-
6. The Basis of Representation
- Liberty Fund
- Chapter
- Additional Information
6 The Basis of Representation After disposing of the suffrage question, the committee of the whole pro ceeded to take up Henry Dearborn’s resolution to change the basis of representation in the senate from property to persons. Dearborn spoke at length, but the Journal preserves only a brief abstract of his speech.The resolution passed.The convention voted to reconsider, and Dearborn explained his plan for a democratically based representation encompassing both chambers of the legislature. Levi Lincoln then introduced his plan, which he expounded on the floor the next day, December 13. Dearborn and Lincoln, the foremost democratic leaders in the convention, were both sons of Massachusetts Jeffersonians who had ser ved in Jefferson’s cabinet. Dearborn, who represented Roxbury in Norfolk County, succeeded his father as Collector of the Port of Boston in 1812and remained in that post until 1829. Lincoln, from Worcester, was a lawyer and, at intervals, an influential member of the legislature. He was later governor of the state for a solid decade, f rom 1825to 1834. The speeches of Saltonstall and John Adams—his longest in the convention—briefly state the views of the two conservatives. Mr. Dear bor n. . . . He did not know whence the pr inciple, by which the senate is appor tioned by the present constitution, was derived. It was not to be found in the organization of any of the republics, ancient or modern . It did not exist in Greece, Rome, Venice or Genoa. It was found in the British House of Lords. The members of that house suppor t the rights of the aristocracy,and are their own representatives.In the United States there From Journal, pp. 257–58, 265–66,27 4–76, 277–79. The Basis of Representation 63 is but one class of people. They are all freemen and have equal rights. The principle of a representation of property in our constitution was not der ived f rom the neighboring states. New Hampshire was the onl y state whose constitution contained a similar provision. If the principle was a good one, it was remarkable that it had not been adopted in any other state.The only reason he had ever heard of to justify the pr inciple was, that the taxes are paid in proportion to property, and that the pr inciple of apportionment was designed for the pr otection of property. But this pr otection was not necessary. Property secures respect whenever it is not abused,and the influence of those who possess it is sufficient for its protection. He apprehended nothing at present from the representation of wealth. But the time might come when the accumulation of property within twenty miles of the capital would be sufficient to control the senate. At present the county of Berkshire , of about equal population with S uffolk, would have but a third part of the representation, and the man of large pr operty in the former county would have but a third part of the influence through the senate which was enjoyed by a man of the same pr operty in the latter count y. This was not just, equitable nor proper. He appealed to the magnanimit y of the rich to yield to the poor their equal pr oportion of rights. The principle might be adopted now, but the people would be dissatisfied with it, they would constantly protest against it, and it would be at some time or other necessarily yielded to their importunity. . . . . . . M r . Lin co ln . . . . The question now under consideration was on what principle should the representation in the senate be founded? He agreed in the sentiment that a f ree government must be f ounded on a system of checks and balances—and it was on this pr inciple that he supported the resolution offered by the gentleman f rom Roxbury. But he did not admit that to obtain this check it was necessary to assume the principle of a representation of property in either branch. It was attained by adopting a different mode of r epresentation for the tw o branches as w ell as a different principle. The object of a check was equally attained by adopting different qualifications for electors,or different periods of election.If it was shown by argument, by experience, or by arithmetical calculation that any principle was unequal, that ought to be abandoned, and another...