Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-11-30
RTcaMoND, TUESD.dY, .voVEAlBER 30.
COVE AND TVDTYTSTBL E?"

The good people OF Ohio Co. appear TO tear
themselves from the Parent STEM ami engrait them
selves upon the State of Maryland Why do they no,
seek TO be united 10 Pennsyl, anial A resolution was
proposed TO that effect by Mr.. Macean; but il re-
Jected almost unanimously. And OF the western
papers has assigned the rcason-They prefer, il seems
going TO Maryland, that they may retain the privilege
oil holding slaves will they then improve their cond
tons by uniting themselves with .Marulandy The
grievance of which they n0,o complain is the ine1u1f
Of representation They say thoy oppressel by
the Lowlander because they not adequately repre-
sened in the Legislature And do they really expect
to better their fortune by going Maryland Is there
any State in this Union which is distinguished by
unequal representation than Maryland HERSELF
The Winchester Nirgnian has noted this circumstance
WIN great force and justice. Mark the following state
ments: -
"Aro primo movers of , secession aware that tho vev
same inequayarising the
OF Maryland that prevailed in Virginia anterior adoption
ss"s {; .Ts %'hG.t to their
rick and Calvert Maryland contrast them and LEI us 500 how
the case % first With
@ M the G having population of only 500
virginia be lot ia" tie inequality %ooS
Population saa SssG IN % MawG OF
dee WIN her 40 Agroator dsporon than existed
than exists under the Nothing them apparent would
eers as the basis of representation 1t would 6o easy to
shew that they would profit little by change
which they may find worthy of their Maryland
and this single item sometimes heavy
of the %e aSs s.o tho
cedng general pretty heavy Suppose that the
state were to be levied upon tho nhaSan of ,hs
suhanced!' r' ~ W s'sa'y
But there is journal upon the spot, which presses
and proves this outrageous Inequality of representation
oy The strongest facts. The Baltimore Republican
touches this subject with its usual abty-and throws
out the following irresistible considerations:
Inc proposed division Of the State Virgins, ce.,iou
. rms s'. S Of the so IN, Of BFCSts o R.ndoh Tyler
c"ement the VirgnssWe CLEARLY whit adj
The Cans. If MAJ.
winch thy complain Of in Virginia could be thu,
Their own State unequal distribution power by IN.
se Convention Yet they preference Maysnd in
possibly Re under the Virginia
@ 40 our stats th. ePe'en,on o by counties, each
Lower ou'e-rwo cities Baltimore aud Annapolis,
Let examine in instances. the result Of bi, mode
OF IePe'snson upon the relative weight different
portions OF the State and ak how Vns
any seser right complain in their present situation Others
would have, were they admitted among US
Nv the Ceu', Of 1890 Frederick county contained $50
hae'an.-eninB four member, TO the House Of DELEGATED
hy n same census Ov,rt county contained o7s inhabitants,
hsxinS an equal voice IN The Legislature with Ere efick
ihu' one man in Calvert is woh-poiicaly five men in
Dy that fillmore City 7ss Inhabitants,
'"i eco memhtr' TO the House of Delegates.
Baltimore. r' 's "'" ~"
We should Ike the rsinia politicians who wish
representation by coming under the Maryland Constitution com
pare the evils OF the two situations imParay and
worth while inquire would he the effect
Of the Virginia proposed 10 be attached 10 M,rynd
county did not by theeen,u, Of 1922 IN nv in.
however he equal ht county and
nearly si1y time: that Of the city fact
than that Of III. single county Of Frederick thus
Brooke essi
Ohio 9IsI
R,3dOlrh ss57
Tyler 22I6
Half Of Wood (5seo) $3.50