Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/318

292 Gen. PINCKNEY and Mr. ALEXANDER MARTIN moved that six representatives, instead of five, be allowed to North Carolina. On the question, it passed in the negative.

North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 3; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, no, 7.

Gen. PINCKNEY and Mr. BUTLER made the same motion in favor of South Carolina.

On the question, it passed in the negative.

Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 4; Massachusetts, Connecticut. New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, no, 7.

Gen. PINCKNEY and Mr. HOUSTON moved that Georgia be allowed four instead of three representatives; urging the unexampled celerity of its population.

On the question, it passed in the negative.

Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 4; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, no, 7.

Mr. MADISON moved that the number allowed to each state be doubled. A majority of a quorum of sixty-five members was too small a number to represent the whole inhabitants of the United States. They would not possess enough of the confidence of the people, and would be too sparsely taken from the people to bring with them all the local information which would be frequently wanted. Double the number will not be too great, even with the future additions from the new states. The additional expense was too inconsiderable to be regarded in so important a case; and, as far as the augmentation might be unpopular on that score, the objection was overbalanced by its effect on the hopes of a greater number of the popular candidates.

Mr. ELLSWORTH urged the objection of expense; and that the greater the number, the more slowly would the business proceed, and the less probably be decided as it ought, at last. He thought the number of representatives too great in most of the state legislatures; and that a large number was less necessary in the general legislature than in those of the states; as its business would relate to a few great national objects only.

Mr. SHERMAN would have preferred fifty to sixty-five. The great distance they will have to travel will render their attendance precarious, and will make it difficult to prevail on a sufficient number of fit men to undertake the service. He observed that the expected increase from new states also deserved consideration.

Mr. GERRY was for increasing the number beyond sixty-five. The larger the number, the less the danger of their being corrupted. The people are accustomed to, and fond of, a numerous representation; and will consider their rights as better secured by it. The danger of excess in the number may be guarded against by fixing a point within which the numbers shall always be kept.

Col. MASON admitted, that the objection drawn from the consideration of expense had weight both in itself, and as the people