entation. The
constitutional provision that gave to the Assembly the power, after
1841 and thereafter at intervals of not less than ten years, and under
prescribed conditions, to make re-apportionments of representation had
never been availed of. In view of its phenomenal growth in wealth and
population, the west keenly resented this failure to act on the part
of the Assembly of 1841-42.[29] The questions, therefore, that
confronted the Convention of 1829-30 were again brought forward in
1850.

The Convention of 1850 met at Richmond in October, but shortly
adjourned until January 6, 1851. In February the question of the basis
of representation was taken up. The Committee appointed to determine
the proper basis could reach no agreement; thereupon, many plans were
submitted by delegates from each section of the State. The western
delegates proposed that the House of Delegates should consist of one
hundred and fifty-six members, should be elected biennially, and that
the Senate should consist of fifty members chosen for four years; both
Houses should be elected upon the suffrage basis; and in 1862 and
every ten years thereafter, a re-apportionment should be made on that
basis. The eastern delegates proposed a House of Delegates of one
hundred and fifty-six members and a Senate of thirty-six; both Houses
should be elected on the mixed basis and re-apportionments should be
made on that basis in 1855 and every ten years thereafter.[30]

Neither of these plans was adopted. Consequently various plans of
compromise were brought forward. Botts, of Richmond, and George W.
Summers, of Kanawha, were among those who suggested propositions. On
the motion of Mr. Martin, of Henry County, it was decided that a
committee of eight, four from each section, be elected by the
convention to provide a compromise. On the fifteenth day of May, this
committee reported in favor of a House of Delegates of one hundred and
fifty members; eighty-two from the west and sixty-eight from the east;
and a Senate of fifty; thirty from the east and twenty from the west.
It provided further for a re-apportionment in 1865 and for submitting
both the mixed and suffrage bases to the people should the Assembly,
at that time, fail to agree.[31] The plan was rejected. Following the
failure of several other compromise plans, Chilton presented with
modifications the report of the committee of eight.[32] This report
provided that the numbers therein indicated for each