vocates for increasing the number and weight of that part of the Legislature in which their influence predominates. And it so happens, that four only of the largest will have a majority of the whole votes in the House of Representatives. Should the Representatives or People, therefore, of the smaller States, oppose at any time a reasonable addition of members, a coalition of a very few States will be sufficient to overrule the opposition; a coalition, which, notwithstanding the rivalship and local prejudices which might prevent it on ordinary occasions, would not fail to take place, when not merely prompted by common interest, but justified by equity and the principles of the Constitution.
It may be alleged, perhaps, that the Senate would be prompted by like motives to an adverse coalition; and as their concurrence would be indispensable, the just and constitutional views of the other branch might be defeated. This is the difficulty which has probably created the most serious apprehensions in the jealous friends of a numerous representation. Fortunately it is among the difficulties which, existing only in appearance, vanish on a close and accurate inspection. The following reflections will, if I mistake not, be admitted to be conclusive and satisfactory on this point.
Notwithstanding the equal authority which will subsist between the two Houses on all Legislative subjects, except the originating of money bills, it cannot be doubted, that the House, composed of the greater number of members, when supported by the more powerful States, and speaking the known and determined sense of a majority of the People, will have no small advantage in a question depending on the comparative firmness of the two Houses.
This advantage must be increased by the consciousness, felt by the same side, of being supported in its demands by right, by reason, and by the Constitution;