4thly. Experience, the only save and unerring guide, is altogether in favor of elections at large rather than by Districts. The representation of this State in Congress has ever been of the most respectable character--It is not too much to say that no State in the Union can justly claim a superiority to Connecticut in this respect. The fame may be affirmed, with truth, of the upper house of the Legislature of this State. Has there not been a constant succession of able and wise men in that branch of the administration of Connecticut? For more than a century we have preserved an unexampled prosperity.--shall we hazard our interests on the speculations of zealous partizans who are constantly bewildering themselves and their followers in new schemes? Another project is that of universal suffrage. The streets resound with the clamour that men are deprived of the invaluable privilege of choosing their rulers, and the people are invited to extend this privilege to all who pay taxes and do military duty. It is now discovered that Connecticut, in this particular, is not free.--The great argument urged in support of universal suffrage is that taxation and representation should go hand in hand--it is said that this maxim was deemed just during the revolutionary war, and that Americans adhered to it as a fundamental principle.--This principle the writer readily recognizes as a sound and indisputable position in every free government. But what is the meaning of the maxim? Does it intend that every person who is taxed, can of right claim the privilege of giving his suffrage? If so persons convicted of offences, or who are infamous for their vices may vote--for such persons are not outlawed.--On this principle, women of full age and unmarried, are also to be admitted.-- Minors also whose property is taxed, should be permitted to exercise this franchise, at least by guardian or proxy. What then is the true meaning of the maxim, that representation and taxation are inseparable? Here all writers agree--it means that no community should be taxed by the legislature unless that community is, or might have been represented in such legislature.--Hence several towns in this State till lately, were not represented in the General Assembly, and of course not taxed.-- Barkhempsted, Colebrook, and Winchester, it is believed, were of this description. This State and the other States understood this maxim precisely as now explained, in their opposition to Great-Britain.--We complained that the colonies should not be taxed because they were not represented in parliament. In this view of the subject the maxim is wise and just. Again, is not every town in Connecticut now represented in the legislature, and of course each individual equally with every other? In the representative of Hartford, for example, a representative of the freemen of Hartford, or of the town of Hartford? The truth is, every man, woman and child are represented.