Mass^{ts} no. Con^t no. N. Y. no. N. J. no. P^a no. Del. ay.
M^d no. V^a no. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
Gen^l Pinckney & M^r Houston moved that Georgia be allowed 4 instead of
3 Rep^s urging the unexampled celerity of its population. On the
Question, it passed in the Negative
Mass^{ts} no. Con^t no. N. Y. no. N. J. no. P^a no. Del. no.
M^d no. V^a ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
M^r Madison, moved that the number allowed to each State be doubled. A
_majority_ of a _Quorum_ of _65_ members, was too small a number to
represent the whole inhabitants of the U. States; They would not possess
enough of the confidence of the people, and w^d 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 New States. The additional expence
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.
M^r Elseworth urged the objection of expence, & 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 Gen^l Legislature than in those
of the States, as its business would relate to a few great national
Objects only.
M^r Sherman would have preferred 50 to 65. 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.
M^r Gerry was for increasing the number beyond 65. The larger the
number, the less the danger of their being corrupted. The people are
accustomed to & 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 ag^{st} by fixing a point within which the number shall
always be kept.
Col. Mason admitted that the objection drawn from the consideration of
expence, had weight both in itself, and as the people might be affected
by it. But he thought it outweighed by the objections ag^{st} the
smallness of the number. 38, will he supposes, as being a majority of
65. form a quorum. 20 will be a majority of 38. This was certainly too
small a number to make laws for America. They would neither bring with
them all the necessary information relative to various local interests,
nor possess the necessary confidence of the people. After doubling the
number, the laws might still be made by so few as almost to be
objectionable on that account.
M^r Read was in favor of the Motion. Two of the States (Del. & R. I.)
would have but a single member if the aggregate number should remain at
65. and in case of accident to either of these one State w^d have no
representative present to give explanations or informations of its
interests or wishes. The people would not place their confidence in so
small a number. He hoped the objects of the Gen^l Gov^t would be much
more numerous than seemed to be expected by some gentlemen, and that
they would become more & more so. As to New States the highest number of
Rep^s for the whole might be limited, and all danger of excess thereby
prevented.
M^r Rutlidge opposed the motion. The Representatives were too numerous
in all the States. The full number allotted to the States may be
expected to attend, & the lowest possible quorum sh^d not therefore be
considered. The interests of their Constituents will urge their
attendance too strongly for it to be omitted: and he supposed the Gen^l
Legislature would not sit more than 6 or 8 weeks in the year.