JAN. 18, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. [H. OF R. Sir, said Mr. G., I prefer the ratio proposed by the venture the assertion, that the same jealous care for a amendment to any above it that has been mentioned, in full popular representation still pervades the nation. And the bill, or in debate; because it will not reduce the pre- could the sense of the people themselves be collected sent number of representatives on this floor from any on this momentous question, it would be decisive in State in the Union. Nor will it, in my apprehension, favor of it. swell the numbers of this House to an inconvenient size But, said Mr. G., a numerous popular representation for the transaction of the public business. I acknowledge has not only been regarded, through all our history, as a myself an advocate for a numerous House of Representa- favorite feature of our republican system, most consonant tives, as being most consistent with the genius and de- with its spirit and design, and as most of all reflecting sign of this Government. Is it not constituted to reflect the character of the country, but it must ever remain the the popular will? But the perfection of the representa-safest depository of power. It is a common complaint, tive principle is only found where the public agents ex- that the tendency of power, in a free Government, is to hibit, most truly, the sentiments, wishes, feelings, and in- the hands of a few. If an aristocratic influence shall terests of the whole people. This great object is most ever arise, under any administration of this Government, completely attained by forming a numerous House on a here, in this Hall of the people's representatives, must comparatively small ratio. On such a body of representa- be found the remedy, the counteracting power. Could tives, the people will impress their own character. But a numerous House ever be subjected to such control? the higher you raise the ratio, the further you remove the Sir, it would be detested and repelled by the charactermember from his constituents, from their intercourse and istic jealousy, independence, and firmness of a popular sympathies, and the further you depart from the true prin- representation. I see other reasons for a rigid adherciple of representation. If this be so, said Mr. G., how ence to this cardinal principle in our Government. can a body of representatives be said to reflect the charac- The time may come when Executive influence will be ter and will of the people, when, either from the extent brought to bear upon this House, to awe it into subservof their districts, or the great number of their constitu- iency, or corrupt its action. It may be attempted to be ents, they can hardly be supposed to understand their exercised among the members, not, perhaps, by direct sentiments or interests? On the other hand, how, in such assaults upon their integrity, but by the arts, and flattea state of things, is the member to make known to them, ries, and favors which ambition knows so well how to clearly and effectually, the measures, the men, and the employ. In such times, where is the people's first relipolicy of their Government? The representative stands, ance? In a small body of representatives? No, sir; they in some sort, between the Government and his constitu- would find safety in numbers. ents, the medium of communication and action. They Mr. Chairman, I am the more confirmed in my opidesire to hold him to a fair responsibility for his public nion on this subject, when I consider the great powers acts. This necessary estrangement, of which I speak, vested by the constitution and laws in the Executive of between members and the people they may have been this Government, and the patronage in his power to bechosen to represent, will open the way for demagogues, by arts and imposition, to excite the popular jealousy, and supplant the representative in their favor and confidence. stow. Having the power of nomination (which may, in some future period, and with a subservient Senate, be equivalent to the power of appointment) of cabinet officers, ministers to foreign courts, of officers in the army But, sir, I find some support for my position, in the and the navy; appointments to the almost countless offices fact stated by my honorable colleague, [Mr. ADAMS,] that and employments connected with the Indian Department, the first House of Representatives under the constitution, and the sales of the public domain-holding, I say, this which consisted of 65 members, bore the same propor- prodigious amount of patronage, would it be marvellous, tion to the population of the country, which the number if some Executive, in future time, with a view to carry given by the amendment to the bill bears to our present some favorite measure through a very limited House of population. I am glad to find the coincidence; for I Representatives, should dispense a share of this patronlove to revert to that glorious period, and to the men age among the friends of its measures? Would attempts of that period. I fear we are fast departing from their like this ever be made to bring over the majority of a safe examples, and discarding their lessons of political large House? Which could be most easily bought up? It was intended by the constitution that power should wisdom. When the people accepted the constitution, they sup-be so distributed among the several departments of this posed they discovered great security for their dearbought Government, that no one should ever acquire an undue rights, in the provision for a body of representatives weight and influence, and that neither should be dechosen by themselves. It was their chief hope. To them pressed. But, sir, have we not, for years, witnessed an alone were they willing to confide the power of originat- undue accumulation of power in the hands of the Execu ing laws by which they were to be taxed. No matter tive, and in the Executive and Senate? The treaty-making whence they derived the hint for this wise and cautious power alone is of amazing extent, in their possession, provision, I refer to the fact, simply as illustrating the with all its train of incidental influences. And some policy of the people of that time, in constructing that have feared that it might be attempted to be exercised branch of the National Legislature, which, by its mem-in derogation of the legislative power. To guard as far bers, issuing from among themselves, would alone be com- as possible against the abuse of any or all of these powers, petent to carry out their purposes, speak their language, this country wants the vigilance, firmness, and integrity, sustain their spirit, and embody their character. Another which could be combined in a full and numerous House fact gives some testimony to the point in question. By of Representatives. In every view, therefore, a large the constitution, 30,000 was established as the first ratio House presents decided advantages; and if my reasoning of representation. This was a startling feature. It was be not deceptive, is less liable to bad influences—more opposed in many of the State conventions. In that of safe for the people, and for the constitution. Massachusetts, many considered 30,000 people as too It has been sometimes asked by the advocates of a great a number to be represented by one individual. But small House, how we would limit the numbers; and what still it was finally judged that the House of Representa- rule shall be adopted for that purpose. Sir, I answer, as tives, as it was then constituted, in numbers and in powers, the population of the country increases, I would enlarge might be a just counterpoise to the Executive Depart- the representation here until it should be apparent that ment of the Government. Sir, the people are slow to an additional number would produce embarrassment and change their sentiments of political expediency; and I inconvenience in legislation. It should not be so large H. OF R.] Apportionment Bill. [JAN. 18, 1832. as to be unwieldy in action, nor yet so small as to reflect proportion to the increase of population. That was the imperfectly the character of the country. Has any evil gentleman's rule, and he invited the House to examine its resulted from the increase of numbers here? What is practical operation, and the influence which, if adopted, the experience of the country on this subject? Is there it must exert on the condition and even on the future desin this House less despatch of business, than in some earlier tinies of the country. periods of the Government? Less wise deliberation? The House in forty years would have grown from sixtyLess decorum of debate? Have the sessions of Congress in late years been protracted beyond the period occupied by them when the numbers of this House were less? If this were so, the reason would be found not in the delay produced by excessive numbers here, but in the new interests and multiplied objects of legislation that are constantly rising up throughout our widely extended country. five to two hundred and fifty-nine members. According The very experienced and learned gentleman had advanced another argument in opposition to the number Mr. Chairman, I see and deprecate the tendency, in this country, to adopt the habits, manners, and sentiments of the old Governments of Europe. It becomes us to hold back, to rest upon the republican plainness of our national character, and the political doctrines of earlier times. It would be strange, indeed, if, while England and France, and the latter under the guidance of the il- forty-eight. It was, that four of the States would lose, lustrious Lafayette, are endeavoring to perfect their representative systems, the people of this enlightened country should be found adopting a course of policy in reference to our own, illiberal and unwise. Mr. A. said he would not advocate a proposition to detract the smallest mite from the weight of any one State, as their weight was measured by the constitution. But he could not think there was any thing in the result the gentleman had stated, of importance sufficient to justify so radical a movement as the addition of forty members, at once, to the members of that House. each, one representative; a result which would not only impair their relative weight as States, but also that of the respective sections of the Union to which they belonged; and thus the balance which now existed between differSir, I have expressed the wish that the ratio which is ent portions of the country would be disturbed. From to determine the representation here for the next ten the premises laid down, he must say that the same concluyears should be such that each State should retain at sion did not strike him. How was the number of the least its present number on this floor. I will not deny House to be determined? By the ratio of representation that it would be to me matter of deep regret that the adopted. But, supposing the number to be doubled— State from which I come should be deprived of one re- would that alter the relative weight of the different States presentative in Congress. Such will be the case, if the on that floor? When two scales were equally poised, ratio be fixed at forty-eight thousand. Is it expedient? Is should equal weights be added, or equal weights subtractit wise to raise it so high? For Massachusetts I ask no fa-ed from both, the balance would not be in the least afvor at the hands of this Government. I only demand for fected; neither would that of the Northern and Southern her justice. Nor will I, in advocating her claims, refer sections of the Union be altered should each lose two rethe committee to her earlier history. No, sir, I would presentatives. speak only of the resources and the great interests of that commonwealth, as they stand connected with those of our common country. And in any view that I can take of this subject, I can discover no national considerations that seem to demand the sacrifice. But her people will acquiesce in the decision. And though it may affect her political influence unfavorably, they will be content to know that no untoward legislation here can disturb The gentleman from Virginia, in his usual forcible and the moral and social condition by which they are distin- lucid manner, had commented on the relation which this guished, nor the wise and liberal institutions which they House sustained to the other branch of the Legislature, cherish as the fairest inheritance of their puritan ancestors. and to the Executive Department, and had argued to show Mr. ALLAN, of Kentucky, addressed the House in op- that the number of the House ought to be increased in position to the amendment. He agreed in the sentiment order to increase the weight of the popular branch. Mr. expressed by the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. A. said he could not comprehend how such a result would ADAMS,] and the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. MERCER,] follow; but, supposing the gentleman to be right, how that the question before the House was one of great im- did the two Houses now stand? If their relative numeriportance; but as to the number of members which the cal weight, as fixed at first by the constitution, was then House ought to contain, he differed widely from them duly regulated, it was manifest that the House had got both. For their experience, learning, and matured wis- greatly in advance of the Senate; for, while the number dom, he had long entertained the most profound regard; of the Senators had not even doubled, that of the Repreand to be obliged to oppose them, added to his embarrass- sentatives had become nearly fourfold. There could, ment on the present occasion. Thus far the question had therefore, be no necessity of enlarging upon that ground. in general been treated as one of purely an arbitrary na- But the gentleman had further said that as the Governture, and subjected to no certain rule. Two, however, ment grew older the Executive power increased, and of the gentlemen from Massachusetts had proposed to would continue to increase yet more; and a large House lay down a rule, which he should now proceed to examine. of Representatives was necessary in order to put this body One of the gentlemen [Mr. ADAMS] had reminded the further from the reach of Executive influence. Now, to House that the first Congress contained but sixty-five his apprehension, the very reverse of this proposition was members, since which the population of the country had in- true, and in support of his opinion he would appeal to hiscreased fourfold; and should the number "44" be adopted, tory. All history concurred in showing that large numand its results produce a House of two hundred and fifty-bers of men were more readily actuated by impulse and nine members, there would be exactly the same increase sudden excitement, and were more apt to be broken into in the number of representatives as had taken place in the parties, and blindly to follow artful leaders, than small number of the people. From this statement of fact, Mr. ones; and the power of an extraneous influence had, in all A. said he inferred that the gentleman intended to lay times, been more commonly and more readily exerted over down this rule, that representation ought to increase in numerous assemblies than over those which contained JAN. 18, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. [H. of R. fewer numbers. It had been said that the British House a body so large as to act only in fragments, and never as of Commons contained six hundred members; but that a whole, could not be considered as a representative body; body was an example in point to support his own view; for, although it was so numerous, the business was actually accomplished by very few of the members. The great mass do not even come into the House, except when they were summoned on some great question. A quorum in the Athenian assembly consisted of six thousand men; yet every one knew that that assembly was controlled by a few orators. So perfectly was this understood, that when Philip of Macedon wished to obtain the control of that body, all he had to do was to purchase up a majority of their leaders. for when its members could not understand the question under deliberation, they could not, and did not, as to that question, represent the public opinion. As the people multiplied in numbers, their wants and their business became proportionably multiplied and various. But as gentlemen increased their legislative body, they proportionably diminished its capacity to do business. On this subject he might appeal to other times. The Congress which gave us our independence, and laid the foundation of our national policy, contained but fifty-four members; and the Congress of '89, the first under our present constitution, Mr. A. invited the House now to look at an opposite contained but sixty-five. He might appeal to gentlemen to example. The Congress of '76 had consisted of but fifty-cite a single instance where like results had followed the four members. On one side was despair, on the other deliberations of a body containing hundreds of men. all the power and wealth of England to corrupt. Yet did Mr. A. said it would be his wish to avoid both exthe result furnish as glorious a comparison as any that had tremes. He would have a House of Representatives nuever been seen on earth. There appeared, therefore, to merous enough to understand the wants and wishes of be little or nothing in the argument of the gentleman from the people, and yet not so numerous as to be unable to Virginia, that increasing the numbers of the House would act together. The relation of the size of the House to screen it from the influence of Executive power. the concerns of the treasury had been alluded to by some gentlemen, and, he thought, with 'great propriety. When gentlemen reflected that the direct expenses of a single session of Congress exceeded a million of dollars, they must perceive that so large an increase of the House as would be the result of the amendment, must produce a heavy draft upon the public funds. Mr. A. said that he could not agree that the subject was one perfectly arbitrary in its character. He considered it, on the contrary, subjected to as certain rules as could apply to any political or moral question. The natural endowments of man suggested an obvious rule. The powers of the human voice and ear marked the limit which should regulate the size of any deliberative assembly. Mr. Å. observed, in conclusion, that, believing the House That assembly was wholly unfit for its functions, every part of which could not be reached by the voice of a member addressing it. Where men could not see, hear, or understand the subject proposed to them, it was physically impossible they could deliberate upon it. at present to be large enough, he should vote in such a manner as would prevent an increase of its numbers, unless, indeed, the matter should unfortunately come to a mere scramble among the States who should get the most members; in which case, it was probable he should remember Kentucky. He might appeal to gentlemen's experience here for the last month and a half. What was more common than to Mr. LECOMPTE, of Kentucky, declared his intention hear subjects announced from the Chair discussed at length, to vote for the amendment, not that Kentucky would sufand, when the House was ripe for decision, to see mem- fer by the number forty-eight, but because he was unwilbers rise in their place and inquire what was the question ling to deprive any State of a representative, whose on which they were called to vote. Yet it was now pro-population had increased since the last census. The total posed to bring forty members more into such an assem- increase would average four thousand constituents to each bly! He had heard several gentlemen say, on the first representative, and he knew how discouraging it must be, day of the session, that they had not heard a single word under such circumstances, for a State, every one of whose of the Speaker's address, although that gentleman pos- members represented now four thousand more people sessed, as they all knew, a fine commanding voice. than before 1820, to lose one of their number. He did The rule he had mentioned was laid down by nature not fear a numerous representation. The people took herself, and whenever her limits were surpassed, an as- pride in their representatives; they knew them personally, sembly became broken into fragments, and acted not as a and made them the depositories of their wants and grievwhole, but in parts. Witness the constant reference of ances. Kentucky had had to bear with large fractions under subjects of every sort to the standing committees of the former censuses, and she could hold her own should forHouse. It was often objected that a majority of the mem-ty-eight prevail; but he should vote for forty-four for the bers could not get a full understanding of all the reports sake of other States. As to the fear of too large a numof those committees, and were obliged, from necessity, to ber of representatives, they could move their seats closer act on the faith that, though they themselves did not un- together; and if the gentlemen who were continually on derstand the subject, the committees did understand it. their feet would but curtail the length of their speeches, Whence such a necessity as this? From the fact that the the House could do its business, and they need not be so body was too large to act together. A gentleman from much afraid that the introduction of a few more silent Maryland [Mr. JENIFER] had contended warmly for hav- members would deprive them of the opportunity of speaking the House constituted on democratic principles. That ing as often as they pleased. position met his hearty approbation. The great principle Mr. ELLSWORTH, of Connecticut, said there was one of representation lay at the very foundation of our politi- general consideration, and, he thought, but one, which cal institutions; and all the hopes of ourselves and our pos- would influence gentlemen to strike out forty-eight and terity rested upon it. In fact, the great difference be- insert forty-four; and that was whether a representation tween our Government and the republics of antiquity lay in this House should be more or less numerous. Some, in this very principle of representation; and its practical said Mr. E., declare they are in favor of increasing it even application in our system was the greatest of all improve- to some hundreds, and others, that it is large enough now: ments in the science of Government. But representation the first think that a great number will best secure the was then the best, when it was numerous enough to ena- liberties of the people, and more fully represent their dible the representatives to understand the wants and opi- versified interests; while the second class believe that a nions of the people, and at the same time enable the smaller number equally secures the same objects, and that people the most effectually to control their representa- a large increase will inevitably embarrass our legislation. tives. That was the best representative body where the Twenty-eight, the increase of this House by the ratio of largest number of representatives could act together. But forty-eight thousand, is not, in my opinion, too great an H. OF R.] Apportionment Bill. [JAN. 18, 1832. increase. I do not, certainly, wish to see this House di- tion, that the people must be represented where they are, minished, nor, with the present population of the country, and not where they are not. increased beyond what is proposed by the ratio of forty- Mr. TRACY, of New York, said he understood that on eight thousand. When gentlemen speak of numerous the present motion the merits of the whole bill were a fair representatives in State Legislatures, or in the English Par-subject for discussion at this time, and he should assume liament, and argue from thence that two hundred and for- this to be correct in the few observations which he purty-one members are too few here, I must ask them to posed to submit to the committee. remember that local interests and small matters in detail I cannot but regret, said Mr. T., to have witnessed, for constitute extensively subjects of State legislation, which the two last days, the impatience evinced by many gentleis not the fact here; we legislate upon general and national men, while members have been expressing their views on objects. And as to the English Parliament, why, the re- the subject of the apportionment bill, which I consider one presentatives in Congress are expected, all of them, con-of grave moment, and probably as important in its effects stantly to attend and understand the business before them, on the future legislation of this country, as any which will and to participate in it, as most of them do, to the advan-be discussed here during the present session. It was protage of the country, but this is not the case in Parliament; vided in our constitution that the actual enumeration of six hundred there, does not ordinarily give as good a re- our population should be made within three years after the presentation or as large a House as two hundred here. first meeting of Congress, "and within every subsequent Should all the members of Parliament attend as we do here, term of ten years." This subject, then, is one, not of anand participate as we do in the business and debates of the nual recurrence; it never has and never can arise oftener House, the business of the nation would never be done. I than once in ten years, according to the former usages of would not object to forty-six thousand, though I think our Government. It, therefore, becomes peculiarly our forty-eight gives a better House, and is more in accordance duty to canvass the subject fairly and fully; to act with with the past. The honorable gentleman from Massachu- great deliberation and mature reflection in deciding upon setts [Mr. ADAMS] complains of the hardship of losing a its merits; and to endeavor to reconcile the discordant senmember, and almost pronounces it injustice. It is to reply timents of the different members composing this committo this consideration that I rise at this time. Why, sir, the tee. Most of those questions which are acted upon here, ratio of forty-four may do more injustice to the whole peo- present two aspects; and gentlemen, without much diffiple than forty-eight: in having four representatives, we culty, are able to arrive at a conclusion satisfactory to may not have as equal a representation as in losing them their own judgments; but, from the very nature of this from certain States. We are, as to this matter, to look to subject, there might be a great diversity of opinions as the whole, to the relative representation of the States on to details, as every one who proposes an amendment prethis floor; and, if we apply the same rule, we have the sents, in fact, a new side of the question, and, in support same relative representation, whether that represen- of his opinion, is able to urge arguments both cogent and tation be smaller or greater; fractions only make the reasonable. difference, and in this the greatest States are the least sufferers. The present House of Representatives is composed of two hundred and thirteen members; the bill reported will Now, sir, the fractional difference between forty-four give us two hundred and thirty-seven; and, should we and forty-eight thousand is only about forty thousand; cer- adopt the proposed amendment, our number would be tainly too small to rest an objection upon; and, indeed, two hundred and fifty-seven; an average of forty-six betaking any number from forty-four to fifty-four, the frac-yond our present representation. tional difference does not exceed one hundred and fifty Sir, said Mr. T., I cannot but consider the report of a thousand; not enough to bring into this House three re- respectable committee of this House, to which an importpresentatives. So that, after all, there is nothing here ant subject has been referred, as deserving of great conbut a question of numbers in this House. No State can sideration, and I am generally disposed to receive their complain, if it is best to take forty-eight. Sir, if any State report as based upon correct principles, though I should has claim on this ground, it is Connecticut and Massachu feel it my duty to scrutinize the same, when that commitsetts least of all. By the ratio of 1810, Connecticut had tee is composed of high-minded, honorable, and intellian unrepresented fraction of sixteen thousand, and Massa- gent gentlemen, from different sections of this country, chusetts one of six thousand only; by the ratio of 1820, and who, I believe, act with a single eye to the public Connecticut had a fraction of thirty-five thousand, and good, and who possess full means of obtaining informalost a member, as did Vermont, but Massachusetts of only tion on the subject entrusted to them. I would not for three thousand; and yet Massachusetts voted, as she had a slight reasons vary from that report. And I cannot but right to do, in phalanx, to favor her own representation. think that the number which they have reported as the Connecticut, too, was comparatively a small State, and ratio of representation, will do more equal justice than any she could not well afford to lose one-seventh of her repre- other. sentation, but she did; and now, with forty-four, as it is It was correctly remarked the other day by a gentleman wished by Massachusetts, Connecticut will have a fraction from Virginia, [Mr. CRAIG,] that we could not expect to of over thirty-three thousand. Forty-nine would be more arrive at a conclusion without a spirit of conciliation and acceptable to me, individually, than any other number, as mutual concession. I concur with him in his opinion. Unmost favoring Connecticut, but I will be satisfied with for- der the bill as reported, it is true many of the States, over ty-six, which will save Massachusetts and Virginia. I do and above their contemplated number of representatives, not speak of the past with any feeling of unkindness to- would be left with large fractions, and four, to wit, Verwards Massachusetts; but if taking away a member was not mont, Kentucky, Georgia, and New York, with over forty unjust or improper in 1820, it is not now. Sir, I am in thousand each; but were we to adopt any other basis, the favor of a full representation in this House; I wish ever to fractions of these States might be diminished by the opebe able to hear the people; but then they may be less ration; others would be placed in the same situation; heard and attended to by an overgrown representation, what would be the gain of some, would be the loss of than by one of a proper size. I believe the interests of others. It is true, by diminishing the votes proposed, the this country have been fully represented in this House, and fractional parts might be lessened; but, as in the bill reportthat twenty-eight new members is quite equal to the in- ed, these remnants would be relative, and the hardship, in creased population. It is impossible for us to act, in all this respect, not less than now. It becomes our duty to time, upon the principle of preserving to each State its disregard particular hardships, if not too flagrant, and look present representation. Such is the rule of the constitu- totally to the general welfare of this Union. Until the re JAN. 18, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. [H. OF R. port of the committee was presented, and the tables of too increased numbers. It was remarked the other day, calculation laid before us, as a representation from the by the gentleman from Rhode Island, [Mr. BURGES,] that State of New York, now represented by thirty-four mem- the House of Representatives ought, as near as might be, bers on this floor-under the bill we have thirty-nine, and, to be increased in a ratio with our population; but I canshould the amendment prevail, to have no less than forty- not subscribe to that opinion. It never was done when three members-I was disposed to favor such a ratio, as our representation was much more limited than now; nor it, at least, would not increase our numbers here from that cannot hereafter be done, when our population is so State, and perhaps as great a one as fifty-five or sixty numerous. In 1790, after our first census, with a poputhousand. Perhaps my impressions were too hastily receiv- lation of less than four millions, the number of our repreed, and one consideration, with me, of greater weight sentatives was one hundred and five, and at that rate, with than any other, has induced me to change those impresa population of more than twelve millions, we should sions. If we should extend beyond forty-eight thousand, have at least four hundred members, a number by far too one independent State in this Union would be deprived of great for convenient legislation. The gentleman from half of her representation here; and if the ratio should not Massachusetts [Mr. DEARBORN] observed the other day, be carried above forty-nine thousand, and one forty-eight that should the amendment be adopted, and the House thousand, she would be left with a fraction sufficiently actually become too numerous after a new census, this large, wanting a few hundred, to entitle her to another might be regulated, and the evil removed. This never representative. I think that the feelings of the citizens of would or could be done by diminishing the number which that respectable State ought to be regarded, and her inte- then might comprise the House. If that gentleman should rests consulted. Justly might she complain of unfairness hold a seat here, after the period referred to, and the evil and illiberality, should this result be produced. I trust which I apprehend should result, I hardly think he would I entertain no feelings for Rhode Island different from be induced to vote to diminish the number which then those which I might possess for any other State which might be here, nor would his State sustain him in so doing. might be placed in the same situation. The case of Dela- The number comprising the popular branch of the Goware has been mentioned as a precedent for a similar vernment never will be diminished. If it must increase, hardship. Under the former census, she was deprived of let it be gradually, and to a limited extent. Now is a faone-half of her representation on this floor. Her case was vorable crisis to establish a precedent, to be followed by truly a hard one, and yet the fraction was far less than our future legislators; and as our population hereafter what would remain to Rhode Island at a ratio of forty-nine may increase, a larger ratio, proportioned to such increase, thousand. The example heretofore set ought not to sanc- should be adopted, and so judiciously as not materally to tion injustice now. enlarge our number here. I am not unconscious of the sensibility felt by the mem- The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. DEARBORN,] bers from New Hampshire and Massachusetts, two of the to illustrate the truth of his arguments in favor of the four States, each of which, by the proposed bill, would amendment, referred to the great number of which the be deprived of one of her present number of representa- British House of Commons is constituted. I know that tives. They are to be commended for this sensibility. body consists of more than six hundred members, but, They entertain a high and correct sense of the honor and except upon the eve of some great and important national dignity of these States. This is as it should be. I have question, not one-half of its members are in their places. listened with great pleasure to the reasons which they Sir, the genius of the British constitution differs much have urged in favor of the amendment, but I am yet un- from ours. Thank God, we have no rotten borough sysconvinced by these arguments. By conceding to these tem. A large proportion of her members are not, like States their present number of representatives, and to ours, the free and voluntary choice of an enlightened namake the same equal to others, forty-six additional mem-tion of freemen, owing to their constituents high accountbers might be added to this body. Now, by this addition, ability, and most of whom are expected to express the would the relative weight or influence of numbers, from sentiments and advocate the interests of their constituents these States, in this branch of our national councils, be on this floor. The pride and interests of our constituents augmented? Massachusetts, at present, is entitled to thir- oblige us to mingle much in the debates of our body. teen members; under the proposed apportionment, she There, but few discuss questions. Observe, sir, in readwould have but twelve. Look at the map of that State; ing the reports on the recent debates in the British House see her limited geographical extent; view her dense po- of Commons on that lately all-absorbing question, the repulation; and do you not believe that twelve members form bill, how few individuals took a conspicuous part in could well, ably, and to the honor of the State, represent debate. But we have other duties to perform besides her here? That they might become intimately acquainted talking. The business of the nation is entrusted to us; with the habits, manners, feelings, and interests of their it is important and multifarious, and it is the more incumconstituents, and be entirely competent to transact the local business which might accrue in their several districts? I have not understood the reverse of this to be denied; if so, I for one should be disposed to yield much for the interests of that respectable State, as well as for others which might be placed in the same predicament. bent upon us to act with vigor and despatch, than to talk. What Mr. Jefferson most appropriately terms "the morbid rage of debate," seizes the members of this House. We talk against time and reason, to the injury of our constituents particularly, and the nation in general. A practical illustration of the truth of this assertion transpired In the course of this discussion, reference has been had here a few days since. A number of respectable indivi. to the additional expense incident to an increased repre- duals (I mean the president and directors of the Bank of sentation; but more important considerations than such the United States) sent a petition to this House, and the operate upon my mind. Nor can I believe that two hun-question was one merely of reference; that is, whether dred and thirty-seven representatives, biennially elected, the paper should be referred to a select committee to be and sent here from the people, would be obnoxious to bri- raised for the purpose of considering that alone, or to a bery, or any other species of corruption. I have too standing committee of this House, to whom the same subhigh an opinion of the integrity and character of the ject-matter had previously been referred. And on this American people to deem it necessary to increase our question nearly twenty gentlemen made speeches, and yet number here to guard against such an improbable evil. a greater number would have done the same, except for While it is of primary importance that the different parts of the Union should be fairly and competently represented in our popular branch, we ought vigilantly to guard against the enforcement of that salutary and most necessary rule permitting the previous question to be interposed, which, fortunately for the interests of the nation, put a stop to so |