Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1851-05-09

thus constituted to carry out that Will and Judgment OF
the constituent body Representation then cannot ay
list without suffrage Take away suffrage and represent.
alton Is necessarily gonehere is nothing left TO rem
resent; aud take from the constituent BODY the ability
moral or physical to constitute and there is no will or
OF the thing represented be carried ont by the
representative agent Consequently the destruction of
suffrage destroys representation with it. and when rep
reseuaton Is taken away, suffrage is but ms the idle
wind that floats around take it then that suffrage
and representation are correlative terms-onc cannot
exist without the other The prncp that governs one
must necessarily govern the other and the upon
when one Is exercised must be carried out by the other
on might rs we'll attempt to separate and effect
rs to separate suffrage and representation because su
rase but the that produces representation Is
the idea clear 1t does to ME that it is undenu.
ole that suffrage and representation but cause and
effect the one dependent upon the other and that the
restriction of the restriction of the other and the
extension OF the one necessarily extends the other To
my mind the proposition is perfectly automatic.
The proposition for which am contendng seems to
have been understood by the gentleman from Fauquier
Mr.. Scorr) IN the same way that understand it. For,
in argument delivered by him some time since upon
the subject under consideration, he said that suffrage
should be exercised BY those in whom the political
power is lodged was pleased TO hear that gentle
an enunciate that proposition for to my mind It lS
cear and ndisputabe truth Suffrage, then, Is to be
exercised by those in whom the political power is
lodged aud the Judgment of political power is the
terring of the right of suffrage If you lodge political
power in the freeholders you give the right of suffrage
20 the reeholders. If the political power is lodged
with the male adults Of the commonwealth the right of
suffrage must be extended to them And Il the political
power is lodged i'll the aggregate masses of the
nonweah the very lodsn! OF That power there
ties with it the right of suffrage. After discussing the
ubect of suffrage, and laying down in that discussion
the proposition which have alluded that gentleman
passed to the discussion of the subject of taxation and
hc ri sht to tax slaves, and then the argument lie
aoanced was, that political power by representation
should be lodged in the slaves because they taxed
Now il you take the two propositions of that gentleman
and put them together, you bound in carrying out
the principles of the two to extend the right OF suffrage
Ito the slaves Suffrage he says should be exercised by
those in whom che political power is lodged and then
political power should be lodged in the slaves because
they are taxed AS before stated was delighted to
hear the first proposition of the gentleman but my JOY
was turned into when heard him announce the
second. And l thought it time We should clothe
ourselves in sackciOth aud ashes when propositions
enunciatel here which, acted out would necessarily cX
tend the right of suffrage TO the slaves. know that
gentleman had such Intention and do not al ude to
it with any such view but show the lnonstrous
suits to which the ablest minds sometimes Brought.
when defending But again, if suffrage and rep
Presentation not necessarily connected and
effect, why do all people, aud why will withhold
the right of suffrage from idiots and lun.tics They
have rights we'll Others They have the rights Of
person and the rights Of property and it is much the
duty Of government protect those rights in this class
If the community those of the Why, then do
| we withhold the right of suffrage from them What
is the for it! For in nm assembiagc like this,
called together to lay deep and broad the fundamental
fpr.cpcs o government we ought to have reason for
all We do Is not the reason for this be found in the
act that idiots and unatics have not the power of mind
hat would enable them to constitute representative!
IAN YOU assign any other 1t is to be found then in
he simple fact that they have no Judgment will. or
desire to be reflected and they therefore unable
| ativ
would lie nothing to represent they have no will TO
reflected through their representatives But gentle
ncn propose to constitute representatives tor them
But would representatives agents thus constituted.
DC their agents, the agents of those by whom ap-
pointed! If were TO appsint agent to attend to
our peculiarly affairs in the city OF New ORGANS or In
Philadelphia would such agent be your representative
il We're by power of attorney. a. authorize the gen
einan from Fauquier. (Alr. Scorr to attend to Your
ccuutry affairs in the city of New Orleans, would not
5ha, agency he null and void And why Because he
could not be representative in that matter, having
eved power or authority from you to therein
And The authority he would have would be derived
from who has interest in that matter to be
cuted carried out. ! have right, interest in
rour pccuniary affairs nt New Orleans and the appoint
uent Of agent my part To attend to them, woulc
DC Ill appointment which had no right to make. Now
take the idiot lunatc, aud give to y, b. or {, tht
appointment Of representatives for him to attend To hi
political rights in the legislative department Of the GOV
srnment and would not such appointment be nudity
Nv friend before ME from Caroline Mr.. Scorr has
interest in the rights of person or OF property OF TIL
idiot or unatic in his neighborhood And the appoint
nent of an agent bv him. act for that idiot luna
c DESTROYS the agency: for it the appointment BY
onc for another in matter in which the appoint
ing power has interest and therefore no right 10 up
i point And the legal proposition, rs received by a.
LAWYERS and all courts is that agent to have powe
0 act must receive the power from the person in whom
the right resides If that is true III law, why Is 1t n"
true h. re If the principle is true when applied to al
egal proceedings why is that principle to bc Gisre
{ ,arded here. in attempting to apply principles to tn
amc rules of action From every view of this sub]ee
that have been able to take, it appears to me vcr
clearly that We cannot separate suffrage and represen
alton without a total violation of all principle and 81
1 reason.
think it is very evident the difficulty of separain:
suffrage and representation presented itself with muc
force to the mind Of the great Upshur in the Convention
If 49,? and So and i'll view of that difficulty he at
tempted to provide OF escape. And having pro
vided that upon which to found I'm ingenious argument
ne has furnished that upon which all eastern gentleine
based their support OF the mixed or combined basis
And that's that property is entitled to protection and
because entitled to protection it should be represented
That the right of protection carries with it the right
representation Rights, they, two fold thcrisnt
Il personS and of property We all know where
}, his division of rights is drawn But Blackstone in hi
ivis;on of rights into the rights Of persons. and In
N lights of things intended to convey reasonable de
!, md not an absurdity. The whole argument here
ased upon the supPoSon rs 1t appears to me- that til
light Of man is one thing, and the right Of things to
ally distinct thing. Did such idea ever enter til
mind OF Blackstone in writing nj commentaries D
that great law-writer imagine t;t in the futur
,yes of the world his position should be perverted int
ne idea that property possessed rights per Suc
IN idea never entered the mind of that great man,
3 suppose that it did, is doing great injustice TO hi
i memory Pr. pery has no rights apart from the right
y ,f persons. And the only opinion ever minated b
blackstone was the right Of the owner in the property
+ But the whole argument here based upon the suppo
tiop that the things have rights in themselves tina
LAIN the protection ofthe government. But is that so
;. now hold an orange in my hand it Is my propert,
What right has this orange toprotection from the gov
peat Why according to the argument OF the sentlena
rom Richmond city, (alr. MEREDITH made some time ag
flint il is the duty of government to protect roPer
oa;nst persons- would infer that he meant that II wa
Le duty of government to protect this orange from ben
:, eaten. daughter Such would be the natural co:
+ ;,ructon OF his argument but that, am sure was nc
his meaning Doubtless he meant that 1t was tue dnt
If the government protect the rights OF proPert
. ,eaipst people But even then, he involves himself |
: difficulty rs great the other For then the argt
nent rightly understood, would mean that it was tn
: jtv of the government to protect the rights OF tn
people in their property against the people theuseve
That would confer upon government the night TO Inter
Fore with private rights and to intefere with then