Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1825-07-09

stitution." He infers that every recur-
renee to these principles, must be de-
signed to beget convention, and a
convention too, "without regard" (such
is his language, )"to its necessity or ex-
pediency." Undoubtedly every con-
vention implies recurrence to the
principles of the constitution, since it is
only, by faithful and discriminating
application of these principles to any
constitution, that its defects can be
discovered, and the expediency or ne
cessity of amendment made manifest.
But every recurrence does not imply
the necessity, or the expectancy OF
such a convention. The recurrence
which the friends of a convention now
recommend, and which they hope will
lead to convention, empowered to sub
nit to the final judgment of the people,
certain amendments of their present
constitution, is founded on conviction
that these amendments are necessary !;
as that necessity is, on candid recur-
renee, in conformity with the inJunc-
ton of the sages of l776, to the funda-
mental principles which they soiemnly
proclaimed. 1t is not denied, that
there are other uses, to which such a
recurrence mayb be applied. No legls-
lature can proclaim what shall be, nor
any court adjudge what as law, without
regard to those principles Of the con-
stitution which no law can contravene;
but it would be the height OF absurdity
to deny the benefit of the application
of similar test, to the constitution IT.
self, which processes to derive its ioun
dation from those principles. If the
superstructure erected on that founda-
ton be impaired by age, he who would
supply its defects or repair the ravages
of time, is no enemy of its perpetuity,
nor can he proceed with greater cir
cumspection in his salutary and useful
labor, than by examining before he be-
gins, the original structure OF the edi-
fee. Hence, the reference by free
man, to the inequality of representa-
ton, and to the present arbitrary and
unjust distribution of the right of suf-
frage.
The solemn truth expressed with
such simple brevity, in the Bill OF
Rights, that sail government is, or
ought to be, instituted for the common
benefit" is said, by Mr.. Leigh, to be
'rorn by Mr. Mercer from the context!'
Why? Is maxim, worthy Of being in
scribed on every temple Of law, in let
tiers of gold, and on the hearts OF all
men, incapable of subsisting alone?
What commentary can make this beau
tiful political axiom more plain-what
argument more perfectly demonstrate
its truth? Is it abused when applied to
the exposure of that political injustice
which gives to Williamsburg and
Richmond, to York and Shenandoah.
the same political influence in the po'
pular branch Of the Virginia legisla-
ture? How does Mr.. Leigh obviate the
force of this application? BY the sim
pie averment, that MIR. M. might "just
as well have inferred, from the Bill OF
Rights, that every hving soul should par
ticipate, equally, in the administration
of public affairs" II this be argument,
it is not original. The very same rea.
son was urged against equalizing the
representation Of the other branch oil
the Legislature, at the time, when sim
gle Senator represented more than
80 900 white inhabitants residing west
of the Blue Ridge; while fraction Of
more than 1000 on tide water, also e.
lected member. How often has Old
Sarum found an advocate in the Bril-
fish House of Commons of the same
doctrine, against the claims OF the cleo.
tors of Westminster. This is not q
question of right between the freeman
and the freeholder, but among the free
holders themselves. Because perfect
or absolute political equality among
all the individuals of one community
be unattainable, Mr.. Leigh, practical
republican too, would make no correc'
ton of the grossest inequality OF re-
presentation. / like his practice as
little as his theory.
In answer to an argument OF "A
Friend of Equal Rights treating OF
the same topic OF universal complaint
the inequality ofrepresentation in the
House of Delegates, MIR. Leigh conf
IDENTIFY "appeals to any man to say it the
inequalities in the counties have not
been continually decreasing from the
foundation of the Commonwealth g
Take notice, the inequality, complained
of, is Of representation, in relation to
numbers. The reply of Mr.. Leigh, is,
that the inequalities of the counties 10y
which must be meant their territory,
is decreasing. Perplexed, as is his ar
gument, and needing illustration, that
which follows it, does not improve its
force. "In 1876" we are informed
"that the small counties, on the seaboard
4lok4 hoa