Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-11-29

this point. his constituents would have been put OF with
a fine dissertation about the right of instruction The
question about be submitted your elaboration
Cor, by strange combination of circumstances il hap
pens that the sweeping amendment against the
project oil ministers, is that in favor of hereditary
peeragc) the great question appears tend higher
than the mere organization of the legislative power
ends whatever may be said the contrary, to rc-esta
bishng in France, and roofing in sell Astocracy
proclaimed from this tribune the early period of our
revolution that ariStocracy is bad ingredient in politics
We have heard much Of the independence of the aristo
of the great service il has rendered still
render to the throne. have nothing of all that
The Swedish aristocracy, the Danish aris,ocrocy
Swallowed the thrcne but not independent for il was
controlled by the different courts of Europe, who arrang
ed II rs IT Were under their respective banners.
told that the prosperity Of England is due the English
arsocracy-A sort OF eulogum hos been pronounce
ed upon it, for havingrearded for fifty Catholic
cpauon and parliamentary reform Gentlemen, ask the
Irish who have endured such troubles, many ills,
much misery they well pleased with these services
OF the English arisocracyl Ask the British nation which
has groahcd long beneath the weight of taxation end
OF endless against revolution ask them wheth-
or they do not think House of Commons under better
auspices would no. have prevented such increase
pcndents who look while the aris;ocracy possesses
itself OF all power and place,and, to look at homc
was II not the astocracy which struck the first blow
against national throne? know twas. for was of
II; but and my friends did what did for the public
good others did il their private interest," and when the
States General full of love for the King of wishes
overthrow an oppressive oristocracy if the king instead
oil hooking himself (parlon the cNpreSSion) that
aristocrary, had united himself frankly with the true
French nationality, there would have been cause to
with those OF the emgronts IT, in short he had placed
himself in the position in which, happily, Louis Philip IT,
oil having Tor enemies that ariStocracy and those egan
then the throne, and royal family, would not have
been swallowed up with the arisocracy. One word
the comparison instituted by of the previous speakers
as TO the prosperity which The asrocracy of England has
assured TO that country and which, is contended
crazy could not have done:-ut the United States arc
democratic that has been often enough thrown in my
teeth And is there less prosperity under the influence
American democracy than under that aristocracy
is the industry of tho United States less than that Eng
land I'm fhac Il.
commerce. more acuFe ana more Deetcial IN
the first than in the lasnamcd county and that relative
ly 10 population the commercial tonnage is considerably
greater there Auson has also been made to the v0o
war of the English aristocracy Certainly most will
ling to do justice to their courage, their talents and their
glory; but it forgotten that in the war; not of InGepcn
dence but OF that since, and which of honorable
colleagues seemed not to recolectterc not single
instance or only one ut the utmost where the flag of he
United States did not in equal combat, triumph that of
England! Is it forgotten that American democracy obtain
cd from English arisoeracy an honorable peace AT mo-
ment when all Europe being pacied it remained to
struggle alone with England and that that peace was
crowned by the battle of New Oeass Democracy there
triumphed over aristocracy.
return now TO the question OF legislative hereditary
Pecrage. have always been in favor of Chambers
l know there weighty authorities the other side,
Iurgo and Franklin are OF the number and might
other celebrated pubciss Of the present day 1t has
said that the American States began, in imitation of Eng
land with two Chambers, and had adopt single
one The contrary is the fact; those States, which com
mcnccd with single Chamber, have been taught by ex
pericnce the advantages of double representations but
not willing to adopt hereditary chamber, nor
any combination drawn from different elements.
respectable colleague has said 'you might az well
merely separate the Chamber by partition" by par
tion' Nobut it would be gaining good DEAL 10 have
Chambers distinct from each other, discussing separately
and after the other, the laws special provisions
of easy adoption would impress upon each distinct
characte-such provisions without going into detail
might relate to age, property, sc. But hereditary
Chamber it's said, would be prop the throne. Ma
ny publcists have been quoted this point Permit
me TO quote who certainly will not he taxed with
enmity 10 monarchs nor be accused of democracy,
republicansm; it is the phiosophic historian Hume
ell then, when this publicis endcavcrng his Es-
to shadow forth the outline Of perfect monarchy he
said that there in England sound representation of
the Commons, the hereditary House would not be strong
enough because it would possess public confidence
and could neither support the throne nor sustain itself nc
therefore suggests means for securing confidence in
Senate or House OF Peers may indeed differ with him
TO these means, but his opinion was that an hereditary
Chamber would be wanting in strength, and that some
other combination necessary. What il said i'm favor
oil the hereditary principle because Of the education IL en-
suTcs TO the OF Peers applies equally 10 notaes
lawyers Judges for, they too may bring up their chill
dren IN the notion that they pursue the profession of
their fathers; and yet if any of should declare in his
will that his children and descendants ever should be
Obliged TO avail themselves OF the services of the children
and descendants ofhis notary and lawyer the viii would
ne set aside on the of mental derancement This
| consideration, therefore, is not happily chosen
Will not enter into the detail of the variols projects
winch have been may be, proposed | will limit my,
self TO positive declaration against the hereditary nnci
pie will also vote against the Kings having the qolc
right OF creating Peers, because in such case this Sc
cond Chamber would not be- in fact, legislative power
IL would represent oncand would present no idea in
common with representative government. will in tie
end sustain the opinion which shall approach nearest 10
nine, or rather dcspairng of doing better, shall probably
vote Tor the proposition least in opposition my own Cpl
hloh winch may have the best chance of success
DOMESTIC.