Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1851-07-28

In The month Of July of the last year. fellow. citi
zens, received communication signed by between
and two hundred persons, asking that would de-
clare myself a candidate for the Convention then
about TO be elected amend the Constitution OF the
State, and at lie time requesting me 10 furnish
them with my views in regard to the various measures
Of reform proposed The first proposition | declined
not only because thought the people ought to be lett
Tree to select their agents. Tor so important trust
irrespective of their personal influence and popularity,
but because really had desire to be in the Conven-
tion-whie did not fee myself at liberty 10 withhold
any service that my friends might call upon me TO per-
| form.
The second request complied with, and sent them
letter embracing my general views the leading
questions of reform then spoken o-which letter was
published in all the leading papers of this city be
HeUe one and it il was not read, the fault was
not mine; every voter in the district was furnished
with the opportunity OF ascertaining my views before
he voted.
In that letter | said-"I am clearly in favor Of ex
tending the right ofsufrage so to make it as near
~ universal may be practicable and expedlent. My
observation and experience has long since satisfied me
that there is no Intermediate ground to be occupied
between freehold and universal suffrage, for many
reasons not necessary here to enter into.
Thus it will be seen that clearly in favor of
extending the right OF suffrage 10 all, aud by conse-
quence of subectng the property OF the country to
some extent to the CONTROL OF the non property hold
ders, who in the which ii is here employed would
constitute large majority OF the voting population in
perhaps every county of the State, and who would
therefore control the selection OF representatives to the
Legislature. Twas in favor of this because was not
one of those who believed all the WISDOM all the virtue
and all the intelligence OF the State, was lodged by
pnnsre with those whom fortune had favored with
abundance OF worldly goods; or in other words, be
eved that the experience OF seventy five years had set
tied what at the time of The adoption OF first consti
tuition unsolved problem-to wit: the capacity OF
man for self government, which was honestly and ear
nestly doubted by of the best and wisest men
of that day-and which had large share of influence
in the deliberations OF the Convention OF lS29-con-
rolled it in great degree, by those whose pre-
JUDGES and early conceived opinions on this subject had
, not been entirely eradcaed.
When declared myself an advocate for Universal
Suffrage it was because not only believed in the
pacity of iDih9ut, we'll in the ,oith pro-
pety for seltgovernment; but because thought the
poor quite as incapable OF approprlating the means
OF the rich to their purposes the rich could be OF APP
propratng the scanty ptance Of the poor their uses
because tho ught the virtue OF one quite as ust-wor
thy as that oil the Others because estimated men by
the qualities off the head and otthe heart and not by
the depths of their pockets or the length OF their purses
because believed this to be government OF men, and
not government of property because believed that
man made to control property and that property
was not made to control man; because believed that
in the philosophy OF government, in the philosophy
of nature, mind made to control matter and that
, matter not made to control mind; because l be-
lieved that wealth and arstocracy had quite enough
land my taste far much) influence and extraneous
Importance attached to it, without ENGRAVING upon
the observation-disclosures | was anxious to establish
as far as could political equality among all men, from
the ordes arstecrat to the humbest and the poorest
peasant because believed that men who called
upon to fight the battles of the country should have
voice in determining the question OF peace or war; be-
cause believed the right ofsufrage greatperso
nal right, that ought not to DE sold a picayune
a head, and because l did not believe the pay
ment of tax of ten cents was any proof o his
interest in or attachment to the Institutions OF The
State; because l believed that the honest ndustri-
GUS, poor man. the mechanic, the day laborer, that
lives by the sweat OF his brow, and spends tor his family
to-day the earned profits OF his labor OF yester
day. was entitled to be ranked above the goods and
chattels, the cattle and beasts of the field, of his
favored aad wealthy neighbor; in short, because L
believed that property was entitled to PROTECTION ONLY,
while man, 'the Lord OF CREATION, "made after Gods
own image, alone entitled TO representation: aud
with these views firmly impressed upon my mind, how
could have voted for mixed bass that would have
given more weight tc property than to men how could
have sustained proposition that gave orty-nine re-
representatives. to the PROPERTY OF the East, and only
thirty three to the PEOPLE fthe East? how could
have yielded TO measure that req tired twelve thou
sand souls to offset every thousand dollars oaxa
ton as the only means oil protecting the property of
the rich from the rapacity OF the poor, and at the
moment have subjected the selection OF those repre-
ssntatives TO the control OF the very men who had
little property of their own. Such
would have been too inconsistent and absurd TOR hui
man ingenuity to reconcile
Nor was this the only objection to the propostionI
was called on to vote,for; and could not have
tanned it without surrender of all claim to Wing
slstency and proprety.
Would any Wing ask me to vote for proposition
which gave an unequal and unjust representation to
Democratic counties, Democratic men, and Democra-
tic taxes, over Wing counties, Wing men, and Wing
taxes What did the mixed basis proposed by the
committee do? 1t made in one instance, ten Demo-
cratic counties, sending ten delegates offset Wing
counties, also sending ten Delegates-while the pop
ulaton In the democratic counties was only 81 400,
and in the Wing counties the population SO 375;
and the taxes paid in the Democratic counties
only $33 9l9, while the taxes paid in the Wing coun-
ties were $62,245 What equality justice was there
In this Again, in another instance, 81, 1872 popula
ton in Democratic counties made offset II 97l
in Wing counties; while the Democratic counties paid
only 1874, JOY taxes, and the Wing counties paid $685.
0ol taxes Again, other Democratic counties, where
the population is nearly equal $27 1871 OF taxation is
made to balance $39,34l taxes in Wing counties -
Again 1896 population in Democratic counties is
made to balance 5S.5l2 in Wing counties, and $l2,-
42s in taxes to balance $2O,3lS taxes in Wing coun-
ties and again. in another instance l05 $3.50 popu alton
in Democratic counties is made to balance 1873 1874
population in Wing counties, and $s7,763 taxes to ba-
lance $106 1874 of Wing laxes-and so on throughout
Democratic Chesterfield, with 1864 population, pay.
ling 81, 1859 taxes, is made to balance Wing Albemare,
with tl,736 population, and paying 81 ,263 of taxes,
WINE the city OF Richmond, which on their own mix
&c oaels would be entitled TO eleven representatives,
was only to be allowed four Bul besides all this it
was such an arrangemen, as would have required
a majority of the Legislature
Now, does any Wing complain of me for voting
against such proposition as this II So all can say
is that am at loss to know how any Whg could be
reconciled to vote tor it, For farther developments in
detail on this subject, refer to my printed speech
the basis question.
But wish to enquire why 100000 persons East
OF the mountains, entitled to fourteen repre- entaves
more than 100000 persons West of the mountains 3
Was it because they more vir,uous more n'ei-
gent,or more patriotic? Not at all Il was put on no
such ground but because they wealthy;
because they had more property; and is it for repudia
ting such principle as this, that am to be condemned
in this age OF reform and in this free country? Do
those who have heretofore supported desire to see
this Distinction this inequality established between the
rich and the poor! Ii so, confess they made a great
mistake when they sent to the Convention d reor-
mer, as supposed, to oblerate such odious and an
n fhp Drinc iDlo no onnH
one let carry to its legitimate results and see
in what it will end.
II minority of rich men east the mountains are
entitled to larger share of political power than
IJorty OF poor west OF the mountains why should
not minority OF rich men on the south side of James
River, be entitled to political power than ma
jortv of poor the north side of the river? And