Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1853-07-07
THE PLURALITY PRINCIPLE.
REMARKS OF
Hon. VIII SON,
(DkLEeATE ron EATIcK)
IN the Constitutional Convention, May %, 1858.

(DELEeATE ron EATIcK,)
IN The Constitutional conuention, May "a, 1858.
~
PhonOgrqphtcaliy reported for the Commonwealth.
had not intended, Mr. President, to take any
part in this debate. | did suppose that any rea
sons l could give, could influence the Judgment of
the Convention But, sir, the gentleman from Fran
ingham Mr. Train, has INDUCED in some remarks l
do not choose TO let pass IN silence. That gentle-
man expresses his surprise that gentlemen who have
advocated the calling of this Convention, stand here
now IN opposition to the adoption Of this plurality
rule. lie is astonshedthat gentlemen should adhere
TO that good old Democratic principle that the
Jority should govern-a principle adhered to in this
Commonwealth Tor more than two centuries. He
accuses gentlemen who have taken leading part in
calling this Convention, OF changing, iront--of fol-
lowing military lead. Sir, il the gentleman from
birmingham, Mr. Train, understood better the pre-
else position of affairs in this Commonwealth he
would not indulge in these reflections. IL he UNDER
stood the political affairs of Massachusetts for the
past lew years he would know thai at least one
portion OF The people who have carried this Con
vention-men whose zeal and advocacy have con-
iributed IN nc slight degree bring us here-haye
opposed il, oppose il, and will continue 10 OBJ
pose IL TO the bitter end. Sir, admit thar some
gentlemen whose laboIs have contributed 10 carry
the Convention have advocated the plurality system
they now advocate is and regret to see thai they
mean to continue their advocacy of il. But, sir, !
venture to saw that large majority Of the menswho
carried this Convention IN November last, were then
and are opposed to departing from the majority
system and adopting The plurality rule in all our
elections. Had the gentleman from Framingha ham
expressed his amazement at the strange change
which has come over his political associates, who,
lew years ago, chung to the majority system with all
the ienacty OF CONVICTION, he would have given ex-
preston to what al! Of us must feel as we witness
the scenes around us.
The gentleman from birmingham does not under
stand how it IS that this majority principle is con-
sidered by some Of US as democratic idea. Sir,
profess to be Democrat-I use the word 10 lis true
seHse-yes sir, profess to be one Of the 'Demo-
cratic Democrats and, according to my poor appre
hension, the right Of the majority rule is coexten
sive with the right TO have government at all. If
government exists at all among men, the American
principle is that ii exists by the consent of the peo-
| plethe majority Of the people who alone can give
that consent. The delegate for Wiibraham, Mr.
HaIleu, in his statesmanlike speech, to day-a
speech not to be answered here or elsewhere has
placed this question before in its true light.
whenever or wherever we depart from that idea,
whether We adopt the plurality rule, or any~ather
rule which allows less than majority to rule, we
depart from that fundamental democratic principle,
that American idea underlying all our American
institutions. That Commonwealth that approaches
the nearest to universal suffrage, and which requires
the consent OF majority Of the people in the cleo
ton oil public servants, maintains in the most perfect
Iidnhef the iuea OIL Il ueHocralici commonwealth. /
disagree entirely, sir, with the idea thrown out bv
! the distinguished member from Taunton, Gov. Nor
| ton, and assented TO by the distinguished member
from Pitished, and some other members, that If the
! people assent 10 the plurality rue-a rule which
! gives TO less than majority OF all the people the
| right TO govern-t is not departure from the DEM
| ocratic theory of government. Suppose the
| people should assent to proposition which should
narrow down the right Of suffrage to one thousand
men IN the Commonwealth, would the fact that the
| people had given their consent 10 such proposition
make it any less wide departure from the demo.
cratic theory of our government? Certainly not,
sir, certainly not. The assent of the people 10 an
ant-democratic theory, principle, system, does
moi make that theory, principle, or system, any the
less anti democratic.
Morris the reference of the gentleman from Taun-
ton, (Gov. Morton,) to the action Of other Stales
assuming TO be democratic, any the less unfortunate.
Ii adhering to the majority principle be in ac-
cordanceto the democratic idea of our American
system, "then,'' says the gentleman, sis Massachu.
setis more democratic than Virginia." Well sir,
is she not SOL Are not the descendants Of the Pu-
tltans more truly democratic than the Of the
| Cavaliers! Is not this old Commonwealth which
gives Tree suffrage to all men, more democratic than
a Commonwealth which denies to more than one
fourth Of her Suns all the rights ofman, and which,
until quite recently, required freehold qualification
Tor suffrage, and gave to the andhoder The right 10
| vote IN several counties at the same election? Sir
there are States that claim 10 be democratic in the
party sense OF that word, where the people have not
yet learned their rst lesson IN that genuine democ-
racy which recognizes IN the humblest man that
| treads their soil, a man and brother, whom God
! made, and fer whom Christ died Nowhere on this
continent personal rights more clearly recog.
| nzed, better defined, and more carefully guarded,
| than in this Commonwealth / 60 further. Iman.
tain, sir, that Massachusetts is, to-day, incompar-
| ably more democratic than Virginia, and has been
from the foundation oil her government Mt in The cab
a he / H. 7
believe it, that Massachusetts the most den9crat
/ &c State IN this Unon-ihat personal rights those
rights which lie at the foundation Of socety are
more clearly comprehended, more fully recognized
! and better guarded than anywhere else ia Amer
| lea. do not wish to travel out Of New England TO
learn democracy. When do so, shall not turn
! 10 that land
"Where the cant of democracy dwells on the ps
OF the forgers of fetters and wielders Of whps''
| do not Mr.. President, concur in the ids thrown
out IN this debate by Of my political friends es-
pecally by my friend for Arlington, (Mr Keyes) that
the adoption The plurality system will destroy the
! men with whom act, and with whom he acts |
have no apprehension, no fear Whatever. Here in
! Massachusetts,I SHOULD like TO see power on earth
that could fling us high that we could moi come
| down on our feet. As a politician, should agree
| with the member for Wilbrsham, (br HaIIett) that
II would be for MY interest, and the interest Of the
men with whom act, to have plurality rule in
this Commonwealth Before three years passes
away, venture TO say that those gentlemen who
think now that this system is 10 blot US Out, will
lind that they have not wonby it, admcnish those
gentlemen who anticipate so much pleasure in swal-
lowing up the ilactions TO look well to their own
heads when The swallowing process begins
! oppose the plurality system, because believe
il tends 10 degrade the politics Of the country, and
to demoralize The politicians Of the country. |
think that this has been the experience Of the coun.
H. ka.. III r. ~.
great interests and the Influence Of political leaders,
and il has diminished the power Of the people who
follow their higher and better sediments. Here,as
elsewhere the world the sentiments of human.
iIy, Of freedom, Of prog ess have sprung from
the bosom Of the people-nol from party organiza-
tions Of interest and ambition. Those greatreorms
in England since the peace Of 1Sl5--Parliamentary
Reform, Catholic Emancipation, West India Eman-
Nipaton, the Corn Laws, and all those measures