Legislature to adopt such a principle if they should think it advisable to do so.

Then the

But Wisconsin is not the only State that has adopted a similar provision. New York has done the same; here is their Constitutional pro-person elected to a seat in the Legislature will vision on the subject: be accountable to the people of the immediate district for which he is elected.

"The members of the Assembly shall be apportioned among the several counties of the State by the Legislature, as nearly as may be, according to the number of their respective inhabitants, excluding aliens and persons of color not taxed, and shall be chosen by single districts."

This proposition is not new. It has been adopted by other States, and is one of the improvements of the times; and I trust gentlemen will not hastily dispose of it, but give it that consideration that it deserves.

This, sir, is an age of improvement, not only in the arts and sciences, but in government also. It is to meet the improvements or advances of the age that has called this Convention. The improvements in the science of government does not consist of the number of restrictions that may be placed on the people, but in removing them, and enabling the people the better to govern themselves. The improvements, in my opinion, that we are mainly called upon to make, are to be found in the three great divisions of the power of govrernment-the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial. As you improve these you better enable a free people to govern themselves. Great reforms are contemplated in the judicicial department and I trust they will be carried out. Judges hereafter are to be elected by the people, and other very important reforms are contemplated in the practice in courts of justice. The executive department is also being improved. This Convention has already determined that all executive officers shall be elected by the people and that they shall serve but short periods.

The Legislative department should also be to the improvement of the age. The people should be enabled to elect, directly their own representatives, and they should be held directly accountable to the district that elect them. Under the plan proposed by the committee, this will not be done, and can in no other way be so well effected as by single districts.

Mr. WOLFE would ask the gentleman from Putnam (Mr. Stevenson) whether he proposed to divide counties into districts where a county sent more than one member?

Mr. STEVENSON. Certainly.

Mr. BORDEN. If I understood this proposition, it is that where a county sends two or three members to the House of Representatives, the Legislature may cause such county to be divided into so many districts, as there are members to be elected that they may either divide it themselves, or cause the county board to divide it. I think the principle is a correct one, and I should be glad to see it adopted. If the Convention is not prepared to say that it shall be so, we might at least leave it with the

Mr. NAVE. So far from agreeing with this proposition, I must say that the idea of dividing counties for representative purposes seems to me to be proposterous. It would create a division in each county that has more than onerepresentative. I believe, sir, that the only way to obtain a fair representation in reference to territory, is that each county should send one.... member, at least, to the Legislature. This would supercede all the difficulty which gentlemen seem to apprehend in those counties which send more than one representative. I am decidedly opposed to representation in the Legislature being based on mere territory; but if gentlemen desire to have the representation confined to certain limits, and that the State should be represented by certain designated territories, the true policy, in that case, would be to let every county in the State have a representative. The proposition of the gentleman from Putnam (Mr. Stevenson) can never effect what he designs to effect by it. It can never have any other effect than to create county fac{tions and county difficulties which must be forever entailed upon the counties of Putnam, Monroe and others, sending more than one represantative to the Legislature. I am, therefore, opposed to the amendment.

Cries of "question, question." Mr. STEVENSON. The amendment I have.. proposed is precisely the provision which is found both in the Constitution of New York and that of Wisconsin, with this exception, that I have added a provision that parts of counties shall not be added to each other in forming districts. With that exception, I have copied ver: batum, the same provision which exists in the Constitutions of both the States I have men-tioned.

Mr. JOHNSON moved to lay the amendment on the table; and upon a division-ayes 43; noes 39-the motion was agreed to.

Mr. ROBINSON moved to amend the section by adding the following proviso: "Provided that each county shall be entitled to one representative."

Mr. BORDEN. I move to amend the amend

ment by striking out all after the word "provi," and inserting the following:

ded,"

"That any county having two-thirds or more, of the ration of representation, shall be entitled to elect one member of the House of Representatives."

Mr. STEVENSON.. I move to lay the amendment and the amendment to the amendment on the table. Mr. BORDEN. and nays.

Then I will ask the yeas

The yeas and nays were ordered and taken as follows: AYES. Messrs. Badger, Beard, Berry, Bourne, Bowers, Bracken, Chapman, Chenowith, Clark of Hamilton, Clark of Tippecanoe, Coats, Cole, Crawford, Davis of Madison, Davis of Parke, Davis of Vermillion, Dunn of Jefferson, Duzan, } Elliott, Farrow, Fisher, Haddon, Hardin, Hogin, Holman, Hovey, Johnson, Jones, Kent, Logan, Maguire, McLean, Mooney, Morgan, Morison of Marion, Nave, Newman, Niles, Rriden, Read of Clark, Ritchey, Schoonover, Shannon, Snook, Stevenson, Tannehill, Thoms, Thornton, Todd, Wallace, Watts, Wiley, Wolfe, and Mr. President.-56.

counties adjoining each other, and say that one of them has two thousand five hundred voters, and that the next county may lack one, two, or three hundred of coming up to the ratio. What, I ask is, that the Legislature shall have the power to transfer the benefit of the overplus of the ratio in the large county to the smaller one, so as to entitle it to a Representative.

Mr. MILLER. I move to lay the amendment on the table.

The motion was agreed to..

Mr. DUNN of Jefferson. Is it in order, now, Mr. President, to move to strike out the whole section?

The PRESIDENT. It is.

NAYS.-Messrs Alexander, Anthony, BickMr. DUNN. Then I move to strike out the nell, Blythe, Borden, Brookbank, Bryant, Butler, Carr, Chandler, Colfax, Dick, Dobson, Ed- section as amended, and insert in lieu thereof, a section, which I will send to the Clerk's table, monston, Foster, Garvin, Gootee, Gordon, Graham of Miami, Hall, Hamilton, Harbolt, Helm, which is, in effect, the same as the one originHelmer, Hendricks, Hitt, Howe, Huff, Kelso, ally reported by the committee. I make this Kendall of Wabash, Kendall of Warren, Lock-motion for the reason that, after we had voted hart, March, Mather, May, McClelland, Miller of Clinton, Miller of Fulton, Miller of Gibson, Milroy, Moore, Pepper of Crawford, Read of Monroe, Robinson, Sherrod, Smiley, Smith of Ripley, Smith of Scott, Spann, Steele, Tague, Trimbly, Walpole, Wheeler, Work, Wunderlich, Yocum, and Zenor.-55.

So the amendment and the amendment to the amendment were laid on the table.

Mr. STEVENSON. I move to strike out the words "or representative;" and that will leave the matter discretionary with the legislature hereafter, whether they will divide the counties

or not.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair would inform the gentleman from Putnam that his amendment is not in order, these words being part of the words which the Convention, a few minutes ago, refused to strike out.

That has been

Mr. LOCKHART offered the following proviso, to be added at the end of the section: "Provided that any county having two-thirds or more of the ratio of representation, shall be entitled to a Representative." SEVERAL MEMBERS. voted down already. The question being taken on the amendment, it was adopted-ayes 55, noes 46. Mr. KELSO. 1 move further to amend the section by adding the following proviso: "Provided, further, that the Legislature shall have the power to transfer the residuum due in large counties, to small counties adjoining, for purposes of representation."

down, by yeas and nays, the proposition to allow a Representative to every county having twothirds of the ratio of representation, the same proposition is suddenly sprung upon us in another form, and carried. The yeas and nays were not called on the second vote, and I must believe that the question was not understood by the Convention. Now, sir, I feel that it is desirable that every county in the State, should, as far as practicable, have a Representative in the popular branch of the Legislature. I shall, therefore, when the section providing that the Senate shall not consist of less than fifty members, and the House of not less than one hundred members, comes up on its third reading, move to refer it back to the committee which reported it, with instructions to report a section, providing that the Senate shall consist of not more than thirty-five members, and the House of Representatives of not more than one hundred and fifteen members; by that means giving a greater number of counties each a Representative in the lower branch of the General Assembly. I hold it to be the true democratic doctrine, that the people are to be represented in the General Assembly, and not territory, Suppose the ratio of representation is so fixed that every fifteen hundred voters shall be entitled to a Representative; then, under the twothirds rule, a county having a thousand voters, would be entitled to a Representative, while another county, having fifteen hundred voters would be only entitled to one Representative. Is this fair? We all enjoy the protection of the same laws, we share alike the burdens of taxation; then let us all stand upon the broad basis of equality, and share equally in the legislation of the State.

I am requested to explain what I intend by this proviso. It is this: Supposing that, by the time we will have the present Constitution adopted by the people-if that should ever happen-there should be in the State, two hundred Mr. KELSO. The gentleman from Jefferson, thousand voters, for a hundred Representatives; (Mr. Dunn,) is very liberal in his professions of that would give two thousand polls to each Rep-liberality to the smaller counties. I wish he resentative, or for the ratio. Now, take two were equally as liberal in his acts and votes.

He is perfectly willing to do all that he can to give them a representation, provided that they do not get it. [Laughter.] That is just the length that he goes, and there he stops, and I am sorry to say that there are too many gentlemen on this floor who are like him.

Wayne county should continue to send four whig Representatives, she would have four whig votes; and if Marion county should retain her three Representatives, she would give three democratic votes. Upon that score there may be some reason to contend for a large number of Representatives; but even in that matter it is by no means unfair to say that each county should have one vote. Some gentlemen appear to be extremely wedded to the people just now. Everything must be measured by the population. Now let us see if we have not a precedent on this subject, somewhat different from the principle here contended for. In the organization of the General Government, they have based one side on the representation of the population, and the other side upon territory. The little State of Rhode Island, with as much territory as would make a tolerable potato-patch, has her two Senators, while the great State of New York, with ten times more territory, and popu

Thus, then, we see that one branch of the General Government is regulated by territory, while the other is based upon population. Now, will any man deny that that is a wholesome fouudation on which to base representation? No, sir; long experience has furnished too strong testimony in favor of that principle. Now can there be any danger in changing that mode, so as to fix the basis of the apportionment for the Senate of Indiana, on the population, and that of the House of Representatives on territory? If that be a good organization of government, and one that has been found to work well for threequarters of a century, to base one portion of the National Government on territory and the other on population, why may not the same thing answer in the State of Indiana, only reversing the difference between the Senate and the House of Representatives?

Now, sir, the large counties with a small population, are entitled to more consideration in this Convention, than they seem likely to receive. You take a county north, with perhaps six, eight, or ten hundred voters in it at the present time, and with from four to five hundred square miles of territory, with every possible inducement for people to settle there, and I believe that, within a very short time, the population will double its present number; and yet you so arrange it that, under the new Constitution, they cannot get their fair share of the representation. There is not a single question that arises in the Legislature, which gives rise to more vexatious discussion than this question of apportioning the State for representative pur-lation too, has only the same number of Senators. poses; and of the truth of this assertion I know that I may appeal to the President for his testimony. Now, if we could have it as it is now, that there should be a Representative from each county, we would save all that difficulty, and the immense expense, and trouble, and vexation that has, every five years, occurred in the Legislature, ever since we had a government. I say that there is no good or substantial reason that can be urged, why a county with three thousand voters, is any better entitled to two Representatives, than one with fifteen hundred voters. If we were going to continue the old mode of legislation, as I once before remarked, that every county, and perhaps every township, should have its separate laws, and that there should not be in two counties, on the same side of a creek, two laws alike, in regard to the regulation of county business, then there would be some propriety in contending for a large number of Representatives in each county. But as the matter is now, as it is the intention of the Convention to place a barrier between the Legislature and the people, so that there shall not be this special and local legislation, that has distracted the State for years, and heaped upon us burdens of taxation for no good purpose; then, sir, the argument fails, and the reason of that provision has ceased, and the force of it has ceased. One man can represent a county with three thousand voters, just as well as he can represent a hundred men. Where, then, is the use of contending for a large number? There is one single reason, and that is just such a one as every member on this floor has taken great pains not to mention. In the election of Uni- | ted States Senator-for beyond that it cannot go, if we adopt the principle that the people shall elect all the officers of the State-in the election of United States Senator, while the mode of election continues as it is now, there might be some reason for contending for it.

If

Now there is a plan which occurs to me that has not yet been proposed, and which, so far as I can judge, is better than any that has yet been offered. It does not originate with me, but I will mention it; and that is, that the State should be divided into fifteen Senatorial districts, based on population; or, if gentlemen are determined to have fifty Senators, then say twenty-five Senatorial districts, based upon population as nearly equal as possible without di-, viding the counties, and in each district let two Senators be elected. Then if there be contending local interests, you will have each fairly represented. By that means you would secure the Senate in such a way as many gentlemen contend for. Then let each county have one Representative, fixing the ratio, if you please, at two thousand votes, and let the surplus over that amount go to the small counties. That kind of plan would be more just. Whether it will succeed here or not, I am not prepared to say; but, as the matter stands now, I contend that it is a nearer approach to justice than

any plan which has yet been proposed to this body.

The gentleman from Jefferson (Mr, Dunn) has complained that this question has been sprung upon the Convention again after it has once been voted down; but he will find that, so far from this being a just matter of complaint, it is the result of calm and deliberate reflection, and a righteous determination to do that which is right in the eyes of all the people.

imate it as nearly as possible. I have been surprised that gentlemen on this floor should so pertinaciously insist that every county, without regard to population, should have a separate representation. Such a provision, unless the number of representatives is increased beyond any number yet suggested, would give to such a county as Benton, having but two hundred voters, the same power in the legislation of the State as a county with ten times her population. Such a system of apportionment would be as detestable as the rotten-borough system of England.

the same number of voters in any other part of the State have the same number of representatives. Four counties having a thousand voters each, may separately elect their four representatives, and their representatives thus elected have the same influence in the Legislature, so far as their votes are concerned, as the four representatives elected by the same number of voters in the county of Wayne. According to the multiplication table I learned, four times I. DUNN of Jefferson. I always regret, one counted just as much as one time four. Mr. President, to be under the necessity of ad- Even at the two-thirds ratio, many of the coundressing the Convention. We have so much ties in the State will not be entitled to a sepado, and as yet have accomplished so little, rate representation. We cannot establish any that I feel disposed to contribute at least my si- ratio of representation that will suit exactly the Ince to the dispatch of business. But the gen- division of our population by county lines. tlemen from Allen and Switzerland have allud- There will be fractions above as well as below ed to me so directly in their remarks, that I the ratio, and where they are not large they must crave the indulgence of the Convention should be disregarded in both cases. Where, for a few words in reply. Before gentlemen however, it is impossible for us to arrive at the are so very liberal in their imputations of inter-exact line of equality, it is our duty to approxested motives to others, it might, perhaps, be quite as well for them to turn the glass the other way, and examine their own hearts to ascertain whether they are totally disinterested in urging the claims of the small counties in this State to such peculiar and important privileges. I have advocated the propriety of basing your representation upon population and not upon territory, not because I happen to be a delegate from one of the most populous counties of the State, but because I believe that to be the only fast and firm basis of representation. I hold that a man should be a man in any county of the State, and in no county the mere fraction of a man. I can see no justice in allowing two men in one county the same influence in the Legislature of the State as three men in another. I have no interested motives in this matter whatever. I know very well that many of the counties in this State which are now but sparsely inhabited, will soon be occupied by a large population, and were I to regard exclusively the interest of that part of the State in which I live, I should vote exactly the reverse of the vote I intend to give. I know that the southern part of Indiana is not increasing in population as rapidly as the northern, and that, in a few years the portion of the State that will control its destiny will not be the centre and the south, but the great north; and as I have said on a former occasion, I care not how soon the north obtains that control, provided she obtains it on that basis which places every voter in the State on an equality as to his political rights.

The gentleman from Switzerland (Mr. Kelso) says, that in a county which has four members in the General Assembly, one voter counts as much as four voters in a county having but one representative. That is not the case; or if it is, I should like to have explained the rule of arithmetic by which it is found. It is true, five thousand voters in the county of Wayne may have five representatives in the Legislature, but

Some gentleman has referred to Sir Robert. Peel's borough of Sayren, which sent two members of Parliament to represent an empty pig-pen, and I think, sir, we shall entitle ourselves to a place in a pig-pen whenever we adopt so unjust and unfair a system of representation as that which has been so earnestly advocated by the gentleman from Switzerland and others.

Sir, I understand it to be the true democratic doctrine that the will of the majority, under such constitutional restraints as may be reasonably imposed, should be the controlling will in a State. And when I speak of a majority I refer to men, citizens of the State, and not to acres of land, whether they be acres of wood land, prarie land, or "land covered with water." Under any other system, to say nothing of ordinary legislation, in the election of a United States Senator the acres might triumph over the men of the State. I trust, sir, that no basis of representation will be adopted that does not regard the people as the source of all power.

Mr. DOBSON. I had no anticipation that this question would have been agitated this afternoon; but as it is up, I will say a single word. I am not willing to depart far from the well-established rule of "taxation and representation;" yet, as we cannot possibly arrive at

exact justice, I have always been willing that a, county having two-thirds of the ratio of representation should be entitled to a representative in the Legislature. There are, however, some counties with but a small number of voters; and it would be unfair to give them a voice in the Legislature, when, by so doing, you would deprive some of the large counties of two-thirds of their representation. I think the section is as good as it can be; and I hope it will be allowed to remain as it is.

avoided. A general scramble must decide the result, and the ten members be set apart by chance, or some other equally uncertain mode. Wayne and Marion, and possibly Jefferson counties, would probably get two representatives and a senator each; but the balance of the counties would have to contend in a sort of general scramble for the other seven or eight mem-> bers.

ate of the United States as being organized upon a very different principle, affording no parallel case, and therefore an unfortunate illustration. I hold, that, in the structure of the Government of the United States, the Senate was created as the power peculiarly fitted and requisite to guard and protect the sovereignty of the several States, they being, in all respects, equal, so far as the attribute of sovereignty is concerned. The Senate of the United States is endowed with diversified pow

The gentleman from Switzerland county has instanced the organization of the Senate of the Mr. MORRISON of Marion. I supposed, United States, as being based upon territory this morning, when we passed the section pro-regardless of population. I look upon the Senviding for fifty senators and one hundred representatives, that we had established a great and important principle, alike permanent and proper. But, from the many attempts to disturb that de- { cision, and the success which has seemingly attended the effort, even to carrying an amendment directly in collision with our previous action, I am now doubtful as to what is the real sense and intention of the Convention. The gentleman from Switzerland (Mr. Kelso) is not content with the vote which ordered the section to be engrossed, but still presses his at-ers; these powers go far beyond a mere legisla tempts to effect a change. By perseverence, or accident, or inattention, together with a thin attendancǝ of the members, he is in a fair way to succeed with his proposition. This proposition I consider as injurious to the people of the State. It violates every well-settled and correct rule of legislation-every republican right. If the small counties be permitted to have the same voice in the halls of legislation as the large counties, you directly establish the principle that the minority shall govern the majority.

tive power. In one sense, the Senate may beconsidered as partially executive, so far as it controls executive appointments, or advises and consents to the diplomacy of the Government, and in the sanction of executive action and the ratification of treaties. They are an entirely different body from the representative body, and that difference is so apparent, that I consider it unnecessary to go into further comparison, or to pursue that branch of the subject at greater length. I would in reply ask the question: Upon what basis is the House of Representatives of the General Government established? Certainly upon population, and not upon territory. The representatives of that population are there to protect and guard the special interests of their local constituency, as well as to legislate for the general welfare. They relieve the Senate from the detail of local business, and afford senators more opportunity for studying and acting upon objects of a morenational character. But enough on this head; for it must be apparent, that the basis of repre

States is population instead of territory.

That, sir, is the practical effect of the proposition of the gentleman from Switzerland. There are ninety organized counties in the State, and the number of representatives will probably be one hundred, such yet being the decision of the Convention. Suppose each county gets a representative, thus, ninety of the hundred would be disposed of, and ten representatives would remain to be distributed among the whole number of counties in the State. What would be the operation under this rule? There are in Indiana fifty-two counties contain-sentation in the Government of the United ing over two thousand polls, and thirty-eight counties containing less than two thousand By the report of the Auditor of State, we see polls. Now, let me inquire which of the fifty- that the number of polls in the State is a little two large counties are to be permitted to take short of one hundred and eighty-seven thous-an additional representative out of the ten and. If we adopt, as a ratio, four thousand which remains after giving one to each of the polls for a senator, and two thousand polls for a several counties, large and small? Which of representative, it will give forty-six senators and the forty-two large counties are to have but one ninety-four representatives. It is probable that representative? How can this ratio be made to the real number of votes within the State work equitably? How can you satisfy the peo-proper very nearly to two hundred thousple of the counties that get but one member of and, because the poll list exempts all persons the correctness of such a division. Ten mem- over fifty years of age. Should this estimate bebers are to be divided into fifty-two counties.correct, then the number of fifty senators and What a field for contention-for arrangement-one hundred representatives will be a very ap-. for trade and barter-if even corruption be propriate number, predicated on the ratio above