it was the thing, not the name, to which he was opposed, and one of his principle objections to the Constitution as it is now before us, is that it threatens the Country with an Aristocracy. The aristocracy will grow out of the House of
Representatives. Give the votes to the people who have no property, and they will sell them to the rich who will be bale to buy them. We should not confine our attention to this present moment. The time is not distant when this country will abound with mechanics and
manufacturers who will
receive their bread from their employers. Will such men be the secure and
faithful guardians of liberty? Will they be the
impregnable barrier
against aristocracy? he is a little duped by the by the association of the words, "taxation without representation." The man who does not give his vote freely is not represented. It is the man who dictates the vote. Children do not vote. Why? Because they want prudence, because they have no will of their own.The ignorant and dependent can be as little trusted with the public interest. He did not
conceive the difficult in describing freeholders to be insuperable. Still less the restriction could be unpopular. Nine tenths of the people are at present freeholders and these certainly will be pleased with it. As to the merchants and
etc. If they have wealth and value the right they can
acquire it. If not they don't deserve it.
