The Virginian

FOR THE VIRGINIAN.

To the Freeholders of Campbell County.

Fellow Citizens-The apathy and indifference with which the people of Virginia have heretofore, and so fatally for their interests, regarded subjects of state policy, are passing away. Adversity, whose lessons are sharp but salutary, impels them to an inquiry into the causes of individual distress and general decay. Necessity requires immediate and thorough investigation, and forbids unreasonable delay in the application of proper remedies. Whilst all participate in the affliction consequent on their reduced and still reducing condition, and, with few exceptions, are determined to seek relief, there is diversity of opinion as to the mode. Some seem disposed to rely on individual exertion, salutary, insulated and opposite-some, overlooking or disregarding the experience of the last thirty years, still cling, with languishing hope and abated confidence, to their State Government-and others, ascribing their decline to the expensiveness, inequality and inefficiency of that Government: declaring, as irrational, the hope of relief from the source of their impoverishment; profiting by the example of their sister states; and mindful of the warning voice of the great men who framed the present constitution, namely, to have "frequent recurrence to fundamental principles" (warning too long disregarded) seek amelioration and advancement of the general interests by revising, in Convention, their fundamental Law-adapting its provisions to the changed condition of the country-lopping off its useless and expensive branches-rendering it more economical, equal and efficient-increasing the responsibility of all public officers-and, by this renovating process, imparting new life and enterprise to individual enterprise and governmental action.

The position which I occupy towards the people of Campbell, and the "momentous" character of the Convention question, (which should, and no doubt will, engross public attention until its decision) induce me to offer to your consideration the result of some experience and much reflection on the condition and prospects of our beloved Virginia. I ascribe the depressed situation of her citizens and the steady and palpable decline of her interests generally (hurried on by the unequal operation of the Tariff laws) to the costliness of her Government-not its inefficiency-its inequality of powers and of operation-the irresponsibility of many public officers-the tendency of some of its constitutional provisions to paralyze and dissipate the energies of the people-in a word, to the want of good Government.

Before proceeding to enumerate and expose the defects of the constitution, it will be useful, and in furtherance of our object, to recur to the natural advantages and capacities of the country, which the goodness of Providence, & the wisdom & spirit of our ancestors have assigned as our portion of the earth. Take the following description of Virginia from the last report of the Principal Engineer-and ask yourselves if it be not literally true?

"No where has the kind hand of providence been more profusely bountiful than in Virginia; blessed with a climate & a fertile soil; producing cotton and the best tobacco, besides the common staples of the northern states, to which she even exports her flour; abounding with rich mines; her coal nearer to tide water than that of any other state. Virginia is no less favoured in her Geographical position: she occupies in the U. nion an important central situation; and the mouth of the Chesapeake, her fine harbour always open, strongly protected against aggression, is equal to even that of New York. She possesses, besides, perhaps more than any other state, the elements of manufactures; she has in abundance water power, coal, iron and raw materials. With these immense resources, Virginia may ask why she is not the most flourishing state in the Union? why she does not occupy the commercial station for which nature designed her? Circumstances purely accidental and temporary can alone have produced this state of things."

Could the able, indefatigable and public spirited Engineer have intended to reproach us? or are we in the prosperous and flourishing condition which the natural advantages and capacities of Virginia authorize us to expect? Shall I draw you a picture of Virginia? not of what she has been or ought to be-but what she is-and must continue to be, without a radical change. It would be too gloomy, mortifying and painful-and besides is unnecessary. For her situation is naked to the eye of every citizen and passenger-distresses almost every individual-wounds the feelings of the sensitive and patriotic-and alarms those who look beyond the present moment.

To what is this state of things justly ascribable? to the government or the people individually? Are the citizens of Virginia less industrious, public spirited or enterprising than others? What has the Government done to advance the happiness & prosperity of the people-to improve the condition of the country? Are not these fit subjects for the legitimate action of State Government? Is not the proverbial improvidence of Virginians generated & countenanced by the improvidence of the Government? Are not the enterprise and public spirit of the citizens dormant, wasted or misdirected, because not elicited, fostered and seconded by the Government?

But I proceed to point out the characteristic defects of the several departments of Government as organized under the present constitution-commencing with the Executive department. The Governor or Chief Magistrate is elected annually by the General Assembly, when in office, he can do no official act whatever without the advice & consent of the Privy Council-which is composed of eight members, appointed by the Assembly, and to compensate them, as advisers of the Governor, are allowed one thousand dollars each per annum. It has two clerks and a door keeper-and its annual expenses may be computed, in round numbers, at twenty thousand dollars-when in council, the Governor is not allowed to vote, unless in case of a division-so that his judgment and opinion weigh less than those of the weakest member of the council. It follows from its organization, 1st. that the members of the council are idle and incompetent, if they seek the office for the support derived from its salary: and if they unite other business with its duties, the preference given to the calls of the former incapacitates them for the faithful and prompt discharge of the latter-2nd that the Governor's office is merely nominal-to preside in council and sign commissions. Hence it excites no competition: does not attract the notice of aspiring and patriotic citizens-because it admits not of acquiring distinction, or of rendering material and important services to the community. Consequently it is filled by three classes of persons-those who, holding another office, are unnoticed and undistinguished therein; those who can get no other; and those who wish to use this as a "stepping stone" to some higher or more desirable station. This department is, therefore, inefficient and costly too much. It may be made more efficient and useful, and cost not more than three-fifths of the above sum-which would save eight thousand dollars annually.

General Assembly-Its annual expenses vary from one hundred and ten to one hundred and fifteen thousand dollars---and must increase if not differently organized. It now absorbs more than one third of the whole "revenue proper," or revenue derived from the taxes on lands and slaves, this revenue is so burdensome, and consumes so much of the people's substance, that, I verily believe, no others than Virginians would bear it--in any other state, it would produce an excitement approaching closely to rebellion. And why should they continue to incur it? Is their legislation so wise and beneficial as to be worth this enormous price? Would not half the number of Delegates do the business better in half the time, and thus save to the people three fourths of the above sum? Is eighty thousand dollars saved or badly expended annually, so small a sum for the notice of the people of Virginia? How many miles of good turnpike road, on public account, would the sum, thus saved construct annually?

The inequality of representation is, if possible, even worse. Each county sends two Delegates-some of them contain twenty odd thousand people-others two, three, or four thousand-such is the inequality of county population. This can be demonstrated by figures (which never err) that the political power of Virginia may be wielded by little more than one sixth of her people, to the prejudice and against the consent of near five sixths. Any one may make this calculation for his own satisfaction. Take the census of 1820- add together the population of one half the counties (taking the smaller) and it will amount to but little more than one third the population of the State. And as elections are decided by majorities, a few more than half of the third will govern--which will enable a fraction more than one-sixth govern near five sixths. Indeed, the representation is so grossly unequal, that the adoption of a resolution or passage of a bill by the House of Delegates is only a circumstance indicative of public opinion. Hence, the fluctuations of law without any change in the public mind.

But the opponents of a Convention, aware that the fact of inequality of representation cannot be denied, and that to defend it on principle would be to offer an insult to the common sense of the community, say, that it is a mere theoretical defect, and is unattended with any practically injurious consequences. Without relying, for an answer to this observation, on the invulnerable position, that in a republic (government of principles) the violation of principle is necessarily attended with injury to the community, I would meet them on their own ground, and taking the history of Virginia's legislation for the last thirty years, point to the shameful neglect of her most valuable and permanent interests, ask them to what cause, other than this inequality, can they attribute the ruinous and shortsighted policy which has governed her councils! especially in regard to the improvement of her Upper and Western country, and her intercourse with the Western States? On these subjects, the councils of Virginia have been governed by a narrow, contracted and sectional policy, alike injurious, in the end, to the Eastern, Middle and Western portions of the State. Whilst the Eastern parts of Maryland, Pennsylvania and New York, have, under a wise and enlightened policy, been husbanding their energies and straining their means to extend their intercourse with the Western parts of their States, and with the Western States generally, assured that their own prosperity would follow the increased trade, capital and population of Baltimore, Philadelphia, and the city of New York, the Eastern portion of Virginia seem to have been alarmed at the prospect of being enriched by the trade of the Western part of their own state; and, dreading the luxury and extravagance that would follow in the train of independence and wealth, have exerted themselves to ward off these evils and force that immensely valuable trade into other channels-It is a melancholy reflection that their efforts are likely to be successful. Had the government of Virginia been remodelled at the commencement of the present century would the people have been at this day without one solitary good road, except what has been constructed by companies? And would not the sums saved in the annual expenses of the government have sufficed for the purpose, without the least addition to the taxes? How can the farming interests of any country prosper without good roads for the transportation of their produce to market? or the mercantile interests prosper, without a safe conveyance to the seaports from the markets in the interior? Had Virginia seven and twenty years back engaged in this business, under the guidance of a wise, enlightened and energetic government, what would be her situation now? Comparatively, a paradise.

The number of the House of Delegates is obnoxious to other objections. Though expensive-it mars deliberation-prevents system and perseverance, both essential to the successful conduct of public matters--by the tardiness of its movements, lengthens the sessions, and thereby deters men of business, whose time is valuable to them and whose labours would be useful to the community, from serving the public-divides responsibility-and is more liable to excitement.

If the Executive and Legislative departments of our government are incompetent to the management of the ordinary concerns of the State, how can we expect it to sustain the shock of a real emergency? May not the period arrive when the happiness and liberty of the people will depend on the wisdom and strength of the State Governments? Ought we to lose sight of the possibility of such a calamity? What can be said of those, who think they see in the organization of the General Government and in the tendency of its measures (no matter by whom administered) silent, but steady progress to consolidation, and rely on the State Governments for protection from this fatal gulph, and yet refuse their aid to the invigoration of our Government? An invigoration consequent on the mere revision and renovating of the old landmarks, without any express amendment-I would put the question to them (respectfully, but pointedly), is this conduct consistent, wise or patriotic?

Judges-In a government where the people have wisely prescribed, in a written constitution, the powers and duties of the several departments, the Judges have other duties to perform besides the decision of civil suits and trial of malefactors. They are the guardians of the constitution; are to protect the people from the unconstitutional acts of the Executive and Legislative departments; and protect the constitution even from the people themselves and their servants. Hence the necessity of judicial independence-in the tenure of office and competency of salary. Owing to the weakness and wants of man, competency and fixedness of salary are indispensable to the preservation of independence of opinion and firmness of conduct. But public interest requires that an officer, entrusted with so much power, the diligent, faithful and able discharge of whose duties are so important, should be responsible-and this responsibility should be real not nominal-should be known to the community and never absent from the mind of the officer-Responsibility is beneficial to the officer and to the community-it quickens and stimulates his efforts, and keeps his faculties alive. Irresponsibility induces, as well as enables, him to put even public opinion (omnipotent in other cases) at defiance-and destroys the moral sense of official duty, which gives respectability to the officer, efficacy to the functions of the office, and contentment and happiness to the community.

The County Court System has two material defects. It should not be vested with the power of adding to its own body, which it now has substantially, nor should the Justices be compensated by the sheriffalty. These defects are not so obvious in the small as in the large counties. Small counties have, even now, many of the benefits of the Ward System, so strongly and justly recommended by Mr. Jefferson-those counties being but large wards. But in the large and populous counties, the office of Justice is important and is, consequently, sought after. Because the court has in its gift the clerkship, worth, from three to five thousand dollars, annually, the appointment of an attorney for the commonwealth; two or more commissioners of the revenue; and from five to ten constables; the recommendation of militia officers for two or more regiments; the distribution of the county levy, amounting to from two to five thousand dollars annually-and the sheriffalty is worth, from fifteen hundred to three thousand dollars. Hence the desire of extending family influence and forming parties on the bench to manage and control the foregoing appointments, &c.; and in fact, the office runs too much in families. The son or son in-law is recommended as soon as grown or married-one brother brings in another or a brother-in law. Is the fault in the persons who fill the office? By no means; others would do the same, men will vote for their relations. The fault is in the system. The power of appointment should be in other hands. The compensation made the Justices is unfair and unjust towards them, and burdensome and injurious to society. The value of the sheriffalty is not always the same-it fluctuates as much as any other article in market-it is received according to seniority, without reference to services rendered, and depends on the tenure of life. Frequent instances occur of Justices having discharged their duties faithfully, diligently and usefully to the public until near their turn for the sheriffalty, and neither themselves nor their families receiving one cent compensation for years of labor, because Providence, in its wisdom, terminated their existence. But the injury to society, from this mode of compensation is yet more serious-The office of sheriff is of high character: its powers are great; and, the diligent and faithful discharge of its duties, important. Every man in the county has more or less to do with him. Many men are completely in his power. Yet, it is notoriously and customarily, throughout the State, sold, (office sold in the republic in the 19th century, and in Virginia! mirabile dictu, it is almost incredible--sold to the keen and sharp witted, who buy it for mercenary purposes. Is any one so credulous and simple as to believe that they are content with the lawful fees of the office? Do they not make their profits through oppression, shaving, usury, and perhaps, peculation? Is not the injury to individuals whose follies or misfortunes place them in the power of this office, and the demoralizing effects on society, obvious and serious? Did the wise framers of the constitution foresee these baneful consequences of this mode of compensating Justices? Let us benefit by the light of experience, and find out some other sufficient reward for these respectable and useful citizens.

Can it be necessary to mention the Law's delay in Virginia? The uncertainty, not only how but when, a decision can be had-the consumption of time and money of suitors and witnesses in litigated suits; the vexations, interruption of business and disappointment consequent on the irregularity of decision; not confined to one court only, but to the constitutional judiciary system generally.

Do not the defects of the constitution require its revision and amendment? Is the wisdom of Virginia incompetent to this labor? Can evil consequences grow out of a freeholder's convention? The friends of a convention earnestly desire its progress deliberately and dispassionately. They have exhibited moderation, forbearance and perseverance, characteristic of reformers. They have not put on its "strait jacket," but support its doctrines and principles--they seek reform--not revolution-they do not desire to see change carried to extremes-they will aid in the introduction of amendments with cautious and strict attention to the interests of the community-Can it be believed that a freeholder's convention will go to extremes on any subject?

Nor are its friends unmindful of the probable moral effect of a convention. It is a spectacle nowhere exhibited, but in the United States--it is, of itself grand, sublime and imposing-it refutes the calumnious charge of man's incapacity for self-government-removes all dread of anarchy, from madequacy and inequality of Government-purges, purifies and renovates the body politic-enables Government to keep pace with the improvements, genius and spirit of the age-disseminates political knowledge through the community-makes the people familiar with the forms, principles, powers and duties of their government-legitimates law-gives impulse and action to intellect, vigour and character to morals, and stimulus and scope to enterprise-the beneficial consequences of which will be seen, felt and acknowledged thro' all the ramifications of society.

Your oblig'd and ob't serv't.
WM. M. RIVES
March 19, 1828.