Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1851-06-23

~
ofthe Commitfee. One wss that the geo.
graphical division was preserved in the
State. and the other was 70 tia manner of
rc-apportionment- He went little furth-
cr. and said he was willing to concede ono
majority in his report he was willing to
come downt to 1870, so as 10 have the re-
apportionncnt totakc effect in 1870 Now,
| wish just FOR a few moments to sec, not
exactly what position gentlemen occupy
who prefer the white or suffrage basis, as
understand them, to the report Of the
compromise committec--thc so-tallcd com
promise committee so often referred toby
my friend from the city Of lsichmond-but
wish TO see what position gentlemen &C.
cupy who vote TO sustain the proposition
offered by the gentleman from Fauqnier, and
announced as preferable proposition to
the report Of the committee.
Now, what is heproposition Of the gen.
iIcman from Fauquierl
Mr.. STANARD. 1.-THE gentleman will
allow me a word in reply to the remark he
has made, desire 10 say that the only vote
which, have given upon this question has
been upon the motion to strike out the pro-
position Of the committee. acknowledge
IS between the proposition Of the commit
f-e, and the proposition of the gentleman
from Fauquier, | prefer the proposition Of
fhc gentleman from Fauqnicr. But no
i,an is authorized to say, from any thing /
llve said here or elsewhere, that the pro.
ro5ition Of the gentleman from Fauguier
tninanded my appreciation. Iprcferred
1t as between The two as the least Of two
eyils. | voted 20 strike that proposition
out--tlic only vote taken.
Mr.. MARTIN. / made the statement
as made by the gentleman from Fauquier,
len he presented his proposition. | pre-
si'nc he was listening to my statement
'f had stated him incorrectly, he would
fasc corrected me. | am aware of the
fact Of the vote Of the gentleman from the
-city of Richmond. But | ask him if upon
lat occasion the report Of the committee
hadbeen stricken outifhe would have voted
TO n1sert,Ac proposition offered by my friend
from the county Of Fauquicrl
= Mr.. STANARD. l should have voted
PROFESSIONALLY upon the motion 10 insert
] have no hesitation now in stating that
preferred other proposiiions-proposition:
which believe might have been carried
to the proposition OF the gentleman from
Fauquicr. If he desired my individual
opinion upon the subject
Mr. MARTIN. No. / merely asked
for the statement whether he would have
voted to insertl
IN Mr.. STANARD. If ! had so voted in
committee of the Whole. ! should have
conp4ed with that vote distinct dcclara.
ton that voted for that time, and for thai
purpose, without a final commitment as to
my course.
Mr. MARTIN. I understand. The gen
tleman makes various qualifications as &c
how he was voting. Ii he had voted tc
insest 1t he would have stood now before
this House precisely in reference to that
prososirion as the friends of the compromise
c5,lmiltcc stand in reference TO their re-
r6rt--he would have voted for it. / was
going on to say how the report stood as
contiastcd with the proposition Of compro.
mise sub nitted by hegentleman from Eau.
1iier. Now he gives majority oftwelve
IN the Senate, and says he was willing to
give in the house fourteen to the west
iio stated he was willing to reduce the
majority TO two. He would have had a
Senate with majority of twelve instead
of a Senate with a majority often. Now,
Z state distinctly and wish to be UNDER
stood. from the first moment entered into
his Convention, when heard the PROPOSE
ton coming from eastern gentlemen, when
| st.I h., ,,it n.
menas to thefnanncr in which they wished
70 have the legislative department organic
ed that have ever been opposed to put
ing ono house upon one basis and the other
asouse upon the other. But state further,
and in that statement will be sustained
by every eastern gentleman who hears me,
that while in nearly all the plans of COM
promise, they wished to put one house upon
onebasis and the other upon the other, still
as an ultra proposition, as an eastern pro-
position, as a proposition for protection
preferred even to the mixed basis in both
houses, very many Of my friends early in
the session preferred the Senate upon taxa
non, and the lower house upon the suffrage
lasis--as an original proposition and not as
efropositlon Of compromise. l however
very soon saw that no compromise could
be effected except by a division of the
houses
ID Now, lust few words further in refer
cnce To NATTER TO some extent, personal
10 myself, and | viii detain this Conven-
t.ga 10 longer. | say, as have said, that
no proposition of compromise could be cf-
tecird which did not have a division of the
two Houses for its basis. The proposition
of the gentleman from Fauquier (Mr.
Scoti,) was to base the Senate upon taxa
'ion and the House upon the suffrage ba-
SIS.
v hen | submitted proposition to this
body some days ago, that they should raise
committee to sec whether, if practicable,
tins question could not be adjusted; and
when 1t was raised, was earnestly in the
hope that they would come to some har
p..ious determination. And allow me to
say, presented that resolution, not doubt
ing the correctness and propriety of doing
so, aid for the reason that thought it the
best mode OF obtaining fair and final set
element Of this question.
" hen in the committee knew that the
eastern delegation preferred Senate up
on taxation, and also House upon the
suffrage basis. | stood out day and night
for that proposition, although l knew the
tact that the proposition which we have re.
ported is even better for the district l re-
presented than Senate based wholly upon
taxation. have surrendered my indivil-
ual views and opinions in order. if practi-
cable. 70 get the support and concurrence
O, eastern gentlemen, whom knew wish
ed upon that plan, to adjust this question:
but | found that could not be effected
We obtained proposition which l think
"a equivalent to 1t, because 1t 81, es a Senate