Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1851-05-15
Mr.. Bots moved TO fiji the Lla,,k SO

iief SN scEitfinatNsy CHtttiCo ~ aAQfE TIE
basis Of representation"
Mr.. Claiborne called the ayes and noes
on this motion. Rather than put BIZ; peo-
pie in the power Of the cities, he should go
for the white basis.
Mr.. Lyons asked Mr. Claiborne how
much the country would gainor lose by one
basis or the other2
Mr.. Claiborne said that he learned from
the speech of Mr.. Bolts, that Richmond
would be entitled to 10 delegates, under the
mixed basis.
Mr.. Lyons said that, under the mixed
basis, Richmond would be entitled to only
five delegates.
Mr.. Bolts said that he based his circula-
ton, including tax on merchants licenses.
Mr.. Lyons.-Licenses are not included.
Hcstill wished to know why one basis, more
than other, would affect the people ofthe
country.
Mr.. Claiborne had pledged himself to
his constituents to protect his people, "a
gainst giving full representation to the CT
ties.
MrAnderson should vote gainst restric-
tons on the cities-as, in connection with
the subject of internal improvements, the
interests Of the cities and his constituents
were identicalIy the same.
! Mr. Strsughan.-For the very reason
why the gentleman from Botetcurt oppo-
SEES restriction, he (Mr. Straughan) should
vote for the restriction. He wished 10
limit the extended internal improvements
and the interests of his constituents de-
manded of him to sustain this restriction.
Mr.. Ferguson hadno idea of giving the
right to the cities to control the question of
internal Improvements. In voting for this
restriction he should but carry out the doc
trine of the delegates from Richmond who
had to-day voted for proposition A., which
robbed Richmond of one vote, to which
she was entitled He was in favor of put
ting bride on the wealth of the cities,
which, it was well known, grew most rap
idly.
Mr. Bcalc was inclined to indulge the
hope that this desPised t;de-water would
be enabled to put check on gentlemen
here. He should, in committee, vote a.
gainst this or any other amendment, though
he was free to say that he was opposed to
giving the Misrepresentation to the cities,on
account of the subject of internal improve
ments.
Mr.. Bolts saw no reason why the tax on
licenses should not legitimately be made a
part of the basis Of representation. That
tax was as much a tax, as any other tax
1t went into the public treasury. He was
surprised 10 see gentlemen, who contended
for the doctrine of giving representation to
property, fail to carry outthe principle and
be unwilling to give to the cities the bene-
fit Of the license tax also. 1t is strange that
men of property who move into town,
should be shorn of the political weight and
influence, which they had in the country,
on account ofthc same property. The on
ly plausible excuse is that there is not an
identity of interest between the CONNER
cial and agricultural interests.
Mr.. Wise, fhe were mixed basis man
could not vote against this restriction on
the cities. Believing that the population.
out of the cities, was not increasing in the
proportion TO the increase OF the cities he
should, OH any basis of representation, vote
for such restriction on the cities. He
should be found arrayed against the posi-
ton of the gentleman from Botctourt, in
connection with his argument on the sub
ject of Internal Improvement. He Mr..
Wise) had contended for the suffrage ba-
Sis, not only because 1t was right in princi-
pie, but because it was for the interests OF
the East-and now he appealed to the
members of the East to come to the res
cue. He thought that the gentleman from
Botetourt was acting against the interests
of the West in voting against this re-
striction. He must know that, if this
restriction be adopted, the delegates from
Richmond would not dare to vote for this
mixed basis proposition.
Mr. Anderson said that he was response
bic to his constituents alone, and the gent
man had no right to come betweenhim and
his duty.
Mr.. Wise also referred to the course of
Mr.. Bcale, as not consonant with the in
terest of his constituents.
Mr.. Beale hoped the gentleman would
allow him to pursue his own couse, to the
best of his Judgment.
Mr.. Wise had no idea Of interfering be-
tween gentlemen and their constituents
but the positions of the gentlemen from
Botetourtand Westmoreland were subjects
of fair ammadversion. Mr.. w. appeald to
the gentleman from Westmoreland to unite
with him in adopting this restriction, NOW
in Committee of the Whole, the best time
and place. so as to defeat the system of
log-roliing, to which, his own argument
must virtually lead the gentleman from
Botctourt. Mr. w. referred to the vast
difference In the assessed value Of large
country estates and small town lots, whose
fictitious wealth gave an undue influence
and power to towns and cities. He also
referred to the constitutions in Ohio, and
other States, where an exception had been
made against Cincinnati and other cities.
He went for the rural population in this
struggle with the cities.
Mr. jeff I. Martin said, lift was correct
that property should form principle of
representation, he should go for giving
weight to property. wherever it exists. A
check may be put on undue taxation, by
constitutional provisions, without incorpo-
rating the restriction on the basis of repre-
sentation. He should go for giving full
weight to population, this side as well as
the other side of the mountains-and, as
the committee had to-day decided to give
weight to property, he should also go for
giving full weight to property in the cities,
as we'll as in the country. The White Ba-
sis proposition sufficiently restricted the
cities.
Mr.. Claiborne had promised to his con
stitaents to allow Richmond not more than
three delegates, and he should vote accor-
dinghy. His constituents were much alarm
ed on the subject ofinternal improvements.
Whv is mt this the proDer time IN ndopf