Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1851-05-02


Saunders, Seymour, Shelley, Sloan, Smith of ]
Smlh OF u, Snodgrass, Stephenson, Stewart of M
WHAT WaE w sa wife, Wa nay9 Of s. ISg .. Van
Wysor-64. "'
NoEs-Messrs. Mason, Speaker, Arthur, Banks Ba,
bour' B,eae, Bowden, Bowes, Braxton Burgess Cham
munds, Edwards, Fmney, Flood, Fuqua Garland, M
Garnett, Goode, Hall, Hill, Janney Jasper, Jones
Leake, Lyon, Lynch, Lyons, McCandsh, Martin
Scott OF F., Shell, Smith Of N, Smith OF K and @
SnoWden, Southall, Stanard, Sraughan, Tredway, Tu
ms, , iufrneull, Wallace, Watts OF NJ Whe, VIII
MI. Boris Withdrawing his proposition, the amend
ment of Mr.. Bowden went with it,
MT SUMMERS moved to strike out all of proposition
A. except the first and last sections The effect of THU
motion would be strike out all concerning the basis
representation, and 10 leave the section for the appor
tonment OF members OF Congress- according to the
Federal constitution
4 Mr.. BEALE said he would make motion that would
take precedence OF this, because it would strike out
smaller portion OF proposition A. As MI B. subse-
quenty perfected his proposition it III these TERMS
Strike out sections 2 and Of proposition A and IN
sert the following:
Representation in both legislative bodies shall be ap
portloned amongst the countess cities and towns
ding to the number OF white inhabitants contained and
the amount OF all taxes paid in each, deducng from
such taxes all taxes paid on law process. licenses
and capitatlon tax paid by free negroes. In making
such apportionment delegate shall be allowed for
every part ofthe said inhabitants, and one delegate
forevery part of aid taxes.
SEC. 4-lst line. Strike out "afer" and insert "in !"
Do. 9th line. Add at the end land capitation
tax raid by free negroes"
| Do. 9Th line. Strike out the word "seventy- five"
| Mr.. Boris inquired il this not the same PROPOSE
| ton that was voted upon yesterday?
| Several members said no-the proposition was 10
deduct the tax paid by free negroes
Mr.. WISE called for the reading Of the whole propo-
| sion as it would be if amended, and it was read
Mr.. RANDOLPH asked for information, what the effect
If. hE2
blish the Mixed Basis proposed in the Convention of
1879, 1t should have his support. He went on TO say
ne ne was bound to vote tor tive propostons one was
understood 10 the Convention OF 49, Thus far he was
bound TO by his obligations to his constituents His
conscience would not permit him to 60 farther in the
other direction. He referred TO the example of Eastern
men 10 the former Convention. Judge Marshall and
Mr.. Leigh receded from the Mixed Basis when it had
been voted down. and each proposed a compromise
That Of Judge Marshal would now give six majority
to the East. Mr.. Leighs still farther and if now
applied would give # not an equality actual majo-
rity 10 the West. This was the action Of those men
when the West was in the minority. How different had
been the of the majority in this body Insult had
been added to injury by demanding unheard of ba-
Bis, which was more exaclng than that formerly pro-
posed Besides the course Of discussion on the part of
Eastern members had been most unwise and unconci-
atine He feared that those who here as the ad-
vocates OF the Mixed Basis would prove its worst enc
mics. He protested that his attachment to the State
extended all its limits, from the Atlantic to the
Ohio, from the Potomac to the Roanoke.
Mr. SCOTT Of F. could sit still aud suffer the gen.
teman to utter his rebuke to Eastern members without
reply He was pleased to rebuke what he termed the
majority Mr.. S. apprehended the vote OF yesterday
proved that this majority was minority. The gentle
man said he stood committed to the mixed basis though
his own Judgment condemned it. But it was the mixed
basis proposed in the Convention OF 1929. BY what
authority did he make this assertion The records and
debates OF that Convention proved ncontestbly that
the mixed basis OF 1929 was identical with that
proposed. IT the gentleman stood pledged the for
mer he stood pledged to support the proposition against
which he voted yesterday. Mr. S. did not mean to in
terpose between the gentleman and his constituents but
when he charged upon Eastern gentlemen that they
not sustaining the principle commended for in the late
Convention he chose to corret him and let the truth be
known. In reply to Mr.. RS assertion, that Eastern
members had pursued an Insulting course, Mr.. S. ad-
verted to the TACT that Western members had dis
closed reir purpose Of secedng from the body they
could not effect their object by discussion, and had
sought to carry their point by intimidation. Eastern
members had said nothing in the way OF denuncation.
But Western gentlemen had denounced us; they had
called arsocras, had accused of proposing what
was degrading to the West, of meaning to place the
negro equality with our brothers of the West
The gentleman from Mason (Mr. Fisher had suggested
that should insert provision specifying the number
OF delegates who would represent the negroes. Was
this an argument! or was 1t intended only to iname
the public mind2
Mr.. FISHER said he only meant express to tbs Con-
vention his utter abominaon OF this negro equality
He spoke Tor his constituents but for himself alone
and disclaimed any desire to nfame the public mind.
Mr. SCOTT could not be convinced that the suggestion
Of Mr. F. not better calculated to have that effect
than TO Influence the judgment OF members. He pro-
ceeded 10 comment on the charge of Western gentle
men that the East proposed what was degrading and
spoke at some length the point that we cannot con-
sstenty abandon the mixed basis degrading free
men, and at the same time adhere to the Federal Con-
stituton. Mr. S. addressed his remarks particularly to
the argument OF Mr. Summt rs and called upon him to
explain wherein the Federal basis right between
the States, and would be wrong and degrading in Vr
GINA He asked Mr. S. why he had not moved to strike
all of proposition A, and why he retained the last
section, which provided Tor appooning Congressional
representation on Federal numbers?
Mr. SUMMERS at this point, inquired il the gentleman
willing to substitute the Federal basis for the mixed?
Mr. ScoTr of F. replied that, in hsjudment the mixed
basis the wises safest and most just He believed
the white basis to be the most mschevous that had been
proposed. And although ne had not been the advocate
of applying the Federal basis 10 this State he should
hesitate for it in preference the white ba-
SIS In conclusion, he returned to the declaration of
Mr. Randolph, and repeated that he could permit it
to go to the public without correction; that the basis
insisted upon by the East not the basis advo-
Gated by the East in the Convention Of 1929.
Mr.. RANDOLPH said he was not satisfied that the
mixed basis now proposed was the same with that
tanned by the East iii 1929. AS understood Mr. RS
view, he considered the combination of population and
taxation then proposed by Judge Green scheme by
which all the lin dollas be added to all
the white population, and common divisor adopted
tor the aegregat quantity In regard to the character
of the de bate either side, Mr.. R adverted to
preston which fell from the gentleman fiom Fauquier
early period OF the session, in which he spoke Of
the white basis exposing Eastern property TO PLUMBER
Mr.. SCOTT OF f., said most satisfactory explanation
OF this matter had taken place in the Convention be-
tween hmeelf and the gentleman from Kanawha' LMr.
Summersl which he presumed, Mr. r. had not heard
So far from mpugnng the integrity ofthe Western peo-
pie he had expressed the opinion that the mixed basis
would ultimately give them majority, and declared
that in that event he would be coent to power pass
to the West.
Mr.. RANDOLPH remarked that the manner as well az
the matter of Mr.. S. was calculated give offence
He referred likewise to some remarks OF MIR. Purkins
which he considered imprudent.
Mr. STANARD convinced that the gentleman
from AIbemare only desired to arrive at facts and he
begged his attention the proof afforded by the De-
bates of the Convention of 49, that the Mixed Basis
then proposed the with that now proposed
Mr.. S. then read from the volume, where Mr. Leigh
states that the basis proposed by the amendment of
Carolina. He cited also speech Of Judge Green him