Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1829-12-31
VIRGINIA CONVENTION.
WEDNESDAY, Nov. Il.
Substance of Mr. CHiPMiN JOINSoN'S
Sgeeci on the 6asi, Of Representation



sgbJaucs of Mr. CHAPMAN JOfLyS0N'S
SDeeci on the 6nsi, Of Representation
coNrfSuED.
t,tas been urged as nm objection TO the re-
-, fine Select Committee, lhatlt proposes
F;at,odnce something new into the C"nsinu
ion II certainty is not new 10 the American
RanobIcs. TO apporlion representation accord
NO 10 The ratio Of white population and whe-
.hor !, IL new TO our constitution, il cannot he
Material 10 enquire, since the otIection mooi
aonsIIv lie against the proposed amendment
p',h Hroposr a change in the Constitution, and
,bs ,rsiien is, which is preferable.
W. are cautioned, however, against a
change unless called for by strong reasons =
ga are r. ferred TO the nearly equal div 81, u Of
nares which probably exist here, on this q .es
,;oo and are emphatlcaly warned against the
jopropriety Of an important change, by ieaa
msiority Of one or two, forcing upon a large
m,Tority A constitution that would be abhorreHt
:, them. Ireadily admit, that no important
sbaooes should he made that are not called Tor
h, clear and strong reasons, and no one eau be-
,noyr sensible than am OF the lmprudence of
forcing 100 large minority, government
that i odiooS TO them. But the existing Ine-
aualiies in The representation are s, glarlng
aud the dis 0atents produced by II are SO srongr
thai every one seems to concede tue Pr"Prirty
of some reform, and both the propositions ~
dee consideration viii effect that reform TO a
considerable extent. II the reform proposed
no ,he select committee be Objectionable, be
eause i, is una cceptabe to large minority,
wound the reform proposed by the gentlemao
from Cnlpeper be less objectionable, IL 2eing
a, least ne dsagreeble to "a small majority o.
snail we be told that tne gentleman from Cal
prpeT aud his friends are not Insisting on any
,efurm, but are content with the pre- sent COZ.
siulon ?-StIl, however, the objection recurs
1t is with the present constitution, that We
suppose the maj ority is discentented, aud the
question again arises, shall they tie compelled
10 submit to IL In whatever light We view 4
therefore, nearly equal division would present
matter for serious consideration, aud not less
serious regret In this view of the case, 4
may he worthy OF some attention, that IT the
MAORI Y here should he found in favor of the
repor of he committee, aud We faithful'' rsp-
resent the will OF our constituents, it is proha-
BILE tina, the majority oil the people will approve
oil an equal number Of members from each sen.
atorial district, these districts hasina been ar.
ranged according to the census OF 1910, so as
10 contain as neariy as CONVENIENT, equal
numbers OF white population, and the popu-
creased by much greater ratio than that OF
ihe eastern districts IL is fair 10 conclude that
proposition sustained here. by majority con
sisng chiefly Of western members. would be
sustained by a larger majority of the people.
We have no warrant, however, for counting
maJorlties, at present. on either side and / Is
oar duty 10 proceed with candor and literally
TO examine the merits oil both propositions, and
TO recommend that which shall be found best,
10 as much favor as possible.
When we have established that the people
are the fountain Of polIacal power, and their
happiness its objecf-that minority oil those
entitled TO suffrage have RICH, to reform their
constitution, and thereby regula,e the political
power,-i must necessarily follow, that the
majority may rightfully retain the power OF
ordinary legislation, unless is can be shown
that the object of good governmen, will not
thereby lie obtained. Gentlemen have, there
tore, with great proprirty as umed up them
selves the burthen ofproving, that in Virginia,
This power in the hands of the majority, won d
be inconsistent with the public welfare. Ttey
insist, that as lending object of all govern.
'nen' IS the protection ofproperty. SO there is
40 mode OF affording that protection so eifecual
anu so proper, as giving it direc, influence in
we government, by emitting II to representa-
non II" by thus claiming representation for
properly that they insist on placing power in
','e oands OF the minority. Let us examine
'ne arguments by which this claim is sustain
"eni'emen tell us, that by our own conces
SONS we surrender the power Of numbers, the
',Bn' OF The majority, and admit the proprlety OF
sHing property nm influence in government
""eh we agree 10 exclude manv from the polls,
u"" ,fq"'rea qualification in property, To give
."e ''eut OF snhlage. This argument is found
gu !" mistake: we have never advocated the
p'"er OF Numbers without distlgcton of per-
.'"s all that we have endeavored Ia maintain
'ne equal power of those " no share the sove
::e'gn'y and the consequent right of their ma
my lhs qualification o property which we
..qu"e' l" give admission into this numb=r Ii
, ""u no view TO give power TO property, but is
',Ne 'oe Qualification Of age and sex, an evl
uence only OF fitness for the exercise oil pollti
."' power. lfh were Intended to give power
W Pi'perty, the richest and the poorest votel
So"." MOI ENJOY the equal portions OF power
~ lar 'hen as this Illustration is entitled to re
pe''' me argument founded upon it turns ir
."ror OF the equal right of every voter withou
ference TO property, in favor Of the simple ba
'S ni representa- ION.
,EAp"fitnce and precedent have been appeal
"a, w. ana the learned gentleman from Orange
$''I barbour,) tad warned us OF the VET.
JUST distinction between experience and eIper