Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-12-29

and supposed thac he question had been settled.
lie opposed the resolution, and urged that II any
scheme OF future apportlonmeut adopted, In the
present state of opinion in and out Of this House, 1t
would SOW the seeds Of future war, and lead TO new
Struggles tor power, by Whatsoever party that might
feel itself strength ened by future entertainments Of
population. He considered it a most happy feature
of tn. scheme % the gentleman from Albemarle
lMr Gordonl that 1t provided Only for the present
without looking TO future appointments. Mr.. $:
Diluted at considerable length on the mischief of
adopting rule for future superintendent, and affnr
ed that the section OF the State which the balance
OF power would be placed by the scheme of the gen.
tleinan from Richmond, was the where pla-
ced by The scheme of the gentleman from Albemarlc
namely the upper extremity of the middle DIS
trict--a region where it safely deposited.
Its interests were in many respects identical with tie
east, anu in mary other, identical with the west-and
Whch could not lean either exclusively to the one d
vision of the State or Inc other, without inring itself
Mr. 5. replied to On objection urged by Mr.. Neaie in
favor OF his plan for future apporiionments that with
ont 1t, efforts would be made for Convention
lie INSISTED that the middle country and the Valley.
by whose aid Convention bad been called would
not unite in the cali of auother--hat IN regard to
representation, the scheme OF the gentleman from AL
beina:lc gave them alIaey entitled to ask and
such reio.InatlOns would ~ made III the Judiciary
and such an extension of the right Of suffrage gran
te" Inc other principal causes which had influenced
them to vote III favo of IA Convention as would he
presumed. satisfy the most GueTulons Mr.. Scott
invest gatcd tho principle asserted in the proposition
OF the gentleman from Richmond. to apporton future
Representation upon the lumber Of freehos assessed
at not less than 25 value. He affirmed that t-yas
based neither upon population, wealth. nor the whole
land OF the country but upon the accidental subdi-
VISION OF lands the different cutDes of the com
conwealth, and he denied that this accident, presen
yea principle Tor the distribution of power worthy of
adoption. HI gave various statistical details to prove
that the rule would work most uneqnallv. and would
EXHIBIT results bearing proportion the relative
population and taxes paid by different Counties-as
for example, the County of Jefferson with more than
10000 white inhabitants, and paying a revenue of
more than So 00O had fewer freeholders than Prince
george with n pc pulatlon a little exceeding 5000
ana paying much less revenue. Mr.. S. contraSted
many other Countless displaying results equally sur
pFising and dsadvontageous to the scheme Of the
gent tomnn from Richmond {Mr. Neale( and urged
! as an additional objection, the FRAUDS that mighf he
practised IN the creation of ffeehods bevond the
mountains from the tracts valuless land in that
part ofLhe state MFR. Scott concluded by depre
eating III warm TERMS the reopcninr of the question
OF the basis, and expressed bis superior dislike of the
scheme ofMr. Neale, TO any that had been offered
Mr.. Cook rose not to debate the merits Of the
scheme under consideration, but to remove wba, he
thought alnsconceptionof the gentleman fiom Fau-
| QUEER Nr Scott lie had argued, as if the scheme
OF the gentleman from Richraond, propoged TO base
future apPortonmen upon ircehoids of the value of
SS5-whereas he understood it to be the whole num-
Der OF resident ,(ieehotders whose frecholds were
worth S25-Mlr. G. took OCCASION to express his O
pinion IN favor of the scheme of Mr. Neale, as fair.
just and hunorahe-and if adop ed he was nrenora,I
to attempt further reconciliation by moving to recon
| to the people. With the assent of Mr. Neale his
scheme was hen amended, by striking out in the
I'd res Jjution the word }reehOtdeys and INSERTING
DreehoM ootes This being done, MIR. Cooke rerar-
Red that-th tabular statements of the peufleman
:r0D Ialqaio- did not apply.
MI ScoTT contcnded that the principle was still
the same-that female and infant freeholders it was
fair to presume, were proportonabIv tho same
throughout the State, and that his former observo
lions applied with equal gee to the resolution as n
nende9 III continuation OF this. he cited various
examples.
Mr.. NEALE briefly replied to some of the ob;ec-
ions ofthe gentleman from Fauquier. In reply to
the argument that his proposition was not founded
upon either population, wealth. and--he said
that 1t founded upon populat ion--not The ross
population but part and the best part
| Mr.. NJ Coy expressed his favor to the proposition
which he deemed far one, but declared he
could not vote for 1t without an amendment. This
was to strike out the paragraph prescribing that the
treeholds shall be OF not less than S25 value lcav
the freehold not to be determined by value but oua
tity-nnd on this amendu nt the ayes and noes were
ordered.
Mr.. STUART moved to amend by INSERTING tba
words 'and Senate" in the first resolution, and on
this question MI SUMMERS called for the ayes and
noes
MIR. MARSHALL moved 10 law the whole sub;ect c
the present on the tible-and said that the question
whe'hcr there should be future apDortionment had
never been determined. What had been daternin-
CO was merely against particular schemes of future
apportlOnmeD, and not against the renei al question
Until 1t had beensleerulined whether there should
be future apportonmint, he felt himself at
! loss how to vote. Mr.. NJ. powerfully appeaIed to
the House on the state Of things the regard which
was attracted to the proceedings of the Convention
from the world the modification, the humiliation and
the danger, OF separating without doing any thing &
concluded by expressing his hope that his motion
would prevail.
| Mr.. RANDoLPH rose TO deliver for himself an o.
pinlon which the gentleman who had just sat down
! imputed TO the Convention generally -uamey-t
the constitution was susceptible ofgrea consider
! dbte amendments lie was not in favorOf great or
considerable changes, but very small changes only
! MIR. MARSHALL replied. The gentleman from Char
lote Mr. Randoph) had expressed himself in favor of
striking Off balfof the House of Delegates and
making changes in the judiciary. Those had appear
ed TO him considerable, but perhaps what appeared
to hun appeared inconsidcrabIe to tic gentleman
from Charlotte.
Mr. MecER briefly czpresscd lis satisfaction at
the course ofthe gentleman from Richmond (1Ir.
Mn,E hall