H. or R.] Apportionment Bill. [FEB. 1, 1832. purity of its patriotism, which first convened under the stood by himself, and by his constituents, contained about constitution by which the great interests of this country forty towns, and was nearly one hundred miles in length. are intended to be protected? It was not only their argu. It was utterly impossible for him to know all his constitument, but their most deliberate act, that there should be ents, much less to be on those terms of free and unreone representative to every thirty thousand inhabitants. served intercourse which should ever subsist between the At that time the interests of the country were so multifa constituent and the representative. He would then say rious and extensive, that it was then considered that the to his friends, do not increase the evil, by extending the popular branch of this Government should be constituted limits of his district, and by increasing the number of his by such a number. This example, and these precepts, constituents. He would merely ask that the same meacoming, as they do, from such high authority, should have sure of justice should be meted out to his State and other effect here; and, by adopting the amendment, you would States similarly situated, that they would wish to have carry out the principles of our political fathers. meted out to them under like circumstances. He would address himself to the representatives of He would detain the House but a moment by adverting to another objection which had been urged, that it would slaveholding States, to bear in mind the difference beimpose a heavy burden upon the public treasury; take tween their situation and the situation of those who repretoo much of the people's money, by representing the sent districts peopled as the districts of New England people's interests! Is this the idea? When the people are. While the representative from Virginia, from the shall complain, it will then be time to give heed to that peculiar population of his district, is enabled to be personsuggestion. This free representative Government has its ally known to the freemen of his district, it is not so with foundation in the opinion of the people. It is supported us. We would then ask for stern justice at their hands. by their patriotism, and it will be sustained by their virtue He would address himself to the representatives of the and their valor. Let us not then infringe their rights or great States of the Union, to go with him in the support abridge their privileges by any departure from the true of his amendment. Our population had gone steadily, policy and principle of our form of Government. Pre- but moderately, onward. New Hampshire has increased serve the representation of the country. It will be the since the last census nearly 30,000; and it is to be hoped most effectual means to prevent corruption. Do not that she will not be required to lose the benefit of what lessen its character, by lessening its number. Do not she now has. impair its moral influence, by diminishing its numerical The country from Erie to the ocean will bear evidence force. Let the representation of the country increase as that the natives of New Hampshire are to be found in the population shall advance. Do not, by the establish- every village and in every town. Even on this floor, ment of any rule, lose sight of the great principle upon among the representatives from the State of New York, which rests the representation of the people. The first he recognised three who were born and educated in his departure from well defined authority, from a well settled own district. And he presumed that not a school district policy, in a free Government like ours, should be regard- could be found in Ohio, without its numbering more than ed as one step towards despotism; as one fatal advance towards the destruction of public freedom. There is no right held more sacred by the American people than the right of representation; a right purchased by their blood! a right which will never be abandoned until they shall surrender their personal liberty. one from the granite State. And he trusted in this day of their great prosperity, for which all New England rejoiced in sincerity and in truth, and he could not doubt that they would be disposed to extend to us that justice which the peculiar situation of the congressional districts in our region of country imperiously requires. The people of this free country are perfectly able, at He would address himself to the representatives of the all times, to understand their duties and their dangers. new States, in that spirit of kindness and good will which The intelligence which pervades every class of our com- it is to be hoped will ever characterize the intercourse munity, fully enables them to understand the nature of between them and us, to go with him in the support of our free institutions--the blessings of self-government. the amendment. While they are destined to be a large, He would then urge upon the House that 'they do not, a rich, and populous section of the Union, New England by any legislative act, weaken the confidence of their can only hope to retain her present weight in her national constituents in the purity and in the permanency of the councils. free principles of their Government. And she trusts that the younger members of the confederacy would not be disposed to deprive her of any portion of her representation, unless the diminution of her number should require it. He would address himself to the representatives of the other States of the Union, to go with him in support of the amendment; and not see the pioneers in that mighty struggle, which gave us a name among the nations of the earth, despoiled of any portion of their representation. It was proper to remark that no consideration as to any probable course which may be taken hereafter by our successors, should influence the decision of the present question. We should not stop to speculate as to what may be the numerical size of this assembly at some far distant period of our history. We should only look to the immediate effect of the proposed amendment. If its tendency would be more equally to distribute political power among the members of the confederacy-if its He would add, in conclusion, that, by adopting the tendency would be to do more justice to some States, and amendment, no injustice is done to any one great State. no injustice to any-if its tendency would be to promote By refusing to adopt it, injustice would be done to more harmony and peace--if its tendency would be to give no than one. And if the question should be carried to every greater number of representatives than the exigencies of hamlet in this nation; if it should be put home to every the republic demand, then he trusted that the motion to individual of this wide and extended republic--Shall the amend would prevail. representation of the country be increased? the universal He would address himself to those who represent on response would be, yes. Have we not a right thus to this floor the great cities of this Union, whether a regard say? Are there any memorials on your table calling for to equal justice should not induce them to support the a reduction? Has any member, in the name of his conamendment. They were peculiarly favored; their dis-stituents, asked for a reduction? Not so. If they could tricts were easily visited; their constituents were readily be heard, they would say to us, go on-swell the repreknown; whose wishes and whose wants, and whose will, sentation--increase the numerical force of the popular were with great facility communicated to their represen- branch of this Government--for in that we repose our tatives. But not so with us; our population is extended confidence--in that is concentrated our hopes--in that, over a large territory, His own district, as well under-and in that alone, rests the security of the republic. FEB. 1, 1832.] Apportionment Bill, ‹ [H. of R. Mr. CARSON next obtained the floor, and made an Many appeals, he observed, had been made to the ge. earnest appeal to those gentlemen who preferred 48, nerosity and magnanimity of the new States, on the effect urging them to forego their choice, and vote for 44, in which the ratio of forty-eight thousand, as reported in order to save the feelings of those whose States would be the bill, would have upon the interests, or the relative deprived of some of their present representatives by the weight, of the older States of the Union. A very eloadoption of 48; and, also, in order to avoid the consump-quent and powerful appeal had been made, in particular, tion of time and money in a protracted contest. by the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. BRIGGS,] who, Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, spoke in favor of in the course of his interesting speech, had asked the the amendment, advocating it chiefly on the principle West to remember that, in the days of her infancy and that the spirit of representative Government required weakness, she was taken in the hand by her elder sisters that the representatives of the people should be as nu- of the South and the East, and introduced into the great merous, not as few, as circumstances would admit. He republican family of the nation upon principles of equality urged the necessity of a numerous House, as the only and justice. Mr. McC. here observed that he was bound counterpoise to Executive influence, and concluded by an to say, in vindication of the West, that, for the continuappeal to the new States, urging them to act in the spirit ance of those principles of equality and justice, and for of liberality toward the elder members of the confederacy. those alone, it was that he contended against the proMr. SUTHERLAND contended that there was no ne-posed amendment of the gentleman from New Hampcessity for any increase of the House. It was an exceed-shire, which, as the tables before them demonstrated, ingly troublesome House even now, and would be much would throw an unequal and unjust weight upon the more so should twenty-two new members be added to it. younger States, by placing the largest fractions of unreWhen the old States appealed to the new States as of presented population upon those which had, at present, their younger brethren, it would be well to remember and in the very nature of things, must have, in future, the that they were such literally; in support of which position, most rapid, and progressively rapid, increase in numbers. he referred to the great number of representatives from He should not attempt to follow the whole of the ar other States who had been born in New England. New guments of the gentleman who had so ably spoken in Hampshire had one of its citizens at the head of one of support of the amendment, even if he imagined himself the departments, and another son of the East was at the capable of throwing more light upon the question by arhead of another, while a son of New England [Mr. PLUM-gument alone. He should prefer to state a few facts, and MER] represented an entire State on that floor, (Mississip- refer to the conclusions which it would be apparent were pi,) and, in case of the Presidential election coming into the only just ones that could be drawn from them, as to the House, would wield the whole force of that State in the fallacy of that reasoning which, admitting the great his single person. Yet the old States, while they were and important principle of an equal representation, conthus peopling and representing the regions of the West, tended that that desirable end, in our republican Governwere stickling to retain their whole representation at ment, could be attained only by the establishment of a home. Their cry was still, give, give, give. The States ratio of forty-four thousand. had an equal representation in the Senate, but could not Mr. McC. here went into an extended calculation of expect it in that House. He concluded by noticing some the respective effects of the different ratios which had of the arguments of the two last speakers. been proposed in the course of the debate, as supported Mr. MCCARTY, of Indiana, commenced by observing by the advocates of the several numbers so proposed, and that he approached the subject before the House with the opposed by the gentlemen who were friendly to the adopgreatest reluctance; not that he was apprehensive that his tion of forty-eight thousand, as reported from the comviews, with regard to it, would fail of receiving whatever mittee, and by those who maintained that forty-four thoudegree of attention and consideration they might be sand only was the number which would render equal thought entitled to, but because he had been unwilling, justice to all the States, by leaving the representation of from the first, to participate in the discussion of the ques- the old States undiminished, and granting, at the same tion, and to contribute thereby to the further protraction time, to the new ones, an increase in their numbers on of the debate, and retard the final action of the House the floor of this House, corresponding with the increase upon the bill. He had been impelled, however, to devi- of their population. With respect to the weight of the ate from the path he had marked out for himself in rela- fractions, under which the advocates of the claims of some tion to this measure, by the course which the debate had of the elder States made so heavy a charge, and so strenutaken on the proposition of the gentleman from New ous an opposition against the ratio of forty-four thousand, Hampshire, [Mr. HUBBARD,] and the line of argument or any greater number, that if the ratio should be fixed at pursued by other gentlemen of the House in support forty-four thousand, as proposed by the amendment of of his [Mr. H.'s] amendment. He had been led to this the gentleman from New Hampshire, [Mr. HUBBARD, } in by a sense of duty to his constituents, and by the regard the whole of the fifteen Eastern, Middle, and Southern which he necessarily felt for the interests of the West; States, containing a representative population of eight and to these considerations, which had induced him to million five hundred and eighty-two thousand one hundred trouble the House with a few remarks upon the bill be- and seventy, there would remain an aggregate of unre. fore them, might be added a third; that was, that he re- presented fractions of no more than two hundred and garded it not merely as a question affecting the different eighty-three thousand one hundred and forty-five, or less States, with respect to the apportionment of political than one in thirty of their whole number. In this estipower in the representative assembly of this nation, but mate, also, of eight million five hundred and eighty-two as involving, also, the great constitutional principle, that thousand one hundred and seventy of a representa representation should be equal: and this not simply that tive population, it should be borne in mind, was included it should be equally apportioned for any one given time, two-fifths of a slave population of one million four hundred but during the whole period, as far as could be, of the and eighty seven thousand two hundred and thirty-three, operation of the bill. But of this he should, perhaps, a class of beings confined, principally, to the Southern have more to say before he sat down. Under these con- States, and having, as far as concerned themselves, no insiderations, he repeated, he should deem it a dereliction of terests to represent, and no elective franchise whatever duty to the State which he had the honor, in part, to re- to exercise, and no participation in the exercise of it by present, were he to be silent upon the subject, and give others. Now, what was the contrast which was presented a vote upon the bill without assigning the reasons which by comparing this state of facts with those in the nine actuated him in giving that vote. new States? Where was the professed equality of repre H. OF R.] Apportionment Bill. [FEB. 1, 1832. This was a sentation, concerning which such vehement declamation of States ought not to form a subject of consideration in had been made by the friends of the ratio of forty-four the matter of the adjustment of the ratio. thousand, when the statement he had just submitted-a singular argument, indeed, on the part of those who used statement based on the numerical tables before them-- it: for how could it be reconciled with their other argu should be taken into consideration, together with the one ments of the great inequality of representation at the he was now about to offer, as respected the operation of ratio of forty-eight thousand, and of the injustice of dithat ratio on the representation and the fractions of the minishing the number of members from the old States? new States? He would first, however, repeat, for the What was the question of the loss or gain of the States in more immediate facility of reference, that there were, on members of that House, if the question of the greater the one hand, the fifteen Eastern, Middle, and Southern or lesser numbers of their respective fractions were asStates, with a represented population of eight million five sumed to be nothing? Was it to be considered then as a hundred and eighty-two thousand one hundred and se- question of representatives, and not of persons repreventy, possessing, at the ratio of forty-four thousand, an sented? Gentlemen complained most grievously of the unrepresented fraction of two hundred and eighty-three alleged injustice done to an old State by the loss of a vote, thousand one hundred and forty-five, or less than one-thir- from the discontinuance of a member, in consequence of teenth of the whole; whilst the nine Western States, the establishment of a higher ratio, whilst, strange enough, with a representative population consisting only of three they were silent on the subject of the actual injury to the million four hundred and eighty-five thousand seven hun- citizens of the new States by the large unrepresented dred and ninety-seven, would, at that ratio, have an un- fractiohs, amounting, in many instances, to a number litrepresented fraction of two hundred and thirty-four thou- tle short of that which would suffice for the return of an sand three hundred and thirty-five, or about one out of additional member at either of the ratios; in fact, the same every fifteen of the whole represented population. In gentlemen were perfectly willing to fix a ratio which other words, the fractions of the new States unrepresent- would leave such large unrepresented fractions to the ed would be in the new States, as compared with the old new States. With respect to this, he might observe, also, ones, under the circumstances which he had stated, as that, if the amendment should be carried, the States of two to one; and that with the further and increasing Missouri and Alabama would each have an unrepresented weight of an increased and increasing population. And fraction of upwards of forty-two thousand, lacking but here, with the permission of the House, he would stop to little over one thousand each of sending an additional ask where were the justice, the equality, the propriety of member to this House. Indiana and Illinois would have, representation urged as a reason for the adoption of this the one thirty-nine thousand, and the other thirty-five amendment? Where was the unreasonable spirit of exaction on the part of the West? And where the grounds of an appeal to their forbearance and magnanimity on the part of the other sections of the Union? In using these observations, he trusted that his motives were not misunderstood. He was not impugning the propriety of the conduct of those who, in advocating the adoption of the ratio of forty-four thousand, were actuated by an honest desire to consult the interest of their constituents, but he was endeavoring to show, from the data which they them-adoption of the ratio of forty-eight thousand, Massachusetts, selves relied upon as the basis of their arguments, the utter fallacy of the general conclusions at which they had arrived. thousand, of fractions of unrepresented population. Was this just and equal, when other States would have only some one, two, or three thousand each? Let the House, for a moment, accompany him in drawing a parallel be tween the West, the East, and the South, on this subject. Look at the present condition of the West, her present representation and population, and then make the comparison. He would take the four States of the East and the South, which thought themselves most aggrieved by the Vermont, North Carolina, and Georgia. Massachusetts, said Mr. McC., has, according to the recent census, a population of six hundred and ten thousand four hundred Again: this part of his argument, Mr. McC. went on to and seven, and is represented on this floor by a delegation show, might be further pursued, to illustrate the still of thirteen. The state of Vermont has five representa greater injustice and inequality of representation which tives to a population of two hundred and eighty thousand would result from the adoption of a ratio of forty-four six hundred and fifty-seven; Connecticut, six representa thousand to the six new States which were the last ad- tives to a population of two hundred and ninety-seven thoumitted into the Union. He meant the States of Indiana, sand six hundred and seventy-five; Georgia, with a free po Illinois, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Missouri. pulation of two hundred and ninety-nine thousand two hun These States, with a representative population of only dred and ninety-four, has seven representatives; and North one million three hundred and two thousand eight hun- Carolina, with a similar population, of four hundred and dred and eighteen, would, in the event of the amendment ninety-two thousand three hundred and eighty-six, has receiving the sanction of this House, and the ratio of forty-thirteen. Compare these facts with the following, and four thousand being passed into a law-these six States, contend for the existing equalization of representation if he said, would have imposed upon them an unrepresent- you can. Indiana, with a population of three hundred ed fraction of two hundred and seven thousand three hun- and forty-three thousand, has but three members in this dred and fifty-eight, or little above one in every five of House; Ohio, with nine hundred and thirty-five thousand the representative population would remain unrepresent-eight hundred and eighty-four, has fourteen; Illinois, with Was this, he might once more be permitted to ask, two hundred and fifteen thousand seven hundred and was this an illustration of the great constitutional princi- thirty-nine, has only one; and Missouri, with one hundred ple of equality of representation? In some cases one in and forty thousand, has no more than the same number. thirty, in others one in fifteen, and in others one in five, Mr. McC. proceeded. He had selected those States, with remaining unrepresented! Indeed, he [Mr. McC.] knew their respective population and representation, for a com not by what novel process of political arithmetic such dif-parison of the relative strength of representation, inasferent terms of members could be equalized. ed. Mr. McC. proceeded to comment on the arguments in behalf of the establishment of the ratio of forty-four thousand, offered by Mr. WAYNE, of Georgia, Mr. BRIGGS, of Massachusetts, and other gentlemen who had spoken before him in support of the amendment, and of a low ratio of representation. They had taken occasion to remark, he said, that the augmentation or diminution of fractions much as the gentlemen from Georgia and other States, We have been told that the West is rapidly growing upon the old States, and that, therefore, we ought not to regard the quantum of fractions. Why, this is the very FEB. 1, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. [H. OF R. reason, in my opinion, why we should guard against an miles to protect, and with but little aid from the glorious unequal amount of unrepresented fractions; and it is, thirteen, protected themselves and their families from the moreover, the very reason why the old States should be ferocious incursions of a most barbarous enemy. Yes, sir, content with their share of the unrepresented fractions. said Mr. McC., these pioneers of the West, these citizens The enumerations of the population of 1820 and 1830 of the new States, and the then territories, by their valor show at once the fallacy of the arguments on this subject. and patriotism, during the last war of independence, deIf, by the emigration from the East and the South, the new fended, like their sires, the land of their adoption, though States are increasing in population with a rapidity beyond many of them were not the proprietors of the soil they all precedent in the history of the world, the old States, inhabited, from sentiments of attachment to their country with a few, and those few very limited exceptions, are and its free institutions, and from that alone. By their ineither decreasing, or remaining stationary. The result, dustry they enhanced the value of your public lands. therefore, of large fractions being thrown upon them, is They caused the settling of that portion of the country, comparatively of little consequence; for, if we are to and the public domain thereby found a ready market. But judge from the censuses of 1820 and 1830, a small fraction this, sir, is not all. They have paid millions into your in the new States will increase in ten years to more than treasury; for what, sir? For that which, by all the princidouble the ratio of representation itself; whilst, in the old ples of justice and sovereignty, they were entitled to ones, a large fraction will either be diminished, remain without; for that which the glorious thirteen, so often stationary, or, considering it in the most favorable point of lauded upon this floor, included in their sovereignty and view, very little, if at all, exceed the ratio. He might jurisdiction, and over which they have ever held an unalso say, and he believed that, in saying so, he was warrant- questionable and uninterrupted control; for that, sir, ed by the facts of the case, that the old States, even at the which the Western States have been deprived of by the present time, would receive a further benefit, and the acceptance, in a spirit of generous confidence, of unjust new States a corresponding injury, from the ratio of repre- compact tendered and almost thrust upon them by the sentation, whatever it might be, being fixed according to older States. I mean, said Mr. McC., the public lands. the census of 1830. Since that enumeration had been But for these services, however, Indiana asks nothing made, vast numbers of persons had migrated to the West; from the Government. The table of the House is not those persons were necessarily added to the existing frac-burdened with bills and reports in their favor; they have tions in the West; and the mere fact of their having cross-no petitions before you asking remuneration for services ed the mountains since the census was taken, operated to rendered during the last war, or any other war: for those deprive them of their equal weight of representation on services they ask nothing, they want nothing; but they this floor. Does not this affect the relative strength of ask that justice, in respect to the bill under consideration, the States? The old States, though losing a part of their which equity demands. They ask, in the arrangement of population, would retain, at any ratio, the number of their this question, that the entire weight of the unrepresented population in 1830, whilst the West would, with its own fractions shall not be allowed to fall on them. Inasmuch natural increase, have also to bear the fractional weights as no ratio can be fixed that will not leave a fraction some. of the redundant population from the East and from the where, it is not proper to throw the heaviest upon the South. States whose population is increasing, instead of upon Mr. McC. said that, after having stated these facts-facts those whose population is stationary, or nearly so. In the that no one could gainsay-in behalf of the West, he Western States, as was shown by the census of 1820, and would ask gentlemen who appealed to them in favor of that of 1830, the increase had been one hundred per cent., the rights of the East, of whom were the West composed? and that increase would advance progressively. Indiana, Were they not the natural descendants of the old States? at the last apportionment of representation, had a heavy and were they not, as such, entitled to the same rights as fraction; and he begged gentlemen to observe the injus the other members of the confederacy? No one could tice which would be done to that State by the ratio of deny that they were. The gentleman from Massachusetts forty-four thousand, which would leave her with a still [Mr. BRIGGS] had asked if there were not reminiscences greater fraction than before, a fraction very little short of connected with the history of the old States, and if the the number sufficient for an additional member. Mr. day of their trial, and the deeds of their valor, were not McC. apologized for having occupied so much of the now to be remembered. He, and other gentlemen, had time of the House; and, after a few other remarks, conadverted to the patriotism and chivalrous self-devotion of cluded by expressing his earnest hope that, under all the the old States. The eulogium was deserved; and no one circumstances of the case, and from a sense of the equal more highly appreciated that patriotism, and the gallantry justice due to the States most deeply interested, the with which they acted, and the sacrifices which they made amendment would be rejected. in the war that achieved our national independence, than he [Mr. McC.] did. He would ask, however, were the new States devoid of patriotism? Were they not, he would again ask, inhabited by the descendants of the patriots of the revolution? And he would ask further, were In the sixteenth and seventeenth Congresses, with a they not, in part, populated by the revolutionary patriots House of Representatives of 186 members, the following themselves? But as gentlemen had brought into this dis-States had on this floor native born sons as follows: cussion the question of the patriotism of their constituents, he might be permitted to remark that the patriotism of the West, during the last war, would suffer little by a comparison with that of Massachusetts, or any other State. He would not particularize States, for individual comparisons might be deemed invidious; but he would say for the State which had done him the honor to confide to him the care of a portion of her interests there, that the people of Indiana would not shun a comparison, in point of patriotism, with the citizens of any other State in the Union. During the late struggle with Great Britain, the West, a large portion of which was then unrepresented on this floor, with a frontier of settlements of more than a thousand Mr. TAYLOR, of New York, in illustration of the truth of the position taken by Mr. SUTHERLAND in reference to the number of New England representatives from other States, quoted to the House the following statement: 7 Connecticut 23 Virginia 16th Congress. 17th Congress. 22 34 26 15 23 -23 23 12 13 Massachusetts 27 New York In the eighteenth and nineteenth Congresses, with a House of 213 members, as follows: 6 Connecticut 22 Virginia 13 Massachusetts 34 New York 18th Congress. 19th Congress. 23 40 20 21 22 42 21 21 Mr. EVANS, of Maine, briefly addressed the House H. OF R.] States. Apportionment Bill. Mr. HUBBARD addressed the House in reply to Mr. SUTHERLAND, and was proceeding with great warmth to repel what he considered as an injurious and unmerited insinuation thrown out by that gentleman against the Secretary of the Navy; when [FEB. 1, 1832. in reply to the arguments of Mr. SUTHERLAND, as further zealous that all the other States should retain their presupported by Mr. TAYLOR. The equal representation in sent number of representatives, as that Massachusetts the Senate was no reason why any State should be willing should. The question with the Western States was, not to surrender its rights in that House; nor was the fact that whether they should lose any part of their representation, other States happened to be represented in many cases but how much they should gain. He did not envy them, by natives of New England, any reason why New Hamp. nor would he do any thing to prevent their increase of shire or Massachusetts should be reconciled to the loss of members. If the number 44 should produce that effect, representatives. Although 48 did no injustice to Maine, he had not the smallest objection. He then presented he should vote against it, because it did injustice to other the result of a calculation, contrasting the effect of the bill as reported, on the States from which the members of the select committee who reported it individually came, with its effect on those States who considered themselves aggrieved. He found that there were on the committee one gentleman from Tennessee, one from Pennsylvania, two from New York, one from Ohio, and one from Maine. Mr. SUTHERLAND explained, and entirely disclaimed Dividing the population of those States, respectively, by all intentions injurious in any way to the Secretary, to 48 as a common ratio, he found the result to be, that the delegation from New Hampshire, or to the gentleman Tennessee would have one representative for every himself. He had referred to the circumstance merely to 48,097; Pennsylvania, one for every 48,145; New York, show the weight New Hampshire possessed in the Go-one for every 49,054; Ohio, one for every 49,257; and Maine, one for every 49,937. But what would be the case with the States aggrieved? Maryland would have one representative for every 50,730; Massachusetts, one for every 50,867; Kentucky, one for every 51,819; Geor gia, one for every 53,726; New Hampshire, one for every 53,865; and Vermont, one for every 56,131. vernment. Mr. HUBBARD, though not satisfied with the explanation, proceeded to reply to other remarks of Mr. S. Though the sons of New Hampshire might have gone abroad, and subsequently appeared in that House representatives from other States, or as occupying posts in the Government, it was no reason the State should lose any of her representation. Her population was not stationary, but steadily increasing, and had gained 30,000 since the last census. hers. The question being about to be taken, Mr. BOON, of Indiana, demanded the yeas and nays, and they were ordered accordingly. Mr. ADAMS, adverting to the lateness of the hour, and to an allusion made about the same time of day, by Mr. WILDE, to a passage in the memoirs of the Cardinal de Retz, as to the influence of the dining hour on political affairs, said that his memory recurred to this line of a British poet: Thus Tennessee would have a representative for every 48,000 of her inhabitants, while Vermont would have only one for every 56,000, making a difference of 8,000 people for every representative. Mr. A. then quoted the Mr. BRIGGS, of Massachusetts, spoke in support of provision of the constitution which declares that reprethe amendment; denied the justice of the charge that the sentation and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the Eastern States were crying "give, give;" insisted that States according to their respective numbers, and conthey were demanding no more than their rights; expressed tended that the results he had shown did not conform to his gratification at seeing sons of New England coming that direction. He declined entering on the other topics to that House from other States, and especially one from which had been discussed. his own county, representing a State in his own person; Mr. BARSTOW said that as the gentleman from Masbut reprobated the idea that any citizen of Massachusetts sachusetts [Mr. ADAMS] had gone into a calculation to should, on her account, fail to represent with fidelity show that the committee who reported the bill, (of which the interest of his own State when it might clash with he had the honor to be a member,) were actuated by im proper motives, he considered it his duty to repel every such insinuation. [Here Mr. ADAMS explained, and said he meant no impeachment of the committee.] The gentleman from Massachusetts disclaims any intention of im peaching the motives of the committee, but the gentleman certainly did go into an arithmetical calculation to show that the States which had members on the committee, with the exception of Louisiana, had a greater representation given them in the bill, at the ratio reported by the committee, in proportion to their population, than any "And wretches hang, that jurymen may dine." other States, and particularly them, the State of MassaAdmonished by this remembrance, he would delay the chusetts and other States, whose members were in favor House only by a statement or two in reference to the of 44,000 as the ratio. The inference to be drawn from observations which had now been made. He then observ- these calculations of the gentleman, could not be mised that the argument of Mr. SUTHERLAND, as to the share taken; it must be that the committee were governed by of New Hampshire among the Secretaries of departments, interested motives. So far as this was intended to apply would not apply to Massachusetts. He then quoted the to the two members who were on that committee, from language of the constitution where it describes the quali- the State he had the honor, in part, to represent, (the fications necessary to a member of the House of Repre- State of New York,) he trusted he should be able to show sentatives, and, remarking that it did not contain the that whatever might have been the motives of the other slightest allusion to the place where the representative gentlemen, members of the committee, the members from had been born, inferred that the other part of the argu- New York had no interest to promote by the ratio of ment, which referred to natives of New England repre- 48,000. By the ratio of 48,000, which was recommended senting other States, and being heads of departments, had by the committee, New York would have the greatest its origin not in the constitution, but in the prolific brain possible fraction which she could have by any ratio which of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. had been proposed. There was only one other ratio that had ever been contemplated, that would leave as great a fraction for New York as 48,000. That ratio, if the calculations on our tables are correct, is the ratio of 52,000, which would leave precisely the same fraction. He trusted, therefore, he had been able to show that the members of the committee, from New York, are clear of any just charge of selfishness in the course they took in 'He then briefly replied to the remarks of Mr. MCCARTY, whether it might not be out of compassion to the old thirteen States, or from whatever other motive, he should be greatly obliged to gentlemen if they would leave the representation of those States unimpaired. He disclaimed any pretension or demand on their behalf to any favors. All they asked was equal justice, and he was quite as |