Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-03-07

as their attachment to their own states
would permit then1.'
The main argument on the question OF
equality or inequality of representation
was had in regard to the first branch OF
the National LEGISLATURE The repre-
sentatives of the large States, not sue
ceesful in argument, persisted sn the
declaration, that they never would
agree to admit the Southern States TO an
equality of suffrage: aud these, IN
turn, Informed them, IN terms the
most strong and energetic that could pos
sibly te used, that they never would
agree ID a system giving the large States
the undue influence and superiority they
claimed During the debate. the large
States threatened, that If the small ones
did not agree to the plan proposed, they
never should have the opportunity OF
meeting again in Convention TO delibe-
rate on another. This Unrest was treated
with contempt. When MASSACHUSETTS,,
Pennsylvani, North Carolina and South
Carolina had, against Connecticut, new
York. Delaware and Maryland, Georgia
being divided, decided that the sut-
frage should be unequal, and the matter
was referred to a grand committee, one
side in committee insisted on inequality
of suffrage in both branches; the other
on equality in both; and at length,
MARTYR says, the members from the
large States, finding that the others
would not yield, proposed by way OF
COMPROMISE, that il the small states
would yield, as to the House, they would
agree 10 an equal representation IN the
Senate. That compromise was nnally
settled q in com mittee, and reported on
the express terms that the propositions
reported were wholly to be adopted or
wholly rejected After a discussion OF a
fortnight, during which, Mr. Martin
said, fwe were on the verge Of dissolu-
ton, scarce held together by the strength
of q hai.,' the report was adopted.
a proposition that a Union Of the
States merely federal ought TO be the sole
object ef the exercise of the powers
vested in the Convention was mega
tived by a majority of members, and the
resolution that a National Govern
ment ought to be formed, was voted by
Massachusetts,, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Virginia, North Carolina and South
Carolina, against Connecticut, New
York being divided, and New Hsmp-
shire and Maryland not yet represented.
The void National was afterwards
struck out, Nj. Martin said, because
LneH lntJuEnE NAlC AAtfte - 49, ~
alarm.i< For the same reason they
excluded the word 'sldUes' from the
Constitution though the Eastern states
were very willing 10 indulge the South
ern States with q temporary liberty to
prosecute the slave-trade if these would
in turn gratify them, by laying no restric-
tion on navigatiOn-acis. This bargain
was effected, and a more disgraceful one
was, perhaps never made.
when the large States Mr.. Martin
said, demanded undue and improper
sacrifices 10 be made to their pride and
ambition, they treated the rights of free
states with more contempt than ever
British Parliament treated the rights OF
her Colonial establishments:
they obsiinately eontended for an unjust
superiority of power in the Government
aud appeared willing to hazard
the existence Of the Union rather than
not succeed 10 their unjust attempt.
. A great portion Of that time which
ought to have been directed calmly and
impartia-ly to consider what alterations
in our Federal Government would be
most likely to procure and preserve the
happiness of the Union, was employed in
q violent struggle on the one side to OBJ
tain all power and dominion in their
own hands, and on the other to prevent
it: and the dqgrGadiSeHlcIlt Of particular
States and particular individuals appears
to have been much more the subject
after, than the welfare OF our