Constitutional Letter

Dear Charles Pinckney, It has come to my attention that we have opposing views on many of the topics discussed at the Constitutional Convention. Representation, counting slaves for taxation and representation, federal control of taxes on imports, and the federal governments control on trade are just some of the topics we have yet to see eye to eye on. I would like to focus on one specific issue and bring to your attention the flaws in you system. I would like to explain why I feel that my system would be a better suit for the states. That is why I write this letter to you explaining and observing our different views on representation.
I find the issue of representation is very important to the new system of government that is wanted to be set up. The way to determine the representation can have different approaches, whether it’s one or two houses, or representation based on population or equal. Without the right system, the states will not be represented correctly and it could become unfair to other states because they are either not powerful enough or neglected because of their size. The idea has been pitched of two houses and one is equal and the other is based on the contribution to the treasury. The many different ideas about how to represent seem endless but the right one must be chosen. I personally feel that we should have two houses, where the first is equal for all states and the second is based on how much the state contributes to the treasury. This is the fair and correct way to represent the states. This way they all have a basis of equality but the states that do contribute more can have more of a say. Any other system would either give the large states more control or the small states would be higher than the larger states. Keeping every state on the same playing field and giving a small advantage to those who help out more is the fair way to determine the representation. It is to my understanding that you would like the representatives to be