Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1851-03-18

of lila happiness; and so of all other properly
WA view Of the subject is sustained by the lahsu.s
Of bill Of rights when ds f tse eoneon benefit
a..,cn and tccuIity Of the people, nation OF con-
n,nn;t,J-uot even mentioning proPertv' NOW, 'u'o
m.tn,t .ndeavor which has heretofore been nauc ~
make property and persons distinct ana pal t
~ ,oyenment with distinct and parallel rights has not
been without meaning and pnrpos" with no
in act than that OF enrolling property 70 Tie "eiSh'
and dignity of man. with intent to give It's owners Po
tical power 1t is not denied that man IL e'.~. ="
protection in his rights OF property a. no ~ ~
&c !, bs eonal and Il is denied that it emobles hIn
II il most confidently denied that it the chel fist :"
n.n ot chief interest of man. The protectioh o .e
personal rights as they are usually Is'i"', W; ~
hnitely more moment TO our happiness ""no". =, 'n'
r;iv Of these rights our rights OF property them
- .a ,.aea. So clearly is this the natural con-
vc,on = the public mind that our opponents ever IN
,r;,v ,,ace personal rights before the rights OF
nronartv-ai 1.-THE rights Of persons ana Things
rn NOT of things and persons WIZ not argue ,ul
ther this superiority and precedence OIL personal =
!, Is hon.d that none will seriously deny 1t Yet II
NJ. ,s ,r,,s upon what principle can they claim the
;gbt of rule for minority with inferior interests
over q majority with superior interests 1ngy hase
rights Of persons, but of inferior amount nav, nave
rights of property but inferior IN amount e' "''e'
ent in quantity not in quniity ,.
Rut i is commended BY the opposition TINT ihe ~eF'
cau have nothing to fear for their personal rights from
the e,s because they have similar interests win Us vi
these subects-and how are they fmllar' Decnuse
bey have the same kind of rlghts Now tue very ''
INV i. said of the west III regard to property: We
have the very same kind of property in every
Ru let ia look at this excuse for controlling tue
sonal rights of the west in another point OF view
canuo. thew do injustice to the west nave not ."'
the sam, right the same power. and the same
tiop TINT the west would have under the ~hi'e paSs
wrong ,hcmi II is said that we could tax s,e"
tho fgN
no, i would be our interest do 80, and therefore We
would do it. Suppose this true; cannot the east
opprcss the upon the same or even ~, Ill
reasons, in this very point OF taxaton I.ar
tax the production Of salt, when oen'. ,., and ds
sIon mon the wcst They could tax hea'iis h'' VIZ
rronortionn,ey live stock which cannot De o,'eu ~
Y;, in the greatest quantity in the west ana ". ";
induc.ment precisely would exist Us WIN 10 I'D n
how.v.r that the east being the consumes y: ~ ~
iooet my this tax on live stock-to my why
H. as, 7 need make no reply tn thl'-for th's M M
lam, INC, demonstrated to their own satiTla','" |
cone,n,rs do not pay the duty; but I" my 'u:,
brethren who are unfortunate Us h"' =. ~ :, Js
tbs species of logic, will SIMPLY say li,h' W, [ mn,
w.. T., ~ hose the reasoning on-the east aoes nv
o.o nm. half of them and it could therefore 1''.'
!, c,nfct V th nv position only rs to extent ''',
49, ~ nr;nc;nle But what is still more direct na
pab, than even these instances Is tue " .h, and
cast have perfect and uncontrolled es1a h cn,ir.
present and direct petuniary llv.,es nol instead Of
nronortv tax This would most muruerou'-. r. ia
ibc west, and vet is within the conpie's ~. !, would
cast mud a. certainly her p"cuniarf Iha,, named
be that Of the west 10 tax their Si' ,,c, onres.on
tbrs. ~ among the many ways III VIM n snl;oc
. o., un3er the property b.-ls even o' NV
- .a~",;n But this is not ALL the east nave "'o'.
,olJ ,ower to make do personal ser'i ~ 60" -
.nt-tLey could compel lis TO work the Io'''i' ."s
the Blue Ridge for any portion .. o' ,v many dnys
h.y conld compel Us to do militia duty aa many
- ~ vcar without compensation as they lnighl oes'te
h co,,lJ cou,p. us to rendezvous at hlcnmo',' uni
cr any given length Of time amuse ,ne eiiee " I
.ond seven hl.dcity" By our barbarc uhiio ms ,'
military evolutions. In time OF war ,ley eoain
~. UNEQUAL or entire defence OF the common" e''
and III. protection of the property OF the east a.no'
w - frn,, o,,r very position safe from inc raN"osn "
n,s and necuuiarily disintere-ted Nor Is ~ TOO '':
tain ,at our friend. would then carry our le'
nI.4 by declaring their peculiar interest III .io ~
and by demanding a property representation ~ INV
"an I'M, On the contrary it is than possible UNI.
for the first time in the history oi the STAKE 'ne,
cnnansc.nd to admit our equality ot repre.en'a:.'n
might possibly forgive us our poverty aua isJ''''
numbers ,,,, ,bev miaht do
H., !; contande by them that the east never mas "
n.vor sill do these things. Without adm.lius;
mi, 10 be true-upon what reasoning 90 nv | ,ac,
sunnositionl Is It because they are not - 'as" ~
mary ntereetor because th"s ha's nps and that
Local. r;rb, No, There can be but ono reason a'' ,"".
;,b9 their sense of Justice or Their sensc I'll
anJ viii not tLe same reasons control the "''t' u
hnJ ,he now,r under like temptations for 'n'',.
sake nav. for very deccncys SAKE koS us ,h.v
admired The very fact that the east "i'esl Vac. ~
- NO, dome ia Injustice when they were ar'.ti! ~
., - ., do 9, in their own sense OF the wora in'e'
s, Nv the plaineet reasoning e@tol'. 'h',. 10, va;
oIia;no :bot tho west would do Otherwise. a''A'',I
l,, ,ba most bare faced seshneso hl'i es",'sn'
induce such concluslon-eueh 10 l N''" Vs.
b. guilty OF. :, ara q Thousand laws
io.;u =, nsrsna rights and even relating 10 HoPIu.H
.u,h IA the question Of capital phhlshies' .Sotnn
marry and in fact every law except ,n' :" 'rIol
which may propose to apply "uaa and vet thu
hnl peonle have an equal interest IN the'.
IN mon tho subjects Of most vital mp"r' shoe INV,
h ,here exists the widest diversity OF opinion
and desire the majority are PowererT anu a. ~ h.na
Of the minority Under the alleged p ossuj, mower
uaiustly taxed, our opponents usafP "i'''''
over every species OF legislation. a.. minor
canuo, pass from the consideration Oh ',,'7 n.',,
mr. zion without referring to AN az eai'"u
m.nt. wa.,h has been fsr"rite with lh' ho,lJ
tn, ,ll i. tiat "taxation and representation sl',
49, .9.,ber a.,i are inscparaGe companions Mu'"a',y
5snsn1sn, On each other That such was Tue lHih.t
r ,bcb car fathers struggled aud bled III tue fesoiu
zion Now moments consideration rs .i;oa, "
satisfy us that this is neither true IN met n' Fol, ri
g , II ia true that fathers denied the rRh, Vi
| b. Eno,;h Parliament to tax thenl-but upon what
a;Jsrot;ona was this denial basedf lhere are houI
,rIa 40 not know them The most enlightened anu anu
ln, Of the colunis,s contended that they were l'
Of the British empire aud subjects 81 the lrll'i sro~
md tbet as such subjects, they were Is af a.
lila entitled TO the rights Of Engshieii under '' YOU
.,ituion and that under that constitution
the voluntary grants gifts of tho Parliament, T,
acted for the people whom they represented nu. Una,
,hsy wero separate political bodies and not part oil
Ens,audthat they stood in the same relation 10 her
Which scotland bore her before the union win Eggs
a,ures Of their own and not represented III rara"el'
md that therefore Parliament could not gTaut 10 Tue
King what was not theirs to grant But ana thry CUM
tLs right Of representation in the British Parliament
would they have oons.nted 10 accept representation
in nro,ortion TO their tayatoni Would they consent
to accept pymy voice in the granting OF supplies from
,hs rockets Of the people Of London aud Liverpool" or
in arranging the game laws of Yorkshire or N"r'hu.
hrIana and by hs, acceptance throw themselves com
ntey ut the uncontrolled despotism OF the brltlrh
par,;ament, No! no such scheme was advocated de-
.;rsl or hoped for They had the rights OF Eng4hmen
without being part OF England. They were not y,
,rasent.d In Parliament and were yet subjects OF the
.ap,s King They had legislative bodies OF their own
o ..nJ FAX themselves which they rpud have done,
ansar',rc TO acknowledged rights of Englishmeu' and
,rh;.b ,bey contendod they had brought with them.
Thsy were Americans, with tho rights OF EngliSime'
~, snnose that to he conceded which is denied thnt
a., cl,.- wished for representation III farhh'sht u
,ax.I Did they claim majority IN that body or could
hiatt not nI