Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1828-02-27
Utr1t1rSa MegEalature.
DEBATE IN THE SENATE or fIIR(SLvIg
on TIE CO.N,HENcIYO.N ELL.

Remarks oGAIr SMITH, in the Senate in opposition
TO Mr. CLorroA'5 amendment (adopting the I!h sec
lion OF Mr.. DRoMGoOLE's substitute, and requiring
the whole number Of frcoho!ders to be asceIlained,
and in explanation CT his first remarks.
DR. SMITH rose AID sadMy object in rising at this
late period oil the debate, is moi merely TO oppose tie
amendment OF the geEtleman from New Ken, (SIr.
CIopOn, but to defend my positions from assaults
which they have encountered in The progress OF this
discussion. Ii is necessary for ne to claim the indu-
gcnce oil the Senate, while shall eudeayor TO yIudica,e
the tue intent and meaning OF my former argu-
ments aud 10 remove fIUm all possible Inscou-
ceptsn.
Ii appeared 10 me, in the threshold of This debate,
that many vi The opponents uf convention entertained
the failacious idea that minority have rights or
III other words that majority have right To opp;ess
minority al Hbitns ct al ichnituDe. attempted TO
rciute this iailacy by adverng the principle of the
American Revolution that in every government taxa
ton and representation ought 10 be Dseparabiy united
To prevent all doubt or misunderstanding beg leave
TO state batmy construction of the principle Oh which
my whole argument based is this that the citizen
should not be bound by laws to which he has never
seDted through the medium Of Representations and that
taxes should be equal the species of property
in every part of the Commonwealth | adopted the
principle not IN reference To freehold or universal
suffrage but 10 prove that all persons 5miiaTIy quail
fed should possess tue degree Of political power
With respect 10 taxation it rs manifest that the prin
cipe here assumed must in ITS practical operation be
necessarily productive ofinequaty greater or less
extent in every county and section of the State One
injipdua for instance may be the owner Of hundred
slaves while another individual in the same c1unty pus
sesses \ tax slaves would therefore onerate
with great inequality on the two individuals whose cir
cum5tances widely different but the tax ,youd
nevertheless be just and equal, because arbrneiical
precision not be expected in the special applica
ton of general law, and the practical ineauality
would be attributable 10 the voluntary act the slave
holder in accommodating one description of property in
preference TO anoIbnr And although this inequality
might become gross and oppressive in particular
section Of the State 10 call loudly for redress VET
that redress would be mere matter of expediency and
not a matter Of right because il would be no violation
Of the inherent rights Of the citizen. 1t would there.
fore, not be such a grievance as would sustain mpo
rity against majority principles Of abstract right
60 70 entitle Tue former to the remedy by consu
tuiional reform.
But the gentleman from New Kent insists that boil,
the power and right Of reform lodged with the ma
jory, because they must be lodged somewhere and
cannot he vested in the minority for that would contra
dict axiom in government. To this singular pro
cess ofreaoniDg the answer is Obvious Iii be meant
,ls' c>Tc5 All right mus! necessarily be luni.s1 in