splendid example of the ever-springing vigour and versatility of the soul. He has showed us fancy personified, assuming the masculine, rise from this hall, pass the ocean with a stride, place one foot upon the Alps, and the other upon the Andes, and there, raising his giant form, and winding the bow-girt clouds around his head, shake his misty curls, and airy garland, in awful majesty.

But, sir, I am admonished that the hour of adjournment has arrived, and I must return from these wanderings. I will not trespass farther on the patience of the committee, which has been so kindly bestowed. I am sensible that the subject is far, very far from being exhausted; and many topics which I had intended to enlarge upon, I have not touched. I would have adverted to the practice of other states, and the great body of American constitutional law; I would have spoken of the character of our castern brethren, as connected with their constitutions of government, and the subject of this debate, and would have endeavoured to show into what errors some gentlemen had run, by adopting their precedents literally without considering the difference between them and us, in the several circumstances of extent of territory, population, manners, and character: but the time will not permit. In conclusion, I can only exhort the people, in their majesty, to assert and defend the rights of property. The amendment will restore to the constitution a principle which has excited the admiration of the wise and prudent of every state, and which, if once abandoned, is lost for ever. We come not here to yield to public clamour, by whatever persons, and for whatever purpose it may have been raised. If we preserve the principle contained in the amendment, property will have its just weight in your government. Those checks and balances, wisely devised by the patriot sages who formed our constitution; those checks and balances, which the experience of nearly half a century has sanctified to the preservation of pure and undefiled liberty, and without which a well organized government cannot exist, will be perpetuated, and the rich inheritance of a stable and free government, received from our fathers, will be transmitted with increasing affection and reverence, as I confidently hope, to the latest posterity.

The committee of the whole then rose and reported progress, and the Convention adjourned.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1921.

The Convention assembled at 9 o'clock. After prayer by the Rev. Mr. MAYER, the minutes of yesterday were read and approved.

THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE.

On motion of MR. N. SANFORD the Convention resolved itself into a committee of the whole on the unfinished business of yesterday-Mr. N. Williams in the chair.

MR. VAN BUREN, said he was opposed to the amendment under consideration, offered by the gentleman from Albany, (Chief Justice Spencer;) and he would beg the indulgence of the committee, for a short time, while he should attempt to explain the reasons, which, in his opinion, required its rejection. The extreme importance which the honourable mover had attached to the subject, and the sombre and frightful picture which had been drawn by his colleague, (the Chancellor) of the alarming consequences, which would result from the adoption of a course, different from the one recommended, rendered it a duty, which those, who entertained a contrary opinion, owed to themselves and their constituents, to explain the motives which governed them. If a stranger had heard the discussions on this subject, and had been unacquainted with the character of our people, and the character and standing of those, who find it their duty to oppose this measure, he might well have supposed, that we were on the point of prostrating with lawless violence, one of the fairest and firmest pillars of the government, and of introducing into the sanctuary of the constitution, a mob or a rabble, violent and disorganizing, as were the Jacobins of

France; and furious and visionary as the radicals of England, are, by some gentlemen, supposed to be. The honourable gentleman from Albany (the Chancellor,) tells us, that if we send the constitution to the people, without the provision, contemplated by the proposition now under consideration, it will meet with the scorn of the wise, and be hailed with exultation by the vicious and the profligate. He entertained, he said, a high personal respect for the mover of this amendment, and also for his learned colleague, who had so eloquently and pathetically described to them the many evils and miseries which its rejection would occasion; he declared his entire conviction of his sincerity in what he had uttered, his simplicity of character, he had himself so feelingly described, his known candour and purity of character would forbid any one to doubt, that he spoke the sentiments of his heart. But believing as he did, that those fears and apprehensions were wholly without foundation, it could not be expected, that he would suffer them to govern his conduct.

Permit me to ask, (said Mr. Van Buren) where are the wise men to be found, who it is supposed would pass a censure so severe on our conduct? Did the honourable gentleman allude to the wise men of the east--Throughout their dominions, not a constitution is to be found, containing, in form or substance, the provision contemplated by the amendment. Did he allude to their descendants in the west? In Ohio, and partially in Illinois and in Indiana? Their constitutions were in this particular as ours would be, if this amendment was adopted. Did he allude to those of the south? In none of their constitutions, nor in those of any state in the union (except North-Carolina) was such a provision as that proposed by the amendment to be found. In the constitution of the Union, too, which has been in operation long enough to test the correctness and soundness of its principles, there was no excessive freehold representation. That constitution was now the boast and pride of the American people, and the admiration of the world. He presumed there was not an individual in that committee, who would question the sufficiency of the general government, for the protection of life, liberty and property. Under this government, and the several state constitutions, the states had been, and continued to be, rapidly advancing in public improvements, and the nation was in the full fruition of the blessings of civil and religious liberty; every one was sitting quietly and safely under his own vine and fig tree, and every one enjoying, without molestation, the fruits of his own labour and industry.

It could not, therefore, fail to strike the mind of every man, that the great alarm, which had been attempted to be excited upon this subject, was entirely imaginary-certainly without adequate foundation.-Why, then, he would ask, had this appeal been made to the fears and apprehensions of the committee?

In the grave and portentous deductions, which the honourable gentleman, who supported the amendment, had drawn from the rejection of the amendment under consideration, the question raised by it, had been, in a great degree, disregarded, if not entirely lost sight of. The committee had been entertained with the most frightful conjectures, on subjects, if not wholly, certainly in a great degree, unconnected with the object of the amendment. They had been told of the present bad character, and worse propensities of a great portion of their present population-the demoralizing effects of great manufacturing establishments, which might, or might not, hereafter grow up among us, had been pourtrayed in the darkest colours-the dissolute and abandoned character of a large portion of the inhabitants of the old cities of Europe, and the probability of similar degeneracy in this happy land, had been represented in hideous deformity-And all the powers of eloquence, and the inventions of imagination, had been enlisted, to present to our view, a long train of evils, which would follow, from extending the right of suffrage to such a description of people. And all this had been done, to procure the adoption of the amendment under consideration. He would now put the question to the sober sense of the committer, and to the highly respectable and venerable gentlemen, who had thought proper to press these matters upon them in this stage of the discussion, with what propriety had this been done? Did the amendment raise the question, whether any, and what amount of property should be a requisite qualification for a voter? Whether contributions to the public for the protection of

property, in the shape of taxes shall be required? or whether personal services, either in the public defence, or for public improvements, should be deemed sufficient? These, he said, were questions brought into view by the report of the select committee, and on which, they would hereafter have to act, but they were not now under discussion. When they would come before them, then would the past, the present, and probable future character of the population of this state, be proper subjects for consideration.

From data, to be obtained in the comptroller's office, it might with safety be stated, that the personal property in the state, which was the subject of taxation, amounted to about one hundred and fifty million of dollars; and that the real estate was valued at two hundred and fifty-six millions. The true question, then, presented to the committee by this amendment, was, whether this one hundred and fifty millions of personal property, which annually contributed to defray the public burdens, and to promote public improvements; and which was not now directly represented in any branch, should be wholly excluded from representation in one branch of the legislature; and that the one possessed of most power, and by far the most important of the two. But this was not all. By the census of 1814, it appeared, that of 163,000 electors in this state, upwards of 75,000 were freeholders, under $250, and all of them householders, who may possess any amount of personal property-men who have wives and children to protect and support; and who have every thing but the mere dust on which they trod to bind them to the country. And the question was, whether, in addition to those who might, by this Convention, be clothed with the right of suffrage, this class of men, composed of mechanics, professional men, and small landholders, and constituting the bone, pith, and muscle of the population of the state, should be excluded entirely from all representation in that branch of the legislature which had equal power to originate all bills, and a complete negative upon the passage of all laws; from which, under the present constitution, proceeded the power that had the bestowment of all offices, civil and military in the state and above all, which, in the language of an honourable member from Albany, as a court of dernier resort, was entrusted with the life, liberty, and property, of every one of our citizens. This, said he, is, in sober truth, the question under discussion; and it would seem to him to be only necessary, that it should be fairly stated, and correctly understood, to secure its rejection. This was the grievance, under which so great a portion of the people of this state had hitherto laboured. It was to relieve them from this injustice, and this oppression, that the Convention had been called; and it was, and always had been, a matter of astonishment to him, that a reformation in this particular had been so long delayed.

There were two words, continued Mr. V. B., which had come into common use with our revolutionary struggle; words which contained an abridgment of our political rights; words which, at that day, had a talismanic effect; which led our fathers from the bosoms of their families to the tented field; which, for seven long years of toil and suffering, had kept them to their arms; and which finally conducted them to a glorious triumph. They were "TAXATION and REPRESENTATION;" nor did they lose their influence with the close of that struggle. They were never heard in our halls of legislation, without bringing to our recollections the consecrated feelings of those who won our liberties, or without reminding us of every thing that was sacred in principle.

It was, said he, but yesterday, that they afforded the strongest evidence of their continued hold upon our feelings and our judgments, by the triumph they effected, over the strongest aversions and prejudices of our nature-on the question of continuing the right of suffrage to the poor, degraded blacks. Apply, said he, for a moment, the principles they inculcate to the question under consideration, and let its merits be thereby tested. Are those of your citizens represented, whose voices are never heard in your senate? Are these citizens in any degree represented or heard, in the formation of your courts of justice, from the highest to the lowest? Was, then, representation in one branch of the legislature, which by itself can do nothing-which, instead of securing to them the blessings of legislation, only enables them to prevent it as an evil, any thing more than a shadow? Was it not emphatically "keeping the word of promise

to the ear, and breaking it to the hope? Was it not even less than the virtuesł representation, with which our fathers were attempted to be appeased by their oppressors? It was even so; and if so, could they, as long as this distinction was retained, hold up their heads, and, without blushing, pretend to be the advocates for that special canon of political rights, that taxation and representation were, and ever should be, indissoluble? He thought not.

In whose name, and for whose benefit, he inquired, were they called upon to disappoint the just expectations of their constituents, and to persevere in what he could not but regard as a violation of principle? It was in the name, and for the security of farmers,' that they were called upon to adopt this measure. This, he said, was, indeed, acting in an imposing name; and they who used it, knew full well that it was so. It was, continued Mr. V. B., the boast, the pride, and the security of this nation, that she had in her bosom a body of men who, for sobriety, integrity, industry, and patriotism, were unequalled by the cultivators of the earth in any part of the known world; nay, more, to compare them with men of similar pursuits in other countries, was to degrade them. And woeful must be our degeneracy, before any thing, which might be supposed to affect the interests of the farmers of this country, could be listened to with indifference by those who governed us.

He could not, he said, yield to any man in respect for this invaluable class of our citizens, nor in zeal for their support: But how did this matter stand? enquired Mr. V. B. Was the allegation that they were violating the wishes, and tampering with the security of the farmers, founded in fact, or was it merely colourable? Who, he asked, had hitherto constituted a majority of the voters of the state? The farmers who had called for, and insisted upon the Convention. Farmers and freeholders! Who passed the law admitting those, whe were not electors, to a free participation in the decision of the question of Convention or No Convention, and also in the choice of delegates to that body. A legislature, a majority of whom were farmers, and probably every one of them freeholders, of the value of two hundred and fifty dollars and upwards! The farmers of this state had, he said, by an overwhelming majority, admitted those who were not freeholders, to a full participation with themselves in every stage of this great effort to amend our constitution, and to ameliorate the condition of the people: Could he, then, ought he to be told, that they would be disappointed in their expectations, when they found that by the provisions of the constitution as amended, a great proportion of their fellow citizens were enfranchised, and released, from fetters which they themselves had done all in their power to loosen? He did not believe it. Again, enquired Mr. V. B. Who are we, that have been chosen to perform this great, and he could not but think, good work? A great majority of us are practical farmers; all freeholders, and of no small amounts. Were they their own worst enemies? Could they be suspected of a want of fidelity to the freehold interest? No! The farmers had looked for such an event; they earnestly desired it. Whatever ravages the possession of power night have made in the breasts of others, they at least had shewn that they could feel power without forgetting right. If any thing, (said Mr. Van Buren,) could render this invaluable class of men dearer and more estimable than they were, it was this magnanimous sacrifice which they had made on the altar of principle, by consenting to admit those of their fellow citizens, who, though not so highly favoured as themselves by fortune, had still enough to bind them to their country, to an equal participation in the blessings of a free government. Thus, Mr. V. B. said he understood their wishes, and he would govern himself accordingly; having the consolation to know, that if he should have misunderstood them, they would have the power of rescuing themselves, from the effects of such misapprehension, by rejecting the amendments, which should be proposed for their adoption.

But let us, said he, consider this subject in another and different point of view; it was their duty, and he had no doubt it was their wish, to satisfy all, so that their proceedings might meet with the approbation of the whole community; it was his desire to respect the wishes and consult the interest of all; he would not hamper the rich nor tread upon the poor, but would respect each alike. He would, he said, submit a few considerations to the men of property.

who think this provision necessary for its security, and in doing so, he would speak of property in general, dropping the important distinction made by the amendment offered between real and personal estate. Admitting, for the sake of argument, that the distinction was just, and wise, and necessary, for the security of property, was the object effected by the present regulation? He thought not; property was not now represented in the senate on the extent it was erroneously supposed to be. To represent individual property, it would be necessary that each individual should have a number of votes in some degree at least, in proportion to the amount of his property; this was the manner in which property was represented, in various corporations and in monied institutions. Suppose in any such institution one man had one hundred shares, another, one share, could you gravely tell the man who held one hundred shares, that his property was represented in the direction, if their votes were equal. To say that because a man worth millions, as is the case of one in this committee, has one vote, and another citizen worth only two aundred and fifty dollars in real estate, has one vote for senators, that therefore their property is equally represented in the senate, is, to say the least, speking very incorrectly; it is literally substituting a shadow for a reality; and though the case he had stated by way of illustration, would not be a commor one, still the disparity which pervaded the whole community, was sufficierly great to render his argument

correct.

If to this it was answered, as it had bee by the gentleman from Albany, (Mr. Van Vechten) that the amount wasnot material; that the idea of their representing freeholders would be sufficent; his reply was, that this purpose was already effected by the constitutio as it stands. It now provides that the senators shall be freeholders; and the part of the constitution it was not proposed to alter. There was no objetion to fixing the amount of the freehold required in the elected, and to ple it on a respectable, but not extravagant footing. If, therefore, an ideal epresentation of property was of any value, that object was fully obtained thout the amendment. But the preservation of individual property, is not e great object of having it represented in the

senate.

When the people of this te shall have so far degenerated; when the prineiples of order or of good Wernment which now characterize our people, and afford security to our insations, shall have so far given way to those of anarchy and violence, as tead to an attack on private property, or an agrarian law; to which allusionad been made by the gentleman from Albany, (Mr. Kent); or by an attest to throw all the public burthens on any particular class of men; then constitutional provisions will be idle and unavailing, because they will havost all their force and influence. In answer to the apprehension so frequery expressed, that unless this amendment prevails, there is all the taxes being laid on the real estate, it is only necessary nothing to preve is no more in the constitution of the United States, than there to state, that th "the amendment fails, to prevent all the revenues of the union will be in ours by direct taxation. And was such a fear ever entertained for from being vernment? How is it possible for gentlemen to suppose, that in the generalal regulation, under which all the states are enjoying the most a constituity for property, an individual state would be exposed to danger? ample se (said Mr. V. B.) to protect property against property, that a proviIt is constitution, basing the representation on property, is, or ought to sion ined in one branch of the government. It is when improvements are be, plated at the public expense, and when for those and for other objects, compositions are to be put upon property, then it is that the interest of difnet sections of the state come in contact-and then it is that their respecweight in the legislature, becomes important to them. As for instance, question of the canal, although the west, the north, and the south might nite in favour of that improvement, and its support by taxation, if that should ever become necessary, the middle and north western parts of the state might not feel that interest, and contemplate that advantage from the measure, as to induce them to consent to be taxed for its support or creation. Again-if it should be proposed to relieve the state from burthens, by calling in the public