may, therefore, be necessary for me, having undertaken the task of replying to him in the morning, that I should rid myself of that burden as I best may this afternoon. As I now understand, the delegate has, for the present, abandoned the Constitutional ground which he assumed this morning, and placed the act, in question, on the ground of expediency.This, sir, is the only and true ground on which to place this question "Tis true, it is not the legitimate question now before the committee; yet, all who have preceded me, have assumed great latitude, but, as my more immediate object is to assail the positions taken by the delegate from Northampton, I will content myself with endeavoring to effect that object. Sir, the delegate has told us, that, by the registry act, an elector may be absent for a few weeks from Philadelphia, and return on the eve of an election, and, his name not being in the registry, he is deprived of a vote. It is very possible that such a case may occur-nay, admit that it has occured concede to the delegate all he asks, and what is the result?— Has the absent elector not a greater chance still under the registry act, than he had before it, to secure his vote? Under this act, the list of voters are published for some time previous to the election. The crowded county of Philadelphia abounds, as we are all aware, with active and busy politicians, who know every voter, and their names in their respective blocks and wards. It is first the sworn duty of the assessors, to hunt up and ferret out every taxable inhabitant in their respective wards, and then, it is the especial business of the busy ward and block politicians, to look into the published registry, and search for the names of their political friends. No one will, I presume, deny that this is done? Then, in the case put by the delegate, of an absent elector, there is an additional safeguard for the security of the right of suffrage? The delegate does not even pretend to deny, that an elector not absent, can, by any possibility (short of total blindness) lose his vote. Such elector has no excuse, except his own remissness, and that of his friends, to urge, if he should forego his right, as he may first examine the registry himself, or should he fail to do so, his friends may do so for him. Cases of omission, whereby the elector loses his right to vote, are (as they necessarily must be) "few and far between". The hostility to this law must arise from some other cause than those suggested here. Permit me now, sir, to examine how the law stood, formerly, in the county of Philadelphia, previous to this obnoxious law, and how it stands now. In all other parts of Pennsylvania, the assessor does not publish any printed list of the taxable inhabitants of his district; it is no where exposed to public view, but is deposited in the office of the County Commissioners, or in the pocket of the assessor.— Have the people of the interior, as the law now stands, the same facilities of ascertaining their right to vote as the people of that district? It cannot be pretended that they have. But, the delegate from Northampton, has charged one party of his fellow citizens with having always endeavored to restrain the right of suffrage, and has sung the praises of another for their repeated attempts to enlarge that right; but, as this charge is vague and very indefinite, it is scarcely possible to answer it. Does he mean the whigs or the tories of the Revolution? Does he mean the old constitutionalists or anti-constitutionalists? Or, does he mean the old federal or demoeratic parties? [Here Mr. PORTER explained, and said, thet he charged the old federal party with having entertained these views]. Mr. R. then

said, I rejoice that the delegate has not dared to charge the great democratic anti-masonic party of Pennsylvania with entertaining these views. They contend for equal rights and equal privileges-the rights of freemen against a many headed monster, even in the opinion of the delegate himself, rise superior to such base charges. It is most grievous, indeed, that the delegate should have thought proper to have arraigned the motives of the old federal party in this way. They have no representation as such here: as a party they have long since gone to the tomb of the Capulets, and it was unkind in that delegate to have raked up the ashes of the dead. But it was particularly unkind. But it was more particularly unkind in that delegate to disturb the ashes of the poor old federal party, as the self styled great democratic family of Pennsylvania are led on by those once the most distinguished leaders of the poor old federal party. This small attack is, however, justifiable in one respect, as it may go to prove the sincerity of a new convert, and to obtain him a more immediate admission into the bosom of the great democratic family, without which it might have been difficult to have obtained that resting place.

But the delegate has told us that the registry, act was passed to exclude the poor from the right of voting. This is a grave and serious charge, gravely made in a deliberative body, and the delegate should be called on to produce his proof, and if he cannot produce such proof, he should sink under the weight of it. I, however, see myself surrounded by men, older, abler, and, perhaps, better men than myself, who were members of the different branches of that Legislature who enacted that most odious law of all laws. To them I leave the task of defending themselves against this odious charge.

But, sir, this charge, I apprehend, was not made in sober earnestness; it is that kind of argument which is intended to tickle the fancy of the sweet fellows, the dear, lovely, and beloved people. It is intended to show them how much they are beloved here, and how far we will go to serve the dear sovereign people. The members of the Legislature need not tremble with apprehension at the denunciation of the delegate; he does not intend to follow the charge by proof. It is made-that is quite enough, and will answer the purpose equally well. Allow me, sir, to inform the committee (if they are not already aware) of some of the reasons which, I understand, induced that Legislature to pass this law. It will be recollected that, a few years ago, at the election polls in the county of Philadelphia, were enacted scenes disgraceful, not only to the citizens there, but discreditable to the State. That fair portion of our State was desolated by murder, bloodshed, conflagration and ruin. Enfeebled and respectable men were openly prevented by hired bullies and emancipated convicts from depositing their votes. The infirm were held in dread by this villanous rabble from exercising their Constitutional rights. The Legislature of the State, sir, were importuned for indemnity by those who had lost their all by the conflagrations perpetrated by a blackguard, villanous crew of scoundrels and convicts, who delight in reducing the respectable portion of the community to beggary, as they cannot hope to reduce them as low as themselves in the scale of morality and virtue. The highest commentary, sir, on the utility of the present law, is, that during the time it has been in operation, we have heard of no murders at the polls, no conflagrations,

ble exercise of that right so inestimable to freemen. Would that the Legisture had extended the provisions of this law to every city and incorporated borough in this Commonwealth.

The delegate has told us, that this most odious of all odious laws was repealed last session by the popular branch of the Legislature, almost by acclamation; but the Spartan Senators had withstood its repeal. He has said so truly, most truly said. 'Tis also true, sir, that invincible body on more occasions than one, during the last session, arrested the mad, headlong career of the popular branch. Yes, sir, on more occasions than one have that Spartan band stood between the rights of the people and the mad infuriated zeal of the infatuated party zealots of the lower branch; and for which they deserve the thanks of every true friend of civil liberty, and of every friend of law and order. Yes, sir, and the delegate has told us, too, that the Legislature of 1835-6 made use of their short-lived power, and that it had departed, never to return. On that point, sir, let me say to that delegate, that the time has now arrived when the healthful intelligence of truth has diffused itself among the hills and the valleys of this glorious Commonwealth. When an intelligent people are aware of the great political results which have been obtained, and are still to be obtained, by an adherence to the pure principles of liberty and equality, and that the time is passed away when the diadems, sceptres, mitres, and all the insignia of speculative free masonry can dazzle an emancipated people.

Mr. DORAN, of Philadelphia, said he had listened to a great deal which had been said concerning the Constitutionality of the registry act, but in all the wide range which the debate had taken, he had heard no gentleman give an opinion as to its origin. One gentleman had regarded it as a Massachusetts invention; and one had stated that it originated with the President of the United States; while another insisted that it was the duty of all those gentlemen who were of the same party as Mr. VAN BUREN, to support it. He did not think the registry act was of American invention. It neither owed its origin to Massachusetts nor New York. If his memory did not deceive him, it was of English invention, got up by the DUKE of WELLINGTON, to put down the forty shilling freeholders, because it was the policy of the dominant party to break down the strength of the poor men. It was the invention of WELLINGTON and PEALE, intended to operate on the forty shilling freeholders of Ireland, who were too patriotic to be swayed into a subserviency to the Government. You know, sir, or

may have heard, how matters have been carried on in Ireland, and what measures have been on the tapis to prevent the honest expression of public opinion. By an act passed some twenty or thirty years ago, it was in the power of any forty shilling freeholder to vote, and when DANIEL O'CONNELL was a candidate, there was not one of these forty shilling freeholders who did not vote for that gentleman, to carry out the principles which he has since so ably discussed. The minority then thought it politic to hack down these freeholders; and how did they go to work to effect their object? By concocting this very registry act, which was to take place, a limited period before the elections, that the landlords might have time to goround to endeavor to work by bribery or persuasion. That was the history of the registry act, as introduced by the tories in Great Britain, and that is the act which was introducd here. He was not afraid

up the registry act introduced by PEALE, the high tory champion of England, we shall find ours, verbatim et literatum, a copy of that act, introduced here to abridge the elective franchise. No conservative, here or there, could have devised a more ingenious scheme to defeat the expression of the public voice. Such was the origin of the act.

It had been said that this law did not operate to exclude any resident and qualified citizen from the polls, and that it did not limit the right of suffrage. But he said that it did; and that it was framed for the purpose of restricting the power of the democracy in the city and county of Philadelphia. The law required all to be registered, the rich and the poor. But was it the duty of the assessor to see that all were registered? It was said that the law required the assessor to go round twice and register all the individuals in the city and county, and it thus afforded an opportunity for each man to go and see that his name was registered. How did this operate in fact? When the assessors went round, the laboring men were necessarily and of course absent from their homes, enaged in providing subsistence for themselves and their families; and not finding the men at home, they did not go again. When the election came on, these men appeared to vote, and were spurned from the ballot boxes. They were told their names were not on the register, and that, therefore, they had no right to vote. These poor men were thus compelled to return to their families in shame and contempt. But how was it with the rich man? The gold and silver door plate, with name, was enough, and there was no danger that the assessor would overlook that. This was the effect of the law in the county of Philadelphia. How was it in the city he would not undertake to say. He would not meddle with its concerns. In the coun

ty, if the poor and laboring man was not at home, when the assessor called, he lost his vote. Men who had been residents of the county, and paid a county tax for forty or fifty years, were thus deprived of the right of voting He had known instances also in which soldiers of the revolution, and of the late war, men who had gallantly fought for their country, were rejected and refused the privilege of voting, because the assessors had wilfully neglected to register them. What was its effect in regard to its other professed objects? Did it prevent illegal votes from being received? Not at all. It excluded more legal than it did illegal votes.— Many illegal votes were received under it. Persons who had neither resided six months in the county nor paid a tax, were registered, and voted. Again, he had heard gentlemen say that the law was made to prevent riots at the polls, and that it had produced this effect; that it had restored peace to the windows, and enabled the aged and infirm to vote; all this he denied In Philadelphia county it was no such thing. If the elections were now conducted more peaceably there, it was because additional windows had been opened, and free access given to the polls. This was the cause of the quiet and peace which now attended the elections there. Formerly, there were two windows only, and as all the votes were to be polled within a certain time, the polls could not be reached without peril of life and limb. An act was passed with the concurrence of all parties, opening four windows, two on the eastern and two on the western side. No man had ever pretended, heretofore, to say, that the calm which now prevails at the polls was owing to the registry. That could have no effect upon the matter. Every one knows that it was entirely owing to the act

What he asked, was, the object of the act. He was not goin mince matters. He was here as the representative of the people, an intended to express his opinion freely. He was not to be deceived the idea that this gerrymandering act was intended to extend and guar right of suffrage. There were men here who would say, in sincerity it was designed for the protection of the aged and infirm, and to allow to vote in quiet. But the real object of the act was, to preserve the poli power of the State in the hands of the minority, where accident had placed it. It was a party measure. All the democrats, he was happ say, voted against it. It was got up by the minority members of the l House, with the assistance of the Senate, and for the

purpose of pre was not intended to benefit the dear people, but it was concocted by and cunning politicians, for the purpose of maintaining themselve power. He would like to see the man here who would say that he w support such a law, in reference to the whole State; or that the act intended to have any effect generally, and any where else than in the and county of Philadelphia. Would the gentleman from Lancaster, o gentleman from Adams, say that they voted for the law in referen their own counties, or that they would vote for such a law in regard to th If they did, it would nullify them forever, as public men, at home. farmers would say that it was a pretty thing that, before they could the right of voting, they should be obliged to go and hunt up an asse and see that their names were registered.

ing the power of that minority. All know this. The people know it

He had not intended to say any thing on this subject, and, for s time, he had taken little part in the debates; but, when an attack, w had no foundation in truth, was made, through the registry act, upon county of Philadelphia, he could no longer hold his peace: and, though matter was a digression from the subject properly before the committe felt bound to rise and repel the charge, as he had done, but in a ma temperate and respectful to the committee.

Mr. DICKEY said he was a member of the Legislature when the reg act, which had been so much complained of, was passed. He was o those members of the Legislature who twice voted for the act, an thought he understood its object and effect. The gentleman from North: ton did great injustice to the Legislature, when he said that they passed act to disfranchise any portion of the citizens of the State. That gentle certainly did not remember the provisions of the law, or he would n much misrepresent its character and objects. He recommended it t gentleman again to read the act, for the purpose of refreshing his mem So far from disfranchising any one was that law, that it extended, sec and promoted the exercise of the right of suffrage. While it guarded right from fraud, and closed the door to spurious votes, it extended the chise to all who were entitled to exercise it, and even provided meas for bringing all resident citizens within the franchise. The act made duty of the assessors to go around, before the election, and see that all were entitled to vote were placed upon the tax lists. Did not this mea tend to increase the number of voters, and to secure the right to all, ev those who, themselves, might be neglectful of it? It provides that the r ter shall be furnished with the tax lists of the assessors, and that afterwa