Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1829-05-26


mationo in minority; but minority so constitute
ed as to protect and secure all the great interests
oil the social body, and their own rights among the
rest The active political community, constituted
by their act, consisted of the reeLoiders only ex-
GLIDING non-ireeholders, infants, and females
This being assented to, the right to govern became
vested in that minority, and must remain so vest
Ell. until the government is reformed alter
ed in that particular, or " abolished by majori-
~ oil the Community" The right Of the maiori-
ty to govern, IN ordinary acceptation, under our
government, means the right of majority OF that
| acting, political community, 70 govern the MINORS
ty; and as asserted in the Bill OF Rights, only
means, that in state Of society. (not in state OF
nature,) the majority has the right to refoun alter
or abolish the existing government. But its au-
thors do not SO on TO affirm, and could not AFFIRM
consistently with the first principle laid down by
themselves and the inherent rights of man. that the
government being abolished, the right of the ma
josity TO bind the minority, without their consent
stil remains. Nor do they assert that the same
right is indu5sable, unalienable, and indeeasible
in the Legislature. which may result from such
alteration. or reform, or abolition. That they
wisely left for their posterity to decide for them
selves "a right Of which they could not deprive
nor divest them, and OF which we cannot de-
prive or divest our posterity,') according TO the
circumstances and condition of the country at the
time, and its probable wants and interests in
time to come. These were their principles.-
Thus they reasoned and acted. Let us do the
IKE. They gave us government, practically
based upon population and ta5ation. Ii WISE we
VIII Keep II SO, while we cc.s.ct the partial ne-
qualities that have arisen. 8ut plumbers alone il
IS said, must decide the question. not only i'm re-
forming, altering aboshing the government
but also in the action of the ordinary Legislature;
because the majority have the ply steal force and
IL Il aristocratica TO insist, that taxation or oro-
perty shall constitute in any degree, an element
oil representation. reply, this doctrice is des-
Potic. Ii POUNDS rightful government in force in
stead OF consent. But the fact is not necessarily
So III money is the snews of war, the physical
force may be in a minority possessing great pre-
donderance OF wealth. Again we are told that
taxation has no such necessary connection with re-
presentation, as ought to have any influence i'm its
spportionment; because taxation IS the price paid
Tor protection, and the man who has $4,000 re-
ceiving ten times the protection that the man re-
ceives, who has but l,0e0S ought to pay ten
times the tax but ought net, therefore. to be en-
titled to any more representation. AS if the pro-
lection, which man receives from government
was TO be measured by the amount OF his proper
~, instead CT the degree OF security he enjoys in
his person and property But admit the conclu-
sion: tho lame one from the premises, it is cor
rect: Though true, in all governments, that pro-
'ecfion and allegiance are the correlative duties
OF the governors and the governed, without reie-
renee TO the relation between taxation and repre-
sentation; and, therefore, the force of this reason
Ing Is not admitted; yet il is readily admitted that
| the man owning bis thousands, ought not to have
ten times the political power with the man own
Ing his hundreds. If such principles were con.
tended Tor, or any from which they could be fair
ly deduced, then might the charge Of aristocracy
OF disposition 70 organize the government upon
the principles OF moned corporation, sc. Sc be
justly charged upon US. But here take the dis
| tinction already aiverted to; though as between
individuals the principle is not correct as between
different states or different sections of State il
| - perfectly correct-tciM this modification, that
the population in each State or section shall be
taken account Of in the apportionment as ell as
property. This modification of the principle, or
combination OF totally different principle with it,
and its application districts Of country in con-
tradisncton to individuals, divest it of ali resem.
biance TO the principles oil joint stock company
| and remove the odium attempted TO be ca.t upon
! it by such imputaton. Let me illustrate
this distinction, and the reasonableness of the rule
| OF representation coEtended for, by supposing
case. Suppose Amelia and Preston about to form
social compact. Amelia had. by the census of
1920, 3,407 free whites; Preston, 1892 But
from certain statistical information obtained by Mr.
Cabeli OF the Senate, ami published in his speech
| or the Convention Bill, last winter, (Which
| would respectfully recommend TO the perusal of
all men OF all parties) il appears that the relative
increase OF the whites is much greater in
the West than in the East, and the reverse
with regard to the blacks. There can be 10 doubt
therefore, that Preston has now majority of free
whites, while Amelia pays annual revenue OF
S4,266 ~ cts. and Preston of 1868 81 | will
mere notice The further FACT, that by the same CEN
sus Preston had so slaves, Amelia 74OO-a dis
proportion OF about to 81. 1t is now fully tn
100. Would Amelia in this case, consent to be
represented in the common legislature, according
TO white population only, would she insist upon
the combined ratio of taxation and white uop,,,a
lion! Would she consent to be dragged al the car
rage wheels OF Preson, 10 have her property mort
gagged TO carry on Preston's schemes Of improve
ment practicable or visionary to be taxed TO nav
interest without any hope OF ever being able TO
redeem the principal to the utmost of her ability
to pay, by the Repre- entatives of Preston always
dead majority in the Legislature, against the
unanimous votes OF her own representatives where
Tor every dollar OF tax paid by Preston she
would pay LIZ; for, that is about the proportion
OF the revenue OF the two countiesl Or in refer
eDce to the property, about which we feel and
nave just cause to feel the most sensitive would
she or ought she to consent TO invest Preston with
unlimited power to tax her slaves at will, nay, to-
make slaves II she chose, the exclusive subieci of
taxation, when, for every dollar OF tax levied un
on herself, Amelia would pay 100! Do YOU NOT
perceive that the latter would have no ,ower ofl
self-Protecton in this case, either as to the impo
sition of taxes, the appropriation of the mr.
as TO the general legislation Of the community and
that every thing like responsibility is destroyed;-
For, IN proportion, that Preston Expresses Hmeli,
she benefits herself, and applauds and. re-elects
her representatives Tor the very grievances of
which Amelia complains Here recurs again the
question already asked-what practical difference
Is there between no representation al all and a
representation inadequate the protection of ihe
people and interests represented? Amelia wonld
''epc.oie' III 'ne aPPOIuonment OF representatives
wi,h Preston, insist that it should be adjusted upon
he combined ratio of white population and taxa
lon; but would give 10 each man entitled 10 suf.
rage by the compact, only one vote, without re-
gard TO the amount OF his property The simple
statement shows,ha the principle is correct which
makes property an element of power and entitled
10 consideration in the apporonmeDt of represen.
tatves between different districts of territorv-
though not correct as betw cen individuals further
than the requisilien of such moderate property
qualification as to furnish the evidence required bv
the Bill of RIGHTS Of " perInarnni cn,nI.nn in,aI