striking out all but the 
 amnesty. 
 
 Mr. Wilson of Monongalia, wished to offer an observation or two in reply to the 
 gentleman from Pendleton. That gentleman thought that the adoption of the reso- 
 lution would place the people of Virginia in a humiliating attitude. The matter ap- 
 peared to him in a very different light. It seemed to him, that in adopting such a 
 measure, Virginia was leading the van in an attempt to put down an odious practice, 
 which had originated in barbarous ages, and in defence of which no good reason 
 whatever could be adduced : in so doing, he thouglit, she had acquired more immortal 
 honour than by all her other achievments. So far from being sunk or humiliated, in 
 his view she was elevated as a State. The gentleman seemed to suppose that Vir- 
 ginians would be placed in a degrading situation, and be exposed to the insults of the 
 citizens of other States and nations, unless they were allowed to resort to the pistol 
 or the sword. He was not of that opinion. Let a provision be introduced into the 
 Constitution, which would stamp the seal of perpetual disfranchisement on all who 
 would fight a duel — then let the citizen of another State insult him, and he would 
 look down upon such a man with contempt. He should say to such a man, " You 
 must be a coward : you know that I cannot resent your behaviour by challenging you 
 without blasting forever all my hopes and prospects in Virginia — your insult recoils 
 upon yourself— it is you that are the dastard, not I." 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said in reply, that if public opinion did not remedy this evil, nothing 
 that they could do would avail to prevent it. The gentleman's observation reminded 
 him of the Quakers, He should incline a good deal to be a Quaker, but they would 
 not fight. Now, if all other nations would adopt the same plan ; if they would all 
 agree to do away with wars and fighting, then he should turn Quaker. But, unless 
 all the other States of the Union, and all other nations would agree to the bargain, 
 he would not consent to put this clause into the Constitution. The gentleman from 
 Monongalia had reasoned well. He entirely agreed with him that the man who 
 would insult a Virginian, whose hands were tied, must be a dastard. But the worst 
 of it was, there would always be such dastards. He was willing to leave the matter 
 with the Legislature, where it now was. Let the law do as much good as it could. 
 But the law would never remedy the evil, unless public opinion went with the law. 
 He believed the practice was going down fast. By putting this provision in the Con- 
 stitution, he queraed whether they should not do more evil than good. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, he hoped there would be no constitutional provision on the' sub- 
 ject. He was willing to leave it with the Legislature, and to remove the doubts, if 
 any existed, as to the authority of that body to act upon it. It would be very easy 
 to do so : and with that view he moved to insert, between the word Resolved,'' and 
 the words which immediately followed it, these words : " That the Legislature shall 
 have power to declare by law," so as to make the whole resolution read : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall have power to declare by law, that no person 
 shall be capable of holding or being elected to any post of profit, trust, or emolument, 
 civil or military, under the government of this Commonwealth, who shall hereafter 
 fight a duel, or send or accept a challenge, to fight a duel, the probable issue of which 
 may or might be the death of the challenger or challenged, or who shall be second to 
 either party, or shall in any manner aid or assist in such duel, or shall be knowingly 
 the bearer of such challenge or acceptance. But, no person shall be so disqualified 
 by reason of his having heretofore fought such duel, or sent or accepted such chal- 
 lenge, or been second in such duel, or been the bearer of such challenge or acceptance." 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, that during the time he had been in the Legislature he had never 
 heard the question started as to the constitutionality of the statute, but only as to the 
 constitutionality of that part of it which applied to members of the Assembly, and 
 which went to add another qualification to membership, beyond those which the Con- 
 stitution laid down. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, that he had heard some of the ablest arguments he ever had 
 heard in the Assembly in support of the idea which the gentleman from Albemarle 
 said he had never heard broached there. He had been present on two different occa- 
 sions when an application had been made for pardon, and he had resisted both appli- 
 cations, with a firm determination, if possible, to cause the statute to re-act on pubhc 
 opinion. He had voted with a heavy heart. He had heard the argument the gen- 
 tleman from Albemarle said he had never heard, and that from able lips, in the case 
 referred to by the gentleman from Chesterfield. He should consider it a blessing to 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. -70^1 
 
 have ail doubts of a constitutional kind removed from the act, and to see the law and 
 public opinion moving harmoniously together. 
 
 Mr. Stuart objected to Mr. Stanard's amendment, as not being imperative, but per- 
 missory only. If it was only said, that the Legislature might pass such a statute, then 
 they might also repeal it again. He wished the provision to be permanent, and, there- 
 fore, he would make it Constitutional. 
 
 Mr. Gordon again declared, that he had never heard the opinion advanced in the 
 Legislature, that the anti-duelling act was unconstitutional in its application to offi- 
 cers of the Commonwealth other than members of Assembly. His friend from Hano- 
 ver, (looking to Mr. Morris.) would be able to support him in this view. That 
 gentleman had made an able report on the subject, but the votes of the Assembly had 
 been equally divided, and it was not adopted. The Session following, the constitu- 
 tional question had been given up, and the opposition was grounded on considerations 
 of expediency. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that his recollections corresponded exactly with the statement of 
 the gentleman from Albemarle. He had been himself the first to start the question as 
 to the constitutionality of the law. Judge Roane had been asked his opinion, and 
 had declared that the law would not apply to the case of Thompson ; but the under- 
 standing was, that he considered it as unconstitutional, so far as it applied to members 
 of the Assembly. iSlr. L. said he should vote for the amendment of Mr. Stanard. 
 
 Mr. Morris said, that the gentleman from Brooke, jNIr. Doddridge, had been longer 
 in the Legislature than he had ; but for himself he could say that he had never heard 
 it questioned, but the Legislature might annex such a test as was required by the anti- 
 duelling law to the tenure of office when the qualifications were presented by the 
 Constitution. In the case the gentleman from Albemarle referred to, the unconsti- 
 tutionality was held to apply only where no qualifications were required by the Consti- 
 tution. But, the gentleman was certainly mistaken as to the Legislature's having been 
 equally divided : the gentleman and liimself had been able to get no more than forty- 
 five votes. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge said, they were all agreed, that a doubt had been argued as to th& 
 constitutionality of the law. This was what he referred to. Possibly he had not 
 heard the gentleman from Albemarle correctly. 
 
 Mr. Madison said, that the amendment would avoid the recognition of the general 
 power of disfranchisement, as residing in the Legislature. He recollected, that after 
 the suppression of Shay's rebellion, an attempt had been made in the Legislature oF 
 Massachusetts, to disfranchise all who had united in that insurrection. In high party 
 times, such a power would be extremely dangerous. To allow this power in a par- 
 ticular case, was one thing; to grant it in all cases, was a very different thing. All 
 he wished was, to avoid recognizing in the Legislature any general power of dis- 
 franchisement. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, he was greatly encouraged by the approbation of the venerable 
 gentleman from Orange. If the amendment had the effect of fettering the power of 
 the Legislature in all other cases, tliis was of itself a strong inducement to agree ta 
 the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, there was one part of the resolution, in which he felt much inter- 
 est. It had been said, that the Legislature had power to superadd to the quahfica- 
 tions for office, where qualifications were required by the Constitution, and to pre- 
 scribe them when the Constitution had prescribed none. He had always thought this 
 a great defect in the existing Constitution. Certainly, where no quahfication was 
 laid down by the Constitution, they could not rightfully be prescribed by the Legisla- 
 ture ; and when the Constitution had prescribed them, the Legislature had no right to 
 extend the constitutional requirement. If the Constitution declared, that in order 
 to be eligible to the office of Governor, a man should possess such and such qualifi- 
 cations, he who possessed them ought to be eligible, and the Legislature could not 
 require any thing more, by any act of its own. If there was any doubt on this sub- 
 ject, the Constitution ought to put an end to it. He considered it a dangerous doc- 
 trine to maintain otherwise. 
 
 Mr. Randolph addressed the House : I submit to the venerable gentleman from 
 Orange — and to the gentleman from Spottsylvania, whether the argument of the 
 gentleman from Orange, is such as ought to have so deep an effect on the gentleman 
 from Spottsylvania, and whether it be not in truth destructive of the adoption of the 
 amendment of that gentleman. I have thought a great deal on this subject, and 
 though it does not become me to question the motives of the Legislature of Virginia — 
 yet 1 do verily believe that the anti-duelling act is in utter subversion of every fun- 
 damental principle of free Government. I submit to the gentleman from Spottsyl- 
 vania whether impowering the Legislature to visit on one description of offences this 
 most odious of all punishments, disfranchisement, be any denial to the Legislature of 
 the power to extend it whithersoever they shall please ^ I ask the gentleman from 
 Spottsylvania, on what principle the Legislature has arrogated to itself the power to 
 
782 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 interpose in this manner, on this behalf, which will not imply a similar power to in- 
 terpose in the same manner, on any other behalf? The evils of such a principle have 
 long been foreseen, by minds infinitely less strong and less clear than that of the 
 gentleman from Orange. It strikes at once at the root of ail free Government. 
 
 Mr. President, it has been my misfortune to have lived in an age of fanaticism 
 and cant. And I would go to the uttermost ends of the earth to find a refuge, if 
 there be one, from this spirit of fanaticism and this spirit of cant. Sir, why not at 
 once embody the entire decalogue ? Aye and the whole Bible — Old and New Testa- 
 ments — and a system of philosophy into the bargain — and gulph down the whole at 
 one oath ? The power is the same. The principle is the same. Sir, do you not be- 
 lieve — nay — do you not know — that there are persons in this Assembly, who believe 
 in their consciences, that to hold a human being in bondage is a crime of the blackest 
 die, not a whit inferior to murder itself.? This spirit of fanaticism is spreading — and 
 it is one of the strongest feelings that exists among men, when once it gets the upper 
 hand. Suppose it should choose to prescribe an oath, that a man never had held, and 
 never would hold a human being in bondage — and this on pain of disqualification 
 from all offices under the Commonwealth ? Is not that an offence as much in the teeth 
 of the Bill of Rights, and of the great and sweeping principles it lays down, as to all 
 men being by nature equally free.? Then, conceive to yourself a Wilberforce, or a 
 Master Stephen, setting forth before the House of Burgesses, the horrors of this op- 
 pressive, this unjust, thi^ nefarious, this bloody, this cruel, this an ti- christian practice, 
 of holding men and women in bondage. Sir, no matter to Vv^hat point it blows, this 
 tornado of fanaticism sweeps all before it. Mr. President, was there ever a Constitu- 
 tion on earth that gave the Legislature power to punish particular offences in a par- 
 ticular manner ? Is it not an anomaly ? Was such a thing ever heard of in any nation, 
 civilized, or uncivilized ? In Christendom, or Heathennesse ? Leave this whole matter 
 where it is. — Sir, I am not so much surpi-ised at seeing some men taking this course. 
 But when I see men for whose characters I feel the most profound respect, lending 
 themselves to a particular purpose, at the expense of the great fundamental princi- 
 ples of free Government, what am I to think ? Sir, the Convention have no right to 
 put any such clause into the Constitution. As was very truly observed, they have the 
 power to do it ; but they have not the right, nor a shadow of right. Why single out 
 this particular class of offences.? The traitor, who has plotted the re-introduction of 
 the Tarquins into the Capitol, he is not pronounced unpardonable : you do not tender 
 to hhn an oath that he has never plotted to overturn your Government — he is not to 
 be put to the torture by an oath — but your oath is in the very spirit of the Spanish 
 Inquisition — it puts the man of virtue only to the torture, and passes over the ruf" 
 fian and assassin. It offers a premium for cowardice — a premium for falsehood — a 
 premium for servility — a premium for slander — a premium for all that is base and ab- 
 ject in human character. 
 
 Sir, I have no hesitation in saying with the gentleman from Chesterfield, that 
 place a man's honour in one scale, and all the offices in the gift of King or Keisar in 
 the other, and a man of honour would spurn them all in comparison with his violated 
 feelings and his violated reputation. Never was there such a test attempted under 
 the sun — never at least in any Government that arrogated to itself the character of a 
 free Republic. This is the entering wedge. Admit the principle, and you may go 
 on allowing one party to proscribe the other, until at length both the great parties in 
 your State will find themselves out of the pale of the Constitution. Sir, I have 
 nothing more to say. If the people are disposed to submit to tyrannical laws imposed 
 on them by their own Legislature, let them do it. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, that every argument of the gentleman from Charlotte went to 
 give a preference to the amendment over the original text, howmuchsoever it might 
 be against that text itself. The gentleman from Charlotte enquired whether, on the 
 principle of the anti-duelling law, the Legislature might not extend the same disqua- 
 lification to the other offences against morals, or offences against party, or offences 
 against religion, or against fanaticism.? He answered — yes, and that was the most 
 powerful argument against the existence of the statute, as being an example for fu- 
 ture imitation. But strong as might be the argument against the principle of the law, 
 and cogent as might be the objection, that it furnished a precedent for extending that 
 principle to other things, and thereby produce all the consequences which the gen- 
 tleman apprehended, yet did not the gentleman from Charlotte perceive that it was 
 the very function of the amendment, by implication, to prevcnt^such an extension of 
 the principle.? to fetter the power! To give it in one case, and in one case only.? 
 And thereby to prevent fanaticism from extending it to any other .? To limit the power 
 of the Legislature .? So that it should not disfranchise men for other classes of offen- 
 ces .? He understood that the grant of one power was, in every sound principle of 
 construction, a negation of all others not granted. 
 
 [Mr. Randolph— not in practice.] 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 783 
 
 Mr. S.-said. he did not speak of irregular and unauthorised exertions of authority— 
 for, against them it was impossible to guard by any written law. This was the con- 
 seque7ice dreaded — nay, the effort had already been made to extend the principle to 
 other cases under the influence of that fanaticism and cant of which the gentleman 
 had spoken. [Mr. Randolph — very probable, Sir.] But the operation of the amend- 
 ment would be to preclude all other attempts of the kind. 
 
 The gentleman had asked, whether there ever had been in the whole world such 
 an experiment made, as to apply the action of the Constitution to one individual 
 species of crime ? The gentleman must surely forget that in the very Constitution 
 the Convention was about to maiie, there was a svreeping clause, in that part of it 
 which treated of the P».ight of Suffrage, w-hich disfranchised at one blow all who had 
 been convicted of any infamous crime : they were all, without an exception, abso- 
 lutely and forever, deprived of the right to vote. Which was the more extraordinary 
 of tlie two, that the Constitution should empower the Legislature to disfranchise for 
 one particular kind of offence, or that the Constitution should, itself, disfranchise for 
 a whole list of offences : Yet, such was the fact. It did disfrancliise, for all tune, 
 those who should have been convicted of " any infamous offence.'" 
 
 The one, surely, was a more mitigated form of authority than the other. The ar- 
 gument of the gentleman from Charlotte did not apply to the competing question be- 
 tween the amendment and the resolution. And if the amendment should be agreed 
 to, his other argument would not apply, because granting povrer in this one isolated 
 case would be a negation of the power in all other cases. 
 
 Mr. S. said, he had no great solicitude on the subject, except as to the granting of 
 an amnesty to past offenders. He earnestly hoped the Convention would not rise 
 without agreeing to a provision of that kind. The offence had been committed in al- 
 most every case by young men reared and fostered in principles not now^ so general 
 as at that time — principles, which they had imbibed as honourable before any change 
 had taken place in public opinion : they had in consequence been disfrancliised : 
 many of them belonged to the most respectable part of the community : yet, they 
 were the objects of perpetual reproach: and being now beyond the range of hope 
 and of ambition, were exposed to the temptation of renewing the offence, 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that the gentleman must perceive at once, that in the case to 
 wiiich he had referred, the House had been settling the qualifications which should 
 entitle a man to exercise the Right of Suffrage. Now, what assignable relation, 
 asked Mr. R., can the locrical mind of the gentleman from Spottsylvania see between 
 an organic law, setthng the question as to the Right of Suffrage, as to which, in the 
 nature of the case, some must be disqualified (or the term quahfication can have no 
 meaning.) and such a proposition as that now offered to the House ^ It is unnecessary 
 that I should point out tlie difference. 1 hope I shall not be understood as entering 
 at all into the question of the moral or the legal turpitude of duelling : whether it is 
 77iahaii 171 se, OT malum prohihiiuvi only. With that question I have nothing to do. 
 My business is with a provision in the Constitution for handhng a particular offence. 
 According to the opinion of some it is malum in se : base — flagitious. If it be so, 
 proceed against the offender as you would against a murderer, an incendiary, a viola- 
 tor of female virginity ; as you do against all other terrible offenders. Proceed 
 against him accordmg to the principles of free Government, the principles of Magna 
 Charta, and of all your Constitutions. Carry him before the grand jury — then place 
 him before a petit jury, convict him according to law, and then inflict your infamous 
 punishment and disqualify him : do this ; if such be your rage and your fanaticism; 
 but in God's name, do it according to the forms of justice which have been established 
 as much for the protection of the innocent, as for the punishment of the guilty. 
 What I object to is, that you shall single out one particular species of offence, and 
 deal with that not according to the principles and spirit of your Constitution. In 
 some of the State Constitutions, it is wisely declared, that there-shall be no cruel or 
 miusual punishments enacted : but disfranchisement is a punishment both unusual 
 and cruel. All I ask is, not to make a favoured class of traitors, murderers, house- 
 burners, thieves and forgers, and give them the benefit of all the forms of the Con- 
 stitution, while you take them away from another class, of whom your hearts, if not 
 
 desperately wicked," are at least deceitful above all things," when you say you 
 think they are so very infamous. I want to know to what man of wealth and of ta- 
 lents, and with no blot on his escutcheon hut this, any among you would refuse the 
 hand of a daughter or a sister? It is in vain to talk. Public opinion is the other way. 
 You will vote for a man who has fought a duel, for President of the United States, 
 and then you come back here and gravely declare that no such man shall be a mem- 
 ber of that august and illustrious assembly, the House of Burgesses ! Sir, it is over- 
 shooting the mai'k. In the words of an eloquent British civilian, it is attempting 
 rigidly to screw up right into wrong :" yes. Sir, every such provision is nothing else 
 but an attempt rigidly to screw up right into wrong. Sumrnum jus, summa injuria. It 
 is a sanctimonious sort of republicanism not to my taste — not at all. Give me the 
 
784 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 good ancient republicanism — and let it not be said, that in proportion as we receded 
 tirom our colonial state, we departed from the true principles of freemen. Give me 
 none of this putting men to tlie question, ordinary and extraordinary — this putting a 
 man on his oath to declare what he has done and what he has not done. Sir, I would 
 not believe such a man : I would not believe him upon his oath. 
 
 Mr. Naylor rose in reply : Could he believe that this measure had its origin in fana- 
 ticism or cant, he should be the first to repel it. But so far from this, if he had been 
 brought up in the faith of the heathen mythology, he should still think that such a 
 measure was dictated by sound policy. If it was sound policy to preserve the best 
 blood of the land — to cherish the ripest hopes of the republic — to prevent scenes which, 
 whenever they occurred, shrouded the face of society in mourning — if this was sound 
 policy, and one of the most sacred duties of a statesman, the measure which was es- 
 sayed as a means of accomplishing it, was not the offspring of cant, fanaticism, and 
 religious hypocricy. The gentleman from Charlotte had asked, why single out this 
 particular offence, and make it the object of so severe a punishment.? His answer 
 was, that desperate diseases called for desperate remedies. Other remedies had been 
 tried in vain. Nothing but this would reach the case. The law against murder had 
 been virtually repealed. It was in vain to talk about grand juries, petit juries : where 
 was the case in which a man was convicted for murder committed in a duel.? The 
 law was nugatory. Was it cant, under such circumstances, to apply to some other 
 remedy to save the lives of valuable citizens.? A law was to be judged by its good 
 or bad consequences. The gentleman was a great advocate for the doctrine of expe- 
 diency, and much opposed to men's standing on abstract rights. Test this measure 
 by his own principles. Had more good or more evil flowed from the enactment of 
 the Statute .? And was more good or more evil likely to follow the securing it by a 
 constitutional provision .? That good had been produced by the law, he had heard 
 none deny. And where would be the evil of the constitutional provision ? A hot- 
 blooded young man would not be able to challenge his adversary (often his bosom 
 friend) to the field. 
 
 Mr. N. said, he was as proud of the chivalrous feelings of Virginia, as any of her 
 Bons : but he did not wish to see them displayed in such a field. 
 
 But was there no other case "singled out?" Had not the Convention deprived 
 Clergymen of a seat in the Legislature ? Was not that case quite as peculiar as this ? 
 They would exclude Clergymen, because they followed a calling for which all men 
 felt or professed to feel some respect, and yet it was all cant and fanaticism to exclude 
 from the same seat the duellist who had shed, or sought to shed, the blood of his fel- 
 low-man. He thought that when the good and bad consequences of any measure 
 were weighed, and the good was found to preponderate, it ought to be rendered per- 
 manent. The people he was confident desired the disqualification to continue : and 
 as the amendment of Mr. Stanard accomplished all the object he had had in view, he 
 was content to waive his own amendment, and should vote for that of the gentleman 
 from Spottsylvania. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that he understood the question at present to be as to the preference 
 between the resolution with, and without, the amendment. He preferred the resolu- 
 tion with the amendment, and he should vote accordingly. If afterward the House 
 chose to strike out the whole, except the amnesty, it would be competent for them 
 to do so. 
 
 The question was now put on Mr. Stanard's amendment, and decided in the afRr- 
 rrtative, without a count. 
 
 So the amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now moved to strike out the resolution as amended, retaining only that 
 portion of it which related to an amnesty. 
 
 The reason for this motion, he said, he had already assigned, and the gentleman 
 from Charlotte much better than himself, and therefore he should not trouble the 
 House with any remarks in support of it. 
 
 Mr. Naylor demanded that the question be taken by ayes and noes, and it was so 
 ordered. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke said, that he should not enter into the discussion, but had 
 risen merely to assign the reasons why he should vote against striking out. He had 
 no wish to visit with punishment this class of evil-doers more than others, (and most 
 of the arguments against the resolution had been grounded on such an idea,) but he 
 supported the measure as a means of prevention. He considered it as the best pre- 
 ventive of one of the most barbarous crimes of the age. 
 
 Mr. Venable desired the question to be divided, so as first to be taken on so much 
 of the resolution as had no relation to the test oath, separately, and then on the clause 
 which prescribed such oath. 
 
 The question was so divided, accordingly; and being put, first, on the former por- 
 tion of the resolution, 
 
 Mr. Cabell moved an indefinite postponement of the whole subject. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 785 
 
 Mr. Leigh enquired, if the gentleman wished the amnesty to be included m his 
 motion .- 
 
 Mr. Cabell said, he -vras fully persuaded the object of the gentleman from Chester- 
 field was unattainable, and that the attempt to attain it vrould only be a waste of time. 
 But as it was now suggested to him by a friend, that the motion he had made was 
 exposed to the same objection, and was likely only to waste the time of the House, 
 he would consent to withdraw it. And he withdrew it accordingly. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then called on the first pai-t of Mr. Leigh's motion, viz : to 
 strike out all that part of the resolution which preceded the oath, and they stood as 
 follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield. Giles, Drom- 
 goole, Goode, Marshall, Clopton, Johnson, M'Coy, Beirne, Miller, Mason of South- 
 ampton, Claiborne, Randolph, Leigh of Hahfax, Logan, Holladay, Mason of Freder- 
 ick, Campbell of Washington, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, IMorris, Cloyd, Mathews, 
 Duncan, Sunmiers, Morcran, Barbour of Culpeper, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch. Townes, Cabell, 31 artin, Gordon, Thomp- 
 son, Massie, Bates, Bayly and Perrin — 45. 
 
 JVoes — 3Iessrs. Barbour, (President.) Brodnax, Alexander. Tyler, ^Nicholas, Ander- 
 son, Coffman, Harrison. "SVilhamson, Baldwin. Moore, Smith. Baxter, Trezvant. L'rqu- 
 hart, Venable, Madison, Stanard, fiercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne. Cooke, 
 Griggs, ZSaylor. Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Miilan, Byars, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Laidley, See, Doddridge, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Scott. Claytor, Saun- 
 ders, Stuart, Pleasants, Iseale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes and L'pshur — i8. 
 
 So the House refused to strike out. 
 
 The question was then put on striking out the last clause, referring to the oath. 
 
 Mr. Stuart, said, that this had been resorted to as the only means of getting at the 
 fact: it was an invidious task (and so invidious that none would attempt it.) to stand 
 up in the Assembly and oppose a man's admission to a seat, by oliering to prove that 
 he had fought a duel, and thus deprive of his seat an individual whom the people of 
 his district had elected and returned to the Legislature : an oath was the only expe- 
 dient that remained. 
 
 Mr. Yenable said, he had a decided objection to excluding any man upon his own 
 oath. 
 
 Mr, Cabell said, that with every feeling of respect toward the gentleman from Pa- 
 trick, he should be opposed to this part of his resolution. He was willing to leave the 
 matter to the Legislature, acting as it would in obedience to public sentiment. A test 
 oath, of all measiures upon the earth, was most objectionable in his view. He could 
 not endure the thouorht, that a free man, whom his countrymen had elected to a dis- 
 tinguished office, should be subjected to a worse than inquisitorial torture to obhge 
 him to bear witness against himself. He beheved that the objection of liis friend from 
 Patrick would be attamed as matters now stood. Public sentiment was fast coming 
 into opposition to tlie practice, and he would not attempt to accelerate it by any con- 
 stitutional provision hke this. 
 
 He now renewed his motion for an indefinite postponement of the resolution and 
 amendments. 
 
 3Ir. Stanard opposed the motion to postpone, which he said rested on incongruous 
 propositions, viz : that it was in the power of the Lecrislature to prescribe the oath as 
 they had done — and that it was worse than inquisitorial torture to requne any such 
 oath. The measure was to be indefinitely postponed, lecause the Legislature already 
 possessed full power, and because it had exerted that power to infiict a worse than in- 
 quisitorial torture on free citizens I What would be the necessary effect of the gen- 
 tleman's motion.' to cut off, with the rest of the resolution, that clause v.'hich con- 
 tained the amnesty for past offences, and leave it in the power of the Legislature to 
 exert its authority in the most injurious and penal manner possible : to empovrer the 
 Legislature to disfranchise men not only for this offence, but for any other offences 
 indefinitely. He said to those who were from the lower coimtry, will you vote for 
 such a consequence as this .' He said to those who were hostile to the exercise of this 
 power at all by the Legislature, will you thus give a carte blanche to the Legislature to 
 act its pleas-ore .' He said to those who were in favour of the law, are vou willino- to 
 leave the security of that law to the capricious determination of the question as to its 
 constitutionahty t He thought that every class of persons in the Convention should 
 concTn: with one voice to reject the motion to postpone. 
 
 Mr. Stuart had one remark to address to those who were friendly to the law, but 
 had voted to strike out the constitutional provision. They did not as vet know whe- 
 ther they were to have an entirely new Constitution, or only the existing Constitu- 
 tion with some new amendments. 
 
 If the existing Constitution was in no shape to continue, where would the Lems- 
 lature get the power to pass any such law r The law itself must go down. A^s it 
 now existed, it rested on the general power given bv tlie existinsf Constitution to the 
 
 99 
 
786 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Legislature, to prescribe the qualification of its own members; and if they could on 
 that ground prescribe one oath, they might prescribe twenty : the resolution proposed 
 to give them power to prescribe this one only. 
 
 The question was now taken on indefinite postponement, and decided by ayes and 
 noes as follows : 
 
 j^ycs — Messrs. Dromgoole, Goode, Marshall, Johnson, M'Coy, Miller, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Holladay, Mason of Frederick, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Duncan, Summers, Morgan, Loyall, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, 
 Cabell, Martin, Gordon, Thompson, Massie and Bates — 27. 
 
 Koes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Alexander, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, CofFman, 
 Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mason of Southamp- 
 ton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, 
 Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 J^aidley, See, Doddridge, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, 
 Green, Tazewell, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Saunders, Stuart, Pleasants, Neale, Rose, 
 Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — C6. 
 
 So the House refused indefinitely to postpone the consideration of the resolution 
 and amendment. 
 
 The question v/as now about to be put on striking out the last clause prescribing the 
 test oath, when 
 
 Mr. Stuart expressed his willingness to withdraw it, with consent; but Mr. Dod- 
 dridge and others objecting, 
 
 The question was then taken on striking out, and decided by ayes and noes as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, 
 Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Beirne, Smith, 
 Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Mason of Frederick, Campbell of Washington, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Cloyd, Duncan, Summers, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Barbour of Culpeper, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell 
 of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 53. 
 
 J^oes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Anderson, CofFman, 
 Harrison, Williamson, Moore, Baxter, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Byars, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Laidley, See, Doddridge, Wilson, Scott, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Stuart, Pleasants, Rose, Coalter and Joynes — 40. 
 
 So the clause was stricken out. 
 
 The question was then taken on agreeing to the resolution as amended, and decided 
 by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Alexander, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, CofFman, 
 Williamson, Baldwin, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trez- 
 vant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, 
 Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Cloyd, Chap- 
 man, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Doddridge, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour 
 of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, 
 Upshur and Perrin — 71. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Dromgoole, Goode, Marshall, Harrison, Johnson, M'Coy, Miller, 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Mason of Frederick, Roane, Mathews, Summers, 
 See, Morgan, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin and Bates — 22. 
 
 So the Convention agreed to the resolution in the following form : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Legislature shall have power to declare by law, that no per- 
 son shall be capable of holding or being elected to any post of profit, trust, or emolu- 
 ment, civil or military, under the Government of this Commonwealth, who shall 
 hereafter fight a duel, or send or accept a challenge, to fight a duel, the probable issue 
 of which may or might be the death of the challenger or challenged, or shall be 
 second to either party, or shall in any manner aid or assist in such duel, or who shall 
 be knowingly the bearer of such challenge or acceptance. But, no person shall be 
 so disqualified by reason of his having heretofore fought such duel, or sent or accepted 
 such challenge, or been second in such duel, or been the bearer of such challenge or 
 acceptance." 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, now moved for the consideration of the following reeo= 
 lution , sometime since offered by hijn, and laid upon the table : 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 787 
 
 Whereas republican institutions and the blessings of free Government originate 
 in, and must always depend upon the intelligence, virtue and patriotism of the com- 
 munity : And whereas, neither intelligence nor virtue can be maintained or promo- 
 ted in any community without education, it shall always be the duty of the Legisla- 
 ture of this Commonwealth to patronize and encourage such a system of education, 
 or such common schools and seminaries of learning, as will in their wisdom be deemed 
 to be most conducive to secure to the youth of this Commonwealth such an educa- 
 tion as may most promote the public good." 
 
 The question being put on considering the resolution, the House refused to con- 
 sider it. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Taylor of Chesterfield, the House then proceeded to consider 
 the report of the Committee on the Bill of Rights. 
 
 The Committee of the Whole having proposed an amendment to the fifth resolution, 
 that came up first in order for consideration. 
 
 The fifth resolution as reported by the Committee, reads as follows : 
 Resolved, That no title of nobility shall be created or granted, and no person hold- 
 ing any office of profit or trust, tinder the United States, or under any King, Prince, or 
 Foreign State, shall hold any office under this State." 
 
 The amendment of the Committee of the Whole proposed to strike out the words 
 " under the United States, or." 
 
 Mr. Randolph, (who had not been present in Committee of the Whole when this 
 amendment was agreed to, having been confined by indisposition,) now rose and ad- 
 dressed the House in opposition to its adoption : 
 
 Mr. President, — It would be better to amend the resolution by striking out the 
 whole of it, than to take out of it the only words that have any efficacy at all. Who 
 expects that we are ever to have titles of nobility in this country ? Nobody. I have 
 no objection, however, to retaining that clause, if it pleases any body. Whoever ap- 
 prehended the granting of offices of honor and profit to our citizens by foreign States 
 and Princes? Sir, they have beggars enough to provide for at home. These words, 
 which the Committee propose to strike out, are the only part of the resolution which 
 guard against any real danger : and they do look to an obvious — a great — an impend- 
 ing — an immediate danger. Against this, we will not provide : oh no : it is quite un- 
 necessary ! And yet this is a case that will happen, and must happen. But against the 
 other case, we will provide most gravely. Sir, there is a farcical solemnity about all this, 
 which is truly amusing. We are to amend the paragraph by striking from it the only 
 w^ords that have any real operation whatever, and which apply to a danger that is imme- 
 diate, and that must and will occur. There is an old proverb which says, that the king's 
 chaff* is better than other men's corn : and it would never be better applied, than to 
 the preference which the people of this Commonwealth give to offices held under the 
 United States Government, to those under the Government of Virginia. W^e learn 
 in that book, which is the fountain of all wisdom, and of all truth, that no man can 
 serve two masters — that a man cannot serve God and Mammon. Sir, no more can a 
 faithful servant of this Commonwealth be an officer under the United States at the 
 same time — and under the same circumstances. A man can't have two countries at 
 once. And under that lies an important truth. What has been so long the dispute 
 between the Irish people and the English Government ? The Irishman feels that he 
 can have but one country : but the Englishman tries to convince him that he can have 
 two; and that he owes a higher allegiance to that country in which he was not born 
 than to that in which he was born and brought up. And until the Englishman can 
 convince him of this, they must go on disputing to the end of the chapter, or until 
 the dispute is cut short by the sabre or the bayonet. Sir, I am against the whole reso- 
 lution. This subject was wisely taken up by Virginia immediately after the adoption 
 of the Federal Constitution, and she passed laws at once, to prevent an amalgamation 
 of the offices under the General and State Governments. I hope we shall have the 
 ayes and noes on agreeing to this amendment. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that there was an existing statute which went to disquahfy all per- 
 sons who held office under the General Government, incompatible in their nature 
 with those under the State. But there was one exception to this remark. A person 
 holding a commission as Justice of the Peace was disquahfied by serving as a Repre- 
 sentative in Congress. Yet these two were not, in liis judgment, at all incompatible. 
 A place in Congress was held to be an office under the General Government, accord- 
 ing to the present interpretation of the statute by the Legislature of Virginia, and had 
 been so held at all times. Every militia officer held an office under the Common- 
 wealth — ought he to be disqualified for serving as such by holding an office under the 
 United States ? The whole purpose of the amendment proposed by the Committee 
 of the Whole, was to preserve the statute as it now stood, and not by the Constitu- 
 tion to go beyond the statutory provision in some parts of it, and to fall short of it in 
 others. The Legislature would still have power to prohibit the holding of offices un= 
 
788 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 der both Governments so far as was necessary and proper. But if any fears were ap- 
 prehended on that subject, a farther amendment could be added to the resolution, and it 
 should have his support, provided it did not introduce a provision equivalent to that now 
 pi'oposed to be stricken out : it ought not to prevent citizens, who held offices valua- 
 ble to the Commonwealth, from being elected as members of Congress. The statute 
 contained a provision, which prohibited office in the State, to any who received any 
 emolument under the General Government. Now, if that was to be interpreted ac- 
 cording to the letter, he should be obliged to oppose it in toto : for, then, a carpenter, 
 who was employed to do a job of work on the court room, occupied by a Federal 
 Court, and who received pay for his work, must be disqualified from all office of 
 honour or profit, under Virginia. This evil, to be sure, was avoided by the prevail- 
 ing construction of the statute, which applied the prohibition only to such as contimied 
 statedly to receive emolument under the Federal Government. Mr. L. concluded by 
 observing, that in his opinion, the law as it now stood, and was at present interpreted, 
 defined the proper limit : and he was not for altering that limit, by a constitutional 
 provision. 
 
 Mr. Randolph again rose. Sir, I believe that there is an adjudged case : I refer to 
 the case of Blount, where it is determined that a member of Congress is not an of- 
 ficer of the United States. I certainly never so understood, or so considered the sta- 
 tion of a member of Congress. He did not receive his commission from the United 
 States. If, indeed, he were appointed by the United States, then he would be a 
 United States' officer. 
 
 Mr. R. said, that his objection to agreeing to this amendment was, that it was a 
 negative pregnant : it contained a very strong intimation that there ought not to be 
 such a provision made by law. If it had not been attempted in the^first instance 
 to raise this banner against Federal encroachment, it would have been one thing : 
 if the question had been untouched, unmooted, undisturbed : but when the attempt 
 to raise the banner had been made, and it was then struck down by the act of 
 this Convention, the case became totally difi^erent : it was put on a different foot en- 
 tirely. Would any man say that the anti-duelling law, for example, stood on the 
 same footing, since the clause in the Constitution prescribing the oath had been 
 stricken out, that it stood on before the attempt was made to insert that clause ? All 
 persons must feel that it did not. As to any farther amendment, Mr. R. said, he had 
 come to the Convention with two fixed determinations in his mind : the one had been, 
 to make no propositions at all during its sitting ; and to this, with the blessing of God, 
 he hoped to adhere : the other had been, not to open his lips save to answer when his 
 name should be called : to this resolution he had not had the fortitude to adhere. He 
 wished he had. 
 
 Mr. Stanard now went into a very extended explanation and recapitulation of all 
 that had been urged in Committee of the Whole, on this subject, and which accounted 
 for the amendment which the Committee had recommended. 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Chesterfield said, that at a proper time he should move to insert by 
 way of amendment to the resolution, the act of Assembly on this subject (which he 
 had offered in Committee of the Wliole.) 
 
 Mr. Leigh observed, that he had said, he was prepared to vote for any proposition 
 by which the offices of the two Governments were properly separated. But the gen- 
 tleman from Loudoun, (Mr. Mercer.) had said that where no qualifications for office 
 were required by the Constitution, the Legislature had no right to require any — Now, 
 this was a position he had never heard taken before in the whole course of his life. 
 He had never heard the right of the Legislature to do so, so much as questioned be- 
 fore. It had, indeed, been contended, that where the Constitution did lay down cer- 
 tain qualifications, the Legislature might not extend those qualifications, on the prin- 
 ciple that exdusio unius est admissio alterius. But it seemed to him that the gentle- 
 man's principle was irreconcileabie with the very notion of State Government. 
 Where a Government exists by enumerated powers, then undoubtedly it was as the 
 gentleman stated. But where the Constitution only interdicted and did not enu- 
 merate the powers of the Government, then the Government might do whatever the 
 Constitution did not forbid. This was the distinction between the Federal and the 
 State Governments. Mr. L. said he had no fears that the gentleman from Loudoun 
 ever could prevail, and therefore, he was for striking out the clause and leaving the 
 Legislature to act as it might see proper in the case. He desired to leave the statute 
 in full force: possibly it might l3e somewhat modified; but he would leave that 
 wholly to the Legislature. He was content with the statute as it stood and was now 
 interpreted. There was one objection to the amendment. If the proposition had 
 been made and should be stricken out by the Convention, it might possibly be con- 
 sidered that the Legislature had no power to pass such an act : but if they refused to 
 do so, it might be construed into a repeal of the act. This statute stood on the same 
 footing with others. It was ancient in its date ; and had been amended in X798, and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 789 
 
 now the several laws on the subject were embodied in one statute. Mr. L. said he 
 was for striking out the words as proposed by the Committee of the Whole, and leav- 
 ing the power of the Legislature unimpaired. He would not consent to say that the 
 Legislature had no powers but such as were expressly given to it by the Constitution : 
 he believed on the contrary that they possessed all powers that were not forbidden. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that it was hardly necessary for him to rise for the purpose of vin- 
 dicating the opinion he had advanced when another topic had been under discussion. 
 His opinion was, that where the Constitution laid down any qualification for office, 
 the Legislature had no power to superadd to those qualifications; and when the Con- 
 stitution required none, the Legislature had no right to require any. The conse- 
 quences of the opposite position were too alarming, and the extent of the principle 
 too obvious to need illustration. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, he should vote for the Committee's amendment. He had not 
 differed in opinion from the gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph :) he wished to 
 see some substantial clause inserted in the place of that which the Committee pro- 
 posed to strike out : and he should therefore vote for striking out the present words, 
 in the hope that better would be substituted. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, that he wished to amend the resolution by adding to it a clause 
 declaring that no person holding any office of emolument under the General Govern- 
 ment, should, at the same time, hold any office of emolument under tlie Common- 
 wealth of Virginia. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh, believing the discussion to be only a waste of time, moved the in- 
 definite postponement of the resolution and amendment. 
 The motion prevailed by a large majority. 
 
 So the amendment of the Committee to the fiflh resolution itself, was indefinitely 
 postponed. 
 
 The Convention now proceeded to the report itself, and took up its resolutions 
 seriatim. 
 
 The first resolution was read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, as the opinion of this Committee, That the Constitution of this State 
 ought to be so amended as to provide a mode in which futm-e amendments shall be 
 made therein." 
 
 Mr. Randolph addressed the Convention in opposition to its adoption : 
 
 Mr. President — I shall vote against this resolution : and I will state as succinctly as 
 I can, my reasons for doing so. I believe that they will, in substance, be found in a 
 very old book, and conveyed in these words sufficient unto the day, is the evil 
 thereof." Sir, I have remarked since the commencement of our deliberations — and 
 with no small surprise — a very great anxiety to provide for futuritij. Gentlemen, for 
 example, are not content with any present discussion of the Constitution, unless we 
 wuU consent to prescribe for all time hereafter. I had always thought him tlie most 
 skilful physician, who, when called to a patient, relieved him of the existing malady^ 
 without undertaking to prescribe for such as he might by possibility endure thereafter. 
 
 Sir, said Mr. R.. what is the amount of this provision ? It is either mischievous, or 
 it is nugatory. I do not know a greater calamity that can happen to any nation, than 
 having the foundations of its Government unsettled. 
 
 Dr. Franklin, who, in shrewdness, especially in all that related to domestic life, was 
 never excelled, used to say, that two movings were equal to one fire. So to any peo- 
 ple, two Constitutions are worse than a fire. And gentlemen, as if they were afraid 
 that this besetting sin of P»,epublican Governments, this reruvi novaruvi Inhido, (to 
 use a very homely phrase, but one that comes pat to the purpose,) this magoot of in- 
 novation, would cease to bite, are here gravety making provision, that this Constitu- 
 tion, which we should consider as a remedy for all the ills of the body politic, may 
 itself be amended or modified at any future time. Sir, I am against any such pro- 
 vision. I should as soon think of introducing into a marriasfe contract a provision 
 
 for divorce ; and thus poisoning the greatest blessing of mankind at its very source 
 
 at its fountain head. He has seen little, and has reflected less, who does not know 
 that necessity" is the great, powerful, governing principle of affairs here. Sir, I am 
 not going into that question which puzzled Pandoemonium, the question of liberty 
 and necessity. 
 
 " Free will, fix'd fate, foieknowledge, absolute ;" 
 
 but, I do contend, that necessity is one principal instrument of all the good that man 
 enjoys. 
 
 'The happiness of the connubial union itself depends greatly on necessity ; and 
 when you touch this, you touch the arch, the key-stone of the arch, on which the 
 happiness and well-being of society is founded. 
 
 . Look at the relation of master and slave ; (that opprobrium, in the opinion of some 
 gentlemen, to all civilized society and all free Government.) Sir, there are few situa- 
 
790 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 tions in life where friendships so strong and so lasting are formed, as in that very re- 
 lation. The slave knows that he is bound, indissolubly, to his master, and must from 
 necessity, remain always under his controul. The master knows that he is bound to 
 maintain and provide for his slave so long as he retains him in his possession. And 
 each party accommodates himself to his situation. 1 have seen the dissolution of 
 many friendships, such, at least, as were so called ; but I have seen that of master 
 and slave endure so long as there remained a drop of the blood of the master to 
 which the slave could cleave. Where is the necessity of this provision in the Con- 
 stitution ? Where is the use of it ? Sir, what are we about i Have we not been un- 
 doing what the wiser heads — I must be permitted to say so — yes. Sir, what the wiser 
 heads of our ancestors did more than half a century ago ? Can any one believe that 
 we, by any amendments of ours — by any of our scribbling on that parchment — by 
 any amulet — any legerdemain— charm — abracadabra — of ours, can prevent our sons 
 from doing the same thing that is, from doing as they please, just as we are doing 
 as we please It is impossible. Who can bind posterity ? When 1 hear gentlemen 
 talk of making a Constitution "for all time" — and introducing provisions into it, 
 " for all time" — and yet see men here, that are older than the Constitution we are 
 about to destroy — (I am older myself than the present Constitution — it was established 
 when I was a boy) — it reminds me of the truces and the peaces in Europe. They 
 always begin, " In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity," and go on to 
 declare, " there shall be perfect and perpetual peace and unity between the subjects 
 of such and such potentates, for all time to come" — and, in less than seven years, 
 they are at war again. 
 
 Sir, I am not a prophet or a seer ; but I will venture to predict, that your new Con- 
 stitution, if it shall be adopted — does not last twenty years. And so confident am I 
 in this opinion, that if it were a proper subject for betting, and I was a sporting cha- 
 racter, I believe I would take ten against it. 
 
 It would seem as if we were endeavouring — (God forbid that I should insinuate, 
 that such was the intention of any here) — as if we were endeavouring to corrupt the 
 people at the fountain head. Sir, the great opprobrium of popular Government, is 
 its instability. It was this which made the people of our Anglo-Saxon stock cling 
 with such pertinacity to an independent Judiciary, as the only means they could find 
 to resist this vice of popular Governments. By such a provision as this, we are now 
 inviting, and in a manner prompting the people, to be dissatisfied with their Govern- 
 ment. Sir, there is no need of this. Dissatisfaction will come, soon enough. I fore- 
 tell now, and with a confidence surpassed by none I ever felt on any occasion, that 
 those who have been the most anxious to destroy the Constitution of Virginia, and to 
 substitute in its place this thing, will not be more dissatisfied now with the result of 
 our labours, than this new Constitution will very shortly be opposed by all the peo- 
 ple of the State. I speak not at random. 1 have high authority for what I say now 
 in my eye. Though it was said that the people called for a new state of things, yet 
 the gentleman from Brooke himself (Mr. Doddridge) who came into the Legislative 
 Committee armed with an axe to lay at the root of the tree, told the Convention that 
 he would sooner go home and live under the old Constitution than adopt some of the 
 provisions which have received the sanction of this body. But I am wandering from 
 the point. 
 
 Sir, I see no wisdom in making this provision for future changes. You must give 
 Governments time to operate on the people, and give the people time to become gra- 
 dually assimilated to their institutions. Almost any thing is better than this state of 
 perpetual uncertainty. A people may have the best form of Government that the 
 wit of man ever devised; and yet, from its uncertainty alone, may, in eflfect, live un- 
 der the worst Government in the world. Sir, how often must I repeat, that change 
 is not reform. I am willing that this new Constitution shall stand as long as it is pos- 
 sible for it to stand, and that, believe me, is a very short time. Sir, it is vain to deny 
 it. They may say what they please about the old Constitution — the defect is not 
 there. It is not in the form of the old edifice, neither in the design nor the elevation : 
 it is in the material — it is in the people of Virginia. To my knowledge that people are 
 changed from what they have been. The four hundred men who went out to David 
 were in debt. The partizans of Caesar were in debt. The fellow-labourers of Cataline 
 were in debt. And I defy you to shew me a desperately indebted people any where, 
 who can bear a regular sober Government. I throw the challenge to all who hear me. 
 I say that the character of the good old Virginia planter — the man who owned from 
 five to twenty slaves, or less, who lived by hard work, and who paid his debts, is 
 passed away. A new order of things is come. The period has arrived of living by 
 one's wits — of living by contracting debts that one cannot pay — and above all, of liv- 
 ing by office-hunting. Sir, what do we see Bankrupts — branded bankrupts — giving 
 great dinners — sending their children to the most expensive schools — giving grand 
 partieg— and just as well received as any body in society. I say, that in such a state 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 791 
 
 of things, the old Constitution was too good for them, they could not bear it. No, 
 Sir, they could not bear a freehold suffrage and a property representation. I have al- 
 ways endeavoured to do the people justice — but I will not flatter them — I will not 
 pander to their appetite for change. I will do nothing to provide for change. I will 
 not agree to any rule of future apportionment, or to any provision for future changes 
 called amendments to the Constitution. They who love change — who delight in 
 public confusion — who wish to feed the cauldron and make it bubble — may vote if 
 they please for future changes. But by what spell — by what formula are you going 
 to bind the people to all future time ? Quis custodiet cvstodes? The daj^s of Lycurgus 
 are gone by, when he could swear the people not to alter the Constitution until he 
 should return — anivio non revertendi. You may make what entries upon parchment 
 you please. Give me a Constitution that will last for half a century — that is all I 
 wish for. No Constitution that you can make will last the one-half of half a century. 
 Sir, I will stake any thing short of my salvation, that those who are malcontent now 
 will be more malcontent three years hence than they are at this day. I have no fa- 
 vour for this Constitution. I shall vote against its adoption, and I shall advise all the 
 people of my district to set their faces — aye — and their shoulders against it. But if 
 we are to have it — let us not have it with its death warrant in its very face : with the 
 fades Jujpocratica — the Sardonic grin of death upon its countenance. 
 
 The question was now taken and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Mason of Frederick, Nay- 
 lor, Donaldson, Boyd, jNI'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Summers, See, Doddridge, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson, 
 Joynes, Bayly and Upshur — 25. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, 
 Clopton, Anderson, Coffmnn, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Henderson, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Griggs, Pendleton, George, Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, ]3arbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Martin, 
 Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter and Perrin — 68. 
 
 So the resolution was rejected, and the Convention determined that the new Con- 
 stitution should contain in itself no provision for future amendments. 
 
 The fifth having been indefinitely postponed, 
 
 The second and third resolutions were also read. 
 
 And on motion of Mr. Taylor of Chesterfield, were laid on the table. 
 
 The fourth resolution was then agreed to as follows : 
 Resolved, That the freedom of speech, and of the press, ought to be held sacred, 
 and guaranteed by the Constitution." 
 
 The sixth was laid on the table, being superceded by one of like character already 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. Doddridge now observed, that the lahours of the Convention thus far completed, 
 he should offer a resolution authorising the Select Committee to have printed under 
 the direction of the President all the resolutions which had been adopted by the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 This resolution was agreed to. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Doddridge, it was agreed by the casting vote of the President, 
 that when the House adjourns, it will adjourn to meet on Saturday next at 11 o'clock. 
 Mr. Mason of Southampton, moved the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That the Select Committee, raised to prepare and report a new Consti- 
 tution, or amendments to the existing one, &c. be instructed to report an apportion- 
 ment of the representation in the Senate and House of Delegates, amongst the several 
 counties, boroughs, and election districts of the Conamonwealth, conformably to the 
 resolutions to them referred." 
 
 A desultory conversation arose on this motion, in which Messrs. Mason, Hender- 
 son, M'Coy, Gordon, Brodnax, Stanard, Marshall, Naylor and Claiborne took part, 
 and which terminated in the adoption of the resolution. 
 
 The House then adjourned to Saturday, 11 o'clock. 
 
792 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 SATURDAY, January 2, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Douglass of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 The President, conceiving that nothing of importance was likely to be done until 
 the Committee should report, forbore to call the House to order : but the members 
 having waited for a considerable time, 
 
 Mr. Summers suggested, that the Select Committee had not probably made up their 
 report, and that it would scarcely be necessary to wait for them. But he enquired, 
 whether it would not be proper to make an order for that report to be printed as soon 
 as it was prepared. 
 
 On putting tlie question for printing, it was agreed to without opposition. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke suggested also, whether the door-keepers had not better 
 carry around to the members the report as soon as it was printed — and the Chair re- 
 plied, that that would be a matter of course. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, January 4, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. ^ 
 Courtney of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Mr. Madison, from the Select Committee, made the following report: 
 
 The Select Committee, to whom the several resolutions of the Convention were 
 referred, with instructions to prepare and report either a new Constitution, or amend^' 
 ments to the existing Constitution, and to report an apportionment of the represen- 
 tation in the Senate and House of Delegates, among the several counties, cities, bo- 
 roughs and districts of the Commonwealth, conformably with the resolutions to them 
 refen-ed, respectfully report the following form of an amended Constitution : 
 
 Whereas the Delegates and Representatives of the good people of Virginia, in 
 Convention assembled, on the twenty-ninth day of June, in the year of our Lord one 
 thousand seven hundred and seventy-six : Reciting and declaring, that whereas, 
 George the third, King of Great Britain and Ireland, and Elector of Hanover, before 
 that time entrusted with the exercise of the kingly office in the Government of Vir- 
 ginia, had endeavoured to pervert the same into a detestable and insupportable tyranny^ 
 by putting his negative on laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public 
 good ; by denying his Governors permission to pass laws of immediate and pressing 
 importance, unless suspended in their operation for his assent, and when so suspended 
 neglecting to attend to them for many years ; by refusing to pass certain other laws, 
 unless the persons to be benefitted by them would relinquish the inestimable right of 
 representation in the Legislature ; by dissolving Legislative Assemblies repeatedly 
 and continually, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions of the rights of the 
 people ; when dissolved, by refusing to call others for a long space of time, thereby 
 leaving the political system without any legislative head ; by endeavouring to pre- 
 vent the population of our country, and for that purpose obstructing the laws for the 
 naturalization of foreigners ; by keeping among us, in time of peace, standing armies 
 and ships of war; by affecting to render the military independent of and superiour 
 to the civil power ; by combining with others to subject us to a foreign jurisdiction, 
 giving his assent to their pretended acts of legislation, for quartering large bodies of 
 armed troops among us, for cutting off our trade with all parts of the world, for im- 
 posing taxes on us without our consent, for depriving us of the benefits of the trial 
 by jury, for transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences, for sus- 
 pending our own Legislatures and declaring themselves invested w^ith powder to legis- 
 late for us in all cases whatsoever; by plundering our seas, ravaging our coasts, burn- 
 ing our towns, and destroying the lives of our people ; by inciting insurrections of 
 our fellow subjects with the allurements of forfeiture and confiscation ; by prompting 
 our negroes to rise in arms among us, those very negroes, whom by an inhuman use 
 of his negative he had refused us permission to exclude by law ; by endeavouring to 
 bring on tiie inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known 
 rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions of 
 existence ; by transporting a large army of foreign mercenaries, to complete the work 
 of death, desolation and tyranny, then already begun with circumstances of cruelty 
 and perfidy unworthy the head of a civilized nation ; by answering our repeated pe- 
 titions for redress with a repetition of injuries ; and finally, by abandoning the helm 
 of Government, and declaring us out of his allegiance and protection : by which se- 
 veral acts of misrule, the Government of this country, as before exercised under the 
 Crown of Great Britain, was totally dissolved : Did, therefore, having maturely con- 
 
DEBATES OF THE LONVENTION. 
 
 793 
 
 sidered the premises, and viewing with great concern the deplorable condition, to 
 which this once happy country would be reduced, unless some regular adequate mode 
 of civil polity should be speedily adopted, and in compliance with the recommendation 
 of the General Congress, ordain and declare a form of Government of Virginia : 
 
 And whereas the General Assembly of Virginia, by an act passed on the tenth day 
 of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-nine, 
 entitled, an act to organize a Convention, did authorise and provide for tlie election, 
 by the people, of Delegates and Representatives, to meet and assemble, in General 
 Convention, at the Capitol in the City of Richmond, on the first ^londay of October 
 in the year last aforesaid, to consider, discuss and propose, a new Constitution, or al- 
 terations and amendments of the existing Constitution of this Commonwealth, to be 
 submitted to the people, and to be by them ratified or rejected : 
 
 We, therefore, the Delegates and Representatives of the good people of Virginia, ' 
 elected and in Convention assembled, in pursuance of the said act of Assembly, do 
 submit and propose to the people the following amended. Constitution and Form of 
 Government for this Commonwealth, tliat is to say : 
 
 I. The Legislative, Executive and Judiciary Departments, shall be separate and 
 distinct, so that neither exercise the powers properly beloncring to either of the others ; 
 nor shall any person exercise the powers of more than one of them at the same time, 
 except that the Justices of the County Courts shall be eligible to either House of 
 Assembly. 
 
 II. The Legislature shall be formed of two distinct branches, v,-hich together shall 
 be a complete Legislature, and shall be called the General Assembly of Virginia. 
 
 III. One of these shall be called the House of Delegates, and shall consist of one 
 hundred and twenty-seven members, to be chosen annually, for and by the several 
 counties, cities, towns and boroughs of the Commonwealth : whereof twenty-nine 
 Delegates shall be chosen for and by the twenty-six counties lying West of the Alle- 
 ghany mountains : twenty-four for and by the fourteen counties lying between the 
 Alleghany and Blue Ridge of mountains: forty for and by the twenty-nine counties 
 lying East of the Blue Rido'e and above tide-water ;. and thirty-four for and by the 
 counties, cities, towns and boroucrhs, lying upon tide-water, that is to say : Of the 
 twenty-six counties lying West of the Alleghany, the counties of Harrison. Ohio and 
 Vrashington, shall each elect two Delegates;, and the counties of Brooke, Cabell, 
 Grayson, Greenbrier, Giles, Kanawha. Lee, Lewis. Logan, ]Mason. Monongalia, Mon- 
 roe, Montgomery, Nicholas, Pocahontas, Preston. Randolph, P».ussell. Scott. Tazewell, 
 Tyler, Wood and Wythe, shall each elect one Delegate. Of the fourteen counties 
 lying between the Alleghany and Blue Ridfre of mountains, the counties of Frede- 
 rick and Shenandoah shall each elect three Delerrates ; the counties of Augusta, Bo- 
 tetourt, Hampshire, Jefferson, Rockingham and Rockbridge, shall each elect two De- 
 legates; the counties of Berkeley and Morgan shall together elect two Delegates ; 
 and the counties of Alleghany, Bath. Hardy "and Pendleton, shall each elect one De- 
 legate. Of the twenty-nine counties lying East of the Blue Ridge of mountains and 
 above tide-water, the county of Loudoun shall elect three Delegates : the counties of 
 Albemarle, Bedford, Buckingham. Campbell, Culpeper, Fauquier. Halifax, ]\Iecklen- 
 burg and Pittsylvania, shall each elect two Delegates; and the counties of Ameha, 
 Amherst, Brunswick, Charlotte, Cumberland, Dinwiddle, Fluvanna, Franklin, Gooch- 
 land, Henry, Louisa, Lunenburg, Madison, Nelson, Nottoway, Orange, Patrick, Pow- 
 hatan and Prince Edward, shall each elect one Delegate. And of the counties, cities, 
 towns and boroughs, lying on tide-water, the counties of Accomack and Norfolk shall 
 each elect tvro Delegates; the counties of Caroline, Chesterfield, Essex. Fairfax, 
 Greensville, Gloucester, Hanover, Henrico, Isle of Wight, King &, Queen, King 
 William, Nansemond, New Kent, Northumberland, Northampton, Princess Anne, 
 Prince William, Southampton, Spottsylvania. Stafford and Sussex, and the city of 
 Richmond, the borough of Norfolk, and the town of Petersburg, shall each elect one 
 Delegate; the counties of Lancaster and Piichmond shall togetlier elect one Dele- 
 gate ; the counties of Westm.oreland and King George shall together elect one De- 
 legate ; the counties of ^Matthews and ^Middlesex shall together elect one Deleorate ; the 
 counties of Elizabeth City, Warwick and York, shall together elect one Delegate : the 
 counties of James City and Charles City, and the city of Wilhamsburg.^shall to 
 gether elect one Delegate ; and the counties of Prince George and Surry shall to^ 
 gether elect one Delegate. 
 
 IV. The other House of the General Assembly shall be called the Senate, and 
 shall consist of thirty-two members, of whom thirteen shall be chosen for and bv the 
 counties Iving West of the Blue Ridge of mountains, and nineteen for and by the 
 counties, cities, towns and boroughs, lying East thereof; and for the election of whom, 
 the counties, cities, towns and boroughs, shall be divided into thirty-two districts, as 
 herein after provided. Each county of the respective districts, at the time of the 
 first election of its Delegate or Delegates under this Constitution, shall vote for one 
 Senator; and the sheriffs or other officers holdmcr the election for each county citv 
 
 100 ^ '' 
 
794 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 town or borough, within five days at farthest after the last county, city, town or bo- 
 rough election in the district, shall meet at some convenient place, and from the polls 
 so taken in tlieir respective counties, cities, towns or boroughs, return as a Senator 
 the person who shall have the greatest number of votes in the whole district. To 
 keep up this Assembly by rotation, the districts shall be equally divided into four 
 classes, and numbered by lot. At the end of one year after the first general election, 
 the eight members elected by the first division shall be displaced, and the vacancies 
 thereby occasioned, supplied from such class or division by new election in the man- 
 ner aforesaid. This rotation shall be applied to each division according to its number, 
 and continued in due order annually. And for the election of Senators, the counties 
 of Brooke, Ohio and Tyler, shall form one district : the counties of Monongalia, 
 Preston and Randolph, shall form another district: the counties of Harrison, Lewis 
 ■and Wood, shall form another district: the counties of Kanawha, Mason, Cabell, 
 Logan and Nicholas, shall form another district : the counties of Greenbrier, Monroe, 
 Giles, Pocahontas and Alleghany, shall form another district : the counties of Wyihe, 
 Grayson and Tazewell, shall form another district : the counties of Washington, 
 Russell, Scott and Lee, shall form another district : the counties of Berkeley, Morgan 
 and Hampshire, shall form another district : the counties of Jefferson and Frederick 
 shall form another district : the county of Shenandoah shall form another district : 
 the counties of Rockingham, Hardy and Pendleton, shall form another district: the 
 counties of Augusta, Bath and Rockbridge, shall form another district : the counties 
 of Botetourt and Montgomery shall form another district : the counties of Loudoun 
 and Fairfax shall form another district : the counties of Fauquier and Prince William 
 shall form another district : the counties of Stafford, King George, Westmoreland, 
 Richmond, Lancaster and Northumberland, shall form another district: the counties 
 of Culpeper, Madison and Orange, shall form another district: the counties of Albe- 
 marle, Nelson and Amherst, shall form another district : the counties of Fluvanna, 
 Goochland, Louisa and Hanover, shall form another district: the counties of Spott- 
 sylvania, Caroline and Essex, shall form another district: the counties of King & 
 Queen, King William, Gloucester, Matthews and Middlesex, shall form another dis- 
 trict : the counties of Accomack, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York and Warwick, 
 and the city of Williamsburg, shall form another district: the counties of Charles 
 City, James City, New Kent and Henrico, and the city of Richmond, shall form ano- 
 ther district: the counties of Bedford, Franklin and Patrick, shall form another dis- 
 trict: the counties of Campbell, Henry and Pittsylvania, shall form another district: 
 the counties of Halifax and Mecklenburg shall form another district : the counties of 
 Charlotte, Lunenburg, Nottoway and Prince Edward, shall form another district: the 
 counties of Buckingham, Cumberland and Powhatan, shall form another district : the 
 counties of Amelia, Chesterfield and Dinwiddle, shall form another district : the coun- 
 ties of Brunswick, Greensville, Southampton and Sussex, shall form another district : 
 the town of Petersburg, and the counties of Prince George, Surry and Isle of Wight, 
 shall form another district: and the counties of Nansemond, Norfolk and Princess 
 Anne, and the borough of Norfolk, shall form another district. 
 
 V. Any person may be elected a Senator, who shall have attained to the age of 
 thirty years, and shall be actually a resident and freeholder within the district, or duly 
 qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly, according to this Constitution. 
 And any person niiay be elected a member of the House of Delegates, who shall have 
 attained the age of twenty-five years, and shall be actually a resident and freeholder 
 within the county, city, town, borough or election district, or duly qualified to vote 
 for members of the General Assembly, according to this Constitution : Provided, that 
 all Ministers of the Gospel, and Priests of every denomination, shall be incapable of 
 being elected members of eitlier House of Assembly. 
 
 VI. The General Assembly shall meet once or oftener every year. Either House 
 may adjourn itself respectively. A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum 
 to do business ; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and shall be 
 authorised to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under 
 such penalties as each House may provide. And each House shall choose its own 
 Speaker, appoint its own oflicers, settle its own rules of proceeding, and direct writs 
 of election for supplying intermediate vacancies. 
 
 VII. All laws shall originate in the House of Delegates, to be approved or rejected 
 by the Senate, or to be amended with the consent of the House of Delegates, except 
 money bills, which in no instance shall be altered by the Senate, but wholly approved 
 or rejected. 
 
 VIII. The members of the Assembly shall receive for their services a compensation 
 to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the public Treasury ; but no law increasing the 
 compensation of the members, shall take effect until the end of the next annual session 
 after such law shall have been enacted. And no Senator or Delegate shall, during the 
 term for which he shall have been elected, be appointed to any civil office of profit 
 under the Commonwealth^ which shall have been created^or the emoluments of which 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 795 
 
 shall have been increased, during such term, except such offices as may be filled hy 
 elections by the people. 
 
 IX. The Governor, the Judges of the Court of Appeals and Superior Courts, and 
 all others offending against the^tate, either by mal-administration, corruption, neglect 
 of duty, or any other high crime or misdemeanor, shah be impeachable by the House 
 of Delegates ; such impeachment to be prosecuted before the Senate, ■u-hich shall have 
 the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, the Senate 
 shall be on oath or affirmation : and no person shall be convicted without the concur- 
 rence of two-thirds of all the members of the Senate. Judgment in cases of im- 
 peachment, shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification 
 to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit, under the Commonwealth : but 
 the party convicted shall nevertheless be hable and subject to indictment, trial, judg- 
 ment and punishment, according to law. 
 
 X. The Legislature shall not pass any bill of attainder; or any ex post facto law-; 
 or any law impairing the obliofation of contracts ; or any law, whereby private pro- 
 perty shall be taken for public uses, without just compensation ; or an}- law abridging 
 the freedom of Speech, or of the Press. No man shall be compelled to frequent or 
 support an_v religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever ;. nor shall any man be 
 enforced, restrained, molested or burthened, in his body or goods, or otherwise suffer, 
 on account of his religious opinions or belief ; but all men shall be free to profess, and 
 by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and the same shall in 
 no wise affect, diminish or enlaro-e their civil capacities. And the Legislature shall 
 not prescribe any religious test w-liatever ; nor establish by law any subordination or 
 preference between different sects or denominations : nor confer any peculiar privi- 
 leges or advantages on any one sect or denomination over others ; nor pass any law 
 requiring or authorising any religious society, or the people of any district "within 
 this Commonwealth, to levy on themselves or others, any tax for the erection or re- 
 pair of any house for public worship, or for the support of any church or ministry ; 
 but it shall be lefl free to every person to select his religious instructor, and to make for 
 his support such private contract as he shall please. 
 
 XL The Legislature may provide by law that no person shall be capable of holding 
 or being elected to any post of profit, trust or emolument, civil or military. Legisla- 
 tive, Executive or Judicial, under the Government of this Commonwealth, w^ho shall 
 hereafter fight a duel, or send or accept a chailege to fight a duel, the probable issue 
 of which maybe the death of the challenger or challenged, or who shall be a second 
 to either party, or shall in any manner aid or assist in such duel, or shall be know- 
 ingly the bearer of such challenge or acceptance ; but no person shall be so disquali- 
 fied by reason of his having heretofore fought such duel, or sent or accepted such 
 challenge, or been second in such duel, or bearer of such challenge or acceptance. 
 
 XIL Every white male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein, aged twenty- 
 one years and upwards, being qualified to exercise the Right of Suffrage according 
 to the former Constitution and laws ; and every such citizen, being possessed, or 
 whose tenant for years, at will or at sufferance, is possessed of an estate of freehold 
 in land of the value of twenty-five dollars, and so assessed to be if any assessment 
 thereof be required by law ; and every such citizen, being possessed, as tenant in 
 common, joint tenant or parcener, of an interest in or share of land, and having aa 
 estate of freehold therein, such interest or share being of the value of twentj'-five 
 dollars, and so assessed to be if any assessment thereof be required by law : and every 
 such citizen being entitled to a reversion or vested remainder in fee, expectant on an 
 estate for hfe or lives, in land of the value of fifty dollars, and so assessed to be if any 
 assessment thereof be required by law^;. (each and every such citizen, unless his title 
 shall have come to him by descent, devise, marriage or marriage-settlement, having 
 been so possessed or entitled for six months) ; and every such citizen, who shall ovrn 
 and be himself in actual occupation of a leasehold estate, with the evidence of title 
 recorded two months before he siiali offer to vote, of a term originally not less than 
 five years, of the annual value or rent of twenty dollars : and every such citizen, 
 who for twelve months next preceding has been a house-keeper and head of a family 
 within the county, city, town, borough or election district where he may offer to vote, 
 and shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within 
 the preceding year, and actually paid the same— and no other persons — shall be quali- 
 fied to vote for members of the General Assembly in the county, city, town or bo- 
 rough, respectively, wherein such land shall lie, or such house-keeper and head of a 
 family shall live. And in case of two or more tenants in common, joint tenants or 
 parceners, in possession, reversion or remainder, having interest in land, the value 
 whereof shall be insufficient to entitle them all to vote, they shall together have as 
 many votes as the value of the land shall entitle them to ; and the Legislature shall 
 by law provide the mode in which their vote or votes shall in such case be given : 
 Provided, nevertheless, That the Right of Suffrage shall not be exercised by any per- 
 Bon of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, soldier, 
 
796 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 seaman or marine, in the service of the United States, or by any person convicted of 
 any infamous offence. 
 
 XIII. In all elections in tliis Commonwealth, to any office or place of trust, honor 
 or profit, the votes shall be given ope^ly, or viva voce, and not by ballot. 
 
 XIV. The Chief Executive power of this Commonwealth, shall be vested in a 
 Governor. He shall hold his otHce, during the term of three years, to commence on 
 the first day of January next succeeding his election, or on such other day, as may 
 from time to time, be prescribed by law ; and he shall be ineligible to that office, for 
 three years next after his term of service shall have expired. He shall be elected as 
 follows : At the first election for members of the House of Delegates, to be held un- 
 der this Constitution, and every third year thereafter, at the times and places of hold- 
 ing such elections, in the several counties and corporate towns of this Common- 
 wealth, the persons qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly shall vote 
 also for a Governor. A poll of the votes so given in each election district shall be 
 duly kept, authenticated, certified, and laid before the General Assembly, at their 
 next annual meeting, in such manner as shall be prescribed by law. These polls shall 
 be examined by a joint committee of both Houses — the number of votes given for 
 each person as Governor, ascertained, and the result declared by resolution of the 
 General Assembly. The person having the greatest number of votes, if that be a 
 majority of the whole number given, and if he be eligible to the office, shall be de- 
 clared duly elected Governor. If no such person have a majority of the whole num- 
 ber of votes given, then it shall be declared that no election hath been made ; and 
 the General Assembly shall proceed, by joint vote of both Houses, to elect a Gover- 
 nor, from those, how many soever there may be. who being eligible, shall have the 
 two highest numbers on the polls. 
 
 XV. No person sliall be eligible to the office of Governor, unless he shall have at- 
 tained the age of thirty years, shall be a native citizen of the United States, and shall 
 have been a citizen of this Commonwealth for five years next preceding his election. 
 
 XVI. The Governor shall receive for his services a compensation to be fixed by 
 law, which shall be neither increased nor diminished, during his continuance in office. 
 
 XVII. He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed ; shall communicate 
 to the Legislature, at every session, the condition of the Commonwealth, and recom- 
 mend to their consideration such measures as he may deem expedient. He shall be 
 Commander-in-chief of the land and naval forces of the State. He shall have power 
 to embody the militia, when in his opinion, the public safety shall require it; to con- 
 vene the Legislature, on application of a majority of the members of the House of 
 Delegates, or when, in his opinion, the interest of the Commonwealth may require it; 
 to grant reprieves and pardons, except where the prosecution shall have been carried 
 on by the House of Delegates, or the law shall otherwise particularly direct ; to con- 
 duct, either in person, or in such manner as shall be prescribed by law, all intercourse 
 with other and foreign States; and during the recess of the Legislature, to fill,p-<? 
 tempore, all vacancies in those offices, which it may be the duty of the Legislature to 
 fill permanently : Provided, That his appointments to such vacancies shall be by com- 
 missions to expire at the end of the next succeeding session of the General As- 
 sembly. 
 
 XVIII. Commissions and grants shall run in the name of the Commonwealth of 
 Virginia, and bear test by the Governor, with the seal of the Commonwealth annexed, 
 
 XIX. The General Assembly shall provide by law, for the discharge of the Execu- 
 tive duties, in all cases of the temporary inability of the Governor to discharge them, 
 and of vacancy in his office, by reason of his absence from the seat of Governmentj 
 sickness, death, removal from office, resignation, or other cause. 
 
 XX. The manner of appointing militia officers shall be provided for by law ; but no 
 officer below the rank of a Brigadier General, shall be appointed by the General As- 
 sembly. 
 
 XXI. A Treasurer shall be appointed annually by joint vote of both Houses. 
 
 XXII. The Judicial power shall be vested in a Supreme Court of Appeals, in such 
 Superior Courts as the Legislature may from time to time ordain and establish, in the 
 County Courts, and in justices of the peace. The Legislature may also vest such ju- 
 risdiction as shall be deemed necessary in Corporation Courts, and in the magistrates 
 who may belong to the corporate body. The jurisdiction of these tribunals shall be 
 regulated by law. The Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of the Superior 
 Courts shall hold their offices during good behaviour, or until removed in the manner 
 prescribed in this Constitution ; and shall, at the same time, hold no other office, ap- 
 pointment, or public trust ; and the acceptance thereof by either of them shall vacate 
 his Judicial office. 
 
 XXIII. The present Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals, of the General 
 Court, and of the Superior Courts of Chancery, shall remain in office until the termi- 
 nation of the session of the first Legislature "elected under this Constitutionj and no 
 longer 
 
DEBATES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 797 
 
 XXIV, The Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of the Superior Courts 
 shall be elected b}- the joint vote of both Houses of the General Assembly. 
 
 XXV^. The Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of the Superior Courts 
 shall receive fised and adequate salaries, wliich shall not be diminished during their 
 continuance in ofnce, 
 
 XXVI. On the creation of any new county, justices of the peace shall be appointed, 
 in the first instance, in such manner as may be prescribed by law. "When vacancies 
 shall occur in any county, or it shall, for any cause, be deemed necessary to increase 
 their number, appointments shall be made by the Governor, on the recommendation 
 of their respective County Courts. 
 
 XXVII. The Clerks of the several Courts, when vacancies sliall occur, shall be ap- 
 pointed by their respective Courts, and the tenure of office, as well of those now in 
 office as of those who may be hereafter appointed, shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 XXVIII. Judges may be removed from office by a concurrent vote of both Houses 
 of the General Assembly : but two-thirds of the whole number elected to each House 
 must concur in such vote, and the cause of removal shall be entered on the journals of 
 each. The Judare asrainst whom the Legislature may be about to proceed, shall receive 
 notice thereof, accompanied with a copy of the causes alleged for his removal, at least 
 twenty days before the day on which either House of the G-eneral Assembly shall act 
 thereupon. 
 
 XXiX. Writs shall run in the name of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and bear 
 test by the Clerks of the several Courts. Indictments shall conclude Against the 
 peace and dignity of the Commonwealth. 
 
 XXX. The Executive Department of the Government shall remain as at present 
 orgamized, and the Governor and Privy Councillors shall continue in office, xmtU a 
 Governor elected, under this Constitution, shall come into office ; and all other per- 
 sons in office when this Constitution shall be adopted, except as is herein otherwise 
 expressly directed, shall continue in office, till successors shall be appointed, or the 
 law shall otherwise provide ;. and all the Courts of Justice now existino" shall continue 
 with their present jurisdiction, until and except so far as, the Judicial system may or 
 shall be hereafter otherwise organized by the Legislature. 
 
 XXXI. The Declaration of Ptights made on the 12th June. 1776, by the represen- 
 tatives of the good people of Virginia assembled in full and free Convention, which 
 pertained to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of Government, re- 
 quiring in the opinion of this Convention no amendment, shall be prefixed to this Con- 
 stitution, and have the same relation thereto as it had to the former Constitution of 
 this Commonwealth. 
 
 The report having been read at the Clerk's table, the Chair announced to the Con- 
 vention that it was open to amendment. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh enquired, whether this form of a Constitution was to be considered 
 and treated as an amendment to the amendments agreed upon before, or a substan- 
 tive proposition, now presented for the nrst time : 
 
 The Chair replied, that it was to be considered in the latter point of view, the whole 
 being presented as one substantive proposition, submitted for the action of the body. 
 
 3Ir. Fitzhugh then further enquired, whether a question wels to be taken separately 
 on each article .- 
 
 The Chair replied in the negative : it would be treated much as a bill was when it 
 had received its first and second reading, it would be open to amendments, and when 
 all the amendments had been agreed upon, the general question would then be put on 
 engrossing the report as amended, for a third reading. The Chair did not consider 
 itself bound to require tlie form of a first and second reading and commitment, as was 
 usual with bills. 
 
 Mr. Johnson thought differently, and that it ought to go through the same stages 
 as a bill. 
 
 The Chair rephed that such had not been the course in other Conventions : In Mas- 
 sachusetts, they estabUshed it as one of their rules at the commencement of the ses- 
 sion, that every resolution proposing an alteration in the Constitution, should be read 
 on two several days, before it was finally acted upon : when the committee appointed 
 to reduce the Constitution to form, made their report, they presented it in the form 
 of fourteen articles ; and the Convention by an order which they made, declared that 
 the question should be put on each article thus : '•' Shall tliis article of amendment, 
 be proposed to the people of this Commonwealth, for their ratification and adoption 
 The Chair sedd, tliat after the engrossment, he would have presented the final ques- 
 tion in this form : Shall tliis Constitution be submitted to the people of the Common- 
 wealth, for their ratification and adoption 'r' And when all the amendments had been 
 agreed upon, the question would then be put upon engrossing the Constitution as 
 amended. 
 
 A desultory debate nov' ensued on the proper course to be pursued in respect to 
 the report. It was read a second time by its title — and a motion being then made to 
 
798 
 
 DEBATES OF 
 
 THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 commit it to a Committee of the Whole, it was negatived. The debate was then re- 
 sumed : and after some time, the vote just passed was re-considered, and the report 
 was committed to a Committee of the Whole House, and made the order of the day 
 to-morrow. Some parts of it havhig been added by the Committee in MS. since the 
 printing of the report, the whole was ordered to be re-printed and sent to the mem- 
 bers this evening. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, January 5, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Courtney of the Methodist Church. 
 
 Pursuant to the order of yesterday, the House went immediately into Committee 
 of the Whole, Mr. Stanard in the Chair. 
 
 The draft of the new Constitution reported by the Select Committee, was then 
 taken up and read section by section for amendment. 
 
 To the first three sections no amendment was offered. 
 
 The third having been read (which apportions the representation in the House of 
 Delegates, among the election districts,) 
 
 Mr. Naylor complained of the arrangement, particularly as to its bearing on the 
 county of Berkeley — and contended that Shenandoah had more than was its due, 
 when the population of the two counties was compared : and moved that one Dele- 
 gate be taken from Shenandoah and given to Berkeley. 
 
 Mr. Boyd, after some general remarks as to the duty of equalizing the representa- 
 tion so far as was consistent with preserving the existing county lines, went into an 
 examination of the distribution of the twenty-four representatives assigned to the 
 Valley among its fourteen counties. He pointed out the tliree interests into which 
 the Valley was divided, as the James River interest, the Shenandoah interest, and 
 the Potomac interest. He complained that Shenandoah should have three Delegates 
 and a Senator, and thought two Delegates was all that county could justly claim. He 
 went into a number of statistical details which we cannot embody in the general 
 sketch of the outlines of the debate, which our limits prescribe to us. 
 
 Mr. Cooke suggested to both the gentlemen that they had better defer their amend- 
 ment for the present, as another motion would shortly be made for so enlarging the 
 number of the House of Delegates as to enable the Select Committee to make a more 
 just and satisfactory distribution of the representation, while the same general pro- 
 portion as at present, was prescribed among the four great divisions of the State. 
 
 They thereupon consented to withdraw the motion for the present. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne suggested it as very desirable that if such a motion should be made, 
 it should be done with as little delay as possible. 
 
 Mr. Cooke then said, that in examining the details on the general subject, it had 
 some time since occurred to him, that many practical difficulties and complaints might 
 be obviated, by taking a larger number than one hundred and twenty-seven for the 
 House of Delegates: he believed that one hundred and forty would be a number 
 much more easily apportioned among the counties, in the same ratio as was already 
 agreed upon. That would give thirty-two to the trans- Alleghany country ; twenty- 
 seven to the Valley ; forty-three to the middle country, and thirty-eight to the district 
 on tide-water. Mr. C. briefly shewed how this plan would afiect the respective divi- 
 sions of the State. To try the sense of the Committee, he moved to strike out one 
 hundred and twenty-seven, and insert one hundred and forty. 
 
 Mr. Leigh stated the very great difficulties which Mr. Tazewell and himself had 
 experienced in apportioning the thirty-four Delegates assigned to the lower country ; 
 (which was their task in the Committee :) agreed with Mr. Cooke, that a larger num- 
 ber would be much more readily apportioned, but expressed his wish that the number 
 should not be fixed, farther than to assign a maximum, say one hundred and fifty, be- 
 yond which it should not go. Possibly one hundred and forty might prove very con- 
 venient : but he thought it best to leave the Committee some discretion. He con- 
 cluded by asking a division of the question on striking out and inserting. 
 
 It was so divided accordingly, and being put first on striking out, 
 
 Mr. Tyler expressed his cordial approbation of the suggestion of Mr. Leigh. He 
 disclaimed all idea of stickling for a larger representation for his own district — on the 
 plan of a House of one hundred and twenty-seven, it had had perfect and entire jus- 
 tice done to it : but should the larger number prevail, an arrangement might be made 
 which would bind the people of that district as one man to the adoption of the new 
 Constitution. They had, though with great reluctance, given up a county represen- 
 tation as impracticable : but the plan he spoke of would meet all their wishes. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 799 
 
 The question being put on striking out the number one hundred and twenty-seven, 
 it was carried : Ayes 54. 
 
 Mr. Leigh proposed that the third section be passed by for the present, stating it to 
 be his purpose afterward to offer a resolution expressive of the view he had submitted. 
 
 Mr. Cooke thereupon withdrew his motion to insert one hundred and forty. 
 
 On motion of iNIr. Goode, the fourth section also was passed by. 
 
 The fifth section having been read as follows : 
 
 " V. Any person may be elected a Senator who shall have attained the age of thirty 
 3^ears, and shall be actually a resident and freeholder within the district, or duly qua- 
 hfied to vote for members of the General Assembly according to this Constitution. 
 And any person may be elected a member of the House of Delegates, who shall have 
 attained the age of twenty-five years, and shall be actually a resident and freeholder 
 wuthin the county, city, town, borough or election district, or duly quahfied to vote 
 for members of the General Assembly according to this Constitution. Provided, 
 that all Ministers of the Gospel and Priests of every denomination, shall be incapable 
 of being elected members of either House of Assembly." 
 
 It was, on motion of Mr. Leigh, amended, by striking out the words " or duly" 
 before ''• qualified to vote :" so as to make that part of the section read, any person 
 may be elected a Senator who shall have attained the age of thirty years, and shall 
 be actually a resident and freeholder within the district, qualified to vote for members 
 of the General Assembly." 
 
 The same amendment was made in the latter part of the same section, so as to 
 cause it to read, any person may be elected a member of the House of Delegates 
 who shall have attained the age of twenty-five years, and shall be actually a resident 
 and freeholder within the county, city, borough or election district, qualified to votefoT 
 members of the General Assf mbly." 
 
 The sixth section was then read as follows : 
 VL The General Assembly shall meet once or oftener every year. Either House 
 may adjourn itself respectively. A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum 
 to do business ; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and be authorised 
 to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under such penal- 
 ties as each House may provide. And each House shall choose its own Speaker, ap- 
 point its own ofiicers. settle its own rules of proceeding, and direct writs of election 
 for supplying intermediate vacancies." 
 
 On motion of jMr. Leigh, the word "respectively," in the second sentence, was 
 stricken out as superfluous. 
 
 Mr. Chapman moved further to amend the section by striking out the words, Ei- 
 ther House may adjourn itself," and to insert in lieu thereof, Aeither House, during 
 the session of the Legislature shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more 
 than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be 
 sitting." 
 
 In supporting the amendment, Mr. Chapman said, that his object was to prevent 
 one House from adjourning (as at present) for two or three weeks while the other 
 House was sitting. It might be convenient for Senators who lived near the city to 
 go home to their families, but they could be much more profitably employed in at- 
 tending the debates of the House of Delegates during their leisure time. He had 
 himself done so : and at the close of the recess he was already well acquainted with 
 the nature of the business on which the Senate had to act, wliile to those who had 
 been absent all was new and strange. 
 
 The clause allowed the Senate to adjourn when it pleased ; and this might happen 
 just when an important election was coming on. He could not see why one House 
 was not as much bound to sit and do the public business as the other : both were alike 
 servants of the people. In other State Constitutions there was a provision of this 
 kind, as also in that of the United States. The Senate might adjourn to a different 
 part of the State from the Lower House, and at a different season. He thought they 
 ought to be together, and the one not to adjourn without the other. 
 
 Sir. Leigh said, that the clause proposed to be stricken out, was a provision copied 
 from the old Constitution. There was not a single instance to be pointed out, where 
 there had been any want of good correspondence between the two Houses ; nor was 
 there likely to be, unless some very important case should occur, where one House 
 might suppose the other to be pressing, w-ith undue eagerness, some great measure, 
 which ought first to be understood and pronounced upon by the people. In all Con- 
 stitutions of Government where there was a Legislature, some provision was made 
 for proroguing their session. Before tlie revolution, this power had resided in the 
 King, and his representative, the Governor;, but, at the revolution, that power was 
 taken away from the Executive; and this was one of the most important changes in 
 our form of Government. But, as the power of prorogation was a very important one, 
 it ought to be preserved somewhere ; in one or other House of the Legislature. It 
 had been found useful in practice, to repose it in each House^ as it respected the other : 
 
800 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 that was virtually the effect of the right of adjournment ; and it had hitherto been 
 found to occasion no inconvenience. Mr. L. said, he could readily conceive of cir- 
 cumstances, where its exercise might be all important to the peace, safety, and happi- 
 ness of the community. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, he had long thought that some such provision ought to be adopt- 
 ed, as was now proposed by the gentleman from Giles. As to the power of proroga- 
 tion, it was a power which had no application, except to the whole Legislature. The 
 question was, whether one House should have the power of adjourning itself for a 
 long time, without the consent of the other If this was prorogation, the Senate was 
 in the habit of proroguing itself every session. Mr. N. contended, that this practice 
 led to a loss of time — the one House would not exert itself, if the other was absent : 
 or if it did, the other, on its return, found its table groaning under an accumulation of 
 business. In times of faction, one flouse might defeat a measure which was matured 
 in the other, by adjourning indefinitely. Both should be kept at their post. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, the gentleman could not fail to perceive, that it was as much in the 
 power of the Senate to defeat an obnoxious measure, by a direct vote, as by an adjourn- 
 ment ; but the question was, whether they should be allowed to defeat such a measure, 
 by a direct vote, or whether, by virtually proroguing them, the other House should 
 give time for the question to be brought before the people. Mr. L. argued to shew, 
 that the public business would not be advanced, by compelling the Senate to remain 
 in session, when they had nothing to do. Being only a revisory body, they could at 
 any time overtake the Lower House. No injury had resulted from the occasional ad- 
 journments of the Senate, in the early part of the session. The gentleman had said, 
 that tlie power of prorogation applied only to the Legislature as a whole. But the Le- 
 gislature, as a whole, consisted of two bodies; and when one of those had adjourned, 
 the Legislature as a whole was no longer in session ; but was virtually prorogued by 
 such adjournment. Cases might occur, when such a power would be useful and im- 
 portant. 
 
 Suppose the House of Delegates should be seized with the idea that it was expedi- 
 ent to create a little army, or a captain's company of Judges : and should pass a bill 
 for that purpose, and send it up to the Senate. No doubt if such were the will of the 
 people, it must be done — the people must always do, and did in fact do, whatever they 
 pleased. But before the bill should pass the Senate, suppose the Senate should ad- 
 journ over to the ensuing session. By that means the voice of the people would have 
 an opportunity of being heard. He had no idea they would ever be guilty of such 
 folly : but he had merely put a case to shew the operation of the clause proposed to 
 be stricken out. Again — Suppose the Senate to be sitting to try an impeachment 
 brought by the House of Delegates, prosecuted by its agents. What necessity was 
 there that it should continue to sit in its Legislative capacity 1 Might it not adjourn 
 as a Legislature, and continue its sittings as a Judicature But should the amend- 
 ment prevail, this would be prevented. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, that in such a case the House of Delegates would not refuse con- 
 sent, and with that consent, the Senate might adjourn, according to the amendment, 
 at any time. If he could subscribe to the opinion that a power to adjourn in one 
 House, was a power to prorogue the other, he was sure the Convention would never 
 assent to any such measure. But no such power was involved; and the public busi- 
 ness would be accelerated by the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell said, if it was true that we ought to consult past time if we would 
 provide for the future, the House iiad on this subject evidence of the highest order. 
 The clause proposed to be stricken out was in the old Constitution : this power of pro- 
 rogation had existed in its present form for fifty-four years, without occasioning any 
 practical evil, but on the contrary with good effect. 
 
 The Committee had proposed nothing new : the regulation already existed : why 
 should it be changed .'' But farther. Additional power had now been given to the 
 Senate to try impeachments. Who was to try them The Senate : the Senate sitting 
 as a Judicial body. But if this power to adjourn in one House separately from the 
 other was taken away, then the House of Delegates, after all its Legislative business 
 had been completed, must still continue in session so long as the Senate should sit to 
 try the impeachment. But this was surely unnecessary. There could be no need of 
 it so far as the impeachment was concerned, any more than there was for a grand 
 jury to remain during trial in court. After it had instituted the prosecution, it might 
 appoint a committee as its agents to conduct it — what need for the whole body to re- 
 main There could be none. When their Legislative function was discharged, let 
 them have the power to adjourn. Now, therefore, there was much more need than for- 
 merly of the clause : and it had done no harm for fifty-four years. 
 
 Mr. Chapman replied. He said, that admitting such to be the fact, it was reason 
 sufficient to give up the clause that it might by possibility do harm ; for it was the 
 business of the Legislature to guard against the possibility of evil where it could be 
 done. But he denied the fact to be so. He believed that serious evils had grown out 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 it. Loud complaints were Iieard of the practice of the Senate to adjourn from the 
 1st December to 1st January. At this very time, if the Senate had not adjourned, 
 Councillors and a Governor might have been chosen, and the elections would not 
 have been postponed to the close of the session, when the Assembly was pressed with 
 •business. This was too often the case : whereas they ought to be conducted in the 
 early part of the session when more leisure was enjoyed. Complaints were constantly 
 heard as to the adjournments of the Senate ; and he remembered one case, v/here the 
 Lower House had been detained nearly a week waiting for the Senate. As to the ob- 
 jection about the House of Delegates being obliged to remain in session all the while 
 the Senate was trying an impeachment, no such consequence resulted from the 
 amendment. It allowed either House to adjourn with the consent of the other; and 
 doubtless the Senate would not refuse its consent in such a case. In every act of the 
 two bodies, the consent of both was required ; why not in this.'' As the clause now 
 stands, the Senate might adjourn for six months — and then meet at Charlottesville : 
 there was nothing to prevent it. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that two evils were apprehended from the clause : one was 
 that of temporary adjournments during the sitting of the other House ; the other was 
 that of permanent adjournment. He referred to his own experience for sixteen years 
 in the Senate, and testified, that no evil to his knowledge had grown out of its tem- 
 porary adjournment, when it had nothing in the world to do. until such time as it 
 would probably have something that it could do. Vvhether those who. during this 
 time, listened to the reading of petitions in the other House, or sat and beheld 
 them laid on the table without reading — got more benefit than those who returned 
 for a short time to their families, he would not undertake to sa}''. It was true that 
 complaints were made b}'- those mem.bers who remained ill the city: and by those 
 Delegates who found their constituents dissatisfied with the very long sessions of the 
 House of Delegates, and who endeavoured to throw off" the blame on the adjournments 
 of the Senate. The experiment had been tried, and what was the result ? The Se- 
 fiate had sat nominally the whole session : but in reality they could not command a 
 quorum, nor was there any necessity for a quorum during a considerable part of the 
 time. He had never known an instance, after a temporary adjournment, where in 
 ten days the Senate had not been able to master all the business before them, and 
 again to be even with the other House and waiting for business. 
 
 As to permanent adjournment, no good could arise from denying that power. 
 When either body was satisfied it had done all it ought to do, it was to no purpose to 
 hold it together and send it business from the other; for, none could compel them to 
 consent to the measures proposed. Both bodies were needed, in order to pass a law, 
 and both should give their free consent to adjourn. This was the usual course, and 
 the only proper one. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, he was one of those who went for the eiiect of measures. It 
 might happen that the Lower House would reject a bill by a bare majority when 
 many were absent, and might then adjourn to prevent the re-consideration. He asked, 
 if there could have been any necessity for the last fifteen years that the Legislature 
 should sit from the 1st of December to the 1st of March ? Though the Legislature 
 was an electioneering body, and had the opportunity of going home and explaining 
 to their constituents why they sat so long, yet he asked if those long sessions of the 
 Legislature had not had full as much efl:ect in producing the present Convention as 
 the odious Judiciary ? who were not an electioneering body, and could give no ex- 
 planation to their constituents of the reasons why they kept causes so long on the 
 docket. The House threw the responsibility on the Senate, the Senate on the House. 
 One said, the Senate is away, we need not hurry ourselves; the Senate said, the 
 House will do little or nothing till February. But the people, meanwhile, had found 
 out that there was oppression ; and that he took to be one of the principal reasons 
 why they were now met in Convention. Mr. C. said he was for stripping them of 
 this excuse — and should vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Giles. 
 
 Mr. Giles said he felt much doubt and embarrassment on this subject. He observed 
 in the next section a provision which had a bearing on the present amendment : if 
 that section should be altered as he thought it ought to be, then the amendment now 
 proposed might be advantageous. [He then read the seventh section as follows : 
 
 " VII. All laws shall originate in the House of Delegates, to be approved or re- 
 jected by the Senate, or to be amended with the consent of the House of Delegates, 
 except money bills, which in no instance shall be altered by the Senate, but wholly 
 approved or rejected.'"] 
 
 He thought serious evil resulted from the adjournment of the Senate : and this was 
 to be attributed to their not having the power to originate bills. Though greatly at- 
 tached to the old Constitution, he thought in this feafure it ought to be amended. Let 
 the Senate have power to originate all bills but money bills. The power had been 
 given to the Senate of the United States, and with advantage. If the Senate should 
 
 101 
 
802 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 be clothed with this power, tlien it would become important that it should not adjourn 
 without the consent of the other House. 
 
 The argument from the power of the Senate to try impeachments was in favour of 
 the amendment, and not against it. The House of Delegates must be in being, in 
 order to prosecute the impeachment before the other House. In the trial of Judge 
 Chase this had never been questioned, and the utmost expedition was urged to bring 
 that trial to an issue before the 1st of March, on that very ground. If they took from 
 the Constitution of the United States the provision about trying impeachments, they 
 ought to borrow likewise the clause now proposed. Mr. G. said he should vote for 
 the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he should vote against the amendment, and that on a principle 
 which he had learned before he came into public life ; and by which he had been go- 
 verned during the whole course of that life, that it was always unwise — yes — highly 
 unwise, to disturb a thing that was at rest. This was a great cardinal principle that 
 should govern all wise statesmen — never without the strongest necessity to disturb 
 that which was at rest. He should vote against the amendment on another and an 
 inferior consideration. Whatever opinion might have been expressed as to a multi- 
 tude of counsellors, there was but one among considerate men as to a multiplicity of 
 laws. The objection urged by the gentleman from Richmond, over the way, (Mr. 
 Nicholas,) to the existing clause, was precisely one of the strongest motives with him 
 for prefering the amendment. I am much opposed, said Mr. R., except in a great 
 emergency — and then the Legislative machine is always sure to work with sufficient 
 rapidity — the steam is then up — 1 am much opposed to this " dispatch of business." The 
 principles of free Government in this country, (and if they fail — if they should be 
 cast away — -here — they are lost forever, I fear, to the world,) have more to fear from 
 over legislation than from any other cause. Yes, Sir — they have more to fear from 
 armies of Legislators, and armies of Judges, than from any other, or from all other 
 causes. Besides the great manufactory at Washington, we have twenty-four labora- 
 tories more at work, all making laws. In Virginia we have now two in operation — 
 one engaged in ordinary legislation, and another hammering at the fundamental law. 
 Among all these lawyers. Judges, and Legislators, there is a great oppression on the 
 people, who are neither lawyers, Judges, nor Legislators, nor ever expect to be- 
 an oppression barely more tolerable than any which is felt under the European Go- 
 vernments. Sir, I never can forget, that in the great and good book to which I look 
 for all truth and all wisdom, the book of Kings succeeds the book of Judges. 
 
 Mr. Mercer, after a few words that could not be heard from the confusion in the 
 House, was believed to say, that experience, if it v/as to be consulted at all, ought to 
 be consulted on both sides of the question. He believed, that the clause which it was 
 proposed to strike out, had never been used as a power of prorogation from the foun- 
 dation of the Government. He would go farther — On inserting the clause, he be- 
 lieved such a notion never once entered into the conception of the framers of the Consti- 
 tution. The power to adjourn was given in no part of the Constitution but this, (save 
 in that clause where a certain number are declared to be a quorum to adjourn,) and 
 it never had been used for the purpose of proroguing the Assenibly, but only for the 
 convenience of one of the branches of that body. Experience, therefore, was so far 
 on the side of the friends of the amendment. 
 
 Should the House of Delegates be reduced to the number of one hundred and 
 twenty-seven, greater dispatch of business might be hoped for. At all events, mere 
 courtesy, if nothing else, required one House to notify the other of its intention to 
 adjourn, when the adjournment was to be for several weeks, and to enquire v/hether 
 there was any pressure of business, which would render such a step inconvenient,, 
 That would be, in practice, the whole result of the amendment. The Senate would 
 make this enquiry, and the House of Delegates, unless there were strong reasons to 
 the contrary, would always give its assent. The question had been argued, as if the 
 one body would arbitrarily retain the other in session, when there was no good reason 
 for doing so. But there were surely no grounds for such a presumption. As to the 
 case of an army of Judges being created by the Lower House, the Senate needed no 
 proroguing power to thwart such a plan — it had only to reject it by its vote — and then 
 the measure could go to the people, and they could let their pleasure be known to 
 their Delegates at the next session. Mr. M. concluded, by insisting that no evil had 
 followed such a measure as was proposed by the amendment, though it had been tried 
 by all the other States, and by the General Government; so that experience was for 
 and not against it. 
 
 Mr. George, in reply to Mr. Johnson, referred to the session of 1817-18, when the 
 House of Delegates had passed upwards of ninety revised bills during the recess of the 
 Senate, of which that body, on its return, acted only on twenty — and the House had, 
 in consequence, to take up the other seventy , and pass them again the next session. 
 He had been for nine sessions in the House of Delegates, and not one had passed 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 803 
 
 without very serious complaints on the subject of the Senate's adjournment, and in 
 one session, the House had to wait a week for the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he well remembered the period to which the gentleman alluded— 
 and the Senate had never done a wiser thing, than to pass no more than twenty of 
 those revised bills — and it would have done a yet wiser thing, if it had retained them 
 still longer. In tico sessions the Legislature had revised laws, which had been the 
 work of forty sessions of the same body. 
 
 The question was now taken on the amendment, and decided in the affirmative — 
 Ayes 50. 
 
 So the House resolved, that neither House should have the power of adjourning 
 for m.ore than three days, without the consent of the other. 
 Mr. Summers moved the following amendment : 
 
 " But if vacancies shall occur by death or resignation, during the recess of the Ge- 
 neral Assembly, such writs may be issued by the Governor, under such regulations 
 as may be prescribed by law." 
 
 The amendment was briefly explained by the mover. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell and Mr. Randolph suggested cases in which some difficulty would 
 arise, and considered the amendment as trenching on the privileges of the Houses to 
 judge of the qualifications of their own members. 
 
 Mr. Summers replied, and denied any such consequence to be possible, because the 
 Legislature was itself to prescribe whatever rules and limitations it might judge ex- 
 pedient to guard its own rights. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend the amendment, by inserting after the word " vacancies," 
 ** occurring by death or resignation;" v\'hich was agreed to. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. Summers, as thus amended, was carried — Ayes 51. 
 
 Mr. Mercer moved tlie following : 
 Each House shall judge of the election, qualification and returns of its members, 
 may punish its members for disorderly behaviour, and with the concurrence of two- 
 thirds, expel a member, but not a second time for the same offence." 
 
 The amendment was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Mercer then moved the following : 
 
 *^ Senators and Delegates shall, in all cases, except treason, felony, or breach of the 
 peace, be privileged from arrest during the session of the General Assembly, and in 
 going to and returning from the same ; and for any speech or debate in either House, 
 they shall not be questioned in any other place." 
 
 Mr. Leigh opposed the amendment as unnecessary, parliamentary law being well 
 established and understood. 
 
 Tlie amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Mercer offered the following : 
 Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and publish all such parts 
 thereof as the public welfare may not require to be kept secret — and the ayes and 
 noes on any question shall, at the request of one-tenth of the members present, be 
 entered on the Journals." 
 
 This also was rejected by the House. 
 
 The seventh section was then read as follows : 
 VH. All laws shall originate in the House of Delegates, to be approved or re= 
 jected by the Senate, or to he amended with the consent of the House of Delegates, 
 except money bills, which in no instance shall be altered by the Senate, but wholly 
 approved or rejected." 
 
 Mr. Mercer moved to amend it, by striking out the following : Except money 
 bills, which in no instance shall be altered by the Senate, but wholly approved or 
 rejected." 
 
 The amendment was rejected — Ayes 35, Noes not counted. 
 
 Mr. Giles now moved farther to amend the section, so as to make it read, "All 
 money bills shall originate in the House of Delegates only, and in no instance shall 
 be altered in the Senate, but wholly approved or rejected." 
 
 Mr. P. P. Barbour said, that the effect of the amendment would be, to give to the 
 Senate power to originate all bills, (except money bills,) equally with the House of 
 Delegates. He was opposed to such a plan. He had had some little experience in 
 another Legislature, where such a power was exercised ; and there, nothing was more 
 common, than for the Senate and the House of Representatives, to be engaged, simul- 
 taneously, in acting on the same subject. The consequence of this, was, necessarily, 
 a great v/aste of time. When a proposition had been offered in the House, and failed 
 there, nothing was of more e very-day occurrence, than merely to cross over to the 
 Senate, and there try the same thing. 
 
 Mr. B. said he objected to the amendment on principle also. The object sought in 
 separating the Legislature into two distinct bodies, was, that public measures might 
 receive more mature reflection before they were finally resolved upon. The Senate 
 was made less numerous than the other House : and if its duties were confined to 
 
804 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 those of a revisory kind, tlien, in case, from any cause, (and the causes were various 
 that might lead to such a result,) a measure threatening to the public interest should 
 hastily be passed in the more numerous branch of the Legislature, the Senate hav- 
 ing more leisure, more calmness, and hence, in general, more accuracy in its delibera- 
 tions and decisions, would supply the means of checking such a result, and either 
 correcting its injurious features, or preventing its passage. -But if the Senate was to 
 have the power of originating all measures, the same as the other House, its revisory 
 character would be lost, and with it, a great benefit to the body politic. Both Ilouses 
 miglit then be engaged at the same time upon the same object : and the Common- 
 wealth would thus lose tJie entire benefit conteni))lated in dividing the Legislature 
 into two branches — the benefit of greater deliberation and greater accuracy in the ex- 
 amination of all matters of legislation. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, that with great deference for the opinion of the President of this 
 body, he had, from his own experience, drawn a directly opposite conclusion. It was 
 true that in some instances, both Legislative bodies in the General Government were 
 acting on tlie same subject at the smue time ; but the effect of this was to accelerate, 
 not to retard tlie public business. His experience had been pretty equally divided 
 between the Senate and the House of Representatives — he had, as Chairman of a 
 Committee, originated many measures in both. In Virginia, such an arrangement 
 would fill up the vacant time of the Senate, and would prevent delay, inconvenience 
 and expense. As to any increased deliberation resulting from giving to one House 
 the originating, and to the other the supervisory power, no such consequence resulted 
 in practice. His experience on the subject led him to a conclusion precisely opposite. 
 
 He agreed witli the gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. liandolph,) that the country 
 suftered under too mucli legislation. But this was not to be attributed to the fact that 
 the Senate was not in session. It arose from our habits, it was occasioned by sche- 
 mers — political schemers — for now-a-days all men in the nation were politicians, and 
 as soon as they got into the Legislature, they considered it a duty to ofier some scheme 
 to that body : and whether oftered late or early in the session, it must go through. 
 The evil arose from Legislative schemers : and schemers of all kinds. In the House 
 of Delegates there were usually a va«t number of young lawyers, who thought in the 
 course of their practice tliat they had discovered some inconvenience that ought to 
 be remedied — and tliey insisted that the House should adopt their notions and carry 
 them into the laws : thus their notions — their whims and blunders, were often re- 
 duced to law. He sliould rejoice witfi the gentleman from Ciiarlolte, if this could be 
 put down: But giving the Senate power to originate bills would not produce any 
 such effects. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he was very happy to have the sanction of the opinion of the 
 Chief Magistrate of the Commonwealth for any thing he said on that floor. But he 
 would suggest to him, with much deference, whether the best wity to lay the evil 
 spirit which had so much vexed that gentleman as well as himself would be to intro- 
 duce that spirit into the Senate 
 
 He was afraid tliey should see tlie same game played between the two Houses here, 
 which he had seen played between tlie two Houses elsewhere : if you will pass my 
 bill, I will pass yours. With mucli deference he would suggest to the gentleman 
 from Amelia, whether his amendment would not be likely to convert the Senate from 
 being a grave and deliberative body into as heated an assembly as the other House : 
 whether it would not tend to introduce parly spirit into tJie Senate — where, so long 
 as their duty was confined to revising and amending the bills sent up to them, it must 
 cceteris parilius have less play ? 
 
 It was an old adage — and all old adages were true — that tlie by-stander saw most 
 of the game. He looked with a cool eye upon the play : but if they permitted the 
 Senate to cu/, in and become participntors in the game, one of the great functions of 
 that body, if not totally destroyed, would be in a great degree impaired. Why was 
 the Senate confined to so small a number ? Because, as a revisory body, it needed not 
 be more numerous. But, if it was to originate bills as the other House did, then it 
 should, like that House, consist of the immediate representatives of the people. It 
 was true, they were to be saved from having money bills originated in the Senate — 
 and this was a most wise provision. He would never consent that a man should put 
 his hand into his pocket who did not live in his county — a Senator — in a big 
 county — out there — whom lie neither knew nor cared for — and who very probably 
 knew and cared still less about him. Such a man would know that his big county 
 would return him again, let him tax him, (Mr. R.) as he might. No — none but a 
 freeholder, and of his own county too, should ever mulct him — or thrust liis hand 
 into his pocket. He submitted wliether the amendment would not introduce this 
 priirilns itfrcs fcrcndl, of which, the gentleman com])lained, into the Senate also. 
 
 The question was taken on Mr. Giles's amendment, and it was decided in the ne- 
 gative. 
 
 So the House refused to give the Senate the power of originating bills. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 S05 
 
 The eighth and ninth sections were then read. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Bedford moved to amend the nintli section, by requiring three- 
 fifths instead of two-thiids of the Senate to convict a Judge : but the amendment was 
 rejected. 
 
 The tenth; eleventh and twelfth sections were then read. 
 
 In the twelfth section. Mr. Nicholas renewed the amendment (so often proposed 
 and rejected.) of requiring a definite amount of tax to be paid by a housekeeper, in 
 order to entitle him to the right of sulfrage: but it was rejected — Ayes 36. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, he was anxious to see a provision introduced for separate elections, 
 and he moved the following : 
 
 " And provided, also, that there shall be no separate elections in any one county, 
 but the Legislature may from time to time provide that the polls shall be kept open 
 not exceeding three days, in such counties as shall be designated by law." 
 
 Mr. C. brietly explained and supported the amendment. He said he was for having 
 a Legislature that should be responsible to the people : but how a member could re- 
 spond to the people in ten different places at the same time, he never could under- 
 stand. Mr. C. cited the case of an individual who had voted for a tax, and against 
 whom great prejudice was in consequence excited ; but who had been saved from 
 losing his place, by being able to explain his conduct to the whole collection of voters 
 at once : if tliey had met in six or eight different places, he would infallibly have lost 
 his election. Such an occasion was valuable, as being in politics a school-day for the 
 people. He concluded hj adverting to the value of character, and the necessity of 
 responsibility. 
 
 Mr. TJiompson said : He hoped the amendment of the gentleman from Stafford, 
 (Judge Coalter.) would not prevail. It was to him matter of surprise as well as re- 
 D-ret, that our system of separate elections had incurred the ban of that gentleman's 
 displeasure : whatever objections might be made to it in tlaeory, he would take upon 
 himself to say, that the Leo-islature of Virginia had never adopted a wiser policy, than 
 that of granting separate elections to all counties that petitioned for them. It was a 
 policy, whatever might be said to the contrary, founded on the plainest principles of 
 justice and expediency; and a pohcy that had been vindicated by experience. He 
 was aware that in its commencement, doubts had been entertained of its expediency; 
 the objections urged by the mover of the amendment had occurred to others, and Mr. 
 T. acknowledged that he himself, had at one tune, entertained doubts as to the pro- 
 priety of authorising separate elections: those doubts, however, had long been dis- 
 pelled, and he was now the most zealous advocate of tiie policy. It was right in prin- 
 ciple, and in practice most beneficent. The Legislature had now become so tho- 
 roughly convinced of its expediency, that whenever a separate election was asked, it 
 was granted. It had become a part of the fixed and settled policy of the State ; a ge- 
 neral separate election law had been enacted, and he believed the Legislature were 
 prepared, if any one would take the trouble to move it, to pass a law, conferring upon 
 tlie County Courts, the unlimited power of establishing as many precinct elections in 
 their counties as they should from time to time deem necessary, prescribing for the 
 govermnent of these elections some general provisions. 
 
 Mr. T. asked, if in a Government of the people, a Government that rested upon 
 pubhc sentiment, it was not desirable and expedient to afford every facihty for the ex- 
 pression of the popular will And how could that will be so well and so effectuaJlv ex- 
 pressed as at the polls ? As many voters should be brought to the polls as possible : 
 it was the duty of every man to vote. Your Legislature had required tliat everv man 
 should vote, and had prescribed a penalty for the failure. Was it not therefore just, 
 as well as politic, to bring the place of election as near to tlie home of the voter as 
 possible ? To many of them it was inconvenient, if not impossible, to attend an elec- 
 tion at their courthouses. They could not spare the time to go so far — the money to 
 pay expenses during their absence — they could not lose the services of a plough-horse 
 at a busy season of tlie year for one or two days : and if they chanced to be without a 
 horse (as some voters were) it would be hard "to require tliem under a penalty to walk 
 to their courthouses, perhaps twenty or thirty miles, (and in some counties more.) for 
 the purpose of exercising their Right of Suffrage. It was convenient, it was rio ht. it 
 was expedient, (and what the voters had a right to require at the hands of the Leo-is- 
 lature) to bring home the elections as nearly as possible, to their own homes, at least 
 to their respective neighbourhoods. 
 
 Mr. T. said, it was with him no little recommendation to the system, that it was an 
 approximation to the plan of ward elections, recommended to us by that great Apostle 
 of human liberty, the illustrious Jefferson, whose wisdom and forecast he now more 
 highly appreciated than ever. 
 
 The gentleman from Stafford, (Judge Coalter.) had objected to separate elections; 
 that it deprived the representative of the opportunity of responding to aJl his consti- 
 tuents, of rendering an account of his stewardship, of vindicating his com-se, and the 
 measures he had supported, and of answering charges, if any were preferred against 
 
806 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 him. He had objected also, that they increased the power of demagogues, enabUng 
 them to wield the democracy of the country to their own purposes, to mislead the peo- 
 ple, whose interests they would betray; and "last though not least," these separate 
 elections in the opinion of the gentleman, had broken up, and would break up the 
 schools of political wisdom, wliich the good people of the Commonwealth annually 
 attended, when they all assembled at their Court-houses, to hear the speeches of their 
 candidates for election or re-election. To support his first objection, the gentleman 
 had referred to a single case, (the case of his friend from Augusta, which he, Mr. T. 
 then heard for the first time) which he supposed had established the utility of a gene- 
 ral assembly of the county to enable a representative to vindicate his course. He 
 doubted not that the sentence of approval then pronounced, was deserved, and he as 
 little doubted, that it had been the same whether the people, whom the gentleman 
 from Augusta represented, had been assembled at one or several places. Mr. T. said 
 there were other times, places and opportunities of vindication, besides the day and 
 place of a county election. There was all the time between the adjournment of the 
 Legislature and the election. There was time and opportunity enough allowed for 
 personal communication between the representative and constituent — and more than 
 all, tbere was a free press, which affords the very best means of defence against 
 groundless accusation. All these were within the power of the representative, and 
 besides, he would always meet a large portion of his constituents at the court-house 
 on the day of election, no matter how many separate election districts are established 
 in the county. 
 
 As to the argument of evil from the power of demagogues, Mr. T. said it was pe- 
 culiarly gratuitous and unfounded. He had supposed that the best mode of enhanc- 
 ing the power of that class of politicians, was to assemble the people in as large 
 masses as possible. He supposed it was upon masses they operated, through the in- 
 strumentality of a popular cant or slang, or eloquence, if you please, appealing to the 
 
 fassions and prejudices of men, which we are told, in large assemblies are contagious, 
 t had been said elsewhere, in reference to the popular assemblies of Athens, that if 
 every Athenian were a Socrates, still every Athenian assembly would he a mob. It was 
 an argument against pure democracy in favour of representative; if there was any 
 truth in it, for any purpose ; certainly for none more, than to establish the utility of 
 separate elections. If you wish to temper the fierce spirit of democracy, this is pre- 
 cisely the best mode. If you fear tumults, popular excesses, riots, and all the infinite 
 evils connected in the imaginations of some gentlemen, with elections, this is the way 
 to eschew them. Mr. T. thought the separate elections, in their effects on the politi- 
 cal body, might without impropriety be likened to the Franklin rods — the one dis- 
 armed the clouds of their destructive elements, the other disarmed democracy of its 
 tumults, its riots, its excesses and excitements, and all those manifold horrors which 
 present themselves to the imaginations of gentlemenj who labour under the phobia^ 
 if I may so speak of democracy. 
 
 The last objections of the gentleman from Stafford coming from him, struck him 
 with the greatest surprise. There was surely a strange inconsistency between his ar- 
 gument to-day and his votes heretofore. If it were true that assemblies of the people 
 were such valuable schools for politics, when the people assembled to elect members 
 of Assembly, why should they be less so if the people were permitted to assemble 
 and elect their Governor and some other public functionaries.'' Why not open as 
 many schools as possible to the political pupils, the people.? As much as tlie gentle- 
 man seems to estimate these schools for political instruction, he has voted in this 
 Convention to have as few of them as possible. There was an inconsistency in this 
 which he could not reconcile. He had never before seen an ardent friend of general 
 instruction voting to reduce the number of seminaries, and diminish the means of 
 instruction. Mr. T. repeated that the sj^stem of precinct elections, which had re- 
 ceived the countenance of the Legislature, and which were becoming every day 
 more popular, as their beneficent operation and effects were more and more developed 
 by experience, in his opinion, deserved any thing at the hands of this Convention, 
 rather than its reprobation. And after all, if it were even obnoxious to the objec- 
 tions urged by the gentleman, and devoid of the paramount considerations of advan- 
 tage, which justify its continuance, it is not a fit subject for the deliberations of those 
 who are deputed to frame a code of fundamental laws. He therefore trusted that the 
 amendment would be rejected by the Convention. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was rejected. 
 
 The thirteenth section having been read, (which completes that part of the Consti- 
 tution relating to the Legislative Department,) 
 
 Mr. Wilson moved that the Committee rise; but the motion was rejected : Ayes 32. 
 
 The other sections were now read seriatim, down to the twenty-seventh inclusive. 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved to amend the twenty-seventh section by prefixing thereto the 
 words following ; 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 807 
 
 " The Attornej/ General shall be appointed by joint vote of the two Houses of the 
 General Assembly, and cominissioned by the Governor ; and shall hold his office 
 during the pleasure of the General Assembly," and carried without opposition. 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved further to amend the section by adding at the end of it the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " The sheriffs and coroners shall be nominated, by the respective County Courts, 
 and when approved by the Governor, shall be commissioned by him. The justices 
 shall appoint constables ; and all fees of the aforesaid officers shall be regulated by 
 law :" which was agreed to. 
 
 The twenty-eighth section was next read as follows : 
 
 " XXVIII. Judges may be removed from office by a concurrent vote of both 
 Houses of the General Assembly ; but tw-o-thirds of the whole number elected to 
 each House must concur in such vote, and the cause of removal shall be entered on 
 the Journals of each. The Judge against whom the Legislature may be about to pro- 
 ceed, shall receive notice thereof, accompanied with a copy of the causes alleged for 
 his removal, at least twenty days before the day on which either House of the Gene- 
 ral Assembly shall act thereupon." 
 
 Mr. Giles moved to amend the section by striking out in the former part of it, the 
 words the whole number elected to," before the words " each House:" so as to 
 make that part of the section read, " but two-thirds of each House must concur in 
 such vote." So as to remove a Judge by a vote of two-thirds of the members present, 
 and not two-thirds of all the members of the body. 
 
 Mr. G. supported his amendment in a speech, which was replied to by Mr. Leigh. 
 
 The question was then taken and decided in the negative — Ayes 41, Noes 43. 
 
 The twenty-ninth section was read as follows : 
 
 " XXIX. Writs shall run in the name of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and bear 
 test by the clerks of the several courts. Indictments shall conclude Against the peace 
 and dignity of the Commonwealth." 
 
 Mr. Cooke now read an amendment in the words following, which he intended 
 hereafter to offer to this section : 
 
 " When a new county shall hereafter be created, it shall be the duty of the General 
 Assembly to make provision by law, for securing to the people of such new county 
 an adequate representation in the Legislative bf)dies. And, if the object cannot be 
 otherwise effected, it shall be competent to the General Assembly to re-apportion the 
 whole representation of such one of the four great districts aforesaid, as shall contain 
 such new^ county within its limits, as defined by this Constitution. But it shall not be 
 competent to the General Assembly, under any circumstances, to increase or dimin- 
 ish the number of Delegates herein before assigned to the four great districts afore- 
 said. It shall, moreover, be competent to the General Assembly to re-apportion, 
 from time to time, the representation of the Senate, of the people of the two great 
 divisions aforesaid of the Conmion wealth, respectively. But the number of Senators 
 assigned by this Constitution to the two great divisions, to wit : nineteen to the 
 Eastern, and thirteen to the Western, shall remain unchanged." 
 
 The thirtieth section was read as follows : 
 XXX. The Executive Department of the Government shall remain as at present 
 organized, and the Governor and Privy Councillors shall continue in office, until a 
 Governor, elected under this Constitution, shall come into office — and all other per- 
 sons in office when this Constitution shall be adopted, except as is herein otherwise 
 expressly directed, shall continue in offi.ce till successors shall be appointed, or the 
 law shall otherwise provide ; and all the courts of justice now existing shall continue 
 with their present jurisdiction, until and except so far as, the Judicial system may or 
 shall be hereafter otherwise organized by the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. Cooke read another amendment, w^hich he proposed hereafter to offer to this 
 scheme, as follows : 
 
 Provisions for carrying this Constitution into effect : 
 
 " I. It shall be the duty of the Executive Department of the existing Govern- 
 ment, so soon as all the returns required by the twentieth section of the act of the 
 General Assembly, entitled an act to organize a Convention," shall have been made, 
 if it shall appear that a majority of all the votes given is for ratifying this amended 
 Consfitution, forthwith to make proclamation of the fact. 
 
 '•' II. And it shall moreover be the duty of the Executive Department, in and by 
 such proclamation, to command the sheriffs and other officers directed bv law to hold 
 and superintend elections under the penalty of dollars for failing to obey 
 
 such command, to open polls in their respective counties, cities, towns and boroughs, 
 and in the election districts established by law in their respective counties, on°the 
 [first Monday in November, in the present year,] for the election of a Delegate or 
 Delegates, as the case may be, to represent the counties, towns, boroughs, and dis- 
 tricts, respectively, mentioned and described in the third article of this Constitution, 
 
808 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and of a Senator to represent each of the Senatorial districts described in the fourth 
 article. 
 
 " III. So soon as the election of Delegates and Senators shall have been made, 
 the previously said existing- Senate and House of Delegates, elected under the old 
 Constitution, shall cease to have legal and constitutional existence. 
 
 " IV. Should any of the contingencies herein before mentioned, render it neces- 
 sary or proper to convene a General Assembly, after such election shall have been 
 made, and before the time herein after appointed for the first regular annual meeting 
 of the General Assembly under this amended Constitution, the new General Assem- 
 bly shall be convened by the Executive Department holding its power and authority 
 under the old Constitution. 
 
 V. The first regular General Assembly under this amended Constitution, shall 
 ■convene and assemble at the Capitol in the City of Richmond, [on the first Monday 
 in January, in the year 1831.] 
 
 " VI. The powers and duties of the Executive Department under the old Consti- 
 tution, cease and determine, and those of the Executive Department under the new 
 Constitution, shall commence, as soon as may be after the commencement of the first 
 regular session of the General Assembly elected under the new Constitution. 
 
 " VII. All ofiicers, whether civil or military, holding their offices under the old 
 Constitution, whose cases are not herein provided for, shall continue to hold their offi- 
 ces under the new Constitution, by the same tenure, and for the same time, as under 
 the old Constitution. 
 
 " VIIL All the Courts of Justice now existing in this Commonwealth shall con- 
 tinue, with the same jurisdiction as heretofore, until the said Courts shall have been 
 modified or abolished, or the jurisdiction thereof modified or taken away, by an Act 
 or Acts of the General Assembly, made under the restrictions and limitations herein 
 before provided." 
 
 The thirty-first (and last) section was then read. 
 
 And the Committee of the Whole having thus gone through the draught of an 
 .amended Constitution, reported by the Select Committee, 
 
 On motion of Mr. Summers, it rose and reported the same, with the amendments, 
 to the House. 
 
 m CONVENTION, 
 
 Mr. Leigh offered the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That the third article of a draught of a Constitution reported by the Se- 
 lect Committee, be re-committed, with instructions to the Committee to apportion 
 Delegates among the several counties, towns, cities and boroughs of the Common- 
 wealth, so that the number of Delegates shall not exceed one hundred and fifty, and 
 •so that tlie same proportion of the whole Delegation be assigned to each of the four 
 great divisions of the Commonwealth, as is contained in the said article. And that 
 ■the fourth article be re-committed to the same Committee." 
 
 Mr. Clay tor moved the following amendment to the instructions moved by Mr. 
 Leigh : 
 
 " And that the said Committee be instructed so to arrange the Senatorial Districts, 
 as to conform as near as may be to the principle on which the members of the Senate 
 are apportioned between the Districts East and West of the Blue Ridge." 
 
 In advocating this amendment, 
 
 Mr. Claytor observed, he would simply assign the reason why he made this motion. 
 It would be apparent to any person who would take the trouble to make twenty 
 figures, that the scheme of representation of the gentleman from Albemarle, adopted 
 by this Convention, was based upon the white population of the State as ascertained 
 by the Census of 1820. The white population of the State as ascertained by that 
 Census, was 603,081 ; divide this number by thirty-two, the number of Senators, the 
 quotient is 18,846. The white population West of the Blue Ridge, was 254,208 ; di- 
 vide this by 18,846, and it gives thirteen and a fraction of a little less than one-half. 
 The white population East of the Blue Ridge was 348,873 ; divide this by 18,846, and 
 it gives eighteen and a fraction of rather over one-half. The gentleman from Albe- 
 marle has merely given the benefit of these fractions to the East. This is his only 
 variation from the basis of white population by the Census of 1820. What I ask is, 
 that this rule thus determined by this Convention to be just as between the two great 
 divisions of the State, may be applied in the distribution of representation amongst 
 the smaller sub-divisions, that in the distribution of power, the people I have the 
 honor in part to represent, may have the full benefit of the rule adopted by the Con- 
 vention as the just measure of political power in the State. Have the Committee 
 done them this justice in their report.? To show that they have not, it is only necessary to 
 state the fact, that the district as reported by the Committee, composed of the counties 
 of Bedford, Franklin, and Patrick, contained by the Census of 1820 a white popula- 
 tion of 22,956; that composed of the counties of Campbell, Pittsylvania and Henry, 
 24,374 ; while that composed of the counties of Halifax and Mecklenburg contained 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 809 
 
 only 16,310; that composed of the counties of Buckingham, Cumberland, and Pow- 
 hatan, 13,803; and that composed of Petersburg, Prince George, Surry, and Isle of 
 Wight, only 13,741. It was not my intention to make a speech upon this subject, but 
 simply to submit these few statements in explanation of the reasons which have indu- 
 ced this motion — and with them I leave it to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he hoped such instructions would not be given to the Committee, 
 as it would only operate to trammel them and still farther to increase a difficulty 
 which was already greater than any one could possibly conceive, who had not at- 
 tempted the task assigned them. The Committee had done their best: but as to per- 
 fect equality, the thing was unattainable, if regard was to be had to existing county 
 limits. The Committee had made the several districts, upon the whole, as nearly 
 equal as they knew how to malie them. Where a county was defective in its repre- 
 sentation in the House of Delegates, the Committee had endeavoured to compensate 
 the inequality by increasing its weight in the Senate ; so as, on the ichole, to do all the 
 justice in their power. The whole effect of the present amendment would be to en- 
 cumber them with new trammels. 
 
 Mr. Scott spoke for some time without being heard distinctly by our Reporter — the 
 House being in some confusion. When he was heard, he was denying having sup- 
 ported the compromise of Mr. Gordon on the avowed idea of its having been based 
 upon either of the contested principles which had been proposed as a basis of Repre- 
 sentation : he advocated it with the express disavowal of its being established on the 
 white basis, the mixed basis, or Federal numbers. The gentleman from Campbell 
 had found an accidental coincidence between some of its numbers and the white ba- 
 sis according to the Census of 1820 : but it had an equal and even greater degree of 
 coincidence with the plan of the gentleman from Northampton, (Mr. Upshur.) Mr. 
 S. concluded, by entering his protest against being understood as advocating this or 
 that principle of representation as involved in the plan of the gentleman from Albe- 
 marle : it had been brought forward as a compromise, and as such he voted for it. 
 
 Mr. Claytor addressed the House as follows : 
 
 I know nothing whatever of the basis on which the gentleman from Albemarle, 
 founded his plan, but from the results of calculations, 1 take it for granted, however, 
 that he must have had some general basis which has induced him to select this par- 
 ticular apportionment in preference to any other ; and as the gentleman from Fau- 
 quier denies the sufficiency of the evidence, I have offered to prove that that basis is, 
 in fact the white population of 1820, with an arbitrary variation of mere fractions. I 
 must be permitted to submit to the House the results of a few more calculations upon 
 that subject. 1 have shewn that in the division of pov\'er in the Senate between the 
 East and the West, the only variation from tlie white population of 1820 was giving 
 a fraction to the East. Let us now examine the apportionment in the House of De- 
 legates. The whole white population of the State in 1820, was 603,081 — divide this 
 by 127, the number of members in the proposed House of Delegates, and the result 
 gives 4,749 as the average number entitled to elect a Delegate upon that basis. Com- 
 pare the apportionment in the House of Delegates, as proposed by the gentleman 
 from Albemarle, with this calculation, and the result is as follows : 
 
 The Western district, white population, 133,112 — 29 members is one for 4,590 : the 
 Valley white population 121,090 — 24 members is one for 5,045. Middle district white 
 population, 187,186 — 40 members is one for 4,679. Tide-water district white popula- 
 tion 161,687 — 24 members is one for 4,755; thus shewing in each district only a 
 slight fractional variation from the white population of 1820. Taking the average of 
 the four districts, and the result is 4,767, varying only 18 from the precise number 
 given by the equal representation of the white population as ascertained by the cen- 
 sus of 1820. Sir, all these results may be purely accidental, but to my mind they 
 look much like design, and as I have been unable to discover any other basis which 
 would produce results approximating so nearly to those arrived at by the gentleman 
 from Albemarle, my mind could not avoid the conclusion that this is the true basis of 
 his proposition. But, Sir, grant to the gentleman from Fauquier, that it is not — I 
 only ask that his basis, whatever it may be, whether it be the v/hite population of 
 1820, that of the gentleman from Northampton, or that of any other gentleman, may 
 be fairly worked out to its results— that, that which this Convention has establishe'd 
 as just for the whole State, inay be equally applied to all its parts- and not after their 
 establishing one rule (arbitrary if you please) for the State, will fit another equally or 
 more arbitrary in its character for districts, by the operation of which the people of 
 that particular section of the State I have the honour in part to represent, are to lose 
 a large portion of the political power, they would be justly entitled to, if the general 
 rule you have adopted were fairly and justly applied. But, Sir, have the Committee 
 adopted any such just rule in their apportionment If they have adopted any rule 
 whatever, it approaches more nearly to the Federal number as ascertained by the 
 census of 1820, than any other I have been able to discover — and surely it will not be 
 contended that this is the basis adopted by the gentleman from iVlbemarle— but even 
 
 102 
 
810 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 in the application of this rule, unjust as it is, it has been unjustly applied to the par- 
 ticular section of country in question. Sir, upon Federal numbers, the two upper 
 districts South of James River and East of the Blue Ridge, are quite too large. 
 
 Sir, I know not how other gentlemen representing that section may feel upon this 
 subject — but, Sir, I should be ver}'- unwilling to meet my constituents, after giving 
 my consent to any arrangement which would leave 11,000 white persons unrepre- 
 sented in the two Senatorial districts, embracing that section of country with which 
 they are locally united — almost a sufficiency to entitle them to another Senator. Sir, 
 this injustice never shall be done to them with my consent — I never can, never will, 
 vote for any such arrangement. 
 
 But the gentleman from Chesterfield says, that any person who will attempt to make 
 a more equal arrangement, observing the county limits, will find it a difficult task. 
 Sir, I have taken the trouble to re-arrange the counties, composing a few of the dis- 
 tricts as reported by the Select Committee, according to the white population of 1820, 
 and will trouble the Convention with some of the results, which I think they will 
 perceive are less unequal than those of the Select Committee. 
 Five districts as arranged by the Select Committee. 
 
 JVhite population of 1820. 
 
 Bedford, 10,953 Charlotte, 
 
 Franklin, ■ 8,227 
 
 Patrick, 3,776 
 
 Campbell, 
 
 Pittsylvaniaj 
 
 Henry, 
 
 Halifax, 
 Mecklenburg, 
 
 22,956 
 
 8,447 
 12,626 
 3,321 
 
 24,394 
 
 8,758 
 7,710 
 
 16,468 
 
 Lunenburg, 
 Nottoway, 
 Prince Edward, 
 
 Buckingham, 
 Cumberland, 
 Powhatan, 
 
 5,005 
 3,873 
 2,805 
 4,627 
 
 16,310 
 
 7,345 
 3,966 
 2,492 
 
 13,803 
 
 I should propose to re-arrange those five districts as follows 
 
 Patrick, 
 Henry, 
 Franklin, 
 
 Pittsylvania, 
 Hahfax, 
 
 Bedford, 
 Campbell, 
 
 3,776 
 3,321 
 8,227 
 
 15,324 
 
 12,626 
 8,758 
 
 21,384 
 
 10,953 
 8,447 
 
 19,400 
 
 Mecklenburg, 
 Charlotte, 
 Lunenburg, 
 Nottoway, 
 
 Prince Edward, 
 Buckingham, 
 Cumberland, 
 Powhatan, 
 
 7,710 
 5,005 
 3,873 
 2,805 
 
 19,393 
 
 4,627 
 7,345 
 3,966 
 2,492 
 
 18,430 
 
 Tt v;ill at once be perceived, that the only material variation from equality in this 
 arrangement, is in the two first districts : this, which is far less than the inequality of 
 the districts as reported by the Committee, is rendered less important, by the fact, 
 that there is an intimate connection in all matters of local interest throughout much 
 the greater part, if not the whole of those two districts — and taking the average of 
 the two, it gives 18,354, within a mere fraction of the number which ought to give a 
 Senator. 1 have also made a different arrangement, from that proposed by the Select 
 Committee, of the counties composing the six upper Senatorial districts on the South 
 side of James River and East of the Blue Ridge, as reported by the Committee, with 
 the details of which I shall not now trouble the Convention — but merely observe that 
 it produces results at least as nearly approximating to equality upon the principle for 
 which I contend, as in those before referred to, while at the same time, a proper de- 
 gree of attention is paid to the local interests and feelings of the counties composing 
 the several districts , thus demonstrating that neither county boundaries nor local in- 
 terests present any serious obstacle to arranging the Senatorial districts in that section 
 of the State, with that practical approximation to equality and proper regard to the 
 just claims of the people whom I have the honour in part to represent, f^r which I 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 811 
 
 contend. Sir, this is all the amendment I have oifered, professing to instruct the Com- 
 mittee what to do, and I trust it will be adopted. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Claytor's amendment and decided in the ne- 
 gative : Ayes 34, Noes 46. 
 
 So the amendment to the instructions was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Leigh now moved to amend the instructions, by adding that the fourth section 
 also (relating to the apportionment of the Senate) be referred to the same Committee, 
 Which having been agreed to, the House then adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, January 6, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Courtney of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The Chair announced that the Select Committee were not yet ready to report on 
 the subject of apportionment. 
 
 The House then proceeded to take up the amendments reported by the Committee 
 of the Whole to the draught of the Constitution. 
 
 The first amendment was in the fifth section, which reads as follow^s : 
 
 " V. Any person may be elected a Senator w^ho shall have attained to the age of 
 thirty-years, and shall be actually a resident and freeholder within the district, or 
 duly qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly according to this Consti- 
 tution : And any person may be elected a member of the House of Delegates, who 
 shall have attained the age of Lwenty-five years, and shall be actually a resident and 
 freeholder within the county, city, town, borough or election district, or duly qualified 
 to vote for members of the General Assembly according to this Constitution : Pro- 
 vided, That all Ministers of the Gospel and Priests of every denomination shall be 
 incapable of being elected members of either House of Assembly." 
 
 The amendment proposed to strike out the words " or duly" where they occur in 
 the parts of the section relating to the qualifications of members of the Senate and 
 of the Assembly. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, that if the amendment left the clause such as to confine the 
 election to the two Houses of Assembly, to the real freeholders, who were such in 
 truth, he should be in favour of it; but understanding it to leave mere nominal free- 
 holders eligible, he should vote against it. 
 
 A conversation took place between Messrs. Leigh and Fitzhugh, as to the value of - 
 a freehold — the latter contending, that a man migiit own twenty-five acres of land, 
 so poor as not to be worth one dollar, which the former believed scarcely possible. 
 
 Mr. Claytor said, that he was taken wholly by surprise, not having paid particular 
 attention to this amendment in Committee of the Whole. The principle was entirely 
 new, that those w^ho had a right to elect, should not have also the right to be elected. 
 He had never heard such a position advanced before. He could not but admire the 
 strange course pursued in this body : if the power of selection was to be exercised 
 by any body but the people, the utmost latitude of choice was readily accorded. If a 
 Judge, for example, was to be appointed, he might be taken from any source what- 
 ever; but the moment it was the people who were to exercise the power, it must 
 forthwith be guarded and circumscribed with the most jealous care. The Conven- 
 tion had determined, that not only freeholders, but that every leaseholder, house- 
 keeper, and head of a family, might exercise the right of voting; yet, here they were 
 to be restrained from choosing, who among themselves should be their representative. 
 Mr. C. said, he had more confidence in the virtue and intelligence of the people, than 
 thus to restrain them. He had not the least apprehension, but that they would choose 
 persons for their representatives, who gave sufficient evidence of having a common 
 intejest with them. There seemed to be a strange dread of giving power to the peo- 
 ple. If it was proposed, that they should be allowed to elect the Governor, the 
 House was immediately alarmed with the dangers of whiskey-drinking and elec- 
 tioneering intrigues. If it was proposed to allow them to choose their own militia 
 officers, the same dangers were again paraded before their view — it would lead to 
 whiskey-drinking and to electioneering. Gentlemen were willing to leave them no 
 other election, but that of their own representatives ; and now, even this was to be 
 further restrained, and they were to be told, " this man you may take, but this man 
 you shall not !" He could approve of no such doctrine. Having first decided who 
 were to be the sovereigns of the land, the Convention ought to leave them in perfect 
 freedom to choose among themselves whom they would. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell said, that if there had been no other provisions in this Constitution 
 to which the gentleman from Campbell had given his assent, and which went on the 
 same principle with the present, the argument of the gentleman would have had 
 
812 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 more weight. But the gentleman had consented that a man might elect at the age of 
 twenty-one, yet he might not be elected until he was twenty-five, as a Delegate, or until 
 he was thirty, as a Senator, or as Governor of the State. What became of the gen- 
 tleman's principle, that every one who was qualified to elect, was qualified also to be 
 elected ? To be elected, a man must reside in the county electing ; but to be a voter, no 
 such restriction was necessary. Here the gentleman's principle failed again. And 
 the ground of his opposition, viz: that the principle of the amendment was new and 
 unheard of, had been destroyed by his own act in assenting to these provisions. He 
 should not enter on the merits of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Claytor admitted that in these cases he had certainly consented to an infringe- 
 ment of the principle ; but this formed no reason why he should go farther, and con- 
 sent to a yet greater violation of it, especially when the gentleman did not pretend to 
 offer a single argument in its behalf. What need could there be for such a limitation ? 
 Did the possession of freehold any better qualify a man for the duties of Legislation.-' 
 Unless some good reason were shewn him, he could not consent to the amendment. 
 
 The question was taken and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Clopton, Johnson, Ma- 
 son of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Cooke, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor 
 of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, 
 Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter and Perrin — 47. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffinan, Harrison, Wilhamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Powell, Griggs, Mason 
 of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, George, M'Miilan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson, 
 Joynes and Upshur — 42. 
 
 So the amendment was agreed to, 
 
 A similar amendment having been proposed, as applying to Senators, Mr. Claytor 
 demanded the ayes and noes also ; hoping that some who had insisted on this as a 
 qualification for a Senator, might not insist on it in a Delegate. 
 
 The question was accordingly taken by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall, Clopton, Johnson, 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Cooke, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, Tay- 
 lor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Tazewell, 
 Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter and Perrin — 48. 
 
 JVoe5— Messrs. Anderson, Cofi"man, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Powell, Griggs, Mason 
 of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, George, M'Miilan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson, 
 Joynes and Upshur — 42. 
 
 The next amendment was the insertion of the words " all persons holding lucrative 
 offices and" in the same section, after the words all Ministers of the Gospel," (so as 
 to exclude office-holders under the State from a seat in the Legislature.) 
 
 Mr. Wilson wished to render the clause more definite, by inserting, " under the 
 Commonwealth," but, Mr. Leigh objected : the words as they stood, were those of 
 the old Constitution, the interpretation of which had been fixed and undisputed for 
 fifty-four years. 
 
 The amendment to the amendment was lost; and the original amendment was 
 then agreed to. 
 
 The following letter of resignation was now laid before the House, by the Pre- 
 sident : 
 
 RICHMOND, January 3, 1830. 
 Sir, — I hereby resign my seat as a member of the Convention, being prevented by 
 ill health from performing my duty as a member of that body. 
 
 Yours, respectfully, 
 
 J. MACRAE. 
 
 Hon. P. P. Barbour, } 
 President of the Convention. ) 
 
 Mr. Scott announced to the House that the Delegation from the district in which 
 Mr, Macrae belonged, had agreed upon Mr. Thomas Marshall of Fauquier, as a suit- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 813 
 
 able person to fill the vacancy occasioned by the resignation of that gentleman, and 
 Mr. Marshall thereupon took his seat in the Convention. 
 
 The remaining amendments reported by the Committee of the Whole, were then 
 severally agreed to by the House, 
 
 The Convention returned to the draught of the Constitution, and the Chair announ- 
 ced, that it was now open to farther amendments. 
 
 Mr. Upshur, with a view to remove any doubt as to the construction of the first 
 part of the fifth section, moved to amend it by inserting the words " by virtue of his 
 freehold'' so as to make it read " any person may be elected a Senator, who shall have 
 attained to the age of thirty years, and shall be actually a resident and freeholder 
 within the district, qualified byzirtyie of his freehold to vote for members of the Gene- 
 ral Assembly according to this Constitution." 
 
 The amendment was agreed to, and a similar amendment w^as inserted in the latter 
 part of the section, referring to members of the House of Delegates. 
 
 The tenth section was amended on Mr. Leigh's motion, by striking out the follow- 
 ing words, as surplusage, the same thing being provided for in another clause : " nor 
 establish by law any subordination or preferenee between different sects or denomi- 
 nations." 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh moved to' insert in the tenth section the following amendment : 
 "Nor shall any capitation tax, either for State or county purposes, be imposed, ex- 
 cept in time of war, on the free white citizens of the Commonwealth." 
 
 Mr. M'Coy demanded the ayes and noes on this motion, and they were ordered by 
 the House. 
 
 Mr. Randolph hoped the gentleman from Fairfax would explain to the House 
 the justice of making this discrimination between imposing a capitation tax on free 
 white citizens and on slaves. He w^ould listen with pleasure to the gentleman's ex- 
 planation. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh replied, that he would with pleasure give the gentleman the explana- 
 tion he desired. The discrimination rested on this principle, that the tax on slaves 
 was a tax on property ; they were taxed as property, not as persons. For his own 
 part, he should prefer an ad valorem tax on slaves together with all other property : 
 but he could not succeed in carrying such a measure. His object was to exempt 
 those from being taxed who had nothing to pay a tax with, w^hile the rich man waa 
 taxed no more who had thousands to pay it out of. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said he could not see the justice of the discrimination. 
 
 The owner of the slaves was taxed whether they were taxed per capita or ad va^ 
 lorem. The Convention were engaged in extending the blessings of free Govern- 
 ment to such as were unwilling, and said they were unable to pay any part of the 
 public expenses. Mr. R. said he would make them both willing and able ; he would 
 constrain their will, and would confer the abihty. There was no free white citizen 
 of this Commonwealth, (unless he was what the French were in the habit of styling 
 a mauvaise sujet.) who was a labourer and able to work, who was not able to pay a tax 
 to the State. There was no free man with that self-respect which the enjoyment of 
 freedom naturally conferred, who vrould not be willing to contribute his mite to the 
 expenses of his Government. He w-as unwilling to admit that there existed in Vir- 
 ginia a class of vagrants and Lazeroni, who were actually unable to make any con- 
 tribution whatever toward the expenses of the State. He was against the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Fairfax. He had been told that it was valuable, inas- 
 much as it might operate in restraining the latitude of the Right of Suffrage. He 
 would not give a straw for all tlie qualifications prescribed for the exercise of the 
 Right of Suffrage in that paper, (pointing to the draught of the Constitution.) For his 
 part, he had rather see the propositions offered, he believed, by a gentleman from 
 Monongalia, and proposing Universal Suffrage, adopted at once. This was Univer- 
 sal Suffrage — it was that in effect. 
 
 He should not vote for the amendment in order to disqualify any one fi'om exer- 
 cising the Right of Suffrage. He would not give one straw for all that had been 
 done with that view, nor for what the House had voted that morning as to the quali- 
 fications of persons to be elected. He would not give a farthing for the whole of it. 
 The House had introduced a principle which was utterly subversive of all free Gov- 
 ernment. None of its free institutions could stand for a century with such principles 
 at the bottom of them. He regarded with consummate — he was about to say con- 
 tempt — but vvith the most consummate and profound indifference — all those miserable 
 little distinctions which had been introduced. Who, he asked, must govern the elec- 
 tion ? Was it not the class fi-om which the members of both Houses were drawn ? 
 The election must always be subservient to those who voted. He had voted wath 
 reluctance for the clauses inserted this morning. The whole was illusory — it was all 
 deceptive : They stood upon a quagmire which would give way beneath their feet. 
 Mr. R. said he would not consent that the poor man should be taxed who owned but 
 
814 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 one slave, in order to extend the blessings of free Government to Lazeroni, who ac- 
 cording to the old proverb were able to sing, and whom he was for making to sing. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, he had the same objection to the extension of the Right of Suf- 
 frage, with the gentleman from Charlotte — and he was ready to vote for any plan 
 which should require a fair amount of property in order to a man's voting. He was 
 truly sorry there should be such a Lazeroni in Virginia — but he had seen such a class, 
 although the gentleman was unwilling to admit its existence. The Convention was 
 about to exclude from the Right of Suffrage, all such as had no property : To take 
 away from these people all ground of complaint, he would exempt them from taxation; 
 so that they could not say we were obliged to pay Government, while they were 
 allowed no share in it. 
 
 Mr. Venable said, he was no advocate for a capitation tax of any kind. He was 
 willing the subject should be left with the Assembly ; but being convinced, that a 
 capitation tax on slaves was unjust, when the subject was up, and it was about to be 
 recognized in the Constitution, he was for having the whole subject taken into con- 
 sideration. Let the Convention express its opinion upon the existence of any capi- 
 tation tax at all. It could be, and it had been shewn, that if the proposition was true, 
 that taxes ought to be laid in proportion to the ability to pay, then a capitation tax 
 on slaves was unfair and improper. If so, why not extend the prohibition to slaves 
 as well as to whites A district, consisting in part of black and in part of white po- 
 pulation, was no more able to pay taxes, than a district of the same extent, filled 
 with a population wholly white — nor so able — because the labour of slaves was less 
 economical and less profitable than the labour of white men. If, then, equal taxes 
 were laid in other respects, on two such districts, and a capitation tax on slaves was 
 superadded, it was most unjust and iTnequal in its effect. One of the districts would 
 be doubly taxed, and more than doubly. 
 
 Mr. V. said, he should vote against the present amendment — but was in favour of 
 abolishing capitation tax entirely. 
 
 Mr. Scott declared his intention to vote for the amendment, as a preventive of 
 -Universal Suffrage — but moved to amend it as follows: ''nor shall any person be 
 chargeable with any tax on real or personal estate, whose real and personal estate is 
 not chargeable with a revenue tax equal to fifty cents." 
 
 The amendment would not have any material effect upon the revenue. A large 
 portion of those, whose tax was below that amount, were annually returned insol- 
 vent by the Sheriff. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, he should prefer to have the other amendment offered as a sepa- 
 rate measure and not connected with his. 
 
 Mr. Wilson said, this was the same proposition the gentleman had offered before 
 and which the House had rejected. This would go to destroy that provision which 
 allowed all housekeepers to vote. 
 
 Mr. Powell regarding the proposition in the same light, demanded the ayes and 
 noes — and they were ordered accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Scott allowed this measure could, in some degree, retrench the Right of Suf- 
 frage, but by very different means from what had formerly been proposed. This ex- 
 empted from payment, the former had required it. 
 
 The question being put on Mr. Scott's amendment to the amendment of Mr. Fitz- 
 hugh, it was decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Mason of Southampton, Trez- 
 vant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, 
 Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Neale, Rose and 
 Coalter— 33. 
 
 NoRs — Messrs. Dromgoole, Alexander, Tyler, Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harri- 
 son, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Logan, 
 Venable, Madison, Mercer, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of 
 Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of 
 Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 60. 
 
 Mr. Johnson moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Fitzhugh, so as to make it ap- 
 ply to State taxes, but not to county levies. 
 
 This amendment was negatived — Ayes 43, Noes 46. 
 
 Mr. Venable moved to amend it by inserting " or on slaves." 
 
 But this amendment also was rejected. 
 
 The question was now about to be put on Mr. Fitzhugh's amendment, when 
 Mr. Randolph addressed the House. He said that the main reason which had been 
 assigned in behalf of the amendment, was the inability of certain free white persons 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 815 
 
 to pay any tax. Now, he should be glad to know how their ability to pay a tax 
 was likely to be increased by the pressure and privation incident to a state of icar ? 
 In peace the man might be able by his mattock and his spade to earn enough to pay 
 a small tax, but how war was to confer an ability which peace did not allow, he was 
 so dull as to be unable to comprehend. The amendment proposed that no capitation 
 tax should be laid on a certain description of persons except in time of xcar. If the 
 principle was sound, this exception was most exceptionable. But the principle was 
 not sound. Every man enjoying the blessings and privileges of a free Government 
 was bound to pay them, except paupers. But this amendment was not intended to 
 apply to paupers : it was made for hearty, able men, for sturdy beggars; not such as 
 were decrepid and helpless. 
 
 He objected to the amendment on another ground. The Convention were acting 
 on the Legislature as a spider acted on a fly : they were tying up its legs and binding 
 fast its wings, so that it had neither leg nor wing to go with. He heard much said 
 about trusting the people : every body was ready and willing to trust the people : but 
 the delegates of the people, whom the people had chosen as their own immediate repre- 
 sentatives; these were held unworthy of any sort of confidence. He thought the 
 people were trust worthy — ^just so far as this — they were very capable of choosing their 
 own agents. They had sagacity and virtue enough to decide between worth and wis- 
 dom and intelligence on the one side, and their opposites on the other; and they 
 having established their agents with power to act for them, he was for leaving more 
 to those agents than some gentlemen seemed willing to do. If gentlemen would 
 have no capitation tax, then in the name of justice let the exemption be equal. Here 
 Mr. Randolph supposed the case of two counties, one with and the other without 
 slaves, and shewed the unequal operation of the capitation tax if on slaves only. He 
 said this was unjust and unequal : and grievously did he feel that w^ant of nerve and 
 want of decision which caused gentlemen from the Eastern part of the State, at the 
 beginning of the proceedings of this Convention, not to claim what they had a right 
 to enjoy, the representation of their ichole population. Then they would have had 
 something to stand on. They would have had the (pou sxo) of Archimedes, Then 
 the gentlemen on the other side would have been glad to meet them on the basis of 
 Federal numbers. And why Because he would not cast on his brethren of the 
 West such an imputation as to say, that they would not have been willing to grant to 
 their brethren of the East what was granted to the Southern States in a hard-driven 
 bargain by their other brethren, the yankees — what was granted them by brother 
 Jonathan. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, the gentleman from Charlotte had represented that as the main 
 argument urged for the amendment which had not been urged at all. The ground 
 he had taken had been, that it was most unjust to compel a man not worth one cent 
 in the world, to pay as much tax as another man worth $ 100.000. And another con- 
 sideration had been urged by others, that it would tend to limit the Right of Suffrage 
 from going to universality. 
 
 Mr. Randolph replied. The gentleman now said that it was unjust to compel a 
 poor ma.n, a ditcher, to pay as much tax as a man worth $ 100,000. The injustice 
 was not half so great — it was precisely half as great — as to tax the slave of the poor 
 man who owned but one negro and hired him out as a labourer — while the man who 
 held thousands in Bank stock paid no tax at all. Here was a case, not where rich 
 and poor were taxed alike, but where they taxed the poor man and exempted the 
 rich altogether: where they taxed the negro of the poor man, but left the Bank stock 
 of the rich man wholly free from taxation. If it was unjust to tax the poor labourer 
 and the rich capitalist equally, a fortiori must it be unjust to tax the poor and let the 
 rich go free. 
 
 He was very sorry — very sorry indeed — that the gentleman from Chesterfield had 
 brought his mind to vote for this amendment. He was going to vote for it as a re- 
 straint upon suffrage. He would not give a straw for the restraint. Suffrage by this 
 Constitution was universal in fact, and it might as well be so in terms : it should be in 
 name what it was in substance. Having extended it as they had done, the Conven- 
 tion had done an act of monstrous injustice, and by consequence of equal impolicy. 
 They had excluded all the well-brought-up sons of freeholders. That was a class, as 
 he had said on a former occasion, towards whom his heart yearned, and in whose fa- 
 vour, did not his judgment forbid it, he felt a strong inclination to extend the Right of 
 Suffrage. For his part, so far was he from being unwilling to trust the Legislature 
 to make a Constitution, that for all the experience he had had in the Convention he 
 had ten thousand times rather the Legislature should do it than those who had under- 
 taken the task : he firmly believed it would be in safer hands. He defied any Legis- 
 lature in the country to make a Constitution less worthy of approbation than that 
 which they had constructed. He would not give a straw for that long list of restric- 
 tions about parsons and what not : in practice it would be perfectly unavailing, unless 
 to exclude the meritorious class of persons he had mentioned> He was not afraid to 
 
816 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 trust the Legislature. And why not? Because he did not fear to trust the people: 
 And how so ? Because the people were the only competent authority to select their 
 own agents. When this was done, they had the principles of free Government. It 
 was now to be determined, whether they were to have a Government that would 
 stand, or whetiier the fruitless attempt was to be persevered in to make a cone stand 
 upon its apex. Their Government under such a Constitution would be futile — it was 
 impossible it should stand for a century. 
 
 The question was now taken, and decided by ayes and noes as follows: 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Anderson, CofF- 
 man, Harrison, Williamson, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Clai- 
 borne, Madison, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Naylor, Donaldson, Fendleton, George, Bj'ars, Taylor of Caroline, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Cui- 
 peper, Scott, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Prentis, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, 
 Martin, Stuart, Joynes and Upshur — 48. 
 
 jYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Giles, Brodnax,Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, 
 Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Baldwin, Mason of Southampton, 
 Trezvant, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Holladay, Griggs, 
 Mason of Frederick, Boyd, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Roane, Morris, Gar- 
 nett, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, See, Green, Loyall, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Branch, Tovvnes, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Bayly and Perrin — 47. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne moved to amend the fourteenth section, by striking out all that part 
 of it which follows, declaring that the Governor "shall be elected as follows:" and 
 to insert a provision for the Governor's election by the two Houses of Assembly. 
 
 Mr. Miller stated, that his colleague (Mr. Beirne,) was absent from sickness, and he 
 should take it as a favor, if the gentleman would consent to postpone this important 
 amendment until he should be able to resume his place, which he had reason to hope 
 would be the case on the following day. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne instantly complied, disclaiming all intention to press any measure 
 under such circumstances. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, he might probably be absent the next day, and he hoped the same 
 indulgence would be extended in that case. 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, if the gentleman should be taken sick before the next day, the 
 indulgence ought to be extended to him: but not, if absent on private or professional 
 business. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne agreed in this view of the subject, and should act upon it. 
 
 Mr. Cabell, after a few prefatory remarks, offered the following amendment to the 
 twenty-second section : 
 
 " The General Assembly shall have power to modify or abolish the said Superior 
 Courts, at such times, and to substitute for them, if in their discretion they deem it 
 expedient, such tribunals as the public good may require. And upon the modification 
 or abolition thereof, the salaries of all officers holding offices therein, or in any wise ap- 
 purtenant thereto, shall be abolished, unless otherwise directed by law." 
 
 The amendment gave rise to a debate, in v^^hich Messrs. Marshall, Tazewell, Giles, 
 and Cabell took part. 
 
 The amendment was resisted as being unnecessary, the clauses retained in the sec- 
 tion going the whole length of its provisions. This was specially pressed by Mr. 
 Tazewell, who agreed in sentiment with Mr. Cabell, as to the main question involved. 
 
 The question was at length taken, and the amendment of Mr. Cabell rejected. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved to amend the twenty-second section in such a manner as to make 
 the General Court a Constitutional Court as well as the Court of Appeals. 
 
 Mr. S. explained and urged his amendment, and was followed by Mr. Leigh, who 
 earnestly advocated and pressed the measure, as leading to the most salutary results. 
 
 Mr. Powell opposed it as unnecessary, all the ends being as well answered by 
 leaving the subject to the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Henderson made some remarks in reply to Mr. Powell, who rejoined, and was 
 followed by Mr. Leigh. 
 
 The question was taken, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnax, Goode, Mar- 
 shall of Richmond, Nicholas, Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Claiborne, 
 Madison, Stanard, Henderson, Cooke, Griggs, Pendleton, Morris, Garnett, Mathews, 
 Summers, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Prentis, Branch, 
 Townes, Massie, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes and Upshur — 33. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Giles, Dromgoole, Alexander, Tyler, 
 Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Smith, Miller, 
 Baxter, Trezvant, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Holladay, 
 Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, 
 George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 817 
 
 Cloyd, Chapman, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Bates, Bayly and Perrin — 62. 
 
 Mr. George moved the following amendment to the sixteenth section : 
 The Legislature shall meet only once in every two years, unless convened in the 
 manner prescribed by the twenty-seventh article of this Constitution." 
 
 He stated that he acted in obedience to the wishes of his constituents in presenting 
 the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, asked the ayes and noes, and they wei^ ordered. 
 
 INlr. Randolph said, that he was not second to any man in that House, or out of it, 
 in his abhorrence of over Legislation : and he would vote for the amendment wath 
 g^reat pleasure, but for one consideration : he was subjected to another Government 
 besides that of Virginia; and as the Legislature of the United States met every year, 
 he wanted that of Virginia to meet every year also, that it might watch them. 
 
 The question was then taken by ayes and noes as follov.'s : 
 
 .^yes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Williamson, Baldwin, Baxter, Henderson, Os- 
 borne, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, ^Vilson. Tazewell, Campbell of Bedford, Townes, 
 Martin, Stuart, Bates. Rose and Coalter — 26. 
 
 .Yoes — Messrs. Barbour. (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax. Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas, Clopton, Harrison, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Smith, I>Iiller, iSIason of South- 
 ampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, 
 Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, iNIason of Fre- 
 derick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton. Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Gar- 
 nett. Chapman, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, Doddridge, Barbour of Culpeper. Scott, 
 Green, Marshall of Fauquier. Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, 
 Cabell, Pleasants. Gordon. Thompson. Massie, jXeale. Joynes. Bavly, fpshur and 
 Perrin— C9. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 On motion of jMr. J. S. Barbour, the vote on Mr. Fitzhugh's amendment, in rela- 
 tion to the capitation tax, was re-considered. The amendment was then withdrawn 
 to be offered to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Coalter moved an amendment to the twelfth section, as follows : 
 
 " And provided, also, that the votes in each county shall be taken at one place to 
 be designated by law." 
 
 jMr. Coalter said, he believed the last chapter in the Book of Judges was now gone 
 through : the next would be the first chapter in the Book of Kings, which being King 
 Legislature, he wished it to be as pure as possible : and he hoped all who agreed in 
 that wish would vote for his amendment. 
 
 The question being taken, the ayes and noes stood as follows : 
 
 £i/es — Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnax. Dromgoole, 
 Nicholas, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Urquhart. Ptandolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Garnett, Green, Loyall, Grigsby^. Rose 
 and Coalter — 21. 
 
 jXoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Giles. Alexander, Goode, Mar.shall of 
 Richmond, Tyler, Clopton, Anderson, CofFinan, Harrison. Williamson. Baldwin, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Smith. iNIiller, Baxter, Claiborne, Venable, Madison, Mercer, Fitz- 
 hugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, iSaylor, Do- 
 naldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, McMillan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Tay- 
 lor of Caroline, Morris, Clo3'd, Cliapman. Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Doddridge, jNIorgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson. Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Prentis, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor. Saun- 
 ders, Branch, Townes. Cabell, Martin, Stuart. Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, 
 Bates, Neale, Joynes, Bayly, Up>hur and Perrin — 74. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Stanard now moved to insert in the twenty-second section, after the word 
 " tribunals," the words, " and of the Judges thereof," so as to read The jurisdiction of 
 these tribunals and of the Judges thereof, shall be regulated by law." 
 
 Mr. S. explained the amendment, as having reference to the duties of Judges out 
 of Court. And it was agreed to. 
 
 The House then adjourned. 
 
 103 
 
818 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 THURSDAY, January 7, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr, 
 Courtney of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The Chair announced, that the Select Committee on the subject of the apportion- 
 ment would not be ready to report till one o'clock, and that they asked leave to sit till 
 that hour. 
 
 Mr. Gordon suggested, that it would be also best to suspend the proceedings of the 
 Convention till tlfat time. 
 
 Mr. Summers hoped, that the motion for a recess would be withdrawn, until he had 
 an opportunity of submitting a paper. 
 
 He observed, that for some days a proposition had remained on the table, having for 
 its object the interposition of some restraints upon the Legislature in creating new 
 Banks, or renewing the charters of those in existence. The subject, he said, was of 
 much public concern, and he was satisfied that a power which included in its opera- 
 tion the currency of the country, and in its effects embraced and regulated in a great 
 degree the -price of every species of property, ought not to be left within the power of 
 a bare majority, of a naked quorum of the General Assembly. If the political effects 
 of the Banks, and their agency (sometimes most disastrous) in the affairs of our fel- 
 low citizens, was taken into the estimate, he thought that prudence dictated the limi- 
 tation of the Legislative power to ca^es challenging the concurrence of three-fifths of 
 both Houses, but if this majority should be regarded as unnecessarily large, and likely 
 to produce injurious restraints, we should be content to change the proposition from 
 three-fifths to majorities of the entire number of members elected to both branches of 
 the Legislature. While he was very desirous of bringing this subject to the conside- 
 ration of the Convention, he was so fully aware of the disinclination of members to 
 take up new questions, as to doubt whether even one of this moment could overcome 
 the impatience nov/ felt. He, therefore, in moving to take up for consideration the 
 amendment wliich he had offered, requested tliat the question miglit be considered as 
 a test of the sense of the House, whether at this period of its session it was its pleasure 
 to go into the merits of the proposed amendment, and that if it should be the determi- 
 nation of the Convention to enter upon the subject, he was prepared to enforce the 
 necessity, policy and propriety of engrafting in the Constitution the article which he 
 had proposed. 
 
 The folio v/ing resolution was then presented, and read by the Secretary : 
 
 "No law shall be enacted by the General Assembly, creating, continuing, altering 
 or renewing any body politic or corporate, with power to carry on the business of 
 banking, or for making loans or discounts, without the assent of three-fifths of the mem- 
 bers elected to each branch of the Legislature ; nor shall the General Assembly, at 
 any one session thereof, create, continue, alter or renew, more than one body politic 
 or corporate, with power to deal as a Bank, by making loans or discounts." 
 
 The Chair said, it would be proper to lay it on the table without taking a question, 
 it being the v/ish of the mover to give it that direction. 
 
 On Mr. Claiborne's motion, the resolution was ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. Stanard rose to remark, that in order to make the twenty-second section more 
 complete, it would be necessary to make another amendment. In the seventh line 
 of that section an amendment had been made yesterday, directing that " The jurisdic- 
 tion of the tribunals, and of the Judges thereof, shall be regulated by law." With a 
 view of accommodating the first part of the section to that amendment, he would move 
 to add in the second line after the words " Court of Appeals," the words and the 
 Judges thereof," and also after the words " in such Superior Courts as the Legisla- 
 ture may from time to time ordain and establish," the w^ords "and the Judges thereof." 
 
 Mr. Cabell said, he did not profess to set himself up for a critic ; but it seemed to 
 him that this amendment would bring back things to the same situation in which they 
 were before the amendment, which he had had the honor to submit, had been adopted 
 by the House. He thought that the proposed amendment would fix the Judges in 
 ouice, even after their Courts were abolished. 
 
 Mr. Stanard admitted, that the member v/hich he wished to introduce, might not 
 very well cohere with the other members of the same sentence ; but it struck him as 
 a necessary provision. As to the remark of the gentleman from Pittsylvania, which 
 st^emed to him to be the offspring of a high degree of jealousy on this subject, he 
 begged leave to sa}'^, that his amendment was only calculated to give the Judge the 
 necessary Judicial power in vacation as well as in the terms of the Courts — out of 
 Court as well as in Court — and it was certainly essential to give such power to the 
 Judge, He would ask of the Chair to confine his amendment at present to the " Court 
 of Appeals," and to take the question first in that shape — but (on Mr. Morris's sug- 
 gestion,) he moved to introduce the words in question, after the word " establish," in 
 the twent3^-second section, so as to read : " The Judicial power shall be vested in a 
 Supreme Court ot Appeal^^ in such Superior Courts as the Legislature may from time 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 819 
 
 to time ordain and establish, in the Judges thereof, in the County CourtS; and in jus- 
 tices of tlie peace." 
 
 Mr. Cabell asked, why then was not the gentleman from Spottsylvania satisfied 
 with confining- his amendment to the introduction of the words " in vacation?" 
 
 Mr. CJaytor remarlied, that the same* provision which is now made by the tv/enty- 
 second section, is to be found in the Constitution of tlie United States; and if a pre- 
 cisely similar provision in that instrument conveyed the necessary power, where was 
 the necessity of making any change Why should they not leave it in the present 
 form, when this provision conveyed the necessar}- power and when it has been found 
 to answer in the Constitution of the United States for forty years.? He remarked 
 also, that if a new provision was to be adopted, it might be necessary to give it a con- 
 struction new and diiierent from the one already established. 
 
 Tjie Chair then read the clause as it would stand with the words " and the Judges 
 thereof," inserted after the word establish." 
 
 Mr. Claytor asked, if the amendment made yesterday did not apply to the Judges 
 themselves ? whether it did not cover the whole case ; and whence, then, the necessity 
 of a repetition ? 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, he would not undertake to assign the reasons why this body had 
 given an unanimous vote yesterday in favor of the amendment, and in which he pre- 
 sumed the gentleman from Campbell had united; but he would retort the enquiry 
 upon that gentleman : why make the amendment yesterday, and object to a similar 
 one to-day ? He thought it was necessary to carr}^ this amendment out. In the first 
 sentence of the section, the Judicial power is vested in the Courts themselves, but 
 you have not said it shall be in the Judges ; and it was to give Judges the necessary 
 jurisdiction out of Court, that he wished the amendment introduced into the first sen- 
 tence. You surely can have no objection, after havmg declared that the jurisdiction 
 of the Judges shall be regulated by law, to say also that it ought to be vested in the 
 Judges — and if yesterday it was not superfluous to declare the one, why should it be 
 superfluous to-day to declare the other.' 
 
 Mr. Claytor observed, as to the iinanimous vote of yesterday, he of course did not 
 vote in the negative, but he did not hesitate to say, that he must then have voted 
 without due consideration. It was sufficient for him to recollect that the provisions 
 of the present section were similar to those in the Constitution of the United States, 
 and where was the necessity of holding up a candle to the noon-day sun ? or of call- 
 ing for the meaning of words, which had been interpreted for forty years past.' 
 
 Mr. Powell asked, if the expressions used in the section before the House, did not 
 necessarily imply a jurisdiction in the Judges themselves. The very terms them- 
 selves vest a Judicial power in the courts; and surely they did equally so in the 
 Judges. He considered, therefore, the amendment as not only perfectly unnecessary, 
 but he objected to it, because it might be so construed as to make the Judges constitu- 
 tional agents as well as the courts themselves. He surely did not wish -o restrain the 
 Legislature from bona fide abolishing the courts, VN^hen the public interest imperiously 
 required it ; because he hoped, whatever had been done in another State, that the 
 Legislature of Virginia would never so far foro-et its dignity and its duty ; would never 
 become so debased, as to strike at the tenure of the Judges hy the abolition of tijeir 
 courts. For his own part, he thought that the amendment adopted yesterday had 
 entirely superceded the necessity of the one now proposed. 
 
 Mr. Henderson suggested, that the House had given leave of absence to seven of 
 its members ; and among them to the Chairman of the Judicial Committee, and asked 
 whether it were not better to vvaive the present discussion and have a recess until 
 1 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. Stanard rose to express his surprise at the remarks of the gentleman from Fre- 
 derick, (^Ir. Powell.) It filled him with amazement to hear that gentleman sa}-, that 
 it was perfectly clear, when the jurisdiction was given to the court itself, it was also 
 given to the functionaries of that court. He would ask him as a practical lawyer, if 
 it has never so happened to him in the course of his practice, to have to interpret an 
 act of Assembly, which gave certain powers to courts, when the question arose whe- 
 ther the Judge could also exercise power except in open court. Is it possible, that 
 this question was never brought before him in a Court of Chancery ? Is it not an es- 
 tablished rule that certain appeals may be granted in open court, which could not be 
 done by the Judge in vacation.^ The language of the law is, that unless in cases pro- 
 vided for, the functionaries may act in open court, in term time, but not in vacation. 
 And yet the gentleman from Frederick says it is perfectly clear, if you give jurisdic- 
 tion to the court itself, you must also give it severally to the integers who constitute 
 the court itself. What I does one Judge constitute the court But, if this doctrine be 
 true, is it not equally true, that if the jurisdiction be given to a Judge in term time, it 
 may be exercised by him in vacation ? And why, (Mr. S. asked,) are we so careful in 
 the first sentence of this section, to give jurisdiction to "justices of the peace .'" Why 
 discriminate between the County Courts" and "justices of the peace.'" The gen- 
 tleman from Frederick says, that if jurisdiction be given to courts, it follows as a ne- 
 
820 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOX. 
 
 cessary consequence that it must be vested in the Judges. True ; but how vested in 
 them ? Only as members of that court ; but not as integers of the court. Mr. S. said, 
 he wished to remove all doubt by the amendment he had offered, that jurisdiction was 
 given to the Judges, in vacation as well as in term time. A writ of habeas corpus is 
 to be sued out, for instance ; he wished it to be understood whether a power could be 
 given to the Judge to issue it in vacation. 
 
 Mr. Powell rose in reply, and expressed his regret that any thing he had said 
 should have filled the mind of the gentleman from Spottsylvania with amazement. 
 But he was as much amazed at the gentleman's argument, after the concession that 
 gentleman had made. He had allowed that, if jurisdiction is given to a court, it is 
 given to the Judges of that court : if so, where could be the necessity of vesting ju- 
 risdiction in them by a separate clause.'' Cui bono? Why reiterate what had already 
 been declared unless it was to give separate jurisdiction to Judges whether in term 
 or in vacation. If this alone was the object, it was a laudable one : but it could be 
 fully attained by the effect of the amendment offered yesterday, giving the Legisla- 
 ture power over the jurisdiction of the court and of the Judge. That amendment 
 completely superseded the necessity of this one. It declared that the jurisdiction of 
 the Judges as well as of the court should be regulated by law. Did not this put it in 
 the power of the Legislature to declare that the Judges might have separate jurisdic- 
 tion for duties out of court.'' Might not the Legislature declare that a Judge of the 
 Court of Appeals, might, in vacation, grant an appeal ? He appealed to the gentleman 
 himself, if the amendment adopted yesterday, did not completely efllect this object.' 
 If it did not, his not perceiving sucli to be t.he fact was, he supposed, to be attributed 
 to the obtuseness of his intellect, or else to the want of his accustomed lucidness of 
 argument in the gentleman from Spottsylvania. 
 
 Mr. Henderson now renewed his motion, and the House took a recess till 1 o'clock. 
 
 After the recess, the House having resumed its session, 
 
 Mr. Madison, from the Select Committee to whom had been re-committed the third 
 and fourth sections of the amended Constitution, made the following report : 
 
 " III. One of these shall be called the House of Delegates, and shall consist of one 
 hundred and thirty-two members, to be chosen annually, I'br and by the several 
 counties, cities, towns and boroughs of the Commonwealth ; whereof thirty Dele- 
 gates shall be chosen for and by the twenty-six counties lying West of the Alle- 
 ghany mountains ; twenty-five, for and by the fourteen counties lying between the 
 Alleghany and Blue Ridge of mountains ; forty-one, for and by the twenty-nine coun- 
 ties lying East of the Blue Ridge of mountains and above tide-water; and thirty-six 
 for and by the counties, cities, towns and boroughs, lying upon tide-water, that is to 
 say : Of the twenty six counties lying West of the Alleghany, the counties of Harri- 
 son, Monongalia, Ohio and Washington, shall each elect two Delegates ; and the 
 counties of Brooke, Cabell, Grayson, Greenbrier, Giles, Kanawha, Lee, Lewis, 
 Logan, Mason, Monroe, Montgomery, Nicholas, Pocahontas, Preston. Randolph. Rus- 
 sell, Scott, Tazewell, Tyler, Wood and Wythe, shall each elect one Delegate. Of the 
 fourteen counties lying between the Alleghany and Blue Ridge, the counties of Frede- 
 rick and Shenandoah shall each elect three Delegates ; the counties of Augusta, Berke- 
 ley, Botetourt, Hampshire, Jefferson, Rockingham and Rockbridge, shall each elect 
 two Delegates; and the counties of Alleghany, Bath, Hardy, Morgan aiid Pendleton, 
 shall each elect one Delegate. Of the twenty-nine counties lying East of the Blue 
 Ridge and above tide-water, the county of Loudoun shall elect three L^elegates ; the 
 counties of Albemarle, Bedford, Brunswick, Buckingham, Campbell, Culpeper; Fau- 
 quier, Halifax, Mecklenburg and Pittsylvania, shall each elect two Delegates; and 
 the counties of Amelia, Amherst, Charlotte, Cumberland, Dinwiddle, Fluvanna, 
 Franklin, Goochland, Henry, Louisa, Lunenburg, Madison, Nelson, Nottoway, 
 Orange, Patrick, Powhatan and Prince Edward, shall each elect one Delegate. And 
 of the counties, cities, towns and boroughs, lying on tide-water, the counties of Acco- 
 mack and Norfolk shall each elect two Delegates ; the counties of Caroline, Ches- 
 terfield, Essex, Fairfax, Greensville, Gloucester, Hanover, Henrico, Isle of Wight, 
 King & Queen, King William, King George, Nansemond, Northumberland, North- 
 ampton, Princess Anne, Prince George, Prince William, Southampton, Spottsyl- 
 vania, Stafford, Sussex, Surr}'' and Westmoreland, and the city of Richmond, 
 the borough of Norfolk, and the tov/n of Petersburg, shall each elect one Delegate ; the 
 counties of Lancaster and Pcichmond shall together elect one Delegate ; the counties 
 of Matthews and Middlesex shall together elect one Delegate ; the counties of Eliza- 
 beth City and Warwick, shall together elect one Delegate; the counties of James City 
 and York, and the city of Williamsburg, shall together elect one Delegate ; and the 
 counties of New Kent and Charles City, shall together elect one Delegate." 
 
 " IV. Strike out from the word "counties," in the twenty-fifth line, to the end, 
 and insert — 
 
 " Of Brooke, Ohio and Tyler, shall form one district: the counties of Monongalia, 
 Preston and Randolph, shall form another district : the counties of Harrison, Lewis, 
 Wood and Pocahontas, shall form another district : the counties of Kanawha, Mason, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 S21 
 
 Cabell, Loffan and Nicholas, shall form another district : the counties of Greenbrier, 
 Monroe, Giles and Montgomery, shall form another district : the counties of Tazewell, 
 Wvihe and Grayson, shall form ajiDther district: the counties of WasJiiugton, R.us- 
 sell, Scolt and Lee. shall form auother district: the counties of Berkeley, ^lorgan 
 and Hampshire, shall form another district: the counties of Frederick and Jefierson, 
 shall form another district : the counties of Shenandoali and Hardy, shall form 
 another district: the counties of Rockingham and Pendleton, shall form angtiier 
 district : the counties of Augusta and Rockbridge, shall form another district : the 
 counties of Alleghany, Bath and Botetourt, shall form another district: tiie counties 
 of Loudoun and Fairfax shall form another district: the counties of Fauquier and 
 Prince Wihiam, shall form another district : the counties of Staiford, Kiug George, 
 Westmoreland, Pv.ichmond, Lancaster and Northumberland, jhall form another dis- 
 trict : the counties of Culpeper. Madison and Orange, shall form another district : the 
 counties of Albemarle. Nelson and Amherst, shall form another district : the counties of 
 Fluvanna, Goochland, Louisa and Hanover, shall form another district : the counties of 
 Spottsvlvania. Caroline and Esses, shall form another district : the counties of King &, 
 Queen, King William, Gloucester. ^Matthews and Middlesex, shall fonn another dis- 
 trict : the counties nf Accomack, Northampton. Elizabeth City, Tork and Warwick, 
 and the city of Williamsburg, shall form anotlier district: tlie counties of Charles 
 City, James City, New Kent and Henrico, and the city of Richmond, shall form ano- 
 ther district : the counties of Bedford and Franklin, shall form another district : the 
 counties of Buckingli-im, Campbell and Cumberland, shall form another district: the 
 counties of Patrick, Henry and Pittsylvania, shall form another district : the counties 
 of Halifax and Mecklenburg shall form another district: the counties of Charlotte, 
 Lunenburg-, Nottoway and Prince Edward, shall form another district: the counties 
 of AmeliaT Powhatan and Chesterfield, and the town of Petersburg, shall form ano- 
 ther district: the counties of Brunswick, Dinwiddle. Greensville and Prince George, 
 shall form another district: the counties of Isle of Wight. Southampton, Surry and 
 Sussex, shall form another district: and the counties of Norfolk. Nansemond and 
 Princess Anne, and the borough of Norfolk, shall form another district." 
 The report having been for the present laid upon the table. 
 
 The Convention "resumed the consideration of the amendment moved by Yir. 
 Stanard. 
 
 Mr. Henderson called the attention of the Chief Justice to the question, and re= 
 quested an expression of his opinion, declaring that it would have great weighl with 
 him. 
 
 Mr. Marsliall said, that being thus called out. it was not in his power to remain 
 wholly silent. His opinion was that the amiendment was a proper one. There was 
 the same reason, in part, though not entirely, for mjaking a declaration respecting the 
 power of a Judge when out of court, as there was for tliat of justices in addition to 
 the power of the County Courts. The acts performed by Judges out of court had 
 been very properly enumerated by the gentleman from Spottsylvania. The awarding 
 of writs of habeas corpus especially, was always done out of court. 
 
 The subject had not occurred to the Judicial Committee, or it would have been at- 
 tended to by them in making their report. If acts of Judicial power were performed 
 by Judges out of court, the Judges as well as the courts ought certainly to be men- 
 tioned in the enumeration of the depositories of that power. 
 
 The quest'on was then taken, and the amendment was carried — Aves 51. 
 
 The report of the Select Committee wcLS now taken up. and on motion of Mr. Stu= 
 art was again laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. Gordon moved to amend the fourteenth section, (which relates to the Gover- 
 nor.) by striking out the following words : He shall be elected as follows : At the 
 first election for members of the House of Delegates, to be held under this Constitu- 
 tion, and every third year thereafter, at the times and places of holdino' such elec- 
 tions, in the several counties and corporate towns, of this Commonwealth, the per- 
 sons qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly shall vote also for a Go- 
 vernor. A poll of the vote so given in each election district shall be dulv kept, au- 
 thenticated, certified, and laid before the General Assembly, at their next annual 
 meeting, in such manner as shall be prescribed by law. These polls shall be e.xam- 
 ined by a joint-committee of both Houses — the number of votes given for each per- 
 son as Governor ascertained, and the result declared by resolution of the General 
 Assembly. The person havinor the crreatest number of votes, if that be a maioritv of tjie 
 whole given, and if he be eligible to the office, shall be declared duly elected Governor. 
 If no such person have a majority of the whole number of votes given, then it shall 
 be declared that no election hath been made: and the General Assemblv shall pro- 
 ceed by joint-vote of both Houses, to elect a Governor from those, how manv soever 
 there may be, if eliofible, who shall have the two highest numbers on the polls :"' and 
 inserting in lieu thereof: He shall be elected by joint vote of the two Houses of 
 the General Assembly." 
 
822 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. G. said, he had heretofore voted for the election of Governor by the people, 
 though he had never felt any very great solicitude on the subject, because he never 
 had desired to confer on that officer any additional Executive powers. The Conven- 
 tion had modified that branch of t.he Constitution so as to render the Governor more 
 independent of the Legislature than formerly, by extending his term of service to 
 three years, instead of one year, and by disqualifying him i'rom being re-elected for 
 three years thereafter, and still more by prescribing that all votes in the Legislature 
 should be given viva voce. This brought the representative into direct responsibility 
 to the people. He considered these guards as sufficient: and he was persuaded that 
 conducting the election in this mode would conduce to the repose of the Common- 
 wealth : nor would there be any just objection to it, where the Legislature was so 
 formed that the people wielded the power of that body. He perceived from one clause 
 of the report, that the Committee had found some difficulty on the subject, as they 
 had proposed, that if a majority of the people would not agree in the election, to de- 
 volve it upon the Legislature. 
 
 This was a case that might often occur ; and he considered it as very improper, 
 that after the people had been excited by an unsuccessful attempt to elect their 
 Chief Magistrate, tiie election should be thrown into the Assembly. Jt would tend to 
 introduce great heats into that body, and might lead to intrigue and bargaining. 
 With these views, he had concluded to propose the amendment he had now offered 
 to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Morgan moved to amend the amendment, by inserting after the word " elect- 
 ed," the word " annually," and on this motion, he asked the ayes and noes. They 
 were taken accordingly, as follows : 
 
 Jlijes — Messrs. Anderson, Williamson, Smith, Osborne, Donaldson, George, M'- 
 Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Oglesby, Laidley, See, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Saunders, Cabell and Pleasants — 20. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Coffinan, Harrison, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, 
 Henderson, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Boyd, Pendleton, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Mathews, Duncan, Summers, Barbour 
 of Culpeper. Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 C'lmpbell of Bedford, Claytor, Branch, Tov/nes, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, 
 Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 74. 
 
 The question then recurring oh the amendment of Mr. Gordon, 
 
 Mr. Powell asked for the ayes and noes, and they were ordered accordingly, 
 
 Mr. Clopton said, that the opinion which his best reflection had induced him to 
 form on this subject, had been indicated by the vote he gave when the question was 
 before presented to this body. The discussion which had occurred since, had not 
 created in his mind a single doubt, as to the propriety of an election of the Chief Ma- 
 gistrate by the people. But, he never had given a vote on any subject, where he 
 feared that his constituents did not concur with him. Believing it to be the duty of 
 a representative, whenever his mind, by whatever means, had arrived at moral cer- 
 tainty, as to the wishes of a majority of his constituents, to obey those wishes, or to 
 vacate his seat, he felt it his duty, on the present occasion, to give a vote different 
 from that he had formerly given. He did tiiis with the less reluctance, as he did not 
 consider the election of Governor by the Legislature, subversive of the great princi- 
 ples of free Government. He, therefore, concluded to yield to the will of those, who 
 had empowered him to give a vote its full efiect, by voting in the affirmative. 
 
 The question was then decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Aijes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, 
 Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Joynes and Perrin — 50. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffinan, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Co}', Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, Seli, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson, Bayly and Upshur — 46. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell proposed further to amend the section, by striking out the words, 
 " or on such other day as may from time to time be prescribed by law." 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 823 
 
 Tlie motion was opposed by Mr. Stanard, and before any question was taken, it 
 was withdrawn by the mover. 
 
 Mr. Thompson moved to amend the ninth section, which reads as follows : 
 
 " IX. The Governor, the Judges of the Court of Appeals and Superior Courts, 
 and all others olfending against the State, either by mal-adminislration, corruption, 
 neglect of duty, or any other liigh crime or misdemeanor, shall be impeachable by the 
 House of Delegates; such impeachment to be prosecuted before the Senate, which 
 shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, 
 the Senate shall be on oath or affirmation : and no person shall be convicted, without 
 the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members of the Senate. Judgment, in cases 
 of impeachment, shall not extend furtlier than to removal from office, and disqualifica- 
 tion to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit, under the Commonwealth; 
 but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, 
 judgment and punishment, according to law by striking out the words of the Se- 
 nate," and inserting the word " present;" so as to make it read " no person shall be 
 convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members present." 
 
 Mr. T. said, he believed the question involved in the amendment, had never been 
 decided directly. If it had, he was still supported by the example of the Convention, 
 in offiering it again, for the body was doing and undoing from day to day. He thought 
 the requiring of two-thirds of all the members constituting the Senate, in order to 
 conviction, evinced an unnecessary degree of caution, and was calculated, in practice, 
 to produce great inconvenience — it might often lead to the acquittal of a Judge, when 
 he ought to be condemned. Members might absent themselves to avoid voting, and 
 thus a very few individuals would have it in their power to screen an offender. They 
 had the precedent of thirteen of the State Constitutions, as well as of that of the 
 United States in favour of the amendment he had proposed. They pursued its very 
 words. He asked what evil was likely to follow its adoption ? If any gentleman 
 could point out a single case where a Judge had been improperly condemned for the 
 want of such a rule as he proposed to strike out, there might be some reason for re- 
 taining it. There had been but three impeachments, indeed but two in the United 
 States, and but one Judge had been cfmvicted in consequence. He believed nobody 
 had ever complained of injustice in that instance. He could not say whether there had 
 been impeachments in the individual States. In England, where the House of Com- 
 mons was prosecutor, and the House of Lords sat as Judges, a simple majority of a 
 quorum of that House had power to convict. And why should so different a practice 
 prevail here 
 
 The question was now taken, and the vote as counted by the Chair, stood, ayes 45, 
 noes 41 ; but, a doubt beinof expressed as to the accuracy of the count, a second count 
 was ordered — when Mr. Thompson called for the ayes and noes, and they were or- 
 dered by the House. Before they were taken, however, 
 
 Mr. Scott said, that he had been greatly surprised at the vote which had been an- 
 nounced, and not less at the argument in favour of the amendment. Here, said Mr. 
 S., is a part}' arraigned before a Judicial tribunal — it is a criminal trial — the Senators 
 sit as triers of the fact, and as Judges of the law. Now, if a slave, the most abject 
 in the Commonwealth, is accused of a capital crime, he is brought before five justices, 
 and he cannot be convicted, unless those five justices are unaniwous in the sentence. 
 Again — if the humblest individual in the community is on his trial for a crime of any 
 sort, he cannot be pronounced guilty, except his twelve con^-titutional triers are unani- 
 mous in their award. But here, you arraign a high public officer before the Senate, 
 and two-thirds of a bare quorum are em.powered to pass upon him the heaviest sen- 
 tence of the law — Yes, Sir, I say the heaviest sentence of the law, because character 
 is dearer than life, especially to men in such stations. There is another principle, 
 which enters deeply into our criminal jurisprudence — It is, that the existence of a 
 df)ubt — a mere doubt as to the fact charged, acquits the accused. And yet the gen- 
 tleman from Amherst proposes, that where there was nearly one-third of the Senate 
 not merely in doubt as to the guilt of the accused, but perfectly satisfied of his inno- 
 cence, he is not to have the benefit of that doubt, but two thirds of those present are 
 to convict an officer of importance under the Government, and to remove him from 
 office. Such doctrine, Mr. S. said, was at war with ail his notions on the subject of 
 criminal justice. 
 
 Mr. Thompson observed in reply, that the gentleman from Fauquier had attempted 
 to liken the prosecution of a Judge before the Senate on an impeachment, to a crimi- 
 nal trial before a Court of Law. There was no analogy between the cases, and could 
 be none! The award pronounced by the Senate, was not in the nature of punish- 
 ment. If the Judge was charged with any criminal offence, the Senate was not the 
 tribunal at which to try it — he was turned over to the courts for trial, and for punish- 
 ment, if he deserved it. 
 
 The charges before the Senate were for acts of a political character — they did not 
 touch character, as criminal offences and felonies did . And besides — he could not see = 
 
824 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 if a concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate present was to destroy a Judge's cha- 
 racter by their vote, how the concurrence of a number greater than a majority, but 
 not quite amounting to two-thirds in a similar vote, would not do the same thing. 
 The difference as to the effect on character, was unworthy of regard. The cliaracter 
 of the Judge would be equally affected, but his office would not — true — but that was 
 the very thing to which he objected. His ofhce ought to be taken away by the vote 
 which took his character away. In a free and intelligent country like this, no man 
 who had come under the ban of a majority of the Representatives of the people, should 
 continue to hold his office — still less a Judge, whose office was of such dignity in 
 itself, and such importance to the Commonwealth. The gentleman from Chesterfield 
 had b'^autifully and truly said, that the honour we pay to a Judge, is part of his autho- 
 rity — but could the people honour a Judge condemned by a majority of the Legisla- 
 ture of his State, and saved only by the want of votes enough to make up two-thirds 
 of that body ? Surely not. The gentleman had referred to the unanimity required 
 of a jury — but there was no more analogy there. The gentleman was too good a 
 black-letter lawyer not to be well acquainted with the origin of the trial by jury. 
 Was the unanimity of twelve men required merely as a test of the truth of the charge 
 The gentleman knew better — it was because in early times the jurors, if they gave 
 in a false verdict, were liable to be attainted. In a subsequent period the requirement 
 was retained, not because it was necessary to the establishment of the truth of the 
 fact charged, but from a spirit of civil liberty, and of mercy to the accused. It never 
 had, nor could be required merely as a test of truth. The gentleman was aware, that 
 jury trial was not conducted in the same manner in all countries. In Scotland, for 
 instance, the jury consisted of fifteen men, and a 7najority was sufficient to convict- 
 As a mere touchstone of truth, this was a better mode than ours. But the spirit of 
 civil liberty had given value to the rights and lives of the citizens, and unanimity in 
 the jury trial was resorted to as a safe-guard against oppression. Mr. T. concluded, 
 by repeating that his amendment ran in the very words employed in the Constitution 
 of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, that he was constrained by a sense of duty, to offer some remarks 
 on this subject — he should gladly be silent, but could not dispense with the obligations 
 his duty imposed upon him. The gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) had consi- 
 dered a Judge impeached before the Senate, as a criminal on trial before a court. 
 There was the greatest dissimilarity imaginable between the two cases. In the first 
 place, the two bodies were not organized alike. The office of a jury was to try the 
 facts charged — and though they rendered a general verdict, including both fact and 
 law, yet the court alone was properly the judge of the law. If the principle of una- 
 nimity, therefore, was relied on, it ought to be unanimity among the members of 
 the court. But, who ever heard of perfect unanimity's being required among the 
 Judges.'' The only exception was that in the case of the slave; and that he consi- 
 dered as one of the highest honors of Virginia, among the many honors she had en- 
 joyed. In the trial of a poor abject slave, the law made the court the " next friend" 
 of the slave, to procure him counsel, and then it required absolute unanimity among 
 his Judges. But in that case, there was no jury — the court performed the duty of 
 both judge and jury. Another distinction was, that a Judge before the Senate, was 
 tried in his political, not in his personal capacity; but, a man on trial before a court, 
 was tried personally, in his private character as a man, let him happen to hold what 
 office he might. Here, then, was a Judge, or other officer of the Commonwealth, 
 (for both the clause and the amendment applied to others as well as Judges, though 
 this seemed to be forgotten,) who holds a distinguished situation under the State. 
 He receives honour, and he receives money for rightly performing the duties of it; 
 and the question was, whether he should retain that honour, and continue to receive 
 the money of the public, against the will of other than two-thirds of the entire num- 
 ber of the Senate, before whom he had been impeached.' Whether all absent votes 
 were to be thrown in his favour To him it was a perfect novelty ; and it would 
 have been the invention of this body, if all absent votes, with or without the will of 
 the voters, were to be thrown into the scale of the accused. 
 
 The court and jury acted on one uniform principle throughout the country: but 
 when an officer of high trust was to be tried, in all the other States, two-thirds of the 
 members present were held sufficient to convict — that number was never transcended. 
 He said it was a novelty : he asked for any precedent of the like : he demanded any 
 similar case that would serve to justify such a proceeding. 
 
 Mr. G. said, it was a matter of real sorrow and affliction to him to differ from gen- 
 tlemen for whom he had such very high regard, and to differ from them so radically 
 as he did in this matter. But, he must obey the dictates of his reason and conscience ; 
 and when these guides taught him that a particular course was right, he could not 
 surrender that conviction to please any man. He was never more fully and tho- 
 roughly convinced on any subject : and when he had as a precedent the practice of 
 all the world with him, his convictions were confirmed beyond the possibility of doubt. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 825 
 
 He had had some experience on this subject — and it convinced him, that if two-thirds 
 of the entire number of both Houses of the Legislature should be required, the rule 
 would be extremely awkward and clumsy in practice, and no test of responsibility at 
 all. A man was accused, and not a step could be taken in issuing the accusation, 
 without an unanimity of two-thirds of the body that was to try him. A thousand 
 perplexing questions would arise ; a.nd if in any case, one more than one-third disa- 
 greed with the rest, the proceedings could not go on. The greatest difnculty might 
 be experienced in getting through even the initiatory steps of such a prosecution. 
 Nothing was more difiicult than to conduct a process under such a rule. The advan- 
 tages on the side of the accused would be immensely great. 
 
 Mr. G. said, he had had no idea, when they were called wiih this, as one main 
 object in view, to provide a means of making Judges responsible for their conduct in 
 office, that the Convention, instead of that, v/ould go beyond all former beings that 
 ever existed in the world — beyond all human tribunals, in making Judges secure 
 against all responsibility. 
 
 They declared, that the Legislature might remove Judges — but how ? By means 
 which rendered it next to impossible. If they succeeded, it must be by the merest 
 chance in the world. How siiould they appear before the world ? How must they 
 appear before themselves ? For his part, he had rather see the vrhole clause stricken 
 out. He had rather gentlemen should go back at once, and tell their constituents 
 that as to removing Judges or punishing them, it was out of the question — they were 
 responsible to nothing and nobody, but God and their own consciences. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, that to hear the arguments on this question, it would seem to a 
 by-stander, that Judges were the only persons im.peachable under the clause. He 
 could wish gentlemen had taken in the Governor as well as the Judges, in their ar- 
 guments, as a Governor might possibly be impeached some day or other. He was 
 afraid the House might vote witii an eye to the Judges only. He believed, that mem- 
 bers of the Legislature too might often be impeached, or at least impeachable. He 
 could relate a fact that had some bearing on this latter point. He had once been asked 
 by a member of the Legislature, if he v/as willing to go to Hell.'' He had answered, 
 yes, if he was sure he could get back again without being scorched. The member 
 had then taken him to a cellar, at the door of which he gave a pass-word, and they 
 entered. After descending a flight of steps, they came to another door — the pass- 
 word was given again — they again descended — other doors were opened — and at last, 
 they got down to Hell itself, sure enough. There he saw a faro-bank, and members 
 of the Legislature at play. Now, the Legislature had declared, that to keep a faro- 
 bank, or play at one, was a Penitentiary oifence. Now, he asked whether a Judge 
 would not be impeached, if it were knov/n that he did such things ? And why mem- 
 bers of Assembly were not impeachable for the same offence ? He thought it probable 
 they should have some oiienders for the Senate to try. Hitherto, Judges had been 
 responsible only to God and their own consciences, but in future it was not to be so. 
 The Scripture declared, that a man could not serve two masters; that a man could 
 not serve God and Mammon. Now. he believed, a man could not serve God and the 
 Legislature of Virginia — he could not certainly please both. But where a man's 
 treasure was, there would his heart be also — and as the Judge's treasure would be at 
 the mercy of the Legislature, he supposed that his heart Vv^ould be in the Legislature 
 also. He concluded, by expressing his hope that gentlemen would vote with a view 
 to all future Judges, not to all past Judges. 
 
 The question was now taken by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 .liijes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Giles, Dromgoole, Tyler, Anderson, 
 Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, 
 Baxter, Trezvant, Randolph, Venabie, Holladay, Mercer, Osborne, Powell, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of V/ashington, Byars, Roane, Taylor 
 of Caroline, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, 
 Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Tazewell, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Bayly and Perrin — 55. 
 
 jYoes — Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Erodnax, Alexander, 
 Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Nicholas, Clopton, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, 
 Claiborne, Urquhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Madison, Stanard, Fitzhugh, Hen- 
 derson, Cooke, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Pendleton, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of 
 Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, 
 Townes, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes and Upshur — 41. 
 
 So the amendment prevailed, and the Convention agreed that two-thirds of the mem- 
 bers present in the Senate, were competent to convict an officer impeached before 
 that body. 
 
 Mr. Stuart now moved to amend the twenty-eighth section, which reads as follows: 
 " XXVni. Judges may be removed from office by a concurrent vote of both 
 Houses of the General Assembly ; but two-thirds of the whole number elected to 
 each House must concur in such vote, and the cause of removal shall be entered on 
 
 104 
 
S2G 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 the Journals of eacli. The Judge against whom the Legislature may be about to pro- 
 ceed, shall receive notice thereof, accompanied with a copy of the causes alleged for 
 his removal, at least twenty days before the day on which either House of the Gene- 
 ral Assembly sliall act thereupon;" by striking out " elected to," each House, and 
 inserting " of the members of each House. 
 
 Mr. S. explained the object of his amendment in a few words, and observed, that 
 as it stood, the article would be inefficient in practice, as eleven men in the Senate 
 would control the proceedings, and prevent a conviction. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, that all the amendments offered, and all the arguments advanced to 
 support them, seemed to be based on the supposition that every officer against whom 
 any chai'ge was prosecuted must be guilty as of course, and the main point to be at- 
 tained was a facility in convicting him : it did not appear to have occurred to the gen- 
 tlemen that an accused man might be innocent, and nobody seemed to be at all anxious 
 about placing any guards against the innocent. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, tliat to his mind the course pursued seemed directly the reverse. 
 Gentlemen who were for throwing these multiplied, these unheard-of guards around 
 the Jiidges, seemed to be conscious that they were guilty, and must be shielded by all 
 possible means : so they had barricadoed them on every side, till conviction was im- 
 possible. 
 
 The question was at length taken on the amendment of Mr. Stuart, and decided hy 
 ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Drom- 
 goole, Alexander, Goode, Anderson, Coffinan, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Ceirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Mercer, Osborne, Nay- 
 lor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bayly and Perrin — 52. 
 
 A''oes — Messrs. Leigh of Chesterfield, Brodnax, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Nicho- 
 las, Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Ur- 
 quhart, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Hoiladay, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Pendleton, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpe- 
 per, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, 
 Townes, Pleasants, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes and Upshur— 43. 
 
 So the amendment was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Garnett moved to amend the twelfth section, by striking out all that related to 
 admitting housekeepers and heads of families to the Right of Suffix-age. 
 
 He declined going into any discussion of the subject, it having been already fully ar- 
 gued : all he purposed was to make one more, and the last trial, to have this feature 
 erased. 
 
 But the hour being late, (past four o'clock,) the House agreed to postpone the con- 
 sideration of Mr. Garnett's amendment until to-morrow: and then adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, January 8, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Sykes of the Methodist Church. 
 
 A memorial was laid before the Convention by the President from Alexander Smyth, 
 as follows : 
 
 To ike Convention of the Conimonzvcalth of Virginia, the Memorial of Alexander Smyth 
 
 represents : 
 
 That he has seen a copy of an amended Constitution, proposed by a Committee of 
 your body, in which is the following clause : " No person shall be eligible to the office 
 of Governor, unless he shall have attained the age of thirty years, shall be a native 
 citizen of the United States, and shall have been a citizen of this Commonwealth for 
 five years next preceding his election." 
 
 Your memorialist was born in a small island in Europe, called on maps Rathlin,by 
 some writers Ratherin, and celebrated as the asylum of Robert Bruce ; he was brought 
 to Virginia a child in 1775, and bred in that Commonwealth ; he was a member of the 
 Legislature of Virginia in 1792, 179G, 1800, 1804, 1805, 1806, 1807, 1808, 1816, 1827, 
 and is now serving his eleventh session as a member of the Congress of the United 
 States, from Virginia. 
 
 Your memorialist has no desire to fill the office of Governor of the Commonwealth 
 of Virginia ; but he would feel aggrieved by an enactment declaring him (who has 
 been fifty -four years a. citizen and inhabitant , and is the grand-lather of sixteen native 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 827 
 
 Virginians,) ineligible, especially when it is to be declared that a native of iSew Or- 
 leans or Pensacola, born and bred under the Spanish Government, and who may have 
 resided in Virginia five years, shall be elicrible. 
 
 Your memorialist considers that ail those who were horn British subjects before the 
 revolution, and became citizens of the United States by that event, whether born in 
 Europe, the West Indies, or in the North American Colonies, have equal rights; they 
 are natural born citizens, and not naturahzed citizens. 
 
 Your memorialist requests a re-consideration of the said clause ; and that it may be 
 amended, so as to save the equal rights of citizens who became such by the revolu- 
 tion, wherever born. 
 
 Wliich is respectfully submitted. 
 
 ALEXANDER SMYTH. 
 On motion of Mr. Summers it was laid upon the table. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to the uutinished business of yesterday, which was 
 the consideration of the amendment proposed by Mr. Garnett. viz : to strike out in the 
 twelfth article of the draughted Constitution, the clause wliicli extends the Right of 
 Suffrage to housekeepers and heads of famihes. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh proposed to amend the amendment by striking out the same words, 
 and inserting in lieu thereof a different proposition. 
 
 The question then recurring on the motion to strike out, simply, 
 
 Mr. Powell asked a division of the question on striking out and inserting; when, 
 after a short conversation, Mr. Fitzhugh withdrew the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Wilson said, that he should vote against the motion; but should it prevail, he 
 should then move to insert an amendment, which he read in his place. 
 
 Mr. Mercer expressed his hope that none of those who approved of the clause as it 
 stood, would be induced to vote to strike it out, from any hope that either of the pro- 
 positions which had been read could possibly carry. That movement had been tried 
 with respect to the Executive Council, and had resulted only in a ten days' discussion. 
 
 The question was then taken by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode. Marshall of Piichmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne. Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Stanard, Holladay, Fitzhugh. Roane, Taj'lor of 
 Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, 2>Iarftliall of Fauquier, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Bates, Neale, Rose and Coalter — 40. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Vv'illiamson, Baldwin, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, INIadison, Mercer. Flenderson, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naj^lor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, 
 George, M'Millan, "Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, SeerDoddridge. Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Tov/nes, Cabell, 2^Iartin, Stuart, 
 Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 55. 
 
 So the House refused to strike out the clause extending the Right of Suffrage to 
 housekeepers and heads of families. 
 
 Mr. Claytor moved to amend the section by striking out the wwds who for twelve 
 months next preceding has been a housekeeper andi head of a family," and inserting 
 the words " who has resided"' within the county, city, town, borough, or election 
 district, where he may ofier to vote. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, if this amendment should prevail, it would be better at once to 
 strike out the entire section, and insert this clause alone : because it conferred Univer- 
 sal Sufirage. 
 
 Mr. Stanard said, this proposition went beyond all that had yet been offered. A mail 
 might become a resident the day before the election, and would by this be entitled 
 to vote. 
 
 Mr. Claytor said, that such had not been his intention ; he was wilhng to restore 
 the words " for twelve months next preceding." 
 
 Mr. Powell moved to amend the amendment by inserting two years"" instead of 
 " twelve months." 
 
 jNIr. Claytor accepted this as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved to amend the amendment thus modified, by addaig and who has 
 been the son of a freeholder" within the county, &c. 
 
 A conversation now ensued, in consequence of the absence of several members from 
 indisposition, wliicli resulted in a permission for them to vote to-morrow on any ques= 
 tions which should be put to-day. 
 
 The question was then put ou Mr. Claytor's amendment, and decided by ayes and 
 noes as follows : 
 
 Aijcs — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Wiiliamson. iNFCoy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith. Miller. Baxter, Mercer, Henderson, 0.iborne, Cooke, Pov/ell, Mason of Fre- 
 derick-, Nnvlor, Don:j.ldf:Oit E^^x'^ George, M Millan" Campbejl of WaHhingfon, 
 
628 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, 
 Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Gordon, 
 Thompson, Joynes, Bayly and Upshur— 43. 
 
 Xocs — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Eroduax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Baldwin, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Hahfax, Logan, V^enable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Fitzhugh, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour 
 of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter and Perrin— 51. 
 
 Mr. Cooke then, after a few prefatory remarks, explaining w^hy he offered his pro- 
 position at this mom.ent, moved the following to be added to the draught of the Con- 
 stitution, to be inserted after the fourth, as a fitth article : 
 
 It shall be the duty of the Legislature to re-apportion, once in ten years, to wit, in 
 the year 1841, and every ten years thereafter, the representation of the counties, cities, 
 towns and boroughs of this Cornmonwtalth, in both of the Legislative bodies ; provided, 
 however, that the number of Delegates from the aforesaid four great districts, and the 
 number of Senators from the aforesaid two great divisions respectively, shall neither be 
 increased nor diminished by such re-apportionment. And when a new county shall 
 hereafter be created, or any city, town or borough, not now entitled to separate repre- 
 sentation in the House of Delegates, shall have so increased in population as to be 
 entitled, in the opinion of the General Assembly, to such representation, it shall be 
 the duty of the General Assembly to make provision by law for securing to the peo- 
 ple of such new county, or such city, town or borough, an adequate representation. 
 And if the object cannot otherwise be effected, it shall be competent to the General 
 Assembly to re-apportion the whole representation of the great district containing such 
 new county, or such city, town or borough, within its limits; which re-apportionment 
 shall continue in force until the next regular decennial re-apportionment." 
 
 Mr. Cooke expressed his hope, that a provision of this kind might reconcile some to 
 the present arrangement of representation, when they found that there was a possi- 
 bility of having any injustice under which they might labour, in consequence of the 
 apportionment by the Committee, remedied by a re-apportionment of their division of 
 the State after ten years. 
 
 Mr. Summers said, if the amendment of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. 
 Cooke,) had contained a provision for future equahzation of the Representatives among 
 the four districts of the State, as well as an authority to equalize within those districts, 
 he should have gladly given it his support. While the amendment looked to the per- 
 petuity of the present distribution as between the different quarters of the Common- 
 wealth, he could but esteem it as utterly valueless, if not injurious. It gave counte- 
 nance and confidence, he thought, to the continuation of the present unequal distribu- 
 tion, and might in its tendencies exclude the hope of justice with reference to the fu- 
 ture. With those impressions on his mind, and in furtherance of that anxious desire 
 which he felt for the adoption of a rule for future apportionments, which would se- 
 cure to the people of the West in some degree the benefits which ought to result to 
 them from the accessions of numbers, wealth, and public contributions in that quarter 
 of the State, he should offer a substitute for the gentleman's additional article. Mr. 
 S. said, his rule for future apportionment had the advantage of avoiding all the con- 
 tested rules heretofore proposed. It equally departed from white population and Fe- 
 deral numbers. It looked to the class which many gentlemen here regard as the only 
 sxfe depositories of the sovereign power — the freeholders ; and proposed to equalize re - 
 presentation in the future according to the num.ber of the resident owners of the soil, in 
 the different quarters of the State. To avoid the objection which had been urged as 
 to what was here called nominal freeholders, he proposed that those only should be 
 computed who resided on the land by virtue of which they voted ; or, who residing in 
 some one of the counties should own therein a freehold estate of the value of $25. 
 In submitting this proposition, he was aware that it gave the West less than its pro- 
 per representation, but it approached that desirable result, and would he hoped be re- 
 ceived as it was proposed, in a spirit of concession and compromise. He then sub- 
 mitted the following substitute for Mr. Cooke's fifth article : 
 
 " For the purpose of future apportionments of Senators and Delegates, the General 
 Assembly shall cause registers from time to time to be formed, of the freehold voters 
 in the several counties, cities, towns, and boroughs, in which shall be ascertained the 
 number of qualified freehold voters in each, residing on the land in virtue of which 
 such right is founded; and also the number of qualified freehold voters not residing 
 on the land in riglit of which they vote, but whose freehold estate therein shall be 
 ol the assessed value of twenty-five dollars and upwards : That in the year 1S35, and 
 every tenth year thereafter, it' sliall be the duty of the General Assembly to re-ap- 
 portion the Senators and Dcle/rates among the several counties, cities, towns, and 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 829 
 
 election districts, as nearly as may be, in proportion to the registered freehold voters 
 in each, vrithout dividing counties in the formation of ejection districts: but no 
 re-apportionment of Senators shall go into operation but as succeeding elections shall 
 take place."' 
 
 3Ir. Cooke explained. He had not offered his plan as doing justice to the State, 
 but as mitigating the injustice of the arrangement, which Jiad been agreed upon, by 
 remed^-ing county inequalities, icithin the four divisions of the Commonwealth. He 
 shoula have offered some such plan as that of the gentleman from Kanawha, but he 
 feared it could not succeed. He was contented to take what he could get, and not 
 lose that, by reaching after what was unattainable. He should, however, vote for the 
 gentleman's proposition. 
 
 Mr. Leigh observed, that the proposition of ISIr. Cooke, went on the principle 
 wKich had been adopted by the Convention, and only carried it out, so as to remedy 
 inconveniences and inequalities in the detail. He considered the plan of Mr. Sum- 
 mers, as virtually the same as that which had been offered by Isli. Stuart, and rejected 
 by the House. All who were in favour of the draughted Constitution, would vote 
 against it. 
 
 Mr. Stuart said, the gentleman was mistaken, if he supposed this to be the same 
 with the plan he had offered. He preferred the plan of -\lr. Summers, to that of Mr. 
 Cooke — because the former respected the whole Commonwealth 3 whereas the lat- 
 ter established four different Commonwealths, and did not prescribe what should be 
 the principle of apportionment, even in them. 
 
 Mr. Cooke denied that his proposition established these four Commonwealths : it 
 found them established by a vote of the Convention ; and it only remedied the evils 
 they must otherwise suffer. 
 
 Mr. Summers in reply, remarked that the gentleman from Chesterfield, (Mr. 
 Leigh.) had been as unfortunate in supposing the plan of future apportionment, 
 which he Qsh. S.) had submitted, was in substance that of the gentleman from Rich- 
 mond county, as he had been in the first instance in regarding it as the counterpart 
 of that of the gentleman from Patrick, (.Jr. Stuart.) 
 
 The proposition of the gentleman from Richmond county looked to re-apportion- 
 ment only in the House of Delegates: the one under consideration embraced both 
 branches of the Legislature — Thaf plan proposed an enumeration of freeholds of twen- 
 ty-five dollars only — this contemplates all freeholds without regard to value, where 
 the freeholder resides on the land, and refers the value to those only which are not occu- 
 pied by the owner. If, said 3Ir. S., the freehold qualification is as gentlemen con- 
 tend, tne only safe, and satisfactory evidence of that common interest which ought to 
 give the elective franchise, he hoped it would be accepted as the proper criterion for 
 apportioning the political power. If it was true that the sovereignty ought to reside 
 with the freeholders, it must be equally true that they ought to hold it iii equal por- 
 tions, and that representation ought to be regulated by their numbers. He rejected 
 the opinion that it would operate to prevent the acceptance of the Constitution by 
 the people, and contended that the strongest ground of opposition would be the want 
 of some provision accommodating the future representation to the varying condition 
 and situation of the people, and securing to them equal weight in tlie Government: 
 That nothing would form so strong an incentive to their acceptance, as a provision 
 approximating an equality of representation hereafter. 
 
 As to the objection founded on the inequality of this rule, as applicable to different 
 portions of the State, he thought tlie gentleman from Loudoun (Mr. Mercer) as well 
 as some others had overrated it. The registered freeholds certainly would not be 
 found to give precisely the same results ever)' where, but he had examined the pro- 
 bable effect which this rule vrould have on the four divisions of the State, by the few 
 lights which offered themselves with reference to this enquiry : and he would place 
 before the House the facts which he had examined, and the conclusions to which they 
 conducted. The number of votes on the question of "Convention," or Xo Con- 
 vention," in ltf2S, were 38,53:3 — apportioning representation in the different districts 
 according to the votes then given, would in a House of Delegates of one hundred 
 and twenty-eight members give to the 
 
 Western District. - - 37 
 
 Valley. - ' - - - 23 
 
 Midland. - - •- - 36 
 
 Tide-water, - - 32 
 
 128 
 
 In the same year an animated election took place for electors of President of the 
 United Stales, at vrhich was given throughout the Commonwealth, 38,719 votes — Ap- 
 portiorhng by this manifestation of the freehold strength in the different districts, the 
 representation would be for the 
 
830 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 31 
 
 25 
 40 
 32 
 
 128 
 
 A comparison of the votes given on the two occasions shewed, that the West had 
 taken the deepest interest, and given the largest vote on the first, and the East on the 
 second, and taking the tAVO elections together, and their combined results as giving 
 the relative number of freeholders, which he thought might safely be admitted, an 
 apportionment founded on this average would give to the 
 
 Western District, - - - 34 
 
 Valley, - - - - 24 
 
 Midland, - - - - 38 
 
 Tide-water, - - - 32 
 
 128 
 
 He combated the hypothesis of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon,) who 
 liad contended that freeholds were necessarily larger in districts where slaves were 
 held in great numbers, than where the ground was tilled by white persons. He in- 
 sisted that in the grazing districts, where pasturage furnished the principal profits, the 
 freeholds must necessarily be larger than in the planting or farming country, and that 
 where slaves constituted the labouring class, a greater proportion of the free popula- 
 tion would be found owners of the soil, than in a community where the labour was 
 performed by hired white men. In the first the labourers were in addition to the 
 white community, in the latter they were a part of it. 
 
 Mr. S. expressed his anxious desire for the adoption of some satisfactory rule of 
 future apportionment, with which he believed the people would accept the Constitu- 
 tion — and urged the acceptance of the one which he had offered, as forming a just 
 medium between the contested claims of the two sides of the Convention, and the 
 true half-way house where all might amicably meet in concord. Concessions were de- 
 manded, and no man felt more disposed to make them, provided they were mutual ; 
 and he sincerely hoped that his proposition would be found acceptable to a majority 
 of the House. He asked for the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that nothing but the most imperious sense of duty could induce 
 him for one minute to retard the dissolution of that body. He had risen to express 
 his regret, that he was unable to vote for the scheme of his friend from Frederick : his 
 objection to it was, that it went to perpetuate the dividing lines which separated the 
 State into distinct parts : besides, should the amendment of the gentleman from Fred- 
 erick succeed, instead of having an apportionment for the present, and leaving the 
 rest to futurity, it presented the idea to the people that they were to have a perpetuity 
 of the injustice which the present apportionment iniiicted upon them. 
 
 It might possibly recommend the Constitution to the adoption of some of the 
 large counties which expected hereafter to be sub-divided, but this consideration 
 would be very limited in its extent. The effect upon the entire West would be to 
 produce utter hopelessness of any effectual remedy for the evil they complained of, 
 and must thus seal the fate of the new Constitution. It would give him pleasure if 
 he could vote for the plan of the gentleman from Kanawha ; but the plan would ope- 
 rate so unequally that it was out of his power. To shew this by one example : the 
 votes according to the gentleman's plan would be nearly equal in his own district to 
 what they were in the Bedford district, and the Pittsylvania district : though the two 
 latter now gave 2700 each, while the Loudoun district gave less than 1300. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said he was surprised to find that he was again charged with perpetuat- 
 ing injustice by his scheme. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said the gentleman had not originated the injustice, but his scheme 
 went to give it perpetuity. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, he had given it no perpetuity: the injustice would be just as per- 
 petual without his scheme as with it. The only difference between his plan and that 
 now in the Constitution was, that the latter went to perpetuate the injustice within 
 the great districts as much as it did between one of those districts and another; 
 whereas his went to remedy the injustice as between county and county laitJmi those 
 districts. The principle from which the general injustice flowed was already adopted, 
 and settled by a distinct vote of this body, and it had by that vote been rendered per- 
 petual : all he did was to mitigate its operation in detail. 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, he should vote for Mr. Cooke's amendment, and against that of 
 Mr. Summers. He saw in the former a spirit of conciliation : it went to relieve sec- 
 tional inequalities, and thus tended to bring about those results of harmony which 
 every friend of his country ought to desire. The inequalities within the separate di- 
 visions of the State being local and county questions^ would involve the same diffi- 
 
 Western District, 
 Valley, - 
 Midland, - 
 Tide-water, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 831 
 
 cullies or produce the game sort of excitement as had been encountered in the pre- 
 sent Convention, where tlie great opposing interests of the whole State were in con- 
 flict. But the plan of the gentleman from Kanawha set the whole question of repre- 
 sentation again afloat : it would operate most unequally in practice. The freeholds 
 were necessarily larger in a great slave-holding district than in a district of the same 
 extent, inhabited wholly by a white population : in this respect, the plan would bear 
 hardly on the lower country ; and particularly in his own district, which was largely 
 interested in slave property. 
 
 Mr. George rose to congratulate the gentleman from Albemarle on his happy dis- 
 position, which enabled hirii with such perfect ease to change his sentiments to suit 
 every new posture of affairs. When that gentleman had first appeared in the Con- 
 vention, nothing would suit him but a basis of free white population : the gentleman 
 would not so much as listen to any thing but the white basis. Now, he was most anx- 
 iously engaged in guarding the slave-holding portion of the State. The gentleman's 
 one, and only object seemed to be to guard his own proposition ; and he turned for or 
 against any measure proposed, just as it threatened to affect that proposition. He had 
 risen expressly with a view to congratulate the gentleman, which he did most heartily, 
 on this his happy disposition. 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, that he utterly denied and repudiated the unfounded imputation 
 of the gentleman from Tazewell. He had changed none of the opinions he had 
 brought with him to that Convention, in relation to the proper and just basis of re- 
 presentation. He had contended from the first, and he had never retracted the posi- 
 tion, that white population was the true basis. He still held that sentiment. He 
 wished it had been in his power to congratulate the gentleman from Tazewell, on his 
 disposition for conciliation and compromise. For his own part, he did not profess or 
 desire an incapacity to receive light from argument, especially argument so able as 
 such as was heard in that assembly. Pie never had considered wisdom to consist 
 in a dogged obstinacy, that persevered against every consideration of policy and all 
 the force of reason. The gentleman's charge gave him little concern : his withers 
 were unwrung, nor should he have felt the gibe at all, save in the unkind spirit 
 which it betrayed. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke said, that if he had been put to the torture to devise a 
 mode of perpetuating the injustice done by the present scheme of apportionment be- 
 tween the Eastern and Western portions of the State, he could not have invented a 
 more eff*ectual one than that which had been proposed by the gentleman from Frede- 
 rick, (Mr. Cooke.) It forever precluded (so far as that word could be applied to human 
 things) all hope of any redress of existing grievances. The only hope of such re- 
 lief consisted in this, that the plan would operate so unequally within the four great 
 divisions of the State, tha.t it would at last produce some sympathy for the unjust 
 treatment of the Western part of the State. As to present justice, the hope had been 
 completely cut off" ; and their only resort was the hope that the plan could be found 
 to operate so unfairly and so oppressively, that others would be induced to co-operate 
 with them in obtaining redress : if the plan did not operate so, they could have no 
 prospect of obtaining allies to their cause from other parts of the State. This mea- 
 sure would go far to destroy that hope ; and conceiving it to be thus hostile to the in- 
 terests of the West, he should vote against it. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that as at present advised, he should vote for the proposition of 
 the gentleman from Frederick ; and for what appeared to him to be the plainest of all 
 possible reasons. Two alternatives were presented to them : the one was, should the 
 apportionment proposed by the Select Committee, if it should be agreed to by the 
 House — be unchangeable ? or, if in practice it should be found to prove unequal, 
 should it be modified by the Legislature in such a manner as might suit the circum- 
 stances of the country ? The measure, as he had understood it, did not involve the 
 question as to the perpetuity of that plan of apportionment which had been agreed 
 upon as a compromise, by the two sides of the House : it had nothing to do with it. 
 Let that proposition be withdrawn altogether, and where was any thing in the Con- 
 stitution which warranted a change in the apportionment ? One thing was sure ; the 
 county of Loudoun would be secure in her three Delegates, ad indcfinituvi. Loudoun, 
 Frederick and Shenandoah were sure of their three portions of the public estate ad 
 indejinitum. If there was any perpetuity in the matter — that was the perpetuity. 
 He had been sorry when the House had devolved upon the Select Committee a task 
 that could be better performed by the House of Burgesses. They could make an ap- 
 portionment among the counties and Senatorial districts, that would suit much better 
 than any the Convention were likely to agree upon. Was it not obvious that without 
 some such proposition of that of the gentleman from Frederick — supposing the re- 
 port of the Committee to be adopted by the Convention, and their apportionment to 
 stand — that the great and wealthy counties of Chesterfield, Caroline, Spottsylvania 
 and Southampton, (not to enumerate others) would stand to Loudoun as one to three? 
 He had not the returns of the Auditor before him, and could not refer to figures ; but 
 
832 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 he was very sure there was no sort of principle which could justify the perpetuation of 
 tills monstrous, this crying injustice. He charged nothing against the Committee: 
 he did not doubt they had done their duty in a spirit of the utmost fairness, and had 
 given to the subject their best attention. But, was there any comparison between the 
 wealth, and the contributions to the Treasury, of Caroline and of Loudoun ? Was 
 there any gentleman who could pretend to deny, that that of Caroline was as one 
 while that of Loudoun was as three ? 
 
 Mr. R. said, he could see no reason for the preference of the three counties which 
 had been singled out, or why they should have three Delegates, when such large, 
 opulent, and highly respectable counties as those he had mentioned, were confined to 
 one. Compare the county of Chesterfield — taking in its mineral treasures — and 
 would not its average value be equal to that of Loudoun ? He did not know any such 
 very great obligations they were under to Loudoun ; except one — and that he should 
 carry in his memory to the grave — it was the county which gave the only vote in 
 Virginia for the elder John Adams against Mr. Jefferson. It had endeavoured to ex- 
 tend the reign of terror to the people of that Commonwealth — and it did hope that a 
 little leaven would have leavened the whole lump : but Loudoun had been mistaken. 
 
 Mr. R. said, however, that he should not vote for Mr. Cooke's proposition in any 
 hope of perpetuating the blessed new Constitution. He could not say to that instru- 
 ment in the words of Father Paul, esto perpetual But his wish was for the shortest 
 possible life to it. He did not vote to perpetuate the monstrous injustice done by the 
 present apportionment of political power. He should vote for it, in order that the 
 injustice of to-day might be rectified hereafter, by the House of Delegates, among the 
 same great portions of the State as were at present designated. He believed gentle- 
 men might discharge all fears of perpetuating the mischief of the proposed Consti- 
 tution. That was his only consolation : no — it was not his consolation : he had no 
 consolation : for he perceived that from that day forth there was to be nothing safe — 
 nothing permanent in their institutions. 
 
 Mr. Cooke repeated his purpose to vote for the amendment of Mr. Summers, and 
 his fear that the attempt of that gentleman would prove abortive. As to the objec- 
 tion of the gentleman from Brooke, (Mr. Campbell,) it was not surprising that that 
 gentleman should be opposed to his proposition if he held such opinions. The gen- 
 tleman had openly avowed his desire, that the Constitution, which had been agreed 
 upon by this body as a desirable compromise between the great and opposing interests, 
 might be rendered as odious as possible. It was very natural, that with this motive 
 confessed, the gentleman should be hostile to a plan whose whole end and purpose 
 was to remedy injustice and to allay discontent. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he had been mistaken in supposing the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Kanawha to be the same with that offered formerly by the gentleman from 
 Patrick, (Mr. Stuart.) It was the same, or nearly so, with that of the gentleman from 
 Richmond county, (Mr. Neale.) The details of that plan had been examined by the 
 gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) and its great inequality, and the strange and 
 capricious results to which it led in practice, had been forcibly exposed by that gen- 
 tleman. It produced great injustice as between the great districts of the State, and 
 yet greater between county and county. Any one would be satisfied of this who 
 should apply the plan to Albemarle and then to Orange. 
 
 Mr. Neale expressed his astonishment at hearing the gentleman from Chesterfield 
 assimilate the present scheme to that he had had the honour to offer. JVo two things 
 could be more unlike. This was merely the shadow of his. They had three essen- 
 tial^points of difference. The plan of Mr. Summers proposed a re-apportionment 
 every ten years, his every twenty years. The one reckoned all the freeholds ; the 
 other all the freehold-voters resident in the county: the one had a Senate that was 
 to be re-apportioned every ten years : the other a permanent Senate of nineteen East 
 and thirteen West of the Blue Ridge. Were these not essential difi'erences 
 
 Mr. Massie observed, that so much had been said both here and elsewhere, about 
 the change of opinion and change of course of the Albemarle Delegation, that he 
 felt it incumbent on him to explain the vote he meant to give. He had altered no 
 opinion, he had changed no course in relation to this matter. In his address to his 
 constituents previous to the election, he had declared he would vote for no Constitution, 
 which in his judgment might expose the country East of the Blue Ridge to the risk 
 of oppressive taxation. He had expressed sentiments on other matters of reform, but 
 they were all subject to the controul of this cardinal pledge; a pledge, not asked at 
 his hands, but insisted on by him as a guarantee for his own liberty of action. He 
 would not now trouble the Convention by going into further detail, but in self-defence 
 he felt himself bound to say, that he held it to be perfectly consistent for him to vote 
 against the resolution of the gentleman from Kanawha, and to support that of his 
 colleague from Albemarle. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, that the direct allusion which had been made to his county, occa- 
 sioned him now to rise, and to say, that he had not had the remotest reference to the al- 
 
DEBATES OF THE COiNVENTlON. 
 
 833 
 
 lotment of representation to Loudoun, within his view — nor could he — for that allot- 
 ment was not yet agreed upon. What he objected to, in the plan of the gentleman 
 from Frederick, was the perpetuating of the division of the Stale into four great dis- 
 tricts — its shutting out the hope of change, till 1841, and its allowing a farther de- 
 cennial apportionment. The people would not consider the Constitution, as fixing 
 on only a temporary apportionment. If the Constitution should succeed at all, it 
 would only be from viewing the whole together, and considering that though the al- 
 lotment of power at present was unjust, yet there was hope for the future : but this 
 would not be their view, if provision was thus to be made for applying the present 
 allotment for centuries to come. If this allotment was to be regarded as perpetual, 
 he called gentlemen to look at it : what great changes must have occurred in the state 
 of the population since 1820, when the Census was taken in which this allotment 
 proceeded. The plan of the gentleman from Frederick, would destroy that hope, 
 which alone would induce a great part of the people to accept the Constitution. As 
 to the obligations of the Commonwealth to Loudoun, he should not pretend to com- 
 pare them with those it ow^ed to the county of Charlotte. Loudoun needed not his 
 defence : she would be judged by her own merits. He had not had Loudoun in his 
 thoughts when he stated his objections to the plan of the gentleman from Frederick: 
 As to her three Delegates, it was perfectly in the power of the House to take one of 
 them away and give it to some other county, if they should judge the apportionment 
 of the Committee unjust. He had endeavoured to shew the difference iDetween the 
 technical fact that the Constitution did not fix this inequality within the districts, and 
 its establishing an unequal ratio between the districts themselves. 
 
 Mr. Stanard protested against the assumption of Mr. Mercer, that Mr. Gordon's 
 compromise was based on the white population of 1820. He renounced any such 
 basis, and utterly disclaimed having supported such principle. He commented with 
 severity upon the argument of Mr. Campbell, who objected to the plan of Mr. Cooke, 
 because it took away the aliment from discontent, and healed the evils which time 
 might disclose. That gentleman wished to sow the seeds of discontent so thickly, 
 that they might soon vegetate, and produce a new Convention. 
 
 To prevent these discontents would, it seemed, rob the gentleman and his friends 
 of a formidable ally ! Was this a fit principle for the Convention to act upon ? Was 
 this a fit argument for the Convention to hear ? An open avowed war was to be waged 
 against the institutions of the State. Mr. S. then referred to the first difficulties of 
 the Convention, the compromise which had terminated them, and the salutary effects 
 likely to flow from the adoption of Mr. Cooke's proposition. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that the Convention, if it had done him the honor to pav atten- 
 tion to what he had said when last up, would do him the justice to recollect, that he 
 had entered into no comparison of Loudoun with Charlotte. The gentleman from 
 Loudoun had said, that he should not do so — in v.'hich determination, he admired the 
 gentleman's discretion full as much as he did his valor. For if he had chosen, instead 
 of looking at the counties of Caroline — (he remembered the time when Caroline paid 
 a larger contribution to the Treasury, and owned more slaves than any county in the 
 Commonwealth) — Spottsylvania and Southampton, he might with propriety have said, 
 that the grossest injustice had been done to Charlotte, who, with more than half the 
 population of Loudoun, and much more than half the amount of taxes, with an 
 amount of productive labour in still greater proportion, and with exports, he would 
 venture to say, of equivalent value — received an allotment of one Representative, 
 while Loudoun received three. But, he had said nothing about Charlotte. He was 
 not in the habit of always talking of himself and his own concerns — he had said 
 nothing about his wish to get a tenantry for his great estates in Charlotte, and his 
 anxiety to induce them to come out of Maryland and Pennsylvania for that purpose, 
 by getting the Right of Suffrage extended. He might have compared Pittsylvania 
 and Halifax, and shewn that they were as well entitled to three Delegates as Lou- 
 doun. With the gentleman from Spottsylvania, (Mr. Stanard.) he disclaimed and 
 denied the apportionment of the Committee to have been founded on the white po- 
 pulation of 1820, or on white popxilation in any shape. Before he sat down he would 
 say farther, that the county of Fauquier was as much entitled to have three Repre- 
 sentatives as the county of Loudoun. Pie had risen before to state the reason why 
 he should vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke.) 
 It was because it would enable the Legislature at short periods to remedy this gross 
 and monstrous and crying injustice — yes — crj'ing injustice — that the county of Caro- 
 line should have but one Representative. Let gentlemen look at the wealth and cha- 
 racter of that county — let them measure her dimensions — one of the great and opu- 
 lent counties of Virginia — that Caroline, and Southampton, and Chesterfield, and 
 Pittsylvania, and all that range of counties through which the great Southern and 
 Western road passed — should have but one Delegate each, while three counties in the 
 Western part of the State should have three each — it was most unjust. He saw, too, 
 that in all the changes made by the Committee in their second apportionment, the 
 
 105 
 
834 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 whole weight of increase was to be thrown into the scale of the North- Western corner 
 of the State. This was aggravating the injustice. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, he rose rather to shew the justice of his former argumentj than to 
 notice the personalities of the gentleman from Charlotte. The argument of the gen- 
 tleman from Spottsylvania was, that the alliance of the enemies to the present appor- 
 tionment, would be prevented by the amendment of the gentleman from Frederick, 
 by re-apportioning the representation within one of the great divisions of the State, 
 so as to remedy inequality. Mr. M. denied this consequence — for, by that plan, the 
 discontent that might have been transferred to one county, or to a few counties, would 
 thus be spread throughout the division of the State to which those counties belonged : 
 all which must be affected by a re-apportionment. It was the very essence of the 
 system, to create an esprit dii corns in each of those divisions. There was no need of 
 this. It would be easy to adopt the present apportionment in substance, without thus 
 classing the counties of the State. Those divisions ought to be obliterated — they be- 
 longed to the land-law of 1807 — and when the ends of that law ceased, the division 
 ought to have ceased also ; but, the mode of proceeding in the Convention was calcu- 
 lated to keep them up, and to render tliem perpetual. The plan of the gentleman 
 from Frederick, instead of allaying discontent, went to diffuse discontent — to make 
 the discontent of one county the discontent of the Valley. He trusted he had thus 
 vindicated his argument as to the attack of the gentleman from Spottsylvania. 
 
 The gentleman from Charlotte had forgotten a part of his own remarks. He should 
 be the last man in that House wantonly to injure the feelings of any gentleman, and 
 he believed he had never done so. The gentleman had not been content with saying 
 tliat Loudoun was not entitled to three Delegates — that he had a perfect right to say 
 if he thought so — and on the gentleman's principles, he presumed he very honestly 
 thought so. But, he had no right to refer to the political history of Loudoun. Her 
 rights to representation did not depend on that history. The gentleman had said he 
 admired his discretion as much as his valor. He was sorry he could not admire, in 
 that gentleman, either. 
 
 [Mr. R. I should be sorry, ver}^ sorry, if you did admire me.] 
 
 Mr. George said, that the gentleman from Albemarle had said he wilfully shut his 
 eyes against the light. 
 
 The Chair interposed. The gentlemnn had not used such an expression. 
 
 Mr. Gordon. I said no such thing. I said I did not consider it a virtue, or a proof 
 of wisdom, to refuse to listen to reason, or admit light for argument. 
 
 Mr. George replied, that if the gentleman meant that remark to apply to him, he 
 was mistaken. He had been disposed to conciliate : but when he saw gentlemen pro- 
 fessing to do only what was just, opposing ev^ry plan that would make the Consti- 
 tution suitable to the wishes of the West, it was a matter of astonishment to him. He 
 had hoped the plan of his friend from Kanawha would have made the unjust appor- 
 tionment of the gentleman's compromise in some degree less unpalatable to the peo- 
 ple of his part of the State ; but it seemed that no plan whatever for future appor- 
 tionment, could suit the gentleman from Albemarle. Nothing would do but his own 
 unjust and unequal scheme of compromise. 
 
 Mr. Gordon replied. He regretted that the gentleman from Tazewell should find 
 it necessary, in order to vindicate his own course, to charge a dereliction of duty upon 
 others. The duties of the Convention had been arduous enough — none could expect . 
 to carry just such a Constitution as pleased himself. If he had the writing of one 
 for himself, he might possibly have produced something that would have suited the 
 gentleman better: but he found the Delegates of all Virginia assembled, and he 
 thought the spirit of conciliation becoming and commendable. On the point of con- 
 sistency, he might challenge gentlemen who accused him. He had advanced but one 
 proposition — and if he had manifested some degree of parental love toward it, the fact 
 was not so very unusual. Yet some gentlemen, who had been great sticklers for the 
 zchiie basis had been willing to consent to a basis, including three-fifths of the black 
 population. They had assented to, and had themselves moved for, a mongrel Senate ; 
 and the unsullied beauty of the white basis had been given up by them, when he 
 alone had stood out in its favour. He meant no imputation on their conduct — he 
 knew that they had done it in the spirit of compromise. But he should be obliged to 
 the gentleman from Tazewell, if he could propose some scheme that would unite the 
 votes of gentlemen in its favour. 
 
 Mr. Summers briefly explained his plan in reply to Mr. Neale — shewing that it did 
 not apply to the freeholds of non-residents, but only of such as resided within the 
 county where the land la}^ He professed his desire to see the Constitution adopted; 
 and it was with a view to pi*oduce that effect, he had offered his plan. He went into 
 some statistical details, to sliew that his scheme was a just medium — a half-way house 
 between the Federal numbers and the white basis. 
 
 He could not vote for Mr Cooke's plan, because he believed that no Constitution, 
 without a plnn for future apportionm-ent, could ever be adopted by the people > 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 S35 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Summers' amendment to the amendment of 
 Mr. Cooke, and decided b}' ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson. CoiTman, "Williamson. Baldwin. .■rC'y. Moore, Beirne, 
 Smilh. Miller. Baxter, Fitzhugh, Henderson, O^jornc. Co' lie. Powell. Grig-g-s. ]Ma- 
 son of Frederick, Xaylor, Donaldson, Bovd, Pendleton, Ge'-rge. ^r^Iiil:]-. Camp- 
 bell of Wasliington. Byars, Clovd. Chapman, IMathews, 0_lc-^y. Bur.'';;. Lriidle}'-, 
 Summers, See, Doddridge, 31orgau, Campbell of Brooke, V.'ilson, Sajucicis. £tuart 
 and Upshur — 10. 
 
 Aoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield. Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode. Marshall of Richmoud, Tyler, 
 Nicholas, Clopton, Harrison, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant. Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph; Lei2"h of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, ]NIercer, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, 
 INIarshull of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grio-sby. Campbell of Bedford, 
 Claytor. Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Pleasants. Gordon, Thompson, Massie, 
 Bates. ZSeale, Rose, Coalter. Joynt'S, Bayly and Perrin — 55, 
 
 So the amendment to the amendn:ient vras rejected. 
 
 Mr. Powell now moved the following amendment to tliat of Air, Cooke : 
 III the year IS'42. and every ten years thereafter, the General Assembly shall have 
 the povrer to apportion the representation of both branches among the several coun- 
 ties, cities and boroughs of the Commonwealth, according to some just and equitable 
 ratio." 
 
 The question was taken by ayes and noes, without debate, and decided as follows: 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman. Harrison, ^vN'miamson. 2u'Ccy, .iloore. Beirne, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Cooke, Powell. ^Mason of Frederick, 
 Naylor, Donaldson, B:)yd. George. rvFMillan. Campbell of AVafhington, Byars, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, ^-lathews. Oglesby, Duncan, Laicley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, 
 Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders and Cabell — 35. 
 
 JShes — ^Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones. Leigh of Chesterfield. Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles. Brodnax. Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode. ^-larshall of Richmond. Tyler, 
 Nicholas. Clopton, Baldwin. Alason of Southampton, Trezvant. Claiborne. Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, "^'enable, ^vladison. Stanard. Holladay. Henderson, 
 Griggs, Pendleton, P».oane, Taylor of Caroline, 3Iorris. Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott, Green. Marshall of Fauquier. Tazewell. Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of 
 Bedford. Branch, Towncj, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants. Gordon. Tiiompson, 2uassie, 
 Bates, Neale, Pvose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upsliur and Perrin — 57. 
 
 Mr. Stuart said, he could not vote for ii\Ir. Cooke's auiendi.ient, unless some basis 
 was specified for the apportionment. He believed the Committee had gone on the 
 principle of Federal numbers. Now, he wished to know if that was to be brought 
 into the great districts of the State among the counties .' The arguments that applied 
 as between district and district, would not apply as between county and county. 
 "Where their interests were the same, the white population was the just basis. He 
 therefore moved to amend ]Mr. Cooke's amendment, by inserting after the word re- 
 apportion," these words, on the basis of white population." 
 
 The question vras taken by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Coftman. Harrison. "Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coj, Moore, 
 Beirne. Smith, i^.Iiller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs. 3Iascn nf Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd. Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, iMathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Sunmiers, See, Doddridge, iMorgan, Campbell of Brooke, Vvilson, Campbell 
 of Bedford, Clavtor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Gordon, and Thompson — 46. 
 
 .\oes — iMessrs, Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield. Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode. Marshall o_f Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas. Clopton, INlason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of 
 Caroline, iMorris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, iiNIarshall of Fauquier, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Massie, 
 Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes. Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 49. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Summers said, that he despaired of any adjustment of the question of future ap- 
 portionment, on principles which would give to the West the benefit of its future in- 
 crease in numbers, wealth or contribution. That the proposed Constitution contained 
 many valuable provisions, which he vras satisfied the people of that country would 
 gladiy accept, if they could be separated from the obnoxious arrangement as to the re- 
 presentation. The provisions as to the Executive and Judicial Departments met his 
 approbation. The extension of the Suifrage he regarded as a valuable improvement, 
 and he should regret the rejection of what he esteemed important alleviations, by their 
 connection with what he was satisfied the W^estern people ought never to accept. In 
 utter hopelessness of any rule of future apportionment, he had become convinced that 
 
836 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 next to some satisfactory rule upon tliat subject, it would be best to leave representa- 
 tion in principle, where the Convention had found it ; best to secure the beneficial provi- 
 sions which had been agreed upon, and leave to the future the adjustment of those 
 questions upon which no satisfactory decision could now be had. 
 
 The proposition which he offered would give an Eastern majority of twenty-nine, 
 in a House of Delegates of one hundred and eleven ; but it would leave the question 
 of representation open to future examination, without prejudice ; all parties would be 
 remitted to the ground which they respectively occupied before the assembling of this 
 body, and it would place them in a situation to accept the amendments without refer- 
 ence to the rights which would be postponed. To the Eastern country the proposi- 
 tion particularly addressed itself, and he submitted it to gentlemen from that quarter 
 of the State to decide, whether the interests of all would not be more fully consulted 
 by forming a Constitution upon the old principle of representation, than by pertina- 
 ciously adhering to one that is extremely inconvenient to them, and peculiarly ob- 
 noxious to their Western fellow-citizens. As to the Senate, he said he offered no new 
 rule — that body had been apportioned in 1817, according to white population, and he 
 proposed the application of the same principle for the future. A restraining clause as 
 to new counties was added to quiet Eastern fears against the multiplication of coun- 
 ties in the West — a restraint perhaps unnecessary with reference to a body composed 
 as the House of Delegates would be. 
 
 Mr. S. then submitted a substitute for Mr. Cooke's proposition, going to establish 
 an equal county representation. 
 
 Mr. Stuart moved that it be laid on the table and printed : but the motion was ne- 
 gatived. 
 
 Mr. Moore moved that both the amendments of Mr. Cooke and Mr. Summers, be 
 indefinitely postponed. 
 
 On this motion Mr. Summers demanded the ayes and noes, but after some conver- 
 sation, he agreed to withdraw his amendment for the present, and let the question be 
 taken on that of Mr. Cooke. 
 
 Mr. Moore thereupon withdrew his motion for indefinite postponement. 
 
 Mr. Naylor briefly expressed his reasons for voting against the motion of Mr. Cooke : 
 it was a palliative, not a radical cure. It prevented the hope of any future apportion- 
 ment different from the present. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Cooke's amendment, by ayes and noes as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Bi'odnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Cooke, Griggs, Pen- 
 dleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Laidley, Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell 
 of Bedford, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 56. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Powell, Ma- 
 son of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Wash- 
 ington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Summers, See, Dod- 
 dridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell and Stu- 
 art— 39. 
 
 So Mr. Cooke's amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Summers now moved to strike out the third and fourth clauses of Mr. Cooke's 
 amendment, and insert the following: 
 
 " One of which shall be called the House of Delegates, and shall consist of one De- 
 legate to be chosen annually, for and by each of the counties of the Commonwealth ; 
 one Delegate to be chosen for and by the city of Richmond ; one Delegate to be chosen 
 for and by the borough of Norfolk, and one Delegate to be chosen for and by each of 
 the towns of Petersburg, Lynchburg, Winchester and Wheeling, That whenever 
 the General Assembly shall create a new county, such county shall elect and choose 
 one Delegate ; but no new county shall be hereafter created of less territorial extent 
 than five hundred square miles, or of less population than fifteen hundred persons. 
 
 The other House of the General Assembly shall be called the Senate, and shall 
 consist of thirty-two members ; of whom fourteen shall be chosen for and by the coun- 
 ties lying West of the Blue Ridge of mountains, and eighteen for and by the coun- 
 ties, cities, towns and boroughs lying East thereof ; and for the election of whom, the 
 counties, cities, towns and boroughs, shall be divided into thirty-two districts, as here- 
 inafter provided. Each county of the respective districts, at the time of the first elec- 
 tion of its Delegate under this Constitution, shall vote for one Senator, and the she- 
 riffs or other officer holding the election, for each county, city, town or borough, within 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 837 
 
 ten days at farthest, after the last county, city, town, or borough election in the dis- 
 trict, shall meet at some convenient place, and from the polls so taken, in their re- 
 spective counties, cities, towns and boroughs, return as Senator, the person who shall 
 have the greatest number of votes in the whole district. To keep up this Assembly 
 by rotation, the districts shall be divided into four classes, and numbered by lot — at 
 the end of one year after the first election, the eight members elected by the first di- 
 vision shall be displaced, and the vacancies thereby occasioned, supplied from such 
 class or division, by new election, in manner aforesaid. This rotation shall be applied 
 to each division, according to its number, and continue in due order annually. And 
 for the election of Senators, the counties of 
 
 The General Assembly shall, whenever it may become necessary, re-apportion the 
 Senators, by changing the number to be elected East and West of the Blue Ridcre of 
 mountains, but no such re-apportionment shall take effect, but as succeeding elections 
 shall take place, and in all such re-apportionments, the former classification shall be 
 preserved, or a new classification made, as the Legislature shall find most conve- 
 nient." 
 
 By desire of Mr. Summers, the question was first put on striking out only the third 
 clause of Mr. Cooke's, and inserting in lieu thereof so much of the above amendment 
 as relates to the House of Delegates. 
 
 Mr. Morris demanded that the question be divided, and taken fi^rst on striking out. 
 It was so divided, and put accordingly, first on striking out. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas explained, at considerable length, his reasons for opposing the amend- 
 ment of Mr. Summers. It seemed to address itself to the smaller counties and held 
 out a boon to each. He contended that it was unjust to give Warwick and Loudoun 
 an equal representation. This was the very inequality the Convention was called to 
 remedy. But the scheme looked to the increase of voters by the extension of the 
 Right of Suffrage ; and the effect would be to agitate the State to a far greater degree 
 than ever, and the result w^as to be another Convention. The scheme was easily seen 
 through, but he could never consent to it — he would give no pledge to vote for the 
 Constitution : but if he did, it would be as a compromise; but this plan took away all 
 the security of Mr. Gordon's, and gave nothing in exchange. 
 
 Mr. Tyler said, he had risen for the purpose of recommending the ancient and re- 
 spectable borough of Williamsburg to the protection of the gentleman from Kanawha. 
 (Here Mr. Summers bowed respectfully.) If the gentleman offer a boon to his dis- 
 trict, he ought to extend that boon to the whole of his constituents. If any were to 
 go by the board, many would have to go by the board, and the}' would have at last 
 the consolation of much good company. Mr. Tyler said, he believed, if the gentle- 
 man would remove one feature from his amendment, about the quantity of land in a 
 county (a provision which seemed intended for the West alone,) and would agree to 
 include the ancient and respectable borough of Williamsburg in his plan, he did not 
 think he should be such an obdurate heathen as to refuse the gentleman's boon. It had 
 been forcibly remarked by the gentleman from Charlotte some days ago that he doubted 
 if the Convention could do better by way of amending the Constitution, than to re- 
 duce the House of Delegates one-half, and after a few small alterations respecting the 
 Judiciary, to turn their backs upon that Hall. And if the gentleman from Kanawha 
 would extend his kindness to Williamsburg, in all human probability he might, after 
 a little time allowed him for reflection, assent to accept that power which they had 
 exercised, (he trusted without injury) for more than fifty years. They were at present 
 fully contented — the}- asked for no change on earth — least of all for such an one as 
 the honorable gentleman from Kanawha had in an earlier stage of the proceedings 
 designed for them. 
 
 Mr. Summers observed, in reply, that he had all the inducements that could well 
 operate on his mind, to gratify the wishes of his honorable friend from Williamsburg, 
 or near it. He had a favourite measure to carry, and a ti-ifle ought not to separate 
 him from a gentleman so highly respectable, and whose vote might exert a powerful 
 influence over others. But as that gentleman was yet in doubt, and had not been 
 able to make up his mind definitively, he hoped to be pardoned for pausing until he 
 received fuller assurance of the course which he might ultimately take. Mr. S. could 
 not consent to restore to the ancient Capital of the Commonwealth its pristine honors, 
 while its Representative remained undecided as to the acceptance. His friend from 
 Richmond, (Mr. Nicholas.) had perceived a lurking design to carry a scheme for fu- 
 ture representation by calling Convention after Convention. That gentleman he 
 knew had very keen vision, and he would not undertake to compete with him in es- 
 timating the chances of bringing about any particular political measure ; his optics 
 were not fitted for such scrutinies. He believed, for his part, that the people of Vir- 
 ginia had been pretty well dosed with Conventions for the present, and that it would 
 be some time before they would call another; neither the wisdom of the State," or 
 its practical good sense, he thought, would be shortly called upon for such a purpose ; 
 
838 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 yet time, the great innovator, he hoped would ultimately bring justice and peace to 
 every portion of the State. 
 
 Mr. S. said, that if his proposition was regarded as a boon offered to any part of the 
 State, he begged gentlemen to carry with them the recollection, that it was not pro- 
 posed by him as matter of choice, but as the dictate of necessity, that to secure the ra- 
 tification of such parts as were valuable, he was induced to relinquish what was unat- 
 tainable in the proposed plan of a Constitution. 
 
 As to the danger which the gentleman from Richmond thinks he percieves in the 
 proposition as to new counties, Mr. S. observed, that it could but excite his surprise. 
 Danger to the East by this limitation of the power of creating new counties, was to 
 his mind inexplicable, when it stood in connection with an Eastern majority of twen- 
 ty-nine, in a House of Delegates of one hundred and eleven members, with the ex- 
 clusive power of originating laws ! But he remarked, that he would leave this ques- 
 tion of Eastern interests to be settled by the gentleman from Richmond and his con- 
 stituents. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, he did not pretend to fathom, or to judge, the motives of the gen- 
 tleman from Kanawha, but the effect of his amendment would be to frustrate the la- 
 bors of three months, by ensuring the rejection of the Constitution, Nothing could 
 more certainly ensure the unanimous and indignant rejection of the Constitution by 
 the whole Western country (unless where the gentleman's personal influence might 
 extend.) His plan gave a greater majority to the East by fifty per cent, than that to 
 which he objected. Yet this was a Western plan, brought forward by a Western man ! 
 
 Mr. Summers remarked, that he was not a prophet or the son of a prophet, but if 
 any weight was to be attached to his opinions, he could assure the gentleman from 
 Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) that the proposition just submitted would secure a larger vote 
 than the one supported by him throughout the entire country from the Blue Ridge to 
 the Ohio river, and would tend to the adoption of the Constitution in that part of the 
 State : That if the extreme West was capable of yielding to interested considerationsj 
 equal county representation would be a favorite plan, as that mode of apportionment 
 gave a larger representation to that district, than the one which received from that 
 gentleman such zealous support. Mr. S. disclaimed any design to frustrate the la- 
 bors of the Convention. He most sincerely desired to give such form to the proposed 
 Constitution as would secure a majority in its favor here, and of the people ; and not- 
 withstanding the gentleman's apprehension of an indignant rejection if the proposed 
 amendment should succeed, Mr. S. took occasion to assure him, that without rely- 
 ing on personal influence, (of which he had none to boast.) he was entirely willing to 
 confide the merits of the respective propositions to the good sense and discrimination 
 of the Western people, with a full conviction that they would accurately decide on 
 the conduct and motives of all those to whom they had confided their interests here. 
 
 Mr. S. observed, that before he closed, he would avail hiwiself of the occasion to re- 
 mark, that whatever of responsibility might be attached to the proposed amendments, 
 he claimed it entirely as his own; he had consulted no one, he had not submitted it 
 to the inspection of a single member before offering it to the House, and that all he 
 asked in its favor was a calm and dispassionate examination, and the votes of such as 
 approved its principles. 
 
 Mr. Mercer, after disclaiming any belief that the gentleman would offer a proposi- 
 tion which he thought injurious to the West, declared himself unable to vote for it. 
 He would vote for striking out, but not for inserting. 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, he rose to congratulate the House on the restoration of the 
 long-lost harmony between the county of Kanawha and the ancient county of Charles 
 City, [from which Mr. Tyler comes.] 
 
 The question was now taken on striking out the third section of Mr. Cooke's amend- 
 ment, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Beirne, 
 Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Freder- 
 ick, Naylor, Donaldson, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, 
 Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Dod- 
 dridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Saunders and Stuart — 37. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Ty- 
 ler, Nicholas, Clopton, Moore, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Hender- 
 son, Cooke, Boyd, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpe- 
 per, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Camp- 
 bell of Bedford, Claytor, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Thomp- 
 son, Massie, Bates, Neale,Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin— 58, 
 
 So the motion was negatived. 
 
 Mr. Summers then withdrew the residue of his amendment. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 839 
 
 [The rest of the day, till near five o'clock, was occupied in discussing the appor- 
 tionment of representation among the counties in the southern part of the State.] 
 
 The debate, though very animated, was wholly local in its character, and for more 
 reasons than one, we abstain from giving any report of it. Only two votes were taken ; 
 one for attachincr the county of Pocahontas to the Botetourt Senatorial District : and 
 the other for taking a Delegate from the county of Brunswick, and giving it to the 
 county of Franklin. 
 
 [As soon as the result of the vote was announced for transferring the double dele- 
 gation from BrunsiDick to Franklin^ Mr. Brodnax rose to move, that one Delegate 
 should be taken from Loudoun, (she being allowed three,) and given to Brunswick; 
 both these counties being in the same section. Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield warmly sup- 
 ported this proposition ; but the Convention adjourned before taking the questioa 
 on it.] 
 
 The House adjourned at 5 o'clock. 
 
 SATURDAY, January 9, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr, 
 Smith of the Methodist Church. 
 
 The House was again engaged in the consideration of the general subject of the 
 apportionment of representation among the several counties and Senatorial districts 
 of the State. The same reasons which induced us to pass over the debate which oc- 
 curred on this subject on Friday, apply to the debate of to-day, and will prevent tts 
 from entering fully into its minutis. It partook, as all debates of this kind usually 
 do, of much warmth — great interest in the parties immediately concerned, and some 
 approaches to personality ; which latter, however, were promptly arrested and repressed 
 by the Chair. 
 
 But the interest of such scenes is confined to those whose local interest happens ta 
 be upon the carpet: much that is said relates to dry statistical details; a comparison 
 of the population, white and coloured, of the several counties; their extent of terri- 
 tory; their relative contributions to the Treasury; their local connexions with the 
 counties adjacent ; or their geographical position in reference to the whole State ; the 
 change that will be occasioned by attaching them to this or to that Senatorial district; 
 the justice of the apportionment proposed for them by the Committee ; all questions 
 in which the general reader feels little or no concern, and readers at a distance none 
 at all. Even the Convention itself became wearied and disgusted with the contest; 
 and it was with the utmost exertion that the Chair was able to confine their attention 
 to the persons addressing it. Under these circumstances, our readers will thank, 
 rather than censure us, from sparing them the copious detail. 
 
 Mr. Neale brought forward the following proposition : The first proposition made, 
 partaking more of a general character, entitles the debate on it to a more expanded 
 report : 
 
 " Resolved, That the counties of Richmond, Lancaster, Middlesex, Matthews, 
 Charles City and New Kent, be assigned one Delegate each, and no more. 
 
 " Resolved, That there shall be three more Delegates assigned to the district next 
 above the head of tide-water, and distributed in such manner as a majority of the De- 
 legates from that district in Convention shall report to this House. 
 
 There shall be two more Delegates assigned to the Valley district to be disposed 
 of in the manner last aforesaid ; and 
 
 " There shall be two more Delegates assigned to the trans-Alleghany district, to be 
 disposed of in the manner directed by the second resolution." 
 
 Mr. Neale in support of his proposition, addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 Mr. President : The gentleman from Southampton has withdrawn the amendment 
 proposed by the member from Dinwiddle : I am glad of it ; for though Franklin 
 county did, on yesterday, capture^ a Delegate belonging to Brunswick, I should be 
 sorry to see Brunswick on a crusade this morning, with a view to make reprisal. I 
 hope. Sir, that the proposition which 1 am about to offer, will supply the demands of 
 such counties as complain of the report from the Select Committee. I propose, Mr. 
 President, to increase the House of Delegates ten members — to give to the counties of 
 Charles City, Middlesex and Lancaster one member each, which they have not by 
 the said report — to equalize the political power in the other great sub-divisions of the 
 State, by assigning three members to the third district; by which Brunswick may 
 get one ; and two members to each of the districts beyond the Blue Ridge. 
 
 I am well aware. Sir, that there is a feeling here much opposed to a large House of 
 Delegates ; and I acknowledge that I strongly participate in that feeling, and am wil- 
 ling to indulge it, when it will not occasion too much sacrifice of counties, respecta= 
 
840 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ble both for their population and for the amount of taxes which they pay. The rea- 
 sons why I deem my proposition ought to prevail, I will briefly state. 
 
 Under the report for apportionment, every county, yes. Sir, every county in the 
 State, has at least one Delegate, except ten counties lying between James River and 
 Potomac River. I do not ask that each of these counties shall have a Delegate. No, 
 Sir, we must agree that four of the smallest counties and the city of Williamsburg, 
 ought to claim but two Delegates — this is submission and sacrifice enough. But we 
 claim, we ought to claim, that the six counties, to wit: Charles City, New Kent, 
 Middlesex, Matthews, Lancaster and Richmond, should have a Delegate each. They 
 have by the report but three among them all — they now pay an average amount of 
 taxes of $ 1726 each — and they ask an addition of three members — the expense will 
 be very trifling when compared with the amount of taxes which each pays. It can 
 hardly be supposed that the Legislature will remain in session hereafter more than 
 six or seven weeks — then say : 
 
 45 days at $ 4 per day, 180 
 
 Allow for traveUing, 50 $230 
 
 So that each member will cost $ 230 ; and the whole increase of expense for the 
 ten members will be $ 2,300 only. After the expenses of a member be deducted, 
 there will remain $1,496 in the Treasury from each of the counties for which I am 
 now seeking to obtain representation. 
 
 The claim which I set up must be considered reasonable and proper, when you re- 
 flect upon the great satisfaction and delight which it will afford to the counties I have 
 named, besides answering the demands in other parts of the Commonwealth. 
 
 Mr. President, I cannot see why the three counties which I claim representation 
 for, should not be gratified. Sir, is not the disfranchisement, the political death of four 
 counties and one city, suflacient to stay the ruthless hand of innovation ? Will you 
 persist to add three more counties, ancient and honourable as they are ^ Remember 
 your forefathers landed there — it was there that your hardy and valorous ancestors 
 first implanted civilization in this western hemisphere ; and from which effort sprung 
 this mighty empire, filled with happy millions ! 
 
 Do not gorge the large counties with Delegates and leave the smaller ones to starve 
 by not increasing the House ten more Delegates. 
 
 Sir, for some one or two centuries these very counties sustained your Government 
 both colonial and republican by their full share of contribution both in money and in 
 men, whilst they have never asked, nor received any benefit from the lavish appro- 
 priations of the public treasure. 
 
 It may be objected, that according to the population of the said counties, they have 
 their full share of representation. That may be so — but suppose we do ask represen- 
 tation over and above the precise quantum according to population 1 Can we of the 
 East, can you of the West object.? Has it not been argued over and over again upon 
 this floor, that where there existed identity of general interests, county repre- 
 sentation should prevail over representation upon population, unless there was a dis- 
 proportion most manifestly unreasonable. These counties do not come within the 
 influence of the exception — no ill whatever can arise from the indulgence 1 ask, and 
 by granting it, you will have done justice — consulted county pride, county prejudices, 
 and county virtues. 
 
 I am well assured, Mr. President, that this House is impatient to close its labours; 
 therefore, I will conclude. But I do hope that this desire may not prejudice my proposi- 
 tion ; if it should, or any other cause, I shall be gratified in the reflection that I have 
 performed my duty in my best way. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, he hoped the proposition of the gentleman from Richmond county 
 would not prevail. It would be remembered, perhaps, by some gentlemen that he 
 had formerly said the most convenient number for the House of Delegates would be 
 one hundred and forty-six. He had fixed on that number in reference to the desire 
 which gentlemen manifested to have each of their counties represented, if possible. 
 But it was impossible to meet the wishes of all. To do that, one representative must 
 be given to each of the very smallest counties in the State : and then the very large 
 counties claiming a representation in proportion, the result would be not a diminution, 
 but a considerable increase of the present number* of the House of Delegates. He 
 prayed gentlemen to consider the fairness of the claim which such counties as She- 
 nandoah and Fauquier might advance, if such counties as Richmond, Lancaster and 
 Charles City, were to have one Delegate a piece. The very attempt at equalizing 
 the representation on such a scheme must of necessity overturn the whole plan re- 
 ported by the Select Committee, and open the entire field of contest anew. It had 
 been represented to the Select Committee by their respected and venerable Chairman, 
 (Mr. Madison,) upon his personal knowledge, (and he hoped that gentleman would 
 pardon him for adverting to the fact) that one favourite object of the people of Vir- 
 gmia in calling the present Convention, had been to reduce the number of the House 
 of Delegates, if possible, to one-half of what it now stood at And thereby to avoid 
 
DEBATES OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 841 
 
 not only the expenditure of a great deal of money, but what was of still more conse- 
 quence, a great deal of the time now consumed by the deliberations of that body. 
 The Committee had cheerfully yielded to this suggestion, and had so reduced the 
 number as to meet that object, so far as it was practicable in consistency with other 
 valuable objects. Then what was the ground of complaint on the part of the gentle- 
 man from Richmond ? 
 
 Mr. Xeale here interposed. He had uttered no complaint whatever. He was well 
 awai'e the Select Committee had done their best, mider the very difficult circumstan- 
 ces in which they were placed. He had not made, or insinuated, any complaint 
 against them. 
 
 Mr. Leigh said, that he was fully aware of this : he had used perhaps too strong a 
 phrase ; but he had employed the vvord complaint in its general sense as an objection. 
 What reasonable objection, he asked, could the gentleman urge against the arrange- 
 ments of the Committee ? His plan might, no doubt, give some content to his own 
 district, and to a few others in the like circumstances. But what could the gentle- 
 man himself say, to skew that such counties as Westm.oreland, King George, Lan- 
 caster, Richmond and Charles City, with a population of from 5 to 6,000, should have 
 each a Delegate, when counties, such as Caroline, Chesterfield, Hanover, Spottsyl- 
 vania and Southampton, with 14, 15, and 18,000, were to have no more than one.' 
 What did he suppose the people of these large and wealthy counties would say to this.' 
 He appealed to the candour, the good sense and the justice of the gentleman from 
 Richmond county, to say whether he believed — whether it was reasonable to expect, 
 that they would yield to those small counties a larger representation unless their own 
 was increased.' They had not yielded even to the plan proposed by the Committee 
 from any sense of imperious jz/.?^ice in the case, but from a feeling of generosity to- 
 ward the smaller counties in the ancient portion of the Commonwealth. Nothing but 
 such a feeling would have reconciled them to things even as they stood by the Com- 
 mittee's report. When the local and comparative claims were fairly examined, the 
 real question would be found to be not whether the small counties should get more, 
 but whether the odd Delegate in the number assigned, should not be taken from 
 Prince George and Surry, and given to Caroline and Chesterfield. He hoped the 
 proposition would not prevail. 
 
 Mr. Neale said, he should be glad to see the House of Delegates reduced to one 
 hundred and twenty, but that would not be practicable, if justice was to be done to 
 the smaller counties. But it would be found, that those counties averaged a contri- 
 bution in taxes to the amount of $1,726, while the pay and mileao-e of a Delegate 
 would come to but $ 220. He hoped the Convention would so far indulge them as 
 to add ten to the proposed number of the Lower House. The gentleman from Ches- 
 terfield insisted, that if the small counties were to be thus indulged, then Chesterfield 
 and Caroline would each be entitled to two Delegates. But ha^d it not been urged in 
 argument throughout the debate, that where there was a complete identit}- of interest 
 between the counties, there was no necessity of adhering, with rigid strictness, to a 
 proportional distribution of representation ? He had himself voted repeatedly on that 
 principle. He knew the Committee had disposed of the one hundred and thirty-two 
 Delegates in the fairest possible manner. He had no complaint on that subject. All 
 he asked was, that the number might be raised to one hundred and forty-two ; and then 
 there would still be a reduction in the number of the House of seventy-two members. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas said, that the proposition went to give his own district one additional 
 member : and therefore, if the question were an insulated one, as a Representative of 
 that district, he should, of course, be disposed to gratify the wishes of the mover. 
 But it was necessary to look at other considerations. All must see the great embar- 
 rassment that would result from disturbing the arrangement of the Committee. He 
 was strongly impressed with the truth and justice of the remarks of the gentleman 
 from Chesterfield, that if this measure should carry, great injustice must be done to 
 the larger counties, unless the House of Delegates should be greatly increased, in- 
 stead of being reduced in number. He was against disarranging the whole plan of 
 distribution adopted by the Committee. On that principle, he had yesterday voted 
 asfainst taking a Delegate from Brunswick, and giving it to Franklin. He thought 
 it" was better to put up with a partial inconvenience, than throw the Convention upon 
 the ocean of contending claims. He should still act on that principle — and should, 
 therefore, vote against the proposition. Each gentleman naturally sought to advance 
 the interests of his own part of the State ; but nothing could be done unless they 
 were resolved to act in a spirit of compromise. 
 
 He referred to the case of Brunswick and Franklin, to shew the difiiculty of any 
 new arranofement — and expressed his belief, that should he vote for the present amend- 
 ment, he should, in the end, injure the interests of Iris district, by unhinging the 
 arrangement of the whole subject. 
 
 INIrT N. referred to the great length of time already consumed, and the discredi- 
 table spectacle exhibited bv the Convention, in contendinar thus for local interests 
 
 106 
 
842 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 merely. After disputing and discussing the principle of representation, and at length 
 agreeing on a compromise, would it not be disgraceful to wind up in a mere county 
 scuffle? He saw distinctly, that the plan of the gentleman was impracticable; or if 
 not so, to be attained only at the expense of heart-burnings and resentment in va- 
 rious parts of the Commonwealth. He should, therefore, though with reluctance, be 
 obliged to vote in the negative. 
 
 Mr. Tyler said, that some of the remarks of his colleague had been such as to re- 
 quire him to make a very few remarks in reply, as he intended to vote the other way. 
 If he saw that such a result could possibly follow, as his colleague seemed to appre- 
 hend, he should certainly be one of the last men, one of the very last, to vote in its 
 favor — and if it could be demonstrated, that such was to be the result, he should aban- 
 don the scheme with promptitude. But did the proposition do injustice to any part 
 of the State ? Did it interfere v;ith the great plan of apportionment, which settled 
 the relative representation of the four great divisions of the State ? Did it deny any 
 thing to the middle country? To the Valley? Or to the trans-Alleghany district? 
 Was it not a perfectly fair and just apportionment? Pray what cabalistic force was 
 there in that mystic number one hundred and thirty-two ? If the principle adopted 
 by the Convention was preserved, how, in the name of all that was just, could this 
 arrangement merit censure or complaint? Did they not allow to others the same 
 thing which they claimed for themselves ? He was not, however, pertinacious in fa- 
 vour of the plan, but he wished to vindicate himself from the charge of injustice. It 
 was natural, that he should desire to see the system of county representation adopted. 
 He had from the first kept that plan in his eye as the just plan. He had always de- 
 sired a graduated system on the county principle. He had never asked, however, 
 that the large counties should be shorn of their representation — he was for according 
 to all their own favourite views. There was a perfect identity of interest between 
 the large counties and the small ones. Charles City and Chesterfield acted in the 
 same spirit, and had the same interests and aims. The Delegates from one would 
 speak the interests of the other. They all had one common cause. If, then, the ar- 
 rangement would be attended with no injurious consequences, why should this boon 
 be denied to counties which had existed for one hundred and fifty years ? A wise 
 Statesman would consult the feelings, and even the prejudices of those for whom he 
 was providing a Government, and would seek to bind the people together by one in- 
 dissoluble cord. Why, then, violate the feelings of the people, who had enjoyed a 
 representation for two hundred years, and in search of a mathematical exactness, 
 (which, after all, could never be attained,) deprive Richmond and Lancaster of all 
 voice in the public offices ? With the utmost disposition, he doubted not, on the part 
 of the Committee to do justice, they had caused his district to embrace no less than 
 seven counties and one borough, while in the Senatorial district, they would utterly 
 be silenced by Henrico and Richmond City. They had united York to Accomack. 
 Though Accomack was able to swallow York alive, she could have no voice in the 
 Legislature, save by the mere grant and good pleasure of Accomack and Northamp- 
 ton. Charles City, James City and New-Kent, would be silenced by the voice of 
 Richmond and Henrico. He did not urge this in the spirit of complaint — and he 
 candidly acknowledged that he had himself been able to devise no better scheme. 
 But, he used these facts as an argument to shew that the number of the House of 
 Delegates ought to be enlarged. He asked gentlemen to give them a real represen- 
 tation in that House, and not in mere pretence. He urged not the slightest imputa- 
 tion against the Committee — they had acted with the most perfect candour and frank- 
 ness. On the contrary, he would go into an eulogium of their many virtues, did he 
 not know it would be disagreeable to them to hear it. He threw himself on the spirit 
 of liberality and of justice, which he knew to exist in that Convention. He had 
 voted in favour of giving a Delegate to Franklin, not on the claims of some gentle- 
 men as to principle, but because he looked to a scheme that would produce peace. 
 He was not for taking a Delegate from Brunswick, or one from Loudoun, but for so 
 far increasing the number of Delegates as to do justice, if possible, to all parts of the 
 State. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Neale's proposition, and decided by ayes and 
 noes as follows : 
 
 ^yes — Messrs. Tyler, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Claiborne, Henderson, 
 Cooke, See, Neale, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 12. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Nicholas, Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, trezvant, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Lo- 
 gan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Koane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan^ Laidley, Summers, Doddridge, Morgan, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 843 
 
 Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fau- 
 quier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, 
 Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Rose and Coalter — 83. 
 
 Mr. Massie moved a re-consideration of the vote by which a Delegate had been 
 taken from Brunswick and given to Franklin — and then the whole battle which had 
 been fought yesterday, was fought over again with renewed ardour. 
 
 Mr. Stuart opposed the motion, and expressed his surprise at the attempt. Mr. 
 Randolph supported the motion. Mr. Townes replied to Mr. Randolph. He was 
 succeeded by Mr. Stuart, who declared that if the injustice was done of depriving 
 Franklin of the Delegate, he could not support such a Constitution. Mr. Dromgoole 
 thanked the gentleman from Nelson, (Mr. Massie.) for making his motion, and sup- 
 ported at some length the proposition. He concluded with saying, that whatever 
 menace the gentleman from Patrick might throw out about not voting for the Consti- 
 tution, all he could say was, that he hoped the Convention would do justice, whatever 
 be the vote of any particular person for or against the Constitution. For himself, he 
 would make no such pledge — throw out no such menace. 
 
 Messrs. Claytor, Cabell and Saunders, supported the claims of Franklin. 
 
 Mr. Claiborne supported the claim of Brunswick. 
 
 After a long and animated debate, the motion for re-consideration was carried by 
 ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Hollada}^, Griggs, Roane, Ta}^- 
 lor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fau- 
 quier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch. Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Baylj^, Upshur and Perrin — 49. 
 
 Js^oes — Messrs. Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, INFCoy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Camp- 
 bell of Washington, Byars, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby , Duncan, Laidley , Summers, 
 See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Clay- 
 tor, Saunders, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart and Thompson — 45. 
 
 Mr. Townes now moved, that Loudoun be placed among the counties which have 
 two Delegates, and Franklin retained in that list, the Delegate taken from Loudoun 
 being given to Franklin. This motion brought new troops into the field, and the con- 
 test was renewed with great spirit, but it issued in a very decided rejection of the 
 measure proposed. 
 
 On a suggestion from Mr. Townes, 
 
 Mr. Stuart withdrew his motion, upon an understanding that he v/ould renew it 
 hereafter. 
 
 Mr. Townes then moved to strike Loudoun out of the counties which had been as- 
 signed three Delegates, in order to give o?ie more to Franklin. He supported this pro- 
 position by a speech. 
 
 When the motion was announced, Mr. Stuart stated, that he did not know the mo- 
 tion which his colleague meant to make — that he would not be the means of doing 
 injustice to one county, (Loudoun.) to do justice to Franklin — that he thought Lou- 
 doun fairly entitled to three Delegates. 
 
 Mr. Henderson supported the right of Loudoun to three Representatives, upon any 
 test which might be laid down — and he laid down several tests for this purpose, as 
 white population, tax-paying people, fighting people, &c. &c. 
 
 Mr. Randolph supported the proposition — declaring that he was opposed to allowing 
 any county in this district three votes — particularly while so many other great coun- 
 ties, as Spottsylvania, Caroline, and others, have only one Delegate. 
 
 Mr. Henderson replied. 
 
 Mr. Leigh spoke in favour of the proposition. 
 
 Mr. Mercer spoke at great length in favour of the claim of Loudoun to three De- 
 legates. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas also supported the claims of Loudoun. 
 
 After some discussion between Messrs. Stuart and Townes, Mr. Fitzhugh rose to 
 ask if there was no way of putting an end to this interminable spirit of debate. 
 
 The Chair replied, that he had looked into this subject, and could not satisfy him- 
 self that there was any other rule than the good sense of the House. 
 
 Mr. Cabell spoke in opposition to the motion of his colleague, (Mr. Townes.) 
 
 Mr. Scott supported the proposition, to take a member from Loudoun. 
 
 The ayes and noes were as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Mason of Southampton, 
 
844 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Sta- 
 nard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, 
 Townes, Martin, Rose, Coaller and Perrin — 37. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, CofF- 
 man, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, 
 Madison, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of 
 Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of 
 Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, ' Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Joynes, Bayly and Upshur — 58. 
 
 Mr. Stuart now renewed his motion, going to give an additional representative to 
 Franklin at the expense of Brunswick. It was put in the form of striking out the 
 latter and inserting Franklin. 
 
 Mr. Brodnax opposed the proposition — and urged that the report of the Select Confv- 
 mittee should remain undisturbed, and regretted that the Convention, on whom the 
 eyes of the civilized world are fixed, should exhibit the example of a body whose 
 members were huckstering for power. He spoke at great length. 
 
 Mr. Saunders supported the proposition. 
 
 Mr. Dromgoole demanded a division of the question ; in consequence of which it 
 was first put on striking out, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Cofl'man, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Scott, 
 Green, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart 
 and Thompson — 49. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leigli of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Marshall of Fauquier, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 46. 
 
 So Brunswick was stricken out. Franklin was then inserted by the following vote : 
 
 Ayes-— Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Marshall of Richmond, Nicholas, Clopton, 
 Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, 
 Miller, Baxter, Pvandolph, Logan, Madison, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, 
 Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Taylor of Caroline, 
 Morris, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, 
 Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, 
 Marshall of Fauquier, Loyall, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, 
 Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Bayly and Upshur — 72. 
 
 JYoes— Messi-s. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brod- 
 nax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Tyler, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, 
 Claiborne, Urquhart, Leigli of Halifax, Venable, Holladay, Roane, Garnett, Taze- 
 well, Prentis, Grigsby, Joynes and Perrin — 23. 
 
 Mr. Naylor moved to transfer Hardy from the Senatorial district of Shenandoah, to 
 the district of Rockingham and Pendli-ton. 
 
 Mr. M'Coy said, he presumed the motion was only a spice of party politics. [The 
 Chair called to order.] He then went into the argument to show that Hardy v/as the 
 natural ally of Shenandoah, not of Rockingham. 
 
 Mr. Naylor said, the political idea had never struck him before ; but since the in- 
 genuity of the gentleman had suggested it. he began to think there was something 
 in it. And was that gentleman himself actuated by that consideration ? But if Hardy 
 was to be punished for her political sins, he hoped she would not be attached to the 
 car of Shenandoah: [The Chair called twice to order.] Mr. Naylor said, he should 
 not have made such remarks, if the gentleman, who has so long been in public life, 
 had not set him the example. 
 
 Mr. Anderson said, that Hardy was the natural ally of Shenandoah— but to allay 
 the fears of the gentleman, he would promise him that she would always be repre- 
 sented in the councils of the country by a republican of the old school. 
 
 Mr. Smith obtained the floor to offer some other change— but owing to the lateness 
 of the hour, he declined pressing his proposition at the present sitting, and moved an 
 adjournment : which motion succeeding by a small majority, the House adjourned. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 845 
 
 MONDAY, January 11, 1830, 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 Mr. Smith of Greenbrier, moved an amendment to the report of the committee on 
 representation. It proposed to detach Greenbrier county from the Senatorial' district 
 of Monroe, Giles and JMontgomery, and attach it to that of Alleghany, Ba^k- and 
 Botetourt. 
 
 The county contest was now commenced afresh, and continued without intermis- 
 sion, till near five o'clock in the afternoon. 
 
 After a discussion, in wliich the motion was advocated warmly by the mover, and 
 by Messrs. Cloyd and Chapman ; and opposed by Mr. Beirne and Mr. Miller, the 
 question was decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — jlessrs. Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, CofFman, Wil- 
 liamson, Baldwin, -Nloore, Smith, Madison, Stanard, Mercer, Osborne, Cooke, Griggs, 
 Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Miilan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chap- 
 man, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Summers, See, Wilson, Green, Campbell of Bed- 
 ford, Clay tor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, Stuart, Thompson, Coalter, Bayly and 
 Upshur— 40. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Anderson, Harrison, M'Coy, Beirne, 
 Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, 
 Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Holladay, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Powell, Naylor, 
 Donaldson, Roane, Taj'lor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Laidley, Morgan, Campbell 
 of Brooke, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, 
 Prentis, Grigsby, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Joynes and 
 Perrin — 51. 
 
 Mr. Claytor moved the following : 
 
 To strike out the following clause : " The counties of Bedford and Franklin, shall 
 form another district: the counties of Buckingham, Campbell and Cumberland, shall 
 form another district : the counties^ of Patrick, Henry and Pittsylvania, shall form 
 another district : the counties of Halifax and Mecklenburg shall form another dis- 
 trict : the counties of Charlotte, Lunenburg, Nottoway and Prince Edward, shall 
 form another district: the counties of Amelia, Powhatan and Chesterfield, and the 
 town of Petersburg, shall form another district: the counties of Brunswick, Dinwid- 
 dle, Greensville and Prince George, shall form another district: the counties of Isle 
 of Wight, Southampton, Surry and Sussex, shall form another district : and the 
 counties of Norfolk, Nansemond and Princess Anne, and the borough of Norfolk, 
 shall form another district." — And substitute the following : 
 
 "The counties of Patrick, Henry and Franklin, shall form another district: the 
 counties of Pittsylvania and Plalifax, shall form another district: the counties of 
 Bedford and Campbell, shall form another district : the counties of Mecklenburg, 
 Charlotte, Lunenburg and Nottoway, shall form anotner district : the counties of 
 Prince Edward, Buckingham, Cumberland and Powhatan, shall form another dis- 
 trict: the counties of Amelia, Chesterfield, Prince George, and the town of Pe- 
 tersburg, shall form another district : the counties of Brunswick, Greensville, Din- 
 widdie and Sussex, shall form another district : the counties of Surry, Isle of Wight, 
 Soutbampton and Nansemond, shall form another district; and the counties of Nor- 
 folk, Princess Anne, and the borough of Norfolk, shall form another district." 
 
 He supported the amendment at considerable length — and it was farther advocated 
 by Messrs. Saunders and Stuart ; and opposed by Messrs. Brodnax, Branch, Ran- 
 dolph, Martin, Venable and Giles; when the question being taken, it was decided 
 by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, CofFman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, 
 Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, W^ilson, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Townes, Cabell, Stuart and Thompson — 43. 
 
 Koes — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Laidley, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, 
 Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsb}', Branch, Martin, 
 Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and 
 Perrin — 51. 
 
 So the amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. Morris moved an amendment which went to add CaroUne to the list of coun= 
 
846 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ties entitled to two Delegates, and advocated his motion at length ; but consented to 
 withdraw it at the request of 
 
 Mr. Leigh, who moved an amendment going to increase the House of Delegates 
 to one hundred and thirty-nine : giving two more to the trans-Alleghany district, 
 (viz : one to Wythe and one to Montgomery,) one to the Valley (to be disposed of 
 among themselves, perhaps to Augusta,) two to the Middle district, (viz : one to 
 Brunswick, and the other probably to Louisa,) and two to the country on tide-water, 
 (viz : one to Caroline, and one to Chesterfield.) 
 
 Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Morris expressed their approbation of this plan. 
 
 Mr. Powell wished the Valley to have one more Delegate, in which case he should 
 vote for it. 
 
 Mr. Leigh could not consent to this, as it would mar the proportion already fixed 
 by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stanard suggested, by way of reconciling the difference, to give one Delegate 
 to Fredericksburg. 
 
 The plan was advocated by Messrs. Gordon and Neale : Messrs. Clay tor and Scott 
 opposed it. 
 
 Mr. Madison, though in favour of reducing the number of Delegates as far as con- 
 venient, gave his assent to the plan, in the hope that it would produce an arrangement 
 more acceptable both to the Convention and to the people. 
 
 The motion was opposed by Messrs. Claytor and Scott ; and decided by ayes and 
 noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brod- 
 nax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, 
 Moore, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Madison, Henderson, Cooke, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, 
 Cloyd, Mathews, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Townes, Martin, Plea- 
 sants, Gordon, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 45. 
 
 JYoes— Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Anderson, Cotfman, Harrison, Williamson, 
 Baldwin, M'Coy, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Logan, Venable, Stanard, HoUaday, 
 Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Povs^ell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, 
 Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Marshall of Fauquier, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Branch, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson and Massie — 49. 
 
 So the plan of Mr. Leigh was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Morris now renewed the motion for his amendment, giving two Delegates to 
 Caroline, by taking one from the Northern Neck. 
 
 Mr. Naylor called for a division of the question, (viz : first on striking out.) 
 Mr. Neale regretted these family divisions, which w^ere springing up among them, 
 and particularly that the gentleman from Planover was seeking to get a Delegate for 
 ^ his county at the expense of his district. For his own part, Mr. N. said, he regarded 
 / the Select Committee as an impartial umpire — they had given their award — and he 
 ' did not think it right to disturb it, unless corruption could be proved in its jrro- 
 ceedings. 
 
 Mr. Coalter opposed the motion : He said he went upon no other basis than the 
 basis of the Select Committee. He hoped its report would not be disturbed. 
 
 Mr. Morris again withdrew his amendment to make room for another, read by Mr. 
 Miller, as follows : 
 
 " Strike out the counties of Brunswick, Caroline, Montgomery and Wythe, re- 
 spectively, from among the counties to which one Delegate each is allotted, and in- 
 sert them in their proper places among the counties to which two Delegates each are 
 allotted." 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Miller, by inserting after Caro- 
 line the county of Chesterfield. 
 
 The motion was carried : Ayes 47, Noes 45. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh moved further to amend by inserting " Fairfax." 
 
 The motion was opposed by Mr. Mason of Southampton, and negatived. 
 
 Mr. Smith moved further to amend by inserting " Greenbrier;" but this motion 
 was also negatived. 
 
 The question was now taken on Mr. Miller's motion and negatived, (that gentle- 
 man saying, that as the object of his motion was defeated he should now himself vote 
 against it.) 
 
 Mr. Morris now offered, for the third time, his amendment, for inserting Caroline, 
 but it was negatived. 
 
 Mr. M. said, that he should be the last man to charge the report of the Select 
 Committee with corruption, attending to Mr. Neale's jocular and technical remark, 
 but he alleged that it might be set aside, as other awards for obvious mistake on the 
 face of it. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 847 
 
 Mr. Mason of Southampton, moved to transfer Prince George from the Brunswick 
 Senatorial district, to the district of Isle of Wight. It was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Goode now moved that Brunswick and Montgomery should receive one Dele- 
 gate each, and for that purpose the number of the House of Delegates should be in- 
 creased from one hundred and thirty-two to one hundred and thirty-four. As one 
 reason for this motion, he produced a letter from the Auditor of Public Accounts, 
 stating that even upon his own principles of calculation, there was a mistake in esti- 
 mating the population of Brunswick by 2,000 white population short. 
 
 Mr. Mathews moved to add Wythe and Chesterfield. 
 
 After a debate in which Messrs. Brodnax, Scott and Chapman took part, 
 
 The question was divided on Mr. Powell's motion, and put separately on Wythe, 
 and then on Chesterfield ; but both were negatived. 
 
 The question respecting Brunswick and Montgomery (which had technically been 
 proposed in the form that they be stricken out of the list of counties having one 
 Delegate and inserted in that of counties having two,) was divided and put first on 
 striking out. 
 
 The count of the Chair made the ayes 46, and the noes 45. The Chair voting in 
 the negative, produced a tie, and the motion was pronounced to be lost; but on a 
 second count, the ayes stood 47, and the noes 44 — so it was carried. 
 
 Mr. Madison now observed, that if any doubt had existed as to the propriety of 
 maintaining an exact and permanent rule for the apportionment of representation in 
 a free Government, he thought the recent course of debate here must have effectually 
 removed it. He had thought that the best mode of arranging the subject would have 
 been to prescribe to the Legislature a fixed basis of apportionment ; and he still thought 
 it deserved consideration, whether the Convention ought not to provide some settled 
 plan for future apportionments. Unless some such provision should be made, great 
 inequality would grow up under the operation of the plan agreed to — the people 
 would call for a remedy, and finding none in the Constitution, they would resort to 
 another Convention, against the necessity of which there seemed to be a universal 
 wish to guard, as far as would be consistent with the principles and interests of the 
 Republic. * 
 
 Within the four great districts, the Legislature was empowered, it was true, to cor- 
 rect any inequalities which might arise, but not to remedy any inequality, as between 
 those districts themselves. And yet the time must come, and perhaps was not far dis- 
 tant, when there would be as great a demand for interference in the latter case as in 
 the former. 
 
 He wished, therefore, to submit an amendment in reference to that subject, though 
 it was with great reluctance that he brought it forward at so late a day, and especially 
 at so late an hour. If it did not at once meet the views of the Convention, he had 
 no disposition whatever to press it on them. Mr. Madison then read the following 
 resolution : 
 
 " The General Assembly, after the year , and at intervals thereafter, of not 
 
 less than years, shall have authority, two-thirds of each House concurring, to 
 
 make re-apportionments of Delegates and Senators throughout the Commonwealth, 
 so that the number of Delegates shall not at any time exceed , nor of Sena- 
 
 tors, ." 
 
 The Chair suggested, that the amendment would better cohere to that which had 
 been offered by the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Cooke,) and which lay at present 
 on the table. 
 
 Mr. Madison consented, that it should not be considered until that was taken up. 
 
 Mr. Mathews now moved to strike the counties of Wythe and Chesterfield from 
 the class of counties entitled to one Delegate, and insert them in that of those having 
 two. 
 
 Mr. Taylor of Caroline moved to amend the amendment, by adding the word 
 " Caroline." 
 
 But this amendment was negatived. 
 
 The motion of Mr. Mathews was then discussed by Messrs. Dromgoole, Scott, 
 Mercer and Leigh, and finally negatived — Ayes 34. 
 
 Mr. Branch moved a re-consideration of the vote by which Mr. Leigh's plan for 
 increasing the House of Delegates to one hundred and thirty-nine members, had 
 been rejected. 
 
 Mr. Marshall of Fauquier advocated the motion. He stated, that if the question 
 were, whether we shall have a large or a small House of Delegates, he should cer- 
 tainly vote in favour of a reduction ; but, as the number originally adopted had been 
 increased for the purpose of consulting the convenience of the people, he was willing 
 for the same reason to vote for the increase now proposed. 
 
 The motion was negatived by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jlijcs — -Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, 
 Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, 
 
848 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Mathews, Barbour of Culpeper, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, 
 Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Pleasants, Gordon, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin— 46. 
 
 jYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, 
 Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Hender- 
 son, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Nay lor, Donaldson, Boyd, 
 Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Scott, Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Thompson, 
 Massie and Bates— 48. 
 
 Mr. Chapman moved an adjournment, but it was negatived. 
 
 The question was then put on adopting the report of the Select Committee, arrang- 
 ing the representation in both Houses, as amended, (viz : by adding two to the Lower 
 House, which are to be given to Brunswick and Montgomery,) and carried. . 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke now moved an adjournment, but it was lost. 
 
 Mr. Powell moved, that when the Convention adjourn, it adjourn to meet at 10 
 o'clock to-morrow, which was agreed to. 
 
 The question was then put by the Chair, shall the draught of the Constitution, as 
 amended, be engrossed for a third reading ? when 
 
 Mr. Leigh moved to amend it, by striking out the counties of Wythe, Caroline 
 and Chesterfield, from the list of counties having one Delegate, and inserting them 
 among those having two, (giving the House of Delegates one hundred and thirty- 
 seven members.) 
 
 The Chair pronounced the motion not in order, the House having agreed to the 
 report of the Select Committee. 
 
 Mr. Leigh thereupon moved a re-consideration of the vote adopting the report. 
 But the motion was negatived by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 £yes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, 
 Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richm»nd, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, 
 Moore, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of 
 Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Holladay, Henderson, Cooke, Roane, Taylor of 
 Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, LtoyaW, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, 
 Upshur and Perrin — 46. 
 
 J\bes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, 
 Baldwin, M'Coy, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Os- 
 borne, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, 
 George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, 
 Stuart, Thompson, Massie and Bates — 48. 
 
 So the House refused to re-consider. 
 
 Mr. Summers moved to amend the fourteenth section of the Constitution, in that 
 clause of it which requires the Governor to be a native citizen of the United States, 
 so as to enable one who had been a citizen for fourteen years, to be eligible, though 
 not a native born. 
 
 The motion was lost. 
 
 Mr. Summers then moved to amend the section, so as to allow those who had been 
 citizens of the United States at the adoption of the Federal Constitution, to be eli- 
 gible as Governor. 
 
 The motion was carried — Ayes 46, Noes 41. 
 
 Mr. Madison now observed, that he was deeply impressed with the importance of 
 the subject involved in the amendment he had offered, and expressed his desire that 
 it might be considered. To illustrate the necessity of having some provision to suit 
 the varying condition of the State, he put the case, that Norfolk should (as he hoped 
 would be the case,) reach a great population : that city could not be duly represented 
 in the Legislature, unless some Delegate were taken from one of the other counties 
 or boroughs. Pie wished that his opinion on this subject might appear, and he hoped 
 the amendment might be considered. 
 
 Mr. Upshur now moved, that Mr. Madison's amendment be laid on the table and 
 printed. The hour was late, (5 o'clock.) and this arrangement would cause no loss 
 of time. 
 
 The question was agreed to, and the printing ordered. 
 
 Mr. Coalter, wishing to see how the Constitution now stood, since the amendments 
 had been made, moved for its being printed as amended; but, on the suggestion of 
 Mr. Powell, he withdrew his motion. 
 
 It was renewed by Mr. Cooke, and carried — Ayes 51. 
 
 On motion of Mr. M'Coy, the House then adjourned. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 849 
 
 TUESDAY, Jaxuary 12, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met before 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. 
 Mr. Lee of the Episcopal Ciiurcb. 
 
 Mr. Madison filled the blanks in his proposition, and otherwise modified it, so as to 
 make it read ; 
 
 The General Assembly, after the year 1341, and at intervals thereafter, of not 
 less than ten years, shall have authority, two-thirds of each House concurring, to 
 make re-apportionments of Delegates and Senators throughout the Commonwealth, 
 so that the number of Delegates shall not at any time exceed cue hundred and fifty, 
 nor of Senators, thirty-six." 
 
 Mr. Chapman moved ^ amend the resolution of Mr. ]\Iadison, by striking out that 
 part whicli requires the assent of t A'O-thirds of the Legislature, under the persuasion, 
 that if the clause should be sutiered to stand, the Yv est would never get a fair ratio of 
 apportionment; and contending, t]iat in a Republican Government a majority ought 
 to govern. 
 
 Mr. Madison opposed this motion — its effect would be to give the State a legislative 
 Constitution, instead of a constitutional Legislature. He thought, with this require- 
 ment of a majority of two-thirds, the Legislature might be safely entrusted with the 
 task of apportionment. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, he had been willing to let the subject rest; but, if it was to be re- 
 ferred to the Legislature to decide at all, it ought to be left to a majority simply. Its 
 introduction into that body would only cause a perpetual struggle, which would be 
 aggravated by requiring two-thirds. He was for the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Trezvant asked for the ayes and noes on Mr. Chapman's amendment, and they 
 were so taken as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Anderson, Cofiman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beime, 
 Smith, 3Iiller, Baxter, Fitzhugh, Osborne, Powell, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Do- 
 naldson, Boyd, George, M'^vlillan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chap- 
 man, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Suimners, See, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Scott, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders. Cabell, Stuart and 
 Massie— 39. 
 
 JVocs — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Brodaax, Dromcroole, Alexander, Goode, I^Iarshall of Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas. Ciopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Zdadison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Mercer, Henderson, CooTie, Griggs, Pendleton, P.oane, Taylor of Caroline, INIorris, 
 Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Green, raarshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Pren- 
 tis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin. Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Bates, Xeale, 
 Rose, Coalter, Jo^mes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 55. 
 
 So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Madison, in consequence of a remark from Mr. Cooke, modified his amend- 
 ment, by restoring the words " throughout the Commonwealth," which he had stricken 
 out. 
 
 IVIr. Ciopton ofi'ered the following, as an amendment to that of Mr. Madison, viz: 
 And whenever the Legislature shall make a re-apportionment of representation 
 throughout the Commonwealth, they shall cause a re-assessment of the lands to be 
 taken for the purposes of taxation." 
 
 Mr. jNIercer was apprehensive, that the amendment inight be so interpreted, that 
 unless there was a re-apportionment of representation, there would be no re-assess- 
 ment of lands. From the injustice now experienced on that subject, he was induced 
 to hope that a provision would be introduced, making it imperative upon the Legis- 
 lature to have a re-assessment at all events. 
 
 Mr. Ciopton said, he had no objection to the introduction of such a clause, if it was 
 prepared. 
 
 Mr. Mercer thought the other clause of the original resolution, requiring two-tliirds 
 of the Legislature to consent to a re-apportionraent, was still more exceptionable. 
 
 Mr. Stanard thought the amendment required to be rendered more definite. There 
 were two species of apportionment v.iiich might be referred to — one among the great 
 districts, and the other within each of them. He presumed the amendment was in- 
 tended to refer to the general apportionment. 
 
 The Chair read the amendment again, and suggested to add the words " throughout 
 the Commonwealth." 
 
 Mr. Ciopton accepted this as a modification. 
 
 Mr. Stanard objected to the amendment, as unnecessary. It was not to be be- 
 lieved, that when the inequalities in representation should become so great as to re- 
 quire a re-apportionrnent, the Legislature would refuse a re-assessment as the basis 
 of it. 
 
 107 
 
850 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 The question was put, and the amendment of Mr. Clopton to the amendment of 
 Mr. Madison, was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, while he cordially assented to the suggestion of the vene- 
 rable gentleman frozn Orange, that no Constitution could be agreeable to the people, 
 which did not contain a plan for the future apportionment of representation, was sorry 
 that he could not view the rule he had proposed, as, any alleviation of the difficulty. 
 He could not conceive any change in the condition of the Commonwealth, that would 
 bring such a rule into any beneficial eliect. There was no hope of getting two-thirds 
 of the Legislature to assent to any equitable principle of apportionment whatever. 
 
 Such a proposition would be of no value in any State in the Union. The experi- 
 ment had been made in Kentucky, as to the removal of the Seat of Government — 
 and the vain efforts to get two-thirds to assent, has cost ih^ State more than a Con- 
 vention would have done. 
 
 He then moved the following amendment: 
 
 " The General Assembly shall have power, in the year 1841, and every years 
 thereafter, to apportion the representation in both Houses of that body, so that the 
 number of Delegates in each of the four grand districts, shall bear the same propor- 
 tion to the Avhole population of each district, which the present apportionment bears 
 to the whole population of each district, as shall be ascertained by tlie next census." 
 
 Mr. C. said, it must at once strike every gentleman that this amendment embraced 
 a principle which had never yet been submitted as a rule of apportionment. It had 
 all to recommend it which the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle could claim : if 
 there was any principle in that amendment, this went to perpetuate it ; and if the prin- 
 ciple was just now, it must be so ten, twenty, thirty years hence, and in all futurity. 
 It went to give the same meai^ure of power in proportion to the same population, as was 
 proposed by the plan of the gentleman from Albemarle, it was disadvantageous to 
 the West, as it went to sacrifice all the gain they had obtained in population since the 
 Census of 1820 : and whatever disadvantage was experienced by the West, from that 
 gentleman's plan, the same was inflicted by this. But he offered it in a spirit of com- 
 
 fromise. The rule was easy of application : it was a question in the Ptule of Three : 
 f 180,000, the population of the West at present, gave 31 Delegates to the "Western 
 district, what would the population of that district in 1841 give ? and so in 1851: and 
 every ten years thereafter. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, the object sought by the amendment, was already provided for by 
 the plan of Mr. Cooke, with this only difference, that the latter plan contained a limi- 
 tation as to the number of the House of Delegates and of the Senate. The only ef- 
 fect in which this amendment would differ from that gentleman's was, in enlarging the 
 number of both Houses : a consequence to which he was opposed. 
 
 One observation as to the amendment of the venerable gentleman from Orange: 
 it provided power in the Legislature to re-apportion representation throughout the 
 State ; but it laid down no rule by Vv'hich they were to be governed in that arrange- 
 ment. This caused him to vote against the proposal of the gentleman from Giles, 
 (Mr. Chapman :) he could not agree to it, unless he agreed to change the whole foun- 
 dation of the Government ; for, representation constituted that foundation. It was not 
 to be doubted that in 1841, there would be a majority in the Legislature holding the 
 Bame sentiments as the majority in this body, and which had prevented the adoption 
 of the white basis : and the result would no doubt be the same. It was, in fact, giving 
 po\yer to the Legislature in 184 i , to make a new Government for Virginia. Having 
 divided the State into four distinct districts, and thus presented to the people the idea 
 of a diversity of interests, (which he did not believe lo exist,) all that remained was to 
 invite three of these divisions to unite in oppressing the fourth, and the Constitution 
 was then in their power. 
 
 Mr. Fitzhugh said, his colleague was certainly mistaken in his view of the proposi- 
 tion : It was totally different from that offered by Mr. Cocke. It was the only propo- 
 sition which had yet been brought forward, which proposed an equal and just rule for 
 future apportionment ; and it should receive his decided support. Suppose one of the 
 great districts increased in population greatly, while another should not ; this rule 
 went to give to that which increased, an enlarged number of representatives. His 
 objection to the plan of Mr. Cooke was, that it retained the relative proportions now 
 established between the great divisions of the State unchangeably and forever. But 
 this amendment avoided that injustice, and should have his support. 
 
 Mr. Mercer said, if he had been mistaken, he had committed a great error : but he 
 was not yet convinced of the fact. Mr. M. here went into an analysis of the amend- 
 ment, and insisted in his former view. 
 
 Mr. Campbell said, that Mr. Fitzhugh had understood his proposition correctly. He 
 here went into an aritlimetical illustration of its effect, on the principle of the rule of 
 proportion. The only objection v/hich had any weight was, that it might increase the 
 number of the House of Delegates too much : but then whilst one division gained, 
 another might lose. But he had no objection to have the present number proposed 
 ror that HousOy fixed as a maximum. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CON\"ENTION. 
 
 851 
 
 Mr. Claiborne called for a division of the question, on striking out and inserting the 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. Campbell remonstrated against precipitancy, and asked the House to give its 
 attention to the plan, that'ts merits, if it had any, might be candidly weighed. All 
 the merits of Mr. Gordon's had consisted mainly in its steering a middle course, and 
 producing a drawn battle between the contending parties : if that were any merit, Mr. 
 C's plan had the same. He insisted on the necessity of some rule for future appor- 
 tionment, and asked what would have become of the Government of the United States 
 if the Federal Constitution had contained no provision on this subject.? 
 
 Mr. Joynes said, he had been anxious for some rule on the subject; but that pre- 
 sented by the present amendment was the worst, and the most injurious to the inter- 
 ests of Eastern Virginia, of any that had yet been thought of. The representation 
 now fixed by the plan of Mr. Gordon, gave to the Trans- Alleghany district one repre- 
 sentative for about every five thousand of the inhabitants, while in the tide-water dis- 
 trict the rule gave them about one for every ten thousand, and this was to be the ratio 
 forever. According to that rule those below the tide-water could never get another 
 representative till their population increased ten thousand above this present number ; 
 whereas the West got a new Delegate for every increase of five thousand, while at 
 the same. time the one district was nearly stationary, and the other growing with ra- 
 pidity. He had much ratlier have the white basis : it would be far less disadvantage- 
 ous to the East. According to the amendment, the proportion between the great dis- 
 tricts would not remain as it was now fixed at all : only the same ratio within each 
 district betv/een the population and representation. 
 
 Mr. Marshall of Richmond said, there was a serious objection to the amendment: 
 it went to enlarge indefinitely, both Houses of the Legislature : that must be its neces- 
 sary effect, unless some restraming clause v/are added to prevent it. But, such he was 
 well assured was not the sense of the Convention : they wished rather to diminish the 
 Legislature, and their objection to it had been stated by the gentleman from Accoraac, 
 (Mr. Joynes.) The apportionment at present agreed on was the white basis as it stood 
 in 1820. They had all agreed that the black population should not be represented in 
 the same manner as the v/hite : and the present schexiie pursued that principle. But 
 the amendment said the same proportion should be observed, whether the population 
 were white or black : suppose that the East should get a majority of white population ; 
 by this plan they would not get a proportional izicrease of representation. The amend- 
 ment would not benefit the Eastern part of the State at all ; all its benefits would be 
 confined to the West. It was unjust to adopt a principle w^hich would not apply itself 
 to a change of the population from black to white, when the general basis of the whole 
 plan was in fact white population. In the middle country it was possible, and pro- 
 bable, that the character of the population would be greatly changed : there were none 
 who could consider the condition, especially of the western part of the middle district, 
 and not perceive this to be true ; but the ratio of representation would not change 
 with it. 
 
 Mr. Mercer proposed to the gentleman from Brooke to modify his resolution, so as 
 to read : 
 
 The General Assembly shall have power, in the year 1841, and every 
 years thereafter, to apportion the representation in both Houses, so that the number of 
 Delegates in each of the four grand districts, shall bear the same proportion to the 
 whole white population of each district respectively, which the present apportionment 
 establishes in such district, the ratio of the present apportionment to be ascertained 
 by the next Census } provided that the House of Delegates shall never exceed in num- 
 ber one hundred and fifty, nor the Senate thirty-six members." 
 Mr. Campbell accepted the modifi-cation. 
 
 The question was then put on striking out, in order to insert Mr. Campbell's amend- 
 ment, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 .4ye5 — Messrs. Anderson, Coflfman, Harrison, Wilhamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Pow- 
 ell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Mlllan° Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Cabell and Stuart — 42. 
 
 ,Yoe5— Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax. Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas. Clopton, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leio-h of Hahfax. Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 'Carnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall 
 of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, 
 Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, 
 Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 53. 
 
 So the House refused to strike out, and Mr. Campbell's amendment fell of course. 
 
852 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CON VEiSTION. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, he had misunderstood the question, not having attended to the 
 modification as to wliite population. In its former step lie thought the amendment 
 claimed too much for the West ; as modified, he thought it was in the other extreme : 
 he, therefore, was willing his vote should remain unchanged. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Washington, now moved to amend Mr. Madison's amendment, 
 by striking out two-thirds" and substituting a majority of the Legislature." 
 
 The Chair said, that motion had already been made and rejected : and could not, 
 therefore, be put again. 
 
 Mr. Campbell said, he had intended to add a proviso, that the new apportionment 
 aoreed to by the Legislature should be adopted b}^ a majority of the whole number 
 of qualified voters," 
 
 Mr. Mercer approved the proviso, and moved a re-consideration of the vote on 
 striking out two-thirds." 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Washington supported his amendment by a few remarks. He 
 had always thought that in such a Government as ours, the great point aimed at, was 
 to execute the public will. But soine gentlemen seemed to apprehend great danger 
 from bringing the question of apportionment too frequently beibre the people. For 
 his part, he thought once in ten years was none too often. 
 
 Both branches of the Legislature, it would be observed, must concur in any altera- 
 tion to be proposed ; and then, (if his plan should prevail) a majority of all the qualified 
 voters in the State must agree to it before it could go into effect. Not a single ques- 
 tion could be settled without this concurrence : and all those who did not vote were 
 to be counted as against the measure. Though his plan might not meet with favour 
 from the House, yet he hoped it would be supported by the gentleman from Albemarle, 
 (Mr. Gordon,) as that gentleman had recently told the House that his opinions as to 
 the white basis had undergone no change. 
 
 Mr. Gordon replied with warmth, and complained of being thus singled out, and 
 personally called on for his concurrence in a proposition which the House had deci- 
 dedly rejected, and to which he was himself opposed. 
 
 He did not see why gentlemen from the W^est should be so much excited in rela- 
 tion to him ; his plan gave them more power than they could otherwise have obtained : 
 they might have had the Federal number thrust upon them or the mixed basis, but for 
 his compromise. He would inform gentlemen that he should vote according to the 
 dictates of his own conscience, regardless of their opinions as to his consistency. 
 
 He had long ago said, that if a plan could not receive the support of a respectable ma- 
 jority of the House, he should not throw himself into the scale to make it preponde- 
 rate by his vote. He believed the sovereignty to reside in the people, and not just 
 where this Convention should choose to place it. He went for a Constitution. He 
 wished and hoped to see one adopted by the Convention and by the people of Vir- 
 ginia. To those who claimed to be reformers (and he had himself been one of thera) 
 he said, that the''exhibitions made on that floor had effectually cured him of all desire 
 to see a Convention again. He came there resolved to advance the cause of popular 
 rights : and what had he found ? That all were engaged in a violent struggle to pro- 
 mote the interests of their own section of country, and in no other design. His phi- 
 lanthropic views of men and of theoretical liberty had received a lesson which he 
 should not soon forget. He had seen how easily principles could be forgotten, as soon 
 as they were found to come in conflict with particular interests. He had hoped to 
 see the Convention agree upon something. He had offered his compromise, because 
 he saw the contest was maddening the Convention and maddening the country. 
 There was manifestly a great division of interests and feehngs as to a delicate but 
 vital question in the State. If gentlemen were content to make the interests he re- 
 spected, their sport, by taunting him, let gentlemen beware. He was not to be made 
 their sport. The consistency of his opinions w^as a matter not to be sported Avith. 
 He should give such a vote as he thought right, very reckless of the opinions of any. 
 
 Mr. Campbell said he had meant to throw out no taunts against the gentleman. 
 He had no unkind feelings toward him; indeed he knew little about him. But he 
 vvished to understand what the gentleman m.eant exactly by telhng gentlemen to 
 " beware." If that was intended as a personal threat, he disregarded it. If it was 
 intended to refer to party or political considerations, he equally disregarded it. He 
 too had a choice ; and if principles were adopted so entirely contrary to all his notions 
 of right, he preferred remaining as he was : he would go for the old Constitution with 
 the gentleman from Charlotte, [Mr. R. ''much obhged to the gentleman!"] unless 
 some change should be made which he approved more than the gentleman's com- 
 promise. 
 
 Mr. C. said, he believed the plan he proposed had never been before the Conven- 
 tion before. It was, that any plan for future apportionment should be submitted to 
 those who were the real sovereigns of the land, to all who could make their sove- 
 reignty telt by exercising it. It was true, the sovereignty resided in the people, but 
 how did It operate when it could not be put in exercise ? It was by votes that the 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTIOH, 
 
 853 
 
 people made their sovereignty known and felt. He was for submitting future appor- 
 tionment to this test. Did the gentleman object to this .' '\^'as this the distinction 
 he took ? Did he say that it v.'as not his doctrine ? that the people should make 
 their will known by their votes.' If so, he was welcome to his distinction. He had 
 meant n© taunt. But if that gentleman was a disciple of the man who had once 
 given such distinction to his district, (Mr. JeiTerson) he should have thought he 
 would have been in favour of such a plan. All he asked for his amendment, was a 
 candid consideration of its merits, and that he knew the House would give. 
 
 Mr. Gordon said, he might, perhaps, have received the gentleman's remarks with 
 more v^armth than the gentleman had intended. He had not meant to use any per- 
 sonal threat, or any political one. Mr. G. here went into a review of what had taken 
 place in the Convention, and argued to shew, that his amendment had been marked 
 with no inconsistency, and concluded by expressing his hope that he might be let 
 alone, and suffered to vote in obscurity, without being thus compelled to present him- 
 self and his course before the Convention. 
 
 -Mr. Leigh wished to know, if the question on re-consideration was to be made a 
 test question as to the amendment itself.'^ 
 
 Mr. Campbell e^ipressed liis willingness that it should be so considered. 
 
 Mr. Mercer made some remarks which were inaudible from the confusion in the 
 House. When he began to be heard, he was saying that the end of the present mo- 
 tion was the accomplishment of wliat the venerable gentleman from Orano-e had so 
 much at heart, the securing of a majority in favour of the Constitution. The Con- 
 vention having organized four distinct parties in the State with notions of separate 
 and conflicting interests, if provision was made for re-apportionment in future with- 
 out any controul over the action of the Legislature, they would expose the basis it- 
 self of the Government to be changed. 
 
 He diffe.-ed from the gentleman from Albemarle as to its producing discontent. 
 The discontent was likely to grow from applying a fixed rule to a changing state of 
 affairs. This amendment went to check the operations of a majority of the Legisla- 
 ture by the will of a majority of the voters of the Commonwealth : and in that he 
 went on a principle already sanctioned ; for the very Constitution they v/ere making 
 v/as by law to be submitted to that very ordeal. It was to be judged of by the votes 
 of the qualified voters for the most numerous branch of the Assembly. Without 
 such a check he could not vote to leave the subject of apportionment to a majority 
 merely of the Legislature. A bare majority might be in favour of adopting Federal 
 numbers as a basis in future. 
 
 At the suggestion of Ivlr. Stanard, Mr. Campbell clianged the form of his amend- 
 ment, so as to avoid the necessity of any re-consideration, by adding merely a proviso 
 at the end of Mr. ^Madison's amendment. 
 
 The question now being directly on the adoption of this amendment, 
 
 Mr. ZS'aylor made a very animated address to the Convention, deprecating the idea 
 that the people must be thrown into a state of agitation, by having the question of 
 representation from time to time submitted to them. He scouted the idea that the ut- 
 most injustice must be submitted to, and things left to take their downward course, as 
 they m.ight, rather than disturb the people and run the risk of an excitement. W^ere the 
 people not to be trusted.' Must they be ''saved from themselves?" W^exe they 
 "their own worst enemies.'" This was the doctrine of the Holy Alliance, not of a 
 Republican Assembly. AVas this famous compromise to be such an anodyne that the 
 people were to sleep under it to all time Zvlust they never be awakened to adopt any 
 other apportionment than that now fixed upon For his part, he had rather see 
 symptoms of life than of death among the people. He had no faith in this medicine. 
 He did not believe it w^as such a catholicon, as would cure all maladies now, and pre- 
 vent them forever hereafter. He contended that a rule of re-apportionment would 
 prevent the real agitations that must ensue, if another Convention had to be resorted 
 to. He concluded by expressing his opposition to all those horrors about trusting the 
 people with their own affairs : he believed in none of those dangers at all. 
 
 Mr. Smith asked for the ayes and noes. 
 
 ISIr. Leigh asked that the question should be divided. 
 
 It was, accordingly, first put on striking out ; and decided by ayes and noes as 
 
 follows : 
 
 Aijes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffraan, Harrison, W^illiamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Sinith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Os- 
 borne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson. Boyd, Pen- 
 dleton, George, M'Millani^ Campbell of W^ashington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 "Wilson, Campbell of Bedford. Claytor, Saunders, Cabell. Stuart and Thompson — ib. 
 ^ JVocs — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 
854 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, 
 Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of 
 Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, 
 Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 50. 
 
 So the Convention refused to strike out, and Mr. Campbell's, of Washington, 
 amendment fell of course. 
 
 The question then recurred on the amendment of Mr. Madison, and was decided 
 by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Cooke, Powell, Campbell of Washington, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Garnett, Bar- 
 bour of Culpeper, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 Branch, Townes, Martin, Pleasants, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter,. Joynes, 
 Bayly and Perrin — 50. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Plarrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Griggs, Ma- 
 son of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Byars, 
 Morris, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Mor- 
 gan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Scott, Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, 
 Cabell, Stuart, Gordon, Thompson and Upshur — 45. 
 
 So Mr. Madison's amendment, leaving future apportionment to two-thirds of the 
 Legislature, was adopted. . 
 
 Mr. Cooke now moved to amend the fourth article of the draughted Constitution, 
 by striking out " 1841," and inserting " 1833," so as to reconcile the people to the adop- 
 tion of the Constitution, by holding out to them the prospect of a speedy redress of 
 grievances. He was aware that some gentlemen thought their constituents had been 
 hardly dealt by, nor could any thing else be looked for from the imperfect lights un- 
 der which the Convention had "acted, in making the present apportionment. In 1833 
 the Legislature would have all the benefit of the Census of 1830, to guide them. 
 
 The Chair said it was not strictly in order to consider this amendment, as the fifth 
 article had been adopted. 
 
 Mr. Cooke then moved to re-consider the vote on reference to this particular sec- 
 tion of the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, he hoped the vote on re-consideration would be taken as a 
 test vote on the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Powell concurred in this desire, and expressed his purpose of voting against 
 the amendment, 
 
 Mr. Claytor understanding the remark of Mr. Cooke as in part applying to him, 
 enquired if he could suppose that this amendment would remove the objections of 
 those who had considered their constituents as injured by the present arrangement.'' 
 The appeal was to be to a Legislature constituted on such principles as must throw 
 them into a minority, and they were to appeal to a majority for redress. His vote 
 would not be changed by this additional tub to the whale, after the other tub of the 
 two-thirds majority. He went for substantials. He was not to be tantalized by being 
 told — yes — your grievances shall be heard — and very soon: but before a packed jury, 
 prepared already with a verdict. [Here Mr. Claytor was called to order by the 
 Chair — and apologized.] 
 
 Mr. Cooke denied that the amendment was any tub to the whale. He should be 
 pleased to get the gentleman's vote for the Constitution ; but whether such might be 
 the eifect of the amendment or not, he thought it valuable in itself, and that it ought 
 to be adopted. 
 
 The question was then put on re-considering, and th.e Chair made the votes to be 
 Ayes 46, Noes 46, and gave the casting vote in the negative : but suggested that pos- 
 sibly there might be some error in the count; whereupon, 
 
 Mr. Cooke called for the ayes and noes, and they were taken as follows : 
 
 Jlijcs — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax. Dromgoole, Alexander, Marshall of Richmond, Williamson, 
 Smith, Miller, F^andolph, Leigli of Haliflix, Logan, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Cooke, Naylor, Donaldson, Campbell of Washington, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Gar- 
 nett, Mathews, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, 
 Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Saunders, Townes, Pleasants, Gordon, 
 Massie, Bates, Rose and Coalter — 43. 
 
 JYbes — Messrs. Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Baldwin, 
 Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, 
 Urquhart, Venable, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Powell, Griggs, Mason 
 of Frederick, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Byars, Roane, Cloyd, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan. Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 655 
 
 Cla^-tor. Branch. Cabell, Mardn. Stuart, ThorGpson, Neale, Jovnes, Bavly. Upshur 
 and Perrin — 51. 
 
 So i' :r C : .^vention refused to re-consider the vote by which the £fm article of the 
 Con;: : '.\?..d been adopted. 
 
 Mr. Clopton moved tbe following amendrnent to the fifteenth article : 
 
 *• And a Privj Council, or Council of State. The Governor shall be elected bv 
 joint vote of the two Houses of the General Assemblv. and shai' ' - clEce dur- 
 
 ing the terni of three years, to commence on the nrst day of Ja:: s ucceeding 
 
 his election, or on such other day as may from time to time 1- ed by law; 
 
 and he shall be inehgible to that oSce for three years next after his term of service 
 shall have expired. The Privy Councilj or Council of State, shall consist of four 
 members, and shall be elected by Joint vote of the two Houses of the General As- 
 sembly, for the term of four years. They shall annually choose out of Lheix own 
 members, a Lieutenant-Governor, who. in case of the death, inability, or necessarv 
 absence of the Gsvernor from the Government, shall discharge the duties of Gover- 
 nor. The Governor shall be President of the CouncU. and shaE, in all cases of divi- 
 sion, have the casting vote. At the first election, the two Houses of the General 
 Assembly shall, by joint resolution, divide the persons elected into two classes. The 
 seats of the members of the first class shall be vacated at the end of the second year: 
 and of those of the second class, at the expiration of the fourth year : so that one- 
 half may be elected every second year : And if vacancies happen by resignation or 
 otherwise, they shall be filled by joint vote of the two Houses of the General Assem- 
 bly. Two members, with the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, as the case may be, 
 shall be sufficient to act : and their advice and proceedings shall be entered of record, 
 and signed by the members present, (to any part whereof any member mav enter his 
 dissent.) to be laid before the General Assembly when called for by them." 
 
 He accompanied his amendment with a brief explanation to shew the reason why- 
 he had changed his views in regard to a Council ; being in substance this, that the 
 election of Grovernor was now transferred from the people to the Legislature. After 
 tills change a controlling council was in his view highly expedient. The article 
 was in so imperfect a state that some amendment must be made to it. 
 
 The question being put on Mr. Ciopton's amendment, it was negatived by the fol- 
 lowing vote : 
 
 Aues — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander. Gix)de, Marshall of Richmond, ZS:icho- 
 las, Oopton, Johnson, jMason of Southampton, Trezvant. Claiborne. L^rquhart. Ran- 
 dolph, Leigh of Halifax. Logan. Venahle, lladison, Stanard. Holladay, Roane. Tavlor 
 of Caroline, .Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis. Grigsby, Branch. Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, 
 Rose, Coalter, L'pshur and Perrin— 4.5. 
 
 .Yoes — Messrs. Tyler, Anderson. Cowman. Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Cov, 
 Moore, Beirne, Smith, .^liller, Baxter. Mercer. FityJiugh. Henderson. Osborne, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd. Pendleton, George. M'MiUan, Campbell of 
 Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman. J>Iathews, Oglesby. Duncan. Laidley. Sum- 
 mers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson. Scott, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Claytor. Saunders, Townes. Cabell, IVIartin. Stuart. Thompson. Joynes and Bayly — 49. 
 
 Mr. Summers expressed his desire that the proposition he had some days since of- 
 fered in relation to the incorporation of Banks be taken up. 
 
 But the motion for consideration was opposed by jMr, Powell, and negatived bv 
 ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ai/es — Messrs. Barbour, (President.) Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, 
 Goode. Anderson. M'Coy, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton . Trezvant, 
 Claiborne, Randolph, Tenable, Madison. George. M"3rLlIan. Campbell of Washincr- 
 ton. Byars, Roane, Taylor of Caroline. Chapman. Mathews. Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, 
 Summers. See. Moraran, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedlbrd, Cabell, 
 Martin, Bayly and Upshur — 3S. 
 
 yoes — Messrs. Jones. Leigh of Chesterfield. Taylor of Chesterfield. ^Marshall of 
 Richmond, Tyler. Nicholas, Clopton, Cofi'man. Harrison, Williamson. Baldwin. John- 
 son. Moore. Beirne, L'rquhart, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Stanard. Hoiladav. fiercer, 
 Fitzhugh. Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell. Griggs, ilason of Frederick. Xav- 
 lor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd. Barbour of Culpeper, 
 Scott. Green, Marshall of Fauquier, TazeweU, Loyall. Prentis, Grigsby. Ciavtor, 
 Saunders, Branch, Townes, Stuart. Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale. Rose, Coalter, Joynes and Perrin — 57. 
 
 Mr. Clopton now ofie'red the following amendment, which he accompanied bv a 
 few explanatory remarks : 
 
 •■ There shall be a Council of State, to consist of three members, any one or more 
 of whom may act. They shall be elected by joint vote of both Houses" of the Gene- 
 ral Assembly, and remain in office three years. But of those first elected, one, to be 
 
856 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 designated by lot, shall remain in office for one year only, and one other, to be desig- 
 nated in like manner, shall remain in office for two years only. Vacancies occurring 
 by expiration of the term of service, or otherwise, shall be supplied by elections made 
 in like manner. The Governor shall, before he exercises any discretionary power 
 conferred on him by the Constitution and laws, require the advice of the Council of 
 State which advice shall be registered in books kept for that purpose, signed by the 
 members present and consenting thereto, and laid before the General Assembly when 
 called for by them. The Council shall appoint their own clerk, who shall take an 
 oath to keep secret such matters as he shall be ordered by the Board to conceal. The 
 Senior Councillor shall be Lieutenant-Governor, and in case of the death, resignation, 
 inability or absence of the Governor from the seat of Government, shall act as 
 Governor." 
 
 Mr. Stanard thought it better to put the question in a naked form as to whether 
 there should be any Council at all, and he proposed an amendment to try that ques- 
 tion, if Mr. Clopton would withdraw his. 
 
 Mr. Powell opposed it as tending to a waste of time. 
 
 Mr. Leigh advocated the amendment of Mr. Clopton with much earnestness and 
 at considerable length, urging a summary of arguments he had formerly so repeatedly 
 and in so expanded a forrn presented to the Committee of the Whole and to the Con- 
 vention on this subject. 
 
 Mr. Clopton objected to withdrawing his amendment, not believing any advantage 
 would be gained by taking the naked question. The House had rejected a control- 
 ling Council ; there remained only an advisory one to be proposed : if that were re- 
 jected, the question would be settled. 
 
 Mr. Coalter urged the value and necessity of a Council in time of war, and referred 
 to the history of the last war in confirmation of his position. 
 
 The question on Mr. Clopton's amendment was then decided by ayes and noes as 
 follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Ty- 
 ler, Nicholas, Clopton, Johnson, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urqu- 
 hart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, 
 Cooke, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, 
 Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Townes, 
 Martin, Pleasants, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Upshur 
 and Perrin — 51. 
 
 J^oes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Powell, 
 Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Mil- 
 lan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, 
 Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, 
 Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Stuart, Thompson and Bayly — 44. 
 
 So the amendment for an advisory Council to the Governor was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Marshall moved to amend the eighth article by striking out the words " ex- 
 cept money bills, which in no instance shall be altered by the Senate, but wholly ap- 
 proved or rejected." 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, he should not have renewed a motion which had been rejected 
 in Committee of the V/hole, if any reasons had then been assigned for the rejection 
 of it ; nor should he have meddled with the subject, if the Committee, appointed to 
 draught the Constitution, had had this subject under their consideration ; but it was 
 not among the amendments agreed to in the House, and so not referred to that Com- 
 mittee. Lender these circumstances, he felt it his duty to bring the subject before the 
 Convention He never could conceive the reason in favour of this part of the old 
 Constitution. It had always appeared to him to have been introduced into it, from 
 an assimilation of the Senate to the British House of Lords. Nothing was more 
 natural when we were just leaving a Government under which we had been born, 
 and had grown up in high respect for all its principles, that such an assimilation 
 should have taken place. But nothing could be more dissimilar than our Senate, and 
 the House of Lords ; which was a paramount body, hereditary in its structure, sitting 
 in its own right, and naturally apt to be much under the influence of the Crown. 
 The rule was adopted there, because it might othervv^ise have been considered as a 
 difficult and unpleasant task to resist in the lower House, an amendment proposed by 
 the upper, and supposed to be in conformity with the will and wishes of the Crown. 
 But there was nothing of this sort in Virginia. The members of the Senate were as 
 much the representatives of the people as those of the House of Delegates. They 
 were elected in the same manner, by the same persons, and they receive the same 
 pay as members of the other House. 
 
 [Here Mr. Coalter interposed, and said that wisdom lifted up her voice in the 
 streets, but was not heard. The Chair called the House to order, and the confusion 
 in some degree subsided.] 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 857 
 
 Mr. Marshall resumed : He could see no essential difference between them. In all 
 respects they resembled each other. The reason why the Legislature was divided 
 into two branches was, that one might exercise a supervision over the acts of the 
 other, and amend its acts when necessary. And to this end a mode of communica- 
 tion was established by the Constitution,- by winch one of those bodies communicated 
 to the other its sentiments respecting the acts of that other body. This was intended 
 to be the result of having two Houses of Jjegislature. But this cardinal principle 
 was violated by this clause, which refused to the Senate the right of amending 
 money bills sent up from the other House. It was an abridgement of the rights of 
 the Senate. No reason could be given for it. The regulation was perfectly useless : 
 and more ; it was productive of a positive injury. It did not prevent the amendment 
 of money bills by the Senate, but forced that body on a more circuitous and time- 
 losing mode of effecting the object. 
 
 The Senate rejected a bill, which they wished to amend. The other House had 
 no official communication from them, of such a wish; but on such private intelli- 
 gence as they might obtain, they draughted a new bill. This bill might not embody 
 all the amendments the Senate wished to introduce : then this too was rejected, and 
 more bills were draughted ; and thus, much of the public time was wasted — and to 
 what purpose ? But this was not all. The Senate and the House might disagree as 
 to what was meant by a money bill. He had known three or four days to be con- 
 sumed in a dispute between the Houses on that subject. The House of Delegates 
 contended, that all bills, containing appropriations of money, w^ere money bills ; the 
 Senate denied this, and considered it as an attempt at usurpation by the other House, 
 to bring within that term, any but bills simply for revenue. He had known three or 
 four bills amended, and consequently rejected, on this ground, until at length the 
 House of Delegates had confora:ied the bill to the form the Senate had at first desired. 
 The rule, therefore, was found inconvenient in practice, besides being wrong in prin- 
 ciple. It forced the Senate on a clumsy, bungling, time-wasting method of getting 
 at the object; but did not operate to prevent the amendment, which it forbade. 
 
 The question was taken on the amendment of Mr. Marshall, and decided in the 
 affirmative : Ayes 49. 
 
 So the amendment was adopted, 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Brooke, now suggested various grammatical amendments in the 
 draught of the Constitution — all which were successively rejected. 
 
 Mr. Thompson moved the following amendment: " The privilege of the writ of 
 Habeas Corpus, shall not be suspended unless iclien, in cases of rebellion or invasion, 
 the public safety may require its suspension.''' 
 
 At the suggestion of Mr. Randolph, he struck out the qualification for cases of ex- 
 treme necessity : and thus modified, the amendment was agreed to : Ajes 61. 
 
 Mr. Green moved the following, to be inserted after the ninth article : " The whole 
 number of members, to which the State ma}^ at anj^ time be entitled, in the House 
 of Representatives of the United States, shall be apportioned as nearly as may be 
 amongst the several counties, cities, boroughs and towns of the State, according to 
 their respective numbers, which shall be determined, by adding to the whole number 
 of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding 
 Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons." 
 
 Mr. Summers explained the reasons why he should vote against the amendment : 
 not that he was opposed to its principle, but because it was unnecessary and impro- 
 per, to regulate by the State Constitution, any of the powers or duties devolved on 
 the Legislature by the Constitution of the United States. Under that authority, the 
 General Assembly had for forty years wisely and satisfactorily exercised the discretion 
 confided to them, and he thought it could not be abridged or restrained by any act of 
 the Convention. If, however, this obligation did not exist, he would not consent to 
 consecrate a rule (by its insertion in the Constitution) providing for the apportionment 
 of representation for the benefit of the slave-holders, wlfile every effort to secure the 
 rights of the free w^iite population in the State Legislature, was so obstinately and 
 successfully resisted. 
 
 Mr. Wilson said, the resolution went on the assumption that the Constitution of the 
 United States would always remain as it was now. But suppose that a Constitutional 
 majority of the States of the Union slaould unite to change that feature of the Consti- 
 tution, ought not the State Constitution to conform itself to such a possibility ? Gen- 
 tlemen were not satisfied v/ith having gotten the Legislature of Virginia on their side : 
 but would secure that rule so long as the Constitution of the United States was to 
 last. They seemed much moi-e anxious about the representation of slaves than of the 
 free white citizens of the Commonwealth. Where was now their dread of excite- 
 ment ? When the question related to the representation of white men, spectres were 
 instantly raised, but they had now all suddenly disappeared, 
 
 108 
 
858 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Randolph now rose : 
 
 Mr. President, — Is it possible that any gentleman can believe that the great southern 
 and western slave-holding interests of the United States will ever abando7i this provi- 
 sion for the representation of three-fifths of their slave population ? Sir, I cannot con- 
 ceive of a greater moral impossibility. And if we— the people of Southern Virginia — 
 torn and divided as she is by factions — marked as she is by lines which divide her into 
 two distinct people — distinct in their feelings — distinct in possessing different and an- 
 tagonizing interests — if we, the people of Virginia — shall ever surrender this question 
 to the oth'er States of this Union — that is, to Northern and Eastern States — if it is pos- 
 sible that we — who constitute the barrier of the Southern interest — the outwork and 
 the bulwark of the great Southern interest — shall — basely I was going to say, for base 
 it will be — shall basely abandon that provision — can any man believe that all the 
 Southern States — that the Carolinas, that Georgia, that Alabama, that Louisiana, that 
 Missouri and Tennessee, and all the others which I need not name, will ever aban- 
 don it ? No ; they never will. And the attempt — whenever it shall be made — to touch 
 this bulwark, will be but sounding the tocsin of disunion. The Government of the 
 United States could not last a day after such an attempt. 
 
 Sir, the question is — shall the apportionment of representation which the Federal 
 Constitution secures to the slave-holding States, be the apportionment on which mem- 
 bers of Congress shall be elected, or shall it not.? Vv'hatever may be the opinion en- 
 tertained in parts of the State, which I m.ust call alien to us, and forever separated 
 from our interests and feelings — there is but one opinion on this side the North Moun- 
 tain, I should hope — certainly on this side the Blue Ridge. Who will be the first to 
 touch this principle ? Who will dare to attack it ? \Yho will venture on it? I should 
 like to see that man — No — I do not wish to see him. 
 
 Mr. President : There is nothing which so alarms me, as to see the existence of the 
 fanatical spirit on this subject of negro slavery, o.s it is called, growing up in the land. 
 Sir, we have preachers on that subject both lay and clerical. We have Apostles of 
 that faith among the laity as well as the clergy. And if it had so happened — but God 
 in his mercy averted from our country so great a calamity — that representation had 
 been established upon the basis of white population — my life for it — yes, all I am 
 worth — in less than twenty years, you would have seen a Bill brought into the House 
 of Burgesses for the emancipation of every slave in Virginia. Sir, I would as soon 
 trust the Quakers of Pennsylvania as the Quakers of any county in Virginia. I v/ould 
 as lief trust the Fanatics of Free-masons Hall, London, as any other Fanatics — for 
 Fanatics — like madmen — are on a par. Yes, Sir, I would as lief trust the Fanatics of 
 Free-masons Hall as the Fanatics in Virginia. Sir, have you not good reason to be- 
 lieve — nay, do you not know — that petitions v/ere preparing for the purpose of being 
 presented to this body on that subject ? 1 have nothing to do with the consciences of 
 men. The abolitionist is as free to hold his opinions as I am to hold mine — I do not 
 find fault with him. I impute no demerit to him for them. But I never will suffer 
 him to put a torch to my property, that he may slake it in the blood of all that are dear 
 to me. I will arrest his hand if I can — by reason if I can — but if not, by force. This 
 is the whole question — Shall representation be on the terms and principles which the 
 Constitution of the United States requires ? If we say no — to what does the rejection 
 amount ? To a most violent presumption — almost to the direct affirmation — that this 
 part of the Constitution of the United States, Virginia stands ready to give up. That 
 will be the amount of it. Sir, if the motion had"^ not been made, the case would be 
 very different. But the motion having been made, the abandonment of it by that part 
 of Virginia directly interested in it, and in the preservation of that property for them- 
 selves, their wives and their children, will be a very difi:erent afiair. If we say no, it 
 will be an abandonment of tlie pi-inciple— it will be a declaration to all the world, that 
 we are ready to surrender tlie question to the first Peter the Hermit, who shall cross 
 the mountains with Universal Emancipation" on his flag. 
 
 I hope the question will prevail, not only— but that it will prevail by an overwhelm- 
 ing majority. I declare to God that it is in no reference to the question of represen- 
 tation — a question which, because it could not be well settled, has been very wisely 
 sunk— that I speak with ardour on this subject. I will be the last to give up the ques- 
 tion : and Sir, if Virginia could be base and recreant enough to give it up. she would 
 be forced on by the bayonets of her Southern neighbours :— Yes, Sir, she would be 
 forced to fight — from cowardice, if not from gallantry. Sir, she can't give it up. If 
 she does, she lays the axe at once to the root of all the slave property in the Common- 
 wealth. 
 
 Mr. Summers said, he rose to disclaim the imputation of being an abolitionist. He 
 was none. 
 
 [Mr. Randolph interposed. Sir, I have not imputed it to the gentleman— I had no 
 '^^Tvr ^"^^ to him— I do not charge him with any such thing.] 
 
 Mr. Summers said, he had risen, not only to make the disclaimer to which he had 
 adverted, (as no one more earnestly deprecated the evils which might arise from mis 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 859 
 
 guided zeal on this subject than he did.) but for the purpose of deprecating the pre- 
 sent movement. The vote on this question, he said, might give rise to an opinion 
 that a part of the State was wiihng to give up this principle of representation in the 
 General Government ; and he wished to avoid such deductions, so far as he was con- 
 cerned. Hioiily as he prized the Union, he would CTive it up ratlier than surrender 
 this indemnity for the concession made by Virginia The opposed the amendment on 
 the ground that we could not superadd provisions to those contained in the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States in relation to this subject, and that for the reasons which he 
 had given, he would not if this objection was removed. 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, they were not there to alter the Constitution of the United States. 
 He was sworn to support it, and until it was altered he should support it as it stood. 
 He must vote for the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Johnson rose to suggest to the mover so to modify the amendment as to make 
 it refer to the Constitution of the United States as it now existed. There was a power 
 by which it might be changed, however little probability there might be of such an 
 event. He considered the question as one of little consequence, but it would be as 
 well to remove objections. Would it not be better to add a proviso to cover any change 
 in the Federal Constitution 
 
 Mr. Cabell said, in supporting the proposition of the gentleman from Culpeper, (Mr. 
 Green.) I am not governed by any threat, or the fear of the rod held in terrorem over 
 my head, by any gentleman, however eminently distinguished. I am actuated by a 
 regard to the principles which have hitherto, and will hereafter continue to guide my 
 public conduct. I have the pleasure to see on this floor, several gentlemen, with 
 whom I formerly served in the State Legislature, who can attest, I beheve i may 
 safely say, the firmness and decision at least, with which I recorded my vote by the 
 side of their's in maintenance, as we thought, of the violated rights'" of the " States." 
 And Sir, be assured, that in any question, as betvreen the United States, and the land 
 of my nativit}- , ••' if I do not put my foot as far as who goes farthest,'" I am most egre- 
 giously mistaken. I have seen with regret, in the progress of our session, various 
 propositions made with a design to introduce into our oro anic law, several of the fea- 
 tures of the Constitution of the United States ; one of the very last Constitutions which 
 I would select, as a modd fit for our imitation. The support, therefore, which I owe 
 to this proposition, is the result of the conscientious convictions of my own judgment. 
 I am gratified hy the opportunity now afibrded, to place the question involved in this 
 proposition, beyond the reach of controversy, a result which I anticipate from engraft- 
 ing it into the Constitution. It has been said that a gentle hand leads an elephant 
 by a hair 3" I too, may be led, Sir, but I must be pardoned for disclaiming the idea of 
 being dragooned into measures. The position I occupy in relation to the parties by 
 which this House has been divided — the support I have conscientiously given to the 
 ^' White Basis"" — one which had, in my opinion, no connection vrith the matter in 
 hand — a question, which has not been, nor never will be ••' sunk," " till the heart of man 
 becomes obdurate from corruption, and until the spirit of liberty is extinguished in this 
 land — all these considerations unite to render it a duty to myself, without tlie slightest 
 intention to use language oiiensive to any cthsr gentleman, to make tiis explanation 
 of my motives. 
 
 The question was now taken, and decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, 13romgooie, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Johnson, M"Coy, Moore, Beirne, ^Nlason of Southamp- 
 ton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, J^eigia of Halifax, Logan, Tenable, 
 Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, 31crris, Garnett, Barbour 
 of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, 
 Campbell of Bedford, Clay tor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Sfuait, 
 Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Xeale, Rose, Coalter. Joynes. Bayly, 
 Upshur and Perrin — GO. 
 
 jXoes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Y/illiamson, Baldwin. Smith, Miller, 
 Baxter, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, INIason of 
 Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, M'Millan, Campbell of 
 Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, 3Iathev\S, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Sum- 
 mers, See, ISIorgan, Campbell of Brooke and Wilson — So. 
 
 So the amendment of Mr. Green was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Chapman moved to amend the twenty-sixth section by addinof as follows : 
 " Provided the said Judges continue to hold such Courts, and perform such duties 
 as shall be assigned them by law ; but if any Judge shall fail to hold any such Court, 
 or perforin such duties, except from sickness or other cause beyond his controul. a de- 
 duction may be made from his salary. And such deduction shall bear the same pro- 
 portion to his whole salary, that the services unperformed would bear to the whole 
 services required to be performed, and the Legislature shall make provision by law to 
 ascertain the amouDt ot the deduction proper to be made in any such case." 
 
860 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 Mr. Chapman addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 Mr. President, — This proposition is not offered through any prejudice or excited 
 feelings which I have towards the Judges. So far from it, that I consider it the most 
 important department of our government. It is this department which protects the 
 weak from the violence of the strong, the simple from the snares of the crafty. It is 
 this department which protects our lives, our liberties, our properties, and our repu- 
 tations. Against such a department of the government, I could not, therefore, en- 
 tertain unjust prejudices. I believe there is no member of the Convention who 
 would more willingly see the Judges made so independent, that they could not by 
 public clamor, or political excitement, be induced to swerve from the path of recti- 
 tude. Yet I am one of those who think the Judges ought to be made much more 
 responsible to the people than they are under the existing Constitution. I should be 
 willing to provide them ample salaries, which should not be diminished during their 
 continuance in office, provided they performed the duties assigned to them. I admit 
 the labourer is worthy of his hire, but I should expect a quid jyro quo. In many cases 
 where a Judge should neglect to perform the duties for which his salary was intended 
 to pay him, I think it v/ould be unjust for him to take the salary, and leave the bvisi- 
 ness of the people undone. I have at this place, and elsewhere, heard much com- 
 plaint against the Judges on the principle that they v/ould receive the people's mo- 
 ney and neglect to perform the people's business ; that they would receive their sala- 
 ries whether they perform their duties or not. The amendment 1 have offered will 
 go to prevent this state of things. Whenever a Judge is diligent and will perform 
 his duties as far as he is able, this clause of the Constitution would have no operation 
 on him. All that I would ask is, that he should perform the services expected from 
 him, and then receive his money, but not to receive his money and not perform ser- 
 vices therefor, which would be in his power to perform. If a Judge should be sick 
 and unable from any cause beyond his control to perform the duties required of him, 
 the proposed amendment still allows him to draw his ftill salary; but if a Judge should 
 rise in the morning and the weather being disagreeable or wet, and he should deter- 
 mine that the weather is rather too bad to turn out, and if on the same day hundreds 
 should be attending at the court-house waiting for the Judge to hold his court — I 
 should say under these circumstances, there ought to be a deduction from his salary. 
 Or if a Judge was to start to court, and come to a water-course a little up, which by 
 travelling twenty miles he could go round the head of, or by travelling eight or ten 
 miles out of his way, he could get to a place where he might cross with safety, and 
 when many others had crossed in order to get to court, if the Judge was to turn back 
 and fail to hold a court, 1 would say that a deduction from his salary ought to be 
 made in such a case. I would state another case : Suppose a court should be established 
 to consist of five Judges, any three of whom should form a court to proceed to business, 
 and one or two of them were to remain at home attending to their domestic concerns, 
 expecting the other three to go on and do the business. I should think in such a 
 case, there ought to be a deduction made from the salary of those Judges who re- 
 mained at home. Or, Sir, take our Court of Appeals as an example. This Court is 
 formed of five Judges, three of whom may form a court to do business. Suppose 
 one of these Judges was to remain at home, v^'^hen it was in his power to attend, and 
 let the other four go on in deciding the causes ; the court take up two causes, depend- 
 ing on the same principle, but decided in the Inferior Courts directly in opposition 
 and contradiction of each other. The four Judges differ in opinion, and are equally 
 divided. What is the consequence.? That both judgments of the Inferior Court 
 stand affirmed, although the decisions of the Inferior Courts were directly in opposi- 
 tion to each other. In examining the reports of the decisions of the Court of Appeals, 
 I have frequently observed, that where causes of much importance had been decided, 
 there would be a note by the Reporter that such a Judge was absent, and such another 
 Judge v/as absent, and sometimes it is stated that the Judge is absent from indisposi- 
 tion, distinguishing it from the other case where it would seem he was not absent 
 from indisposition. There is something wrong in this; the fault is either in the law 
 or the administration of the law, and let it proceed from what cause it may, the peo- 
 ple feel the evil of the great delay in deciding causes in the Court of Appeals, and if 
 possible^ the corrective ought to be applied. I think if we advert to what has taken 
 place in our General Court, the propriety of the provisions I have proposed will still 
 be more manifest. The General Courtis required to meet twice a year in Richmond 
 to hold a court for the trial of Commonwealth's business, and to determine on points 
 of law adjourned from the Superior Courts for novelty and difficulty, and certify 
 their opinion to the Superior Courts of Law. Where a point is adjourned in a crimi- 
 nal case, the prisoner remains in jail until the decision of the General Court is certi- 
 fied to the Superior Court of Law : the law requires that a majority of all the Judges 
 shall be present to decide a law point in a criminal case, where the life of a human 
 being may depend on the decision. We know, that in the General Court it has fre- 
 quently occurred that a majority of the Judges have failed to attend the court as re- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 861 
 
 quired by law ; in such a case, the prisoner whose case is adjourned to the General 
 Court, must lie in jail until it may be convenient for a majority of the Judges of the 
 General Court lo attend and decide the case adjourned for their decision. I think it 
 has seldom, periiaos it never has happened, that a majority of the Judges have been 
 sick at the same time, and unable to attend the General Court from that cause. Tet, 
 Mr. President, you know cases have happened, that in consequence of a majority of 
 the Judges of the General Court having failed to attend, prisoners have been confined 
 in jail from term to term without a trial : you know in the case of Benjamin Kee- 
 wood, who was indicted for the murder of his wife. The case was adjourned to the 
 ' General Court, as the clerk of the Superior Court of Law, where the indictment was 
 found against him, had omitted to make any entrv on the record of the findingr such 
 indictment, which omission had escaped the notice of the Judge until after the 
 adjournment of the court. The case was afterwards adjourned to the General 
 Court, to decide whether an indictment had been found against him for murder, 
 as no entry appeared on the record. A majority of the Judges of the General Court 
 failed to attend at the first term — at the next term the case was continued, and ulti- 
 mately the General Court decided that no indictment had been found against him ; 
 and at about the expiration of three years confinement in jail, he was discharged, it 
 being decided that as he had been confined until the third term of the court had 
 passed, that he could not be indicted afterwards, and tlie murderer of his wife esca- 
 ped the punishment due to his crime. I tliink the amendment proposed would be 
 well adapted to such cases as I have mentioned. If the law makes it the duty of the 
 Judofes of the General Com-t to attend and hold the court, I ask if it would be right 
 for tliem to draw their whole salary, in the same way as if they had performed all the 
 duties assigned them by law r 
 
 Again; I am strongly inclined to think whenever this Constitution shall go into 
 operation, that there will be some change in the Circuit Courts. They will probably 
 be given chancery as well as common law jurisdiction, and, perhaps, two assigned to 
 a circuit. I would wish to see such a provision in the Constitution, as would have 
 the effect of preventing the Judges from making arrangements between themselves 
 that you shall attend that court, and I will attend this. I have seen something of 
 this, when the old District Courts were in operation. Two Judges would be directed 
 to attend several District Courts — for instance, at Washington, the Sweet Springs, 
 and perhaps some other places. It frequently happened that both the Judges would 
 attend at the Washington District Court, from thence they were to come to the 
 Sweet Springs ; but unless a prisoner should be there, which required the presence 
 of the two Judges to try him, it frequently occurred that the court at the Sweet 
 Springs would be holden by one Judge only, the other Judge at that time, being on 
 his wav home, or, perhaps, by agreement to attend at some other court, which ought 
 to have been holden by two Judges. I well recollect that when I applied for license 
 to practice law, I attended at the Sweet Springs District Court: I found only one 
 Judffe there, and was informed that the other was on his way home. After being ex- 
 amined by the Judge at the Sweet Springs, I then pursued after the other Judge, and 
 overtook him before he g-ot home, and was exas:iined by him. Cases of this kind 
 have induced me to think, that such a provision as I have proposed, ought to he en- 
 grafted in the Constitution : and then the Judges themselves would feel it their in- 
 terest to attend diligently to all their courts, to prevent a reduction from their sala- 
 ries. How, Sir, is this provision to operate.' ISot to the injury of a diligent and 
 faithful Judge, for he would always draw his full salary. Such a provision as I now 
 propose, if it had been in the old Constitution, I know, would have had no effect on 
 the very diligent Judge, who presides over the circuit in which I live. That Judge 
 (I mean Judge Allen.) has presided in that circuit for eighteen years. Tliree of the 
 courts in his circuit I have regularly attended — and. Sir, in the course of the eighteen 
 vears he has never missed a single court. Yes. Sir, he has not only attended court, 
 but at 9 o'clock in the morning he woiild go on the bench, and never leave it until 4 
 in the evenincr, unless the business set for the day was got through before that hour. 
 Indeed, Sir, I have frequently known that Judge to take his seat at 9 o'clock in the 
 mornincp, and remain on the bench until 9 o'clock at night, without any intermission 
 or recess of the court. For such a Judge as this, the amendment proposed holds out 
 no terrors. 
 
 I have also attended two of the courts of an adjoining circuit, where Judge John- 
 ston presides. Wythe, one of the counties, I have attended for eighteen years — 
 Grayson, not so long. But. during the time I have attended those courts, that Judge 
 has "never failed toehold his courts, except last spring, in the county of Grayson. 
 The Judge had come on to Wythe court, where he had a violent attack of disease, 
 and was unable to get to Grayson court. Consequently, on him, the amendment 
 proposed would have no effect. 
 
 But, it may be asked, how is it to be ascertained, whether a Judge has failed im- 
 properly to attend his courts - I reply, that I have no doubt but the wisdom of the 
 
862 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Legislature can prescribe the mode in which that fact can be correctly ascertained. 
 But, I do not think the task would be a difficult one. I would make it the duty of 
 the Clerk of the Superior Court of Law to certify to the Auditor of Public Accounts, 
 that the Judge had failed to attend his court. The Clerk should certify the same fact 
 to his County Court. And if the Judge, by his own affidavit, or the affidavits of 
 others, could shew to the County Court, that he was prevented by sickness, or other 
 cause beyond his controul, from attending his court, the County Court should certify- 
 that fact to the Auditor; in which case, no deduction should be made from his salary. 
 But, if the County Court should be of opinion, that the Judge had failed to shew 
 good cause for failing to attend his court, they should certify that fact to the Auditor, 
 and a deduction should be made in such case. A similar mode might be adopted, as 
 it respects the Judges of the Court of Appeals. The Legislature, directing that tri- 
 bunal, should make the necessary enquiry into the failure of the Judge to attend his 
 court. 
 
 The plan I have proposed, that the Judges should be paid according to the services 
 they perform, is not without an example. Some of our sister States have adopted a 
 similar principle. For instance, in the State of North Carohna, the Judges receive 
 a certain sum for each court they may hold ; but, if they fail to hold a court, a de- 
 duction is made from their pay for such failure. It may be said, there is a provision 
 now in the Constitution, authorising the Legislature, two-thirds of both Houses pre- 
 sent concurring therein, to remove a Judge for a failure to do his duty, or for ne- 
 glecting to do the business assigned to him, or for any other cause. I think it seldom 
 or ever would happen, that a Judge would be removed for these omissions to perform 
 his duty that I have mentioned. It must be a very glaring act of impropriety in a 
 Judge that would induce two-thirds of the Legislature to turn him out of office. It 
 would be a very painful duty for any Legislature to perform. We know what sym- 
 pathy and commiseration would be excited in favour of a Judge who had spent a 
 large portion of his life-time in the public service. Such would be the sympathy and 
 commiseration, that the Legislature would always be inclined to overlook small fai- 
 lures, rather than disgrace a Judge by removing him from office. I therefore think, 
 that the clause incorporated into the Constitution, authorising two-thirds of the Le- 
 gislature to remove a Judge, would not have the desired eftect, and accomplish the 
 end I have in view. The principle I contend for, is a principle of immutable justice, 
 that no man shall receive something for nothing ; that no man shall receive his pay 
 without performing the services for which the pay was to be given, if in his power 
 to perform them. This would be doing justice to the people and justice to the Judge. 
 
 Mr. President, I have delayed offering this amendment, with a hope, that some 
 other gentleman of this Convention, much abler than myself, and who would be much 
 better calculated to do justice to this important subject than I am, would have offered 
 a similar proposition ; but no gentleman having done so, I felt myself constrained, 
 from a sense of duty, to submit this proposition of amendment. I am aware, that 
 many gentlemen differ from me in opinion on this subject ; but believing the prin- 
 ciple correct, I am willing that the world shall know my vote on this subject. I shall, 
 therefore, ask for the ayes and noes on this question, 
 
 Mr. Coalter said, gentlemen need not be alarmed : they would have no Judges to 
 remove after this day : he meant Judges, not men filling Judicial stations. 
 
 The question was now taken by ayes and noes and decided as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Chapman, 
 Oglesby, Campbell of Bedford and Cabell — 8. 
 
 JVb&s — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, 
 Nicholas, Clopton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy , Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Clai- 
 borne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, 
 Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Oisborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of 
 Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, 
 Garnett, Cloyd, Mathews, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of 
 Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, 
 Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Claytor, Saunders, Branch, Townes, Martin, Stuart, Plea- 
 sants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Up= 
 ehur and Perrin — 87. 
 
 So Mr. Chapman's amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Cooke now moved to add the following as a separate article : 
 
 " I. It shall be the duty of the Executive Department of the existing Government, 
 so soon as all the returns required by the twentieth section of the act of the General 
 Assembly, entitled, " an act to organize a Convention," shall have been made, if it 
 shall appear that a majority of all the votes given is for ratifying this amended Con- 
 stitution, forthwith to make proclamation of the fact. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION, 
 
 863 
 
 II. And it shall moreover be the duty of the Executive Department, in and b j 
 such proclamation, to command the sheriiis and other ofEcers, directed by law to hold 
 and superintend elections, un^ler the penalty of dollars for failing to obey such 
 
 command, to open polls in their respective counties, cities, towns and boroughs, and 
 in the election districts established by law in their respective counties, on the 
 
 , for the election of a Delegate or Delegates, as the case may be, to 
 represent the counties, towns, boroughs and districts, respectively mentioned and 
 described in the third article of this Constitution, and of a Senator to represent each 
 of the Senatorial districts described in the fourth article. 
 
 " 111. So soon as the said election of Delegates and Senators shall have been made, 
 the previously existing Senate and House of Delegates, elected under the old Con- 
 stitution, shall cease to have legal and constitutional existence. 
 
 " IV. Should any of the contingencies herein before mentioned, render it necessary 
 or proper to convene a General Assembly, after such election shah have been made, 
 and before the time herein after appointed for the first regular annual meeting of the 
 General Assembly under this amended Constitution, the new General Assembly 
 shall be convened by the Executive Department holding its power and authority under 
 the old Constitution. 
 
 V. The first regular General Assembly under this amended Constitution, shall 
 convene and assemble at the Capitol, in the City of Richmond, on the 
 
 " VI. The powers and duties of the Executive Department under the old Consti- 
 tution, shall cease and determine, and those of the Executive Department under the 
 new. Constitution, shall commence as soon as may be after the commencement of the 
 first regular session of the General Assembly elected under the new Constitution. 
 
 VII. All ofiicers, whether civil or military, holding their offices under the old 
 Constitution, whose cases are not herein provided for, shall continue to hold their 
 offices under the new Constitution, by the same tenure, and for the same time, as 
 under the old Constitution. 
 
 " VIII. All the Courts of Justice now existing in this Commonwealth, shall con- 
 tinue vrith the same jurisdiction as heretofore, until the said courts shall have been 
 modified or abolished, or the jurisdiction thereof modified or taken away, by an act or 
 acts of the General Assembly, made under the restrictions and limitations herein be- 
 fore provided." 
 
 Jle added a few words in explanation. 
 
 Mr. Johnson expressed a doubt, whether the Convention had a right to provide a 
 different mode for carrying the Constitution into effect, than that appointed by law ; 
 and also, if they had, whether it ought to be left to the Executive, rather than to the 
 Legislature, to surrender up the old Government to the new. That these questions 
 might be considered, he moved an adjournment, but withdrew the motion at the re- 
 quest of 
 
 JNIr. Coalter, who suggested a difficulty in case the Constitution should be adopted 
 by a single vote, and that vote be disputed, to whom was the question to be referred ? 
 To freeholders.^ To house-keepers.' He asked if the Convention had not power to 
 require a given majority, in order to the adoption of tne Constitution He should 
 be very unwilling to leave it to a bare majority of one. 
 
 Mr. Johnson now renewed his motion, and the House adjourned to 11 o'clock to- 
 morrow. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, January 13, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
 Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 The question lying over from yesterday, was on striking out the thirty -first article of 
 the draughted Constitution, which is in the following words : 
 
 " XXXI. The Executive Department of the Government shall remain as at pre- 
 sent organized, and the Governor and Privy Councillors shall continue in office until 
 a Govel-nor, elected under this Constitution, shall come into ofiice : and all other per- 
 sons in office when this Constitution shall be adopted, except as is herein otherwise 
 expressly directed, shall continue in office till successors shall be appointed, or the law 
 shall otherwise provide : and all the Courts of Justice now" existing, shall continue 
 with their present jurisdiction, until and except so far as the Judicial system may or 
 shall be hereafter otherwise organized by the Legislature." 
 
 And on appending to the Constitution the following article : 
 II. And it shall moreover be the duty of the Executive Department, in and by 
 such proclamation, to command the sherifls and other officers, directed by law to hold 
 and superintend elections, under the penalty of dollars for failing to obey such 
 
864 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 command, to open polls in their respective counties, cities, towns and boroughs, and 
 in the election districts established by law in their respective counties, on the 
 
 , for the election of a Delegate or Delegates, as the case may be, to re- 
 present the counties, towns, boroughs and districts, respectively mentioned and de- 
 scribed in the third article of this Constitution, and of a Senator to represent each of 
 the Senatorial districts described in the fourth article." 
 
 The question being on filling the blanks in this article, Mr. Cooke moved to fill the 
 first blank, relating to the fine of the sheriff", with " $5,000." 
 
 Mr. Wilson proposed to fill it with " $ 1,000." 
 
 Mr. Scott expressed a doubt of the authority of the Convention to pass any final 
 law. The act of Assembly under which they were acting, gave them no such autho- 
 I'ity ; and as he understood it, this clause was to operate before any final action of the 
 people on the Constitution. If so, they certainly had no authority to inflict any fine. 
 
 Mr. Cooke explained. The fine was not to be exacted until after the people should 
 have accepted the Constitution — and their act would give validity to the provision, 
 let it exact what it might. 
 
 Mr. Scott withdrew his amendment, and the motion of Mr. Cooke was agreed to — 
 Ayes 50. 
 
 So the first blank was filled with ^' $5,000." 
 
 Mr. Cooke now moved to fill the second blank with these words : " the first Mon- 
 day in November of the present year." 
 
 A desultory debate arose on this motion, in which Messrs. Bayly, Claytor, Stanard, 
 V enable, Randolph and Scott took part. Mr. Cooke's motion was lost, and after se- 
 veral other periods were proposed, the blank was finally agreed to be filled with " the 
 respective court days in the month of November." 
 
 [Mr. Randolph's argument for preferring November to October, was, that it was 
 the feast of new corn — all were then in the enjoyment of plenty — and a man felt 
 more independent and more respectable who had corn in his crib, than a man who 
 had corn to buy.] 
 
 The third blank was filled, on Mr. Cooke's motion, with " the first Monday in Ja- 
 nuary, 1831." 
 
 The question then recurred on agreeing to the article as thus amended. 
 
 Mr. Wilson requested, that the question might be divided, and put separately on 
 the several clauses of Mr. Cooke's proposition, seriatim. 
 
 The question was accordingly first propounded on the first clause as amended. 
 
 Mr. Giles enquired if it was the intention of the mover, that the election should 
 be held and completed on the first day ? If not, reference must be had to the existing 
 law under the present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied, that all laws which the new Constitution did not supersede, 
 would, of course, remain in full force, and that law among the rest. The sheriff 
 would hold the elections just as he did at present. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that he had no objection to the details of the proposition, if the 
 House should be of opinion that it ought to prescribe the mode of carrying the Con- 
 stitution into effect, and to confer the duty on the Executive instead of on the Lgis- 
 lature. He was, however, strongly under the impression that it was neither necessary 
 nor proper for the Convention to make any provision on the subject. The act of the 
 Assembly was the charter of all their rights as a Convention. It contemplated, most 
 clearly, the conferring on them no other power than to prepare amendments to the 
 old Constitution, or a new Constitution in lieu of it. That was the whole extent of 
 their authority. When that duty had been performed, the same act declared how their 
 work should be submitted to the people, and how it should be ratified. If he was 
 correct in that view, the whole of the present article was a work of supererogation 
 entirely. (Mr. J. here quoted the act at large.) To him it appeared that that act 
 prescribed in the first place the duty of the Convention, then the manner in which 
 the new Constitution was to be submitted to the people, and next the mode in which 
 it was to receive its ratification if they should approve it. There was nothing left for 
 them to do on the latter part of the subject. They had no authority to repeal any 
 part of the old Constitution. 
 
 But if it were otherwise, he asked whether the provisions in the act were not am- 
 ple, and whether they were not preferable to those in the proposition of the gentle- 
 man from Frederick ? The difference between the two, was, that according to the one 
 the Legislature was to prescribe the details for the first election, while by the other the 
 Convention were to dispose of those details, and were to dispense with convening 
 any extra meeting of the Assembly at all. The saving of that expense was certainly 
 our object, if the same ends could as well be attained without it ; but that was a small 
 item. Was it not more fit and proper that the Legislature should be convened.? The 
 act manifestly intended to submit to the existing Government as now organized the 
 question, whether the act of that Government had been answered or no by the means 
 it had prescribed. The Legislature certainly proposed that the decision of that ques- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 865 
 
 tion should be submitted to themselves and not to the Executive Department ; and if 
 BO, this amendment went to make a substantial change in the course intended. They 
 were referring the question to a body possessed cf no powers to send for persons and 
 papers, and having no adequate means of ascertaining whether the Constitution had 
 been accepted by the people or not. He would not submit any question of such a 
 character to such a department of Government. The solemnity of a Legislative act 
 was required in order to pronounce on the fact that the Constitution had been duly 
 ratified, should a doubt be started. Should it be affirmed, that in some parts of the 
 State the question on the acceptance of the new Constitution had been submitted to 
 people of all descriptions that chose to vote, and not to the qualified voters merely, 
 the Legislature would have the necessary power to enquire into the matter — to obtain 
 proof, and definitively to decide on matters of fact, connected with the question. 
 
 It might be supposed, that under that provision of the act, which empowers the 
 Governor to convene the Legislature, on ascertaining that the Constitution had been 
 adopted by the people, the question was decided. But, he thought otherwise. Some- 
 body must have been appointed to convene the Legislature, and in so doing, the 
 Governor acted of course on mere 2}rhna facie evidence, on which he was to convene 
 that body, which constituted the grand tribunal of the nation. They alone could 
 properly settle all disputed points that might arise. He thought it infinitely better to 
 leave the matter as the act had provided, siuce there might be great doubt as to the 
 validity of any decision of the Convention in the case. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied : The first question for the Convention to settle was, whether it 
 was expedient to take the course he proposed On that question, he presumed there 
 could be little doubt. It would save, entirely, the whole expense of an extra session 
 of tlie Legislature consisting of two hundred and fourteen members. No man who 
 was acquainted with the mode of doing business in Virginia, who was aware of the 
 fondness which existed for talking a great deal before much was done, and knew the 
 modus operandi usual in the^Legislature, could believe tha' this extra session would oc- 
 cupy less than at least thirty days ; and that must cause an expense to the Common- 
 wealth of at least $ 30,000. To save this money, was in itself confessedly expedient. 
 But if the Convention had no right or authority to prescribe such an arrangement, 
 then, no matter how expedient it might be, they, of course, would not do it. 
 
 But he maintained that they had the right. The first act of Assembly to which he 
 referred in support of this position was, tliat of 31st January, 1828, which declared 
 how the sense of the people should be taken as to the expediency of holding a Con- 
 vention. By that act it was declared that the Governor was to report to the Legisla- 
 ture what was the people's decision. The sense of the people was accordingly taken, 
 and it was found that there was a majority in favour of calling a Convention. The 
 Legislature then enacted a law assembling the Convention, and defining to some ex- 
 tent the powers it was to possess. He admitted this. But still he contended that the 
 members of that Convention, as the representatives of the sovereignty of the people, 
 had a perfect right to recommend to the people a departure from that act. The terms 
 of the law were not so narrow as to preclude them from considering what was the 
 best mode of carrying the new Constitution, if adopted, into effect. They might in- 
 sert in the instrument they reported to the people, what they intended to recommend 
 as permanent parts of the Constitution, and they might also recommend to the peo- 
 ple to adopt a less expensive mode of carrying its provisions into effect. He admitted, 
 that they had no right themselves to modify the provisions of the act of Assembly 
 under which they acted. They could act with no authorit}'^ in any ihi-ng prcriotLS to 
 the adoption of the new Constitution by the people. But the twenty-first section of 
 that act referred to what was to be done after the acceptance of the Constitution : and 
 the question was, whether it was not competent to the Convention to recommend to 
 the people to modify an act passed by a few of their own servants, by the old Legisla- 
 ture That was the question. 
 
 But it was contended by the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson,) that it had 
 been the obvious intention of the Legislature, that the question whether a majority 
 of the people ratified the Constitution or no, should be submitted to the Legislature 
 and not to the Executive. He could not see in the act any thing like that. The act 
 said that the Executive was to examine that question, and when he found that the 
 Constitution was accepted, he was to convene an extra session of the Leoislature to 
 carry the Constitution into effect. The returns of the votes were to be made by 
 sworn officers : and they were to be submitted to a sworn Executive — persons holding 
 a high and important trust, and so entrusted, owing to their claims to confidence in 
 the community. 
 
 The act assigned it to such citizens to examine into the question of the acceptance 
 of the Constitution ; and if from that examination it should appear — appear to whom.? 
 To the Executive that a majority had accepted the Constitution, then the Executive 
 was to convene the Legislature : to do what.? To examine the same question again ? 
 No, but to carry the Constitution into effect. The extra Legislature thus convened, 
 
 109 
 
866 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 had no power to do any thing whatever, but that : they were called to carry the Con- 
 stitution into effect : that they were to do, and that only. The construction of the 
 gentleman from Augusta, was borne out by the words of the act. The law gave to 
 the Executive and the Executive alone, the power of determining whether a majority 
 of the people had voted for the Constitution. They were to judge : and as soon as 
 they had determined, the act commanded them to convene the Legislature to carry 
 the instrument into operation. 'J'he Legislature was not made a Court of Enquiry to 
 see whether the determination of the Executive had been right or wrong. They had 
 no right to interfere, till the question of ratification had been determined. And the 
 moment it was duly certified that the people had ratified the new Constitution, from 
 that moment it became permanent — it rode over the nineteenth section and all other 
 sections of the act of the Legislature, and became the supreme law of the land. Mr. 
 Cooke concluded by expressing his hope, that this mode of carrying the Constitution 
 into effect, and saving an expense of ^ 30,000, and all the time and trouble of an extra 
 session of the Legislature, v.'ould be approved by the Convention and by them re- 
 comuiended to the people. 
 
 Mr. Pow^ell said, it seemed a matter of doubt and of difficulty how far the Conven- 
 tion had power to enact such a provision as was now proposed to them. To obviate 
 the difficulty, and at the same time to save expense, he would submit an amendment, 
 the effect of which would be to present to the Assembly now in session a copy of the 
 Constitution, with a request that the Assembly Avould provide for carrying it into ef- 
 fect on its adoption by the people. If they should not comply, the Convention would 
 but be thrown back on the original law. This would avoid the difficulty of an extra 
 session and effect every object in view. 
 
 Mr. Powell tlien submitted the following amendment : 
 Resolved. That a copy of this amended Constitution, be presented to the General 
 Assembly now in session, and that the General Assembly be requested to provide by 
 law for carrying the same into operation : provided said amended Constitution should 
 be adopted by the qualified voters of the Commonwealth, under the amended Con- 
 stitution." 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he had been very forcibly impressed by the observations of the 
 gentleman from Augusta upon the motion of the gentleman from Frederick. As to 
 the amendment of the other gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Powell,) he considered 
 it as premature (to use a very incorrect mode of expression, but one which was very 
 familiarly employed and well understood ;) he supposed it to have been urged rather 
 as an argument against the adoption of the proposition of the first gentleman. He 
 had been forcibly impressed by the observations of the gentleman from Augusta. 
 But while attending to him, (as he always did) with the utmost respect, he had been 
 struck with this difficulty : By whose authority did the Legislature pass the very 
 questionable act — 1 do not mean, however, to question it at present — under which we 
 are assembled here By the authority of their constituents. And who were their con- 
 stituents The freeholders of the Commonwealth. By whose authority do we sit 
 here ? Whence is our power.? From our constituents. And who are our constituents? 
 The same ansv/er must be given — the freeholders of the Commonwealth. Now, the 
 freeholders of the Commonwealth having given their sanction to the very question- 
 able act of the Legislature — 1 refer to the first as well as the second act on the sub- 
 ject of a Convention — and deputed us here to propose amendments to the old Con- 
 stitution, or the draught of a new one — to whom, I ask, in the nature of things — did 
 the freeholders suppose the new Constitution was to be submitted for adoption or re- 
 jection ? Must it not have been to that original authority — to that source and fountain 
 from whence is derived all our authority as a Convention I mean to themselves ? 
 Let me suppose a case : A majority of the freeholders of Virginia — (Sir, I do not be- 
 lieve it — I do not believe one word — no not a syllable of it) the freeholders of Vir- 
 ginia have consented — being the body politic of Virginia — the fountain of all power 
 in Virginia — have consented that a Convention shall assemble for the purpose of de- 
 vising amendments to the existing Constitution or proposing a new Constitution in 
 its stead. Now, Sir, the freeholders of Virginia have not yet decided — though they 
 have decided that amendments shall be proposed to them — that with worse than the 
 stupidity of Esau, they shall be deprived of their birthright. The Convention are 
 proposing that the former limits of the Right of Suffrage shall be extended — I will 
 say — ad indejimtum. Who is to decide on this question Those to whom we propose 
 to extend that right? Unquestionably, no : no more than the people of Ohio or Penn- 
 sylvania, have a right to decide it. They have no right whatever : they have not a 
 shadow of right. 
 
 This Convention proposes to extend the Right of Suffrage beyond its former limits 
 and circumscription. Who are to decide on the question? They, from whom the 
 Legislature and the Convention both derive all the authority they possess, and the 
 latter, all the authority they have usurped — they, from whom the Legislature derive 
 all the power they justly had, and all they unjustly usurped — are they to decide? or 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 867 
 
 are those to whom we propose to extend this boon ? Do you not see the palpable in- 
 justice — I was about to add — for it is the only word that will express my idea — the 
 absurdity of this thing? Those from whom we derive all our authority, are not to de- 
 cide ; but, those to whom the power is to be given which we have first taken away 
 from those to whom it belonged. 1 ask of gentlemen to consider this — 1 beg them to 
 ponder well upon it — f beseech them to lay it to their hearts, having first presented 
 it to their understandings. The instant those who are not the freeholders of Virginia, 
 attempt to decide upon any Constitution we may propose, one has as good a right to 
 decide as another — the moment you leave the land — the freehold — there is no stop- 
 ping place — no limit — no line of demarcation— no boundary. So far, so good; we are 
 proceeding under the sanction of the freeholders of the Commonwealth. But we can 
 derive no power from her Legislature to betray those freeholders — to disavow them 
 — to disfranchise our constituents. 
 
 Sir, if the freeholders choose to say, we approve of what you propose, there is an 
 end — nothing more is to be said. But, nobody else has any right to speak in the mat- 
 ter. We are their agents, acting under their sanction. 
 
 One word as to the amendment of the gentleman from Frederick, who sits before 
 me, (Mr. Powell.) If the Convention shall resolve to allow others than freeholders 
 to decide the question of the adoption of the Constitution, then it will be necessary 
 that the present Legislature should act in the case : but they will have to act as usur- 
 pers. So long as you conferred the suffrage on the land — the only safe foundation of 
 free Government, in a landed community — you had record evidence of who were 
 qualified voters ; but now, you might as well apply to Babel or to Chaos for any cer- 
 tainty about the matter. Sir, I am afraid I have not done justice to the clear — the 
 perfectly clear opinion I had formed on this subject, while the gentleman from Augus- 
 ta was speaking. Sir, we are the trustees for the freeholders : and we have no right 
 to betray them. We act by their authority alone. We may to be sure, take in other 
 persons, besides freeholders — violence may prevail. The kingdom of heaven suffer- 
 eth violence, and the violent take it by force — but we have no more legal authority 
 than Bonaparte, or Attila, or Ghengis Khan : it will be the law of force — and the law 
 of force alone. 
 
 Mr. Powell observed, that the gentleman had said his amendment was premature : 
 if so, that of his colleague, (Mr. Cooke,) must be premature also. But he did not con- 
 sider it as premature : the efiicacy of the amendment would depend on the event. If 
 the Convention departed from the Act of Assembly at all, it must be at some period, 
 and why not now .'' If the Constitution should be rejected, this amendment would ©f 
 course fall with it: it only operated in case the Constitution should be adopted. As 
 to the other objection of the gentleman from Charlotte, the Legislature which had 
 passed the Act by which they sat as a Convention, had provided that tlie adoption of 
 any Constitution they might propose, should not depend on the freeholders alone, 
 but on all who should be qualified voters under the new Constitution. That was the 
 law of the land. The gentleman said, the Legislature had acted as usurpers : if that 
 were true as to their original act, how stood the case now.? Those very freeholders 
 for whom the gentleman was so zealous, had themselves adopted the Act of tiie Le- 
 gislature by their ov/n votes. They had sanctioned this very Act by a majority of 
 five thousand votes. If there had been any usurpation in the first instance, that vote 
 had made the Act legitimate. If the amendment was thought to be premature, he had 
 no objection to withdraw it for the present. But the amendment obviated the only 
 objection his colleague had urged against the provisions of the law; and it settled a 
 question which was at best doubtful. 
 
 Mr. Cooke enquired, if the amendment was to be understood as withdrawn.? 
 
 Mr. Powell, after some hesitation, replied in the negative. 
 
 Mr. Stanard thought it manifest that the proposition had better not be pushed at 
 present ; it was not the proper occasion. The examples of other States shewed that 
 similar provisions had been reserved until after the vote in Convention was taken on 
 the amended Constitution. It was not to be considered as a part of the Constitution 
 itself, but a mere appendage to it, providing for the mode of giving effect to its pro- 
 visions. 
 
 He would turn the attention of the gentleman from Frederick, in his eye, (Mr. 
 Cooke,) to some considerations not fully developed by the gentleman from Augusta, 
 (Mr. Johnson,) from which the inevitable inference would be, that the Constitution, 
 and the decision that might be had upon it, in order to give any solid satisfaction to 
 the public mind, must of necessity be subjected to Legislative action. He should not 
 enter on the question which had been discussed by the gentleman from Charlotte : but 
 would proceed on the concession, that those were to vote on the Constitution, who were 
 qualified to vote for the most numerous branch of the Legislature. There was no pro- 
 vision of law for this new state of things, which would arise in consequence of the ex- 
 tension of the Right of Suffrage. No criteria had been fixed for determining whether 
 voters had or had not the qualifications the Constitution required. 
 
868 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 He submitted, whether there was not a cogent necessity for establishing some tests 
 of this kind, which might be a guide to the officers who should superintend elections ? 
 The Constitution i^ust go back to the Legislature for this purpose, otherwise it might 
 be adopted or rejected by tlie indiscriminate votes of persons not qualified. Another 
 serious consideration presented itself. He could anticipate no event fraught with 
 more mischief, or surrounded with more dreadful, because more undefined evils, than 
 the effect of an unauthorised body assuming to itself the functions of a Convention as 
 settled by law. Such a Convention was one of the most fearful events that could 
 occur in the State. To avert this, they ought to cherish respect to the law under 
 which they had been convened. It was better, far better, than the assumption of 
 power by individuals in faith. 
 
 Would not the gentleman destroy all respect to the law, if under the authority of 
 that law, he offered a proposition by which the law itself was to be superseded and 
 annulled ? Mr. S. said, he would not enlarge upon this idea} but would merely ask 
 the gentleman, if he was willing to set such an example ? 
 
 He concluded, by moving to lay the amendment on the table. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he had risen with unfeigned reluctance to say a dozen words on 
 the question before the House. It was plain to him, that there could be none of greater 
 importance, or which seemed to be less understood. I ask, said Mr. R. whether we 
 are empowered to do any thing which shall be binding either upon the people or upon 
 the Legislature Sir, we have been called as Counsel to the people — as State physi- 
 cians — to propose remedies for the State's diseases — not to pass any act that shall have 
 in itself any binding force. We are here as humble advisers and proposers to the peo- 
 ple. Does not the gentleman from Frederick distinctly see, that if his doctrine be 
 correct, we are giving a Convention power to bind conclusively the people of Virgi- 
 nia quoad the Rlc ht of Suffrage ? to settle that question in the first and in the last in- 
 stance, without consulting them ? I shall be told that we have been clothed with this 
 power. Are we.^ The Legislature, I grant, have been very kind in clothing us with 
 a power they did not possess. Sir, we do not draw one single jot or tittle of authority 
 from the Legislature of Virginia. If the gentleman's doctrine be correct, then the 
 Legislature of Virginia — who cannot touch tlie subject without an act of treachery 
 themselves — have given to the Convention power, as to the Right of Suffrage, to bind 
 the people of Virginia: Converting us, in this one single instance, from an advisory 
 into a controlling Council. We can propose to the people that the Governor shall be 
 elected by themselves ; but we cannot say that he shall be. We may propose, that 
 under certain circumstances, the Judges may be removed from their offices, but we 
 cannot say that they shall be thus removed. Yet we can act decisively on the subject 
 of the Right of Suffrage. Here we may say, it shall be so. 
 
 If that be true, then, by a juggle between the Legislature, who were without the 
 power themselves, and a Convention, v/ho were called only to advise the people, an 
 act is to be done by which the people are to be finally bound. Sir, I wish to God I had 
 the powers of the gentlemen in my eye (Mr. Marshall and Mr. Leigh,) to shew this 
 matter as it is. In the all-important question of the Right of Suffrage, this Conven- 
 tion is to exert an absolute power to decide, without consulting the people at all. How 
 do we derive it ? From a Virginia Legislature who never possessed it. To refer to 
 the Legislature is only putting a tortoise under the Elephant. Thus power rests upon 
 the Elephant — the Elephant upon the tortoise — and the tortoise upon nothing. Sir, 
 this won't do. It won't do. Sir. I wish — I would to God, that I had the powers of 
 that gentleman to exhibit this subject as it ought to be exhibited. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, he was unable to perceive how this subject had any connexion with 
 the amendment he had offered. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he would tell the gentleman. It had grown out of the remarks 
 of the gentleman from Augusta on his amendment. 
 
 Mr. Cooke said, the question was in no manner or shape involved in the proposi- 
 tions he had laid before the House. It would be perceived that in the second clause 
 of his amendment it was directed, how the election was to be holden for members of 
 the new Legislature. The question as to whom the Constitution itself was to be sub- 
 mitted, was not in the most distant manner involved. That question must be settled 
 either by the silence of this Convention, in which case the law would settle it, or by 
 an expression of the sentiments of the Convention in the manner prescribed by the 
 law. (Here Mr. C. quoted the Act of Assembly.) It was obvious, that if the Con- 
 vention should be silent, the Constitution would be submitted for adoption to those 
 qualified to vote for the most numerous branch of the Legislature : the law settled that 
 point. But had they not a perfect right to let in others, under the law or otherwise ? 
 That was the question the gentleman from Charlotte had argued. He conceived they 
 had a right to say that the whole white population should be admitted to vote on the 
 question — they had received from the Legislature a carte blanche. 
 
 [Mr. Randolph here interposed, to ask one question. Whether two persons, neither 
 of whom had any right to an estate, could by joint deed convey it away ?] 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 869 
 
 Mr. Cooke resumed. The Act gave the Convention a right to confer the right of 
 voting on whomsoever they pleased. Had the Legislature any right to give them 
 this authority ? It was of no moment whether or not ; because the people themselves, 
 the source and fountain of all authority and power, had passed upon that Act of the 
 Assembly : the freeholders of the Commonwealth had elected the members of the pre- 
 sent Convention, in pursuance of the provisions of that Act. Here was something 
 under the tortoise : and something solid too, and perfectly substantial. Here was the 
 case of an estate deeded away under mere colour of title ; but that deed afterwards ra- 
 tified by the true and acknowledged owner. The freeholders had recognised and ra- 
 tified the act of their agents ; they had confirmed it by their own deed : and according 
 to that Act, the Convention might, if they so thought fit, submit the new Constitution 
 to the whole people of Virginia, without an exception. 
 
 As to the time when the amendment ought to be offered, he agreed with the gen- 
 tleman from Spottsylvania, that it would have been better to have postponed it until 
 the vote for adopting or rejecting the Constitution in the Convention had been taken. 
 But he had been influenced by the circumstance that the draught of the Constitution 
 itself, as reported by the Committee, attempted to do the very same thing as was the 
 aim of his amendment, but had, in his opinion, made an imperfect provision on the 
 subject. The thirty-first section provided against an interregnum in the Executive and 
 Judicial Departments, but not against an interregnum in the Legislative Department. 
 
 Mr. C. then moved to strike out the thirty-first section : (intending to postpone of- 
 fering his own until after the vote on the Constitution.) 
 
 Mr. Leigh observed, that if, ultimately, the proposition of Mr. Cooke should be re- 
 jected, this section would have to be re-instated. All who would ultimately vote 
 against that gentleman's proposition, would of course vote against striking out. 
 
 Mr. Johnson did not think the section ought to be stricken out. He did not ac- 
 knowledge it to be an imperfect provision — nor was it an unsuccessful attempt, or any 
 attempt, to carry the Constitution into effect. 
 
 Mr. Cooke explained. He had not said it was: he had only said, it was an unsuc- 
 cessful attempt to provide against an interregnum. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, if that were the case, it was important that the defect should be 
 remedied, and the whole section abandoned. The gentleman admitted, that the sec- 
 tion did provide against an interregnum in the Executive and the Judicial Depart- 
 ments, but said that it did not so provide in the Legislative Departnjent. That it did not 
 attempt to do. That was left to the Act under which the Convention had been called. 
 The clause intended no more than to carry the Constitution into effect under the law. 
 It had no purpose of leaving a Legislature clothed with full powers for ordinarv legis- 
 lation, after that end had been effected: but only to provide such a Legislature as 
 should carry the new Constitution into effect. And that it had done. There was no 
 need to strike out the clause: the gentleman's article would not interfere with it. 
 
 Mr. Cooke replied. If the section did not intend to provide a Legislature prepared 
 for ordinary legislation, it was defective in not so intending. So soon as the old Le- 
 gislature should have provided to carry the Constitution into effect, it would be func- 
 tus officio: and then there would be a perfect Legislative interregnum of several 
 months, until the new Legislature should be organized. This ought not to be. 
 The question was now put on striking out the thirty-first section, and negatived. 
 Mr. Cooke then withdrew his amendment for the present. 
 
 The question now recurring on the engrossment of the draught of the Constitution 
 for a third reading, 
 
 Mr. Tazewell asked that it be taken by ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, that if it was desirable to get the sense of the Convention on 
 the question which had been commented on by the gentleman from Charlotte, this 
 was the proper time to do so. After the third reading, the Constitution would not 
 regularly be open to amendments. He had understood the act of Assembly in the 
 same manner as the gentleman from Frederick. The Constitution might be submitted 
 to the qualified voters, or to any others whom the Convention might please to declare 
 such. If the sense of the House v;as to be expressed on that subject, now was the 
 proper time. The act of the Assembly would Imve had no authority, but fi-om the 
 act of the people upon it. He agreed with the gentleman from Charlotte, that the 
 Legislature had no right to pass such an act; but, it had been legitimated by their 
 constituents. 
 
 The act had become their ov.m act by the sanctioning it, and the people had thereby 
 given the Convention power to submit the Constitution to whom they thought fit. 
 
 Mr. Randolph. One word in reply to the gentleman from Augusta — I do not 
 know — I am finite — and cannot know — but there is no fact on which'l have a clearer 
 conviction — than that when the freeholders of Virginia voted, they voted on the sin- 
 gle and naked question, " Convention, or No Convention," and on no other question 
 whatever. I shall not, I hope, be condemned as overweening and vain, when I profess 
 to believe, that I possess at least the average intelhgence of the freeholders I repre- 
 
870 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 sent — that take them one with another, I have as much sense as the average of them : 
 yet I say, that this provision of the law never entered my head at all — and I will en- 
 gage, that it never entered the head of one man in ten thousand of all those who did 
 vote. The only question the people did decide upon, was the question of Convention, 
 or JSo Convention. Tliey never decided any other — and could not. I have as much 
 respect for the people as any one. I am one of the people. It is common now-a-days 
 to profess vast respect for the people. This bov/ing to the majesty of the people, as 
 Patrick Henry says, is death to the independence of the people. Sir — 1 have come 
 to the conclusion, from much observation, that the people are incapable of acting but 
 by their agents. Sir — I once thought myself to be a Republican — and 1 believe I 
 was thought by some to be, if any thing, rather an over-violent Republican. But 
 now, I find gentlemen gone far beyund me — yes, Sir — they beat me hollow — I am left 
 behind — and begin to be thought an Aristocrat by those whom I think ultra Jacobins. 
 
 The people cannot act unless to their destruction, but by agents. They are like 
 the infirm owner of a large estate. A man who possesses a large plantation, and is in 
 feeble health, gets an overseer. If he should undertake to superintend it himself, the 
 infallible effect would be the loss of the crop — and the next thing we should hear of, 
 would be a deed of trust for his estate — and away it goes. So the people must act — 
 they can act safely only by their agents. Yet they may be lured to their destruction 
 by elections in November, and elections in April — at the feast of new corn, or in the 
 season of want and scarcity, when they are called to pass upon an act of Assembly, 
 containing thirty or forty sections — of which one-tenth — no, Sir — not one-tenth — 
 even of the Assembly that passed it — know the true meaning. 
 
 Sir, I have been too long acquainted with Legislative bodies, not to know something 
 about them. They are not themselves acquainted with the meaning of their own 
 acts. They must be carried to the General Court, to be settled one way — and then 
 to the Court of Appeals, to be settled another way — and it is not until the question 
 becomes res adjudicata, that the meaning of their act is known. Yet you expect the 
 people to pass on an act of I don't know how many sections, at the polls. Sir, the 
 people did no such thing. They could not do such a thing. As to the act of the 
 Legislature's being cured by the assent of the freeholders of Virginia, the freeholders 
 knew nothing about it. I am sure 1 did not. 
 
 Mr. Campbell of Bedford moved to strike out in the twenty-ninth section the word 
 " concurrent," and insert the word "joint." 
 
 The question was decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 ^yes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, 
 Smith, Baxter, George, M'Milian, Byars, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, See, Morgan, 
 Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Campbell of Bedford, Saunders and Cabell — 22. 
 
 jYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, Mason of Southampton, Trez- 
 vant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, 
 Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, Cooke, Powell, Griggs, 
 Mason of Frederick, Najdor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, Campbell of Washington, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Cloyd, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, 
 Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, 
 Grigsby, Claytor, Branch, Townes, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, 
 Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 73. 
 THE JUDICIARY QUESTION. 
 
 Mr. Scott then addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 It is probable that many members of this Convention think, that my sensibility on 
 the subject of the Judiciary is a morbid sensibility. Possibly it is so. But, whether 
 it be morbid or not, as it exists, I must obey its impulse. 
 
 Ml. President — I know very well, that mankind are prone to refer our actions to 
 selfish motives, when such motives can be found. And unhappily, such is the frailty 
 of our nature, the suspicion that we are prompted by them, is often but too well 
 founded. I cannot expect that I shall escape on the present occasion. I am well 
 aware, that the zeal which I have manifested in relation to this subject, may be, and 
 probably by some is, attributed to sinister views. It is at all times exceedingly pain- 
 ful to me to speak of myself. I know very well, that a man seldom does himself a 
 service by such a course. But, there are occasions on which it is indispensable that 
 he should do so, and this appears to me to be one of them. 
 
 It has been a maxim with me, that our first care should be to do that which in our 
 conscience we believe to be right ; our second, to have the credit of it. But, Sir, 
 whilst I place reputation next in order to virtue, there is a vast space between them. 
 
 Upon the present occasion, I shall pursue that course which is pointed out by duty, 
 let the consequences be what they may. 
 
 It has been my misfortune, ever since I arrived at manhood, if misfortune it may be 
 called, to be in the minority on the great political questions which have divided this 
 
DEBATES OF THE COXVEXTIOX. 
 
 871 
 
 country. Previous to the late Presidential election, I was in the minority — that is. I 
 tveis opposed to those in power. The present Administration had been in power but 
 a short time, before I found myself in the minority asrain. Perhaps it is a vice of my 
 nature, that 1 cannot remain with the majority. You will allow,, howeyer. that it is 
 not the way to get office. 3Ir. President. [ take this opportunity pubhcly to declare, 
 that there is not an office or place in the gift of the General or State G-oyernment, 
 which I would accept. 1 ayaii myself of this occasion, to record my own eyidence 
 of my total unfitness to fill any public station. Sir. 1 haye laboured under disease for 
 the last seyen years of my life, and I find that my health, instead of improying. con- 
 tinues to dechne. I declare myself to be utterly incapable of either bodily or mental 
 labor. I take this public occasion, to record my eyidence to the end. that if at any 
 time hereafter, I should be mad enough to sohcit office, I may be condemned out of 
 my own hps. I haye trespassed thus much on the indulorence of the Conyention, 
 with a hope that justice may be done to my motiyes, should I be driyen by eyenls to 
 change my course in relation to the great question which has so long agitated this body. 
 
 At a yery early period of my life, I imbibed the sentiment, that no form of Goyem- 
 ment, howeyer excellent in other respects, can long secure the hberty and happiness 
 of the people, without an independent Judiciary. This sentiment was deeply planted 
 in my bosom. It has grown with my srrowth. and strenalhened with my strength. 
 For what purpose. Sir, do we enter into civO society? For what purpose is all this 
 machinery of Government constructed .- Why are laws enacted ? To protect the 
 weak asuiost the strong. The strong can protect themselyes without the aid of laws. 
 To what end shall laws be enacted, if they be not ably and justly administered ? 
 Where will the weak find refuge and protection, but in your Courts of Justice .' If 
 your Judofes are dependent, will they depend upon the weak or the strong? I did 
 not rise to enter into an argument, and I will not pursue the subject farther. If 1 
 rightly understood the exposition of the proposed Constitution, giyen by the gentle- 
 man trom ^sorfolk the other day. the Judges will be completely dependent on the 
 Legislature. According to that exposition, the Legislature, by abolishing the Court^ 
 may depriye the Judge of his office , and by consequence, that office is held at the 
 will of a majority of a bare quorum. Tiiis is not my construction of that instrument. 
 The twenty-third section of the draught reported by the Committee, declares , that the 
 Judges shall hold their offices ■'• during good behaviour, or until remoyed in the man- 
 ner prescribed in this Constitution.'" ^Now, there are only two modes prescribed in 
 this Constitution," by which a Judge may be removed firom office. One by impeach- 
 ment, the other by a concurrent vote of two-thirds of botli Houses of the Legislature. 
 This enumeration, I conceiye. excludes any other •'■'manner" of removal: and by 
 consequence, a remoyal by mere legislation. The twenty-sixth section declares, that 
 the Judges shall receive fixed and adequate salaries, which shall not be diminished 
 during their continuance in office. Hence, I should infer that as a depriyation 
 of ofnce by abolishing the court, is not one of the modes - prescribed in this Consti- 
 tution," the office would remain, although the court shotild be abolished: and whilst 
 the office remains, the right to the salary continues. But, Sir, I will not venture to 
 place my opinion in opposition to that of the gentleman from Norfolk, who was one 
 of the Committee that draughted the Constitution. If that instrument goes down to 
 posterity, with a construction sanctioned by the name and authority of that gentle- 
 man, there can be but httle doubt that his construction will preyail: and a dominant 
 faction can, by a simple repeal of a law, sweep eyery Judge from the bench. I rose, 
 Sir, for the purpose of enquiring of the members of the Select Committee, and more 
 especially of my friend from Richmond, (the Chief Justice.) who I understand to be 
 the author of that part of the Constitution which relates to the Judiciary, whether I 
 rightly understand the exposition of the gentleman fi-om .S'orfolk. and whether the 
 other members of the Committee concur in that construction. Upon the answers 
 giyen to this enquiry, my yote upon the Constitution will depend. Sir. I do not ap- 
 prehend, be the construction of this Constitution what it may, that in the short rem- 
 nant of my days, I shall suffer any miscliief. I do not apprehend, that in so short a 
 period, the character of Virginia legislation wiU so change, as that the Judicial tenure 
 •vsill be invaded by such means. But, Sir, we are making a Constitution for posterity. 
 "VYe have witnessed such invasions in other States. It would be presumptuous to 
 suppose, that they never can occur here. It is our duty to cruard against them. 
 
 Mr. Marshall said, that it was with great, yery great repugnance, that he rose to 
 utter a syllable upon the subject. His reluctance to do so was yery ^eat indeed; 
 and he had, throughout the previous debates on this subject, most carefully avoided 
 expressing any opinion whatever upon what had been called a construction of the 
 Constitution of the United States by the act of Congress of 1502. 
 
 He should now. as far as possible, continue to avoid expressing any opinion on that 
 act of Congress. There was something in his situation which ought to induce him 
 to avoid doing so. He would go no farther than to say, that he did not conceive the 
 Constitution to have been at all definitiyely expounded by a single act of Consrress. 
 
872 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 He should not meddle with the question, whether a course of successive legislation 
 should or should not be held as a final exposition of it : but he would say this — that a 
 single act of Congress, unconnected with any other act by the other Departments of 
 the Federal Government, and especially of that Department more especially entrusted 
 with the construction of the Constitution in a great degree, when there was no union 
 of Departments, but the Legislative Department alone had acted, and acted but 
 once, even admitting that act not to have passed in times of high political and party 
 excitement, could never be admitted as final and conclusive. 
 
 When the report had been made by the joint committee, and a plan had been laid 
 before that committee, no declaration was made that the clause since expunged was 
 necessary to prevent this construction of that report. The words had been introduced, 
 not for the purpose of making the report conform to the act of Congress, but because 
 they furnished ^ ready mode of disposing of the Judicial Department. If the words 
 had not been used in the Constitution of the United States, nothing was more proba- 
 ble than that the very same words would have been employed in the report. He said, 
 as being the individual who had draughted the article, that he had not had in his mind 
 the clause of the Federal Constitution alluded to, and its construction by Congress. 
 When the article was introduced, it had not been for the purpose of acknowledging 
 the justice of that construction, but to prevent the possibility of it : it was considered 
 as possible, and barely possible, that such a construction might be given. 
 
 He did not v>dsh to enter at all into the argument. All must have witnessed the cau- 
 tion with which he had avoided doing so. But he said freely, that the present Con- 
 stitution ought to be construed in its words, and not in the opinion any member 
 might have expressed upon it. They entertained different opinions : those opinions 
 were not to regulate the construction of the Constitution, but its own words alone 
 were to regulate the construction of it. And so far as he had any right to protest, he 
 did protest against his individual construction, in any mode, being engrafted into the 
 Constitution. Let the Constitution speak its own language, and be construed by 
 those whose office it was to construe it. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell followed Mr. Marshall — and expressed an exactly opposite opinion. 
 He vindicated the passage of the law for abolishing the newly appointed Judges, at 
 the very close of Mr. Adams's administration. He contended that that act was per- 
 fectly constitutional and propex- — and that the course then taken by Congress had 
 fixed the meaning of the words in the Constitution of the United States, which had 
 been copied into the proposed Constitution of Virginia. 
 
 He was followed by Mr. Johnson, who conceded that the abolition of the Judges at 
 the commencement of Mr. Jefferson's administration, however objectionable it might 
 seem at first, had been sanctioned by the acquiescence of the people. 
 
 Mr. Giles rose in reply to Mr. Marshall : 
 
 Concurring in the belief, that the interpretation which has hitherto been put on the 
 terms of the Federal Constitution, will be put on the same terms, if used in the Con- 
 stitution we are now making, and acting on that presumption, I conceive it unneces- 
 sary that any other explanation should be made, and hope that the amendment may 
 be withdrawn : I prefer the Constitution as it now stands. 
 
 Although I have paid the utmost possible attention to the opinions and arguments 
 of the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. Marshall.) for whom I entertain the highest 
 respect and regard, I cannot for my life find out how it is that an office should exist 
 in a court, while the court itself does not exist, but is completely functus officio. 
 Such a position appears to me to be a perfect contradiction ; as much so, as it would 
 be for us to declare, that a man shall enjoy his life after he is dead ; and the effect of 
 one declaration would be much the same, with that of the other. The proposition 
 contains a contradiction in terms, and is in my judgment utterly inadmissible. 
 
 There is another reason which confirms me in my opinion as to what will be the 
 interpretation put upon tliis part of the Constitution. The gentleman, it is true, says 
 that he has not officially examined the point ; but such was the impression on his 
 mind, when the act of Congress was passed which limits the continuance of the 
 Judge's office, to the existence of his court. Now, I have given the utmost attention 
 to tiiis subject. I formed an opinion at the time, which 1 publicly expressed. I have 
 thought of it a thousand times since, and I have examined every act passed on the 
 subject from that day to this, and I have no more doubt now than I had then, as to 
 the true interpretation of the clause. It is a fundamental principle, which reigns 
 throughout our institutions, that compensation and services should correspond to each 
 other. The compensation of a Judge is paid him, not for his good behaviour, but for 
 his official services. 
 
 The sensibility of the gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) on the subject of Ju- 
 dicial independence, is so very great, that he himself supposes it may be morbid in 
 its character, and I have no doubt that it is so. Nor is it confined to that gentleman 
 alone : it extends to a vast many others who seem to labour under the same morbid 
 sensibihty with himself. The gentleman insists, that by the Constitution as it now 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 873 
 
 stands, the independence of the Judges is not provided for. I ani of a different 
 opinion. I am prepared to go as far as any gentleman in favour of the independence 
 of the Judiciary: I consider independence in a Judge as valuable as any gentleman 
 can do ; but I would not iiave independence extended into inviolability. I am as hos- 
 tile to that, as I am favourable to their independence, and shall always be so, while 
 republican government continues to be founded on the principles of responsibility. 
 Sir, what do gentlemen want ? What more would they have r The utmost security 
 is given that a Judge shall continue to receive his salary, so long as he renders Judi- 
 cial services. Ought he to have it any longer : Would any one tliink of advancing 
 the same claim with reference to any other officer but a Judge ? Would any man 
 say that in a repubhcan government, a public officer is to receive the public money ^ 
 any longer than he renders service to the public Yet that is the amount of what is 
 now claimed in behalf of the Judges of Virginia : That they shall receive their salary 
 after the duty of their offices has ceased. A Judge when out of office is no more 
 independent than any other citizen. Being firmly convinced that such not only will 
 but ought to be the construction put upon the Constitution as it stands, it will be more 
 acceptable to me, if the gentleman will consent to witladraw his amendment. 
 
 The very worthy and highly respectable gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. Mar- 
 shall,) lays much stress on the fact, that there has been but one decision by the Con- 
 gress of the United States, giving an interpretation to the language of the Federal 
 Constitution as to tlig tenure of the Judicial office. He says, there has been but a sin- 
 gle decision; but the gentleman has not kept his eye on all the events connected with 
 this subject. There have been many decisions : So many, that the point has always 
 been considered by me as completely surrendered. xA.pplications for compensation 
 have, again and again, been made, and have been rejected over and over. Has not our 
 whole Judiciary establishment been going on upon tliat avowed principle ? and does 
 it not exist on that foundation at the present moment? If not, on what principle 
 does it rest Upon none. There is no other principle. That is the law on which 
 the entire system stands. I have no earthly doubt that such will be the decision. I 
 think indeed it is highly probable, that the Judges would decide differently. But, 
 thank Grodl the decision is left to the Legislature, and not to the influence of that 
 esprit du corps, which is ever found to exist among persons holding the same employ- 
 ment, whether they be Judijes or Councillors, Consuls or Kings. I wish that the 
 sense of the Constitution mav be decided on its own words, and on the experience 
 of the effect of those words for thirty years. It will be settled, I doubt not, that ac- 
 cording to the existing arrangement the Judsres are independent; that this is the real 
 definition of an independent Judiciary, and^that its independence is as abundantly 
 secured by this Constitution as it ever ought to be. 
 
 Mr. Marshall observed, that the present was not the first example which had oc- 
 curred in the debates of this Convention, nor was it likely to be the last in the de- 
 bates of this or of any other deUberative Assembly, where gentlemen held opinions 
 directly opposite to each other, and yet each side thought their own so perfectly clear 
 as not to admit the possibility of doubt. But declarations of such perfect confidence 
 on the part of those who held certain opinions, did by no means render it indispensa- - 
 hie that others should subscribe to the same. The ultimate decision must rest, not 
 on the confidence of conviction, but on the reason of the case. His whole wish was, 
 that this question should go forth, uninfluenced by the opinion of any individual: let 
 those, whose duty it was to settle the interpretation of the Constitution, decide on the 
 Constitution itself. He did not say that he was perfectly clear what that decision 
 would be, but he wished it to rest on the opinions held at the time by those who made 
 it, and who were responsible for such opinions, and not by the views of particular in- 
 dividuals in this Convention. If any other clause was requisite, let it be added. 
 Whatever weight the decision of Congress in 1802 was entitled to have, let it have. 
 But let not the sense of this instrument be judged of by the opinions of individuals 
 in this body. He had already stated what were the views he had held in the Judi- 
 ciary Committee, and the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson.) had stated cor- 
 rectly what took place in the Select Committee : the two clauses adopted by the Con- 
 vention vrere found to be in utter repugnance, and therefore the Committee had re- 
 solved to omit both, and report the article in the form which it now assumes. The 
 question now before the House had once been decided already, but he did not wish 
 to prevent the decision of it now. 
 
 Mr. Giles expressed his hope, that the gentleman who had moved the present 
 amendment, (Mr. Cabell.) would consent to withdraw it. The gentleman last up had 
 assigned the best of reasons why it had been omitted by the Committee, viz : that it 
 involved a palpable contradiction in terms, to another clause in the same instrument. 
 
 Mr. G. declared his intention to vote for the clause with the amendment rather than 
 reject it : but repeated tlie expression of his hope Lhat the amendment would be with- 
 drawn. 
 
 110 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
874 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, the gentleman from Amelia greatly misconceived him if he under- 
 stood him to say that he presumed tlie sensibility which he (Mr. S.) felt on this sub- 
 ject was morbid. He had said, that other gentlemen might so consider it. For him- 
 self, he considered it healthful. He considered the insensibility manifested by gen- 
 tlemen on the other side, as morbid. Upon the question under consideration, it ap- 
 peared that the members of the Committee differed. The gentleman who sat near 
 him, concurred in opinion with the gentleman from Norfolk. [Mr. Johnson said, 
 that he had not expressed it as Ids opinion, that that was the correct construction, 
 but that it was the construction which would in practice be put upon it : he did not 
 think it the true construction.] Mr. S. said, he was glad to hear that the gentleman 
 from Augusta agreed with him as to the true construction of the Constitution. But 
 it appeared that a doubt rested upon it ; and he hoped one way or other that doubt 
 would be removed. 
 
 Mr. Cabell addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 I used to express my extreme mortification and unfeigned astonishment, at the con- 
 struction given to the Constitution as reported by the Select Committee to the House, 
 by the venerable and learned gentleman from the city of Richmond, It must be with- 
 iu the recollection of every gentleman present that it was on my motion, that the 
 House settled the question, in terms, not to be misunderstood, that, the abolition of a 
 court, rieces.sarily and inevitably carried with it the abolition of the office, and of 
 course the salary of the Judge of such court — and that by a most decisive majority, 
 upon a call of the a3'es and noes. The words of the amendment, taken in connec- 
 tion with that portion of the resolution, imported that idea, to which it was attached. 
 The whole subject was then debated, by gentlemen of great eminence, who were re- 
 garded as the luminaries of constitutional law, that such was its fair, natural, and ne- 
 cessary construction, as it went from the House to the Select Committee. But now, 
 Sir, what do we hear from the yet higher authority of the gentleman from the city of 
 Richmond He now thinks, that the fair construction of the Constitution reported 
 by the Select Committee, as modified by them, must be, that notwithstanding the abo- 
 htion of a court, the Judge thereof will still retain " his office,''' and, though he may 
 have no duties to perform, will be entitled to enjoy his salary. I ask, Mr. President, 
 whether it is consistent with the honour of the Committee, or of the House — [here 
 the Chair called to order,] to which Mr. C. replied — 1 mean. Sir, no imputation on 
 the House or the Committee — but what I meant to ask, was, whether it would be 
 consistent with the honour of the Committee or the House, after the latter had, in 
 the most solemn manner, passed affirmatively upon a question, and sent it to the 
 Committee for the revision of its phraseology merely — to permit an important and 
 substantive proposition, asserting a great principle, applicable in all time to come to 
 the future legislation of the country on similar subjects, to be gotten round either by 
 leaving it out altogether, or by the use of language defeating its object ? 1 earnestly 
 trust they will not. It is perfectly evident, that the public rnind will not be satisfied, 
 and that it ought not to be. If the construction put upon this article, (the 25th,) by 
 the three last named gentlemen should prevail, the time may, and in all human pro- 
 bability will come, when the people will have saddled upon them, not a battalion only, 
 but an army of civil pensioners. I cannot contemplate such a state of things with- 
 out the extremest repugnance, and without being impelled by an imperious sense of 
 duty to my constituents, to endeavour to avert it, by all the means in my power. 
 
 Gentlemen may possibly imagine, that my course on this subject, is dictated by 
 some private grief, some pique or prejudice against the Judges, or some of them. God 
 forbid that such should be the fact ! So far from this being the case. Sir, there sits on 
 the bench of the highest tribunal in this State, a gentleman endeared to me by 
 every tie, that can sanctify the affections of man. I cannot, nevertheless, through 
 tenderness to the gentlemen, for many of whom I feel the greatest personal respect, 
 who happen to occupy at present the seats of justice, consent to see entailed upon 
 my country, the most grievous and oppressive judicial system. Is it not a fact, per- 
 fectly notorious, that in some parts of the State, for months and years, the temples of 
 justice have been closed That the supplications of the widow — the cries of the or- 
 phan, and claims of the poor, liave passed unheard and unheeded ? Yes, Sir, it is an 
 indisputable fact, that in numerous instances, the delays of justice have amounted to 
 a denial of it. This staj;e of things has continued too long. It is a grievance too in- 
 tolerable to be patiently borne. This thing " was not done in a corner" — it is noto- 
 rious. Is it wise then, to tie up the hands of the Legislature To restrain the power 
 of the representatives of the people, to modify or abolish, from time to time, and to 
 je-organize the Courts of Justice, in such manner as the public good may require, 
 without creating a necessity for continuing, at the same time, a privileged order — a 
 band of civil pensioners — a set of useless or incompetent officers — enjoying salaries 
 at the public expense, without rendering an equivalent service This, it appears to 
 me, ia carrying the idea of Judicial independence, to a most pernicious extreme, 
 while it betrays the want of a just confidence in the wisdom and integrity of the re- 
 
DEBATES OF 
 
 THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 875 
 
 presentatives of the people. For myself. 1 deem it mj duty, so far as may depend 
 upon me, to secure to the people, either directly or by their representatiyes. a real, 
 not a nominal responsibility of their officers, in all the departments of their Goyern- 
 raent. To my mind, independeiice is one thing — irresponsibiiity is another, and quite 
 a different thing. You create a responsibility of the omcers. in all the departments, 
 the Judicial only excepted. Why this distinction .- I know of nothing in the situation, 
 or functions of a Judicial, any more than in that of any other officer, requirinor him 
 only to be placed aboye the reach of the laws, ordinary or extraordinary. I asli par- 
 don of the House, for haying so unexpected!}' to myself, trespassed thus ions' on its 
 attention. 
 
 ZVIr. Cabell then moyed to add to the twenty-third article in these words : 
 Xo modification or abolition of any court, shall be construed to deprive any Judge 
 of his office : but such Judge shall perform any Judicial duties which the Legislature 
 shall assign him; but if no Judicial duties are. assigned him by the Legislature, he 
 shall receive no salary in virtue of such office."' 
 
 Mr. Cabell's remarks in support of his amendment : 
 
 I feel great embarrassment at obtruding m.yself on the attention of the House on 
 any question, especially this, (the Judiciary.) in relation to which, perhaps, more than 
 any other department of the Government, I might naturally suspect miyself of want of 
 information. It was not my fortune, Sir. to be brought up at the feet of Gamaliel. 
 Yet, 1 cannot be insensible to the effects resulting from the existence of a doubt, on 
 this important question. And I must confess that it is not a little extraordinary and 
 surprising to me, to obserye that gentlemen who have hitherto acted with me on this 
 subject, and to whose abilities, my amendment to the original resolution of the Com- 
 mittee of the Whole was mainh' indebted for its passage, should now be willing to 
 see the same doubt remain. It was maintained on this floor by gentlemen of great 
 ability, that the fair construction of the Constitution as reported to the House by the 
 Select Committee, went to the abohtion of the q§ice of Judge, and consequently, of 
 the salary, upon the abolition of the court. In tlie expression of that opinion, you, 
 Mr. President, and tlie gentleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell,) and the gentleman 
 from Amelia, (Gov. Giles.) concurred. Those opinions thus publiclj' given, were 
 satisfactory to the House, and to me, and it was at their instance, that I withdrew an 
 amendment which I had offiired to the twenty-second article of the Constitution. But, 
 now. Sir, when the able gentleman from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott.) declares that he dis- 
 sents from that opinion — when the gentleman from Augusta, (Mr. Johnson.) declares 
 it, as his opinion, that the act of Congress of 1502, was an erroneous interpretation 
 of the same words in the Constitution of the United States : and when, above all, the 
 Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the L'nited States declares in substance, the 
 same opinion, can gentlemen deem it inexpedient to adopt an amendment which 
 w^iU definitively settle the proper construction .' I trust not. And I earnestly hope that 
 some gentleman, more able than myself, more experienced and disciplined on legal 
 questions, and more conversant with the construction of Constitutional law, will move 
 such an amendment to the Constitution as it came to the House from the hands of 
 the Select Committee, as v.-ili forever put this question to rest. If no other gentleman 
 will make such motion, I wiU, in the hope of effecting this object, moye as an 
 amendment the words heretofore adopted by the House on my motion. 
 
 ISlx. Tazewell wished to say one word : It will be recollected by the Convention 
 that he had given his support on a former occasion to an amendment substantially the 
 same as that now offered. When the resolution was introduced a second time, the 
 same gentleman offered the amendment which he now proposed, and it was rejected 
 by the House. 
 
 Mr. Cabell begged leave to correct this statement. No vote had been taken on this 
 specific proposition : he had withdrawn this, and offered another. It was on that 
 other, that the House had passed, but not on the present amendment. 
 
 Mr. Tazewell rephed. the other amendment might have been somewhat different 
 in form, but its object and its effect were substantially the same with this ; and it was 
 negatived by a large majority. Mr. T. said he had voted with the majority on that 
 occasion, and should pursue the same course now, by voting against the present 
 amendment. In statincr his reasons, he should not detain the Convention very long, 
 certainly not so longr as some gentlemen had detained them on questions of less im- 
 portance. When the original resolution was introduced by the Judiciary Committee, 
 the venerable chairman of that Committee said, that the words of the resolution had 
 been employed expressly to guard against the construction which had been given 
 to the Fe^deral Constitution on this subject. The gentleman from Pittsylvania had 
 then offered this amendment with a view to neutradize the effect of the words as rer 
 ported, and it had carried : the whole was then referred to a Select Committee ; that 
 Committee found that certain words had been introduced into this Constitution which 
 were taken literally from another, where they had received a fixed and settled con- 
 -traction. They t"hen found a clause added, that was intended to prevent that con= 
 
876 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 struction, and then a third clause which went to neutrahze the effect of the second. 
 Why should the instrument be encumbered with two paragraphs which directly con- 
 tradicted each other ? But this was not all. If those clauses were incorporated, other 
 effects must follow, which Mr. T. was not prepared to sanction. You admit, said he, 
 the absurdity, (I beg pardon for employing the term,) the impossibility that the officer 
 should continue as such, after the abolition of his office ; that the office of the Judge 
 shall continue, after the tribunal to which he is attached is abolished. It is a doctrine 
 I cannot conceive, and never can consent to admit, and the clause whicli declares it 
 is at war with other powers in the instrument. By one clause you declare that the 
 compensation of a Judge shall not be diminished during his continuance in office ; by 
 a second clause you declare that his office shall remain after his court is abolished ; 
 and then by a third you say, that though his office remains, his compensation shall 
 not continue, unless under certain conditions. I cannot consent to these contradic- 
 tions, and I shall therefore vote against the amendment : yet I favour the object the 
 gentleman has in view, and ] am very sure that without the amendment, that object 
 must be accomplished by the construction that will be put upon the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Scott now offered an amendment to the amendment, by which he proposed to 
 strike out the last clause and insert the following : " Unless such court be abolished 
 by the concurrence of two-thirds of the General Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Claytor demanded a division of the question on striking out and inserting, and 
 it was divided accordingly. 
 
 Mr. Marshall submitted to his friend from Fauquier, (Mr. Scott,) whether his 
 amendment would not produce an effect which he did not contemplate ? A case might 
 occur, where a majority of the Legislature desired to abolish a court, not out of any 
 hostility to the Judge, but because they thought its abolition would promote the pub- 
 lic good : the amendment would prevent such a measure, unless two-thirds of both 
 Houses could be obtained in its favour. 
 
 Mr. Scott replied that his object was, to put a check upon the Legislature in de- 
 priving a Judge of his office by the abolition of his court. 
 
 Mr. Stanard proposed to modify Mr. Scott's amendment by striking out the words 
 
 modification or." 
 
 Mr. Scott accepted the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Claytor asked the ayes and noes on the amendment as thus modified. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, it would be with great reluctance he should be compelled to vote. 
 He thought the remarks of the gentleman from Norfolk, (Mr. Tazewell,) had great 
 force, yet if the mover would not consent to withdraw his amendment, he should be 
 compelled to vote in its favour. 
 
 Mr. Cabell thereupon expressed his willingness to withdraw his amendment with 
 the consent of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Stanard objecting, 
 
 The question was put on granting leave, and being carried, 
 Mr. Cabell withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. Scott thereupon, moved the following, to be inserted as a substantive article in 
 the Constitution : 
 
 " No law abolishing any court shall be construed to deprive a Judge thereof of his 
 office, unless two-thirds of the members of each House present, concur in the passage 
 thereof : But the Legislature may assign other duties to the Judges of courts abolished 
 by any law enacted by less than two-thirds of the members of each House present." 
 
 Mr. Giles : Is it possible that the gentleman from Fauquier can conceive such an 
 article necessary to the independence of the Judges ? On all other subjects a majority 
 of the Legislature is sufficient for action ; but here, after clogging the removal of a 
 Judge by all possible impediments, it is now proposed that in an act of ordinary legis- 
 lation, intended to suit the public institutions to the changing state of the country, 
 the assent of two-thirds of both Houses is to be required. In the modification of the 
 courts, it may become necessary to lessen the number of the Judges and thus leave 
 supernumeraries ; yet under the idea of supporting the independence of the Judges, 
 this cannot be done unless two-tliirds of both Houses concur. A bare majority of the 
 Legislature may not organize a court, so as to adapt it to the better administration of 
 the purposes of justice. If the Convention are ready for that, God knows where 
 they will stop. If such partiality exist in the House toward the Judges, that in order 
 to save them the business of the country must not go on, nothing more is to be done. 
 But this is not independence ; it is privilege. 
 
 Mr. Scott said, there was not a shadow of ground for such a construction. The ar- 
 ticle he had proposed, did not require the assent of two-thirds of the Legislature for 
 the abolition of a court. It merely provided that if the court should be abolished by a 
 vote of less than two-thirds of both Houses, such abohtion should not deprive the 
 Judge of his office : the court might go, but the Judge would remain, and be ready to 
 receive such other duties as the Legislature might assign him. If tlaey neglected to 
 assign him. any, his idleness would not be his fault, but theirs. Mr. S. said his whole 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 877 
 
 purpose was, that it should require two-thirds of the whole Legislature, to destroy 
 the office of a Judge. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, he would endeavour to state as succinctly as possible the reasons 
 why he should vote in favour of the proposition of the gentleman from Fauquier. At 
 the very commencement of my public life, or nearly so, I v.-as called to give a deci- 
 sion on the construction of that clause in the Federal Constitution which relates to 
 the tenure of the Judicial office ; and I am happy to ffiid, that after the lapse of thirty 
 years, I remain precisely of the same opinion that I then held. If a law should be 
 passed bona fide for the abolition of a court, wliich was a nuisance, and ought to be 
 abolished — Islx. R. said he considered such a lav/ as no infringement of Judicial in- 
 dependence : but, if the lavr was enacted mala fide and abolished a useful court, for 
 the purpose of getting rid of the Judge who presided in it, such a law was undoubt- 
 edly a violation of that independence : just as the killing of a man might be murder 
 or not, according to the intention, the quo anhno with wliich it was done. He said, 
 that it could not be necessary to recount to the gentleman who occupied the Chair, 
 (Mr. Barbour.) the history of the decision which was given in Congress, as to the 
 true intent and meaning of this part of the Federal Constitution. Parties had never 
 run higher than at the close of the administration of the elder Adams, and the com- 
 mencement of that of Mr. Jefferson. After effiDrts the most unparalleled, Mr. Adams 
 was ejected from power, and the downfall of the party attached to him was near at 
 hand. After this decision by the American people, when they were compelled to 
 perceive that the kingdom was passing from them, in the last agonies and throes of 
 dissolution, they cast about them to make some provision for the broken down hacks 
 of the party : and at midnight, and after midnight on the last day of Mr. Adams's ad- 
 ministration, a batch of Judges was created, and bequeathed as a legacy to those who 
 followed. The succeeding party on coming into power, found that They must consult 
 the construction of the Constitution to prevent the recurrence of such a practice ; be- 
 cause, if the construction should be allowed under which this had been done, it would 
 enable every palitical part}-, having three months notice, of their departure from the 
 helm of affairs, to provide for themselves, and their adherents, by getting up a Judi- 
 ciary S3'5tem, which would be irrevocable ;. a city of refuge v\"here they would be 
 safe from all approach of danger. To avoid such a result, it became necessary to 
 abolish the system which was then believed to be injurious, and which experience has 
 proved to be unnecessary. Mr. R. said, that he was one of those who voted for the 
 decision which declared thaTt the court might be abolished bona fide, and that the of- 
 fice of the Judge should cease with it. Mr. R. said, there was no cause for appre- 
 hending a similar abuse of power on the part of the Legislature of Virginia, and pro- 
 ceeded to give his reasons for this opinion. He remarked, that in political faith, as 
 in religious faith, no man could tell what might be believed hereafter, and he saw a 
 good reason for making a distinction on this subject, between the Legislature of a 
 State, and that of the Union. It was agreed on all hands that the mere modification 
 of a court did not abolish the office of a Judge, and the Legislature was left free in 
 that matter to play the whole gamut : the}- might modify and re-modify to their 
 heart's content, until the courts became as uncertain as the law. But such a state of 
 things could never occur, as that a party having timely notice that they must go out 
 of power, should make use of the Judiciary departaaent to make provision for tliem- 
 selves and their friends. But granting, that such aineasure should ever be attempted, 
 could there be the least doubt that a court got up for such an end, v.-ould find two- 
 thirds of the Legislature prepared to abolish it.' There could be no such doubt. Un- 
 der the proposed arrangement, tiiere could be as little danger that a court would be 
 abolished, for the purpose of getting rid of a Judge. Some confidence must be re- 
 posed in the Legislature. Under the Constitution at present in force, that body had 
 ftill power to abolish and regulate the courts ad libitum. The whole purpose of the 
 gentleman's proposition, as he understood it, was to prevent them from taking indirect 
 and undue means to get rid of an obnoxious Judge. Under this impression, he accepted 
 with perfect cheerfulness and heartiness, the amendment proposed by the gentleman 
 from Fauquier. 
 
 ]Mr. Coalter said, that he had been opposed in sentiment to the gentleman from 
 Augusta, to the gentleman from Amelia and the gentleman from i^Horfolk, as to the 
 position in which the Constitution stood, and as to the construction v.'hich was likely 
 to be oiven it : he had then determined to give his reasons why he could not vote for 
 it ; but as lonof as there was life there was hope, and he trusted he should be allowed 
 briefly to state his sentiments at this time. 
 
 Mr. C. then said, Mr. President : I came here this morning prepared to vote against 
 the passage of the Constitution to a third reading, not knovring. or having the least 
 idea that the amendment, now under consideration, would be offered. 
 
 One of the grounds of my intended vote being now under consideration ; and in 
 as much as there is hope, as long as life lasts, I will now, briefly as I can, submit my 
 
873 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 views on this subject, hoping they may have some effect on the question before us ; 
 if not, they will stand in print, as the reasons for my final vote. 
 
 I never can vote for a Constitution, which shall provide for a hatch, or litter of 
 Judges — (terms which may be very appropriate to some future set of Judges,) who 
 are to hold their offices at the mere icill of the Legislature — who may be put out of 
 existence by that body, either by sinking the boat under them, and drowning them — 
 by starvation — cruel and inhuman abuse and destruction of character, or by any other 
 wilful and deliberate slaying. 
 
 As to the present incumbents being turned out by this body, unless that is neces- 
 sary to give effect to the new Constitution, I give no vote, and say nothing, except 
 that if it inflicts no wound on the State, it inflicts none on me which I would avoid 
 hy turning on my heel. 
 
 But 1 have been alarmed for my country from the moment I was told that, in future, 
 I am to respond to another tribunal than God and my conscience. 
 
 If I am corrupt, unmindful of my duty, and unfaithful to my oath ; if I commit 
 any crime, I have neither God nor my conscience with me ; and my country must 
 punish me, when I divn. fairly convicted. This is my situation under the present Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 I am now advised, though, that Judges may become odious to the people and their 
 representatives, and they must be subject to be turned out by those representatives, 
 as they may by the people ; and that a responsible Judiciary, in this sense of the term, 
 may nevertheless be an independent Judiciary. 
 
 This may be according to the march of mind, and the true republican principle, as 
 understood in these latter days. 
 
 Our ancestors did not think so, and provided for no such case in the Constitution 
 they made for us. 
 
 When I was a boy, there was a book in use called Common Sense. It was read at 
 meeting-houses on the Lord's day. 
 
 I well recollect when, at the beginning of the revolutionary war, some one got on 
 a stump, between sermons, and read Common Sense to the people. 
 
 When I advanced in life, about the time of the French Revolution, there was ano- 
 ther book, read by some, called the .^ge of Reason. This was not read on Sundays I 
 believe, except by such as would not object to read the cards on Sundays. 
 
 I have lived in this Jlge of Reason, and yet I have some distrust in the doctrines of 
 the March of Mind that has taken place since the days of Common Sense. 
 
 Are we to recommend this Constitution to the people by the arguments used here.-* 
 
 That our Henrys and Pages, and Taylors, and Nicholases, and Pendletons, and Ma- 
 sons and Wythes, and a host beside, were aristocrats? and that our Judiciary, except 
 the County Courts, have become so odious, as that they must not only be cashiered, 
 but during all future time put under the ban of the empire ? 
 
 I don't think the people are yet mad enough, either to believe these things, or to 
 concur in the result. 
 
 A number of honourable men of this body, (not so numerous it is true, as I ex- 
 pected and feared, considering the high respectabihty of the quarter, from which the 
 proposition came) have thougTit, that it was a necessary part of the present scheme, 
 to call Judges to render a daily account on oath, why they were not in court on such 
 and such days, &c. Whether sfteh a provision, in prospect of some future Judiciary, 
 may be necessary, I know not. But if the conduct of the present Judges are sup- 
 posed to deserve the implied censure contained in that proposition, it is no wonder 
 they should be in the odour which it indicates. I have heretofore denied, so far as 
 -» the court I belong to is concerned, the justice of any such charge ; but if the proposed 
 Constitution contemplates a Judiciary, which, in the opinion of honest men, requires 
 such a clause as that, to carry its principles into practice, I can't think, until I see it, 
 that the people will approve of it. 
 
 The course which this subject has taken here, is well calculated to make that 
 branch of our Government, which has the least chance of defending itself against 
 groundless clamour, odious to the people, and to destroy their confidence in, and re- 
 spect for them ; and what is the consequence 
 
 Every Judge who will sit in the seat of justice under such a Constitution, will 
 know and feel, that when he decides against a man, in any case in which his motives 
 may be misconstrued, he does so at the hazard of being suspected of want of inte- 
 grity. The party may have some right to think, and in the bitterness of his heart 
 may say, that fellow dared not to do me justice. The fear for the security of his re- 
 putation, of his feelings, and even of his bread itself, has perverted the pure stream 
 of justice. However just and pure the administration of justice may be, it is not 
 considered as justice by him who has any cause to suspect its purity. 
 
 I am still more alarmed, when I hear it intimated here, that Judges, when they be- 
 come odious, can no longer be useful, and therefore ought to be dismissed. This, too, 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 879 
 
 in the face of so many cases, vrell known to this body, in which honest and honorable 
 Judcres have for a time been odious. 
 
 In how many ways may not Judges become odious, and during the excitement of 
 the moment, be irretrievably ruined, if they can be acted on by a body to whom they 
 are made odious, if that body lias it in its power to act during the heat of the moment 1 
 
 Sometimes he offends the prominent members of the bar, as was the case of Judge 
 Chase and others. So. too, if he opposes the Legislature in any favourite measure, 
 by declaring a liw uncoiistitidion-al ; or he may offend the other party, by declaring it 
 constitniionat. Sometimes the Judges become so by a leaning, as is supposed, to Fe- 
 deral usurpation — and the day may come — I think I see its dawn — when they will 
 become equally so, because tiiey go too far for State Rights. iVay, I understood my 
 friend from Ciiesterfield, who has borne honourable testimony in favour of the Judges, 
 to insinuate, that perhaps on some occasions, we may have done wrong in meddling 
 icith politics. 
 
 1 have had little to do on that subject, except in Presidential elections. It is true, 
 I have had my finger in that delicious pie more than once — I have been a member of 
 a Correspondmg Committee in three cases, I think. In two of them, however, I was 
 fortunate enough to be appointed by the Legislative Caucus. 
 
 In the last, bv tlie Convention to form an Anti-Jackson ticket. In one of the for- 
 mer, that of Clay. Crawford &- Co. I was against the whole set. They began the 
 electioneering campaign too soon for my taste; but, in a choice of evils, I was for 
 Crawford. In the late affair — or affray, if that is a better term, I might have been in 
 the Convention itself; but, I informed my old friends in Pvockbridge, who proposed 
 to confer that honor on me, that I was again opposed to both, and would, even at that 
 late day, do my best to oppose both, by offering some third man ; that I was tired of 
 a choice between evils ; and though I had that choice, yet as I could see no great dif- 
 ference, in political principle, between the candidates, I wished Virginia to stand erect 
 and firm in her principles, and to leave it to others to make that choice for us, if they 
 would not come over to a positive good. Who I will be for next, must noic depend 
 much, as is perceived, on the opinion of the Legislature. I hope no man will con- 
 sider me so ineffably stupid, as to risque my bread for such trifles as these. 
 
 I may have thought, that to elect one man would be a curse to the nation : but, I 
 have a right to change that opinion. I may even honestly change it — and to begin 
 my electioneering course in time, I think it not impossible, that I may be found on 
 the side of the Hero ; with liberty, however, to change my course on proper occasion 
 and due conviction. I was for him, (with the exception of the case of the Governor 
 of Georgia, and some other trifling matters) in his wars, although others, who honestly 
 supported him as President, then thought he was little better than a heathen and mur- 
 derer. Z\\y ancient regard for him is reviving ; and if he once swims across the Tiber, 
 with his batch of Editors round his neck, I may again rally in his ranks. If he can 
 do that, he will be greater than Caesar : he would have gone to the bottom with his 
 armour on, but for his friend. If he redeems that evil day, and I trust he will do that, 
 and much more good for his country, I may vote for him as a positive good. I wish 
 no more choices between evils. Seriously, though, I am opposed to Judges being thrown 
 into a situation in which they may be brought into a particular odour, by exercising 
 the right of every freeman. 
 
 Hitherto, having nothing further to hope for from the Government, and having 
 nothing to fear from the Government, except when they had an equal right to fear 
 their God and their consciences, they have acted, I hope, as upright and independent 
 men. If they are to become odious in these and a thousand other ways, and to be 
 turned out as consequently useless, although they may be perfectly honest, I can only 
 compare their situation to that of a witch in former days. The way she was to be 
 tried, I have been told, was to throw her into a river. If she swam out, she was a 
 witch, and was burnt ; for, nothing but witchcraft could have saved her. If she went 
 to the bottom, whether dragged there by the fiends who had laid a snare, and had 
 tempted her to sell her conscience and soul, or because she was an honest woman, 
 ^ mattered not — she only went to her last home a few hours before her time. 
 
 As the Constitution before us now stands, the whole hatch of Judges may be turned 
 out by a majority of a quorum, by a repeal of the law; and under a similar law, re- 
 enacted the next day, those of the true faith re-instated. Or, you may vote out a 
 Judge, two-thirds of a quorum concurring, whether he is merely odious only, or whe- 
 ther some high crime is imputed to him — or you may turn him out, for the latter, by 
 impeachment. It may be easier to vote him out, than to give him a fair trial ; the 
 responsibility for such an act is more decided. There are no Judges sworn in that 
 case : they don't sit in the judgment seat, but in a tumultuary assembly, with this 
 additional circumstance, that the accusing body becomes both Judge and Jury — the 
 Bill of Rights, which says, that a man has a right to be confronted icith his accusers, 
 to the contrary notwithstanding. 
 
880 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 If it be said, that this will compel an impeachment for an impeachable offence, I 
 ask why put into our Constitution a clause opposed to that Bill of Rights, on which 
 it is founded? Make a Judge only impeachable for crime, and give him a fair trial 
 when and where you will. 
 
 If he is superannuated, or otherwise unable to discharge his duties, or shall be 
 negligent or lazy in the discharge of them, which may arise from habit, not involving 
 moral turpitude, or if (on other days than the 4th of July,) he has unfortunately con- 
 tracted a habit, too frequently indulged in on that day — if he labours under a disease 
 of this kind — one to which many an honest man is subject, without ever being con- 
 scious of it himself, so as in this way to unfit himself for his highly important duties — 
 hear him, and if the accusation is well founded, turn him out by a vote. 
 
 Go beyond this, and you lay a snare for his conscience — ^you join the betrayer of 
 the souls of men, and you are answerable for those souls who are thus tempted and 
 destroyed. Under such temptation, let no man say, that he stands lest he fall. 
 
 Plow are we now to decide the pending questions of the officers, as to their claims 
 for half pay, or such others as may probably come before us of that kind, involving 
 the Treasury in very large sums ? If we decide in favour of the State, may we not 
 be suspected ? If against, may we not become odious, and must we not risque the 
 consequences ? 
 
 May we not be tempted to do the latter, that we may avoid suspicion ? Will you 
 leave a dispute to your friend or dependant, and not recollect, that, if he is an honest 
 man, he may bear against you on this very ground, and decide against you, unless 
 you have a very clear case indeed ? 
 
 I trust and hope, that the amendment will prevail. 
 
 Mr. Cabell moved the following amendment: 
 
 " But if no Judicial duties are assigned him by the Legislature, he shall receive no 
 salary in virtue of said office." 
 
 Mr. Randolph was opposed to the amendment of Mr. Cabell, and observed, that the 
 House would perceive at a glance, the question might as well be taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. Scott, as that of Mr. Cabell. That of Mr. Scott declared, that the Judge 
 should not lose his office by the abolition of his court, unless that abolition took place 
 by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses : that of Mr. Cabell went to nullify this pro- 
 vision. The sense of the House, therefore, would be declared on the latter when it 
 was expressed on the former. 
 
 The question was then put on Mr. Scott's amendment, and decided by ayes and 
 noes as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnax, Drom- 
 goole, Alexander, Marshall of Richmond, Nicholas, Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, 
 Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne,_Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, 
 Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Holladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Cooke, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, Taylor 
 of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, 
 Prentis, Branch, Townes, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Pvose, Coalter, Joynes, Up- 
 shur and Perrin — 53. 
 
 JYoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Giles, Goode, Tyler, Anderson, Coffman, 
 Harrison, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Osboi-ne, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of V/ashington, Bj^ars, Roane, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, 
 Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, SumVners, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, 
 Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, 
 Stuart, Pleasants, Thompson and Bayly — 42. 
 
 Mr. Cabell then renewed his motion, and it was decided by ayes and noes as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Giles, Goode, Tyler, Anderson, Coffman, Har- 
 rison, Williamson, M"Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Osborne, Donaldson, 
 George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Roane, Cloyd, Chapman, Ma- 
 thews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, 
 Wilson, Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, 
 Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Thompson and Bayly — 43. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnax, Drom- 
 goole, Alexander, Marshall of Richmond, Nicholas, Clopton, Baldwin, Johnson, Mil- 
 ler, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Hali- 
 fax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Stanard, Plolladay, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Henderson, 
 Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Boyd, Pendleton, Taylor of 
 Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, 
 Prentis, Branch, Townes, Gordon, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Up- 
 shur and Perrin — 52. 
 
 No other amendment then being before the Convention, the question was pro- 
 pounded on engrossing the Constitution. 
 
 Messrs. Giles and Coalter said, they should vote in the afiirmative, but reserved to 
 themselves the right of voting as they thought best on the ultimate passage. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 8S1 
 
 The vote on the engrossment was read as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Randolph, Leigh of Halifax. Logan, Venable. Madison. HoUaday, Henderson, Cooke, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Mar- 
 shall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, CanipbeU of Bedford, Branch, 
 Towne.-. >I ,.i-:n. Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale.Rose, Coalter, 
 Jojmes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 53. 
 
 jYoes — ]NIessrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, WiHiamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, iNaylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Bj-ars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, 
 Saunders, Cabell and Stuart — 42. 
 
 On Mr. Clopton's motion, an Engrossing Committee was appointed, (viz : Messrs. 
 Clopton, Powell and Fitzhugh :) and to give time for engrossing the Constitution, 
 a4journed till to-morrow 12 o'clock. 
 
 THURSDAY, January 14, 1530. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, but the engrossing of the draught of the Con- 
 stitution not having been completed, it adjourned to meet again at 2 o'clock. 
 
 It met again at 2, but the engrossing not having yet been completed, it adjourned 
 to meet at 7 o'clock. 
 
 The Convention met at 7 o'clock. After some time, Mr. Clopton, from the Com- 
 mittee appointed to superintend the engrossing of the Constitution, entered the House 
 and presented the engrossed copy to the President. 
 
 It was then read a tliird time from the Chair, 
 
 And the question being thereupon put, Sliall this Coiisiitution jjass ? 
 
 Mr. Summers stated, that a member from one of the northwest districts, (INIr. Dod- 
 dridge,) was so seriously indisposed as to be confined to his bed, and requested that the 
 liberahty and indulgence heretofore extended to members under like circumstances, 
 should apply to the case of this gentleman, and that he might be permitted to record 
 his vote at any time before the adjournment of the Convention, should his health so 
 improve as to enable him to attend. Mr. S. said, that if the health of the sick mem- 
 ber was not improved by the following morning, and it should be found that his vote 
 would materially jifiect the question about to be taken, that the remaining delegation 
 would, he understood, be prepared to give the people of that district their proper weight 
 upon the very interesting proposition announced from the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Jones made a similar request in behalf of his colleague, (Mr. Giles.) whose in- 
 firm state of health would probably prevent iiis attendance after night in such damp 
 Aveather. 
 
 The Chair said, that presuming from what had hitherto been done in similar cases, 
 that such was the will of the Convention, he should give the permission unless it were 
 objected to. 
 
 Mr. Pvandolph, after expressing his strong disposition to do all in the case which 
 courtesy would require, said he was compelled by the stern dictates of duty to object 
 to the granting of the leave desired. He thought the principle was fraught with the 
 utmost danarer. He put the case, that the adoption or rejection of the Constitution 
 should depend on a single vote — or on two votes — and asked whether the Convention 
 would permit two members, who had been absent during a considerable part of the 
 discussions, to enter the House to-morrow, and by their votes to reverse the decisions 
 that mio-ht t3e had to-night.? He illustrated the principle by a further case of a bill 
 in Congress being similarly situated, and asked if every one must not perceive the 
 tampering to which such leave would open a door He repeated his wish to be able 
 to extend^ every courtesy toward the absent gentlemen, but concluded by expressing 
 his conviction that it was his bounden duty to resist the request, 
 
 (As Mi-. R. was speaking. Mr. Gile^s entered the House.) 
 
 Mr. Summers expressed his regret, that the indulgence which he had asked for a 
 sick friend, should have rnet with "opposition : he referred to the uniform practice of 
 the Convention in accordinsf like permission, whenever it had been asked under cir- 
 cumstances like the present" He thought there was but slight ground to apprehend 
 that the vote, about to be taken, would be affected by the one vvhich mav be hereafter 
 
 111 
 
882 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 recorded ; but suppose that to be the case, was the Convention prepared to send out 
 a Constitution to the people which could only be passed by the absence of a sick mem- 
 ber ? The gentleman from Charlotte had heretofore reprobated an attempt to pass a 
 Constitution by a lean majority of one or two, and therefore he had the less expected 
 an opposition from him : if the coming in of the absent member should reverse the 
 decision, it would only show that it ought never to have taken place. The objection, 
 founded in the danger of the example, he thought was not entitled to serious weight. 
 If it would leave a door to tampering, that door was already open 3 every member 
 voting on the side of the majority might be tampered with, because any member so 
 voting might move a re-consideration, and change his vote, and thus by possibility 
 change the decision of the question. 
 
 Mr. Randolph said, that the permission heretofore granted, had had reference to in- 
 termediate votes, but this vote was final. 
 
 The question being put, the leave was granted without a count. 
 
 The question being again proposed, and on the passage of the Constitution, 
 
 Mr. Coalter, after referring to the difficulty he had had in making up his mind, ex- 
 pressed his final determination to be, that he should vote for the Constitution : he took 
 it, if at all, as the least of two evils : he declared his decided preference for the mixed 
 basis of representation, compounded of population and taxation, and his objection to 
 the extension of the right of sufFrage as being of dangerous tendency ; but hoped that 
 as he had not entered the Convention till the discussion on those points was princi- 
 pally over, he should be permitted to enter a full statement of his views in the volume 
 which was preparing by the gentleman who took notes of the debate. 
 
 The President then rising, put to the Convention the final question, Shall this 
 Constitution pass 
 
 Mr. M'Coy asked for the ayes and noes, and the vote stood as follows : 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Ches- 
 terfield, Giles, Erodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Goode, Marshall of Richmond, 
 Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, 
 Kandolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Holladay, Henderson, Cooke, 
 Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Mori'is, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Mar- 
 shall of Fauquier, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Campbell of Bedford, Branch, 
 Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, Thompson, Massie, Bates, 
 Neale, Rose, Coalter, Joynes, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin — 55. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, 
 M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Stanard, Mercer, Fitzhugh, Osborne, 
 Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, George, 
 M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, 
 Duncan, Laidley, Sunnners, See, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor 
 and Saunders — 40. 
 
 So THE Constitution was agreed to, (by a majority of fifteen votes; which will 
 be reduced to fourteen by the vote of Mr. Doddridge, if he shall be so far recovered 
 as to be able to give it.) 
 
 The question was then put on the title, which was also agreed to, as follows : 
 
 " An amended Constitution, or form of Government for Virginia." 
 
 A Committee of three was, on motion of Mr. Joynes, appointed to superintend the 
 enrolment of the Constitution now adopted. 
 
 The Chair appointed Messrs. Joynes, Scott and Cooke as that Committee. 
 
 Mr. Powell moved that the enroled Constitution be signed by the President, and 
 countersigned by the Secretary. 
 
 Mr. Scott moved as an amendment that it be signed by the President, and such other 
 members as were disposed to sign the same, and countersigned by the Secretary. 
 
 This amendment was carried, ayes 51, and the resolution as amended was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. Joynes moved the printing of ten thousand copies of the Constitution for the 
 use of the members. 
 
 Mr. Upshur suggested some difficulty as to the transportation and distribution. 
 
 Mr. Joynes said, it would be but about one hundred copies apiece to the members. 
 
 Mr. Wilson, after objecting to thus spending the people's money, proposed that five 
 copies should be presented to each member of the House of Delegates and Senate, 
 which was agreed to, and the motion of Mr. Joynes was carried. 
 
 Mr. Cabell, believing that the vote which had passed as to the mode of authentica- 
 ting the enroled Constitution might place some gentlemen in dehcate and unpleasant 
 circumstances, moved a re-consideration of it. 
 
 This motion gave rise to a desultory debate, in which Messrs. Cabell, Henderson, 
 Mason of Frederick, Claytor, Scott, Bayly, Coalter, Mercer, Stanard, Johnson and 
 Nicholas took part. 
 
 It was urged on the one side, that the signatures of the members were unnecessary, to 
 authenticate the instrument, those of the officers of the Convention being sufficient: 
 that the course was unusual, having been pursued in only nine out of twenty-six Con- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 883 
 
 stitutions agreed to in other States, and in those cases the members had been nearly 
 unanimous in agreeing to the instrument so certified : that if some signed the instru- 
 ment while others refused, it would be perpetuating on the face of a document, to be 
 deposited in the archives, the disunion of that body : and that it would place those gen- 
 tlemen who had voted against adopting the Constitution, in a very unpleasant situa- 
 tion, some of them being very unwilling to put their hands to an instrument as re- 
 commending it to the people, while they entirely disapproved of it as a whole. 
 
 It was contended on the other side, that as the caption of the instrument ran in the 
 plural number, there was a propriety that it should have a plurality of signatures, and 
 not be signed by a single man only : that no gentleman was committed by signing it, 
 as the signature was merely a form of attestation to the instrument, as being that which 
 the Convention had agreed upon : that it could occasion no misunderstanding of any 
 one's views, as the vote was recorded by ayes and noes, and pt;blished to the world : 
 and as to perpetuating- the evidence of disunion in the archives, that would of neces- 
 sity be done, and much more effectually too, by preserving in the archives, the Jour- 
 nals of the Convention, where all the discordant votes were on record : and that if 
 granting the leave to sign might place some gentlemen in a delicate situation, with- 
 holding it would be a very harsh act toward such as were desirous of placing their 
 signatures to the instrument. 
 
 (Mr. Mason of Frederick, after declaring that if it was the last act of his life, he would 
 refuse his signature to such a paper, gave notice, that a protest would be drawn up, 
 and the signatures invited of all who were opposed to the form of the new Consti- 
 tution.) 
 
 Mr. Cabell said, that he had acted throughout, so help him Heaven, in good faith 
 to the West: he had believed, and still did believe, that the white population alone 
 was the true and proper basis of representation : but having been, as he esteemed it, 
 fairly beaten, he was willing to confess it. and he trusted he should be permitted to 
 march off the field retaining his side-arms, with flag flying, and he hoped, with all the 
 honors of war. 
 
 Mr. Stanard wished to declare his explicit renunciation of the ground taken by the 
 gentleman from Frederick, (Mr. Mason.) He objected to several provisions in the 
 instrument, and thought that the allotment of power was, according to every test, less 
 favorable to Eastern Virginia than justice required : but he would have given up that, 
 and more, if he saw that it would be accepted bv gentlemen from the West as an ami- 
 cable compromise : but the ground on which he had rested his negative vote, was one 
 provision, which alone would have been decisive with him, even if he had received a 
 carte hlatiche to make all the rest as he pleased : he thought the Convention were doing 
 what they had no right to do. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said, he had voted against this Constitution under a sense of imperi- 
 ous duty, but with a degree of reluctance which few were able to conceive. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas was glad of an opportunity of saying, that the vote he had given was 
 dictated solely by a conviction that the public good required it at his hands. 
 
 The question on re-consideration was at length put and carried. 
 
 Mr. Claytor moved to amend the amendment of Mr. Scott, by striking out the 
 clause relating to the attestation by the signatures of the members. 
 
 When, after some further conversation, on motion of Mr. Stanard, the resolution 
 and amendments were laid upon the table. 
 
 Some accounts for expenses of fuel, transcribing, &c. were passed. 
 
 Mr. Mercer obtained leave of absence. 
 
 Mr. Cooke gave notice that he should to-morrow move the consideration of the pro- 
 positions he had offered as to the mode of carrying the Constitution into effect. (He 
 would willingly have waived them ; but should he do so, they would be immediately 
 moved again by another gentleman.) 
 
 The Convention then adjourned, (at near 10 o'clock.) 
 
 FRIDAY, January 15, 1830. 
 
 The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with the following appropriate 
 prayer by the Rev. Mr. Croes of the Episcopal Church. 
 
 Jl form of prayer used on the last clay of the session of the Convention, by the Rev. 
 
 Robert B. Croes. 
 
 God, the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us, miserable sinners. 
 O G-od, the Son, Redeemer of the world, have mercy upon us, miserable sinners. 
 O God, the Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, have mercy upon 
 us, miserable sinners. 
 
884 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Thy property, O Lord, is always to have mercy ; to thee it appertaineth to forgive 
 sins. Spare us, therefore, good Lord; spare thy people, whom thou hast redeemed. 
 Enter not into judgment with thy servants, who are vile earth and miserable sinners, 
 but so turn thine anger from us who meekly acknowledge our vileness, and truly re- 
 pent us of our faults; and so make haste to help us in this world, that we may ever 
 live with thee in the world to come, through the merits and intercession of our com- 
 passsionate High Priest. 
 
 We thank thee, most Gracious Father, for the various mercies of Creation, Provi- 
 dence, Redemption and Sanctification, with which thou hast been pleased to bless us. 
 We render thee the ascription of praise, that thou hast cast ouy lot in this land of jus- 
 tice and liberty; that we are endowed with civil and religious principles, v/hich no 
 worthiness of our own could have obtained ; that we are permitted to sit under our 
 vine and fig-trees, with none to make us afraid. But chiefly are Ave bound to glorify 
 thy name for thine inestimable love in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, for the means of grace, and the hope of glory. Make, we beseech thee, all 
 the people of this our favored country to be duly sensible of these distinguished bles- 
 sings — and grant that they may shovv^ their gratitude to thee by cultivating that right- 
 eousness which exalteth a nation, and by abstaining from those sins which are a re- 
 proach to any people. To the mem-bers of this Convention, now assembled in thy 
 presence, give the abundance of thy grace — that they may be especially thankful for 
 thy goodness to them. May they call to remembrance, that while others have been 
 afliicted by thy chastising hand, Ihey, for the most part, have enjoyed the blessing of 
 health. May they bear in mind, that by the King's reign, Princes decree justice, and 
 that it is of thij mercy, that they have been permitted to proceed thus far in their la- 
 bours, without a more serious interruption of harmony than they have yet experi- 
 enced. Be with them. Almighty Father, at the close of their dehberations. May that 
 spirit of charity now animate them, which beareth all things, believeth all things, 
 hopeth all things, and endureth all things. Separating from one another with the 
 most friendly feelings, do thou return them in safety and in health to their families 
 and constituents ; and so direct and dispose their hearts, that they may use their best 
 exertions to promote peace and unity and concord — to advance thy glory, the good of 
 thy church, the safety, honour and welfare of thy people. 
 
 Finally, we pray thee, that all the nations of the earth may be made to cherish, and 
 to stand fast in the liberty wherev/ith Christ hath made us free — and that the time 
 may soon arrive when the comfortable Gospel of the Saviour shall be truly preached, 
 truly received, and truly followed in all places, to the breaking down of the kingdom 
 of sin, satan, and death — till at length the whole of thy dispersed sheep being 
 gathered into one fold, shall become partakers of everlasting life, through the merits 
 and death of Jesus Christ our Saviour. 
 
 The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of 
 the Holy Ghost, be with us all, ever more ! Amen. 
 
 Mr. Joynes, from the Committee appointed to superintend the enrolment of the 
 Constitution, entered the Convention about 12 o'clock, with that instrument in his 
 hand, enroled on parchment of the largest size, and presented it to the Chair, ac- 
 companied with a certificate that it had been carefully compared with the engrossed 
 copy and been found to be correct. 
 
 Mr. P^andolph now rose and addressed the Convention in substance as follows : 
 
 Mr. President, — I feel embarrassed with regard to bringing forv/ard the question, as 
 to those to whom this Constitution shall be submitted for adoption or rejection. If I 
 did not misunderstand the gentleman from Augusta, that gentleman conceded, that 
 the Act of Assembly, by Vv'hich tiiis Convention — shall I say, was gotten up — was not 
 a legal Act, having been passed without legal authority; but he seemed to think, that 
 the fact of its having been subsequently submitted to the freeholders of the Common- 
 wealth, cured the defect of authority in those who passed it. Now, with all deference 
 to that gentleman, let me be permitted to say, that the freeholders never gave any 
 such assent as is supposed to be implied. The Legislature passed two Acts : the first 
 was for determining the question, whether there should be any Convention at all. By 
 that Act, the question was submitted to the freeholders ; and from the face of the re- 
 turns, it appeared that there was a majority in favor of a Convention : Whereupon, 
 the Legislature passed a second Act, convening that body ; but inserted in the Act a 
 clause, leaving no option in the freeholders to reject, or to assent to the Constitution 
 which should be proposed ; or to the provisions of that Act itself, even if they had 
 been aware of all the provisions it contained : whereas I am as certain, as I can be of 
 any thing, that they y/ere not av^^are of those provisions at all. The freeholders first 
 assent to the assembling of a Convention — the Legislature thereupon appoint the day 
 when Delegates should be chosen— and, in the same Act, insert a clause, requiring 
 the Constitution to be submitted to whomsoever the Convention might please to de- 
 clare qualified for members of the House of Burgesses. When the election day ar- 
 rived, the freeholders were obIiged~5e defendendo— or rather—^e defcndendis— to elect 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 885 
 
 Delegates tQ the Convention — or, as the other alternative, to allow a part only of the 
 Commonwealth, to propose such Constitution, as to them might seem good. If the 
 freeholders residing East of the Blue Ridge, had refused to elect Delegates, the Con* 
 vention vrould have been attended exclusively by Delegates from the West of that 
 Ridge — and then, what Constitution would have been presented to the Commonwealth, 
 I cannot pretend to tell. On the other hand, if the freeholders West of the Ridge had 
 refused to elect Delegates, then those East of the Ridge would have proposed a Con- 
 stitution equally objectionable to the West. So tliat it is plain, that the fact of the 
 freeholders having appointed their Delegates under the Act of Assembly, cannot, 
 even by the most distant implication — unless it be the remotest implication that 
 ever entered the mind of man — be considered as conveying any assent of theirs, that 
 the new Constitution should be submitted for acceptance or rejection, to any persons 
 but themselves, they shall assent to this Constitution — if they shall choose to ratify 
 it — well and good — there is an end of the matter — theirs is the power — though theirs 
 will not be the glory. Sir, it is as plain as any proposition in Euclid — Sir, it is plainer — 
 it is self-evident — that no other power on earth, save that from which this Convention 
 derives all its authority to propose any Constitution at all, can rightfully pronounce 
 on the validity of our acts, or decide upon the acceptance or rejection of such Consti- 
 tution as we shall make. 
 
 Sir, I consider this as the greatest question which has been presented to this body, 
 since it assembled. Much will depend on its decision — yes, Sir, very much will de- 
 pend on it. 
 
 Is it not plain that the freeholders had no option but to elect delegates ? But that 
 does not in the slightest degree consecrate that provision in the act, which declares 
 to whom the Constitution shall be submitted. Sir, though it is using strong terms, it 
 would have been an act of treachery to their own principles, to permit the Constitu- 
 tion to be submitted to any others than freeholders for acceptance or rejection. Is it 
 not obvious that if the Commonwealth consists of freeholders and noivfreeholders — 
 and the non-freeholders are — as we have been told they are-— the most numerous of 
 the two — that tJie worst of Constitutions — and God knows, I have nothing to say in 
 favour of this one — might have been imposed upon the Commonwealth by those 
 who — in the language of a gentleman on this floor — are " out of the Constitution" — 
 against the voice of every freeholder in the country ? Sir, what sort of a tribunal do 
 you elect, when you admit tlaose who have no lot or part in our acts — to pass judg- 
 ment upon them Sir, you might as well refer the Constitution to the people of 
 Ohio — or the people of Kentucky — or — I v/ill go farther — to the people of Japan. 
 Yes, Sir — they have just as good a right to decide upon it. 
 
 Mr. President, 1 knov7 the time is precious. I believe I have done justice so far as 
 my poor capacity will allow — to the opinions I hold, and I will not longer detain you. 
 
 Mr. Coalter took the same ground — and contended that the act of the Assembly, 
 calling a Convention, was an act of usurpation — which he had opposed at the time, 
 and still considered as a revolutionary movement. He explained the grounds of ne- 
 cessity on which he had voted for delegates to the Convention, and contended, that 
 as that body derived all its authority from freeholders, it had no right to go beyond 
 them in submitting its acts. 
 
 While Mr. Randolph Vv^as engaged in reducing his intended motion to writing, 
 
 Mr. Mason of Frederick stated to the Convention, that when the question had been 
 agitated, the evening previous, as to the proper mode of authenticating the instru- 
 ment which had to-day been returned by the Committee on enrolment, finding it to 
 be the sentiment of a majority that it was to receive the signatures of all the mem- 
 bers who chose to sign it, he had been stronglj^ impressed with the necessity of pre- 
 senting the viev/s held by himself and others opposed to the adoption of the new Con- 
 stitution, in the shape of a protest: but finding afterwards that the resolution on that 
 subject had been laid upon the table, and perceiving it to be the understanding that it 
 was not again to be taken up, he considered that necessity as having ceased; and, 
 therefore, no protest would be presented. 
 
 Mr. R,andolpli then moved the following resolution, on which he asked the ayes 
 and noes : 
 
 Resolved, That the amended Constitution adopted by this Convention, be submit- 
 ted on the respective election days in the month of April next, to the persons quali- 
 fied to vote under the existing Constitution, for members of the General Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Thompson said he was constrained by an imperious sense of duty, to trespass 
 (he hoped for the last time) upon the patience and attention of this Convention, for 
 the purpose of expressing his most decided disapprobation of, and his objections to, the 
 passage of the resolution just offered by the gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Ran- 
 dolph.) He regretted, that the gentleman had felt it his duty at this late hour to urge 
 its consideration, because its adoption could not possibly accomplish any valuable pur- 
 pose, but on the contrary might, and he verily believed, would produce excitement, 
 heart-burnings, and dissatisfaction, v/ith that part of the community, the non-free- 
 
886 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 holders, whom your new Constitution invests with the elective franchise — Chd hono ? 
 will you do this. Can those who are friendly to the new Constitution, and really 
 desire its ratification by the people, expect to accomplish their wishes by the adoption 
 of this resolution, the necessary effect of which will be, gratuitously to insult and ex- 
 5isperate that portion of your fellow-citizens. Reject this resolution, and permit them 
 to have a voice in the decision of this question, and they will be the fast friends of this 
 hew charter. Adopt it and you make them its enemies and create an excitement in 
 the country to be deprecated by all ; an excitement that will not be confined to them, 
 but which will prevail with the freeholder, in common with the non-freeholder. For, 
 permit me to tell gentlemen, who deem the freeJiolders indifferent on this subject, 
 that they do them the most flagrant injustice. It should be recollected that this Con- 
 vention was called by the freeholders, and an object not the least prominent, was that 
 of enfranchising their disfranchised brethren. 
 
 Mr. T. said, this new Constitution was no very great favourite with him. He had 
 voted for it, it was true, but with tlie most unfeigned reluctance — he had done so in 
 the spirit of conciliation and compromise. It had been his misfortune to represent on 
 this floor a divided people, a people entertaining conflicting views and opinions on the 
 great and delicate questions involved in our recent deliberations — and he had felt it his 
 duty thus circumstanced, to consult in some measure, the wishes, the hopes, and the 
 fears of both sides — to yield somewhat to the unforeseen circumstances of the occa- 
 sion, and to offer up some of his own individual convictions of political right and po- 
 litical justice, upon the altar of the public peace : for these reasons only, had he recorded 
 his vote in favour of the passage of the Constitution : that he did so with extreme re- 
 luctance, was not because he considered the new devoid of all recommendation ; far 
 from it; (he would frankly confess, that he considered it a valuable improvement 
 upon the old, containing many valuable features of reform ;) but because representa- 
 tion had not been based at the present and in all future time upon free white popula- 
 tion, the only true basis ; because the election of Governor was not referred to the 
 people; because an Executive Council was retained, the Right of Suffrage not suffi- 
 ciently extended, and the County Court system in its organization and powers left 
 unreformed. A hard necessity, however, had compelled him to give his assent to this 
 new charter, notwithstanding these great objections; and whenever as one of the peo- 
 ple he should be brought to choose between the new and the old, he should not hesi- 
 tate to give to the new his decided preference and support. When he voted for it, 
 he had done so in good faith : he should vote for it at the polls, and should recommend 
 it to the adoption of his constituents. But, said Mr. T., notwithstanding this avowal, 
 and as anxious as he was that this day should terminate our labours in peace, harmo- 
 ny, and mutual good feeling, he icould scuj, that should that resolution be adopted, he 
 should esteem it his duty to move a re-consideration of the vote adopting the amended 
 Constitution — and would, if sustained in this motion, vote against its adoption, pre- 
 ferring to submit no Constitution at all, to submitting any, in a manner as he believed, 
 so violative of the natural, inherent, and original rights of man, as that proposed by 
 the resolution under consideration. He contended, that according to the theory and 
 principles of free government and the equal rights of man, the question of ratifica- 
 tion or rejection should be submitted to the whole community — freeholder and non- 
 freeholder, whether entitled or not to the Right of Suffrage under the Constitution 
 submitted, or the existing one. This, he said, had been the invariable practice of 
 every State in the Union, that had submitted an original or amended Constitution. It 
 was the only way in which a government could regularly and rightfully be called into 
 existence. It is then the act of a majority, all having been consulted — and if a ma- 
 jority exclude a part from Suffrage, they have the unquestionable right to do so. From 
 their decision there is no appeal. Then, and then only is decided rightfully the ques- 
 tion, whether it is expedient to surrender this great natural right. Then is there less 
 cause of complaint against its abridgment. Then might the plea of expediency be 
 urged with plausibihty and effect to sustain the decree of the majority, in which resides 
 the rightful sovereignty in all free governments. All the gentlemen who have advo- 
 cated a restricted Suffrage on this floor, have founded the right to exclude upon the 
 ground of expediency, and not that one man by nature has more right than another ; 
 but the difference between us is, that they make the minority the judges of the ex- 
 pediency of retaining power in their own hands. I claim for the majority the right 
 to decide this question. The same principle that would sanction the right of less 
 than a majority to decide this question of expediency, would justify monarchy, oli- 
 archy, aristocracy, despotism. If the freeholders, without consulting the non-free- 
 olders, arrogate to themselves the exclusive right to govern this land, whether they 
 be a majority or not, why may not a part of them with equal propriety assume that 
 right in exclusion of the rest why may not the large landed proprietors deposing the 
 petty freeholders, say, that they alone are the rightful sovereigns ? 
 
 The act to organize a Convention, has been made the subject of allusion and con- 
 struction on several occasions in this Convention, and by the gentleman from Char- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 887 
 
 lotte. (Mr. Randolph.) the subject of complaint and severe animadversion. He has 
 been pleased to term the whole act, but more especially that part of it that has imme- 
 diate reference to this subjectj an usurpation on the part of the Legislature that 
 enacted it. The 19th section of this act provides, that the amended Constitution shall 
 be submitted for ratification or rejection, to ail such persons, as shall, by the amended 
 Constitution, be authorised to vote for members of the Lesf^slature, or by this Conven- 
 tion shall be authorised to vote on the question of its ratification or rejection. I give 
 the substance and not the vrords of the act. The whole object of this provision was 
 to declare, what it was supereroofatory to affirm, that if it should be the pleasure of this 
 body to designate the persons to whom our work should be submitted, we had the 
 power to do so. and that in the event of our silence on this subject, the sheriffs should, 
 on the question of ratification or rejection, take the votes of all qualified under the 
 amended Constitution. The history of this provision of the law in its progrress and 
 passage tlu-ough the Legislature, induced Mr. T. to beheve, that it was intended as 
 an indication of that body to this, of its sense of the propriety of estendinof Suffrage 
 on the question of ratification to the whole community, rather than to restrict it to 
 freeholders as we are asked to do by the resolution of the gentleman from Charlotte, 
 (Mr. Pvandolph.) In the Legislature it was contended on the one hand, that all 
 should be allowed to vote on this question — on the other, that only the freeholders 
 should vote. The adoption of the provision referred to. taken in connection with the 
 almost universal opinion prevailingr- in the Legislature, that Suffrage would be ex 
 tended by the Convention, repudiates entirely the claim of those who contended for 
 a freehold submission. Mr. T. believed, the rea.1 object of the provision, was an ex- 
 tended submission of the question, thousfh by its terms, the right to diminish or to 
 enlarge it might equally be inferred. 
 
 This was the usurpation of which the gentleman complained, that the Legislature 
 had not confined the submission to the freeholders. If it were an usurpation — 
 against whom and by whom was it committed ? Against the freeholders by the free- 
 holders themselves — for, what thev did bv their acrents. the members of the Legisla- 
 ture, they did by themselves — and this 'usurpation thus committed by themselves 
 aguinst themselves, these same freeholders ratified, first, by their acquiescence, and 
 secondly, by the act of electing members to this Convention, and all this, so far as I 
 have heard, without a murmur^ or complaint acrainst this act or any part of it. The 
 gentleman from Charlotte, (:\Ir. Randolph.) will surely not complain of the fiction by 
 which I make the law of the last session the act of the freeholders — when he and his 
 associates have so frequentlv contended on this floor, that the act of the Legislature 
 in the election of a Governor or other officer, would be substantially an election by 
 the people, beinor their act performed by their agents. No one ever supposed, that 
 the acts to take the sense of the jpeo-ple and to oriranize a Conxeixtion. were acts of ordi- 
 nary legislation, or properly speakingr, acts of legislation at ah, as little so as an elec- 
 tion by that body of anv officer. No one ever supposed, that the old Constitution 
 either expressly or impliedly gave such a power — for it must be recollected, the old 
 Constitution contained no provision for its own amendment, and to expect that it 
 could, strictly speaking, be changed according to laic, would be to suppose an absur- 
 dity. The acts spoken of, were called for by their constituents, resulted from the 
 necessity of the case, and were justified by that supreme and paramount law, the salus 
 popidi. In short, they supplied the only mode, by which the orioinal riofht of the peo- 
 ple to meet in fill and free Convention to reform, alter, or abolish their form of go- 
 vernment, could be exercised, without jeopardizing the peace, tranquillitv, and har- 
 mony of the State. The g-entleman has himself stated over and over again, that the 
 people Could not exercise this right in propria persona, and independently of the ex- 
 isting government — and that an attempt to call a Convention, without Legislative fa- 
 cilities, would be flaoritious. The gentleman's various arguments taken together, 
 prove too much : that is — that although the riarht of the people to call a Convention 
 is conceded by all. yet the practical exercise of this right is usurpation or crime, for 
 that is the sum and substance of his arguments. In one breath with the gentleman, 
 the Legislature is very trust-worthy — and their acts are to be deemed the acts of their 
 constituents — ^but when those acts incur his disapprobation, and are not entirely to his 
 taste, they are acts of usurpation. 
 
 The truth is, the action of the ordinary Legislature on this subject, as before re- 
 marked, is not of the character of ordinary lesrislation. It is, in the nature of a re- 
 solve or ordinance, adopted by the agents of the people, not in their Legislative cha- 
 racter, for the purpose of rollectin? and ascertaining the public will, both as to the 
 call and organization of a Convention, and upon the ratification or rejection of the 
 work of that Convention. If the substance of the thing, to wit : the ascertainment 
 of the public will, is accomolished. it is needless to stickle about forms. For this pur- 
 pose only is the aid of the old government, its officers, and instruments invoked, to 
 perform j^he office of a scaffoldinsr on which to stand, whilst you axe erecting the new. 
 Thus has this matter been viewed in other States similarly circumstanced as ourselves ; 
 
888 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 and in their Legislative action on the subject of a Convention, they have adopted 
 the language of resolve, recommendation, and advice, instead of the technical and 
 imperative language of enactment : I allude particularly to the example of Pennsyl- 
 vania. Mr. T. concluded by saying, he should extremely regret the passage of the 
 resolution. Let us not add another to the many causes of excitement already produ- 
 ced by our proceedings. Having agreed with so much difficulty upon a Constitution, 
 let us, at least, submit it to those, who are declared by it, worthy of the Paght of Suf- 
 frage. 
 
 Mr. Henderson said, that he did not rise to take any part in the discussion. He 
 had, indeed, a strong opinion on the subject ; but he should not attempt to state the 
 grounds on which it rested, or to support it by argument. He had once before taken 
 the advice of the venerable gentleman at the head of the Judiciary Committee, and 
 he would now repeat the liberty of asking him to favour the Convention -vvith his 
 opinion : it would shed light upon the body, and might tend to still the rising tempest. 
 
 Mr. Mason of Southampton said, that he had been a member of the Senate, which 
 gave its assent to the act in question. lie trusted he should be the last to be guilty 
 of any act of treachery to the freeholders of the Commonv/ealth : he had always 
 maintained that freeholders alone had a right to elect members of the Convention, 
 and afterwards to pass upon its acts. In that sentiment he agreed entirely wath the 
 gentleman from Charlotte. It would be recollected that the bill finally passed, was a 
 substitute for another bill from the House, tie had regretted to find in nearly half 
 the Senate, a feeling similar to tliat now manifested by the gentleman from Amherst; 
 and that they were disposed to take the Government out of the hands of the free- 
 holders. The task of the friends of the freeholders had been a very delicate one, yet 
 they finally succeeded in establishing the principle they wished. He believed most 
 religiously that a majority had been, and still were, opposed to the call of a Conven- 
 tion ; nevertheless, his duty as a public functionary required of him to give effect to 
 the bill. The law fixed the time and the mode in v;hich members of the Convention 
 were to be elected ; but the Legislature did not stop there : they knew that the acts 
 of the Convention would be inchoate and in fieri, until they vv^ere ratified. What 
 then, had the Legislature to do The public officers were bound by acts of the As- 
 sembly, under penalties that might be recovered, and he felt bound to say, that the 
 officers should act under such penalties as the Assembly might require, and he had 
 accordingly voted that tlie sheriffs, whenever the proceedings of the Convention 
 should have been published, should take the sense of the people thereon. The Legis- 
 lature never had intended to prescribe who should vote on that: they had never 
 dreamed of any such meaning as was now contended for the act ; an interpretation, 
 which virtually gave to the act of the Con.vention the force of law. The sheriffs 
 were directed to take the sense of the people, by v/hich was understood the sense of 
 the voters or of such other persons as the Convention might designate. If the Con- 
 vention should adjourn v/ithout saying who were to vote upon the final question, then 
 the provisions of the act were simply a declaration that the voters should decide. Af- 
 ter that explanation, he hoped that none would impute to the Legislature any act of 
 usurpation. He did not believe that the people ever ratified the law. They had, in- 
 deed, elected members under it, but that was purely in self-defence. Mr. M. said, he 
 would address one consideration to the good sense of the gentleman from Frederick, 
 (Mr. Cooke.) The Assembly had prescribed one mode for carrying the new Consti- 
 tution into effect; that gentleman now proposed a dilierent mode. Bat, if the peo- 
 ple had ratified the act as was contended by that gentleman, whence did the Conven- 
 tion derive its authority But this was an argument for that gentleman alone. For 
 himself, he did not believe that the people ever had ratified the act, and after all, the 
 whole purpose of the act itself, was to devolve a duty on the sheriffs and to compel 
 them to perform it. Mr. M. concluded by saying, that he had only risen for the pur- 
 pose of withdrawing himself from the strong terms of censure, used by the gentle- 
 man from Charlotte, in reference to the act, and to those who passed it. 
 
 Mr. Randolph rose in reply. I can assure the most worthy and highly respectable 
 gentleman from Southampton, that nothing was farther from my intention than to 
 impute to him any wrong in word, thought or deed. Sir, my language was altogether 
 hypothetical. I insisted, that if that which was contended for were true, then the 
 Legislature had been guilty of treacherj/ — and nothing is more true. 
 
 As to the gentleman from Amherst, I can only say that I could not understand him. 
 The gentleman imputes it as a fault to me, that whereas the Governor of Virginia 
 has always heretofore been elected by the people, 1 am willing to continue that mode 
 of election, because I believe that the opinions of the General Assembly are usually 
 a fair expression of the sentiments of the people. But, what analogy is there between 
 such a belief and the opinions that the General Assembly have a right to alter the 
 Constitution in one jot or tittle ^ Sir, I am not such a mad-man — such a moon-struck 
 maniac — as to attempt to butt against the united force of the whole people of Vir- 
 ginia, backed by the General Assembly. All I contend for is, that if the act is to be 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 889 
 
 SO construed — and I acknowledge myself a poor hand at construction — though I think 
 1 have seen courts that were little better — then the act was a gross act of treachery to 
 those whose trustees they were. 
 
 No gentleman who liears me, will deny that the provision, with respect to the 
 Right of Sutfrage, is among tlie most important parts of the Constitution. Kow, with 
 regard to all the other parts of it, the action of this House is held to be advisory and 
 initiatory only. On every other subject, we are merely advisers ; but, if the con- 
 struction of the act be good, which is here contended for, we are not, as it respects 
 this particular thing, advisers at all. We do not advise — we decree. Is it possible 
 there can be any so obtuse as not to perceive the distinction ? Decrevimvs — we have 
 decreed. Sir, if we have the power to decree with respect to the Right of Suffrage — 
 why not with respect to the apportionment of representation ? I would thank any 
 gentleman to take me out of t.*-iat difficulty — or himself rather. I ask again, if we 
 may decree with respect to this question, why not with respect to all questions.^ Sir, 
 the right cannot be denied. 
 
 As to being actuated by any wish for the adoption or the rejection of the Constitu- 
 tion, if this were a mere question of expediency, it might be so ; but, he knows little 
 of me, who thinks that in a question of vital principle, 1 can be so actuated. Sir, it 
 is a principle as clear to me as anj^ in mathematics, that the whole authority in this body 
 lias emanated from the people. The Assembly took on themselves — in a case, 1 grant, 
 of extreme necessity — what they had not a riglit to do. I grant that this act was af- 
 terwards cured by the act of the freeholders — that is, supposing they approved it — it 
 was so far cured — not entirely. But, the second Act of Assembly has not been rati- 
 fied at all — the freeholders have never passed upon it in any shape. If my resolution 
 shall be adopted, they will haA^e to do so — nay, if a majority of the voters — pot-boilers 
 and all — shall have approved or rejected the Constitution, then that Act of the As- 
 sembly will have been ratified — but not till then. It is still s^ih judice. Sir, I am 
 wasting time — I am burning day-light — to argue the question, whether this House 
 can act definitively on any one subject. 
 
 In regard to the threats of the gentleman, that he will move a re-consideration, 
 they have no effect on me whatever. I am perfectl}^ impassive to any such threat. 1 
 have not the least objection in the world that he should make that motion this moment. 
 
 Mr. Johnson now rose to give a brief explanation of his views on this subject. 
 After quoting the Act at large, he stated his understanding of its meaning to be, that 
 in case the Convention should make no other provision, the sheriffs were to take the 
 votes of all such persons as the Convention should declare duly qualified to vote for 
 members of the House of Delegates ; but, that if the Convention should not approve 
 of that arrangement, it was for them to prescribe to whom the Constitution should be 
 submitted. The proposition of the gentleman from Charlotte was not decided upon 
 by the act, and it was still competent to the Convention to say, that the Constitution 
 should be submitted to freeholders only, if so they thought best; otherwise, they 
 might say nothing at all on the subject, and leave the matter Avhere the act had placed 
 it. This was his understanding of the meaning of the act. As to its authority, he 
 had already admitted, and he now repeated the admission, that the General Assembly 
 had no legitimate power to pass such an act. The only power the Assembly could 
 possess must be received from its constituents, and must either be previously given, 
 or implied in their subsequent ratification. How, then, stood the question ? By the 
 first act, the question was to be submitted to the freeholders, whether they desired a 
 Convention or not. The question was put accordingly, and what was to be regarded 
 as a majority of the freeholders, declared that a Convention should be held. But 
 how ? As the people might prescribe ? As the people themselves should determine 
 in their parishes, in the election districts, at their court-houses, and their muster- 
 fields No. It was the intention of tlie people, that the expression of the public 
 will should be given by the Legislature, as well with respect to the manner in which 
 the Convention was to proceed, as to the purposes for which it was to be holden. 
 Here, then, was the authority of the constituent bod}'. Here was the voice of the 
 principals to whom the Legislature were but agents. Acting under that authority, 
 they declared the manner and purpose of the Convention; but, that declaration was 
 not obligatory — it had no sanction — it did not bind the freeholders to send Delegates. 
 If it contained any thing which the freeholders did not approve, they might have ar- 
 rested the proceeding. They had the same authority to give counter instructions, as 
 they had to give original instructions. They could have gone to the polls again, and 
 commanded their Delegates to repeal the act. But as the case was, the Delegates, if 
 they acted at all in the matter, had plainly to prescribe the objects of the Convention, 
 and how they were to be attained. The whole subject had been referred to them — 
 there was no other wa}'' to do it — and the only remedy was to arrest the matter in 
 fieri. That was the only safe, the only proper and wise remedy, which they could 
 retain in their hands. Such being the case, what had been done ? The act, when 
 presented to the freeholders, had been acquiesced in by the election of members every 
 
890 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 where without complaint or remonstrance. Was there any other mode in which the 
 people could express their approbation ? If there was, then the act was still unrati- 
 fied, and the members were assembled there by the Legislature alone. What were 
 they doing? They were proceeding solemnly to sign, seal and deliver to the people 
 the plan of a new Constitution ; and yet would they say that this was done without 
 authority ? That it was all void ? It could not be. And if the act had been ac- 
 cepted by the people, he begged gentlemen to tell him what part of it had been ac- 
 cepted, and what part rejected What was their authority, and what was not their 
 authority ? From that act they derived their powers, and if any, then all that it con- 
 tained. 
 
 It had been said, that the Convention was acting definitively on the subject of the 
 Right of SufiJi-age, without consulting their constituents. This was true — and why .'' 
 Their constituents had authorised them so to do. Would it be contended, that their 
 constituents had no such authority ? That they could not give such power to their 
 agents beforehand ? Was the principal necessarily bound to retain the right of rati- 
 fying the acts of his agent? He had never understood so. It might have been un- 
 wise in them to do so ; but, that was a question for the constituent body alone. If 
 they chose to do so, why might they not? Suppose the Constitution which they had 
 now made should be rejected by the people — had they no Government under them ? 
 Would they have no Constitution ? He was sure the gentleman from Charlotte would 
 not say so. [Mr. R. That 1 won't.] How came that Constitution to be the supreme 
 law of the land ? Had it ever been submitted to the constituent body for their ratifi- 
 cation ? Had they ever voted on it at the polls ? How else had the people expressed 
 their assent to it, than by the election of Delegates under it, and by a tacit acquies- 
 cence. The authority of those who framed it was a general grant of power to pro- 
 vide for the exigencies of the times — to adopt a form of Government for the Com- 
 monwealth. He did not believe they had usurped any authority. There had been a 
 great political emergency. That form of Government had been provided, and the 
 people exercised their pleasure respecting it. They gave no other vote but the sub- 
 stantial act of using it as their shield, and adopting it as their own. Mr. J. concluded 
 that there could be no doubt of the right of the original body to give such authority 
 as the act contained — they had given it — and under that authority, it was at the dis- 
 cretion of the Convention to submit the new Constitution to whom they would. He 
 would submit one consideration which was entitled to respect from every one who 
 was not a friend of revolutionary scenes — that it was of the last importance, to do all 
 in their power to save the necessity of resort to original Assemblies of the people, 
 and in place of this, to facilitate, as much as possible, the use of legislative acts under 
 the people's sanction. But, how could this be done, if the Convention should pay 
 no respect to the very act under which they were assembled ; but, claiming to be the 
 people acting by their representatives, to set aside its provisions, and adopt others in 
 their place ? He thought it was becoming in them to show all respect to an Act of 
 the Assembly, which the people themselves had sanctioned. 
 
 On the question of expediency he had little to say, and he felt but little concerned. 
 As one of the minority, he could not be expected to feel an overweening zeal for the 
 adoption of this Constitution. He regretted much that it had proved to be a Consti- 
 tution for which he could not feel some, yea, a deep interest. He should vote on the 
 present question in conformity with what he believed to be just and sound principles, 
 and not as looking to the consequences of his vote upon either the adoption or rejec- 
 tion of the Constitution. He thought it right to submit the final question to the qua- 
 lified voters of the Commonwealth. The Convention declared them (he did not) the 
 proper depositories of tlie sovereignty of the country ; the fit associates of all who 
 exercise that sovereignty now, and he trusted that none who had declared this, would 
 consider these same persons, unfit to be consulted on the question, whether the Con- 
 stitution settled them or no. They who are to be the sovereigns of the land, were 
 certainly the persons to answer such a question. The freeholders had said so, and 
 the Convention, as their representatives, ought to say so too. 
 
 Mr. Randolph replied. There is much ingenuity in the argument of the learned 
 gentleman from Augusta : notwithstanding — it happens to the argument of that gen- 
 tleman as it often does to the arguments of men fully his equals — it has no substan- 
 tial force. So far as my opinion is concerned, the gentleman might have spared him- 
 self the trouble of a demonstration, that it was competent to the freeholders to have 
 invested this body — if so it had seemed good to them — with absolute power to dictate 
 a Constitution like Solon or Lycurgus (great men whom we should then have re- 
 sembled in one respect at least.) But I put it to the gentleman from Augusta, whe- 
 ther there was a single man in the Commonwealth, who did believe, when he voted 
 for members to this body, that whereas our powers on all other points were to be the 
 powers of advisers only, on this point alone, were we to be absolute. 
 
 If the freeholders chose to invest men with power to make a Constitution over which 
 they were themselves to have no control^, that is one question : but can the legal sub- 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 891 
 
 tleties of the learned gentleman bear liim out in the earnest belief, that the freeholders 
 ever intended to invest us with plenary powers on this one point and not on any of 
 the rest? That it ever entered the head of a freeliolder in the State, when he 
 went to the polls, to give us absolute power in miy thing? Sir, there is not such an 
 honest raan in the State. None who ever proposed a Convention, ever thought of 
 giving its members a power of attorney to make a Constitution absolute, in the one 
 respect, and advisory in every other. Sir. it is a monster unknown. The people 
 have been foolish enough in all ages to give up their liberty, but they have never con- 
 sented to give up one half of their liberty, while they insisted on retaining the rest. 
 The people of Virginia did no such thing. They empowered tliis Convention as ad- 
 visers only, and if under the quirk — I must be permitted to use the term — if under this 
 quirk, the people shall be entrapped as to one of the greatest branches of power, any 
 honest Chancellor would be entitled to give them redress. 
 
 Sir, I am afraid that I am very unfit for the task I have undertaken, but nothing is 
 more clear to me, than that the attempt of the gentleman from Augusta, is an illu- 
 sion — it is a deception : — not that it is so meant — but the gentleman's ov.m ingenuity 
 has led him astray — I would put the question to any man — yes, Sir, to any woman — 
 in the Commonwealth, and the decision of all would be the same. 
 
 Mr. iVicholas observed, that it might well have been anticipated, that the question, 
 to whom the ratiiication or rejection of the Constitution was to be submitted, would 
 prove one of great interest and importance. He had reflected on it, and endeavoured 
 to ascertain what course he ought to pursue in its decision. The result of this en- 
 quiry was, that the subject should be referred to the persons authorised to vote under 
 the existing Constitution. It appeared to him that there are two modes in which a 
 Government can be changed. The one, where the people being oppressed, resort to 
 the original and inherent right to resist despotic powers, and to carve out their own 
 redress, by overturning the existing establishment. This is revolution, in the plain 
 and simple meaning of that term. The other is, where the community agrees to mo- 
 dify its existing institutions, with the consent of the actual Government. This is the 
 course which has been pursued in the present instance. Application was made to 
 the Legislature to submit the question of Convention to the public decision. They 
 submitted it to the freeholders, from whom they derived their power, and to whom 
 alone they had a right to make the appeal. By this act, they recognized, and admit- 
 ted the principle, that in this mode of changing a Government, the only persons 
 who had the right to decide, were those who were the depositories of the powers of 
 the present Government. If the principle be correct, it would seem to follow as an 
 inevitable consequence, that the assent of the freeholders ought to be obtained to the 
 amended Constitution to give it validity. Every reason which could be urged, for 
 referring the question of calhng a Convention to the freeholders, applies with equal 
 force to shew, that the ratification or rejection should also be submitted to them. But, 
 it is contended, that the freeholders ha.ve assented to a reference of this question to 
 others than themselves. The law submitting the question to the freeholders, only re- 
 quired them to say Convention or No Convention." 
 
 Their decision in favour of a Convention, did not waive their right to pronounce 
 on the form of government, which might be tendered for their acceptance, nor 
 amount to a sanction of all the provisions wliicli might be incorporated into an act 
 calling the Convention. Nor is the argument valid, which attempts to shew that 
 sending delegates to the Convention implied an assent to all the provisions of the 
 law, where those provisions exceed the power given the Legislature, which was sim- 
 ply to call a Convention. This has been satisfactorily shewn by the gentleman from 
 Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph.) The freeholders in one section, knowing that those in 
 another would send deputies, were placed in a situation, where they were compelled 
 to do the same, or suffer a Constitution to be got up, by one-half of the State to the 
 exclusion of the other. And though the authority of such a Constitution might be 
 well questioned, yet the conflict about it might have convulsed the State. The ar- 
 gument that the people might have remonstrated against the terms of the law, is not 
 sufficient to shew, that the' Legislature did not transcend their powers, in referring 
 the subject to voters other than freeholders. 
 
 The omission to remonstrate in this way, does not prove that the Legislature acted 
 within the sphere of their legitimate power; or otherwise, every tyrannical, or uncon- 
 stitutional act, where the people do not remonstrate, may be proved to be wise and 
 constitutional. 
 
 Besides, the people had no opportunity to interfere; the law of the last Assembly 
 was to go into effect, before another meeting of that body was to take place. It ap- 
 pears to^'me, then, that the freeholders have done no act to exclude their right to be 
 heard on this subject. If it be admitted, that the change in the government can only 
 be made, with the assent of those who possess the power, the reference of the ques- 
 tion to those not now entitled to vote, would present a curious political anomaly. In 
 the first place, on a question whether the Constitution is to be adopted, we are to an- 
 
892 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 ticipate, that it will be so adopted, and give the decision to those who are to possess 
 no political power until after the event takes place. Instead of obtaining the assent 
 of those in whose hands the power of government is, we are to unite in the decision 
 of numerous classes, who constitute no part of the actual government. 
 
 In doing this, we not only depart from the principles ] have endeavoured to enforce, 
 but adopt their very opposites, as rules of action. Suppose all the freeholders, or a 
 majority were to decide one way ; and a greater number of other, and new voters the 
 other. The decision would then be made, not with the assent of the existing authori- 
 ties of the country, but against it. I do not feel at liberty to enquire into the effect 
 which the decision of this question will have on the rejection, or adoption of the new 
 Constitution. Ideas of expediency, are not those which ought to govern my vote. 
 
 I must leave the fate of the Constitution to be decided by my constituents. All we 
 can do, is to adopt the best we can get, and let those who sent us here, decide whether 
 their happiness will be promoted by what is offered to them. In their decision, I shall 
 acquiesce with pleasure. But in determining the great and interesting question un- 
 der discussion, I must, as an honest man, and a faithful representative, give my vote as 
 my conscience directs, regardless of consequences. I am here the representative of 
 the freeholders. I do believe, that they have the right to decide this question, both 
 on principle, and on a just construction of the various Legislative acts, and the pro- 
 ceedings which have taken place under them, and I cannot consent to be instru- 
 mental in depriving m^ constituents of that right. 
 
 Mr. Stuart wished to make a single remark as to the question of power, not of ex- 
 pediency. The gentleman from Charlotte had said that the people had not done so 
 foolish a thing as to say, that the Convention might make a Constitution without sub- 
 mitting it to them. But vv^here did they say so ? only in the act of their representa- 
 tives. That was the only expression of their will, and that act, while it restrained the 
 powers of the Convention in one respect, extended them in another, and it was cer- 
 tainly as valid in extending as in restraining. 
 
 Mr. Moore asked that the question should be taken by ayes and noes. It was so 
 taken accordingly, and decided as follows : 
 
 Jlyes — Messrs. Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Giles, Brodnax, 
 Dromgoole, Alexander, Nicholas, Mason of Southampton, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urqu- 
 hart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Holladay, Roane, Morris, Gar- 
 nett, Tazewell, Loyall, Prentis, Grigsby, Branch, Coalter, Upshur and Perrin — 28. 
 
 JVoes — Messrs. Barbour, (President,) Goode, Marshall of Richmond, Tyler, Clop- 
 ton, Anderson, Coffman, Harrison, Williamson, Baldwin, Johnson, M'Coy, Moore, 
 Beirne, Smith, Miller, Baxter, Madison, Stanard, Fitzhugh, Henderson, Osborne, 
 Cooke, Powell, Griggs, Mason of Frederick, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, Pendleton, 
 George, M'Millan, Campbell of "Washington, Byars, Taylor of Caroline, Cloyd, 
 Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Morgan, Campbell 
 of Brooke, Wilson, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Green, Marshall of Fauquier, Camp- 
 bell of Bedford, Claytor, Saunders, Townes, Cabell, Martin, Stuart, Pleasants, Gordon, 
 Thompson, Massie, Bates, Neale, Rose, Joynes and Bayly— 66. 
 
 So the resolution of Mr. Randolph was rejected. 
 
 Mr. Cooke now moved the consideration of so much of his propositions as had not 
 been superseded, as follows : 
 
 I. It shall be the duty of the Executive Department of the existing Government, 
 so soon as all the returns required by the twentieth section of the Act of the General 
 Assembly, entitled, An Act to organize a Convention," shall have been made, if it 
 shall appear that a majority of all the votes given is for ratifying this amended Con- 
 stitution, forthwith to make proclamation of the fact. 
 
 " II. And it shall moreover be the duty of the Executive Department, in and by 
 such proclamation, to command the sheriffs and other officers, directed by law to hold 
 and superintend elections, under the penalt}'^ of dollars for failing to obey such 
 
 command, to open polls in their respective counties, cities, towns and boroughs, and 
 in the election districts established by law in their respective counties, on the 
 
 , for the election of a Delegate or Delegates, as the case may be, to 
 represent the counties, towns, boroughs and districts, respectively mentioned and 
 described in the third article of this Constitution, and of a Senator to represent each 
 of the Senatoi'ial districts described in the fourth article. 
 
 " III. So soon as the said election of Delegates and Senators shall have been made, 
 the previously existing Senate and House of Delegates, elected under the old Con- 
 stitution, shall cease to have legal and constitutional existence. 
 
 " IV. Should any of the contingencies herein before mentioned, render it necessary 
 or proper to convene a General Assembly, after such election shall have been made, 
 and before the time herein after appointed for the first regular annual meeting of the 
 General Assembly under this amended Constitution, the new General Assembly 
 shall be convened by the Executive Department holding its power and authority under 
 the old Constitution. 
 
DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 893 
 
 ''V. The first regular General Assembly under this amended Constitution, shall 
 convene and assemble at the Capitol, in the City of Richmond, on the 
 
 He briefly recapitulated the arg'ument he had before urged in support of his plan. 
 
 He moved to fill the first blank with " 8 5.000 the second blank with " the first 
 day of November term, in the year 1830 ;"' and the third blank with " first Monday 
 in January, 1S31 :" which amendments were agreed to. 
 
 3Ir. Leigh then moved a substitute for the entire proposition submitted by Mr, 
 Cooke. He supported the amendment, by referring to the argument of Mr. Sta- 
 nard of yesterday, which went to shew the necessity of some test of voters, to be a 
 guide for the sheriffs at the polls. 
 
 ISIr. Stanard proposed the following orders : 
 
 Ordcied. That the roll containing the draught of the amended Constitution adopted 
 by this Convention, and by it submitted to the people of this Commonwealth, for their 
 ratification or rejection, be enclosed by the Secretary in a case proper for its preserva- 
 tion, and deposited among the archives of the Council of State. 
 
 ••' Ordered. That the Secretary do cause the Journal of the Proceedings of this Con- 
 vention to be entered in a well-bound book ; and after the same shall have been signed 
 by the President and attested by the Secretary, that he deposit the same, together with 
 all the original documents in the possession of the Convention, and connected with 
 its Proceedings, among the archives of the Council of State ; and furtlier. that he 
 cause ten printed copies of the said Journal to be well bound, and deposited in the 
 public Library.'" 
 
 Mr. Leigh approved of the orders. 
 
 Mr. Coo^e also, of the first two ; and it was agreed the test question should be put 
 on the last. 
 
 Mr. Leigh modified his amendment, combining it with Mr. Stanard's third order, 
 60 as to read as follows : 
 
 Ordered. That the President of the Convention do certify a true copy of the 
 amended Constitution to the General Assembly now in session ; and that the General 
 Assembly be, and they are hereby requested to make any^ additional provisions by law, 
 which may be necessary and proper for submitting the same to the voters thereby 
 qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly, at the nest April elections, 
 and for organizing the Government under tlie amended Constitution, in case it shall 
 be approved and ratified by such voters." 
 
 3Ir. Johnson expressed his preference of Mr. Leigh's amendment over that of Mr. 
 Cooke, but could not wholly approve either. He denied the right of the existing Le- 
 gislature to act in the case, and the right of the Convention to invite them to do an 
 unauthorised act. If the act had provided no means for carrying the Constitution 
 into effect, he should not have denied that the Convention would have had the inci- 
 dental right to make provision for that end ; but, as the act had itself provided, that 
 part of the subject was taken out of their hands. 
 
 Mr. Johnson then moved an amendment to the amendment of Mr. Leigh, by 
 strikinsf out from tlie word the," in the second line of the third order, to the end 
 thereof, and inserting the following- : 
 
 Executive of this Commonwealth, with a request that it be published, in order to 
 be submitted to the people, for ratification or rejection, at the April elections in the 
 present year, pursuant to the provisions of the nineteenth section of the Act of tlie 
 General Assembly, entitled, An Act to organize a Convention," passed the 10th of 
 February, 1529." 
 
 Both Messrs. Leigh and Johnson defended their own amendments by an eloquent 
 speech. 
 
 Mr. Johnson's amendment was rejected. 
 
 !Mr. Cooke moved a division of the question, so that the vote be first taken upon 
 the third order contained in Zvlr. Leiorh's proposed substitute ; which was agreed to by 
 the House. 
 
 And the question being put accordingh^, was determined in the affirmative — Ayes 
 51, Noes 43. 
 
 The question then recurred upon agreeing to the two first orders contained in Mr. 
 Leigh's proposed substitute, and was determined in the affirmative. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield, Resolved. That the President do now sign 
 tile enroled amended Constitution, adopted by this Convention, and that the Secre- 
 tary do attest the same ; which was done accordingly. 
 
 The President then retired, having called INIr. Stanard to the Chair. 
 
 On motion of 3Ir. Stuart, the following resolutions were agreed to : 
 
 Resolved. That the President of this Convention tender to the Pastor and Trustees 
 of the First Baptist Church the thanks of this Convention for the use of their Church. 
 
 Resolved^ That the President of this Convention tender to the Clergy of this City 
 the thanks of the Convention for the promptness and punctuality with which they 
 have complied with the request of the Convention, in opening its daily sessions by 
 prayer. 
 
894 
 
 DEBATES OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. Randolph then rose and addressed the Convention nearly as follows : 
 Mr. Chairman, — For the last time, I throw myself upon the indulgence and cour- 
 tesy of this body. 1 have a proposition to submit, which I flatter myself— which 1 
 trust — I believe, will be received not only with greater unanimity than any other which 
 has been offered in tlie course of our past discussions, but with perfect unanimity. 
 You will perceive, Sir, that I allude to your eminent colleague, who has presided over 
 our deliberations. When I shall have heard him pronounce from that Chair the 
 words " This Convention stands adjourned sine die,'' I shall be ready to sing my po- 
 litical JYunc dimittis ; for, it will have put a period to three months, the most anxious 
 and painful of a political life neither short nor uneventful. Having said thus much, 
 I hope I may be permitted to add, that, notwithstanding any occasional heat excited 
 by the collision of debate, I part from every member here with the most hearty good 
 will towards all. But, I cannot consent that we shall separate without offering the 
 tribute of my approbation, and inviting the House to add theirs — infinitely more va- 
 luable — to the conduct of the presiding officer of this Assembly. If this were a suitable 
 occasion, I might embrace within the scope of my motion and of my remarks his 
 public conduct and character elsewhere, with which I have been long and intimately 
 acquainted : but this, as it would be misplaced, so would it be fulsome — I shall, there- 
 fore, restrict myself to the following motion : 
 
 " Resolved, That the impartiality and dignity with which Philip P. Barbour, Esq. 
 hath presided over the deliberations of this House, and the distinguished ability 
 whereby he hath facilitated the dispatch of business, receive the best thanks of the 
 Convention." 
 
 The resolution was agreed to unanimously, and so entered on the Journal. 
 
 (After an account for printing had been passed, and a compensation of ^ 200 voted 
 to the Secretary to cover the expense of transcribing the minutes into a volume,) 
 
 Mr. Barbour resumed the Chair, and addressed the Convention as follows : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention — Never in my life, did I feel such strong emotions, as 
 those with which I now address you. 
 
 The resolution which you have just passed, expressive of your approbation of my 
 conduct, as presiding officer of this Assembly, is an evidence of your good opinion, 
 which I shall long cherish, as one of the most pleasing recollections of my life ; and 
 for which, I have no return to make, except the expression of my sincere thanks and 
 profound acknowledgments. To be a member even, of such an assembly as this, im- 
 ports a large and gratifying share of public confidence ; to be called to preside over 
 its deliberations, is an honour sufficient to fill the measure of a higher aspiration 
 than I dare pretend to ; to receive the unanimous testimony of its approbation, under 
 the circumstances which attend it, inspires me with the deepest sense of gratitude. 
 It has been said, gentlemen, that the power of legislation is the highest trust which 
 man can confide to his fellow-man : this is true, in those Governments in which writ- 
 ten Constitutions are unknown ; but the trust which has been confided to us, is a yet 
 higher one ; for to us, has been delegated the power, of representing the people in 
 their primary sovereign character; of forming a Constitution, which, if ratified, will 
 create that very legislative power which is elsewhere deemed to be omnipotent ; 
 which will prescribe to it, the law of its action, and the orbit in which alone, it can 
 rightfully move. 
 
 We have been for a long time, laboriously engaged in this great work; our labours 
 are now at an end ; the Constitution which we have formed, is now to be submitted 
 to the people, for their ratification or rejection. 
 
 In the language, substantially, of the Convention which framed our Federal Con- 
 stitution, I will say — that it will meet the full and entire approbation of every portion 
 of the Commonwealth, is not to be expected ; but each will doubtless consider, that 
 had its interests alone been consulted, the consequences would have been particularly 
 disagreeable, or injurious to the others. Whilst, therefore, we cannot expect that it 
 will be considered by the people the best form of Government that could have been 
 devised, we may indulge the hope, that as it is the best the discordant opinions and 
 conflicting interests of the Commonwealth enabled us to make, it will be received by 
 them, in the spirit of conciliation and compromise; and be accepted, as " the result 
 of that mutual deference and concession, which the peculiarity of our political situa- 
 tion rendered indispensable;" more especially, as it will carry with it this weighty 
 recommendation, that we have been aided in its foi-mation, by the experience and en- 
 lightened counsel of the patriarchs of the land; of men, whom Virginia knows to be 
 her master workmen, in the great art of Constitutional architecture. 
 
 The general course of our proceedings, gentlemen, has been characterized by the 
 moderation and forbearance, which became the dignity of the occasion, and the great 
 questions which we have been called to decide. If in the collisions of discussion, an 
 occasional spark of excitement shall have been struck out, I trust, that like that, 
 which is struck from the flint, it will have been extinguished in the moment which 
 gave it birth ; and that we shall separate from each other with that reciprocal feeling 
 
NEW CONSTITUTION. 69 5 
 
 of good will, which will constitute the strongest cement of our union . and bind us 
 together, in all time to come, as a people, one and mdizisible. 
 
 In this spirit; I beseech you, let us return to our constituents, resolved to cast oil 
 upon the waters, as far as we can. to still the agitations of the public mind, and to 
 cause it to settle down, like the unrufned bosom of the ocean, into a state of calm 
 tranquilhtj. 
 
 He who shall contribute to a consummation so devoutly to be wished, will deserve 
 well of his country : and \vill assuredly receive the approbation of that country, the 
 highest and best reward to faithful public servants. 
 
 We are now, gentlemen, upon the eve of a separation, many of us, perhaps, never 
 to meet again — Zvlay health and happiness attend you all — May you long hve to see 
 this ancient and venerated Commonwealth, prosperous at home, respected abroad — 
 May she be looked up to by our sister States, as an example worthy of all imitation — 
 Mar she hereafter be considered by them, as she heretofore has been, the key-stone 
 of that arch, which supports our Federal Union, and whose strength I hope and trust, 
 will be increeised by every increasing pressure, wliich shall bear upon it. 
 
 On motion of ^Ir. Leigh, be then pronounced the welcome sentence, •• This Con- 
 vention stands adjourned sixe due." 
 
 BILL, OF RIGHTS. 
 
 A Beclaraiion of Poghts made hy the Representatires of the good people of Virginia , 
 assembled in full and free Coitcention; ichich Rights do pertain to them, and their 
 posterity, as the basis and foundation of Goterament. 
 
 (Unanunously adopted. June 12th. 1776.) 
 
 1. That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inhe- 
 rent righti. of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any 
 compact, deprive or divest their posterity : namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, 
 with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining 
 happiness and safety. 
 
 2. That all power is rested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that 
 magistrates aire their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them. 
 
 3. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection 
 and secmrity of the people, nation, or community : of all the various modes and forms 
 of government, that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of hap- 
 piness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal-adminis- 
 tration ; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrarv to these 
 purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefea- 
 sible right, to reform, alter or abohsh it, in such memner as shall be judged most con- 
 ducive to the public weal. 
 
 4. That no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or 
 privileges from the community, but in consideration of pubhc services, which not be- 
 ing descendible, neither ought the offices of Magistrate, Legislator, or Judge, to be 
 hereditary. 
 
 5. That the Legislative and Executive powers of the State should be separate and 
 distinct from tlie Judiciary; and that the members of the two first mav be restrained 
 from oppression, by feeung and participating the burthens of the people, they should, 
 at fix:ed periods, be reduced to a private station, return into that body from which they 
 were originallly taken, and the vacancies be supphed by frequent, certain, and re^- 
 lar elections, in which all, or any part of the former members, to be again eligible^ or 
 ineligible, as the laws shall direct. 
 
 6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in Assem- 
 bly, ouQfht to be free: and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent, com- 
 mon interest with, and attachment to. the community, have the right of suffiage. and 
 cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses, without their own con- 
 sent, or that of their representatives so elected, nor botmd by any law to which they 
 have not, in hke manner, assented, for the pubhc good. 
 
 7. That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, bv any authority, 
 without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their' riarhts, and 
 ought not to be exercised, " 
 
 fc. That, in all capital or criminal prosecutions, a man hath a riofht to demand the 
 cause and nature of his accusation , to be confronted with the accusers and witnesses, 
 to call for evidence in his favor, and to a speedy trial, by an impartial jury of his vi- 
 cinage, without whose unanimous consent he cannot be found guilty ; nor can he Le 
 
896 
 
 NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 
 compelled to give evidence against himself; that no man be deprived of his liberty, 
 except by the law of the land, or the judgment of his peers. 
 
 9. That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor 
 cruel and unusual punishment inflicted. 
 
 10. That general warrants, whereby an officer or messenger, may be commanded 
 to search suspected places, without evidence of a fact committed, or to seize any per- 
 son or persons not named, or whose offence is not particularly described and supported 
 by evidence, are grievous and oppressive, and ought not to be granted. 
 
 11. That, in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, 
 the ancient trial by jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred. 
 
 12. That the freedom of the press is one of the great bulwarks of liberty, and can 
 never be restrained but by despotic governments. 
 
 13. That a well-regulated militia,"composed of the body of the people, trained to 
 arms, is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State; that standing armies, in 
 time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases, the 
 military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. 
 
 14. That the people have a right to uniform government; and therefore, that no 
 government separate from, or independent of, the government of Virginia^ ought to 
 be erected or established within the limits thereof. 
 
 15. That no free government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any 
 people, but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, firugality, and vir- 
 tue, and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. 
 
 16. That religion, or tlie duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of 
 discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; 
 and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, accordino- 
 to the dictates of conscience ; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian 
 forbearance, love, and charity towards each other. 
 
 AH AMEHHEB CONSTITUTION 
 
 OR 
 
 FORM OF GOVERNMENT FOR VIRGINIA. 
 
 (Adopted by the Convention January 14th, 1830.)' 
 
 Whereas the Delegates and Representatives of the good people of Virginia, in Con^ 
 vention assembled, on the twenty-ninth day of June, in the year of our Lord one thou- 
 sand seven hundred and seventy-six : reciting and declaring, that whereas, George 
 the third. King of Great Britain and Ireland, and Elector of Hanover, before that time 
 entrusted with the exercise of the kingly office in the Government of Virginia, had 
 endeavored to pervert the same into a detestable and insupportable tyranny, by put- 
 ting his negative on laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good ; by 
 denyinof his Governors permission to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, 
 unless suspended in their operation for his assent, and when so suspended neglecting 
 to attend to them for many years ; by refusing to pass certain other laws, unless the 
 persons to be benefitted by them would relinquish the inestimable right of represen- 
 tation in the Legislature; by dissolving legislative assemblies repeatedly and continu- 
 ally, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions of the rights of the people ; when 
 disso]ved, by refusing to call others for a long space of time, thereby leaving the po- 
 litical system without any legislative head ; by endeavouring to prevent the popula- 
 tion of our country, and for that purpose obstructing the laws for the naturalization of 
 foreigners ; by keeping among us, in time of peace, standing armies and ships of war; 
 by affecting to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power; by 
 combining with others to subject us to a foreign jurisdiction, giving his assent to their 
 pretended acts of legislation, for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us, 
 for cutting off" our trade with all parts of the world, for imposing taxes on us without 
 our consent, for depriving us of fehe benefits of the trial by jury, for transporting us 
 beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences, for suspending our own Legislatures 
 and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatso- 
 ever ; by plundering our seas, ravaging our coasts, burning our towns, and destroying 
 the lives of our people ; by inciting insurrections of our fellow-subjects with the allure- 
 ments of forfeiture and confiscation ; by prompting our negroes to rise in arms among 
 us, those very negroes, whom by an inhuman use of his negative he had refused us 
 permission to exclude by law ; by endeavouring to bring on the inhabitants of our 
 frontiers, the merciless Indian stivages, whose known rule of vrarfare is an undistin- 
 
NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 
 897 
 
 guished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions of existence ; by transporting 
 hither a large army of foreign mercenaries, to complete the work of death, desolation 
 and tyranny, then already bes'un with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy unworthy 
 the head of a civilized nation ; by answering our repeated petitions for red'ress with a 
 repetition of injuries : and finaUy,by abandoning; the helm of Government, and declaring 
 us out of his allegiance and protection ; by vrliich several acts of misrule, the Govern- 
 ment of this country, as before esercised'under the Crown of Great Britain, was to- 
 tally dissolved : did, therefore, having maturely considered the premises, and viewing 
 with great concern the deplorable condition, to which this once happy country would 
 be reduced, unless some regular adequate mode of civil pohty should be speedily 
 adopted, and in comphance with the recommendation of the General Congress, ordain 
 and declare a form of Government of Virginia : 
 
 And whereas the General Assembly of Virginia, by an act passed on the tenth day 
 of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-nine, 
 entitled, an act to organize a Convention, did authorise and provide for the election, 
 by the people, of Delegates and Representatives, to meet and assemble, in General 
 Convention, at the Capitol in the City of Richmond, on the lirst Monday in October 
 in the year last aforesaid, to consider, discuss and propose, a new Constitution, or al- 
 terations and amendments of the existing Constitution of this Conunon wealth, to be 
 submitted to the people and to be by them ratified or rejected : 
 
 We, therefore, the Delegates and Ptepresentatives of the good people of Virginia, 
 elected and in Convention assembled, in pursuance of the said act of Assembly, do 
 submit and propose to the people, the following Amended Constitution and Form of 
 Government for this Commonwealth, that is to say : 
 
 ARTICLE I, 
 
 The Declaration of Plights made on the r2th June, 1776, by the representatives of 
 the good people of Virginia assembled in full and free Convention, which pertained 
 to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of Government; requiring 
 in the opinion of this Convention no amendment, shall be prefixed to this Constitu- 
 tion, and have the same relation thereto as it had to the fonner Constitution of this 
 Commonwealth. 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 
 The Legislative, Executive and Judiciary Departments, shall be separate and dis» 
 tinct, so that neither exercise the powers properly belonging to either of the others ; 
 nor shall any person exercise the powers of more than one of them at the same time, 
 except that the Justices of the County Courts shall be eligible to either House of 
 Assembly. 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 1, The Legislature shall be formed of two distinct branches, which together shall 
 be a complete Legislature, and shall be called the General Assembly of Virginia. 
 
 2. One of these shall be called The House of Delegates, and shall consist of one 
 hundred and thirty-four members, to be chosen, annually, for and by the several cotin- 
 ties, cities, towns and boroughs of the Commonwealth: whereof thirty-one Delegates 
 shall be chosen for and by the twenty-six counties lying West of the Alleghany 
 mountains ■. twenty-five for and by the fourteen counties hung between the Alleghany 
 and Blue Pv-idge of mountains ; forty-two for and by the twenty-nine counties lying 
 East of the Blue Ridge of mountains and above tide- water ; and thirty six for and 
 by the counties, cities, towns and boroughs lying upon tide-water, that is to say : Of 
 the twenty-six counties lying West of the Alleghany, the counties of Harrison, 
 Montgomery. Alononsalia, Ohio and Washington T shall eaci elect two Delegates; 
 and the counties of Brooke, Cabell, Grayson, Greenbrier, Giles, Kanawha, Lee, 
 Lewis, Logan, 3.Iason, Monroe, Mcholas, Pocahontas, Preston, Randolph, Russell, 
 Scott, Tazewell. Tyler, Wood and Wythe, shall each elect one Delegate. Of the 
 fourteen counties lying between the Alleo-hany and Blue Ridge, tlie counties of Fre- 
 derick and Shenandoah, shall each elect thr^e Delegates : the counties of Augusta, 
 Berkeley, Botetourt, Hampshire, Jefferson, Rockingham and Rockbridge, shall" each 
 elect two Delegates- and the counties of Alleghany, Bath, Hardy, 3Iorgan and Pen- 
 dleton, shall each elect one Delegate. Of the twenty-nine counties lying East of 
 the Blue Ridge and above tide-waler, the county of Loudoun, shall elect three Dele- 
 gates ; the counties of Albemarle, Bedford, Brunswick, Buckingham, Campbell, Cul- 
 peper'. Fauquier, Franklin, Halifax, Mecklenburg and Pittsylvania, shall each elect 
 two Delegates : and the counties of Amelia, Amherst. Charlotte, Cumberland, ^Din- 
 widdle, Fluvanna, Goochland. Henry. Louisa. Lunenburg, Madison, >'elson, Notto- 
 way, Orange, Patrick, Powhatan and Prince Edward, shall each elect one Delegate. 
 A.nd of the counties, cities, towns and boroughs hing on tide-wateij the counties of 
 
698 
 
 NEAV CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Accomack and Norfolk, shall each elect two Delegates; the counties of Carolme, 
 Chesterfield, Essex, Fairfax, Greenesville, Gloucester, Hanover, Henrico, Isle of 
 Wight, King & Queen, King William, King George, Nansemond, Northumberland, 
 Northampton, Princess Anne, Prince George, Prince William, Southampton, Spott- 
 sylvania, Stafford, Sussex, Surry and Westmoreland, and the city of Pvichmond, the 
 borough of Norfolk, and the town of Petersburg, shall each elect one Delegate ; the 
 countfes of Lancaster and Pi.ichmond, shall together elect one Delegate; the coun- 
 ties of Matthews and Middlesex, shall together elect one Delegate ; the counties of 
 Elizabeth City and Warwick, shall together elect one Delegate ; the counties of 
 James City and York, and the city of Williamsburg, shall together elect one Dele- 
 gate; and the counties of New Kent and Charles City, shall together elect one 
 Deleg-ate. 
 
 3. The other Plouse of the General Assembly shall be called the Senate, and shall 
 consist of thirty-two members, of whom thirteen shall be chosen for and by the 
 counties lying West of the Blue Ridge of mountains, and nineteen for and by the 
 counties, cities, towns and boroughs lying East thereof ; and for the election of whom, 
 the counties, cities, towns and boroughs shall be divided into thirty-two districts, as 
 herein after provided. Each county of the respective districts, at the time of the 
 first election of its Delegate or Delegates under this Constitution, shall vote for one 
 Senator ; and the Sheriffs or other olficers holding the election for each county, city, 
 town or borough, within five days at farthest after the last county, city, town or 
 borough election in the district, shall meet at some convenient place, and from the 
 polls so taken in their respective counties, cities, towns or boroughs, return as a Sena- 
 tor the person who shall have the greatest number of votes in the whole district. To 
 keep up this Assembly by rotation, the districts shall be equally divided into four 
 classes, and numbered by lot. At the end of one year after the first general election, 
 the eight members elected by the first division shall be displaced, and the vacancies 
 thereby occasioned, supplied from such class or division by new election in the man- 
 ner aforesaid. This rotation shall be applied to each division according to its number, 
 and continued in due order annually. And for the election of Senators, the counties 
 of Brooke, Ohio and Tyler, shall form one district: the counties of Monongalia, 
 Preston and Randolph, shall form anotlier district: the counties of Harrison, Lewis 
 and Wood, shall form another district: the counties of Kanawha, Mason, Cabell, 
 Logan and Nicholas, shall form another district : the counties of Greenbrier, Monroe, 
 Giles and Montgomery, shall ibrm another district : the counties of Tazewell, Wythe 
 and Grayson, shall form another district : the counties of Washington, Russell, Scott 
 and Lee, shall form another district: the counties of Berkeley, Morgan and Hamp- 
 shire, shall form another district : the counties of Frederick and Jefferson shall form 
 another district : the counties of Shenandoah and Hardy shall form another district : 
 the counties of Rockingham and Pendleton shall form another district : the counties 
 of Augusta and PLOckbridge shall form another district : the counties of Alleghany, 
 Bath, Pocahontas and Botetourt, shall form another district : the counties of Loudoun 
 and Fairfax shall form another district : the counties of Fauquier and Prince William 
 shall form another district: the counties of Stafford, King George, Westmoreland, 
 Richmond, Lancaster and Northumberland, shall form another district: the counties 
 of Culpeper, Madison and Orange, shall form another district : the counties of Albe- 
 marle, Nelson and Amherst, shall form another district: the counties of Fluvanna, 
 Goochland, Louisa and Hanover, shall form another district: the counties of Spott- 
 sylvania, Caroline and Essex, shall form another district : the counties of King & 
 Queen, King WiUiam, Gloucester, Matthev/s and Middlesex, shall form another dis- 
 trict : the counties of Accomack, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York and Warwick, 
 and the city of WilUamsburg, shall form another district : the counties of Charles 
 City, James City, New Kent and Henrico, and the city of Richmond, shall form 
 another district : the counties of Bedford and Franklin, shall form another district : 
 the counties of Buckingham, Campbell and Cumberland, shall form another district: 
 the counties of Patrick, Henry and Pittsylvania, shall form another district : the coun- 
 ties of Halifax and Mecklenburg shall form another district : the counties of Cljar- 
 lotte, Lunenburg, Nottoway and Prince Edward, shall form another district: the 
 counties of Amelia, Powhatan and Chesterfield, and the town of Petersburg, shall 
 form another district: the counties of Brunswick, Dinwiddle and Greenesville, shall 
 form another district : the counties of Isle of Wight, Prince George, Southampton, 
 Surry and Sussex, shall form another district: and the counties of Norfolk, Nanse- 
 mond and Princess Anne, and the borough of Norfolk, shall form another district. 
 
 4. It shall be the duty of the Legislature, to re-apportion, once in ten years, to 
 wit : in the year 1841, and every ten years thereafter, the representation of the coun- 
 ties, cities, towns and boroughs, of this Commonwealth, in both of the Legislative 
 bodies: Provided, kozvever, That the number of Delegates from the aforesaid great 
 districts, and the number of Senators from the aforesaid two great divisions, respec- 
 tively, shall neither be increased nor diminished by such re-apportionment. And 
 
XEV.- COXSTITUTIOX. 
 
 899 
 
 when a new coantj sliall hereafter be created, or any city, town or borough, not now- 
 entitled to separate representation in the House of Delegates, shall have so increased 
 in population as to be entitled, in the opinion of the General Assembly; to such re- 
 presentation, it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to make provision by law 
 for securing to the people of such new county, or such city, town or borough, an. 
 adequate representation. And if the object cannot otherwise be eSected, it shall be 
 competent to the General Assembly to re-apportion the whole representation of the 
 great district containing such new county, or such city, town or borough, within its 
 limits ; which re-apportionment shall continue in force till the nest regular decennial 
 re-apportionment. 
 
 5. The General Assembly, after the year 1S41, and at intervals thereafter of not 
 less than ten years, shall hare authority, two-thirds of each House concurring, to 
 make re-apportionment5 of Delegates and Senators, throughout the Commonwealth, 
 so that the number of Delegates shall not at anv time exceed 150. nor of Senators So, 
 
 6. The whole number of members to which the State may at auT time be entitled 
 in the House of E-epresentatives of the United States, shall be apportioned as nearly 
 as may be, amongst - — . counties, cities, boroughs and towns of the State, ac- 
 cording to their re- .mbers, which shall be determined by adding to the 
 whole number of frcr including those bound to serrice for a term of years 
 and excluding indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons. 
 
 7. Any person raay be elected a Senator who shall have attained to the age of thirty 
 years, and shall be actually a resident and fireeholder within the district, qualified 
 by virtue of his freehold, to vote for members of the General Assembly according to 
 this Constitution. And any person may be elected a member of the House of Dele- 
 gates, who shall have attained the age of twenty-five years, and shall be actually a 
 resident and freeholder within the country . city, town, borough or election district, 
 qualified by virtue of his freehold, to vote for members of the General Assembly ac- 
 cording to this Constitution : Provided . That all persons holding lucrative o^ces and 
 ministers of the Gospel and priests of every denomination, shall be incapable of be- 
 ing elected members of either House of Assembly. 
 
 6. The members of the Assembly shall receive for their services a compensation to 
 be ascertained by law, and paid out of the public Treasury : but no law increasing 
 the compensation of the members shall take effect until the end of the next annu^ 
 session after such law shall have been enacted. And no Senator or Delegate shall, 
 during the term for which he shall have been elected, be appointed to any civil office 
 of profit under the Commonwealth, which shall have been created, or the emoluments 
 of which shall have been increased, during such term, except such o:£ces as may be 
 filled by elections by the people. 
 
 9. The General Assembly sliall meet once or oflener every year. Neither House, 
 during the session of the Legislature, shall without the consent of the other, adjourn 
 for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses 
 shall be sitting. A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business ; 
 but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and shall be authorised to compel 
 the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under such penalties as each 
 House may provide. And each House shall choose its own Speaker, appoint its own 
 officers, settle its own rules of proceeding, and direct writs of election for supplying 
 intermediate vacancies. But if vacancies shall occur by death or resignation, during 
 the recess of the General Assembly, such writs may be issued by the Governor, un- 
 der such reofulations as may be prescribed by law. Each House shall judge of the 
 election, qualification and returns of its members: may punish its members for dis- 
 order! v behaviour, and with the concurrence of two- thirds, expel a member, but not 
 a second time for the same offence. 
 
 10. All laws shall originate in the House of Delegates, to be approved or rejected 
 bv the Senate, or to be amended with the consent of the House of Delegates. 
 
 11. The privilege of the Writ ot Habeas Corpus shall not in any case be suspended. 
 The Legislature shall not pass any bill of attainder ;. or any ex post facto law ; or any 
 law imp^incr the obligation of contracts •. or any law, whereby private property shall 
 be taken tor public uses, without just compensation or any law abridging the fi-ee- 
 dom of Speech, or of the tress. No man shall be compelled to firequent or support 
 anv religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever ; nor shall any man be enforced, 
 restrained, molested or burthened in his body or goods, or otherwise suffer, on ac- 
 count of his religious opinions or belief; but all men shall be tree to profess, and by 
 argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of rehgion, and the same shall in no 
 wise affect, diminish or enlarge their civU capacities. And the Legislature shall not 
 prescribe any religious test whatever ; nor confer any peculiar privileges or advanta- 
 ges on any one sect or denomination ; nor pass any law requiring or authorising any 
 reliarious society, or the people of any district widnn this Commonwealth, to levy on 
 themselves or others, anv tax for the erection or repair of any house for pubhc wor- 
 ship, or for the support of any church or ministry ; but it shall be left free to every 
 
900 
 
 NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 
 person to select his religious instructor, and to make for his support such private con- 
 tract as he shall please. 
 
 12. The Legislature may provide by law that no person shall be capable of holding 
 or being elected to any post of profit, trust or emolument, civil or military, Legislative, 
 Executive or Judicial, under the Government of this Commonwealth, v;ho shall here- 
 after fight a duel, or send or accept a challenge to fight a duel, the probable issue of 
 which may be the death of the challenger or challenged, or who shall be a second to 
 either party, or shall in any manner aid or assist in such duel, or shall be knowingly 
 the bearer of such challenge or acceptance ; but no person shall be so disqualified by 
 reason of his having heretofore fought such duel, or sent or accepted such cliallenge, 
 or been second in such duel, or bearer of such challenge or acceptance. 
 
 13. The Governor, the Judges of the Court of Appeals and Superior Courts, and 
 all others offending against the State, either by mal-administration, corruption, ne- 
 glect of duty, or any other high crime or misdemeanor, shall be impeachable by the 
 House of Delegates ; such impeachment to be prosecuted before the Senate, which 
 shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, 
 the Senate shall be on oath or aflirmation : and no person shall be convicted without 
 the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present. Judgment, in cases of im- 
 peachment, shall not extend further than to removal from ofiice, and disqualification 
 to hold and enjoy any office of honour, trust or profit, under the Commonwealth ; but 
 the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judg- 
 ment and punishment, according to law. 
 
 14. Every white male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein, aged twenty- 
 one years and upwards, being qualified to exercise the Right of Suffrage according to 
 the former Constitution and laws; and every such citizen, being possessed, or whose 
 tenant for years, at will or at sufferance, is possessed, of an estate of freehold in land 
 of the value of twenty-five dollars, and so assessed to be if any assessment thereof be 
 required by law ; and every such citizen, being possessed, as tenant in common, joint 
 tenant or parcener, of an interest in or share of land, and having an estate of freehold 
 therein, such interest or share being of the value of twenty-five dollars, and so assessed 
 to be if any assessment thereof be required by law ; and every such citizen being en- 
 titled to a reversion or vested remainder in fee, expectant on an estate for life or lives, 
 in land of the value of fifty dollars, and so assessed to be if any assessment thereof be 
 required by law ; (each and every such citizen, unless his title shall have come to him 
 by descent, devise, marriage or marriage-settlement, having been so possessed or en- 
 titled for six months) ; and every such citizen, who shall own and be himself in ac- 
 tual occupation of a leasehold estate, with the evidence of title recorded two months 
 before he shall offer to vote, of a term originally not less than five years, of the annual 
 value or rent of twenty dollars ; and every such citizen, who for twelve months next 
 preceding has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, town, 
 borough or election district where he may offer to vote, and shall have been assessed 
 with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, and ac- 
 tually paid the same — and no other persons — shall be qualified to vote for members of 
 the General Assembly in the county, city, town or borough, respectively, wherein 
 such land shall lie, or such house-keeper and head of a family shall live. And in 
 case of two or more tenants in common, joint tenants or parceners, in possession, re- 
 version or remainder, having interest in land, the value whereof shall be insufficient 
 to entitle them all to vote, they shall together have as many votes as the value of the 
 land shall entitle them to : and the Legislature shall by law provide the mode in 
 which their vote or votes shall in such case be given : Provided, nevertheless, That the 
 Right of Suffi-age shall not be exercised by any person of unsound mind, or who shall 
 be a pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, soldier, seaman or marine, in the service 
 of the United States, or by any person convicted of any infamous offence. 
 
 15. In all elections in this Commonwealth, to any office or place of trust, honour or 
 profit, the votes shall be given openly, or viva voce, and not by ballot. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. 
 
 1. The Chief Executive power of this Commonwealth, shall be vested in a Gover- 
 nor, to be elected by the joint vote of the two Houses of the General Assembly. He 
 shall hold his office, during the term of three years, to commence on the first day of 
 January next succeeding his election, or on such other day, as may from time to time 
 be prescribed by law ; and he shall be ineligible to that office, for three years next af- 
 ter his term of service shall have expired. 
 
 2. No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor, unless he shall have at- 
 tained the age of thirty years, shall be a native citizen of the United States, or shall 
 have been a citizen thereof at the adoption of the Federal Constitution, and shall have 
 been a citizen of this Commonwealth for five years next preceding his election. 
 
NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 
 901 
 
 3. The Governor shall receive for his services a compensation to be fixed by lavr, 
 whicli shall be neither increased nor diminished, during- his continuance in office. 
 
 4. He shall take care that the laws be faithfuUy executed ; shall communicate to 
 the Leg-isiature. at every session, the condition of the Commonwealth, and recom- 
 mend to their consideration such measures as he may deem expedient. He shall be 
 Commander-iii-cliief of the land and naval forces of the State. He shall have power 
 to embody the rnilitia. when in his opinion, the public safety shall require it; to con- 
 vene the Legislature, on applicati-n of a majority of tiie members of the House of 
 Delegates, or wiien. in liis opinion, the interest of the Commonwealth mav require it ; 
 to g-rant reprieves and pardons, except wliere the prosecution shall have been carried 
 on by the House of Delegates, or the law shall otherwise particularly direct : to con- 
 duct, eitiier in person, c^r i:i such manner as shall be prescribed bylaw, all intercourse 
 with other and foreign States: and during the recess of the Legislature, to fill, pro 
 tempore, all vacancies in those otfices, which it may be the duty of the Legislature to 
 fill permanently : Pravided. That ills appointments to such vacancies shall be by com- 
 missions to expire at the end of the next succeeding session of the General Assembly. 
 
 •5. There shall be a Council of State, to consist of three members, anv one or more 
 of whom may act. They shall be elected by joint vote of both Houses of the Gene- 
 ral Assembly, and remain in oifice three years. But of those first elected, one. to be 
 designated by lot, shall remain in ofiice for one year only, and one other to be desig- 
 nated in like manner, shall remain in olnce for two years only. Vacaircies occurring 
 by expiration of the term of service, or otherwise, shall be supplied by elections made 
 in like manner. The Governor shall, before he exercises any discretionary power 
 conferred on him by the Constitution and laws, require the advice of the Council of 
 State, which advice shall be registered in books kept for that purpose, signed by the 
 members present and consenting thereto, and laid before the General Assembly when 
 called for by them. Tiie Council shall appoint their own Clerk, who shall take an 
 oath to keep secret such matters as he shall be ordered by the Board to conceal. The 
 Senior Councillor shall be Lieutenant-Governoi . and in case of the death, resignation, 
 inability or absence of the Governor from the seat of Government, shall act as Go- 
 vernor. 
 
 6. The manner of appointing militia officers shall be provided for by law; but no 
 officer below the rank of a Brigadier General, shall be appointed by the General As- 
 sembly. 
 
 7. Commissions and grants shall run in the name of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 
 and bear teste by the Governor, with the seal of the Commonwealth annexed. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 1. The Judicial power sha.ll be vested in a Supreme Court of Appeals, in such Su- 
 perior Courts as the Legislature may from time to time ordain and estabhsh. and the 
 Judges thereof, in the County Courts, and in Justices of the Peace. The Legisla- 
 ture may also ve^t such jurisdiction as shall be deemed necessary in Corporation 
 Courts, and in tlie Magistrates who may belong to the corporate body. The jurisdic- 
 tion of these tribunals, and of the Judges thereof, shall be regulated by law. The 
 Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of the Superior Courts, shall hold their 
 offices durinsr good behaviour, or until removed in the manner prescribed m this Con- 
 stitution ; and shall, at the same time, hold no other office, appointment, or public 
 trust: and the acceptance thereof by either of them shall vacate his judicial office. 
 
 2. Sj law abolishing any court shall be construed to deprive a Judge thereof of 
 his otfice. unless two-thirds of the members of each House present concur in the 
 passing thereof: but the Legislature may assign other Judicial duties to the Judges of 
 courts abolished by any law enacted by less than two-thirds of the members of each 
 House present. 
 
 3. The present Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals, of the General Court, 
 and of tlie Superior Courts of Chancery, shall remain in office until the termination 
 of the session of the first Legislature elected under this Constitution, and no longer. 
 
 4. The Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of the Superior Courts shall 
 be elected by the joint vote of both Houses of the General Assembly. 
 
 5. The Jiidges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of the Superior Courts shall 
 receive fixed and adequate salaries, which shall not be diminished during their con- 
 tinuance in office. 
 
 6. Judges mav be removed from office by a concurrent vote of both Houses of the 
 General Assembly 3 but two-tlrirds of the members present must concur in such vote, 
 and the cause of removal shall be entered on the Journals of each. The Judge 
 against whom the Legislature may be about to proceed, shall receive notice thereof, 
 accompanied with a copv of the causes alleged for his removal, at least twentv davs 
 before the day on which either House of the General Assembly shall act thereupon. 
 
902 
 
 NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 
 7. On the creation of any new county, Justices of the Peace shall be appointed, in 
 the first instance, in such manner as may be prescribed by law. When vacancies 
 shall occur in any county, or it shall, for any cause, be deemed necessary to increase 
 the number, appointments shall be made by the Governor, on the recommendation of 
 the respective County Courts. 
 
 8. The Attorney- General shall be appointed by joint vote of the two Houses of 
 the General Assembly, and commissioned by the Governor, and shall hold his office, 
 during the pleasure of the General Assembly. The Clerks of the several courts, 
 when vacancies shall occur, shall be appointed by their respective courts, and the 
 tenure of office, as well of those now in office as of those who may be hereafter ap- 
 pointed, shall be prescribed by law. The Sheriffs and Coroners shall be nominated 
 by the respective County Courts, and when approved by the Governor, shall be com- 
 missioned by him. The Justices shall appoint Constables. And all fees of the afore- 
 said officers, shall be regulated by law. 
 
 9. Writs shall run in the name of the Commonwealth of Virg-inia, and bear teste 
 by the Clerks of the several courts. Indictments shail conclude, Against the peace 
 and dignity of the Commonwealth. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 
 A Treasurer shall be appointed annually by joint vote of both Houses. 
 
 ARTICLE VII. 
 
 The Executive Department of the Government shall remain as at present organi- 
 zed, and the Governor and Privy Councillors shall continue in office, until a Gover- 
 nor elected, under this Constitution, shall come into office ; and all other persons in 
 office when this Constitution shall be adopted, except as is herein otherwise expressly 
 directed, shall continue in office, till successors shall be appointed, or the law shall 
 otherwise provide ; and all the Courts of Justice now existing shall continue with 
 their present jurisdiction, until and except so far as, the Judicial system may or shall 
 be hereafter otherwise organized by the Legislature. 
 
 Done in Convention in the City of Richmond, on the fifteenth day of January, in 
 the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty, and in the fifty- 
 fourth year of the Independence of the United States of America. 
 
 PHILIP P. BARBOUR, 
 
 President of the Convention. 
 
 D. Briggs, 
 
 Secretarij of the Convention. 
 
 SCHEDULE. 
 
 Ordered, that the roll containing the draught of the Amended Constitution adopted 
 by this Convention, and by it submitted to the people of this Commonwealth, for their 
 ratification or rejection, be enclosed by the Secretary in a case proper for its preserva- 
 tion, and deposited among the archives of tlie Council of State. 
 
 Ordered, that the Secretary do cause the Journal of the proceedings of this Con- 
 vention, to be fairly entered in a well bound book, and after the same shall have been 
 signed by the President, and attested by the Secretary, that he deposit the same, to- 
 gether with all the original documents in the possession of the Convention, and con- 
 nected with its proceedings, among the archives of the Council of State ; and further, 
 that he cause ten printed copies of the said Journal to be well bound, and deposited 
 in the Public Libi-ary. 
 
 Ordered, that the President of the Convention, do certify a true copy of the Amended 
 Constitution to the General Assembly now in session ; and that the General Assem- 
 bly be and they are hereby requested to make any additional provisions by law, which 
 may be necessary and proper for submitting the same to the voters thereby qualified 
 to vote for members of the General Assembly at the next April elections, and for or- 
 ganizing the Government under the A mended Constitution, it case it shall be approved 
 and ratified by such voters. 
 
ENTIRE OFFICIAIw POLE 
 
 ox THE 
 
 NEW CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA. 
 
 Accomack, 
 
 Albemarle, 
 
 Alleghany, 
 
 Amelia, 
 
 Amherst, 
 
 Augusta, 
 
 Bath. 
 
 Bedford, 
 
 Berkele}', 
 
 Botetourt, 
 
 Brooke. 
 
 Brunswick, 
 
 Buckincrham. 
 
 Cabell," 
 
 Campbell, 
 
 Caroline, 
 
 Charles City, 
 
 Charlotte, 
 
 Chesterfield, 
 
 Culpeper, 
 
 Cumberland, 
 
 Dinwiddle, 
 
 Elizabeth City, 
 
 Essex, 
 
 Fairfax, 
 
 Fauquier, 
 
 Fluvanna, 
 
 Franklin, 
 
 Frederick, 
 
 Giles, 
 
 Gloucester, 
 
 Goochland, 
 
 Grayson, 
 
 Greenbrier. 
 
 Greenesville, 
 
 Halifax, 
 
 Hampshire, 
 
 Hanover, 
 
 Hardy, 
 
 Harrison, 
 
 Henrico, 
 
 Henry, 
 
 Isle of Wight, 
 
 James City, 
 
 Jefierson, 
 
 Kanawha, 
 
 King and Queen, 
 
 King George, 
 
 King William, 
 
 Lancaster, 
 
 Lee, 
 
 Lewis, 
 
 Logan, 
 
 Loudoun, 
 
 Louisa, 
 
 Lunenburg, 
 
 Madison, 
 
 Carried up. 
 
 Ratifying. Rejecting 
 
 266 
 
 70 
 
 626 
 
 7 
 
 80 
 
 72 
 
 250 
 
 3 
 
 349 
 
 
 265 
 
 MlO 
 
 no 
 yo 
 
 14/ 
 
 C09 
 
 OO 
 
 yo 
 
 XDi 
 
 DOU 
 
 1 O 
 
 r>A 
 UU 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 565 
 
 40 
 
 5 
 
 oo4 
 
 44t) 
 
 OO 
 
 331 
 
 OA 
 
 no 
 
 OO 
 4.4, 
 
 33o 
 
 1 0 
 
 A iZI 
 
 lo 
 
 y21 
 
 OA 
 
 4Xi 
 
 ono 
 
 ID 
 
 64l 
 
 01 
 
 110 
 
 DO 
 
 248 
 
 15 
 
 184 
 
 lo 
 
 468 
 
 OO 
 
 243 
 
 17 
 
 593 
 
 138 
 
 451 
 
 438 
 
 21 
 
 556 
 
 252 
 
 62 
 
 198 
 
 3 
 
 70 
 
 649 
 
 34 
 
 464 
 
 112 
 
 5 
 
 636 
 
 15 
 
 241 
 
 211 
 
 359 
 
 7 
 
 63 
 
 120 
 
 8 
 
 1,112 
 
 280 
 
 46 
 
 208 
 
 71 
 
 246 
 
 8 
 
 71 
 
 33 
 
 243 
 
 53 
 
 42 
 
 266 
 
 262 
 
 22 
 
 102 
 
 7 
 
 187 
 
 12 
 
 73 
 
 83 
 
 330 
 
 99 
 
 10 
 
 546 
 
 2 
 
 255 
 
 505 
 
 128 
 
 543 
 
 32 
 
 218 
 
 4 
 
 256 
 
 00 
 
 15,340 
 
 7,316 
 
 Brought up, 
 
 Ratifying. 
 
 Rejecting. 
 
 7,316 
 
 15,340 
 
 ]SIason, 
 
 31 
 
 369 
 
 jSIatthews, 
 
 123 
 
 35 
 
 Mecklenburg, 
 
 488 
 
 24 
 
 Middlesex, 
 
 123 
 
 14 
 
 Monongalia, 
 
 305 
 
 460 
 
 Monroe, 
 
 19 
 
 451 
 
 ^Montgomery, 
 
 194 
 
 670 
 
 Morgan, 
 
 29 
 
 156 
 
 Nanseraond, 
 
 162 
 
 72 
 
 Nelson, 
 
 332 
 
 5 
 
 New Kent, 
 
 156 
 
 34 
 
 Nicholas, 
 
 28 
 
 325 
 
 Norfolk County, 
 
 230 
 
 23 
 
 Northampton, 
 
 48 
 
 32 
 
 Northumberland , 
 
 286 
 
 7 
 
 Nottoway, 
 
 214 
 
 5 
 
 Ohio, 
 
 3 
 
 643 
 
 Orange, 
 
 417 
 
 18 
 
 Patrick, 
 
 274 
 
 246 
 
 Pendleton, 
 
 58 
 
 219 
 
 Pittsylvania, 
 
 955 
 
 40 
 
 Pocahontas, 
 
 9 
 
 228 
 
 Powhatan, 
 
 238 
 
 10 
 
 Preston, 
 
 121 
 
 a57 
 
 Prince Edward, 
 
 3.28 
 
 3 
 
 Princess Anne, 
 
 285 
 
 88 
 
 Prince George, 
 
 142 
 
 4 
 
 Prince Wilham, 
 
 183 
 
 52 
 
 Pvandolph. 
 
 4 
 
 565 
 
 Richmond County, 
 
 126 
 
 51 
 
 Rockbridge, 
 
 416 
 
 125 
 
 Rockingham, 
 
 457 
 
 49 
 
 Russell, 
 
 86 
 
 240 
 
 Scott, 
 
 155 
 
 297 
 
 Shenandoah, 
 
 671 
 
 64 
 
 Southampton, 
 
 347 
 
 8 
 
 Spotls3-lvania, 
 
 452 
 
 16 
 
 Staiiord, 
 
 204 
 
 58 
 
 Surry, 
 
 108 
 
 36 
 
 Sussex, 
 
 259 
 
 2 
 
 Tazewell, 
 
 35 
 
 423 
 
 Tyler, 
 
 5 
 
 299 
 
 Warwick, 
 
 2 
 
 63 
 
 Washington, 
 
 556 
 
 175 
 
 Westmoreland, 
 
 Wood, 
 
 Wythe, 
 
 106 
 
 33 
 
 28 
 
 410 
 
 41 
 
 625 
 
 York, 
 
 76 
 
 43 
 
 Norfolk Borough, 
 
 198 
 
 38 
 
 Petersburg, 
 
 272 
 
 5 
 
 Richmond City, 
 
 301 
 
 19 
 
 Williamsburg, 
 
 29 
 
 13 
 
 26,055 15,563 
 15.563 
 
 Majority, 
 
 10,492 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 (Xo. 1.) 
 
 Substance of Governor Giles's Address to the Executive Commit- 
 tee, on Saturday, October the llth, 1529. {Made at its request.) 
 
 Referred to in [jage 257 of these Debates. 
 
 Mr. Giles introduced the address, by begging the Committee to be assured, that 
 he felt a high sense of the honor conferred upon Kim. by a call to present to the Com- 
 mittee his views of the interesting subjects then under its consideration ;. and that 
 while it would give him sincere pleasure to comply with the call, he had not the 
 vanity to presume, that any thing he could say would influence the opinion or vote 
 Q^any member of the Committee. But, he could not avoid expressing the high satis- 
 motion he felt at the spirit of liberality, harmony and concession, which had marked 
 the proceedings of that Committee from their commencement to the present time, 
 rsor could he help expressing at the same time, the deep concern and regret he. felt 
 at the equality of votes, or near approach to it. which had been given upon several 
 of the most interesting subjects, as well by this as by the other Commiitees of the 
 Convention. He could not, however, entirely suppress the hope, that by persevering 
 in the same friendly and liberal comparison of opinions, which had heretofore been 
 manifested in the Committee, a nearer approach to unanimity might hereafter be had, 
 or at least, greater majorities might be found for adopting some one course of mea- 
 sures. 3Ir. G. then observed, that in executing the task he had undertaken, he pro- 
 posed to yresent to the Committee nothing more than an outline compendious view 
 of the whole subjects before them, as weil as of the particular one more immediately 
 under consideration. Relying upon the intelligence of every member of the Com- 
 mittee, he proposed to adventure but little into minute demonstration or argument, 
 and hoped that each member would fill up for himself, from his own reflections, the 
 vacuums which must necessarily attend a mere outline view of this, as well as every 
 other subject. 
 
 Mr. G. then said, he was himself deeply impressed, and he was confident every 
 other member of the Committee was equally so, with the great importance of the 
 objects for which they were called together, and of the powers with which they were 
 invested to effectuate these objects. The one was nothing less than the formation 
 of a social compact or written Constitution for the whole people of Virginia — the 
 other, nothing less than the whole sovereign rights and powers of the same people. 
 These involve trusts and duties of high and paramount impression, and demand the 
 best efforts of our best deliberations to carry them into effect in such a manner as to 
 answer the just expectations of our constituents and of the world. The object of 
 every social compact or written Constitution, is to establish a practical Government, 
 and to prescribe rules for its observance, thereby limiting its powers v.'ithin a pre- 
 scribed sphere of action. Fundamental laws must necessarily be general in their 
 character, otherwise they would swell into a formidable code of legislative enact- 
 ments. These ofeneral laws are intended as guides to the practical Government es- 
 tablished bv them, and are to such practical Government what that Government is to 
 the individual citizens. The social compact or written Constitution prescribes rules 
 of conduct for the observance of the practical Government. The practical Govern- 
 ment prescribes rules of conduct for the observance of its individual citizens. All 
 Governments profess to have the same objects in view in their formation — the safety 
 of the people from all violence witliout or within — the protection of person — and the 
 protection of property. These last are effected by an equal administration of justice 
 to all. All these great objects can only be effected, by drawing from nature great 
 general principles, applicable to the science of politics, for the formation of a prac- 
 tical Government, which, from its own intrinsic operation, shall produce good moral 
 tendencies on the community over which it is established. Two general modes only 
 have heretofore been devised for the formation of Governments, with the exceptions 
 of a few Republics of verv limited extent of t-erritory and population. The one 
 
 114 
 
906 
 
 APPENDIX— NO. I, 
 
 through the notion of inviolability — the other, through the principle of responsibility. 
 Governments founded on the notion of inviolability, are far more ancient, and even 
 at the present day far more numerous than those founded on the principle of respon- 
 sibility. TJie notion of inviolability is not found in nature. It is of human invention. 
 It is the oiTspring of fraud and cunning, supported and effectuated by force. The 
 admission that an agent, transacting the concerns of his principal, becomes thereby 
 invested with the powers to exercise jurisdiction over both the person and property 
 of such principal, through an invented faculty of inviolabilit}'^, is repugnant to every 
 dictate of nature, and of common sense. The notion of inviolability cannot, there- 
 fore, be found in nature, and consequently not in science — yet the elder Mr. Adams 
 has not hesitated to declare, that the British Government, which is founded on the 
 notion of inviolability, is the only scientific Government in the world. This form of 
 Governm-.iC professes to derive its origin from something above human rights; and 
 for the want of something mora inteUigible, asserts that origin to be divine — derived 
 from God himself. This origin, if true, would be solid, unquestionable and irresistible. 
 But, it is not true — it is the mere invention of fraud and cunning. Responsibility is 
 a principle found in nature — yet the Governments founded on it are of comparatively 
 modern date. Tlie North American Constitutions, so called for distinction's sake, are 
 at this day the only ones founded on this principle. Attempts at its imitation have 
 been made by the Mexican and South American Republics ; but, they are at this time 
 in such an unsettled state, that no positive conclusions can be drawn as to their final 
 destinies. The first of these Constitutions is of little more than half a century stand- 
 ing, and is the one we are now engaged in amending or destroying. Responsibility 
 is a principle derived from nature. It consists simply in the obligations, that every 
 agent, who undertakes to manage the concerns of his principal, thereby takes up(^ 
 himself to account for his conduct, in their management, to his principal. It is the 
 plain, natural principle of the accouritability of the agent to his principal. Every 
 dictate of our nature — every dictate of the innate or moral sense, attests the truth of 
 this principle. This principle of responsibility is the true ground of the representa- 
 tive system of Government, and is founded upon the natural rights of man, in his in- 
 dividual character. These form the basis of every social compact or written Consti- 
 tutioxa. Every social compact or written Constitution is formed by the distribution of 
 these rights between the governors and the governed. This distribution, when made, 
 constitutes what is called the Republican form of Government ; and whether such 
 Government, when formed, be good or bad, must essentially depend upon the wise 
 or unwise distribution of these rights. Inviolability is the basis of the Monarchical 
 form of Government. All tlie North American Constitutions, as well State as Fe- 
 deral, profess to be founded on this principle of responsibility in all their departments. 
 The Federal Executive professes to be founded on the same principle, but the test of 
 its responsibility has been found in practice, inefficacious and unavailing. That test, 
 during the continuance of the Executive in office, consists only in impeachment, 
 which is found in practice to be an inefiicient test. But, the real inefficiency of the 
 responsibility of the Executive, consists in the great patronage originally bestowed 
 upon it, and its vast accumulation since that time. Patronage is the offspring of in- 
 violability, not of responsibility — and in that consists the great error in the organiza- 
 tion of the Federal Executive. It is the anomalous adaptation of a Monarchical Ex- 
 ecutive to a Republican Legislature. Patronage is tlie natural enemy of responsi- 
 bility, and has been seen at open war with it in the administration of the Federal 
 Government, particularly since its vast accumulation v/ithin the last fifteen or twenty 
 years. The Virginia Executive is founded on the same principle of responsibihty, 
 but it is an actual, eliicacious one — not merely virtual or nominal. Its test is the best 
 that human wisdom could devise. 
 
 Mr. G. expressed extreme regret, that this part of our Constitution should have 
 been so much misrepresented through the public prints, and he feared, so little un- 
 derstood through the State generally. He, therefore, begged the dispassionate and 
 deep reflections of the Committee to this brunch of the subject, banishing, as far as 
 practicable, all former prepossessions — and he hoped to be indulged with a more mi- 
 nute examination and illustration of this part of the subject, fie said, the Governor 
 and Council v/ere respectively elected by joint ballot of both branches of the Legis- 
 lature. The present Constitution requires, that a regular journal of the proceedings 
 of the Council should be kept and subscribed by the Councillors themselves. The 
 Councillors are made advise x a of the Governor by the Constitution, and these jour- 
 nals, containing minutes of all their advice, are at ail times subject to the call of the 
 General Assembly, and are in fact annually called for by the House of Delegates. 
 In these provisions will be seen a complete and perfect test of the accountability of 
 the Councillors to their electors. The same journals furnish the test of the accounta- 
 bihty of the Governor. He is required to follow, or refuse to follow, the advice of the 
 Council — and, in either case, the journals will exhibit his conduct; and, therefore, 
 furnish a perfect test of his responsibility also. But, the tests of responsibility do not 
 
APPENDIX— NO. 1. 907 
 
 stop here. The Constitution contains a provision foi* excluding, periodically, two of 
 the Councillors, instead of leaving their offices to expire periodically; and thus adds 
 greatly to the efficacy and severity of the test of their responsibihty. This provision 
 has generally heen designated by the term " ostracism," as indicating its extreme se- 
 verity. In practice, this extreme severity seems to be universally admitted. Yet, it 
 detracts nothing from the consummate wisdom of its author, the celebrated and vene- 
 rated George Mason. His object was to have a completely and efficiently responsible 
 Executive, and he was entirely without a model, all pre-existing Governments having 
 been founded on the notion of inviolability. He was compelled, therefore, to resort 
 exclusively to the efforts of his own great independent mind, to effect his own novel, 
 untried conception, and his vrisdom is manifested in selecting means best suited to 
 the accomplishment of his ends. The Virginia Executive is the only strictly respon- 
 sible, and, therefore, the only Republican one known to Mr. G. The error of the 
 celebrated George Mason consisted in a modification of his principle, by pushing this 
 test to an extreme. It probably did not occur to him, that this extreme s"everity would 
 have immoral tendencies, by calling into action some of the worst of human passions, 
 whenever it should be brought into practical execution. This, however, was its na- 
 tural tendency, and has been reduced to proof by practice. Hence, it seems unani- 
 mously agreed, that this provision should be expunged from the Constitution ; for, 
 whenever it is ascertained that any provision, from its own intrinsic operations, tends 
 to produce immoral results, it is surely sufficient groi;'->d for its rejection. Equally 
 unfounded are all the charges which have been put into circulation, through the news- 
 papers, against the Constitution itself, that it was the production of an unauthorised 
 body of men, and the effect of hurry and alarm — that little or no deliberation had 
 been employed in its formation. Directly the reverse of truth are all these invented, 
 unfounded suggestions. It was the production of perhaps the wisest duly authorised 
 body of men tliat ever assembled in the United States, and it was the result of the 
 most perpetual and unceasing labours from the GUi of May, to the 29th of June, 1776. 
 Every provision contained in it was disputed inch by inch, and the best efforts of the 
 soundest heads, the purest hearts, and the best informed minds, were exerted to the 
 utmost to bring it to its consummation — and its wisdom is abundantly manifested by 
 its moral tendencies over the Virginia people for above half a century, and the un- 
 paralleled political blessings enjoyed by them during that time. To rescue the existing 
 V^irginia Constitution from these unworthy, unfounded imputations brought against 
 it, and to present to the Committee a correct view of the real liistory of its formation, 
 Mr. G. begged to call its attention to a letter from the late Mr. Jefferson to the late 
 celebrated Judge Woodward, referring to one from Mr. Pendleton, the President of 
 the Convention, containing a sketch of this history. An extract from this letter will 
 be found in a volume of political miscellanies recently compiled by himself, intended 
 to perpetuate that and many other highly important political facts, some of which 
 will be found to be directlj'- tlie reverse of what he believes tliey are generally under- 
 stood to be. Mr. G. then read from this volume the follov\nng extract of the letter 
 referred to : 
 
 " The fact is unquestionable, that the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of Vir- 
 ginia, were drav/n originally by George Mason, one of our really great men, and of 
 the first order of greatness. The history of the preamble to the latter is as follows : 
 I was then at Philadelphia with Congress, and knowing that the Convention of Vir- 
 ginia was engaged in forming a plan of Government, 1 turned my mind to the same 
 subject, and drew a sketch or outline of a Constitution, with a preamble, which I sent 
 to Mr. Pendleton, President of the Convention, on the mere possibihty that it might 
 suggest something vrorth incorporation into that before the Convention. Re informed 
 me afterwards, by letter, tha.t he received it on the day on which the Committee of 
 the Whole had reported to the House the plan they had ao-reed to ; that that had been 
 so long in hand, so disputed inch by inch, and the subject of so much altercation and 
 debate, that they were worried witJa the contentions it had produced, and could not, 
 from mere lassitude, have been induced to open the instrument again ; but that being 
 pleased with the prcanible to mine, they adopted it in the House by way of amend- 
 ment to the report of the Committee ; and thus my preamble became tacked to the 
 work of George Mason. The Constitution, with tlie preamble, vras passed on tlie 
 29th of June ; and the Committee of Congress had only the day before that reported 
 to that body the draught of the Declaration of Independence. The fact is, that that 
 preamble is prior in composition to the Declaration, and both having the same object 
 of justifying our separation with Great Britain, they used necessarily the same mate- 
 rials of justification; and hence their similitude." 
 
 In this extract will be seen the most complete and authentic refutation of all these 
 unworthy and unfounded imputations against the framers of the Constitution, as well 
 as against the Constitution itself. So far are they from being founded in truth, it is 
 here completely demonstrated, that they are directly the reverse of truth. Equally 
 unfounded is the still more degrading imputation, that this Constitution was made in 
 
908 
 
 APPENDIX NO. I. 
 
 the midst of peril, and was the hasty effect of terror and alarm. Mr. G. said, he 
 knew it had often been tritely said, that the framers of this Constitution acted " with 
 ropes around their necks," and hence, the false and degrading inference, that the in- 
 strument itself was the effect of terror and alarm. It is true that the framers of this 
 Constitution, did act in the midst of the most imminent perils. It is true, that durmg 
 their deliberations, the country was threatened with armed bands incalculably greater 
 in numbers and in military skill, than any force that could be brought to their del'ence. 
 But It is equally true, that this appalling force inspired neither terror nor alarm ; nor 
 did it disturb in the smallest degree, the equanimity of mind of a single member of 
 the Convention. They continued their dehberalions with the most perfect calmness 
 and equanimity of mind, from the 6th of May to the 29th of June, following ; ex- 
 hibiting a more remarkable spectacle of heroic, moral courage, dming their delibera- 
 tions, than of consummate wisdom in the final production of this Constitution — the 
 first social compact that ever was reduced to writing — the first written Constitution 
 that ever brought into practical use, the great principles derived from the natural 
 rights of man. Yes, gentlemen, the 29th of June, 1776, is the first day in which the 
 glorious light of liberty burst forth upon a benighted world, through the resplendent 
 mirror of this Constitution ; and that ought to be the great Jubilee day, not only for 
 the Virginia people, but for the whole human race. Mr. G. said, he never could sa- 
 tisfactorily account for the inattention, or almost oblivion, which had been shewn by 
 the people of Virginia, to the 29th day of June, 1776, which ought to be commemo- 
 rated as the first in the calendar, unless it was for a preference given to the 4th of 
 July, which shortly followed it, and which ushered forth the Declaration of Indepen- 
 dence to the world. But, the Declaration of Independence is a paper of incompara- 
 bly less importance to mankind, than the Virginia Constitution, which was exclu- 
 sively the production of our Virginian forefathers; and the only possible inducement 
 which he could conceive to justily the people of Virginia, in yielding this preference 
 to the 4th of July for commemoration, instead of the 29th of June, arose from their 
 noble, generous self-denial, for which they have been so justly celebrated on other oc- 
 casions, in being willing to share the honour and glory ot this great political discovery 
 with the people of their sister States, while the Virginian people were, in fact, 
 exclusively entitled to them. The least attention to the subject must admonish us all, 
 that the Constitution of Virginia is a paper of extremely difterent character from the 
 Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence is a mere act of 
 diplomacy. It is the mere declaration of ambassadors from several sovereign States, 
 which at that time had surrendered up none of their sovereign rights, nor were bound 
 even by any articles of confederation : for, it should be recollected that the articles of 
 confederation were not entered into at the time of the Declaration of Independence, 
 nor for more than two years thereafter — the one having taken place on the 4th of 
 July, 1776, and the other on the 6th of July, 1778. The late projected, abortive 
 Panama Congress, if such a singular, eccentric conception could have been carried 
 into effect, would have presented a precise resemblance of that Congress which 
 made the Declaration of Independence : Whereas the Virginia Constitution is a 
 written social compact, the first ever entered into by man, and forms the most instruc- 
 tive model, not only for the people oT the other American States but for the whole 
 human race. Mr. G. then observed that, after having presented this outline view of 
 some of the general principles applicable to some of the subjects which were before 
 them, and having given this concise sketch of the history of the formation of the 
 Virginia Constitution, he would now beg leave to call the attention of the Committee 
 more particularly to the specific subject under its consideration. That subject in- 
 volves the inquiry as to the best mode of electing the Governor of Virginia. Shall he 
 be elected by the General Assembly, or by the people of Virginia ? Mr. G. said he 
 was surprised to hear several highly intelligent gentlemen of the Committee, in 
 speaking upon this subject, make the suggestion, that a Governor elected by the 
 General Assembly would not be, in fact, elected by the people. That there would, in 
 fact, be an essential difference in the character and responsibility of the Governor 
 when elected by the people, and when elected by the Legislature : Whereas he con- 
 ceived an election by the Legislature, was as much an election by the people, as if the 
 election were made directly by themselves. The mode only is different. The effect 
 the same. This result is the effect of another plain, simple principle in nature, and, 
 in practice, universally received as a legal axiom, " he who acts by another, acts by 
 himself;" or, in other words, that he who causes a thing to be done, does that thing 
 himself. When the people, in their individual characters, have elected their Legis- 
 lative Representatives and invested those representatives with power to prescribe rules 
 of conduct for their observance, they have done all that is necessary for the security 
 and preservation of their rights and liberties. These rules essentially afford the pro- 
 tection of human rights and liberties. Electing the ministerial officers for carrying 
 these rules into effect, would add nothing to the security of these rights and liberties. 
 The question, therefore, resolves itself into a mere question of fitness, expediency 
 
APPENDIX NO. 1. 
 
 909 
 
 and convenience. Elections by individuals, in their individual capacity, under cer- 
 tain circum-ianceS; instead of securing to them an extension of rights, might impose 
 up j;i lii-.n 0 leroua duties. In the present case, calling' upon the people in their in- 
 d:vii ..iri.ter to elect their Governors, Juolciai and other ministerial officers, 
 mig : - dered as imposing an obligatory duty, instead of reserving- to them an 
 
 imp . - ; and might condict with all just conceptions of elections. "What is 
 
 an el - ■. - und what are tlie essential requisitions in making one.' An election for 
 reprt---;r V -5. is an act of choice between candidates. Knowledge of the objects 
 of the cii jice is essentially necessary in making it rightly. In the election of a Go- 
 vernor of Virginia by the individual voters, how would it be possible for them to be 
 acquainted with the candidates ;. at least to any material extent ? The choice of re- 
 presentatives by individuals should be confined" to districts of country of such limited 
 extent, as to enable the individual voter to elect his candidate from his own know- 
 ledge, or from knowledge derived from his neighbours in the exercise of his ordinary 
 social intercourse. Individual elections beyond a sphere like this, are merely formal 
 and factious. They are not made iiT-'n ih \^ kird r f kr.'^i-.vlec^e. vliich will enable 
 the v jter to judge correctly of t .-' ! :dual candidates. 
 
 Tile inevitable elfect, theretbre. ; . ..: : ,•■ duty of making 
 
 an election beyond a sphere like this. i= to Uitu w ine v jIct mlo the hands of the elec- 
 tioneerer, and to subject hiin to become the sport of the electioneering spirit — the 
 most demoralizing of all others, and therefore the most to be deprecated, and the 
 last that ouirht to be countenanced or encouraged by extending its scope of action. 
 Even at the present moment, and within the last four 3'ears, the most conspicuous 
 examples of this electioneering spirit have been exhiuited in open, unblushing 
 public harangues, throughout the whole United States — disgraceful to the election eerer, 
 the people and to the Government. To avoid these deplorable and demoralizing 
 scenes, intermediate elections have been resorted to, and rendered indispensable by 
 the extent of territory and population. This refinement in elections, by intermediate 
 agents, is a prmeiple peculiar to the United States. It is already carried into effect 
 in the election of President and Senators of the United States, and must be much 
 more extensively resorted to upon the increasino- extent of inhabited territory and of 
 population — if the people of the United States mean to preserve and to perpetuate 
 their liberties. Mr. G. expressed great regret, that while he was perfectly conscious 
 that nothing could save and perpetuate the liberties of the people of the United 
 States, but intermediate elections, he was compelled, most reluctantly, to admit, that 
 the popular current of the moment is running strongly in favour of the extension of 
 elections by the people individualh^ in their primar}' assemblies. Whilst, therefore, 
 he thought there was a peculiar unfitness in calling upon the people of Virginia to 
 elect their Governor, Judicial and other ministerial ofiicers. in their individual capa- 
 cities, he thought the General Assembly was the best and most appropriate tribunal 
 that could be devised for that purpose, and had always heretofore discharged that dufy 
 most beneficially both to the people and to the Government. He observed that the 
 General V — ^mbly consisted of persons chosen by the people from every nook and 
 corner tv.e State: and let the candidate for Governor come from what part of the 
 State he mio-ht. there would always be snm.e of the members who would necessarily 
 be acquainted with his qualities and qualifications for the ofiice to v.hich he aspires; 
 and such members always could and always would, as they always have done, com- 
 municate this knowledor'e to oth-rs. This is precisely that kind of knowledge which 
 may be perfectly confid'ed in, for the purpose of enabhng each individual to make his 
 choice. There is always a presumption too, in favour of t'lis kind of information, 
 from the circumstance,' that it is given by one honoured by the votes of Ins constitu- 
 ents. Besides, the members of the General Assembly, in their ordinary intercourse, 
 soon become acquainted with each other after their arrival at the seat of Government, 
 and are thus enabled, from their own observation, to judge of the degree of credit to 
 be 2'iven to such communications. It is not proposed tiien. to give a preference to 
 tile General Assemblv in the appointment of ministerial ofiicers, for the want of ca- 
 pa::tv on the part of 'the people'to judge correctly, but for the want of that kind of 
 knowledge, which would enable them to exercise such capacities correctly. From 
 these considerations, and many others which might be added, it would be much bet- 
 ter, he concluded, that the General Assembly should elect the Governor, and all the 
 highest grades of Judicial and ministerial o-Scers. as they have heretofore done, in pre- 
 ference to referrincr them to the people in their individual characters. Mr. G. said, 
 it should be recollected by the Committee, that the Executive Department formed an 
 essential part of one entire system of Government ; is necessarily and intimately 
 connected with the whole, and", therefore, ought to be considered in connection with 
 that one Government as a whole. The Government of Virginia, as a whole, has 
 been found for above half a century's experience, uniformly to have had good, moral 
 tendencies upon society, and to have produced the best moral efi'ects upon its present 
 condition. These happy results could only have arisen from an harmonious co-ope- 
 
910 
 
 APPENDIX NO. I. 
 
 ration of all its parts, the Executive Department with the rest, in producing them. 
 The great end, in the formation of all Constitutions should be, to promote the com- 
 mon good; and no Constitution ever yet devised has been found more successful in 
 producing this great end, than the existing Constitution of Virginia. This has been 
 effected by the wise adaptation of all its parts, in their practical operation, to produce 
 one common end, and is founded upon the same principle of nature, which, in prac- 
 tice, constitutes the perfection of all dramatic productions; the tendency of all its 
 incidents to produce an unity of object and an unity of action. The chief means by 
 which this end has been effected in the Virginia Constitution, have been, the ten- 
 dency of all its parts to place a great preponderancy of the governmental powers in 
 the hands of the middling class of society ; through which the great end — the common 
 good — has been most effectually produced and secured. Whenever a Government 
 is so formed, as from its own intrinsic operations, to place a great preponderance of 
 its powers in the hands of the middling class, it may be said to be a near approach to 
 governmental perfection, whatever may be the means used to effect that end. It will 
 be readily seen, however, that such end could never be produced by any Government 
 founded upon the invented notion of inviolability : Because the autocrat is in every 
 case presumed to be invested with all power, derived too, as he pretends, from a di- 
 vine ordination. In the disposition of governmental powers, the extremes of so- 
 ciety should always be avoided. The extreme rich, as well as the extreme poor. 
 Neither extreme can be a safe or beneficial depository of governmental powers. 
 The Constitution of Virginia, Mr. Giles said, had been more successful in placing 
 a great preponderancy of power in the hands of the middling class of sot iety, 
 than any other Government in the world ; and in consequence thereof, he be- 
 lieved the moral condition of the population of Virginia, to be sounder and better 
 than that of any other in tlie world, notwithstanding the mixture in its com- 
 position of three castes — the white free — the coloured free — and the coloured slave 
 population, and the ver}'^ great proportion of this last caste, to the whole free 
 white population. Mr. G. said, he had for a long time bestowed much reflection 
 upon this novel and interesting subject, and had resorted to the best evidence at his 
 command, for the purpose of ascertaining the facts in relation to it. He said the first 
 evidence was of a general and indefinite character, but still, he thought entitled to 
 great respect. It consisted of the general celebrity accorded to Virginians, for an in- 
 violable adherence to moral principles, even in opposition to their own supposed in- 
 terests. This most honourable celebrity, in favour of Virginians, had been manifested 
 on many occasions, and in various ways, since the abandonment of all moral princi- 
 ples, and the introduction of an unprincipled, bargaining, huckstering and trafiicking 
 in the legislation of the Federal Government, alike degrading to its authors and to 
 the Government. It has been particularly attested by the acknowledgements and 
 declarations of the busy authors themselves, of this unprincipled, trafficking course 
 of legislation. It had often been observed, when a proposition was made for intro- 
 ducing a Virginian into any of these trafficking schemes, it is in vain to apply to him; 
 ^' He is a Virginian — Virginians never abandon their principles for their interests." 
 How honourable this celebrity to the Virginian character, and how much indebted are 
 all Virginians to our members of Congress from the commencement of the Govern- 
 ment to this day, for this honourable distinction, whose uniform conduct during that 
 whole time has been such, as to draw, even from their political opponents, this reluc- 
 tant admission. And to what cause can it most rationally be attributed Certainly to 
 no other than to the uniform moral tendencies of the Virginia fundamental laws, upon 
 the Virginia people, for more than half a century. What other imaginable cause can 
 be assigned for this distinguished effect And v/hen we see that such effect is pro- 
 duced, is it not perfectly just and rational to ascribe it to that cause in preference to 
 any other How cautious, therefore, ought we to be, to avoid every interpolation into 
 our Constitution, which might, by possibility, tend to deprive us of this distinguished 
 celebrity Mr. G. said, that the only other evidence upon this point, to which he had 
 resorted, was through the Penitentiary establishment in this and several other States. 
 His object was to ascertain the number of convictions in each State, compared with 
 the population respectivelj^; and to infer the moral condition of each, from the re- 
 spective numbers of convictions in each for Penitentiary offences. Mr. G. said, that 
 with this view, shortly after coming into his present office, he instructed Mr. Parsons, 
 the Superintendent of our Penitentiary, when on a visit to the Northern and Eastern 
 States, by personal inspection of the several Penitentiaries, to ascertain several facts, 
 which were reduced to writing, and intended to show the actual number of convicts 
 in each, for Penitentiary offences. This service the Superintendent performed very 
 much to his satisfaction ; and, in addition to their systems of prison discipline, ob- 
 tained an official statement of the most material information called for, from the offi- 
 cers of each Penitentiary establishment. The result of the whole, was highly honor- 
 able to the present moral condition of the white population of Virginia, compared 
 with that of any other State, from which the information had been derived; and, of 
 
APPENDIX NO, I. 
 
 911 
 
 course, highly honorable to tlie moral tendencies of our fundamental laws, to which 
 cause alone it must be attributed. It appeared, that at that time the nvmber of con- 
 victs in the Penitentijiries and other correctional establishments of JSew York, ex- 
 ceeded 1;300; and from subsequent information less authentic, it is estimated that 
 the number now exceeds 1,.5U0. The whole population of !New York, at the last 
 census, exceeded 1,30U,C'gI) and probably now exceeds l.oOO.OOO. The white popu- 
 lation of \ irginia. at the last census, when fulij corrected, was about 660. OOU — its 
 probable amount at present may be estimated at ■rOO.OOO. The nimaber of white con- 
 victs in the Penitentiary in 1526, was about 140, and there has been no increase of 
 convicts, since that time, corresponding with the increase of population ) the number 
 being at this c ay about 140. Hence, if will appear, that estimating the population of 
 New York at double the free white population of Virginia, there would be rather 
 more than five times as many convicts in New York for Penitentiary offences, than 
 in \ irginia, according to their relative population. ]Mr. G. said, he "did not mean to 
 give tiiis statement as strictly and minutely correct, but m^erely to present sreneral 
 relative results. He said he had been induced to select New York for this compari- 
 son, because the late Convention of that State had been frequently resorted to for 
 precedents to influence the measures of this Convention ; but he hoped that they 
 would be considered as precedents rather to be shunned than to be fr.jlowed ; for he 
 had the best reasons to beheve, that if the same members who formed that Constitu- 
 tion had to act again, they would themselves disavow the very precedents they had 
 set; for he believed that they had done more injury to the former Constitutio'n, by 
 the single provision which introduced the notion of universal suSrage, than could be 
 compensated for by all the other amendments put toofether : and the very members, 
 who introduced that provision, would be the last to introduce it under the experience 
 of its practical operauruis. whilst they had now notliina- left but the deepest lamenta- 
 tions for their own indiscretion. 31r. G. said, he thought it but an act of justice to 
 the people of New York, to ascribe at least one-half of the Penitentiary offences, 
 committed in that State, to the operation of that fatal measure, and from the elec- 
 tioneering spirit which had been called into action by it. [An inquiry was made of 
 Mr. G. by a member of the Committee, what relative proportion of convicts there 
 was in the Penitentiary of Massachusetts, compared with those in the Penitentiary 
 of Virginia r relying upon the homogeneous population of that State as lessening the- 
 proportion against the State of New York, arising, as he presumed, from the mixed 
 character of the population of tliat State.] Mr. G. replied, that there was a smaller 
 disproportion, which he could not ascertain precisely : but he was confident it was at 
 least two to one asrainst the Massachusetts' population ; and was above that propor- 
 tion in every other State, from which he had received authentic information. Mr. G, 
 said, his enquiries into the relative numbers of convictions for Penitentiary offenceSj. 
 had led to the discovery of another fact, which was unexpected to him ; and he pre- 
 sumed would be to others. That there were fewer convictions for Penitentiary of- 
 fences by slaves, than the free white population of Virginia according to their relative 
 numbers — doubtlessly arising from the comfortable condition of the slaves : That 
 although slaves were not punishable in the Penitentiary, yet all the records of con- 
 victions for capital and Penitentiary offences by slaves, are laid before the Executive^ 
 and registered in the Penitentiary — and except in capital cases, the convicted slaves 
 were brought there for the purpose of carr3-ing into effect their punishment, by sale 
 and transportation. The number who suffer death for capital offences, is so small, as 
 not to make any difference in the relative results: Vrhilst tiie number of the con- 
 victions of the free coloured, is about four times greater, according to numbers, than 
 either the free white, or coloured slave population. Mr. G. said, that he was im- 
 pressed with tlie strongest convictions that die superior moral condition of the popu- 
 lation of Virginia over that of any other State, from which he had received inibrma- 
 tion, wa.s produced more from the unfortunate notion wliich had been introduced mto 
 practice tiiere, of electing universal officers — legislative, judicial, ministerial and 
 military — by universal suffrage, than by any other cause whatever. Mr. G. said, that 
 the extension of the right of suffrage, not only to persons but to offices, had intro- 
 duced the baneful electioneering spirit, which had produced, and always would pro- 
 duce, more general corruption in society, than almost any other cause whatever. It 
 had introduced an increased waste of whiskey, waste of labour, waste of time, waste 
 of money, and an increased waste of morals, as a necessary and indispensable con- 
 sequence of all the other ruinous wastes he had mentioned. Mr. G. said, tliat he had 
 no doubt whatever, that the increased waste of whiskey in New York, since the ex- 
 tension of the right of suffrage there, would be more than all the savings, from eJl 
 the temperance societies put together. They were ephemeral in their character and 
 effects, and might, perhaps, pass away before Christmas : Whereas, tlie extension of 
 the principle of suffrage in tiie Constitution, had heretofore been uniform in its effects, 
 and he feared, would hereafter be eternal. -Sir. G. observed, that he Had heretofore 
 confined his remarks to the Slate of Nev.' York, in consequence of her Convention 
 
913 
 
 APPENDIX NO. I. 
 
 having been frequently held up as a precedent to guide our dehberations. He would 
 now beg to call the attention of the Committee to the effects which had been pro- 
 duced in the State of Alabama, in consequence of the introduction into her Constitu- 
 tion, of this popular notion of election to universal offices by universal suffrage. He 
 stated that he had no invidious feelings towards the peopl| of the State of Alabama, 
 nor of the State of New York, but entertained the best fei'/uw feelings towards both. 
 The account he proposed to give, was taken from a Huntsville newspaper; and re- 
 lated to the election before the last. He said, in forming the Constitution of Alabama, 
 to avoid the onerous burdens, which would be imposed upon the people, by the fre- 
 quent recurrence of the days of elections, for such a multiplicity of officers, it was 
 speciously provided that all the elections should be held on the same day. The con- 
 sequence was, that the Governor, the Judges of the Superior Courts, justices of the 
 peace, sheriffs, constables, &c. &c. were seen trampoozmg the whole State, calling 
 upon the people to attend barbacues and frolics of all kinds, for the purpose of quali- 
 fymg the voters to exercise the great elective franchise, to the best advantage ; and 
 for three months before the great day of election, a great portion of the whole people 
 of Alabama were seen prostrated through the potent influence of the delicious fumes 
 of whiskey. When tlie great jubilee day arrived, for exercising the great elective 
 francliise, by universal suffi-age, for the advantage of the State, and tlie honor and 
 dignity of man, a vast number of bottles of whiskey, arranged in fantastical rows, 
 with fantastical labels around their necks, were exhibited in Huntsville, by the dif- 
 ferent candidates, and the universal suffrage voters were called upon to drink deep of 
 their Pyerian contents, as tlie best qualification for the discharge of their great politi- 
 cal duties. And so freely and generously did they obey these calls, that when the 
 hour of voting arrived, it was said, there were scarcely sober voters enough to take the 
 votes of the drunken ones. If in carrying into effect, this popular notion of electing 
 universal officers, by universal suffrage, in the Alabama Constitution, the framers had 
 determined, that there should be as many public officers, as there were voters, and 
 that each voter might vote for himself, they would have found themselves precisely 
 where they started, when they commenced the formation of their social compact. 
 How far their present Constitution falls short of this extreme, the Committee may 
 judge. He intreated every gentleman of the Committee seriously to reflect, and to 
 ask himself ; whether he did not conscientiously believe, that the extension of the 
 right of suffrage vvould most essentially tend to the extension of the scope of action 
 for the electioneering spirit; to the extension of vice, intrigue and corruption, and 
 thus to demoralize society to its very core? And if so, ought a provision to be intro- 
 duced into our Constitution under a firm conviction of its demoralizing tendencies 
 upon our happy society; rendered peculiarly so, by the moral tendencies of onr pre- 
 sent fundamental laws? From this view of the consequences of the extension of the 
 right of suffrage in other States, how cautious ought we to be against disturbing the 
 calmness and deliberation, characteristic of our elections, by the introduction here of 
 such scenes of revelry, intoxication and corruption ! 
 
 Mr. G. said, that he had already extended his remarks greatly bej^ond the limits he 
 had marked out for himself, in the commencement, but he could not resist the desire 
 he felt, to present to the Cniumittee, for its dispassionate consideration, some observa- 
 tions upon the most obvious and deprecated consequences, of placing the powers of 
 Government, into the hands of the extremes of society. For this purpose, he begged 
 leave to present Great Britain to the view of the Committee, as an example, for illus- 
 trating the case, of placing all Governmental power in the hands of the extreme rich; 
 both in regard to the moral and political condition of the people. He said. Great Bri- 
 tain, including Ireland, possessed a population, estimated at 21,500.000 souls; that out 
 of this vast population, 280,000 possessed all tlie property , including the % ast public debt 
 in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. This most wonderful and iiiiportant fact, 
 was ascertained by a number of philosophical gentlemen in London, from an actual 
 inspection of the returns of all the persons, who paid the late income tax. Add to this 
 number the unproductive laborers in the army and navy, the tythe and tax-gatherers, 
 estimated at 220,000 more ; and it would appear, that all the fiscal laws of Great Bri- 
 tain, were made for 500,000 unproductive lal)orers, and against 21 ,000,000 of produc- 
 tive laborers. This is effected by the distribution of the proceeds of labor, through 
 tythe and tax-gatherers, taking from the productive laborers the whole proceeds of 
 their labor, and transferring them to th-e unproductive laborers. The effects, result- 
 ing from placing all Governmental power into the hands of the extreme rich, are thus 
 seen to be, almost to annihilate the middling class, to deprive a great portion of the la- 
 boring class of a sufficient portion of bread for their mouths, and covering for their 
 backs, and to pamper the extreme rich with so many luxurious indulgencies, as to de- 
 bilitate both mind and body ; rendering the body almost universally gouty, by the ar- 
 tificial refinements in cookery, and debilitating the mind through sympathy with the 
 body. Such, he believed, to be a true and just picture of the moral and political con- 
 dition of the people of Great Britain ; and yet this condition is often held up to the 
 
APPENDIX NO. II. 
 
 913 
 
 American people for their imitation; and, strange to tell, the recent policy of the Fe- 
 deral Goyernment, is driving them on to the Uke lamentable and deprecated condi- 
 tion. Mr. G. said, that he would then turn the attention of the Committee, to the 
 state of things which took place a few years since in Kentucky ; when the election- 
 eering demagogues, availing themselves of the principles of general suffrage, stripped 
 the creditor interest of one-half of their debts, in favor of the debtor interest. This 
 was done by the establishment of about forty Banks, without any capital of intrinsic 
 value, and forcing the reception of the paper, which they issued, upon the creditors, 
 or subjecting them to conditions, which hazarded the loss of their entire debts. The 
 issuing of these paper-bills, as a relief of the debtor against the creditor interest, was 
 hailed with delirious joy, by the unthinking portion of the community, throughout all 
 Kentucky. Yet, in less than four 5'ears after this injustice had been practised upon 
 the creditor interest, and the morals of the communitj- materially impaired, it was 
 found necessary to gather in these same bills, and commit them to the flames; and 
 upon every newspaper annunciation, of an auto de fe of these bills, the people mani- 
 fested a still more delirious joj' than that which marked their issuing. These most 
 unwise and immoral measures, effectually destroyed all the commercial credit of the 
 State abroad, and demoralized the people at home, by the introduction of universal 
 injustice and corruption. How strongly are we admonished by these examples, 
 against the introduction into our happy system of Government, of any untried expe- 
 dients, which may, even by possibihty, disgrace our people and Government by the 
 like results ! Mr. G. said, he had been induced to present these views to the Com- 
 mittee, in the hope, that each member would, for himself, bestow that dispassionate 
 and profound deliberation upon them, which he thought their importance demanded. 
 Mr. G. observed, that he intended to have presented to the view of the Committee, 
 for their consideration, two more highly interesting subjects, but having already de- 
 tained them much longer in making this address, than he expected, he would defer 
 them to some future occasion, should a proper one hereafter arise. 
 
 (No. 2.) 
 
 Mr. Giles's Speech on the Executive Council, delivered in the 
 Convention on JVovember 2Sth, 1829. [Referred to on page 490, 
 of this T^olume.) 
 
 Mr. Giles addressed the Convention nearly as follows : 
 
 Before we proceed to the abolition of the Executive Council, I should suppose that 
 we ought at least to be agreed as to the facts of the case ; that we ought at least to 
 understand what is the present organization of the Council we are about to abolish. 
 I do not believe that at present, we are all agreed, either as to its organization, or its 
 practical operation. Surely, where the facts are attainable and indisputable, we 
 ought to agree upon what they are, before we proceed to act. The gentlemen, 
 (Messrs. Henderson and Doddridge,) commence their objections to the Executive 
 on the supposed ground of its want of responsibility. Now I presume, if these gen- 
 tlemen shall find that they heve misapprehended the matter, and that the Execu- 
 tive of Virginia, instead of being an irresponsible body, is the most responsible that 
 ever existed under any Constitution, they will at least withdraw that objection. Both 
 the gentlemen told us, we had been sent here by the people expressly to abolish the 
 Executive Council, and to extend the Right of Suffrage. ]f this be so, all delibera- 
 tion upon those points will be in vain. We have only to obey 'h^ will of those who 
 sent us. But I presume it is not the case. I believe we were sent here to deliberate — 
 to deliberate coolly and in a spirit of mutual respect and concession; and after we 
 have satisfied ourselves of the premises, to come to such conclusion as in our own 
 judgments they shall render proper. The gentlemen urged one consideration, in 
 which I am persuaded they are mistaken. They assert, that a majority of the firee- 
 holders were in favour of this Convention. Sir, I doubt the fact — I doubted it when 
 I signed the proclamation calling the Convention. My personal impression then was, 
 as it still is, that a majority of the freeholders of Viro-inia, were not in favour of it, 
 and I mentioned this impression at the time to the Council. I will state the reasons 
 of that impression. There was indeed upon the returns an apparent majority in fa- 
 vour of calling a Convention of more than 4000. But on a critical examination, it 
 will be found that in those counties v,-here the people had no wish for a change in 
 the Constitution, the votes were comparatively few. The freeholders being content 
 with their present condition, were without any stini'ilus to action- But in the coun- 
 
 115 
 
914 
 
 APPENDIX— NO. II. 
 
 ties which were anxious for a new Constitution nearly all the freeholders turned out, 
 and their votes were generally given. It is my belief, that if the returns had been 
 equally full all over the State, the majority would have been materially diminished, if 
 not carried to the opposite side. In examining the whole progress of the matter, it 
 will be found, that there were vast numbers who had no personal wish for any altera- 
 tion in the Constitution, but who voted in favour of a Convention from a disposition 
 to indulge their friends who thought it all important. Many were influenced too, by 
 the popular slang of being willing to trust the people. If these two classes of voters 
 were added to the minority, it is my settled impression that they would have made a 
 majority against calling any Convention at all. But whatever might have been the 
 opinion of the mass of freeholders at that time, I ask of every gentleman to say, 
 whether he does not believe that the majority would be opposed to it now, since they 
 have witnessed the exhibition here ; such as it is and has been Does any gentleman 
 believe, that if the freeholders of Virginia, should speak their minds respecting the call 
 of a Convention this day. we should be any longer favoured with our seats here ? I 
 for one do not believe it. Sir, our proceedings have alarmed the country and have 
 furnished the best argument against a Convention that ever was given. They have 
 threatened the total demolition of the first and best Constitution in the world. I have 
 no doubt, the gentlemen are perfectly sincere in their convictions on this subject. I 
 am equally so. I hope we shall compare opinions in mutual confidence and good feel- 
 ing. My sole object is to get at truth, regardless of all extraneous influences. 
 
 As to the responsibility of the Council, I was still more astonished at what fell from 
 the gentlemen. Give me leave on this subject to state what is the actual relation which 
 subsists between the Governor of this Commonwealth and the Executive Council. 
 The gentleman from Brooke, I perceive is misinformed in regard to it, although, he 
 tells us, that his constituents sent him here for the very purpose of abolishing the 
 Council. I ask that gentleman, if there is a single man in his district or in mine, 
 who can be said to know with any accuracy what the relation between the Governor 
 and this Council is? and what his constituents know upon the subject.'* I am per- 
 suaded there is not one, among his constituents or mine, who has such a knowledge 
 on the subject as entitles him to instruct his delegate how to act in relation to it. 
 Surely when the gentleman from Brooke himself is not accurately informed, it cannot 
 be expected that the people should be, who have had so much less opportunity to be- 
 come so. The gentleman has repeatedly made use, when speaking of the Governor, 
 of the word " commanded." He tells us the Governor is " commanded" by this 
 Council what to do. Now it is not a fact that the Governor is either subject to the 
 command of the Council or under their influence. The Council " advise" the Gover- 
 nor. That is the technical term properly expressing the true relation between them. 
 The Governor has the whole initiatory power. He originates every measure — and 
 he asks the advice" of his Council upon it, nor do the Council in any case advise 
 him until their advice is so asked. He asks for it in his own words, and those words 
 are entered on the records of the Council. The Governor enters the request in his 
 own v/ords, and the Council enter their reply in their own words. He has full power 
 to refuse to follow their advice, although, in all cases submitted to them, he has no 
 power to act without it. I should, without hesitation, have refused to follow it in my 
 own case, if circumstances had occurred to render such a course, in my judgment, 
 proper and necessary. Let us see now, how this arrangement tests the responsibility 
 of the Governor. The Governor originates a measure and calls for the advice of his 
 Council thereon. Is he not responsible in this.? He receives their advice — and he 
 refuses it or not. Is not this on his own responsibility ? Surely it is. Every act of 
 his is recorded in the same Journal with the acts of the Council, and that record is 
 laid before the electors once every year. I ask the gentleman to say, whether a Go- 
 vernor can by any possibility be placed in circumstances where he will be more com- 
 pletely responsible. This is all just and proper. It secures no more responsibility 
 than that which every public agent owes to those who appoint him. He is not and 
 cannot be screened in any way. The Council too are called upon to record every act 
 they perform and to sign the record. If they have done wrong, they are thus com- 
 pelled to give evidence against themselves — and to whom ? To those who put 
 them into office, and can put them out of it. Such is the test of their responsibility. 
 I ask the gentleman if he can improve it? If he had a private agent of his own, 
 could he do more than to say to him — first mark down every act of your agency — 
 now sign the record — and then present it to me every year ? Sir, responsibility was 
 the very object aimed at by the great and wise man who penned this Constitution. 
 I can see the traits of his wisdom throughout the instrument. All his means go di- 
 rectly to their ends, and all those ends are wise and efficient. 
 
 We have heard much said about the scratch," about the ostracism of the 
 Council. That, 1 grant, is an act of severity, such as I never knew in any other 
 case, and though I see even in this the Avisdom of v/hich I have just spoken, yet 
 here 1 think the writer of the Constitution is rather on an extreme. He intended 
 
APPENDIX NO. II. 
 
 915 
 
 the Council should be a permanent bodyj and he devised tiiis expedient to render it a 
 responsible body. Some of the members are obliged to go out at the end of every 
 three years, by a vote which bears the aspect of a mark of disrespect. This is a re- 
 sponsibility, such as I never saw any where. It is a responsibility which is inevitable, 
 uniform, incessant, everlasting. The gentleman indeed says, that the members of 
 which the Council is composed, operate to obscure the responsibility of individuals. 
 But, this is another mistake of the gentleman. Each member who disapproves any 
 vote that is given, has libert37 to enter his protest on the record — and this stimulus of 
 the ostracism is found to be sufficient to induce each member to protect himself by his 
 protest, wherever a case of his disapprobation occurs. He knows that the Journal 
 must be openly examined before the Assembly. He knows that some members of 
 the Council must be excluded, and this induces him to take great care to enter his 
 protest against any advice which he may consider erroneous. This is the good effect 
 of the scratch. I ask, if it be possible to devise a sj'stem of m.ore complete responsi- 
 bility It is responsibility in the extreme. It is responsibility carried to excess; for, 
 I would never introduce any test, which, in its own nature, is calculated to have an 
 evil tendency; and the operation of this ostracism certainly has a tendency to excite 
 evil passions. I consider the advice as ill-chosen, and I am in favour of rejecting it. 
 It introduces jealousies when the umfortunate time arrives. Yv'hen the selection is 
 to be made, it calls into action every angry passion of the human mind. Every mem- 
 ber exerts himself to preserve his own reputation, and they almost unavoidably get 
 into collision with each other. The amendment proposed by the gentleman from 
 Richmond, (Mr. Nicholas,) seems to me to present a perfect cure for this evil, and I 
 am ready to adopt it. His amendment keeps up the stability of the Council, and se- 
 cures at the same time a sufficient degree of responsibility. It is very important, 
 that there should be in the Council experienced members; because, in the exercise 
 of the Executive functions, there are many precedents which ought to be known and 
 remembered. As to the impeachment of tiie G-overnor, the gentleman from Brooke 
 was under the impression that it operated while the Governor was in office, and that 
 his term might run out before the impeachment was ended. Hence he argued, that 
 the responsibility arising from impeach.ment, was merely nominal. Here is another 
 mistaken impression of the gentleman. He will look in vain, in George Mason's 
 Constitution, for features thus incompatible with each other. The i:-.ipeachment of 
 a Governor takes effect after his term of office has expired ; and by producing a dis- 
 abilty again to serve, it does operate to secure his responsibility in one mode, although 
 not so efficient as that by re-election. 
 
 Sir, if I shall have been so fortunate as to relieve the gentleman from Brooke from 
 a mistaken impression as to the irresponsibility of our Executive, and if it now ap- 
 pears that tlie Executive of Virginia is in fact and in truth the most responsible Ex- 
 ecutive now in the world, I hope the Executive Council v.'-ill not be rejected for a want 
 of responsibility. But it is said, that under the existing Constitution, the Governor 
 possesses no power. Let us look at the power that he has, connected with the Exe- 
 cutive Council. 1st. The Governor is the commander-in-chief of the whole militia 
 of the State, and commissions all officers, civil and military, whilst the Executive 
 have the superintendence of all the arms and military materials of all sorts ; of the 
 appointments of a greater portion of the militia officers, all County Court magistrates 
 and sheriffs; also, over the Penitentiary establishment, public buildings, &c. &c. 
 The Governor, sometimes with and sometimes without the advice of the Council, has 
 all the power which is given him by law, and every Legislature assigns him impor- 
 tant duties. There is always something committed to him to do — and has this trust 
 ever been neglected Can gentlemen point out a single instance, from the beginning 
 of the Government to this day ^ They have been racking the Journals, and trying 
 to find some instance of mal-feasance. The gentleman from Brooke gave us the dis- 
 coveries he had made — we had them spread before us in extcnso. Sir, I will not in- 
 jure the gentleman's feelings, by throwing back upon him any recollection of his un- 
 fortunate efforts ; for, I entertain towards that gentleman nothing but good feeling. 
 But it has served to shew, that after exerting the best efforts of his mind in search of 
 charges, he has been able only to discover such as have served to call forth the highest 
 eulogiums of the highest Judicial tribunal of this State. Unfortunate indeed, there- 
 fore, for his side of The question, must be the discoveries of the gentleman. If, after 
 a course of fifty-four years, talents, industry and hypercriticism themselves have not 
 been able to find any thing censurable in the conduct of the Executive, ought an 
 institution so blameless to be rashly thrown down When gentlemen are called upon 
 to put something as good in its place, they decline the necessary task. It is said, 
 there ought to be a Lieutenant Governor. To do what.? To do nothing, at least 
 under the arrangement as it now stands. We have already a Lieutenant Governor, 
 who is President of the Council, and who acts in the room and stead of the Governor, 
 in certain contingencies. If gentlemen mean to give us a Lieutenant Governor 
 without assigning him any duties, then they will give us an officer, who possesses 
 
916 
 
 APPENDIX NO. IT. 
 
 the title, t>ut has nothing to do. Whenever they attempt to assign him any duties, 
 the utihty of a Council immediately presents itself. Gentlemen say, this Council 
 must consist of the Attorney General, who is to give his legal advice, when called 
 upon by the Governor. We have that now. I never hesitate to call on the Attorney 
 General, whenever his official advice is needed on any important point of law, and 
 this advice is always readily given in writing, and when necessary, is laid before the 
 Assembly. Again, gentlemen talk about the Auditor and the Treasurer as fit mate- 
 rials for a Council. But, one great duty of the Executive is to supervise the official 
 conduct of these very officers. How has that supervision been useless ? The Execu- 
 tive has detected the defalcations of two treasurers, and has thereby saved much money 
 to the State. Another power exercised by the Governor, is the power of pardoning ; 
 but, that subject has been so fully developed by the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. 
 Nicholas,) that my labour in considering it will be greatly lessened. Cases frequently 
 occur, in the exercise of this power, where the advice of Council is necessary. I 
 certainly never felt above asking it, and I have received very good advice upon that 
 point as well as others, and received it frequently. All the Contingent Fund has to 
 pass under the scrutiny of the Council. Such is the strictness of their examination, 
 that every item of public expense may be said to undergo the scrutiny of a miser. 
 They are examined down to a dollar, and to a cent — and I can truly say, that fewer 
 improper accounts are passed by the Executive of Virginia, than (as I beheve) by any 
 other fiscal tribunal under the sun. Sir, the fact has become notorious, in so much 
 that the money-hunters have all abandoned us. They cannot get a cent out of us, 
 without law and voucher. Hence it comes to pass, that our Contingent Fund has 
 been most economically expended. In this department also, the responsibility of the 
 Governor is manifest. The Council never advises him, unless it is asked to do so. 
 The usual practice is to send all accounts, as a matter of course, to the Clerk of the 
 Council. The Governor exercises his responsibility in thus presenting them ; and 
 when the accounts are passed by the Council, the Governor is not bound to issue his 
 warrant for the amount — he is at perfect liberty to refuse to do so. The Governor is 
 in the first place responsible for laying an account before the Council. The Council 
 is responsible for advising its payment, and then the Governor is responsible for 
 taking their advice. The whole is matter of record, and that record is submitted to 
 the constituents both of the Governor and the Council. I beg gentlemen to take this 
 view of the subject into consideration. It is possible I may have some partiality for 
 the present members of the Council — it is very natural that I should have. I have 
 been long associated with them, and there may be some attachment between us ; but, 
 that attachment shall never induce me to misrepresent one iota of fact in relation to 
 their duties, or to their responsibility. I consider the Executive Council a most im- 
 portant provision in our fundamental law. I know its importance, and I think the 
 Convention ought to hesitate before they put it down. Let us not first vote down the 
 Council, till we have got sometliing ready to put up in its stead. Sir, it is easy to 
 pull down — any body can do that. A simple lisp of the tongue, without the least 
 exercise of the head, will serve, to abolish any political institution. But to build up, 
 requires the head ! Let gentlemen first shew us their substitute, and prove to us that 
 it is better than the original which they ask us to destroy. The gentleman from Lou- 
 doun, (Mr. Henderson,) has with honourable frankness acknowledged, that a person 
 proposing any change, is under obligation to state good reasons for such change. I 
 beg gentlemen to look at the reasons he has adduced. I hope to have the pleasure 
 of hearing that gentleman acknowledge, in the same spirit of honourable frankness, 
 that after weighing and considering opinions, which he had thought solid and sound, 
 he finds, on examination, that they were onlj- specious and plausible. But, I insist, 
 that it is the duty of those who propose any change, to shew that there exists a ne- 
 cessit}' for it; and when, for so long a course of time, the conduct of those in office 
 has been unimpeachable, is there not a peculiar obligation on those who would abolish 
 the office, to produce solid, obvious, substantial reasons, strong enough to strike the 
 mind at the first view of them.? 
 
 Some gentlemen wi::h to give the Executive more power. That seems in fact, the 
 real inducement for proposing this measure. The real object in view is to assimilate 
 the Executive of Virginia to that of the United States. I beg gentlemen seriously to 
 reflect before they engage in such a design. V\^e have seen the abortive attempt to 
 shew any usurpation of authority, and let it be remembered, that it is not sufficient to 
 say, the Executive may err. Have they ever attempted to usurp authority, or to abuse 
 it.^ None can pretend it — yet we are called upon to imitate the Executive of the 
 United States. Has that usurped nothing ? The gentlemen are clamorous against 
 the usurpations of the General Government. Yet they call upon us to imitate the 
 unfortunate and mischievous example. Give your Executive similar powers, and you 
 will have similar results. For my part, I consider the Executive of the United States 
 as better suited to a monarchy than a republic. For God's sake, let us not imitate 
 such an example as that. It is the very last in all our republics, that I should be dis- 
 
APPENDIX NO. II. 
 
 917 
 
 posed to follow. Infinitely better would it be for the security of the liberties of the 
 American people, if the framers of the Constitution of the United States had followed 
 our example, in framing the Executive Department of the General Government. Its 
 original patronage was too great, but that has become ten times greater now, and it 
 will hereafter be ten times greater than it is at present. It is constantly accumulating, 
 and it will become the same swelled and overgrown monster which has swallowed up 
 all other free governments. Gentlemen will do well to reflect upon the irresistible 
 influence of a vast mass of accumulative power in any single hand wliatever. The 
 great practical question of the Federal Government is, who shall be President, and 
 how shall he distribute his vast patronage. Legislation is lost sight of : The very evils 
 of the dreadful tariff" itself, were not brought upon us from any consideration of the 
 real merits of the tariff" question, Lut the calculation was, who should get the most 
 votes for their favourite President by voting for the unprincipled tarilf — " that act of 
 abominations." The parties threatened one another with losing their respective can- 
 didates for President. You will lose your President if you vote against this abomi- 
 nable bill," was the threat on both sides. The questions — is it right.'' is it moral.'' are 
 its principles just.'^ were all disregarded. The Legislature was corrupt to its root 
 That one consideration of carrying their own candidate, had more eff"ect upon their 
 proceedings than all others put together. The great cause was to be found in the pat- 
 ronage of the President. Take the same thing on a smaller scale. Take the case of 
 Pennsylvania : Though Jackson's interest was powerful there, there were some lurk- 
 ing interests of the opposite party. They found that Adams was down, so they 
 started an anti-masonic candidate. Electioneering ran high : at length the true Jack- 
 sonians succeeded, and there were two hundred and eighty of true Jacksonians, ap- 
 plicants for office from Pliiladelphia in the course of a week. Was this notiaing.'' Doe-s 
 not this example incontestibly prove tiiat the patronage of the Executive, according 
 to its extent, will have the same corrupting influence, whether in the General or State 
 Governments.' But one gentleman told us, "we are too calm in Virginia. We 
 want some of this agitation to circulate the blood through the body politic." Sir, is 
 this the kind of agitation gentlemen want.' do they want to see among us a party 
 government, corrupt to its very core ? Their motives, I have no doubt are as pure as 
 can be, while they are urging us to abandon a system from which we have derived 
 every blessing we possess. Do they not see the awful responsibility they would have 
 us assume.'' Do they remember, that what they would change involves the best in- 
 terests of our State. Can they avoid recollecting what must be their own fate, and 
 what must be their personal interest in the consequence Does it not behove us to 
 be careful, and positively sure that we are doing right, before we alter what is now 
 good .'' What will our constituents say if we fail ? If the new Constitution shall not 
 improve the sound and healthful provisions of the old ? If, instead of soundness and 
 health they introduce political disease Will not the people accuse us of being politi- 
 cal quacks, instead of grave and wise statesmen.? Has not the gentleman some terror, 
 lest after he has carried his point, he shall be condemned by the judgment of pos- 
 terity Before we tear down our political edifice to please these gentlemen, let us at 
 least understand what we are to have in its place. Have gentlemen settled it in their 
 mind that they will make no sacrifices of opinion.' Sir, we had some little expe- 
 rience in the Executive Committee. Gentlemen found it hard to tell what their 
 Lieutenant-Governor was to do, or how that duty was to be performed which the 
 Council are doing every day with facility. Yet they call upon us to tear down this 
 Executive, and they alarm our fears by threatening us with another borrowed from 
 the United States. 
 
 Sir, when I rose I meant only to state facts which I conceived to have an important 
 bearing upon the subject. These I wished to state with perfect coolness, and in the 
 clearest manner, and then to submit a few observations which naturally grew out of 
 them. I have been insensibly drawn farther than I intended. I know the impatience 
 of gentlemen in listening to a set speech, and God knows I was far enough from in- 
 tendino; to make any thing that could bear that name. I will not farther trespass 
 upon the patience of the House. 
 
918 
 
 APPENDIX NO. III. 
 
 (No. 3.) 
 
 A brief sketch of Mr. Giles's Remarks on the Judiciary, (Dec, 29.) 
 Referred to in page 766. 
 
 Mr. Giles said, that he perceived, and participated in, the impatience of the House, 
 and nothing could induce him to meet it, but an imperious sense of duty. He hoped 
 to be excused for offering a few remarks, which he would endeavour to render as short 
 as possible. He had had the misfortune the other day, to differ from the venerable 
 gentleman from Richmond, (C. J. Marshall,) on points which he conceived to be of 
 the first impression. That gentleman, unless he had misunderstood him, conceived 
 that all the Judges of the State held their offices during life. 
 
 [Mr. Marshall here interposed. The gentleman had entirely misunderstood him, if 
 he had supposed him either to say or to think the commission of the Judges was a 
 commission during life, and that a breach of good behaviour did not terminate it. 
 Their commission did extend for life, if their good behaviour should continue so long, 
 but not otherwise.] 
 
 Mr. Giles resumed. So he had understood the gentleman. He had supposed him 
 to mean, that Judges held their offices for life, on one single condition, to wit, unless 
 forfeited by misbehaviour. But, his own doctrine was, that a Judge held his office 
 only during the continuance of that office, and his good behaviour therein. Abolish 
 the court, and there was nothing left for the Judge to hold. There was then no office 
 in existence in fact. To say that a Judge continued to hold his office after the court 
 to which he belonged was abolished, was analogous to declaring, that he should enjoy 
 his life after death. A respect for the feelings and opinions of honourable gentlemen, 
 would not permit him to call such a position an absurdity, or a contradiction in terms, 
 but it contained an incompatibility, such as he could not reconcile. When he had 
 the other day returned from this Hall to his Chamber, he found there the commission 
 of a Judge, waiting for authentication, and he had taken the trouble to make a copy 
 of it, which he would now read. 
 
 Here Mr. Giles read the commission of a Judge. 
 
 What, asked Mr. G., does this commission authorise the Judge to enjoy His 
 office. In wliat court? In " the General Court." Abolish the General Court, and 
 where is the office of the Judge His office is merely an adjunct of the court; yet 
 gentlemen say, when the court is destroyed, the office remains. I repeat it, that this 
 sounds to me like saying a man may enjoy his life after death, or at least that one 
 hand is left for the purpose of receiving, after the body to which it is attached is de- 
 prived of every vital function. Do gentlemen see any thing here about the Judge 
 holding his office during life ? No — nothing like it. This commission gives him an 
 office in a particular court. Upon the non-existence of that court, that office ceases 
 to exist of course. Could any thing be more absurd, than to commission a Judge, to 
 hold his office during good behaviour, without the designation of any court to which 
 it is attached, thus leaving him to be Judge of any court, or all courts.^ Was there 
 ever any such case in existence, or is there any such now But it had been said, 
 that a Judge commissioned in the General Court, nevertheless performed District 
 Court service, and that there is nothing in mere name. I say, that there is a great 
 deal in a name, when that name properly defines a substance — and in a case of the 
 District Courts, the Judges of the General Court had merely changed their plan of 
 operation. If the General Court were abolished, could the Judges continue to per- 
 form duty either there, or in the District Courts, or any where else.? Certainly not. 
 
 Mr. G. said, that he objected to the amendment of the gentleman from Spottsyl- 
 vania, (Mr. Stanard,) because it embodied a mass of complex ideas, in order to get 
 rid of a contradiction. It amounted to a sophism, and went to destroy that simplicity 
 which should always characterize an organic law. He might possibly be in favour 
 of such an amendment, if the original clause must stand, but he hoped the House 
 would get rid of both the clause and the amendment. 
 
 I ask the gentleman from Richmond to consider, if after prescribing this provision 
 in his Conventional character, he should then be transferred to the Legislature to carry 
 it into effect, how he would act I ask him what those duties are which remain for 
 a Judge to perform after his court has been destroyed There are no duties ; and how 
 then can any be assigned ^ There is an attempt too to make this imperative ; that is 
 the evident design, though I own that the words will bear a construction that leaves 
 this optional with the Legislature. What sort of Judge is to perform these duties.? 
 There is no description given, and the inference is, that Judges of all sorts, compe- 
 tent and incompetent, as soon as they are thrown out of office, by the abolition of their 
 court, must have judicial duties assigned to them. Is it not strange that the Legisla- 
 ture should be called upon ; should be almost commanded to assign duties to an incom- 
 
APPENDIX NO III. 
 
 919 
 
 petent Judge ? Yet here is no exception, no saving clause. Gentlemen tell us the 
 difficulty may be avoided by the provisions of the eighth section, and I acknowledge 
 that the tv/o ought to be taken together : but here is a provision that must stand un- 
 less according to the eighth section, two- thirds of both Houses shall consent to turn 
 out the Judge. We have Judges now that are incompetent, yet the Legislature is 
 bound to assign them duties. 
 
 I am as much in favor of the complete independence of the Judiciary as the warm- 
 est advocate of that principle, but 1 am in favor of its responsibility also : I hold these 
 two things not to be incompatible. 1 would make all the Judges responsible, not to 
 God and their own conscience only, but to a human tribunal. I hold in my hand a 
 history of the independence of the Judges in England : I will not weary the Conven- 
 tion by reading it, but will briefly state its substance. Judges in England were an- 
 ciently the Commissioners of the King. The Executive and the Judicial offices were 
 united, and the Judges were at first appointed during pleasure. In the time of Queen 
 Anne, their compensation was fixed by law, but they were all removed from office by 
 the demise of the Crown. In the first year of George the 3d, the statute was passed 
 which conferred upon them complete and absolute independence. The tenure of their 
 office was placed upon good behaviour, and their salar}' was fixed. But what do we 
 understand by the independence of the Judges in this country.'' We too place the 
 tenure of their office upon good behaviour, but we add another and a very important 
 provision; for, we say that their salary shall not be diminished during their continu- 
 ance in office. Here is a vast security to which the English Judges are strangers; 
 and yet the English Judges are deemed completely independent — why then not ours 
 under more favorable circumstances ? With their support. Parliament can do what it 
 pleases ; but we have gone one point farther, in makmg them really and fully inde- 
 pendent. And what i ask is the independence of a Judge It is neither more nor 
 less than this: that when he pronounces judgment, he shall do it with the certainty 
 that he can neither gain nor lose by his decision. If you take away your requirement 
 of two-thirds of the Legislature, and put it in the power of a bare majority to turn them 
 out of office, you still leave them on as good a footing and better, than they have in 
 England. But here you first clog the Legislature in its action upon them by requiring 
 two-thirds of the whole ninnber of members elected ; you then give the Judge to be 
 removed a citation of twenty days, and allow full scope to all the chicanery which can 
 be brought to bear by himself and his friends to prevent his removal. These excep- 
 tions to the ordinary course of legislation , go beyond independence ; they now deserve 
 another name : they amount to favoritism. You establish what I did once call a pri- 
 vileged order; but I will recall the term, out of respect to the feelings of gentlemen, 
 since it is considered by some as offensive. But certainly these are so many excep- 
 tions, and what are exceptions but privileges ? Sir, I hope the clause will be stricken 
 out: the eighth resolution provides an incompetent remedy: the gentlemen them- 
 selves own this, and say that that resolution may be amended ; but it is not yet amend- 
 ed, and suppose it should not be, there will then be no pro[)er provision to impose on 
 the Judiciary a due responsibilit}^ Gentlemen are making a great effijrt of the hu- 
 man mind to avoid a danger which has never occurred but in the single instance of 
 Kentucky ; that of the abidition of a court for the purpose of getting rid of the Judges, 
 I disapprove of any such expedient, but it arose from this very restriction which gen- 
 tlemen are so anxious to impose upon the Legislative power. The Legislature of 
 Kentucky was placed in just that condition, that a majority could be obtained to turn 
 out the Judges, but not tliree-fifths of the Assembly. The Governor happened to 
 concur with a majority of the Legislature : If a simple majority possessed the power 
 to displace, the difficulty would not have occurred. But, they found that three-fifths 
 were required by the Constitution, and they resorted to the other expedient, because 
 it was necessary to the object they had in view : yet we are about to establish the very 
 same principle, against ail the requirements of lair and rational responsibility. Re- 
 sponsibility IS the characteristic principle of your Government throughout; and why ^ 
 should there not be such a thing as Judicial responsibility ? Your eighth resolution 
 says there shall be such a thing, but you clog it with provisions which make it/e/o de 
 se. It is like an obligation with a defeasance written in the face of it : You enforce 
 the principles of responsibility in two of the departments of your Government with 
 great anxiety, and completely abandon it in the other part of it I am in favor of car- 
 rying the principle throughout. 
 
CORRECTIONS, 
 
 Page 272 — In the report of Mr. Johnson's speech, reference is made to an explanation by Mr. P. F. 
 Barbour. The words of that explanation, more accurately stated, are as follow : 
 " Mr. Barbour explained, when he referred to the Roman Comitia, as formed by centuries 
 and tribes : It was for the purpose of shewing that each was in the extreme, and that 
 neither by itself ought to bo adopted ; that the Comitia by centuries were organized, so 
 that property alone prevailed over numbers ; and the Comitia by tribes, so that numbers 
 alone prevailed over property. This difference in the mode of organization produced con- 
 flict between them, so as to array them in hostility against each other. He went neither 
 for the representation of property or persons alone, but for one founded upon tliem both, 
 so as to produce not conflict, but harmony between them : the effect of the amendment 
 of the gentleman from Culpeper, would be the attainment of this object." 
 
 Page 357 — Line 16, in Mr. Henderson's speech on the Right of Suffrage, for " Horn," read " him." 
 
 Page 441 — Judge Coalter, in speaking of incurring a debt for purposes of Internal Improvement, said, 
 that he thought " such debt ought to be created, whenever there is a well-founded belief, 
 that the improvement will yield a profit equal, or nearly equal, to the interest of the 
 money expended. He said, that he was a friend to Internal Improvement ; but, as all 
 national debts, whether to carry on war, for purposes of Internal Improvement, or any 
 other great scheme, are to be a lien on the lands of the country, which are immovable, 
 and are not so on chattels, which can be removed at pleasure, those whose real estates are 
 to be thus permanently mortgaged, ought exclusively to judge of the expediency of cre- 
 ating such incumbrance." 
 
 Page 471 — Line 14, in Mr. Henderson's speech on the election of Governor by the people, for " com- 
 plete," read " complex." 
 
 Line 16, for "required," read " acquired." 
 
 Line 46, for "prostrate," read " protract." 
 
 Line 49, for " with," read " not." 
 
 Line 52, for Few," read " Two." 
 Page 472 — Line 27, for " true," read " here." 
 Page 473— Line II, for " this," read " the." 
 
 Line 24, for " soberminded men," read " soberraindedness " 
 Page 702 — In Mr. Upshur's speech, first paragraph, 3d hne, between " were" and " met," insert " not." 
 Page 703— 9th line, for " exceptionable," read " unacceptable." 
 
 31st line, for "This object," read "His object." 
 
 46th line, for " 07ie number," read " our number." 
 
 4th line from the foot, for " evcT^j other basis," read " any other," &c. 
 
f 
 
 Virgi n1 a „ Con,st1 tuti ourI 
 
 Convention, 1829-1830. 
 
 P7-onRftding;s rug debfitft.Q . . . . 
 
 
 LI .^966 IRm 
 
 
 DATE 
 
 ISSUED TO