FEB. 8, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. The convention had been appointed to revise the articles of confederation, the first compact of union formed between the States of the confederacy; under that compact, the Congress consisted of a single assembly, of delegations from the thirteen States, each State having one vote, and being represented by not less than two nor by more than seven members. The maximum of delegation for any State was seven, which, multiplied by thirteen, the number of the States, made ninety-one, the highest number of which the Congress of the confederation could consist, with full delegations from every State. But whether a State was represented by two members or by seven, her delegation possessed but one vote, which was expressed by the majority of her delegation, and when that was of equal numbers and equally divided, as very often happened, she could give no vote at all. The convention assembled for business on the 25th of May, 1787; on the 29th of that month, Edmund Randolph, Governor of Virginia, offered fifteen resolutions, which formed the basis of all the subsequent deliberations of the convention. Among these resolutions were the following: 3d. Resolved. That the National Legislature ought to consist of two branches. 4th. Resolved. That the members of the first branch of the National Legislature ought to be elected by the people of the several States, &c. These resolutions of Mr. Randolph were, together with other projects presented by different members of the convention, successively debated in Committee of the Whole, till the 19th of June, when they were reported with amendments and additions in nineteen resolutions, by the Committee of the Whole, to the convention. Of these, the two resolutions which I have just read, as originally offered by Mr. Randolph, formed, in the report of the Committee of the Whole, the second and third. [H. OF R. the States now in the Union be allowed one member for every forty thousand inhabitants of the description reported in the seventh resolution of the Committee of the Whole House. That each State not containing that number shall be allowed one member," &c. "II. That in the second branch of the Legislature, each State shall have an equal vote. ور The question upon the second of these propositions was taken before that upon the first. It was determined that each State should have an equal vote in the Senate. There it was that the confederate character of the Union was to be retained, and the representation in that body was fixed at two members for each State, the smallest number by which a State could be represented under the articles of confederation. The Senate was therefore to consist of twenty-six members; and then, to complete the largest number by which the States could have been represented under the articles of confederation, there remained for the composition of the House of Representatives sixty-five members to be apportioned among the several States according to the number of their federal population respectively. Of that number, the House of Representatives established by the constitution was accordingly composed; and the sixty-five members of the House of Representatives, and the twenty-six members of the Senate, formed the precise number of ninety-one--the largest number by which the whole thirteen States could have been represented in the Congress of the confederation. In this composition of the two Houses of Congress with regard to their numbers, there was then surely nothing arbitrary. It was a revision of the articles of confederation. Under them the Congress consisted of a single assembly; the minimum of representation in which was twenty-six, the maximum ninety-one. The constitution The second resolution reported by the committee was, formed a Congress of two Houses, retaining the minimum "That the right of suffrage in the first branch of the of the old representation in one, and distributing the comNational Legislature ought not to be according to the rule plement of the maximum according to the principle of established in the articles of confederation, but according popular representation in the other. Nor was the distrito some equitable ratio of representation, namely, in pro-bution of the numbers among the States more arbitrary portion to the whole number of white and other free citizens, and inhabitants of every age, sex, and condition, including those bound to servitude for a term of years, and three-fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the foregoing description, except Indians not paying taxes in each State." The eighth resolution was, "That the rights of suffrage in the second branch of the National Legislature ought to be according to the rule established by the first." Here the ratio of representation in both Houses was proposed to be the same. On the 29th of June, after ten days of debate, so much of the seventh resolution as went to substitute for the rule of the confederation some equitable ratio of representation in the first branch of the Legislature, was adopted. The remainder of that resolution was postponed, and a motion was made to amend the eighth resolution reported from the Committee of the Whole, so as to read: vote." than the aggregate number of the whole. It was made after much deliberation and much debate. There had been no exact and formal enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States before taken, but quotas of taxation had been assessed upon the several States by the old Congress two years before, and estimates of their respective population had been given in by the delegations from the several States. In the printed journals of the convention, at page 159, two of these statements will be found, which present a population of about three millions. When the census came to be taken, from three to five years afterwards, the result presented a population of less than four millions, including about seven hundred thousand slaves. The estimates used by the convention therefore rather underrated, though very little, the actual population at the time, which must have been very near three million two hundred thousand souls. But from the first conception of organizing in Congress a representation of the people, observe the principle as"Resolved, That, in the second branch of the Legisla-sumed of a large representation for a small constituency-ture of the United States, each State shall have an equal a principle truly republican, and vital to that of democracy--a principle which has been preferred through every stage of our history, from that day to the present, when, for the first time, we are called upon to reverse it, and adopt its direct opposite of a large constituent for a small representative body. On the 2d of July, after much debate, the question was taken upon this amendment, and it failed by a tiefive States voting for it--five against it, and one being divided. The eighth resolution, together with so much of the seventh as had been left undecided, was then referred to a committee of one member from each State, which, after an adjournment over of two days, reported a recommendation of two propositions, on condition that both should be generally adopted. The propositions for organizing the new Congress in two Houses were presented by the committee as conjoint, and mutually conditional of each other. That in the Senate each State should have an equal vote--and that in the House each State should have one representative for every forty thousand inhabitants of federal num"I. That, in the first branch of the Legislature, each of bers. Both these propositions were adopted; and as the H. OF R.] Apportionment Bill. [FEB. 8, 1832. number of sixty-five, of which the House of Representa-people, hitherto, excepting that by virtue of which we tives was to be composed, was the largest number which are here assembled. The apportionment under which we could be assumed without transcending the maximum of sit is of one member for every forty thousand, precisely representation allowed by the articles of confederation, the smallest number which could have been assumed, so a ratio of forty thousand federal numbers for cach even after the first enumeration, if the alteration thus representative was the nearest approach they could effected by President Washington had not taken place. make to a House of sixty-five members, for the population summed up according to the estimates which they had before them. members. It was only in 1820 that the ratio of forty thousand was assumed--the smallest that could have been assumed thirty years before, but for the amendment carried by the prevailing influence of Washington. The apportionment adopted after the first enumeration of 1790 was of one member for every thirty-three thousand, and it gave a House of one hundred and five memIn the first draught of the constitution reported to the bers. The same ratio was adopted ten years later, after convention on the 6th of August, the number of sixty-five the second census, and gave a House of one hundred and was accordingly fixed for the House of Representatives; forty one members. After the third enumeration in 1810, until a census of the people should be taken, the number the ratio was still increased only to thirty-five thousand, of forty thousand was settled as the ratio of representa- and returned a House of one hundred and eighty-one tion, and the number of representatives allotted to each State was proportioned to the relative numbers of its then estimated population to that of the whole Union. All this was assuredly any thing but arbitrary. The draught of the constitution, in twenty-three articles, In the low ratio adopted after the first enumeration, of was debated, article by article, and amended, till the 12th of thirty-three thousand, approaching so near to the smallest September, when a new and revised draught was reported number for the constituent body admissible by the amend by a committee of five members which had been appointed ed constitution; in the adherence to the same ratio ten on the 8th of that month for that purpose. In this second years after; in the very small increase of only two thoudraught, after the provision made for taking of the census sand to the ratio of 1810; and even in the apportionment within three years after the first meeting of the new Con- now existing, being that which had been deliberately gress, it was prescribed that the number of represen- adopted by the final draught of the constitution as the minitatives should not exceed one for every forty thousand, mum of the constituent body for a population of only three but that each State should have at least one representative. millions of souls, we discern a constant and unvarying This was a new limitation, to restrain the numbers of the preference for the principle of a large representative for House of Representatives, so that the whole number of a small constituent body. members of Congress should not exceed that which they And such is the vital principle of popular representahad adopted, and which equalled the largest represen- tion, I shall not enter into the general question, so well tation allowed by the articles of confederation-and thus and so ably pressed upon the attention of the House by the constitution, and the letter of President Washington, the members from Georgia [Mr. WAYNE] and from Virtransmitting it to the President of Congress, were agreed to. The constitution was engrossed. And now let us recur again to the journal of the convention of 17th Sep tember. "The engrossed constitution being read, it was moved that the constitution be signed by the members in the following form: Done in convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present, the 17th September, &c. In witness whereof, we have hereunto subscribed our names. Well, sir, after this, and at the very moment when the members were all ready to sign the engrossed constitution, what says the journal? "It was moved to reconsider the clause declaring that the number of representatives shall not exceed one for every forty thousand, in order to strike out forty thousand, and insert thirty thousand. Which passed in the affirmative." And the very next entry upon the journal is, ginia, [Mr. MERCER,] of the expediency of a numerous body of representatives, to maintain the relative weight and influence of this House in the Government, with reference to the other branch of the Legislature, and to the co-ordinate department of the Executive. That topic has been exhausted by them. But what is popular represen tation in its essence and in its origin? It is a substituted invention of modern times, for the meeting of the whole body of the people--a substitute suggested by necessity, because the whole body of the people, from their great numbers, find it impracticable to meet and transact the affairs of the community in person. Were they not too numerous, they would certainly prefer to act for themselves. Popular representation, therefore, is in its nature a representation in numbers; and, as such, it is expressly prescribed for the formation of the House of Representatives by the constitution of the United States. To be consistent with its own character, it should be numerous; increasing at least in some proportion with the increase "On the question to agree to the constitution enrolled of the numbers represented, not indeed always in the in order to be signed, all the States answered, ay." same proportion, but always having reference thereto, as The constitution was signed by the members, and the con- well as to the magnitude and multiplicity of the business vention dissolved itself by an adjournment without day. to be transacted, and to the practicability and convenience Now, sir, this diminution from forty thousand to thirty of transacting it. It has been said that the Congress thousand as the lowest admissible ratio of representation which declared our independence consisted of less than to be assumed after the enumeration of the people of the sixty members; that the convention which formed the United States should be taken, was thus effected at the constitution of the United States was not more numerous; very last moment of the existence of the convention, by and it is asked whether those assemblies were not amply the personal interposition, and at the solicitation of Presi- competent to represent the people of this Union. They dent Washington himself. It became universally known, were so, but the Congress of the confederation, as we and was one of the most popular acts of his life. I hesi- have seen, were as numerous, in proportion to the people tate not to express my belief that it contributed to ac- of the Union then, as would be an assembly of near three complish the adoption of the constitution by the people; hundred persons now. They were, besides, under the and I consider it now, as it was generally considered then, articles of confederation, representatives of States, and as an emphatic manifestation of his opinion in favor of a not of numbers-a federative and not a popular represennumerous representation of the people in the popular tation. branch of the Legislature. So also was the convention which formed the constituNow, sir, consider how much the numbers of this House tion of the United States. Besides which, the task they would have been reduced under every enumeration of the had to perform, great and momentous as it was, had a FEB. 8, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. [H. OF R. man of worth and power beyond the common average of his peers. Of such a man, thus selected, there is not a day passed in deliberation here but supplies him with means of improvement, of better qualifying himself for future and for other service to his countrymen. Sure I am that no man, thus well and virtuously predisposed, ever served a tour of duty in this House, without returning a wiser and a better man to his constituents. single object in view: their commission was merely to upon his duties here. Exceptions there are, and, from revise the articles of confederation--to prepare a plan of the nature of human society, there must be, of worthless Government to be submitted to the subsequent consider- men who find their way into this House, even through the ation and action of the people. For this a smaller num-avenue of popular election. But so long as there is virtue ber even might have been equally competent. But what and knowledge in the people, and on no other foundation analogy is there between the duties and the labors of that can republican Government subsist, so long must the assembly, limited to the construction of a single political chosen man of forty thousand be, in the general result, a frame of Government, and those of a body to whose charge are committed in continual succession, and subject to periodical returns of elections, the feelings, wishes, and interests of multiplying millions of people for all time? There is one other consideration, not, I believe, yet presented to the House, but which operates forcibly with me to wish for a numerous representation of the people in this assembly. The public benefits derivable from this National Legislature are not limited to the business offi. How often do we see the people of every State of the cially transacted by them in the public service. There Union select for their magistrates, their judges, and their are others, collateral and incident to them, but in their governors, persons who are serving, or who have served consequences perhaps not less important. It is an admir- them as members of this or the other House of Congress? ed saying of an eloquent orator of the other hemisphere, And how often, on the other hand, do they take from their that in these times "the schoolmaster is abroad." Yes, immediate and domestic functionaries, other individuals sir, happily the schoolmaster is abroad: and with equal to serve and represent them in these councils of the propriety may it be said, that within these walls the school- Union? Can there be a doubt that in every such case the master is at home. Human life itself is a school of disci- previous service has been a probationary school of impline, from the cradle to the grave. And what more in- provement for the performance of that to which the indistructive school can be found for the cultivation of the vidual is transferred? The knowledge of the general understanding and the improvement of the heart, than in affairs of the Union, and their connexion with the differthe deliberations of this and the other House of Congress? ent predominating interests of its several parts, the conThey ought to be, and, after all the deductions to be made stantly growing fund of experience in the forms and subfor the perturbations of passion, and the collisions of con- stance of transacting the public business, the personal flicting interests incidental to them, I firmly believe they acquaintances and friendships contracted between eminent are schools--inestimable schools of wisdom and virtue- and influential citizens from opposite quarters of the counschools in which, according to the monitorial system of try, and the links of social relations thus multiplied among modern invention, every member is at once the teacher them, have the double tendency of elevating the sentiand the pupil of all the rest. What are our debates but ments and increasing the faculties of the citizens for afterpractical discussions of moral philosophy applied to public service among their constituents at home, and of soothing affairs--but mutual exhortations to high and honorable the dissensions and of harmonizing the discordant proaction-but stimulants to diffusive philanthropy--to lofty pensities of the several parts of the Union. Every addipatriotism? The more numerous is the composition of tion to the number composing the House of Representathis House, the more widely is the benefit of this national tives adds also to the catalogue of these distinguished and academy extended throughout the Union. The numbers enlightened citizens. I wish to multiply them in every of the Senate are limited, and are the same, for the teem- part of the country. The States to which they belong ing millions of New York, and for the stationary thousands ultimately derive the principal advantages of their acquireof Rhode Island or Delaware. In this House only can ments; and the more they possess of them, the fairer will they increase with the increasing numbers of the people. be the prospects of their future welfare. We come here and meet from the extremest borders of I will no longer obtrude upon the patience of the this extensive land, to consult and to act for the advance- House; nor should I have detained them at this time, had ment of the common good, for the protection of individual it not been for the introduction of new principles into the rights, for the conciliation of clashing interests. Every apportionment prescribed by this bill-principles incomman who enters this House as the representative of the patible, as I believe, with the spirit of the constitution, people of his vicinage, meets here from two to three hun- and irreconcilable with its letter. An apportionment dred others, charged with a like trust, from every other which gives to Pennsylvania one representative for every similar portion of the whole people. He speaks and feels, forty-eight thousand and less than two hundred of her specially for his own constituents; he hears others plead inhabitants, while it grants to Vermont only one represen with not less earnestness the cause of theirs; he is one day tative for every fifty-six thousand and upwards of hers, the suitor, and the next day the judge or chancellor of the is not a representation as the constitution requires, apporcommon tribunal. He comes, perhaps, from home with tioned among the several States "according to their reprejudices which men before they leave their homes are spective numbers." It fulfils neither the letter nor the apt to entertain, that there is a Benjamin's portion of in- spirit of the constitution. Nor is the manner in which it tellect and of moral worth diffused among his immediate is carried through this House less exceptionable than the neighbors, beyond that of the other inhabitants of the partiality and oppression which it exercises over the country, if not of the whole earth. He meets here whole Eastern section of the Union, and especially over associates from other regions, perhaps harboring pre- the State a portion of whose people have entrusted the judices similar to his own, but inconsistent with them, charge of their interests here to my hands. Nor has it because favoring another portion of the family. He soon been possible to overlook the part borne by the almost finds that there is genius, talent, and principle, in other unanimous delegation from Pennsylvania, throughout the neighborhoods than his own. Not perhaps equal in progress of this bill, from its origin, through this Houseall; but, most probably, in superior degree from some the inexorable sway of twenty-four votes, dispensing alquarter, and in degree very little inferior from all. He ternately life and death at their pleasure to the weaker finds his level, and ascertains that of others. He comes members of the Union, selecting their favorites, yielding to witness and to share in deeds of wisdom and virtue. and withdrawing the preponderant weight of the balance, And were the incitements to these even wanting in his as they have seen fit, from day to day, and, finally, by a mind before, he would find them in the daily attendance [bare and dubious majority, fixing the double aggravation H. OF R.] Steam Carriages on Roads. [FER. 9, 1832. of a crippled delegation, and of an enormous fraction, upon opportunity for taking the sense of the House on a ratio the unfortunate State of Massachusetts. Should the ratio larger than that reported in the bill, and, to get at that reported by the committee ultimately prevail, that State, object, he moved to recommit the bill to a select commitin losing one of her representatives, will lose a part of her tee, with instructions to strike out the ratio of 44,400, and existence; and with the first principle of popular repre-insert 53,000. This ratio, he said, would give the least sentation reversed, the whole existence of the smaller possible increase to the present number of representaStates must remain at the mercy of the State holding the tives, namely, one member. largest number of votes upon this floor. We are told Mr. BRIGGS moved an adjournment. Lost: yeas 89, that by the reduction of our representation we shall be nays 102. left with the same relative proportion to the whole; but it Mr. TAYLOR demanded the yeas and nays on his mois not so. The relative proportion is not the same, and, if tion, and they were ordered. it were, the level to which we should be reduced would be effected, like that of the bed of Procrustes, only by lopping off our limbs. If, in deprecating the fate with which we are threatened, I have, on witnessing its ap-mitment, and decided in the negative-yeas 66, nays 129. proach, returned to the task of addressing the House till it is wearied with importunities, I can only plead my apology in the language of the poet: "For who, to dumb forgetfulness a prey, "Nor cast one longing, lingering look behind." Mr. COULTER replied at some length, and submitted his reasons for resisting the appeal of Mr. ADAMS, and for opposing the amendment. Mr. CLAY and Mr. POLK also opposed the amend ment, and Mr. WAYNE, Mr. LETCHER, Mr. CARSON, and Mr. SLADE advocated it. Mr. MITCHELL, of South Carolina, renewed the mo- THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9. STEAM CARRIAGES ON ROADS. The motion of Mr. MERCER, from the Committee on Internal improvements, to print the report of the British House of Commons on the subject of the operation of steam carriages on roads, coming up, Mr. CAMBRELENG thought that if it were proper to appropriate five thousand dollars annually for the pur pose of a library for the use of Congress, it was equally proper to vote for an appropriation which would diffuse At length, after loud calls for the question, the ques-information, universally useful, not only amongst the memtion was taken by yeas and nays, as follows: bers of that House, but throughout the nation. He would NAYS.-Messrs. Adams, Angel, Appleton, Babcock, go as far as the gentleman from South Carolina, who Noyes Barber, Barringer, Isaac C. Bates, Beardsley, Ber-spoke upon this subject on a preceding day, as to the gen, Bouck, Bouldin, Briggs, John Brodhead, John C. constitutional question, but he did not consider the preBrodhead, Cahoon, Cambreleng, Carson, Chandler, sent would be an infringement on the principles of the Choate, Clayton, Coke, Collier, Lewis Condict, Silas Con- constitution, if the annual vote of five thousand dollars dit, Eleutheros Cooke, Bates Cooke, Corwin, Crane, for the Library of Congress was not so considered. Creighton, John Davis, Dayan, Dearborn, Dickson, Dod- Mr. MITCHELL, of South Carolina, said he had been dridge, Doubleday, Ellsworth, Edward Everett, Horace misunderstood. He had not objected to the constitutionEverett, Grennell, Hammons, Harper, Hawes, Hodges, ality of the proposition, but to its expediency. He was as Hoffman, Hogan, Howard, Hubbard, Hughes, Hunt, great an advocate for free trade as the gentleman from Huntington, Ingersoll, Jewett, Richard M. Johnson, New York was for internal improvements; but he should Charles C. Johnston, Kendall, Kerr, Lansing, Lecompte, not feel himself justified in calling on that House to apLetcher, Lyon, Marshall, Mercer, Newnan, Newton, propriate money for the printing of a work, containing Pearce, Pendleton, Pierson, Pitcher, Randolph, John an exposition of the advantages of free trade. Reed, Edward C. Reed, Root, Slade, Soule, Southard, was the work before them but a work on mechanics? Spence, Stanberry, Storrs, Wiley Thompson, Tompkins, Mr. DRAYTON was willing that the same course should Vance, Ward, Wardwell, Washington, Watmough, be pursued as to the present work, which was adopted as Wayne, Weeks, Wilkin, Wheeler, Elisha Whittlesey, to others imported from the other side of the water. He Campbell P. White, Edward D. White, Wickliffe, Wilde, would vote to put it in the Library. Williams, Worthington, Young.-97. And what Mr. MERCER said he hoped that if he could show that gentlemen had wholly misconceived the merits of the proposition, they would assent to the motion to print the document before them. That House was frequently called upon to decide betwixt the propriety of constructing a road or cutting a canal; the report in question would aid them in such decision. He would further state that there was not another copy of the document in the United States; nor could another be obtained before the conclusion of the present session. He hoped this would be a sufficient answer for all the objections which had been proposed. NAYS.--Messrs. Adair, Alexander, Chilton Allan, Robert Allen, Allison, Anderson, Archer, Ashley, Banks, Barnwell, Barstow, James Bates, Bell, Bethune, James Blair, John Blair, Boon, Branch, Bucher, Bullard, Burd, Carr, Claiborne, Clay, Conner, Cooper, Coulter, Craig, Crawford, Davenport, Warren R. Davis, Denny, Dewart, Drayton, Duncan, George Evans, Joshua Evans, Felder, Fitzgerald, Ford, Gilmore, Gordon, Griffin, Thomas H. Hall, William Hall, Hawkins, Heister, Holland, Horn, Ihrie, Irvin, Isacks, Jarvis, Cave Johnson, Kavanagh, Kennon, Adam King, John King, Henry King, Leavitt, Lewis, Mann, Mardis, Mason, Maxwell, McCarty, William Mr. DAVIS, of Massachusetts, said he conceived the McCoy, Robert McCoy, McDuffie, McIntire, McKennan, subject of land transportation by steam to be one of the Milligan, Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Nuckolls, Patton, Plum-greatest importance to the nation. They had seen the mer, Polk, Potts, Rencher, Roane, Russel, William B. almost incredible effects which it had produced on water Shepard, Aug. H. Shepperd, Smith, Speight, Standifer, carriage, and there was reason to believe it would be Stephens, Stewart, Sutherland. Taylor, Francis Thomas, found still more powerful by land. If the transmission of Philemon Thomas, John Thomson, Tracy, Verplanck, intelligence from one part of the country to the other Vinton, Frederick Whittlesey.--97. could be facilitated, whether regarded as to its advantages in the state of war or of peace, it was the duty of the Government to lend its aid to such a purpose. The House being equally divided, the SPEAKER voted in the affirmative, and decided the question in favor of the amendment. Mr. TAYLOR then rose, and said there had been no Mr. BARNWELL rose to point out a difference in the present case, and the one formerly referred to by a gentic APPORTIONMENT BILL. [H. OF R. The House resumed the the consideration of the bill to fix the ratio of representation. [Three hours were spent in an arduous discussion of various amendments, which were successively offered, and in taking the yeas and nays on several of them. The following is a mere outline of the debate and course of proceeding:] man from Massachusetts, [Mr. EVERETT,] that of a report printed at the request of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on the subject of the cholera morbus. That request had arisen from a memorial referred to them on the subject. He thought gentlemen could not avoid seeing the distinction between that case and the present. He had always expressed his abhorrence that members of that House should, by their own vote, supply themselves with libraries. What was the effect of the present motion, but Mr. EVANS, of Maine, moved to strike out 44,400, to supply them with an additional volume? It might be (the ratio inserted in the bill yesterday, in lieu of 48,000,) that some members considered their constituents as amply and insert 44,300; [his precise motion was to strike out compensated by the additional wisdom they thus attained; the number 4,400, and insert 4,300;] and argued at some but having neither experienced it in his own case, nor no-length to show that justice to the State of Maine reticed it in the action of that House, he conceived it his duty to vote against the proposition to print the report on the table. Mr. POLK here made an ineffectual motion that the House proceed to the orders of the day. Mr. DEARBORN followed in support of the resolution to print, and enlarged on the importance to the whole community of the information contained in the report. Mr. WICKLIFFE expressed a hope that the House would proceed at once to vote upon the proposition. Mr. McDUFFIE said the only question appeared to be how the House should get the information. For his own part, he [Mr. McD.] thought that if they were to have it, they had better obtain it from their own printer, than import books from abroad to fill the Library of Congress. Mr. MITCHELL, of South Carolina, moved an amendment, to add the words, "that at any such time as may be expedient" the printing might be ordered. Mr. L. CONDICT moved the previous question, which being sustained, the amendment was cut off; and quired the change, as 44,400 would leave that State a fraction of 44,000, whereas a ratio of 44,300 would give her an additional member, without injuriously affecting any other State, and add but one member to the number which would be given by 44,400. Mr. VANCE, who yesterday moved the ratio of 44,400, expressed his acquiescence in the amendment of Mr. EVANS. Mr. ANDERSON, of Maine, supported the amendment. He himself had been in favor of as high a ratio as 55,000; and the people generally, he believed, had not contemplated a lower ratio than 50,000; but, as the House had, after various propositions for a high ratio, decided on a low one, he hoped, in justice to the State of Maine, that the amendment of his colleague would prevail; and he argued at some length in its favor. Mr. BARSTOW, of New York, stated the motive which influenced the committee in reporting 48,000. The committee was in favor of the ratio of 50,000, and he believed the people did not expect a lower one; but as that number would deprive one of the States (Rhode The question upon agreeing to the resolution was taken Island) of one-half of its representation in the House, by yeas and nays, and decided in the affirmative, as follows: 48,000 was adopted and reported. He made a number YEAS.--Messrs. Adams, Chilton Allan, Appleton, of remarks on the general subject, especially in reply to Armstrong, Babcock, Banks, Noyes Barber, Barringer, some former remarks of Mr. ADAMS, and scouted the Barstow, Isaac C. Bates, Beardsley, Bethune, John Blair, idea that any great principle was involved in this whole Bouck, Briggs, Bucher, Bullard, Burd, Cahoon, Cambre-matter of ratio. leng, Choate, Collier, Lewis Condict, Silas Condit, Eleu- Mr. WICKLIFFE stated briefly the reasons which intheros Cooke, Bates Cooke, Cooper, Corwin, Craig, duced him to go for the amendment. Crane, Crawford, Creighton, John Davis, Dayan, Dear- Mr. ASHLEY, of Missouri, moved to amend the amendborn, Denny, Dewart, Dickson, Doddridge, Doubleday, ment by striking out four and inserting three, so as to Duncan, Ellsworth, George Evans, Joshua Evans, Ed-make the number 43,300. His duty to his State impelled ward Everett, Horace Everett, Fitzgerald, Ford, Gren- him to move this amendment. He had been originally in nell, Harper, Hodges, Hogan, Howard, Hughes, Hunt, favor of a high ratio-he would have gone as high as Huntington, Ihrie, Ingersoll, Irvin, Isacks, Jewett, R. M. 60,000, but the House had decided in favor of a low one; Johnson, Kendall, Kennon, Henry King, Lansing, Letcher, and as 44,300 would leave Missouri a large fraction, and Marshall, Maxwell, McCarty, Robert McCoy, McDuffie, give her but two members, and 43,300 give her three McKennan, Mercer, Milligan, Muhlenberg, Newnan, New-members, he contended that justice to that State deton, Pearce, Pendleton, Pitcher, Plummer, Potts, John manded the change; further to show which, he offered a Reed, E. C. Reed, Rencher, Root, Russel, Wm. B. She-number of arguments. pard, Augustine H. Shepperd, Slade, Smith, Soule, The SPEAKER having declared the motion of Mr. Mr. SUTHERLAND observed that this motion of Mr. A. showed the inexpediency of entertaining the motion of Mr. EVANS, which Mr. S. could not conceive to be regular, after the House had yesterday decided in favor of 44,400. It was obvious now that if the pending moNAYS.-Messrs. Alexander, R. Allen, Anderson, An- tions were not negatived, other numbers might be moved, gel, Archer, John S. Barbour, Barnwell, J. Bates, Ber- almost ad infinitum, and render it next to impossible to gen, James Blair, Bouldin, John C. Brodhead, John settle on any one, so long as members chose to move Brodhead, Carr, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Conner, others. Coulter, Davenport, Drayton, Felder, Gilmore, Gordon, The SPEAKER replied that the motion was, notwith- VOL. VIII.--112 Mr. EVANS submitted briefly the reasons why he could not vote for Mr. ASHLEY'S amendment. |