Cooper's Clarksburg register. [volume] (Clarksburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1851-1861, 1852-03-24

you tnaL the Dill OF nights secures 70 the
majority of the people the right to change
their Virginia government, but the mi.
nority-I will not say ."despieable," mi.
nority-denies this right, and possessing
the governmental power endeavors C
prevent a change which all coneede is de.
sired by the majority of the people. Is
it nota dangerous attitude for them to
occupy?
Now ask the serious attention of gen.
tlemen to the views of that great man,
when considering that provision of the
constitution of the United States, which
prescribes the mode by which amend
ments shall be made. When comparing
it with our Bill of Rights, he denounced
the provision of the constitution of the
United States, because the minority could
prevent the majority from altering and
changing the form of government. He
tells you that by the Bill of Rights, upon
which the government of this State was
founded. this right of the msiority does
exist the right is vested in the majority
to alter and change the existing form OF
government whenever that form of gov
ernment is found to be unsuited for the
purpose of which it was created. But
sir, look to the views of other great men
of that day. Look to the opinion enter
tained by the great Jefferson-the head
of the republican church in this country.
He prepared constitution basing repre-
sentation upon suffrage but gentlemen
say he gave to the governor the veto
power. What if he did? How was rep
resentation affected by it? Does it in
the slightest degree affect representation ?
The great question is, how is the COM
munity to be represented? How is the
voice of the people to be heard in the leg
islatiYe halls? How that voice may be
placed upon it, does not in the slightest
degree affect the principle. No, sir, our
fathers of the revolution never intended
that principle so anti-republican as the
mixed basis should ever prevail in this
commonwealth. The past history of our
government shows that the mixed basis
WAS never intended to be fixed upon the
people as principle of representation in
the legislature.
There has been some little controversy
in reference to the senatorial districts that
were formed in the year 1916. It was
announced, 1 think with much proprietY,
by the friends of the suffrage basis that
these districts were formed according to
the white population of 1870 beg leave
to introduce Pa item of testimony to that
effect. 1t is known to this Committee
that the Legislature which met in the Fall
~ 1928, organized the Convention OF
l829-'S0, composed of ninety-six MEM
bers, four from each senatorial district.
1t has been stated upon this floor that the
senatorial districts were not laid off accor-
ding to the white population of 1910.
After the bill passed the legislature to
organize the Convention, the editor of the
Enquirer, in his paper of the 18th Feb.
1899, makes this statement under the
head of" Convention bill passed :"
The west claimed the basis of 1920.
The East that of 1910. The West said
they yielded enough of their rights in not
going for the free white population OF
1890. The East said that they yielded
some of their opinions and interests as re-
garded the counties, or slave population,
by consenting to the census of 1870"
That law was published in the same
paper, and reference was made to it again
as follows: Says Mr.. Ritchie. at
adopts the arrangement of the present
senatorial law. The districts are laid of
according to the free white population oi
the census of 1870" The gentlemen on
the other side bring forward the state
ment of Mr. TazeWell made in the last
Convention, for the purpose Of showing
that the senatorial districts were not SC
formed. In addition to the evidence here
tofore brought to the notice of this COM
mittee, present this item from the pen
of the editor of the Enquirer, one who il
well known to the committee. l take II
that the statement made by the Enquirer
at that time settles the question beyond
doubt, beyond controversy, Bnt look al
the action of the legislature in 1915,
brought to the notice of the Committee
by the worthy delegate from this city
Mr.. Davis, and see what the members Of
the House of Delegates at that time un'
derstood to be Che true basis Of represen-
tation in bodies representing the people
of the commonwealth. That bill adopted
the congressional districts allowing q
member for every 5000 free white per.
sons and l would invite the attention oI
gentlemen representing, on this floor, AL
bemarle and other counties of this com
monwealth, to the yeas and nays spread
upon the journal upon the passage of tha
bill. have endeavored to ascertain the
cause Of this change, and why it was tha
neighborhoods, counties and portions o
the State that held to the greatrepublicaI
principle of equal representation, when i
was their interest to do so, have sine,
abandoned it.
l have heretofore stated in this Com
mittee that it was my fortune to be
member of the House Of Delegates tha
convened in December. 1898, and con
tinued in session until 1929 ; and that tn
/ NoDvo,.;o. I:l =. -o.,aJ bry tba uous