In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

25 Gordon on the Gordon Plan Although the convention had adopted Gordon’s plan, he felt called upon to defend it against expressions of dissatisfaction on both sides. In the work of compromise, William Fitzhugh Gordon of Albemarle was unquestionably the leading fi gure in the convention, just as the district he represented played a pivotal role. He was a reformer, like the other delegates from the district, but he f elt no allegiance to the west and was naturally inclined to moderation. A lawyer and a general of the militia, he had represented Jefferson’s county in the house ofdelegates for ten years, during which he had labored diligently for the establishment of the University of Virginia. His remarks on December 19 help to explain the motiv es and the reasoning behind his mixed-basis plan. Mr. President,—I greatly regret the excitement, either of expr ession or manner, apparent in this debate. I shall endeavour to avoid either, in what I may say. The proposition I submitted for the consideration of the Convention , was made in the hope of sinking the discussion on the basis of future apportionment of Representation. My own opinion was, and is, that the white population, gave a fair criterion for a just arrangement of power among the several parts of the Commonwealth. We have, however, found the Convention equally divided in opinion; each positive and pertinacious, in opposing any plan of Representation founded in the views of the other. This discussion had greatly agitated our councils, distracted our deliberations , and disturbed the quiet of the country.We had nothing to hope from prolonging it: nor can there now be any other pur pose in continuing it, From Proceedings, pp. 672–74. Gordon on the Gordon Plan 331 unless to rupture the Convention and send us home to a distracted and dissatis fied community, divided by a geographical line, into two great hostile parties. Sir, it was in the hope of healing these divisions, that I ventured to propose to this Convention a plan for thepresent division of Representative power in the State. I thought long and anxiousl y on the subject. I made var ious calculations on the condition of the Commonwealth, drawn from statistics within my reach. Sir, the proposition which I have submitted, was not guess work; much less was it a scheme to give to one part of the Commonwealth a disproportionate and unjust power over the rights and interests of any other. It was proposed in a spir it of conciliation and compr omise, violating no principle deemed correct by myself, and those with whom I had thought and acted; and, above all, in strict regard to what I considered just to every part of the State. I found by calculations on the Census of 1820,the only authentic document of population within our pow er, that the present apportionment of Representation in the House of Delegates was greatly unequal throughout the State, and among its se veral parts: That in a House of Delegates of two hundred and fourteen members, the twenty-six counties West of the Allegheny mountains, composing the first Western district, had fifty-two delegates, when, by the white numbers of 1820,they were entitled to only forty-seven: That the section of the S tate, below tide-water, with thirtysix counties and four towns, had seventy-six delegates, whilst they w ere entitled to but fifty-nine: That the Valley or second Western district, with fourteen counties and tw enty-eight delegates, was entitled to for ty-two, and that the middle country from which I come, with twenty-nine counties , had fifty-eight delegates, and was entitled to sixt y-six: That the two last mentioned subdivisions of the S tate, the Valley and middle sections, had a majority of seven thousand, seven hundred and forty-two white population , of twenty-two thousand, five hundred and sixty-two slaves, and paid of the taxes of 1828,$17,926 more than the other two, or the extreme West and Eastern divisions: That these two central contiguous districts of country, containing a major ity of whites, a majority of slaves, and paying greatly more than half the r evenue of the S tate, had a vote in the House of Delegates, as eighty-six is to two hundred and fourteen. Sir, the glaring inequality of Representation, has not, and cannot be met by any argument, [3.144.109.5] Project MUSE (2024-04-20 06...

Share