The fourth: from an essay by "A GEORGIAN", appearing in The Gazette
of the State of Georgia on November 15, 1787.
Article 1, section 2. This section mentions that, within three years after
the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, an enumeration shall
take place, the number of representatives not to exceed one member for every
30,000. This article I believe to be inadmissable. First, it affords to small a
representation, (supposing 48 at the highest calculation) and especially in the
southern states, their climate, soil, and produce, … not being capable of
that population as in the northern states. Would it not therefore be better to
increase the number of representatives, say one member for every 20,000 for the
states north of Virginia, and one for every 15,000 south of the said state,
itself included? Or, secondly, divide the states into districts which shall
choose the representatives, by which every part of a state will have an equal
chance, without being liable to parties or factions? Should it be said it will
increase the expense, it will be money well laid out, and the more so if we
retain the paying them out of our own bands. And, supposing the voting in the
house of representatives was continued as heretofore by states, would it not be
more equal still? At any rate I would strenuously recommend to vote by states,
and not individually, as it will be accommodating the idea of equality, which
should ever be observed in a republican form of government. Or, thirdly, if it
was in proportion to the quotas of the states, as rated in taxation, then the
number of members would increase with the proportion of tax, and at that rate
there would always be an equality in the quota of tax as well as representation;
for what chance of equality according to the constitution in question, can a
state have that has only one or two votes, when others have eight or ten, (for
it is evident that each representative, as well as senator, is meant to have a
vote, as it mentions no other mode but in choosing the president), and as it is
generally allowed that the United States are divided into two natural divisions,
the northern as far as Virginia, the latter included forms the southern? This
produces a wide difference in climate, soil, customs, manners of living, and the
produce of the land, as well as trade, also in population, to which it is well
observed the latter is not so favorable as the former, and never can nor will
be, nature itself being the great obstacle. And when taxation is in agitation,
as also many other points, it must produce differences in sentiments; and, in
such dispute, how is it likely to be decided? According to the mode of voting,
the number of members north of Virginia the first three years is 42, and the
southern, Virginia included, 23.…
Is human nature above self interest? If the northern states do not horde the
southern in taxation, it would appear then really that they are more
disinterested men than we know of.
