The convention of 1787, which formed the
Federal constitution, after the most mature
consideration, and after the question had been
argued pro and con, with great ability by the
leading spirits of that day, and by men who
were inspired by the highest patriotism, de-
termined that the true basis of representa-
tion should be fixed upon the whole free pop-
ulation, both white and black. And in a spirit
of compromise, they gave the slave States a
representation for three-fifths of their slaves.
This principle of representation was adopted
by every slave State in the Union, and is now
adhered to by nearly all of them, and the Fed-
eral basis of representation has never, up to
this time, been changed except in one or two
States. Slaves being considered as the chief
productive industry of the country, and con-
tributing mainly to the support of the govern-
ment, the constitutional convention of 1850,
which assembled in this hall, and from whom
we received our present constitution, went a
step farther, in fixing our basis of representa-
tion. They fixed it upon the whole popula-
tion, doing away with the distinction which
had existed theretofore, between the represen-
tation of the free and slave population. They
not only treated the slaves as persons, but as
property, and gave them this representation
because they constituted the chief productive
industry of the State. The majority report
ignores this settled and Just principle of rep-
resentation, as adopted in the Federal consti-
tution, and also the basis of representation as
agreed upon by the convention of 1850, and
recommends a new basis, which is not at all
applicable to the State of Maryland, and if
adopted will give Baltimore city the control-
ling influence in the State legislature. The
majority report further proposes to give rep-
resentation according to the white population
of the State. Now, let us look at the effect of
adopting the majority report, upon the sever-
al and respective interests of the State. You
must hear in mind that this is a small State,
containing about 687,000 inhabitants, having
within its limits Baltimore city, containing
212,000, nearly one-third of the whole popu-
lation of the State, who are a commercial and
manufacturing people.
In the lower counties, where they are more
largely engaged in agricultural pursuits than
in any other portion of the State, there are
slaves in large numbers, and in some of the
counties the negro population exceeds that o
the white population. Then it would be a
manifest injustice to that portion of the State
to adopt any other basis of representation.—
And the effort is now made here to do so, for
the purpose of depriving that portion of the
State of its proper political influence in your
State legislature. If this principle is carried
out, what. will be its effect upon the future po-
litical condition of your State? You give to
Baltimore city, only representing a few of the |
many distinct interests of the State, having
within her confines nearly one-third of the
whole population, one-third of the whole
representation in your legislature.
Mr. ABBOTT. Will the gentleman allow me
to correct him? The report allows Baltimore
city less than one-fourth of the representa-
tion.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I am ob-
liged to the chairman of the committee for
this correction, as I do not desire to state any
thing not founded in fact. The report gives
to Baltimore city about one-fourth of the
whole representation, instead of one-third, as
1 stated. Now, is this principle of representa-
tion according to population applicable to
Maryland? Can this principle be inaugura-
ted in our State government without doing
manifest injustice to other parts of the State 7
Look at the geographical position, and man-
ifold interest? of the various portions of the
State to be represented in the popular branch
of your legislature. The Eastern Shore is
divided from the Western Shore by the great
Chesapeake bay; here people are an agricul-
tural people, and their chief products are
wheat and corn. In the lower part of the
State our chief product has been tobacco, and
our soil is only suitable for the growth of to-
bacco. Baltimore city is interested in com-
merce and manufactories, and the northern
part of the State is rich in its mineral re-
sources. This shows that Maryland, from its
position, is divided by various, and may be, by
conflicting interests, and it would be unwise
to give to any portion or particular interest of
the State a controlling influence over the oth-
er portions of the State.
This has always been a question of com-
promise in Maryland, and can only be fixed
upon a basis of compromise, without you in-
tend to overlook the material interests of the
State. In the convention of 1850, where this
question was very elaborately and ably con-
sidered, it was determined that the principle
of representation, as applicable to other States,
was not applicable to Maryland, because of
her geographical position, because of the dis-
tinctive interests which prevailed in every
part of the State, and because of its being a
small State, with a large city within its con-
fines. It was therefore determined that it
could only be fairly settled upon a basis of
compromise, to give the several interests of
the State their proper representation, and not
to give to any other section or interest an
undue influence in the legislature. There is
scarcely a State in the Union in which this
question has not been settled upon some prin-
ciple of compromise of rights. I will refer to
the basis of representation as fixed in the con-
stitution of Rhode Island, as being more near-
ly applicable to Maryland than that of any
other State.
The house of delegates there is composed |
