The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-05-28

rate Of duties produces great deal OF SNUG
Cling, and therefore desire that home valua-
ton or specific duty may be imposed on watch
es, and that the duty on jewellery may be but
ten per cent, on diamonds one per cent, and
on other precious stones five per cent.
On the motion of Mr.. LINN, it was resolved that
there be Transmitted to the STATES and Territories
three copies Of the Documents now ON hand, IA reia
ton to the public lands heretofore printed by order oil
| the Senate.
The bill from the Huuse TO extend the collection
district OF Wlscasset, Maine, read twice anc ie-
| Il fred to the Committee on Commerce.
Mr.. EVANS, from the Comm ttee on Finance, re-
ported the bill making appropriation for the navy Tor
| the year 1872, with amendments.
The Appcrt'onment bill was then taken uP-the
question beng on The motion of Mr.. PREsros TO In
sert 80, OUO as the ratio OF representation.
Mr.. McROBERTS gave his reasons why he pre-
ferred 6S OOO the ratio of representation which
would give House of two hundred and twenty four
| members
Mr. BENTON, the question being, as he re-
marked, whether the House to be a large or
small body, free to declare his opinion In favor Of
numerous representation because he conceived that
liberty safest in large body; and, if they re-
duced the present number, the popular will must con-
sequenty be proportOnaely unrepresented lie was
for sending back to the House the same number as
the ratio ESQ., l79 which that body had sent to the Sc
nate.
MI. ARCHER argued that the degradation OF the
most popular branch fatal freedom, and the ell
feet o. large representation must be inevitable to that
degradation.
Mr.. WRIGHT said that what the medium be-
tween large and that for a small representation
oughtto be, he did not know, had he formed any
opinion but he thought that the House was the pro
per body to consider ard determine the question as
preference between the two bodies; and he would
vote against every proposition to reduce the number
OF Representatives below what 1t was at the present
time.
Mr.. CALHOUN would be indisposed to disturb
the ratio proposed by the House. if he thought that
all were satisfied with it, but he entertained contra
ry opinion. If another ratio should be substituted by
the Senate and sent to the House, and that body
should insist its own he would be disposed to re-
spect its adherence.
Mr.. RlVES maintained that the House during
the last eight or ten years. had fallen into dlscredt
and this was to be Traced altogether to the unwiedi-
of the body. To remedy the evil the number OF
the House must be brought back to what it was be-
fore the increase of the Of $780, which, ne be-
ieved was two hundred and twelve.
After interchange Of remarks between Mr..
RIVES and Mr.. WOODBURY. as to the views of
Mr.. Madison in relation to large number Of Repre-
sentatives-
Mr. CUTHBERT said that he would vote against
the amendment of the Senator from South Carolina
Mr. Preston) without having any determination to
90 low The ratio proposed by the bill it came
from the House, but he would prefer ratio OF
$4,000, which would give two hunded and forty-fou
members.
Mr.. BUG HANAN replied to Messrs. Wright and
Calhoun, and protested against the Senate acting in
this matter in consequence Of any thing which the
| House has done or will do. He thought that they
ought to act not only independently, but without
bringing into view the opinions Of the other House.
Mr. WRIGHT explained, and said that he had
only stated his own principles of action; and ne had
admitted, over and over again, that the Senate had
perfect right to act rrespectvey of the other body
Mr.. ALLEN remarked that the protest of the Sen
ator from Pennsylvania induced him to rise and say
that the House should have preponderatIng infiu-
ence in its own organization; and he also protested
against some of the sentiments which had been utter
ed on the side of those who advocated reduction OF
the members of the House
He then continued his remarks in favor of an ex-
tended representation in the course of which he de-
cared his preference for House Of ten thousand
members to reduction of the present number to two
| hundred.
| The question taken on the amendment to fill
the blank with 80 OOO and it decided in the mega
tve-ycas 10, nays 36.
| The questI taken on the amendment of MIR.
Sewer, to fill the blank with 1900, and It was de-
cided in the negatlve-yeas ~ nays a. -
| The amendmen: proposed by Mr.. White-7b,ooo-
was disagreed to.
| The proposition of Mr.. Basby-75, OOO-was re-
jected by vote Of l6 to 30
The question was taken on filling the blank with
$4,000, and it decided in the gative-yeas q,
nays "a.
| The proposition of Mr.. Fulton-74, 39l-was re-
jected-yeas %, nays %.
The question was taken filling the blank with
70, 1854, proposed by Mr. Merrick and it was decided
in the negative-yeas %, nays "a.
The amendment of Mr.. Barrow, fixing the ratio at
II ,257, was agreed to-yeas IS, nays 81.
Mr. WALKER moved reconsideration Of the
| vote just taken, and the motion prevailed.
Mr. BARROW withdrew his amendment, and
Mr.. WALKER proposed II, l43 as the ratio of re-
presentation.
Without taking the question, the Senate, at five
o'clock, adjourned until Monday next