Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1822-01-22

sarv but in the former case the knowledse
required was less Ola local character. II was
general in its object it related 10 questions al
war and peace, foreign relations, revenue, &c.
The policy of the nation was settled, and the
wheels ut government We're moving Or
where number was agreed to of great ex-
tent, there was better opportunity of select
ing men oil talents hut, on the other hand,
body, If too small, was more liable to in
fngue, The ratio of $4,000 would Increase
the present number of Representatives but
one, and the present was, i'm his opinion, a
sufficient number for the despatch of public
business. 4 greater number would diminish
responsibility: and, so far us public sentiment
IN the state he had the honor in part to re-
present, had been expressed, both by the old
constitution and that proposed by the recent
convention. it was opposed TO a numerous le-
| gisative body.
Mr.. CAMPBELL, of Ohio, stated the ratio
| and numbers that had been heretofore sue
ccssiveiy adOnted. In the first Congress. the
nuinaer OF representatives was So, but the ap.
poftioninent was made upon an uncertain RAJ
to. twas the effect of mutual compromise
ana opinion. At the census of 1890 the num-
her ot representatives was increased TO loI
upon ratio of $4,000. At the census of 1900
me same ratio was retained, which increased
| the number of representatives to al. At the
censuiot l310the ratio was increased TO 80 GOG
| which gave the present number of lS7 rcpre-
sentaiircs. The first inc. Ease was SO. the
second 40, and the third 40. He (Mr. CA
was in favor of the number of a.. 900 under
the present apportiOnmcnt which would give
an increase OF thirteen. This increment was
small, III comparison with the progress of
wealth and population. A great reduction
naturally exposed the body acted upon to ex-
ccutive influences and small body must
ever be considered as more assailahe than a
larger. He agreed with the gentleman from
New York, Mr.. Wood that bv reducing the
ratio to $4,000 the body would become too
numerous. A medium should be preserved,
and he doubted whether any number could
be found less objectionable than that which he
supported. The members of this House
ought to correspond in some Just proportion
tn the numbers Of the Senate but it was very
obvious that within 4 few wears past that bn-
dy had increased in ratio altogether dispro-
portionate To this House.
The question being about to he put by the
| thalrman on the largest number, 10000
| htr. hEYEs rose and oshcrvch that havin.,
proposed that number as the ratio, il was per-
maps incumbent upon him to state the reasons
| by which he was influenced. Each member
would admit that his voice was not loud
enough to he heard in the various PARTS of
tins hall. Where business was TO be done, il
was eXpedent that those who do it should he
Observation-Disclosures it cannot be undcrstond-
! Inns. was one reason. Another was, that. i'm
| $" numerous a body If was next to impossible,
Tor the Speaker To preserve that order which
was requisite as well for a due decorun as
the despatch ofpubiic business Another cs
sential reason was, that il would reduce the
expenditures upon the civil list, and be a great
saving to the nation.
| The question was then taken on the num-
Der proposed, and ncgatived
| The next number in order was $4,000.
MIR. VAN WICK stated, briefly, his reasons
IN favor of that number. His object was two
iold-to expedite public business and to eco
nomlze the public expenditure. Mr.. V. w.
advcrted to the reasons that had influenced
the trainers of our Constitution TO adopt a
small ratio, hut commended that they were
wholly lnapplIcabIe at present. The facilities
| OF intercourse had so much increased of late
that there was no difficulty, on the part of
the representative, in the way of obtaining.
every necessary knowledge of the situation of
all his constituents and, in point Of economy,
his proposition would save $4,000 per an
mum to the public treasury.
Inc question WIS then taken on the ratio
as proposed by Mr.. pan Uycl, and negatived.
| W.
were successfully put, without debate, and
| lost.
$4,000 was also put and lost--ayes 50.
$4,000 was put and lost-ayes So.
| 10000 was next put, and lost-ayes 80.
$4,000 was then put, and lost-ayes 81, noes
80.
$4,000 and $4,000 were also rejected, with
out division.
The question was then taken on 10, 900, and
carried-ayes 81, noes 49,
| Mr.. Campbell moved that the residue of the
bill be so amended as 10 correspond with the
ratio that had been adopted: which was a.
greed to.
The committee then rose and reported the
bill as amended.
In the House, Mr.. Campbell moved that the
question of concurrence be taken by Yeas and
Nays which was agreed to-
Mr. DuRFEE spoke at considerable length
in opposition to the concurrence with the
committee of the whole 10 the ratio of 1000.
Want OF room precludes at the present time
any but a very brief sketch of his remarks
| lie thought that IN increase of the numbers of
the national Legislature would not retard the
passage OF the wholesome and necessary laws
and 1T unnecessary laws were precIudrd. If
might be considered as a benefit to the conn
try for few things were more pernicious than
experiments in legislation 1t had been SAID
| that the room in which the House of Repre-
sentatives assembled was not sufficiently IN =
pacious to accommodate greater number
than it now contains. On question Of this
magnitude, he did not expect TO hear an argu-
ment ofthis sort. Would it he seriously said.
that, in defining the number of the represenl
taiiyes of the people, resort should be first
had to the architect that representation
should DC dealt out by the cubic foot or the
yard ? and the Congress of the u. States be
regulated by the size of the representatives
chamber, and not the chamber to the Con-
grcss Such a principle, he thought, it would
/ DC uIlicult TO sustain. There was uprha ne