Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-01-30
DEBATE ON THE CONVENTION

DEBATE ON THE CONVENTION.
MIR. DODDRIDGE'S reply to the Speeches Of
| Messrs Old and Miller of Powhatan and Mr.. PARK
I er OF Northampton, the 9th inst
! MI CHAIRMAS: The principal argument relied
on by tine members from Powhatan and Northanp.
ton Is that persons and property being the objects OF
governmental protection, ought both be Represent
ed IN tho Legislature, and therefore in convention
One ofthe members from Powhatan has gone so far
| as to say that slaves in time of peace are eonaI in
usefulness 10 the lower classes of white abourers and
add rs much to the strength of the country and he
contends that the represent in Congress- and tho
pan OF the first section of the bill under Consideration
are alike detective, in omiting to provide represen
IaIion OF their whole number instead of three fihs
Indeed one OF the Delegates from Powhatan the frst
who addressed the Commute, has said that pronertv
Is more especially entitled to representation than
SONS. iis argument is this If persons possessed OF
properly hold the Legislative power they cannot Lee
gSiate nlurlonsy personal rights wtbonttnrino
themselves but if persons ,citioah property couI3
egsiate or"r property, they could exercise this pow
er inJurlousiy without affecting themselves The
o'her member from the same county has assumed the
revolutionary MAXIM that representation and
should go hand and hand and has endeayored IA n-o
IL INTO the present service BY this maxim he airns
the great Earl of Chatham made the Knp of EnrIaud
remhie on his throne Finding the princ pie of Slave
representation to be growing every div, moro od;,
re has endeavored to support the bill on the now NC
tehce mat IT was intended, not to produce slave ron
resentation, but was founded OF combined ratio If
persons and property. %
The application of the great maxim that tn v,+io,
ana representation should go hand in hand is spocious
indeed, but is not well founded. Doctor BraukI;n ba
placed this claim in its true light. At the ner;od ~
the revolution the King of England held the tbro,s
OF England and Scotland by descent, and that sc Ire
Iand by conquest. The three European k;nodorns
now composing the united kingdom or emnre Jyer.
separate and independent of ench other. Thew were
alike subject to the same executive head hnt eacb he
IT'S own permanent 1T which tho estates Of each wn,e
Efn tod -,
grants by the Commons to the Kiuo for nuhl;c ,,son
Ihe Commons of England could tax the pcople of
England, but not those of Scotland and reond. md
SO wee versa Doctor Franklin considered tho thin
Ecu Anietican Colonies as Occupying the same re-
iaons to the monarch aud people of ENGLAND 40 did
scotland and Ireland. Each COLONY Ind ts own
Parliament or General Assembly. by whom alone tbov
couu lawfully be taxed, and tIf prineipl srftd ~,
eDc FYoiuuoh was no more than this that the colo
mes having no representation in parliament ourbt
not to be taxed by Parliament. The pr,nciple md
no personal individual application or if Had th
commonwealth has from its birth lived in the continu
al VOCATION OF the prncipe itself for from the first the
non-freeholder has been subjected to- toxation. nj
though he has had no voice in the choice of renre
sentative. pc
The Earl of Chatham however, has never said
what me enemies OF reform now contend for that
man VINO IS taxed tor million of dollars o1,ott 70
possess ten times much political power No he u,bo
IS taxed for one hundred thousand ii was reserved
TO the republicans the present day TO advance iris
alarming doctrine. .'''i
me answer to gentlemen on this head, may no
statedn few words. Taxation on property. and
protection Of property, should 70 hand in hand. A
citizen taxedtor million, has that million protected
ny government and he who is only taxed one dollar
has that dollar protected. The account is thus set,
tied. But personal and political rights arc concerns
OF incomparatvcly higher order and renuire eonal
representation The statesmen who claims that tho
possessof OF wealth must govern the rosior,t az tb
only means ofprotecting that wealth do in fact asset
me principle Of governing country by an orarchv
OF few wealthy individuals. ACCORDING to tbo;r
iheoTy the protection Of property IL of more ipor
lance than the protection Of all the rights Of person
political or religious theory which we cannot sd.
nit
The term olgarchy. although perfectly descriptiyci
u Tic colonial and present government seems 20