peer to the humblest beggar, either directly or indirectly, if not in both these modes, and in many ways, pay tax on every single article that he uses, whether for food or for dress? If so, and taxation be the test of elective qualification, then, not only all intelligent and independent persons, but all persons whatsoever, ought to share in the suffrage.

How comes it to pass, moreover, that the very able and energetic advocates for the principle that numbers alone ought to be considered in the formation of the national representative assembly, insist on the right of householders only to the suffrage ? Has it been discovered by any process of divination that renting a house of a certain amount confers intellectual or moral qualifications, so as at once to adapt a person for the right exercise of the suffrage? If not, why do they consent merclessly and unjustly to exclude from all share in the representation that much larger portion of the free people of this great country, who, though quite as intelligent, industrious, honest, and independent as the other, only rent lodgings, or board in families?

Indeed, before the passing of the Reform Act,several of the provisions contained in which, though in very different ways, were directly at variance with the practice and the spirit of the Constitution, -many persons were allowed to vote independent

C

of either property or taxation. In fact, the restriction of the suffrage to those alone who are thus qualified was a new principle altogether,— strictly, indeed, in accordance with the moneyloving spirit of the age. Thus, freemen, and those who were distinguished by the uneuphonious title of "pot-wallopers, " and as "scot-and-lot " ” voters, were all engulphed together in the merciless abyss of this tremendous measure.

The only true and sound fundamental principle, as regards popular representation in a free state, I believe and maintain to be this: that every member of that state who is of full age and competent understanding, and who has not been convicted of any crime, ought to have a voice in the making of all laws, except those only which are a mere re-enactment of the law of nature,whether relating to taxation, crimes and punishments, property, fiscal regulations, or any other subject by which his interests may be affected, or he himself may be bound. In other words, that every man of the age of twenty-one, who can read and write, and who is not proved to be a rogue, ought to have a vote for a representative in Parliament.

I do not say that all representatives in Parliament should be elected only in this manner. Such is the numerical or democratic theory to which I am directly opposed. But I contend that a large

proportion of the representatives of the nation ought to be so returned. And that, in addition to those thus chosen, a certain number should be also sent as the representatives of the other great interests in the state, of which that which comprises the popular element, and is hereafter classed as No. VI., is one only, though doubtless a very important one.

It is, moreover, a principle of our Constitution, which is acknowledged by the most eminent writers upon it of all parties, that every man who is supposed to be a free agent ought to be in some measure his own ruler, and ought to have a share in the making of all laws by which he is bound. Indeed, the principal reason for requiring an elector to be possessed of a property qualification was that thereby such people should be excluded from the franchise as were in so mean a situation that they were esteemed to have no will of their own; and it was supposed (experience has proved, neither uncharitably nor unjustly) that if these persons had votes, they might be tempted to dispose of them under some undue influence or other, which might conduce as much to the danger or abridgment of the liberty of the people as the exclusion altogether of a large portion of them from the elective franchise. These individuals are therefore deprived of their votes

by our Constitution, not from any jealousy of the people partaking too largely in the representation, but in order to prevent the legitimate influence of the people being unduly swayed by those who are possessed of wealth and power. Even Sir William Blackstone declares that "if it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence, of any kind, then upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote in electing those delegates to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty, and his life.” *

Holding, therefore, at the same time, as fundamental and as well established, though not at all inconsistent constitutional principles, that, on the one hand, every subject of this realm, who has a will of his own and who is competent to the discharge of such a duty, has an undoubted and inalienable right to a direct share in the representation; and, on the other hand, that the great interests of the nation, and not the mere weight of numbers, is that which ought to have the predominating influence in its representative assembly:- we now arrive at the grand inquiry propounded as the subject of this dissertation, and proceed at once to

* Commentaries, vol. i.

the examination into what is the True Theory of Representation in a State. In pursuing this

subject it should be shown alike what is the guiding principle here to be followed, and in what manner such an assembly should be constituted.

Four distinct axioms must here be laid down, the truth of which I shall endeavour to demonstrate as we proceed: -1. That all the essential and real interests of the State ought to be represented in its legislative assembly. 2. That they ought all to be directly represented there. 3. That each ought to be represented in due proportion to its relative importance. 4. That they ought so to be represented that, as much as possible, they may all harmonise together.

As man is composed of body and mind, the interests of both of which are united and inseparable, and ought never to be neglected, but each should be regarded in due proportion; so the care of a State must be directed alike to the wealth and the material well-being, and also to the intellectual, and moral, and social condition of the community. The full development of its energies and powers, and the due and proper proportion of influence to be allowed to each, deserve surely as much consideration, and are of equal importance in the State as in the man. It is well remarked by Aristotle, that, to give stability to any government,