by the people, it cannot abide. Socner or later its downfall must come. You cannot bind the people many years by any such unjust and oppressive system. We have seen the result in other States. No more here than in Rhode Island can power be permanently retained in the hands of one-third of the people. It cannot be done. The great popular pulse will keep beating against these restraints, and by and by they will give way and the people will rise in their might. It may become, in time, the rallying cry upon the soil of Massachusetts, when if the figures of my friend for Berlin be true, one-fifth of the people of Massachusetts may have the power, and twelve cities of the Commonwealth having a majority of the people, may be without any power at all in the House of Representatives. Then I ask you, Sir, if you think these green withes will hold ; if you think that the gates of your Gaza will stand, or the pillars of your temple keep their foundation? No, Sir! the watchword and rallying cry will go forth throughout the length and breadth of the old Commonwealth; for you know, Sir, that "Freedom's battle once begun, Bequeathed from dying sire to son, With my thanks to the Convention for the patience and attention with which they have listened to my somewhat dull and tiresome remarks, this sultry morning, I yield the floor. Mr. DURGIN, of Wilmington, moved that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. The motion was agreed to, and IN CONVENTION, Leave was granted to the Committee to sit again. Militia. [June 21st. inexpedient for the Convention so to amend the Constitution. HENRY K. OLIVER, Chairman. The Report was referred to the Commitee of the Whole, and ordered to be printed. On motion of Mr. BRIGGS, of Pittsfield, the Convention, at one o'clock, adjourned. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention having re-assembled, Mr. MORTON, of Andover, moved that the Con vention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on the unfinished businesss of the morning. The motion was agreed to, and the Convention accordingly resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, Mr. Wilson, of Natick, in the Chair, and proceeded to consider the unfinished business, being the resolves on the Basis of Representation. The pending question being upon the amendment moved by Mr. Hale, of Boston, to substitute the Minority for the Majority Report. Mr. DURGIN, of Wilmington. The subject now before the Committee is one of fundamental and vital importance, and is, in fact, according to admissions on all hands, and on all sides, the great question of this Convention. It is a subject over which no individual in this body can sleep. If we feel any interest at all in any one subject that can come before this Convention, that interest is certainly involved in this question. Sir, I come from a small town. The large towns have spoken and it might not be improper for some of the small towns to lisp forth a few feeble accents on this great and important subject. Little children, Sir, can sometimes tell what they want, and, not Mr. OLIVER, of Lawrence, submitted the unfrequently, can tell it as significantly as "chilfollowing Report from a Committee:- COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. In Convention, June 21, 1853. The Committee on the Militia, to whom was referred the order of June 15th, instructing them "to consider the expediency of so amending the Constitution as to strike out whatever relates to the Militia, and instead thereof provide for the registration of all citizens between twenty-one and fifty years of age, as a standing police of the Commonwealth, to render such assistance as may be necessary for the preservation of the peace, and the faithful and efficient execution of the laws of the Commonwealth," having had the subject under consideration, beg leave to report that it is dren of a larger growth." In regard to this matter I think one great and important thing to be gained by the Convention is this-it is to ascertain, if possible, what is wanted. Something is wanted, and, Sir, the question is, "What is that something?" What is the great thing that we want to find out? and when we find out what is really wanted, then it is my impression that this Committee and this Convention will be ready and willing to act, and that, too, without delay. It is quite true, Mr. Chairman, that I may not be able to tell what is needed. Many individuals have spoken here upon this question and have tried to solve the mystery, with how much success it is not for me but for the Convention to say. Some of them have spoken against the Majority Report very clearly, forcibly, and eloquently; and after having used up the Majority Report have turned round and devoured the Minority Report also. The gentleman who spoke this morning, for example, reminded me forcibly of certain animals known by the name of "Kilkenny Cats," which in a certain quarrel ate up one another, so that there was nothing left of them. That gentleman, Sir, spoke eloquently against the Majority Report, and in terms almost as expressive and denunciatory of the Minority Report. I thought that this was somewhat singular; and I wished while he thus spoke that he had pointed out something better than either of them, which, however, he did not attempt to do. Not many days ago we heardas has been admitted time and again by all who have spoken of the effort-a very eloquent, a very flowery and very wordy, and I may say a truly argumentative speech from the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Choate). That speech was remarkable, not only for its eloquence and scientific research as well as its keenness of logic, but moreover it was adorned and beautified with flowers. I almost imagined to myself that the gentleman had completely gleaned the land of Bulah in search of flowers with which to adorn it. And, Sir, in the course of his argument, he came down upon the "great principles of justice." That word "justice" came from his mouth boldly; and when he brought forth that sentence in which he spoke of "monstrous injustice" it seemed to be full of meaning; and when he wound it up by a sentiment higher than any human being can conceive of by the natural heart"Do unto others as ye would that others should do unto you," the Committee listened to him in breathless silence, indicating the close attention which the Committee bestowed on every word that fell from his lips. I thought of it then, and I have not forgotten it now. And, Sir, the other day when the gentleman from Cambridge, with matchless logic, descanted, as he is wont to do upon other subjects, upon the danger-the certain danger, not the imaginary, or fabulous, or poetic danger-but the certain danger of centralization, I thought I also would quote a passage of Scripture and it is this: "If thy hand offend thee, cut it off; or if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out; for it is better to go into life having one eye or one hand than that the whole body should perish." To a mathematical certainty-or at all events to what is tantamount to it-did he carry his reasoning, and portray the danger of centralization, looking back upon the past, and judging of the future by the lessons of experience which the past has taught us, comparing the tendencies of | [June 21st. this nation and of this Commonwealth with those of the nations of the old world; and, in my estimation, there was not a man here who did not feel and acknowledge to himself that there was something in what that gentleman said besides fiction; that power brought to a single point and made to bear upon a single locality was dangerous, not only now, but dangerous in the future. I said, therefore, in my own mind that we had better put on a restriction than that the whole Commonwealth should perish. Now, Sir, in offering some remarks on this occasión, I wish to ask-and I would that I could put it not only to every individual present, but to every-body in this Commonwealth-what were the component parts of the Colony of Massachusetts when it was erected into a State as it is at present? And even, Sir, before the Revolution, of what was it composed? What were those localities, what those disintegrated masses, if you may so express it, which, when put together, composed the Colony of Massachusetts? Counties? "No," says one, "not counties." What, then, was it? What were those little items which, when coming together voluntarily, mutually, and upon equal rights, each having an equal voice, and each important to the whole, what were they? Sir, the answer is one which I need not give. Mr. Chairman, what are now the component parts of this Commonwealth? What are its elementary and primary parts? There is but one voice about it, and that is, that they consist of the towns. Take away your towns, and where is your Commonwealth? Take them away, one after the other, take away all their powers and functions, let them all die out, and where is your Commonwealth? These, Sir,-the towns,—are the component parts; these are the fundamentals. When these are brought together, here is, in fact, your Commonwealth. Mr. Chairman, I hold it that the Commonwealth ought not to be viewed as an abstract thing. What are the vitals of the Commonwealth? If it have any vitality, any power of action, in what does it consist? Where do you find its great arteries? Where is its pulse? Why, Sir, you find the body and the soul, the head and the heart, the flesh and the bones, and the sinews and the veins, and the blood and the nerves, and the pulsation, all in the towns. They are emphatically the Commonwealth. Well, Sir, I want to ask one question more. Who supports all the institutions of the Commonwealth? There are certain burdens to be borne, and who supports those burdens? Somebody supports them; who is it? Why," says one, "the men, of course, support them the folks; don't you know that?" And how, do the people give support to the Commonwealth? Why, Sir, they give that support as towns. It is the towns from which the support comes. Yes, Sir, even my little town does something towards the support of the great Commonwealth; and the towns adjoining my little town contribute their share of support also. Suppose that there should be an invasion or an insurrection,-and, from the speech of my very eloquent friend, I really thought there was some danger of something of the sort,-who is to repel or suppress it? He drew such a picture as might almost have led one to fancy that rebellion was rife in the land. If centralization is to come, it will come, and it is not in the power of earth, heaven, or hell, to prevent it. Suppose that his imaginary idea should be realized, and that the people of Boston were to rise up and rebel; what is to be done? Or suppose that there is an invasion, on whom is the executive to call? He is to call upon every town in this Commonwealth. So many men will be demanded from this, that, and the other town - the young and the middle-aged men - men who are the strength, and bone, and sinew of the Commonwealth. These little insignificant towns are to be called upon, and they are to act; there is no alternative. Mr. Chairman, suppose a case—a case which it is true, is hardly supposable; [laughter;] suppose that a tax is to be assessed in the Commonwealth of some two, three, four, or five hundred thousand dollars; on whom do you assess the tax? A VOICE. Not on the towns. Mr. DURGIN. A gentleman near me says "not on the towns." Very well, then; if that is so, I will leave Wilmington out. If I thought the gentleman spoke truly, I would give way and not make any speech; but I apprehend that Wilmington would be called upon to contribute her share of the burdens of the government. A MEMBER. I agree to that. ⚫ [June 21st. I think myself, that something like taxation and representation ought to go together, at any rate to come within speaking distance of each other. Why should you separate them? Not representation because one man pays a little, while another pays much, not because one pays two or three dollars, while another pays a tax upon millions. I want to be represented though I pay but a small tax, yet I should like to pay a large one, only let there be a foundation for it. It is not the simple circumstance that a man puts two or three dollars into the public treasury that gives him a right to vote. Then the sentiment which my friend here seems to throw out that we should have representation in proportion to the amount of taxation, will hardly do for this day, hardly do for this Convention. What good reason is there that towns should not be represented? Is it money in itself? Does any body pretend to that belief? Not at all. I have not yet seen the first man that has dared to place himself upon that position, and if he should he would find it utterly untenable. There is then nothing wrong in it. I insist upon it that there is something right in it. I insist upon it that there is something of privilege, and something of deserved and earned privilege in it, if we may so speak. I insist upon it that every town has a just claim to representation. This cannot be denied. Well, this being granted, here comes the difficulty. We are perfectly willing that the towns should be represented, say a great many, if you can only make its representation equal. Now that is fair, that is handsome, generous, democratic and noble. But, Sir, can you make it equal? I was almost tempted to appeal to Omniscience itself to devise any system of representation that shall be equal precisely and at all times, and under all circumstances. That is the point. You cannot get it, and you never will get it. Now the question in my mind is this: whether the system of representation embraced in the Ma Mr. DURGIN. You agree to that, do you? jority Report is to operate so unequally as to The MEMBER. Yes. Mr. DURGIN. The gentleman says he agrees to that and that is what I want. I expect that Burlington and Tewksbury, and every other town, whether large or small, will be called upon to pay its share of tax; that that tax being assessed upon them, they must pay it-that they cannot get rid of it any more than they can get rid of their graves and their coffins. That is it. They might better attempt to circumvent the stream of death than to get rid of paying their share of taxation. Every man's property is sacredly held to meet his taxes. bring about the state of things predicted by my friend this morning. If it is really going to lead to a revolution and civil war, I say by all means do n't adopt it, because civil war is to be dreaded above all things under Heaven. We better go without representation than to bring upon ourselves the untold horrors of a civil war. But the question is, will this be the result of it? Will the people shoulder their muskets and roll the war cry throughout the land? Equal representation! Dear me, Sir, what is the number of the population of New York? Over three millions, leaving the fractions out. And what is the population of Rhode Island? Not one hundred and fifty thousand. How many senators are they entitled to in Congress? Can some gentleman of mathematical talent figure it out? Every State is entitled to two, I believe. New York is entitled to two, with her three millions of people. Think of that. And then there is little Rhode Island, a small point of territory, and inconsiderable numerically, when compared with New York, and yet she has just as much power in the Senate of the United States as New York has, or the old State of Virginia. O! Monstrous injustice. [Laughter.] O! Monstrous injustice. [Renewed laughter.] "What ye would that others should do unto you, do ye even so unto them." Rebellion! Why not rebellion in New York or Virginia? Who thinks of nullification? Who thinks of breaking away from the Union because Rhode Island, and thenceforth Massachusetts, and little New Hampshire, and good old, moral and thriving Vermont, all small States both in numbers and territory, have just the same power, and sometimes more than the larger States possess, in the Senate of the United States. Well, now, in this State, what do you purpose to do? You are to have the State divided into senatorial districts. That is a very fair, generous, wholesome kind of an offer; and certainly it is not a bad one if you carry out the principle, for it is my wish to make all things as equal as consistent with the safety and good of all concerned. This is the principle and the only principle upon which men should act, and if equality is practicable I go for it. One word in regard to the district system. Eighty representative districts, entitled to three representatives each, are to be the maximum number, according to the Report of the Minority. Now let us look at that. What does the Minority Report ask leave to do? That is the question. Who was the father of that Report? Who do you suppose claims the paternity of it? The gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Choate,) doubtless, and he will not deny it, and I would not deny it were I in his place, for it involves a principle which he has stood by for a long time, and it is presumed, honestly and conscientiously. I would impute no impure motives to that gentleman. He has seen too much of wrong in his day to imbibe it himself, I believe. What then does this Minority Report ask leave to do? I will tell you. It asks leave to sunder the only link, to dissolve the only cement which binds the towns to the Commonwealth. That is what it asks leave to do. It says, Let us cut off the last golden link, let us dissolve the last particle of cement which connects the towns of the [June 21st. Commonwealth to the Commonwealth. That is, to disfranchise them. Towns hereafter are not to be known in the Commonwealth at all, but only the districts. If it does not ask for that, human induction cannot tell what it does ask for. Let me ask gentlemen from the country how they came to have seats here upon this floor? By the free suffrages and votes of whom? By the votes of your respective corporations, your respective towns. Now, do you propose to say to your constituents, that "you have too much power; you have exercised more than your share of influeuce in sending me here, and in sending me to the legislature in former times, and it must be so no longer." Will you say this to them? That, Sir, is what, and only what the Minority Report asks leave to do. It seeks to dry up, and forever dry up, the only channel through which the towns may be felt as towns. That is the result of the district system, and I do not want any such thing at all, nor do any of us. It asks leave to cut off the legitimate relations-and who would desire to say anything about illegitimate relations in this connection, [laughter.] I say it seeks to cut off the legitimate relations between the towns and the Commonwealth. How do the towns connect themselves with the Commonwealth? Only through their representatives to the popular branch of the legislature. In this manner only do they speak and act, and through this means they sometimes act a noble part, a philanthropic part, and the part of reform. If we do anything at all we had better try to do something that will be acceptable to, and sanctioned by the good, sober, practical common sense of the people. Now, Sir, I tell you that there is but one district system which the people will accept. The people will never adopt such a measure as is now before you, that is, the Minority Report. You have not eloquence enough, you have not power enough, you have not common sense enough, you have not enough of anything to make the people of the Commonwealth take such a dose. If you present such a system to them, you present to them the sword of Solomon, ready to divide the living child, and the true mother, the good old Commonwealth, will cry out, "In no wise"-give her my child rather than take its life. And as the child of old was returned to its true mother, so will the rightful representation of towns continue to old Massachusetts. Should such a system be adopted, I do not know but it will divide man and wife. [Laughter.] As I have already said, there is but one system of districting that the people of the Commonwealth will ever adopt,—and, in my opinion, they Tuesday,] DURGIN. [June 21st. will never adopt that, [laughter,]—and that, Sir, | spoke wisely; but before he had finished his is the single district system. Such are my honest convictions. Now, Mr. Chairman, the reasons for entertaining these views are simply these: First, the single districting will, of necessity, divide the towns in a majority of cases, which is a thing so impracticable that there can be no hope of success if such a proposition be made to the people. Again, for a number of years many of the towns, under the present Constitution, have had full powers to district, if they chose so to do. And what has been the result? Why, Sir, not a single instance, to my knowlege, is to be found, where a thing so palpably repugnant to the good sense and better feeling of the people has taken place. "Actions sometimes speak louder than words." I have talked upon this subject for the last three or four weeks with very many, and I find nine-tenths of the honest, sober, intelligent, and influential men in the community cry out, "For Mercy's sake, preserve the town representation." Sir, that principle of town representation is to the people of this Commonwealth as sacred as their existence. It was here where the fires of liberty were first kindled, and the people of these towns would as soon give up their vital breath as to give up their representation. Sir, I never will give it up, if I can help it. But, Sir, these cities would like to be districted, would n't they? That question was put fairly by the gentleman from Cambridge, (Mr. Dana,) who represents some little town in Essex County-I think it is Manchester, and for aught I know, he was born there. Well, Sir, I do not know how many inhabitants that town may have, but whether many or few, they may be proud of such a representative. Sir, he has not forgotten the place where he was born, the place where he was conceived, [laughter,] and the place where he was brought up. He has not forgotten the place where he first drew his vital breath. But I wish I could say as much for my friend from Adams. He said he was born in a small town. But he now represents in this Convention a large town, which can boast of its thousands of inhabitants. Yet he seemed to have forgotten those hills, those dales, those running streams, and I should almost think he had forgotten the mother who bore him; that he had lost all sympathies for the small towns, that his feelings towards them were cold and dead, and that even his relations to them were entirely forgotten. The gentleman who addressed the Committee this morning, (Mr. Dawes,) said that he came here not as a politician, that he was actuated by no political or partizan motive. Well, Sir, I could but approve that sentiment. I thought he speech, I thought I saw the "ears sticking out." [Laughter.] Of course I mean nothing disrespectful to that gentleman; I mean simply that I discovered that there was something of the politician left about him after all. It seems to me that he exhibited about as much of it as any man upon this floor has done. He brought in a quotation from somebody else, that they were not going to follow the lead of the gentleman from Pittsfield, in relation to matters before the Convention. Well, Sir, I will not follow the lead of that gentleman or of any one else, merely as a gentleman, upon questions which are brought before us for our deliberation. I presume my friend from Adams would not follow the lead of the gentleman for Wilbraham, nor of any gentleman belonging to the party with whom the gentleman for Wilbraham is associated. I think that is a perfectly correct principle for us to adopt. I think it would be well for all of us to adopt the motto of Davy Crocket, "First know you are right, and then go ahead." No matter who comes after. I would not want to see how the gentleman from Pittsfield or the gentleman for Wilbraham, or any other gentleman went; I think, upon these great political matters, we should all act for ourselves. Well, Sir, I did get off a little joke the other morning, which I do not often do. My military friend from Lawrence, (Mr. Oliver,) asked me how I was going to vote. I said, "I am going to vote right against you, and then I think I shall be right." That passed off as a joke, but in less than eight-and-forty hours I found that I was very glad to vote with him. Sir, what are the rules which should govern our action here? I came to this Convention with the determination to carry out my own conscientious convictions of duty, and I considered that tantamount to any oaths that I can take. I am for treating all men as friends, as citizens, as neighbors, but when we come to the matter of political action, I think every man should take an independent course, and act for himself. But my friend from Adams spoke very disparagingly of the great centralizing power which the cities exercise. Now that gentleman knows, if he knows anything, and he does know a great deal, that the great ingathering, and the great accumulation of the population is to the great manufacturing and commercial cities rather than to the country towns. Every man knows that. Look at the comparative growth of the large manufacturing and commercial cities and towns for the last twenty or thirty years, compared with that of the agricultural towns. Think of the |