Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1831-11-29

much misery, if they we'll pleased with those
7ervicos of the English oristccracy1 Ask the
British nation which has grpaned so lang beneath
The weight OF taxation, and OF endless wars
aSains, our revolution; ask Thorn whether they do
not thihk House OF Commons, under bettor aus
pieces, would not have prevented such an increase
OF dependents, who look on while the arislocracy
possesses itsclf Of all power and pIacc-and, to
LOOK at homo,-was it not the aris;ocracy which
struck the FIRST blow against national ihrone2
know II was, for was one OF it: but | and my
friends did what we did for the public good, others
did II their private interest; and when the third
cs'aie, for such was the language then. to tho
StaloS General iull oil love for tho king, and OF
wishes TO overthrow an oppressive aristocracy, If
the hing instead of hooking himself (pGrdon
the exPresson) to that artist ocracv, had united him
sell KY with tbs true French nationality, there
would have been cause To fear that the interests
OF tile court would lie identified with tIosc of the
ein'granis. Ii, in short, Ina had placed himself in
the position in which, happily, Louis Phillip is, OF
having for enemies that arstocracy, and those emf
grants, then the throne and tho royal family would
not havc boon swallowed up with the aristooracy
ona word az TO the comparison inst tuted by one
OF tile previous speakers, 10 the prosperity which
tho arlstoCIacy of England has assured TO tina,
country, and which, it is cuntcnted, des,locracv
could not hlvo dunc:-but the United States are
democratic; that has been often enough thrown in
my teeth And is there less prosperity under the
influence OF American democracy, than under that
of English aratocracy2 IL The industry of the
United States less than that of Engandl On the
contrary, II is certain that COM aratirclv speaking,
commerce IS active and more beneficial in the
hr't than III the last named country; and that rela-
tivoly population, the commercial tonnage is
considerably greater there. Allusion has also
been rnate TO the yalnr i'll war OF the English aris-
tocracy. Certainly am most willing To do jus.
lice to their courage, their talents and their glory:
hut Ia 1t forgotten that la tho war, not Of Indercn-
dcnce, bu' of that second ana which one of our
honorable colleagues seemed not 10 rceolIcct-
theTo 10 not single instance, or only one at the
utmost where tho flag of the United ;ia,os did not
IN c'lnat combat, triumph that of England
IL II forgotten that American democracy obtained
from English ariS;ocracy honorable peace, at a
moment non all Europe being paciiied. it remain
90 Ia struggle alone with England and that that
peace was crowned by tho battle of New Orleans
democracy there tTuin phcd over rristocracv.
return now TO the question of Il Legislative
hereditary Pecrage. | have always been in favor
oi TWO Chambers. L know there are wciUl,ty au-
thor!lies on the other side; Turgct and Franklin
are OF The number and might name other celc-
DRAFTED publicsts of the present day. 1t has been
said that tho American States began in imitation of
hl'2land, with Two Chambers, and had come TO
adopt single one The contrary is the fact; thosG
states, which commenced with single Chamber
nave hcen taught by experience, the advantages OF
double representation; but not one was willing To
adept an hereditary chamber, nor any combination
drawn from different elements.
respectable colleague has said 'you might as
We'll merely separate the Chamber by 4 partition
BY partition not-but it would !,e gaining a good
doal TO have two Chambers distinct from each
otler, discussing separately, and after the
other, the same laws; special provisions of easy
ADOPTION would soon impress upon each distinct
ciarIcter--such provisions as, without going into
detail, might relate TO age, property, sc. But an
hereditary Chamber it is said, would he Il prop TO
The throne. Many publicists have been quoted on
this point. Permit me to quote one VINO certainly
VIII! not be taxed with cnInity to monarchs. nor
be accused of democracy, or rarahgicanisn,: il is
tho Phitosophc historian Hume. Well then when
Tins pubcist was endeavorng in his ESSAYS to sI,.
dow forth the outline of perfect munurchy he
sad, that II there was in En- gland n sound repre-
sentation o. the Commons, the Hereditary House
would not be strong enough, because it would nos
rosscrs public confidence, and could neither sup
pert the throne, sustain itself; he therefore sr
ees- -.'aiS Tor securing confidence in his Senate
or House OF Peers. Imuv indeed differ with him
rs to these means, but his opinion was, that an
hereditary Chamber would he wanting in strength
and that some other combination was necessary.
W nat is said in fvor of the hereditary principI.
because OF the education il iIsurcs to the sons of
Peers, applies equally to notarcs, to LAWYERS, to
judges, for they too may bring up their children in
the notion mat they arc 10 pursue the profession Of
lne!r fathers; and vet il any one ofus should de-
clare III his WILL that his children and descendants
Tor ever, should he obliged to avail themselves of
the services of the children and descendants of his
notary ana lawyer, tho will would be aside on
the score of mental deran cement This consJcr,-
ton therefore, is not happily chosen
will not enter The de d Il OF the various mr. ie,.
wh en- have httn proposed. viii lnu myseif to pos
We declaration aaan- the hereditary i,rinc'pie w II
hSo voe against Tie having sole TInri cen
ting iee's, because III such this second Chamber
would not lie in fact, legislative rower-it world re-
hI..th' no o"e-and would present idea in common
WIN Il Representative government will IN the end sts
'a me opinion which shall apnroash rearest o nina
nr rather, despairng Of dnjug better shall uro h,h'
Voe '"f NE proposition least in opposition To INV nv n
'th"h' winch may have the best chance OF SUCCESS