American watchman and Delaware advertiser. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1822-1828, 1825-03-11
"a Freebooter of New Castle County. 2
[Concluded.]

[Concluded]
tits no unusual thing with communities as well
as vduals in their transactions with one another
to be governed by their supposed interests, without
very scrupulous regard to right and justice Onl
this occasion, however, the representatives OF Kent
have shown their freedom from thl. inhrmty OF our
nature In their socitude TO bciriend sussex, they
have overlooked the interests OF Kent; Whtch, as
there is good reason to suspect their constituents
will not approve, they may in these hard times be
little inclined to forgive. Had these gentlemen
been reduced to the necessity OF infringing correct
principles in accedng TO the second proposition
made by the representatives OF Newcastle, they
might not only have been excused, but justified
But in agreeing to what SO well comported with the
interests of Kent they could not have been accused
of violating any principle mo,al or political The
rule proposed is one OF reason and Justice and Its
holding so conspicuous place as 1t does, IN Inc
lconsitution oil the United States is an evidence OF
the value set upon it by the wise men who framed
that instrument The rule Of wealth as measure
If the contributions of the different states to the
exieencies OF the Union had been tried under the
articles of confederation and had been found too 10
convenient and difficult OF execution, to be retained.
That of population was, therefore, after an expert
ence OF its unftness, substituted as wiser and better
l(2.) And so anxious was the convention that this
rule should be faithfully observed, that not content
with positively enloinlng in sec. 2. art |. OF the
constitution, is guarded by prohbltory provision
| in sec. 9. OF the same article
| Had the alotments 10 The respective counties oil
The State tax now Land been made in conformity to
the rule of population, the quota of Kent would
have been less than it is rated the State
ment
| quota of S15, 900 distributed to Kent according
TO state assessment S447o
1 Ditto, by rule of population, 4,252
Emf,
i The representatives OF Kent in postponing her in
Iteress TO those of Sussex, by determining, when II
was optional with them which OF these two sums
she should pay, that the largest should be assigned
her. have not surely been governed by motives which
lshould have influenced faithful public servants
Al Had these motives no connection with party! or
lit to be imputed TO an excess of liberay in III,
members of Kent, that they preferred making thu
i minor population of that county pay more, that tn
!, greater population of Sussex might pay less ,
Ia population (it should not be orgoen) that by it
votes and unanimty at elections governs the state
100 poor, as its representatives would have it thought
10 pay for enjoying the rights and privileges OF free
men, and yet boastful and proud OF the triumphan
. lexercse of them.
: 1t was in the power Of the representatives Q
Kent, by pursuing the which their duty 4
their constituents prescibedo have averted the evil
. which may grow out OF a contrary procedure.
Newcastle in a0QltlOn 10 the appOftonment oil stat
. tax assigned her in 1916, paid in that year til
!, 1896 AZ allotted to her in 1915 which she did nc
then pay, the inference from that circumstance thu
:, she will again succumb, ought not to be relied or
Il The subject has undergone more thorough cor
sideration than it received in 81 g. and however we
disposed the frcemen of Newcastle may be to cor
~ tribute all occasions, in their just proportion,
: the necessities OF the state, doubt much whetht
they will yield to Kent and Sussex contest,
Mt which it is not merely matter OF money, but
ne right and principle, that is involved. What wou
W. meet her views, and will add, what is founded
Al reason, justice. and republican principles, is to SUI
all ply the means of supporting the government, ar
all to be admitted to participation in its councils. in
mo degree proportionale to her number of nhabitan
res So far respects the exercise Of the elect
MIS- franchise, she enjoys that privilege under the san
regulations and restrictions with her sister countie
nl But her representation in The legislature is relav
er- too small whereas the quota OF state tax now, al
q, hereafter to be allotted to her, is disproporlonae
res high. These are inequalities Of which she has
ub- right to complain. They are grievances wifi
the ought to be redressed, and the quiet endurance
asd which is not to be expected from her citizens
ub happily sentiment different from this preva
son among the representatives Of Kent and Sussex.