M^r Wilson could see nothing like a concession here on the part of the smaller States. If both branches were to say yes or no, it was of little consequence which should say yes or no first, which last. If either was indiscriminately to have the right of originating, the reverse of the Report, would he thought be most proper; since it was a maxim that the least numerous body was the fittest for deliberation; the most numerous for decision. He observed that this discrimination had been transcribed from the British into several American constitutions. But he was persuaded that on examination of the American experiments it would be found to be a trifle light as air. Nor could he ever discover the advantage of it in the Parliamentary history of G. Britain. He hoped if there was any advantage in the privilege, that it would be pointed out. M^r Williamson thought that if the privilege were not common to both branches it ought rather to be confined to the 2^d as the bills in that case would be more narrowly watched, than if they originated with the branch having most of the popular confidence. M^r Mason. The consideration which weighed with the Committee was that the 1^{st} branch would be the immediate representatives of the people, the 2^d would not. Should the latter have the power of giving away the people's money, they might soon forget the source from whence they received it. We might soon have an aristocracy. He had been much concerned at the principles which had been advanced by some gentlemen, but had the satisfaction to find they did not generally prevail. He was a friend to proportional representation in both branches; but supposed that some points must be yielded for the sake of accomodation. M^r Wilson. If he had proposed that the 2^d branch should have an independent disposal of public money, the observations of (Col. Mason) would have been a satisfactory answer. But nothing could be farther from what he had said. His question was how is the power of the 1^{st} branch increased or that of the 2^d diminished by giving the proposed privilege to the former? Where is the difference, in which branch it begins, if both must concur, in the end? M^r Gerry would not say that the concession was a sufficient one on the part of the small States. But he could not but regard it in the light of a concession. It w^d make it a constitutional principle that the 2^d branch were not possessed of the Confidence of the people in money matters, which w^d lessen their weight & influence. In the next place if the 2^d branch were dispossessed of the privilege, they w^d be deprived of the opportunity which their continuance in office 3 times as long as the 1^{st} branch would give them of making three successive essays in favor of a particular point. M^r Pinkney thought it evident that the Concession was wholly on one side, that of the large States, the privilege of originating money bills being of no account.