has ever been subverted. Where are all the ancient empires of the world? The Egyptian, Assyrian, Persian, Grecian, Roman? All, all, Sir, dilapidated, all gone to ruin. And what was the cause? Either they were not founded on a just regard of social rights, or ceased justly to regard man according to his nature. Their perdition is, and ought to be, a beacon, a caveat to us. I said upon another occasion, that every departure from the principles of the true philosophy of man was dangerous. The illustration which I used has been perverted by the gentleman from Spottsylvania. I did not say that the laws and rules of mathematical science were to be applied to civil Government, but that there was as much certainty, as much truth in morals, in politics too, as in mathematics. It is not always so perceptible, but it is nevertheless just as certain, and as unchangeable. And, Sir, however slow, however gradual, the departure from correct and fundamental principles, if persisted in, if continued, it must result in very great and fatal enormities.

I was sorry to hear, the other day, the eloquent gentleman from Charlotte, (Mr. Randolph,) protest against his majesty King Numbers, and declared his readiness to revolt from his government, and to migrate from his dominions. King Numbers, Mr. Chairman, is the legitimate sovereign of all this country. General Jackson, the President of these United States, is only the representative, the lawful representative of King Numbers. And, whither, Sir, can that gentleman fly from the government of this King? In the North, in the South, in the East and in the West, he can find no other monarch. Except he cross the ocean, he can put himself under no other King. And whenever he may please to expatriate himself, he will find beyond the dominions of King Numbers, there is no other monarch, save King Cypher, King Blood, King Sword, or King Purse. And, Sir, permit me to add, there is none of those so august as our King. I love King Numbers; I wish to live, and I hope to die, under the government of this majestic personage. He is, Sir, a wise, benevolent patriotic and powerful prince-the most dignified personage under the canopy of Heaven.

I heard that same gentleman, Mr. Chairman, with pleasure too, refer to a saying of the inmortal Bacon. Twice he alluded to it; twice he spoke of the great innovator, time. I did wish to hear him quote the whole sentence, and apply it. Lord Bacon said, (I think I give it in his own words)—“ Maximus innovator tempus; Quidni igitur tempus imitemur?" Why then, says he, can we not imitate time, the greatest of all innovators? The Romans long ago learned this lesson. Their moralists taught it to their children-" Tempora mutantur, et nos mutamur in illis." Why, then, Sir, cannot we learn to imitate time?

I am glad, Sir, to find myself associated with many gentlemen on this floor, who are inspired with the spirit of this age, who have not only grown up under this age, but grown up with it. They are willing to learn what time, the great teacher, and the greatest revolutionist, teacheth. And, Sir, she is an eloquent preceptor. These gentlemen, Sir, who feel the current of time, who are in heart, in unison, with this age, have no idea of making Chinese shoes for American feet; or of constructing a new bedstead after the manner of Procrustes, for men of American stature.

But, Sir, there is one most august tribunal to which we must all bow. Time will make us all do homage before it. This, I need not inform you, is the tribunal of public opinion. This is the supreme tribunal in all this extensive country. No sentiment is canonical in this country, which this tribunal reprobates. All our acts must be judged by it, and I rejoice to live in a country in which this is the supreme law-and in which no political maxim can prevail which does not quadrate at all angles with the dicta of this tribunal.

I am assured, Mr. Chairman, that it is in the power of this body to make this land one day, the happiest land on the earth-to infuse into our institutions, such principles as would elevate, enlighten, and happify this community, greatly beyond any thing yet experienced on this continent. I mean to say, Sir, that from the lights which concentrate their influences upon us-from the wisdom and talent assembled here, we have every facility for carrying to a much greater extent improvements into the social compact. Were this assembly far inferior to what it is, such a result might reasonably be expected. Standing as we do, upon the shoulders of all former Conventions, and being furnished with all the experiments which have been made in ancient and modern times, much is reasonably expected from us. But I fear these monosyllables mine and thine, are about to frustrate all attempts at a thorough amelioration of our condition.

I did hope that we would feel a little more in accordance with the progress of improvement and the spirit of the age, than to put forth all our energies in a contest about mere local interests, which a few years will change in defiance of all our ef forts. Yes, Sir; a few years will settle all these questions about miney and thiney. But should the improvement of the condition of society have been taken into consideration should the adaptation of our political institutions to the actual condition and circumstances of the great mass of the community have engrossed our attention

or entered into our hearts, I doubt not but we could have endeared our memory to the latest posterity. To mention only one instance; we have been told that it is quite practical now to give birth to a system of education, which in twenty years from this day would render it impossible for a child to be born in this Commonwealth and to live to manhood, without receiving a good education, and that too, Sir, without the laying any tax after that day for the support of such a system. I have understood, Sir, and from good authority too, that in some parts of Massachusetts, particularly in the environs of Boston, any child, without the contribution of a single cent, may receive not only a good English, but a classical education. Such is the extent to which the common school system has been carried in that enlightened community.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, we might now bless Virginia with a social compact which would, in the gradual progress of time, develop and improve the intellectual and moral powers of every member of the community, and contribute to the political good of the whole Commonwealth. Is not such an object worthy of such a Convention? And would not the origination of such a splendid scheme carry down, for a thousand generations, the grateful admiration of our services? But, if we exhaust our energies on these little localities, time, the great innovator, will break our arrangements to pieces: For it is decreed, that every system of Government not based upon the true philosophy of man-not adapted to public opinion, to the genius of the age, shall fall

into ruins.

But, Sir, one gentleman, (Mr. Randolph,) referred us to the great men, which the present system in Virginia had produced. "We doubt it not, Sir. I have lived in a country in which there were many great men: very learned and very powerful men. But how were they created, Sir? For one noble Lord, there were ten thousand ignoble paupers, and for one great scholar, there were ten thousand ignoramuses. That is the secret, Sir. I never wish to see this mode of making great men introduced into this Commonwealth. I trust, Sir, we will rather strive to make many middling men, than a few great or noble men. When we adopt the English way of making great men, we will soon adopt the English way of speaking to them. I have heard of but one "noble friend” in this Committee, as yet; but, Sir, it is a contagious spirit. There are many sorts of great men. It is not necessary to create them in advance of the demands of society. Peculiar crises call them into being. This sort of great men, has always been the creature of circumstances. One of them was once found on Mount Horeb, another on the way to Damascus-one at Mount Vernon, and another was found in the county of Hanover, with a fishing rod in his hand. The Island of Corsica produced one, when he was wanted. There is no occasion to devise any plan for creating this sort of great men. But, Sir, under a proper system of Government, we should be able to multiply other sorts of great men a hundred fold, and we should not fail to derive benefits of every sort, intellectual, moral, and political, incomparably surpassing any sacrifice we should be obliged to make in cominencing such a system.

One word more, Sir, and I will not further trespass upon the patience of the Committee. The scheme which is contemplated in these resolutions, is not only, I think, adapted to the general good of the whole State, but especially to the Eastern part of it. I was much pleased with the suggestion of the gentleman from Albemarle, (Mr. Gordon,) it was founded on a correct knowledge of man. When we disfranchise one class of men, or deprive them of their political and natural rights, to secure any property or privilege we possess, we endanger that very property and those very privifeges, more by such disfranchisements, than we protect them. We give an invidious character to those interests and privileges, and we create antipathies against ourselves. It is in the nature of man to hate, and to attempt to impair and destroy, that which is held at his expense, and which degrades him in his own estimation. For the safety, then, and preservation of those very interests, I would conceive this extension of the Right of Suffrage indispensable. If the extension sought for in these resolutions, can be obtained, I am not tenacious of the words or of the form in which it is sought. I chose thus to develop the principle. I aimed at no more, than to shew, that it is in accordance with the Bill of Rights. I did not expect to have addressed the Committee at this time; but on the failure of the scheme submitted by the gentleman from Monongalia, (Mr. Wilson,) I thought it expedient to make another experiment. Had it been my object to do more than to expose the principle, I should have, in a more syllogistic form, fortified and defended the grounds on which it is based. But, even in this, I have been, in a great measure, anticipated by the gentlemen who have preceded me.

The question being then taken, it passed in the negative by a very large majority, eleven only rising in the affirmative.

Mr. Scott then gave notice that in case the resolution offered by Mr. Pleasants yesterday shall be rejected, he will move the following:

Resolved, That in the apportionment of representation in the House of Delegates, regard should be had to the white population exclusively, and in the Senate to taxa

tion exclusively: That the House of Delegates shall consist of one hundred mem bers; and the Senate of forty-eight: That the Senate shall have the same Legisla tive powers in all respects as the House of Delegates-and all appointments to office, which by the Constitution shall be referred to the two Houses of the Legislature, shall be made by a concurrent vote.

The Committee then rose and the House adjourned.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1829.

The Convention met at 11 o'clock, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Taylor, of the Baptist Church.

Mr. Thompson of Amherst, offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That during the remainder of the session of this Convention, the 22d rule thereof shall be observed in the Committee of the Whole, and that " it shall be the duty of the Clerk hereafter to keep a Journal of the proceedings of said Committee, and to insert in such Journal, if they can be ascertained, all the proceedings heretofore had therein."

Mr. Wilson called for the reading of the 22d rule.

The 22d rule is as follows:

"Any member on his motion made for that purpose, on being seconded, provided seven of the members present be in favor of the motion, shall have a right to have the Ayes and Noes taken upon the determination of any question, provided he shalf give notice of his intention to call the Ayes and Noes, before the question be put, and in such case the House shall not divide, or be counted on the question, but the names of the members shall be called over by the Secretary, and the Ayes and Noes shall be respectively entered on the Journal, and the question shall be decided as a majority of votes shall thereupon appear: provided that after the Ayes and Noes shall be separately taken, and before they are counted, or entered on the Journal, the Secretary shall read over the names of those who voted in the affirmative, and of those who voted in the negative; and any member shall have liberty at such reading to correct any mistake which may have been committed in listing his name, either in the affirmative or negative."

In supporting the resolution, Mr. T. observed, that it might have been foreseen, and must now be obvious to all, that the whole of the important business of this Convention would be done in a Committee of the Whole; the Convention, as such, having little left for it to do but to give its sanction to the acts of the Committee of the Whole, and embody them in a regular form. If then the privilege of recording his vote was important to a Delegate any where, it was eminently so here; for, the Committee was nothing else but the Convention in another form. The adoption of the resolution, would be productive of an economy of time. All the members came charged with some grievance his constituents desired to have redressed. If they were allowed the opportunity of satisfying their constituents, that they had made an attempt to discharge the duty entrusted to them in the Committee of the Whole, there would be no need of repeating their motions to that effect, in the Convention: the District having seen the course pursued by their Delegate, would be satisfied, and much time would be saved. Such a measure was not unsupported by precedents. A similar regulation had been adopted in the Federal Convention, when the Constitution of the United States was framed: the Yeas and Nays were recorded, and a regular Journal kept in the Committee of the Whole. Another precedent was to be found in the records of the New York Convention, in 1820. He hoped that gentlemen, who professed to hope every thing from a re-action in the public mind, would offer no opposition to a proposal of this description.

Mr. Leigh was opposed to the resolution. He had supposed that if there was any body of law in the world approved by the experience of mankind, and altogether unexceptionable, it was the body of Parliamentary Law. The Committee of the Whole was one of the most valuable institutions ever devised for facilitating the business of a deliberative body. It gave opportunity for full, fair and free discussion, untrammelled by the forms necessarily attendant upon the definitive action of a Legislative Assembly. Yet here, said Mr. Leigh, we have a proposition to abolish all distinction between the Committee of the Whole, and the House in its Conventional capacity. Its effect will be to make the Committee of the Whole, the Convention-the only remaining difference will be that the presiding officer of the one is called a Chairman, and the other a President. I differ entirely from the gentleman's view of the matter. I hold that there is a great and essential difference between the two, and in that dif ference it is that the excellence and advantage of the Committee of the Whole entirely consists. But there is precedent for it. The gentleman has quoted two, but the first

of them is no precedent at all; for the Convention of '87 voted not by members, but by States, and it was necessary to declare, which States were for, and which were against any proposition, in order to determine the question. It is true that such a rule was adopted by the Convention of New York, which sat at Albany in 1820. Why, I do not know; but this I do know, that there was in that Convention such bidding in the auction of popularity, as never was known on earth before. It seems to have been adopted there in order to record the bids, but here there is no bidding that I know of, and if there shall be any, there can be no need of recording it; for the opinions we deliver here, are as well known by the public, as if they were recorded on

our Journal.

Mr. Thompson thought the gentleman from Chesterfield, had not been very happy in his appeal to experience; he had said that no such example could be furnished. There have been many deliberative bodies, they are of ancient origin; but there have been only a few Conventions, and they belong to modern times. We have adduced the experience of two of these Conventions; whether the same expedient be resorted to in the others which have been holden, I cannot tell: but it is very probable. But, how has the gentleman succeeded in shewing, that the case of the Federal Convention was so entirely dissimilar, as to furnish no precedent for this body? The gentleman says, it is because the votes there taken, were given, not by individuals, but by States. But, surely there was no more need to record the votes on that account, than if they had been given by individuals. I can see no distinction whatever, in principle; we may just as well record our votes, as they recorded theirs. The experience we have already had in this Convention, proves the utility of the plan; for we have already been compelled to resort to it. We have been greatly crowded by company, who have almost mingled themselves with the members. This may be the case again, and we may be again compelled to take the same course. It occupies little more time to record the names than it does to call them, and surely we have not shewn ourselves penurious of time. As to the auction of popularity, of which the gentleman spoke, I have nothing to say, because he has disclaimed any personal allusion. Whether he is right in his opinion of the New York Convention in this respect, I cannot tell. I have read the Journal of their Debates, and I did not perceive the evidence of any thing of the kind. I thought their proceedings were such as did honour to the State, and I consider them well worthy of our imitation.

Mr. Stanard said, that judging from appearances as to what the gentleman's object was, he thought he had taken a very round-about way to get at it: his more direct and obvious course would have been to move at once to abrogate the Committee of the Whole. His resolution did that in effect; for, why have any Committee of the Whole, if its proceedings are to be attended with the same formality, and to have the same effect as those of the original body? The gentleman had better march up at once, fairly, to his object. He has quoted precedents, said Mr. S., and what are they? He ventures to suppose that the precedents in the Conventions of all the States are in his favour: it is a bold supposition. Yet it is a little extraordinary, that that gentleman has contented himself with supposing, and has forborne to examine. This will appear strange to any one who knows with what accuracy that gentleman furnishes information, and what pains he takes to be exact in all his facts. If, indeed, the gentleman has examined, he cannot be ignorant that there have been thirty Conventions in this country, which have had the same service to perform as this; and yet out of that whole number, there have been but two which have so much as thought of recording their proceedings in Committee of the Whole. One law seems to have governed bodies of that kind, ever since they existed, and I am not in favour of any innovation. It is a measure likely to end in no good, and there is not the least shadow of necessity for it.

The question being now about to be put,

Mr. Gordon demanded that it should be taken by Yeas and Nays. It was accordingly so taken, when the Yeas and Nays stood as follows:

Ayes-Messrs. Goode, Anderson, Coffman, Williamson, M'Coy, Moore, Beirne, Smith, Baxter, Mercer, Henderson, Cooke, Opie, Naylor, Donaldson, Boyd, George, M'Millan, Campbell of Washington, Byars, Cloyd, Chapman, Mathews, Oglesby, Duncan, Laidley, Summers, See, Doddridge, Morgan, Campbell of Brooke, Wilson, Claytor, Saunders, Cabell, Martin, Gordon, Thompson and Joynes-39.

Noes-Messrs. Monroe, (Pres't.) Jones, Leigh of Chesterfield, Taylor of Chesterfield, Brodnax, Dromgoole, Alexander, Marshall, Tyler, Nicholas, Clopton, Harrison, Baldwin, Johnson, Miller, Mason, Trezvant, Claiborne, Urquhart, Randolph, Leigh of Halifax, Logan, Venable, Madison, Barbour of Orange, Stanard, Holliday, Powell, Griggs, Pendleton, Roane, Taylor of Caroline, Morris, Garnett, Barbour of Culpeper, Scott, Macrae, Green, Tazewell, Loyall, Grigsby, Townes, Pleasants, Massie, Taliaferro, Bates, Neale, Rose, Bayly, Upshur and Perrin-51.

So the House refused to rescind the rule as proposed, and to record their proceedings in Committee of the Whole.

The Convention then proceeded to the Order of the Day, and went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Powell in the Chair; and the question still being on the third resolution reported by the Legislative Committee, and amended by the Convention, in the following words:

66

Resolved, That the Right of Suffrage shall continue to be exercised by all who now enjoy it under the existing Constitution; and shall be extended, 1st, to every free white male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein, above the age of twenty-one years, who owns, and has possessed for six months, or who has acquired by marriage, descent or devise, a freehold estate, assessed to the value of not less than dollars, for the payment of taxes, if such assessment shall be required by law; 2d, or who shall own a vested estate in fee, in remainder, or reversion, in land, the assessed value of which shall be dollars; 3d, or who shall own, and have possessed a leasehold estate, with the evidence of title recorded, of a term originally not less than five years, and one of which shall be unexpired, of the annual value or rent of dollars; 4th, or who for twelve months next preceding, has been a house-keeper and head of a family within the county, city, borough or election dis trict, where he may offer to vote, and who shall have been assessed with a part of the revenue of the Commonwealth within the preceding year, and actually paid the same: Provided, nevertheless, That the Right of Suffrage shall not be exercised by any person of unsound mind, or who shall be a pauper, or a non-commissioned officer, soldier, sailor or marine, in the service of the United States, nor by any person convicted of any infamous offence; nor by citizens born without the Commonwealth, unless they shall have resided therein for five years immediately preceding the election at which they shall offer to vote, and two years preceding the said election, in the county, city, borough or election district, where they shall offer to vote, (the mode of proving such previous residence, when disputed, to be prescribed by law), and shall possess, moreover, some one or more of the qualifications above enumerated."

Mr. Leigh of Chesterfield moved to amend the resolution by striking out all after the words "Resolved, that," and inserting the following as a substitute:

66

Every male citizen of the Commonwealth, resident therein (other than free negroes and mulattoes,) aged 21 years and upwards, qualified to exercise the Right of Suffrage by the existing Constitution and saws,—

And every such citizen being possessed, or whose tenant for years, at will and at sufferance, is possessed, of land of the assessed value of dollars, and having an estate of freehold therein,

And every such citizen being possessed, as tenant in common, joint-tenant or coparcener, of an interest in or share of land, and having an estate of freehold therein, such interest or share being of the value of dollars,

And every such citizen, being entitled to a reversion, or vested remainder in fee, expectant on any estate for life, or lives in land of the assessed value of dollars,-

And every such citizen, being possessed of a leasehold estate in land, claiming under a lease, renewable at the option of the lessee, absolutely, or upon payment of a fine, or performance of other condition, the yearly value of such land being

dollars,

Each and every such citizen, unless his title shall have come to him by descent, devise, marriage or marriage settlement, having been so possessed or entitled for six months,

And no other persons,

Shall be qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly, in the county, city, or borough, respectively, wherein the land lieth :

Provided, That no person shall be entitled to vote more than once, or at more places than one, in any election ;

And, provided, That non-commissioned officers, soldiers, sailors, and marines, in the land or naval service of the United States, shall not be qualified to vote;

And, provided, That the Legislature may, by law, deprive any persons of the Right of Suffrage, for crimes, whereof they shall or may be convicted."

The amendment having been read, and the question upon it propounded from the Chair, MR. LEIGH rose, and spoke to the following effect

Mr. Chairman,—It may be, perhaps, that in submitting this proposition, and in the earnest endeavour I am going to make to explain the principle it is founded on, to maintain it as the wisest and surest foundation of a Representative Republic, and particularly suited to the circumstances of this Commonwealth, and thus to recommend it to the favourable consideration of the Committee, I am taking a task upon myself, utterly nugatory, as well as laborious and ungracious. For, it seems, plainly enough, to be the general opinion, that any effort to preserve a landed qualification of the Right of Suffrage must fail. Yet, if it shall fail, the principal reason of its failure, I am persuaded, will be found in the prevalence of the opinion that it certainly will fail, rather than that it ought to fail. It happens in most political questions and controversies in our day and nation, that the first exertion of men's minds is to ascertain which way