FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   711   712   713   714   715   716   717   718   719   720   721   722   723   724   725   726   727  
728   729   730   731   732   733   734   735   736   737   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   751   752   >>   >|  
e mere distinction of color made, in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man.--_p_. 806. MONDAY, June 11, 1787. Mr. SHERMAN proposed, that the proportion of suffrage in the first branch should be according to the respective numbers of free inhabitants; Mr. RUTLEDGE proposed, that the proportion of suffrage in the first branch should be according to the quotas of contribution. Mr. KING and Mr. WILSON, in order to bring the question to a point, moved, "that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the National Legislature ought not to be according to the rule established in the Articles of Confederation, but according to some equitable ratio of representation."--_p_. 836. It was then moved by Mr. RUTLEDGE, seconded by Mr. BUTLER, to add to the words, "equitable ratio of representation," at the end of the motion just agreed to, the words "according to the quotas of contribution." On motion of Mr. WILSON, seconded by Mr. PINCKNEY, this was postponed; in order to add, after the words, "equitable ratio of representation," the words following: "In proportion 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"--this being the rule in the act of Congress, agreed to by eleven States, for apportioning quotas of revenue on the States, and requiring a census only every five, seven, or ten years. Mr. GERRY (of Massachusetts) thought property not the rule of representation. Why, then, should the blacks, who were property in the South, be in the rule of representation more than the cattle and horses of the North? On the question,--Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--9; New Jersey, Delaware, no--2.--_pp_. 842-3. TUESDAY, June 19, 1787. Mr. MADISON. Where slavery exists, the republican theory becomes still more fallacious.--_p_. 899. SATURDAY, June 30, 1787. Mr. Madison,--admitted that every peculiar interest, whether in any class of citizens, or any description of states, ought to be secured as far as possible. Wherever there is danger of attack, there ought to be given a constitutional power of defence. But he contend
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   711   712   713   714   715   716   717   718   719   720   721   722   723   724   725   726   727  
728   729   730   731   732   733   734   735   736   737   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   751   752   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

representation

 

quotas

 
suffrage
 

proportion

 

branch

 

equitable

 

WILSON

 
question
 

motion

 

Carolina


seconded

 

citizens

 

agreed

 

inhabitants

 
property
 

Massachusetts

 

States

 

description

 

RUTLEDGE

 

contribution


proposed

 

horses

 
Delaware
 
Jersey
 
thought
 

cattle

 
Virginia
 

Maryland

 
blacks
 
Georgia

Connecticut
 

Pennsylvania

 
fallacious
 
Wherever
 

secured

 

states

 
interest
 
danger
 

contend

 
defence

attack

 

constitutional

 

peculiar

 

admitted

 

slavery

 

exists

 
MADISON
 

TUESDAY

 
republican
 

theory