Martinsburg gazette and public advertiser. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1826-1833, 1829-11-19

1 oehSs-toat the tax on carf1aqs.s and hor&es
:. WOULD extend TO themselves as well as 10
hs West-"hereas If the power was given 10
sac west, we had a species OF property in our
i'cs' winch they had not, and which might
-, N oseieaNed' Mr.. U. concluded by asking
sttution9 '' "~i S"h-
Mr.. Doddridge rose in renlv----sco;o;,,,.
with the remark, that the arguments ,yh;n5
he gentleman of Northampton, fMr. Upsbnr y
yesterday offered were so abstract, as To re.
| 2u'fe very hide notice. 1t was those which
Nc hsu offered to-day, when he touched on
nrSinia ground, which called for an answer
re began by expressing his acknowledge
MEMS 10 Mr. L. Tor the candor and good feel
ing ne had displayed. Mr.. ID. then contend
CO. that the present Constitution had nat been
Termed as partnership ought to be formed.
Where all ought TO have participated in max
ing compact for all. But, the present Con-
| saSs ION, was framed by the freeholders and
| py aportion of the freeholders only lie then
went INTO the history of the Constitution, shew-
ing how the last House of Burgesses in I776.
winch has set under the Colonial Government.
anu elected by the freehoders only. had
| drawn up th's instrument in which the people
nau acquiesced IN consequence Of the perilous
| state oil the tunes. This was not AN action.
~.
| treehoiders alone, owning 80 acres of land.
sc. protesting to act for all He stated, that
the former organization had only been perpet-
nated with some exeriions--the Senate taking
the place OF the Council, and the Governor OF
the deputy OF the King; but the House OF De
iesates took the place Of the House of Bur
Sesses, and possessed similar quabic ations--
lie admitted that the representation in the
House ofDelegates might have been at first,
tolerahy equal, but by degrees, as the back
country filed up and the boundaries of the
counties not undergoing a proportonate
change, the inequality was increased, and
the injustice became oppressive. Mr.. d.
showed how early the complaints against this
inequality began in the .State--and how peii-
tons Tor call OF the Convention were almost
every year presented to the Legislature |
they were disregarded by the Eastern Politi-
Clans. This state of things continued until
body OF men at Siaunton called upon the Lee
gislature to appeal TO the people. In 1916,
accordingly, such bin was brought into the
House of Delegates, Cor taking the sense of
the people On the call OF Convention with
hmited powers The subjects proposed were
e9ualizlng the representation in both Houses
OF the General Assembly, and equalizing the !
1and-tax, and extending the Right of Suffrage |
to all such as had evidence OF permanent |
common interest with, and attachment to the !
community Mr. ID. gave a history Of the diff |
ierent propositions which were presented 10 |
the Legislature in 1915, on this subiect--anG |
among the rest, the plan of representing the |
blacks, which was reiected-not more than |
26 or % members veting for it. So incorrect |
was 1t now 10 say, that the idea of represent |
nag the whites alone Is new idea. lie show |!
Ell how this Convention bill was at that time |
superseded by the bib Of the Senate, for re- |
organizing the Senatorial Districts, and foun- |
dcd On the white population -svitl, this irregu
Iarity, indeed, that the apportionment of the |
Districts was made on the census Of 1910 |
He expressed his surprise, therefore, that |
whilst this apporiionment had been made in |
the Senate, such principle should be object |
cd to in relation to The House of Delegates. |
Mr.. ID. stated that the Convention OF Stanton |
in 1916 took the same ground in relation to |
white population, as was now done by Its |
iriends---How then can it be asserted that 1T |
is a new doctrine in this land?
He referred also 10 the history of the law |
of the last session. The majority in that Lee |
gislature (the minority as he believed in this |
Convention) coatended then for the federal |
ratio-but they ended with claiming represen- |
tation on the principle Of taxation. The doc
trine Of the Federal basis, however, had be- |
come every day more unpopular in the State; |
and instead of its being introduced in the first |
instance here, the minority began with press |
ing the same principle which they ended with |
in the last session of the Legislature But it |
was the same doctrine, let it assume whiche- |
yer shape it may, as seems to have been a |
vowed by the gentlemen from Culpeper and |
Northampton-the slave, being in the one
case regarded as subject of tara.ioa, and IN |
the other as reason for representation.
Mr.. ID. proceeded to examine the argument |
of Mr.. Upshur, on the representation OF pro-
perry. He contended, that such doctrine
would give an undue ascendancy to wealth
that a man, with 900 slaves in one county,
might have 900 times as much weight as ano-
Their in another lie declared he repudlated
such doctrine in every shape-and that tho
property was entitled to protection, 1t was
not entitled to representation.
He contended that there was no analogy be
tween the doctrine held duringo revolution,
of taxation and representation going together,
and the present pretensions of the Eastern
People.
Tie examined the various postulates advan-
ced by Mr. Upshur, and dweit particularly on
the principles laid down In the Bill of Rights,
which had been pronounced by one OF the
highest judicial authorities a series of abstrac-
tons This Bill of Rights has been recognis-
ed unanimously by the present ConventAon,as
establishing the principles of the Constitution.
IL is admitted by us as an abiding authority,
and vet 1t is said that it is set of distractions
| The very Legislature which formed the pre-
| sent Constitution, appointed Committee to
| report on what was called in their digniiied