Governor Randolph. I am informed, and I believe rightly because I derive my information from those whose knowledge is most respectable that Virginia is in a very unhappy position with respect to the access of foes by sea, though happily situated for commerce. This being her situation by sea, let us look at land. She has frontiers adjoining the States of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and North Carolina. Two of those States have declared themselves members of the Union. Will she be inaccessible to the inhabitants of those States? Cast your eyes to the Western country, that is inhabited by cruel savages, your natural enemies. Besides their natural propensity to barbarity, they may be excited by the gold of foreign enemies to commit the most horrid ravages on your people. Our great and increasing population is one remedy to this evil: but being scattered thinly over so extensive a country, how difficult is it to collect their strength or defend the country. This is one point of weakness. I wish for the honor of my countrymen, that it was the only one. There is another circumstance which renders us more vulnerable. Are we not weakened by the population of those whom we hold in slavery? The day may come when they may make impression upon us. Gentlemen who have been long accustomed to the contemplation of the subject, think there is a cause of alarm in this case. The number of those people, compared to that of the whites, is in an immense proportion; their numbers amounts to 236,000, that of the whites only to 352,000.-- Pages 80, 81.

Mr. Mason. We are told, in strong language, of dangers to which we will be exposed unless we adopt this Constitution. Among the rest, domestic safety is said to be in danger. This government does not attend to our domestic safety. It authorizes the importation of slaves for twenty odd years, and thus continues upon us that nefarious trade. Instead securing and protecting us, the continuation of this detestable trade adds daily to our knees. Though this evil is increasing, in no clause in the Constitution that will sent the Northern and Eastern States from filing our whole property of that [?] There is a clause to prohibit the importing of slaves after twenty years; but there is provision made for securing to the Southern States those they now possess. It is far being a desirable property. But it will be us in great difficulties and infelicity to [?] deprived of them. There ought to be because in the Constitution, to secure us that property which we have acquired under out former laws, and the loss of which would bring ruin on a great many people.

Mr. Lee, of Westmoreland. The honorable gentleman abominates it, because it does not prohibit the importation of slaves, and because it does not secure the continuance of the existing slavery! Is it not obviously inconsistent to criminate it for two contradictory reasons? I submit it to the consideration of the gentleman, whether, if it be reprehensible in the one case, it can be censurable in the other. Mr. Lee then concluded, by earnestly recommending to the committee to proceed regularly.-- Page 212.

Mr. Pendleton. I am unfortunate enough to differ from the worthy member in another circumstance. He professes himself an advocate for middling and lower classes of men. I profess to be a friend to the equal liberty of all men--from the palace to the cottage--without any other distinction than between good and bad men. I appeal to my public life and private behaviour, to decide whether I departed from this rule. Since distinctions have been brought forth and communicated to the audience, and will be therefore disseminated, I beg gentlemen to take with them this observation, that distinctions have been produced by the opposition. From the friends of the new Government they have heard none. None such are to be found in the organization of the paper before me.

Why bring into the debate the whims of writers--introducing the distinction of well born from others? I consider every man well born who comes into the world with an intelligent mind, and with all his parts perfect. I am an advocate for fixing our Government on true republican principles, giving to the poor man free liberty in his person and property.-- Page 212.

Mr. Henry. It is exceedingly painful to me to be objecting, but I must make a few observations. I shall not again review the catalogue of dangers which the honorable gentleman entertained us with. They appear to me absolutely imaginary. They have, in my conception, been proved to be such. But sure I am, that the dangers of this system are real, when those who have no similar interests with the people of this country are to legislate for us--when our dearest interests are left in the power of those whose advantage it may be to infringe them. How will the quotas of troops be furnished? Hated as requisitions are, your Federal officers cannot collect troops like dollars, and carry them in their pockets. You must make those abominable requisitions for them, and the scale will be in proportion to the number of your blacks as well as your whites, unless they violate the constitutional rule of apportionment. This is not calculated to rouse the fears of the people. It is founded in truth. How oppressive and dangerous must this be to the Southern States, who alone have slaves! This will render their proportion infinitely greater than that of the Northern States. It has been openly avowed that this shall be the 002121rule. I will appeal to the judgements of the committee, whether there be danger.-- Pages 240, 241.

Mr. Henry. He told gentlemen that these clauses were sufficient to shake all their implication. For, says he, if Congress had no power but what was given to them, why restrict them by negative words? Is not the clear implication this--that if these restrictions were not inserted, they could have performed what they prohibit? The worthy member had said that Congress ought to have power to protect all, and had given this system the highest encomium; but still insisted that the power over the militia was concurrent. To obviate the futility of this doctrine, Mr. Henry alleged that it was not reducible to practice. Examine it, says he, reduce it to practice. Suppose an insurrection in Virginia, and suppose there be danger apprehended of an insurrection in another State, from the exercise of the Government; or, suppose a national war, and there be discontent among the people of this State, that produces or threatens an insurrection; suppose Congress, in either case, demands a number of militia, will they not be obliged to go? Where are your reserved rights, when your militia go to a neighboring State? Which call is to be obeyed, the Congressional call, or the call of the State Legislature? The call of Congress must be obeyed. I need not remind this committee, that the sweeping clause will cause their demands to be submitted to. This clause enables them "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to carry into execution all the powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." Mr. Chairman, I will turn to another clause, which relates to the same subject, and tends to show the fallacy of their argument. The tenth section of the first article, to which reference was made by the worthy member, militates against himself. It says, that "no State shall engage in war, unless actually invaded." If you give this clause a fair construction, what is the true meaning of it? What does this relate to? Not domestic insurrections, but war. If the country be invaded, a State may go to war, but cannot suppress insurrections. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot therefore suppress it, without the interposition of Congress. The fourth section of the fourth article expressly directs, that in case of domestic violence, Congress shall protect the State, on application of the Legislature or Executive; and the eighth section of the first article gives Congress power to call forth the militia, to quell insurrections. There cannot, therefore, be a concurrent power. The State Legislatures ought to have power to call forth the efforts of militia, when necessary. Occasions for calling them out may be urgent, pressing, and instantaneous. The States cannot now call them, let an insurrection be ever so perilous, without an application to Congress. So long a delay may be fatal.-- Page 315.

Mr. G. Nicholas. Another worthy member says there is no power in the States to quell an insurrection of slaves. Have they it now? If they have, does the Constitution take it away? If it does, it must be in one of the three clauses which have been mentioned by the worthy member. The first clause gives the General Government power to call them out when necessary. Does this take it away from the States? No; but it gives an additional security; for, beside the power in the State Governments to use their own militia, it will be the duty of the General Government to aid them with the strength of the Union when called for. No part of this Constitution can show that this power is taken away.

But an argument is drawn from that clause which says that "No State shall engage in war unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay? What does this prohibition amount to? It must be a war with a foreign enemy that the States are prohibited from making, for the exception to the restriction proves it. The restriction includes only offensive hostility, as they are at liberty to engage in war when invaded, or in imminent danger. They are therefore not restrained from quelling domestic insurrections, which are totally different from making war with a foreign Power. But the great thing to be dreaded is, that during an insurrection, the militia will be called out from the State. This is his kind of argument. Is it possible that at such a time the General Government would order the militia to be called? It is a groundless objection, to work on gentlemen's apprehensions within these walls. As to the fourth article, it was introduced wholly for the particular aid of the States. A republican form of government is guarantied, and protection is secured against invasion and domestic violence, on application. Is not this a guard as strong as possible? Does it not exclude the unnecessary interference of Congress in business of this sort?-- Page 318.

Sec. 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

Mr. George Mason. Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under theRoyal government this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the Revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this State and most of the States in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the States, and such a trade is diabolical in itself and disgraceful to mankind. 002222

Yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value an union of all the States, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union, unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness and not strength to the Union. And, though this infamous traffic be continued we have no security for the property of that kind which we have already. There is no clause in this Constitution to secure it for they may lay such tax as will amount to manumission. And should the Government be amended, still this detestable kind of commerce cannot be discontinued till after the expiration of twenty years; for the fifth article, which provides for amendments, expressly except this clause. I have ever looked upon this as a most disgraceful thing to America. I cannot express my detestation of it. Yet they have not secured us the property of the slaves we have already; so that "they have done what they ought not to have done, and have left undone what they ought to have done."

Mr. Madison. Mr. Chairman, I should conceive this clause to be impolitic, if it were one of the things which could be excluded without encountering greater evils. The Southern States would not have entered into the Union of America, without the temporary permission of that trade; and if they were excluded from the Union, the consequences might be dreadful to them and to us. We are not in a worse situation than before. That traffic is prohibited by our laws, and we may continue the prohibition. The Union in general is not in a worse situation. Under the Articles of Confederation it might be continued forever; but by this clause an end may be put to it after twenty years. There is, therefore, an amelioration of our circumstances. A tax may be laid in the mean time; but it is limited, otherwise Congress might lay such a tax as would amount to a prohibition. From the mode of representation and taxation, Congress cannot lay such a tax on slaves as will amount to manumission. Another clause secures us that property which we now possess. At present, if any slave elopes to any of those States where slaves are free, he becomes emancipated by their laws; for the laws of the States are uncharitable to one another in this respect. But in this Constitution, "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." This clause was expressly inserted to enable owners of slaves to reclaim them. This is a better security than any that now exists. No power is given to the General Government to interfere with respect to the property in slaves now held by the States. The taxation of this State being equal only to its representation, such a tax cannot be laid as he supposes. They cannot prevent the importation of slaves for twenty years, but after that period they can. The gentlemen from South Carolina and Georgia argued in this manner: "We have now liberty to import this species of property, and much of the property now possessed has been purchased or otherwise acquired in contemplation of improving it by the assistance of imported slaves. What would be the consequence of hindering us form it? The slaves of Virginia would rise in value, and we would be obliged to go to your markets." I need not expatiate on this subject. Great as the evil is, a dismemberment of the Union would be worse. If those States should disunite from the other States, for not including them in the temporary continuance of this traffic, they might solicit and obtain aid from foreign Powers.

Mr. Tyler warmly enlarged on the impolicy, iniquity, and disgracefulness, of this wicked traffic. He thought the reasons urged by gentlemen in defence of it were inconclusive and ill-founded. It was one cause of the complaints against British tyranny, that this trade was permitted. The Revolution had put a period to it; but now it was to be revived. He thought nothing could justify it. This temporary restriction on Congress militated, in his opinion, against the arguments of gentlemen on the other side, that what was not given up was retained by the States; for that, if this restriction had not been inserted, Congress could have prohibited the African trade. The power of prohibiting it was not expressly delegated to them; yet they would have had it by implication, if this restraint had not been provided. This seemed to him to demonstrate most clearly the necessity of restraining them, by a bill of rights, from infringing our inalienable rights. It was immaterial whether the bill of rights was by itself, or included in the Constitution. But he contended for it, one way or the other. It would be justified in our own example, and that of England. His earnest desire was, that it should be handed down to posterity, that he had opposed this wicked clause.- Pages 335,336.

Mr. Madison was surprised that any gentleman should return to the clauses which had already been discussed. He begged the gentleman to read the clauses which gave the power of exclusive legislation, and he might see that nothing could be done without the consent of the States. With respect to the supposed operation of what was denominated the sweeping clause, the gentleman, he said, was mistaken; for it only extended to the enumerated powers. Should Congress attempt to extend it to any power not enumerated, it would not be warranted by the clause. As to the restriction in the clause under consideration, it was a restraint on the exercise of a power expressly delegated to Congress, viz; that of regulating commerce with foreign nations.Mr. Henry insisted that the insertion of these restrictions on Congress was a plain demonstration that Congress should exercise powers by implication. The gentleman had 002323admitted that Congress could have interdicted the African trade, were it not for this restriction. If so, the power, not having been expressly delegated, must be obtained by implication. He demanded, where, then, was their doctrine of reserved rights? He wished for negative clauses to prevent them from assuming any powers but those expressly given. He asked why it was omitted to secure us that property in slaves which we hold now? He feared its omission was done with design. They might lay such heavy taxes on slaves as would amount to emancipation, and then the Southern States would be the only sufferers. His opinion was confirmed by the mode of levying money. Congress, he observed, had power to lay and collect taxes, imposts, and excises. Imposts (or duties) and excises were to be uniform. But this uniformity did not extend to taxes. This might compel the Southern States to liberate their negroes. He wished this property, therefore, to be guarded. He considered the clause which had been adduced by the gentleman as a security for this property as no security at all. It was no more than this--that a runaway negro could be taken up in Maryland or New York. This could not prevent Congress from interfering with that property, by laying a grievous and enormous tax on it, so as to compel owners to emancipate their slaves rather than pay the tax. He apprehended it would be productive of much stock-jobbing, and that they would play into another's hands in such a manner as that this property would be lost to the country.

Mr. George Nicholas wondered that gentlemen who were against slavery would be opposed to this clause; as, after that period, the slave trade would be done away. He asked if gentlemen did not see the inconsistency of their arguments? They object, says he, to the Constitution, because the slave trade is laid open for twenty odd years; and yet tell you that, by some latent operation of it, the slaves, who are so now, will be manumitted. At the same moment it is opposed for being promotive and destructive of slavery. He contended that it was advantageous to Virginia that it should be in the power of Congress to prevent the importation of slaves after twenty years, as it would then put a period to the evil complained of. As the Southern States would not confederate without this clause, he asked if gentlemen would rather dissolve the Confederacy than to suffer this temporary inconvenience, admitting it to be such? Virginia might continue the prohibition of such importation during the intermediate period, and would be benefited by it, as a tax of ten dollars on each slave might be laid, of which she would receive a share. He endeavored to obviate the objection of gentlemen, that the restriction on Congress was a proof that they would have power not given them, by remarking that they would only have had a general superintendency of trade, if the restriction had not been inserted. But the Southern States insisted on this exception to that general superintendency for twenty years. It could not, therefore, have been a power by implication, as the restriction was an exception from a delegated power. The taxes could not, as had been suggested, be laid so high on negroes as to amount to emancipation; because taxation and representation were fixed according to the census established in the Constitution. The execution of taxes from the uniformity annexed duties and excises, could not have the operation contended for by the gentlemen; because other clauses had clearly and positively fixed the census. Had taxes been uniform, it would have been universally objected to; for no or object could be selected without involving great inconveniences and oppressions. But, says Mr. Nicholas, is it from the General Government we are to fear emancipation? Gentlemen will recollect what I said in another House, and what other gentlemen have said that advocated emancipation. Give me leave to say, that that clause is a great security for our slave tax. I can tell the committee that the people of our country are reduced to beggary by the taxes on negroes. Had this Constitution been adopted, it would not have been the case. The taxes were laid on all our negroes. By this system, two-fifths are exempted. He then added, that he had imagined gentlemen would not support here what they had opposed in another place.

Mr. Henry replied, that though the proportion of each was to be fixed by the census, and three-fifths of the slaves only were included in the enumeration, yet the proportion of Virginia, being once fixed, might be laid on black and blacks only; for the mode of raising the proportion of each State being to be directed by Congress, they might make slaves the sole object to raise it. Personalities he wished to take leave of; they had nothing to do with the question, which was solely whether that paper was wrong or not.

Mr. Nicholas replied, that negroes must be considered as persons or property. If as property, the proportion of taxes to be laid on them was fixed in the Constitution. If he apprehended a poll tax on negroes, the Constitution had prevented it; for, by the census, where a white man paid ten shillings, a negro paid but six shillings; for the exemption of two-fifths of them reduced it to that proportion.-- Page 337.

Mr. George Mason said, that gentlemen might think themselves secured by the restriction in the fourth clause, that no capitation or other direct tax should be laid, but in proportion to the census before directed to be taken; but that, when maturely considered, it would be found to be no security whatever. It was nothing but a direct assertion, or mere confirmation, of the clause which fixed the ratio of taxes and representation. It only meant that the quantum to be raised of each State should be in proportion to their numbers in the manner therein directed; but the General Government was not precluded from laying the proportion of any particular State on any 002424one species of property they might think proper. For instance, if 5 hundred thousand dollars were to be raised they might lay the whole of the proportion of the Southern States on the blacks, or any species of property; so that by laying taxes too heavily on slaves, they might totally annihilate that kind of property. No real security could arise from the clause, which provides that person held to labor in one State escaping into another, shall be delivered up. This only meant that runaway slaves should not be protected in other States. As to the exclusion of ex post facto laws, it could not be said to create any security in this case: for laying a tax on slaves would not be ex post facto.

Mr. Madison replied, that even the Southern States, who were most affected, were perfectly satisfied with this provision and dreaded no danger to the property they now hold. It appeared to him that the General Government would not intermeddle with that property for twenty years, but to lay a tax on every slave imported, not exceeding ten dollars; and that after the expiration of that period, they might prohibit the traffic altogether. The census in the Constitution was intended to introduce equality in the burdens to be laid on the community. No gentleman objected to laying duties, imposts, and excises, uniformly; but uniformity of taxes would be subversive to the principles of equality; for that it was not possible to select any article which would be easy for one State, but what would be heavy for another; that the proportion of each State being ascertained, it would be raised by the General Government in the most convenient manner for the people, and not by the selection of any one particular object; that there must be some degree of confidence put in agents, or else we must reject a state of civil society altogether. Another great security to this property, which he mentioned, was, that five States were greatly interested in that species of property; and there were other States which had some slaves, and had made no attempt or taken any step to take them from the people. There were a few slaves in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut; these States would probably oppose any attempts to annihilate this species of property. He concluded by observing that he would be glad to leave the decision of this to thecommittee.-- Pages 422, 423.

Mr. Henry. Among ten thousand implied powers which they may assume, they may, if we be engaged in war, liberate every one of your slaves, if they please. And this must and will be done by men, a majority of whom have not a common interest with you. They will therefore, have no feeling for your interests. It has been repeatedly said here, that the great object of a National Government was national defence. That power which is said to be intended for security and safety may be rendered detestable and oppressive. If you give power to the General Government to provide for the general defence, the means must be commensurate to the end. All the means in the possession of the people must be given to the Government which is intrusted with the public defence. In this State there are 236,000 blacks, and there are many in several other States; but there are few or none in the Northern States; and yet, if the Northern States shall be of opinion that our numbers are numberless, they may call forth every national resource. May Congress not say that every black man must fight? Did we not see a little of this last war? We were not so hard pushed as to make emancipation general; but acts of Assembly passed that every slave who would go to the army should be free. Another thing will contribute to bring this event about; slavery is detested--we feel its fatal effects--we deplore it with all the pity of humanity. Let all these considerations, at some future period, press with full force on the minds of Congress. Let that humanity, which I trust will distinguish America, and the necessity of national defence--let all these things operate on their minds; they will search that paper, and see if they have power of manumission. And have they not, sir? Have they not power to provide for the general defence and welfare? May they not think that these call for the abolition of slavery? May not the pronounce all slaves free, and will they not be warranted by that power? There is no ambiguous implication or logical deduction. The paper speaks to the point. They have the power, in clear, unequivocal terms, and will clearly and certainly exercise it. As much as I deplore slavery, I see that prudence forbids its abolition. I deny that the General Government ought to set them free because a decided majority of the States have not the ties of sympathy and fellow-feeling for those whose interest would be affected by their emancipation. The majority of Congress is to the North, and the slaves are to the South. In this situation, I see a great deal of the property of the people of Virginia in jeopardy, and their peace and tranquillity gone. I repeat it again, that it would rejoice my very soul, that every one of my fellow-beings was emancipated. As we ought, with gratitude, to admire that decree of Heaven which has numbered us among the free, we ought to lament and deplore the necessity of holding our fellow-men in bondage. But is it practicable, by any human means, to liberate them, without producing the most dreadful and ruinous consequences? We ought to possess them in the manner we have inherited them from our ancestors as their manumission is incompatible with the felicity of the country; but we ought to soften, as much as possible, the rigor of their unhappy fate. I know that, in a variety of particular instances, the Legislature, listening to complaints, have admitted their emancipation. Let me not dwell on this subject. I will only add, that this, as well as every other property of the people of Virginia, is in jeopardy, and put in the hands of those who have no similarity of situation with us. This is a local matter, and I can see no propriety 002525in subjecting it to Congress.-- Page 431.

Gov. Randolph. That honorable gentleman [Mr. Henry] and some others have insisted that the abolition of slavery will result from it, and at the same time have complained that it encourages its continuation. The inconsistency proves, in some degree, the futility of their arguments. But if it be not conclusive to satisfy the committee that there is no danger of enfranchisement taking place, I beg leave to refer them to the paper itself. I hope that there is none here who, considering the subject in the calm light of philosophy, will advance an objection dishonorable to Virginia; that at the moment they are securing the rights of their citizens, an objection is started, that there is a spark of hope that those unfortunate men now held in bondage may, by the operation of the General Government, be made free. But if any gentleman be terrified by this apprehension, let him read the system. I ask, and I will ask again and again, till I be answered, (not by declamation.) Where is the part that has a tendency to the abolition of slavery? Is it the clause which says that "the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808?" This is an exception from the power of regulating commerce, and the restriction is only to continue till 1808. Then Congress can, by the exercise of that power, prevent importations; but does it affect the existing state of slavery? Were it right here to mention what passed in Convention on the occasion, I might tell you that the Southern States--even South Carolina herself--conceived this property to be secure by these words. I believe, whatever we may think here, that there was not a member of the Virginia delegation who had the smallest suspicion of the abolition of slavery. Go to their meaning. Point out the clause where this formidable power of emancipation is inserted.

But another clause of the Constitution proves the absurdity of the supposition. The words of the clause are: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on, claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." Every one knows that slaves are held to service and labor. And when authority is given to owners of slaves to vindicate their property, can it be supposed they can be deprived of it? If a citizen of this State, in consequence of this clause, can take his runaway slave in Maryland, can it be seriously thought that, after taking him and bringing him home, he could be made free?-- Page 437.

Mr. Madison. With respect to the amendments proposed by the honorable gentleman, it ought to be considered how far they are good. As far as they are palpably and insuperably objectionable, they ought to be opposed. One amendment he proposes is, that any army which shall be necessary, shall be raised by the consent of two-thirds of the States. I most devoutly wish that there may never be an occasion of having a single regiment. There can be no harm in declaring that standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and ought to be avoided, as far as it may be consistent with the protection of the community. But when we come to say that the national security shall depend, not on a majority of the people of America, but that it may be frustrated by less than one-third of the people of America, I ask if this be a safe or proper mode? What part of the United States are most likely to stand in need of this protection? The weak parts, which are the Southern States. Will it be safe to leave the United States at the mercy of one-third of the States, a number which may comprise a very small proportion of the American people? They may all be in that part of America which is least exposed to danger. As far as a remote situation from danger would render exertions for public defence less active, so far the Southern States would be endangered.

The regulation of commerce, he further proposed, should depend on two-thirds of both Houses. I wish I could recollect the history of this matter; but I cannot call it to mind with sufficient exactness. But I well recollect the reasoning of some gentlemen on that subject. It was said, and I believe with truth, that every part of America does not stand in equal need of security. It was observed that the Northern States were most competent to their own safety. Was it reasonable, asked they, that they should bind themselves to the defence of the Southern States, and still be left at the mercy of the minority for commercial advantages? Should it be in the power of the minority to deprive them of this and other advantages, when they are bound to defend the whole Union, it might be a disadvantage for them to confederate.

These were his arguments. This policy of guarding against political inconveniences, by enabling a small part of the community to oppose the Government, and subjecting the majority to a small minority, is fallacious. In some cases, it may be good; in others, it may be fatal. In all cases, it puts it in the power of the minority to decide a question which concerns the majority.

I was struck with surprise when I heard him express himself alarmed with respect to the emancipation of slaves. Let me ask, if they should even attempt it, if it will not be an unsurpation of power? There is no power to warrant it, in that paper. If there be, I know it not. But why should it be done? Says the honorable gentleman, for the general welfare; it will infuse strength into our system. Can any member of this committee suppose that it will increase our strength? Can any one believe that the American Councils will come into a measure which will strip them of their property, discourage and alienate the affections of five-thirteenths of the Union? 002626Why was nothing of this sort aimed at before? I believe such an idea never entered into any American [?], nor do I believe it ever will, unless it will enter into the heads of those gentlemen who substitute unsupported suspicions for reasons.-- Page 452.ELLIOTS DEBATES--VOL. III.North Carolina State Convention, called to ratify the Constitution.First clause of the ninth section read.

Mr. J. McDowall wished to hear the reasons of this restriction.

Mr. Spaight answered, that there was a contest between the Northern and Southern States; that the Southern States, whose principal support depended on the labor of slaves, would not consent to the desire of the Northern States to exclude the importation of slaves absolutely; that South Carolina and Georgia insisted on this clause, as they were now in want of hands to cultivate their lands; that in the course of twenty years they would be fully supplied; that the trade would be abolished then, and that, in the mean time, some tax or duty might be laid on.

Mr. McDowall replied, that the explanation was just such as he expected, and by no means satisfactory to him, and that he looked upon it as a very objectionable part of the system.

Mr. Iredell. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express sentiments similar to those of the gentleman from Craven. For my part, were it practicable to put an end to the importation of slaves immediately, it would give me the greatest pleasure, for it certainly is a trade utterly inconsistent with the rights of humanity, and under which great cruelties have been exercised. When the entire abolition of slavery takes place, it will be an event which must be pleasing to every generous mind and every friend of human nature; but we often wish for things which are not attainable. It was the wish of a great majority of the Convention to put an end to the trade immediately, but the States of South Carolina and Georgia would not agree to it. Consider, then, what would be the difference between our present situation, in this respect, if we do not agree to the Constitution, and what it will be if we do agree to it. If we do not agree to it, do we remedy the evil? No, sir, we do not; for if the Constitution be not adopted, it will be in the power of every State to continue it forever. They may or may not abolish it, at their discretion. But if we adopt the Constitution, the trade must cease after twenty years, if Congress declare so, whether particular States please so or not. Surely, then, we gain by it. This was the utmost that could be obtained. I heartily wish more could have been done. But as it is, this Government is nobly distinguished above others by that very provision. Where is there another country in which such a restriction prevails? We therefore, sir, set an example of humanity, by providing for the abolition of this inhuman traffic, though at a distant period. I hope, therefore, that this part of the Constitution will not be condemned, because it has not stipulated for what it was impracticable to obtain.

Mr. Spaight further explained the clause: that the limitation of this trade to the term of twenty years, was a compromise between the Eastern States and the Southern States. South Carolina and Georgia wished to extend the term; the Eastern States insisted on the entire abolition of the trade. That the State of North Carolina had not thought proper to pass any law prohibiting the importation of slaves, and therefore its delegation in the Convention did not think themselves authorized to contend for an immediate prohibition of it.

Mr. Iredell added to what he had said before, that the States of Georgia and South Carolina had lost a great many slaves during the war, and that they wished to supply the loss.

Mr. Galloway. Mr. Chairman, the explanation given to this clause does not satisfy my mind. I wish to see this abominable trade put an end to. But in case it be thought proper to continue this abominable traffic for twenty years, yet I do not wish to see the tax on the importation extended to all persons whatsoever. Our situation is different from the people to the North. We want citizens; they do not. Instead of laying a tax, we ought to give a bounty to encourage foreigners to come among us. With respect to the abolition of slavery, it requires the utmost consideration. The property of the Southern States consists principally of slavers. If they mean to do away slavery altogether, this property will be destroyed. I apprehend it means to bring forward manumission. If we must manumit our slaves, what country shall we send them to? It is impossible to be happy, if, after manumission, they are to stay among us.

Mr. Iredell. Mr. Chairman, the worthy gentleman, I believe, has misunderstood this clause, which runs in the following words: "The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person." Now, sir, observe that the Eastern States, who long ago have abolished slavery, did not approve of the expression, slaves; they therefore used another that answered the same purpose. The committee will observe the distinction between the two words, migration and importation. The first part of the clause will extend to persons who come into the country as free people, or are brought as slaves; but the last part extends to slaves only. The word migration refers to free persons; but the word importation refers to slaves, because free people cannot be said to be imported. The tax, therefore, is only to be laid on slaves, who are imported, and not on free persons, who migrate. I further beg leave to say, that the gentleman is mistaken in another thing. He seems to say that this extends to the abolition of slavery. 002727Is there anything in this Constitution which says that Congress shall have it in their power to abolish the slavery of those slaves who are now in the country? Is it not the plain meaning of it, that after twenty years they may prevent the future importation of slaves? It does not extend to those now in the country. There is another circumstance to be observed. There is no authority vested in Congress to restrain the States, in the interval of twenty years, from doing what they please. If they wish to inhibit such importation, they may do so. Our next Assembly may put an entire end to the importation of slaves.-- Pages, 96, 97, 98.

Article fourth. The first section, and two first clauses of the second section, read without observation.

The last clause read.

Mr. Iredell begged leave to explain the reason of this clause. In some of the Northern States they have emancipated all their slaves. If any of our slaves, said he, go there, and remain there a certain time, they would, by the present laws, be entitled to their freedom, so that their masters could not get them again. This would be extremely prejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern States, and, to prevent it, this clause is inserted in the Constitution. Though the word slave be not mentioned, this is the meaning of it. The Northern delegates, owing to their particular scruples on the subject of slavery, did not choose the word slave to be mentioned.-- Page 157.

Mr. Iredell. It is, however, to be observed, that the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article are protected from any alteration till the year 1808; and in order that no consolidation should take place, it is provided that no State shall, by any amendment or alteration, be ever deprived of an equal suffrage in the Senate, without its own consent. The two first prohibitions are with respect to the census, according to which direct taxes are imposed, and with respect to the importation of slaves. As to the first, it must be observed that there is a material difference between the Northern and Southern States. The Northern States have been much longer settled and are much fuller of people than the Southern, but have not land in equal proportion, nor scarcely any slaves. The subject of this article was regulated with great difficulty, and by a spirit of concession which it would not be prudent to disturb for a good many years. In twenty years there will probably be a great alteration, and then the subject may be considered with less difficulty and greater coolness. In the mean time, the compromise was upon the best footing that could be obtained. A compromise likewise took place in regard to the importation of slaves. It is probable that all the members reprobated this inhuman traffic, but those of South Carolina and Georgia would not consent to an immediate prohibition of it; one reason of which was, that during the last war they lost a vast number of negroes, which loss they wish to supply. In the mean time, it is left to the States to admit or prohibit the importation, and Congress may impose a limited duty upon it.-- Page 158.Debates in the Pennsylvania State Convention, called to ratify the Constitution.Mr. Wilson. Much fault has been found with the mode of expression used in the first clause of the ninth section of the first article. I believe I can assign a reason why that mode of expression was used, and why the term slave was not admitted in this constitution. And as to the manner of laying taxes, this is not the first time that the subject has come into the view of the United States, and of the Legislatures of the several States. The gentleman [Mr. Findley] will recollect that in the present Congress the quota of the Federal debt and general expenses was to be in proportion to the value of land, and other enumerated property, within the States. After trying this for a number of years, it was found, on all hands, to be a mode that could not be carried into execution. Congress was satisfied of this, and in the year 1783 recommended, in conformity with the powers they possessed under the Articles of Confederation, that the quota should be according to the number of free people, including those bound to servitude, and excluding Indians not taxed. These were the expressions used in 1783, and the fate of this recommendation was similar to all their other resolutions. It was not carried into effect, but it was adopted by no fewer than eleven out of thirteen States; and it cannot be but matter of surprise to hear gentlemen, who agreed to this very mode of expression at that time, come forward and state it as an objection on the present occasion. It was natural, sir, for the late Convention to adopt the mode after it had been agreed to by eleven States, and to use the expression which they found had been received as unexceptionable before. With respect to the clause restricting Congress from prohibiting the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit prior to the year 1808, the honorable gentleman says that this clause is not only dark, but intended to grant to Congress, for that time, the power to admit the importation of slaves. No such thing was intended; but I will tell you what was done--and it gives me high pleasure that so much was done. Under the present Confederation, the States may admit the importation of slaves as long as they please; but by this article, after the year 1808 the Congress will have power to prohibit such importation, notwithstanding the disposition of any State to the contrary. I consider this as laying the foundation for banishing slavery out of this country; and though the period is more distant than I could wish, yet it will produce the same kind, gradual change which was pursued in Pennsylvania. It is with much satisfaction I view this power in the General Government, whereby they may lay an interdiction on this reproachful trade; but an 002828immediate advantage is also obtained, for a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. And this sir, operates as a partial prohibition. It was all that could be obtained--I am sorry it was no more: but from this, I think there is reason to hope that yet a few years, and it will be prohibited altogether; and in the mean time the new States which are to be formed will be under the control of Congress in this particular, and slaves will never be introduced amongst them. The gentleman says that it is unfortunate in another point of view--it means to prohibit the introduction of white people from Europe, as this tax may deter them from coming among us. A little impartiality and attention will discover the care that the Convention took in selecting their language. The words are: "The migration or importation of such persons, &c., shall not be prohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation." It is observable, here, that the term migration is dropped when a tax or duty is mentioned, so that Congress have power to impose the tax only on those imported.-- Pages 250,251.Debates in the South Carolina State Convention, called to ratify the Constitution.General Pinckney. The numbers in the different States, according to the most accurate accounts we could obtain, were--

In New Hampshire, 102,000; Massachusetts, 360,000; Rhode Island, 58,000; Connecticut, 202,000; New York, 238,000; New Jersey, 138,000; Pennsylvania, 360,000; Delaware, 37,000; Maryland, (including three-fifths of 80,000 negroes,) 218,000; Virginia, (including three-fifths of 280,000 negroes,) 420,000; North Carolina, (including three-fifths of 60,000 negroes,) 200,000; South Carolina, (including three-fifths of 80,000 negroes,) 150,000; Georgia, (including three-fifths of 20,000 negroes,) 90,000.

The first House of Representatives will consist of sixty-five members; South Carolina will send five of them. Each State has the same representation in the Senate that she has at present; so that South Carolina will have, under the new Constitution, a thirtieth share in the Government, which is the proportion she has under the old Confederation and when it is considered that the Eastern States are full of men, and that we must necessarily increase rapidly to the southward and southwestward, he did not think that the Southern States will have an inadequate share in the representation. The honorable gentleman alleges that the Southern States are weak. I sincerely agree with him; we are so weak that, by ourselves, we could not form a union strong enough for the purpose of effectually protecting each other. Without union with the other States, South Carolina must soon fall. Is there any one among us so much a Quixote as to suppose that this State could long maintain her independence if she stood alone, or was only connected with the Southern States? I scarcely believe there is. Let an invading Power send a naval force into the Chesapeake, to keep Virginia in alarm, and attack South Carolina with such a naval and military force as Sir Henry Clinton brought here in 1780, and, though they might not soon conquer us, they would certainly do us an infinite deal of mischief; and if they considerably increased their numbers, we should probably fall. As, from the nature of our climate and the fewness of our inhabitants, we are undoubtedly weak, should we not endeavor to form a close union with the Eastern States, who are strong? And ought we not to endeavor to increase that species of strength which will render them of most service to us, both in peace and war? I mean their navy. We certainly ought; and by doing this, we render it their peculiar interest to afford us every assistance in their power, as every wound that we receive will eventually affect them. Reflect, for a moment, on the situation of the Eastern States--their country full of inhabitants, and so impracticable to an invading enemy by their numberless stone walls, and a variety of other circumstances, that they can be under no apprehension of danger from an attack. They can enjoy their independence without our assistance. If our Government is to be founded on equal compact, what inducement can they possibly have to be united with us, if we do not grant them some privileges with regard to their shipping? Or, supposing they were to unite with us without having these privileges, can we flatter ourselves that such a union would be lasting, or that they would afford us effectual assistance when invaded? Interest and policy both concurred in prevailing upon us to submit the regulation of commerce to the General Government; but I will also add, justice and humanity require it, likewise; for, who have been the greatest sufferers in the Union, by our obtaining our independence? I answer, the Eastern States; they have lost everything but their country and their freedom. It is notorious that some ports to the eastward, which used to fit out one hundred and fifty sail of vessels, do not now fit out thirty; that their trade of ship building, which used to be very considerable, is now annihilated; that their fisheries are trifling, and their mariners in want of bread. Surely we are called upon, by every tie of justice, friendship, and humanity, to relieve their distresses; and as, by their exertions, they have assisted us in establishing our freedom, we should let them, in some measure, partake of our prosperity. The General then said he would make a few observations on the objections which the gentleman had thrown out on the restrictions that might be laid on the African trade after the year 1808 On this point your delegates had to contend with the religious and political prejudices of the Eastern and Middle States, and with the interested and inconsistent opinion of Virginia, who was warmly opposed to our importing more slaves. I am of the same opinion now as I was two years ago, when I 002929used the expressions the gentleman has quoted, that while there remained one acre of swamp land uncleared, of South Carolina, I would raise my voice against restricting the importation of negroes. I am as thoroughly convinced as that gentleman is, that the nature of our climate, and the flat, swampy situation of our country, obliges us to cultivate our lands with negroes; and that, without them, South Carolina would soon be a desert waste. You have so frequently heard my sentiments on this subject, that I need not now repeat them. It was alleged by some of the members who opposed an unlimited importation, that slaves increased the weakness of any State who admitted them; that they were a dangerous species of property, which an invading enemy could easily turn against ourselves and the neighboring States; and that as we were allowed a representation for them in the House of Representatives, our influence in Government would be increased in proportion as we were less able to defend ourselves. "Show some period," said the members from from the Eastern States, "when it may be in our power to put a stop, if we please, to the importation of this weakness, and we will endeavor, for your convenience, to restrain the religious and political prejudices of our people on this subject." The Middle States and Virginia made us no such proposition; they were for an immediate and total prohibition. We endeavored to obviate the objections that were made, in the best manner we could, and assigned reasons for our insisting on the importation, which there is no occasion to repeat, as they must occur to every gentleman in the house. A committee of the States was appointed, in order to accommodate this matter; and, after a great deal of difficulty, it was settled on the footing recited in the Constitution.

By this settlement we have secured an unlimited importation of negroes for twenty years; nor is it declared that the importation shall be then stopped; it may be continued. We have a security that the General Government can never emancipate them, for no such authority is granted, and it is admitted on all hands that the General Government has no powers but what are expressly granted by the Constitution, and that all rights not expressed were reserved by the several States. We have obtained a right to recover our slaves in whatever part of America they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. In short, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms for the security of this species of property it was in our power to make. We would have made better if we could; but, on the whole, I do not think them bad.-- Pages 355--357.

C. Pinckney. Those who are acquainted with the Eastern States, the reason of their original migration, and their pursuits, habits, and principles, well know that they are essentially different from those of the Middle and Southern States; that they retain all those opinions respecting religion and government which first induced their ancestors to cross the Atlantic; and that they are, perhaps, more purely republican in habits and sentiment than any other part of the Union. The inhabitants of New York and the eastern part of New Jersey, originally Dutch settlements, seem to have altered less than might have been expected in the course of a century indeed, the greatest part of New York may still be considered as a Dutch settlement--the people in the interior country generally using that language in their families, and having very little varied their ancient customs. Pennsylvania and Delaware are nearly one-half inhabited by Quakers, whose passive principles upon questions of Government, and rigid opinions in private, render them extremely different from the citizens either of the Eastern or Southern States. Maryland was originally a Roman Catholic colony, and a great number of their inhabitants, some of them the most wealthy and cultivated, are still of this persuasion; it is unnecessary for me to state the striking difference in sentiment and habit which must always exist between the Independents of the East, the Calvinists and Quakers of the Middle States, and the Roman Catholics of Maryland; but striking as this is, it is not to be compared with the difference that there is between the inhabitants of Northern and Southern States; when I say Southern, I mean Maryland and the States to the southward of her; here we may truly observe that nature has drawn as strong marks of distinction in the habits and manners of the people as she has in her climates and productions. The Southern citizen beholds with a kind of surprise the simple manners of the East, and is too often induced to entertain undeserved opinions of the apparent purity of the Quaker; while they, in their turn, seem concerned at what they term the extravagance and dissipation of their Southern friends, and reprobate, as an unpardonable moral and political evil, the dominion they hold over a part of the human race. The inconveniences which too frequently attend these differences in habits and opinions among the citizens that compose the Union, are not a little increased by the variety of their State Governments; for, as I have already observed, the Constitution or laws under which a people live never fail to have a powerful effect upon their manners. We know that all the States have adhered in their forms to the republican principle, though they have differed widely in their opinions of the mode best calculated to preserve it.-- Pages 386,387.EXTRACTS FROM JEFFERSON'S NOTES ON VIRGINIA.Boston Edition, 1832.Under the mild treatment our slaves experience, and their wholesome though coarse food, this blot in our country increases as fast or faster than the whites. During the Regal Government, we had at one time obtained a law, which imposed such a duty on the importation of slaves as amounted nearly to a prohibition 003030when one inconsiderate Assembly, placed under a peculiarity of circumstance, repealed the law. This repeat met a joyful sanction from the then sovereign, and no devices, no expedients, which could ever after be attempted by subsequent Assemblies--and they seldom met without attempting them--could succeed in getting the royal assent to a renewal of the duty. In the very first session held under the Republican Government the Assembly passed a law for the perpetual prohibition of the importation of slaves. This will, in some measure, stop the increase of this great political and moral evil, while the minds of our citizens may be ripening for a complete emancipation of human nature.-- Page 93.

Many of the laws which were in force during the monarchy, being relative merely to that form of Government, or inculeating principles inconsistent with republicanism, the first Assembly which met after the establishment of the commonwealth, appointed a committee* to revise the whole code--to reduce it into proper form and volume, and report it to the Assembly. This work has been executed by three gentlemen, and reported, but probably will not be taken up till a restoration of peace shall leave to the Legislature leisure to go through such a work.

They proposed the following, among other alterations:

To emancipate all slaves born after passing the act. The bill reported by the revisors does not itself contain this proposition, but an amendment containing it was prepared, to be offered to the Legislature whenever the bill should be taken up; and further directing that they should continue with their parents to a certain age, then be brought up, at the public expense, to tillage, arts, or sciences, according to their geniuses, till the females should be eighteen and the males twenty-one years of age, when they should be colonized to such place as the circumstance of the time should render most proper, sending them out with arms, implements of household and of the handicraft arts, seeds, pairs of the useful domestic animals, &c., to declare them a free and independent people, and extend to them our alliance and protection, till they have acquired strength; and to send vessels at the same time to other parts of the world, for an equal number of white inhabitants; to induce whom to migrate hither, proper encouragements were to be proposed. It will probably be asked. Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the State, and thus save the expense of supplying by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep-rooted prejudices entertained by the whites, ten thousand recollections by the blacks of the injuries they have sustained, new provocations, the real distinctions which nature has made, and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions, which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race.-- Page 142--144.

Whether further observation will or will not verify the conjecture, that nature has been less bountiful to them in the endowments of the head. I believe that in those of the heart she will be found to have done them justice. That disposition to theft with which they have been branded must be ascribed to their situation, and not to any depravity of the moral sense. The man in whose favor no laws of property exist, probably feels himself less bound to respect these made in favor of others. When arguing for ourselves, we lay it down as a fundamental, that laws, to be just, must give a reciprocation of right; that, without this, they are mere arbitrary rules of conduct, founded in force, and not in conscience; and it is a problem which I give to the master to solve, whether the religious precepts against the violation of property were not framed for him as well as his slave? And whether the slave may not as justifiably take a little from one who has taken all from him, as he may slay one who would slay him? That a change in the relations in which a man is placed should change his ideas of moral right or wrong, is neither new nor peculiar to the color of the blacks. Homer tells it was so 2,600 years ago. 'Emisu, ger t'aretes apoainutai euruopa ZousHaneros, eat'an min kota douhon ema elesin.Odd. 17,323.Jove fix'd it certain, that whatever dayMakes man a slave, takes half his worth away.But the slaves of which Homer speaks were whites. Notwithstanding these considerations, which must weaken their respect for the laws of property, we find among them numerous instances of the most rigid integrity, and as many as among their better-instructed masters, of benevolence, gratitude, and unshaken fidelity. The opinion that they are inferior in the faculties of reason and imagination, must be hazarded with great diffidence. To justify a general conclusion, requires many observations, even where the subject may be submitted to the anatomical knife, to optical glasses, to analysis by fire or by solvents. How much more, then, where it is a faculty, not a substance, we are examining; where it eludes the research of all the senses; where the conditions of its existence are various, and variously combined; where the effects of those which are present or absent bid defiance to calculation. Let me add, too, as a circumstance of great tenderness, where our conclusion would degrade a whole race of men from the rank in the scale of beings which their Creator may perhaps have given them. To our reproach it must be said, that though for a century and a half we have had under our eyes the races of black and red men, they have never yet been viewed by us as subjects of natural history. I advance it, therefore, as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. 003131It is not against experience to suppose that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications. Will not a lover of natural history, then--one who views the gradations in all the races of animals with the eye of philosophy--excuse an effort to keep those in the department of man as distinct as nature has formed them? This unfortunate difference of color, and perhaps of faculty, is a powerful obstacle to the emancipation of these people. Many of their advocates, while they wish to vindicate the liberty of human nature, are anxious also to preserve its dignity and beauty. Some of these, embarrassed by the question, "What further is to be done with them?" join themselves in opposition with those who are actuated by sordid avarice only. Among the Romans, emancipation required but one effort. The slaves, when made free, might mix with, without staining, the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture. The revised code further proposes to proportion crimes and punishments. This is attempted on the following scale.-- Pages 149--151.

It is difficult to determine on the standard by which the manners of a nation may be tried, whether catholic or particular. It is more difficult for a native to bring to that standard the manners of his own nation, familiarized to him by habit. There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people, produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions--the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him. From his cradle to his grave, he is learning to do what he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive, either in his philanthropy or his self-love, for restraining the intemperance of passion towards his slave it should always be a sufficient one that his child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. The parent storms, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose rein to the worst of passions; and, thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circumstances. And with what execration should the statesman be loaded, who, permitting one-half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other, transforms these into despots and these into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, and the amor [?] of the other; for if a slave can have a country in this world, it must be any other in preference to that in which he is born to live and labor for another; in which he must lock up the faculties of his nature, contribute, as far as depends on his individual endeavors, to the evanishment of the human race, or entail his own miserable condition on the endless generations proceeding from him. With the morals of the people, their industry also is destroyed; for, in a warm climate, no man will labor for himself who can make another labor for him. this is so true, that of the proprietors of slaves a very small proportion, indeed, are ever seen to labor. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure, when we have removed their only firm basis--a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? that they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever; that, considering numbers, nature, and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest. But it is impossible to be temperate and to pursue this subject through the various considerations of policy, of morals, of history natural and civil. We must be contented to hope they will force their way into every one's mind. I think a change already perceptible, since the origin of the present Revolution. The spirit of the master is abating, that of the slave rising from the dust, his condition mollifying, the way I hope preparing, under the auspices of Heaven, for a total emancipation; and that this is disposed, in the order of events, to be with the consent of the masters, rather than by their extirpation.-- Pages 169--171.EXTRACT FROM PLAN OF A CONSTITUTION FOR VIRGINIA.Drawn up by Mr. Jefferson in 1783.The General Assembly shall not have power to infringe this Constitution; to abridge the civil rights of any person on account of his religious belief; to restrain him from professing and supporting that belief, or to compel him to contributions, other than those he shall have personally stipulated, for the support of that or any other; to ordain death for any crime but treason or murder, or military offences; to pardon, or give a power of pardoning, persons duly convicted of treason or felony, but, instead thereof, they may substitute one or two new trials, and no more; to pass such laws for punishing actions done before the existence of such laws; to pass any bill of attainder of treason or felony; to prescribe torture in any case whatever; nor to permit the introduction of any more slaves to reside in this State, or the continuance of slavery beyond the generation which shall be living on the thirty-first day of December, one thousand eight hundred--all persons born after that day being hereby declared free.-- Page 226.

EXTRACTS FROM MR. JEFFERSONS CORRESPONDENCE.--VOL. 1.The first establishment in Virginia which became permanent was made in 1607. I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until about 1650. The first brought here as slaves were by a Dutch ship; after which the English commenced the trade, and continued it until the revolutionary war. That suspended, ipso facto, their further importation for the present; and the business of the war pressing constantly on the Legislature, this subject was not acted on finally until the year 1778, when I brought in a bill to prevent their further importation. This passed without opposition; and stopped the increase of the evil by importation, leaving to future efforts its final eradication.-- Page 31.

The bill on the subject of slaves was a mere digest of the existing laws respecting them, without any intimation of a plan for a future and general emancipation. It was thought better that this should be kept back, and attempted only by way of amendment, whenever the bill should be brought on: The principles of the amendment, however, were agreed on; that is to say, the freedom of all born after a certain day, and deportation at a proper age. But it was found that the public mind would not yet bear the proposition, nor will it bear it even at this day; yet the day is not distant when it must bear and adopt it, or worse will follow. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same Government. Nature, habit, opinion, have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them. It is still in oar power to direct the process of emancipation and deportation peaceably, and in such slow degree as that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their place be pari passu filled up by free white laborers. If, on the contrary, it is left to force itself on, human nature must shudder at the prospect held up. We should in vain look for an example in the Spanish deportation or deletion of the Moors. This precedent would fall far short of our case.-- Page 39, 40.To General Chastellux.Paris, June 7, 1785.Dear Sir: I have been honored with the receipt of your letter of the 2d instant, and am to thank you, as I do sincerely, for the partiality with which you receive the copy of the Notes on my country. As I can answer for the facts therein reported on my own observation, and have admitted none on the report of others, which were not supported by evidence sufficient to command my own assent, I am not afraid that you should make any extracts you please fcor the Journal de Physique, which come within their plan of publication. The strictures on slavery and on the Constitution of Virginia are not of that kind, and they are the parts which I do not wish to have made public, at least till I know whether their publication would do most harm or good. It is possible that in my own country these strictures might produce an irritation which would indispose the people towards the two great objects I have in view--that is, the emancipation of their slaves, and the settlement of their Constitution on a firmer and more permanent basis. If I learn from thence that they will not produce that effect, I have printed and reserved just copies enough to be able to give one to every young man at the college. It is to them I look--to the rising generation, and not to the one now in power--for these great reformations.-- Page 228.To Dr. Price.Paris, August 7, 1785.Sir; Your favor of July the 2d came duly to hand. The concern you therein express, as to the effect of your pamphlet in America, induces me to trouble you with some observations on that subject. From my acquaintance with that country, I think I am able to judge, with some degree of certainty, of the manner in which it will have been received. Southward of the Chesapeake, it will find but few readers concurring with it in sentiment on the subject of slavery; from the mouth to the head of the Chesapeake, the bulk of the people will approve it in theory, and it will find a respectable minority ready to adopt it in practice--a minority which, for weight and worth of character, preponderates against the greater number, who have not the courage to divest their families of a property which, however, keeps their consciences unquiet; northward of the Chesapeake, you may find, here and there, an opponent to your doctrine, as you may find, here and there, a robber and murderer; but in no great number.

In that part of America, there being but few slaves, they can easily disencumber themselves of them; and emancipation is put into such a train that in a few years there will be no slaves northward of Maryland. In Maryland I do not find such a disposition to begin the redress of this enormity, as in Virginia. This is the next State to which we may turn our eyes for the interesting spectacle of justice in conflict with avarice and oppression--a conflict wherein the sacred side is gaining daily recruits from the influx into office of young men grown and growing up. These have sucked in the principles of liberty, as it were, with their mothers' milk; and it is to them I look with anxiety to turn the fate of this question. Be not, therefore, discouraged. What you have written will do a great deal of good; and could you still trouble yourself with our welfare, no man is more able to give aid to the laboring side. The college of William and Mary, in Williamsburg, since the remodelling of its plan, is the place where are collected together all the young men of Virginia, under preparation for public life. They are there under the direction (most of them) of a Mr. Wythe, one of the most virtuous of characters, and whose sentiments on the subject of slavery 003333are unequivocal. I am satisfied,if you could resolve to address an exhortation to those young men, with all that eloquence of which you are master, that its influence on the future decision of this important question would be great, perhaps decisive. Thus you see that, so far from thinking you have cause to repeat of what you have done, I wish you to do more; and wish it, on an assurance of its effect. The information I have received from America of the reception of your pamphlet in the different States, agrees with the expectations I had formed. Our country is getting into a ferment against yours, or rather has caught it from yours. God knows how this will end; but assuredly in one extreme or the other. There can be no medium between those who have loved so much. I think the decision is in your power as yet, but will not be so long. I pray you to be assured of the sincerity of the esteem and respect with which I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, Th. Jefferson. [Pages 268, 269.]

M. de Meusnier, where he mentions that the slave law has been passed in Virginia without the clause of emancipation, is pleased to mention that neither Mr. Wythe nor Mr. Jefferson was present, to make the proposition they had meditated; from which, people who do not give themselves the trouble to reflect or inquire, might conclude, hastily, that their absence was the cause why the proposition was not made, and, of course, that there were not in the Assembly persons of virtue and firmness enough to propose the clause for emancipation. This supposition would not be true. There were persons there who wanted neither the virtue to propose nor talents to enforce the proposition, had they seen that the disposition of the Legislature was ripe for it. These worthy characters would feel themselves wounded, degraded, and discouraged, by this idea. Mr. Jefferson would therefore be obliged to M. de Meusnier to mention it in some such manner as this: "Of the two commissioners who had concerted the amendatory clause for the gradual emancipation of slaves, Mr. Wythe could not be present, he being a member of the judiciary department, and Mr. Jefferson was absent on the legation to France. But there were not wanting in that Assembly men of virtue enough to propose and talents to vindicate this clause. But they saw that the moment of doing it with success was not yet arrived, and that an unsuccessful effort, as too often happens, would only rivet still closer the chains of bondage, and retard the moment of delivery to this oppressed description of men. What a stupendous, what an incomprehensible machine is man! who can endure toil, famine, stripes, imprisonment, and death itself, in vindication of his own liberty, and, the next moment, be deaf to all those motives whose power supported him through his trial, and inflict on his fellow-men a bondage, one hour of which is fraught with more misery than ages of that which he rose in rebellion to oppose. But we must await, with patience, the workings of an overruling Providence, and hope that that is preparing the deliverance of these our suffering brethren. When the measure of their tears shall be full, when their groans shall have involved heaven itself in darkness, doubtless a God of Justice will awaken to their distress, and, by diffusing light and liberality among their oppressors, or at length by his exterminating thunder, manifest his attention to the things of this world, and that they are not left to the guidance of a blind fatality.-- Pages 427, 428.VOL. II.To Dr. Gordon. [Extract.]Lord Cornwallis then proceeded to the Point of Fork, and encamped his army from thence all along the main James river, to a seat of mine, called Elk-hill, opposite to Elk island, and a little below the mouth of Byrd creek. (You will see all these places exactly laid down in the map annexed to my Notes on Virginia, printed by Stockdale.) He remained in this position ten days, his own headquarters being in my house at that place. I had time to remove most of the effects out of the house. He destroyed all my growing crops of corn and tobacco; he burned all my barns, containing the same articles of the last year, having first taken what corn he wanted; he used, as was to be expected, all my stock of cattle, sheep, and hogs, for the sustenance of his army, and carried off all the horses capable of service; of those too young for service he cut the throats; and he burned all the fences on the plantation, so as to leave it an absolute waste. He carried off, also, about thirty slaves. Had this been to give them freedom, he would have done right; but it was to consign them to inevitable death from the small-pox and putrid fever, then raging in his camp. This I knew afterwards to be the fate of twenty-seven of them. I never had news of the remaining three, but presume they shared the same fate. When I say that Lord Cornwallis did all this, I do not mean that he carried about the torch in his own hands, but that it was all done under his eye--the situation of the house in which he was, commanding a view of every part of the plantation, so that he must have seen every fire. I relate these things on my own knowledge, in a great degree, as I was on the ground soon after he left it. He treated the rest of the neighborhood somewhat in the same style, but not with that spirit of total extermination with which he seemed to rage over my possessions. Wherever he went, the dwelling-houses were plundered of everything which could be carried off. Lord Cornwallis's character in England would forbid the belief that he shared in the plunder; but that his table was served with the plate thus pillaged from private houses, can be proved by many hundred eye-witnesses. From an estimate I made at that time, on the best information I could collect, I supposed the State of Virginia lost under Lord Cornwallis's hands, that year, 003434about thirty thousand slaves; and that of these, about twenty-seven thousand died of the small-pox and camp fever, and the rest were partly sent to the West Indies, and exchanged for rum, sugar, coffee, and fruit, and partly sent to New York, from whence they went, at the peace, either to Nova Scotia or England. From this last place I believe they have been lately sent to Africa. History will never relate the horrors committed by the British army in the Southern States of America. They raged in Virginia six months only--from the middle of April to the middle of October, 1781--when they were all taken prisoners; and I give you a faithful specimen of their transactions for ten days of that time, and on one spot only. Ex pede Herculem. I suppose their whole devasations during those six months amounted to about three millions sterling. The copiousness of this subject has only left me space to assure you of the sentiments of esteem and respect with which I am, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,[Page 334.]TH. JEFFERSON.VOL. III.To John Jay. [Extract.]The emancipation of their [French] islands is an idea prevailing in the minds of several members of the National Assembly, particularly those most enlightened and most liberal in their views. Such a step by this country would lead to other emancipations or revolutions in the same quarter.-- Page 21.VOL. IV.To. S. Kerchival. [Extract.]Since writing my letter of July the 12th, I have been told that, on the question of equal representation, our fellow-citizens in some sections of the State claim preemptorily a right of representation for their slaves. Principle will, in this, as in most other cases, open the way for us to correct conclusions. Were our State a pure democracy, in which all its inhabitants should meet together to transact all their business, there would yet be excluded from their deliberations--1. Infants, until arrived at years of discretion. 2. Women, who, to prevent depravation of morals and ambiguity of issue, could not mix promiscuously in the public meetings of men. 3. Slaves, from whom the unfortunate state of things with us takes away the rights of will and property. Those, then, who have no will, could be permitted to exercise none in the popular assembly; and, of course, could delegate none to be an agent in a representative assembly. The business, in the first case, would be done by qualified citizens only; and in the second, by the representatives of qualified citizens only. It is true, that in the general Constitution, our State is allowed a larger representation on account of its slaves. But every one knows that that Constitution was a matter of compromise; a capitulation between conflicting interests and opinions. In truth, the condition of different descriptions of inhabitants in any country is a matter of municipal arrangement, of which no foreign country has a right to take notice. All its inhabitants are men, as to them. Thus, in the New England States, none have the powers of citizens but those whom they call freemen; and none are freemen until admitted by a vote of the freemen of the town. Yet, in the General Government, these non-freemen are counted in their quantum of representation and taxation. So, slaves with us have no powers as citizens; yet, in representation in the General Government, they count in the proportion of three to five; and so also in taxation. Whether this is equal, is not here the question. It is capitulation of discordant sentiments and circumstances, and is obligatory on that ground. But this shows there is no inconsistency in claiming representation for them from the other States, and refusing it within our own. Accept the renewal of assurances of my respect.[Page 295.]THOMAS JEFFERSON.To William Short. [Extract.]Although I had laid down as a law to myself, never to write, talk, or even to think of politics, to know nothing of public affairs, and therefore had ceased to read newspapers, yet the Missouri question aroused and filled me with alarm. The old schism of Federal and Republican threatened nothing, because it existed in every State, and united them together by the fraternism of party. But the coincidence of a marked principle, moral and political, with a geographical line, once conceived, I feared would never more be obliterated from the mind; that it would be recurring on every occasion, and renewing irritations, until it would kindle such mutual and mortal hatred, as to render separation preferable to eternal discord. I have been among the most sanguine in believing that our Union would be of long duration. I now doubt it much, and see the event at no great distance, and the direct consequence of this question; not by the line which has been so confidently counted on; the laws of Nature control this; but by the Potomac, Ohio, and Missouri, or, more probably, the Mississippi upwards to our Northern boundary. My only comfort and confidence is, that I shall not live to see this; and I envy not the present generation the glory of throwing away the fruits of their fathers' sacrifices of life and fortune, and of rendering desperate the experiment which was to decide ultimately whether man is capable of self-government. This treason against human hope will signalize their epoch in future history, as the counterpart of the medal of their predecessors.-- Page 322.To John Holmes.MONTICELLO, April 22, 1820.I thank you, dear sir, for the copy you have been so kind as to send me of the letter to your constituents on the Missouri question. It is a perfect justification to them. I had for a long time ceased to read newspapers, or pay any attention to public affairs, confident they were in good hands, and content to be a passenger 003535in our bark to the shore from which I am not distant. But this momentous question, like a fire-bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. It is hushed, indeed, for the moment. But this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence. A geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never be obliterated; and every new irritation will mark it deeper and deeper. I can say, with conscious truth, that there is not a man on earth who would sacrifice more than I would to relieve us from this heavy reproach, in any practicable way. The cession of that kind of property, for so it is misnamed, is a bagatelle which would not cost me a second thought, if, in that way, a general emancipation and expatriation could be effected; and gradually, and with due sacrifices, I think it might be. But as it is, we have the wolf by the ears, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other. Of one thing I am certain, that as the passage of slaves from one State to another would not make a slave of a single human being who would be so without it, so their diffusion over a greater surface would make them individually happier, and proportionally facilitate the accomplishment of their emancipation, by dividing the burden on a greater number of coadjutors. An abstinence, too, from this act of power, would remove the jealousy excited by the undertaking of Congress to regulate the condition of the different descriptions of men composing a State. This certainly is the exclusive right of every State, which nothing in the Constitution has taken from them, and given to the General Government. Could Congress, for example, say that the non-freemen of Connecticut shall be freemen, or that they shall not emigrate into any other State?-- Page 323.To J. Adams. [Extract.]Our anxieties in this quarter are all concentrated in the question, what does the Holy Alliance in and out of Congress mean to do with us on the Missouri question? And this, by the bye, is but the name of the case; it is only the John Doe or Richard Roe of the ejectment. The real question, as seen in the States afflicted with the unfortunate population, is, are our slaves to be presented with freedom and a dagger? For if Congress has the power to regulate the conditions of the inhabitants of the States, it will be but another exercise of that power, to declare that all shall be free. Are we then to see again Athenian and Lacedemonian Confederacies? To wage another Peloponnesian war to settle the ascendancy between them? Or is this the tocsin of merely a servile war? That remains to be seen; but not, I hope, by you or me. Surely they will parley awhile, and give us time to get out of the way. What a Bedlamite is man!-- Page 338To M. de Lafayette. [Extract.]On the eclipse of Federalism with us, although not its extinction, its leaders got up the Missouri question, under the false front of lessening the measure of slavery, but with the real view of producing a geographical division of parties, which might insure them the next President. The people of the North went blindfold into the snare, followed their leaders for a while with a zeal truly moral and laudable, until they became sensible that they were injuring instead of aiding the real interests of the slaves, that they had been used merely as tools for electioneering purposes; and that trick of hypocrisy then fell as quickly as it had been got up.-- Page 384.To Jared Sparks.MONTICELLO, February 4, 1824.Dear Sir: I duly received your favor of the 13th, and with it the last number of the North American Review. This has anticipated the one I should receive in course, but have not yet received, under my subscription to the new series. The article on the African colonization of the people of color, to which you invite my attention, I have read with much consideration. It is, indeed, a fine one, and will do much good. I learn from it more, too, than I had before known, of the degree of success and promise of that colony. In the disposition of these unfortunate people, there are two rational objects to be distinctly kept in view. 1. The establishment of a colony on the coast of Africa, which may introduce among the aborigines the arts of cultivated life, and the blessings of civilization and science. By doing this, we may make to them some retribution for the long course of injuries we have been committing on their population. And considering that these blessings will descend to the " nati natorum, et qui nascentur ab illis, " we shall in the long run have rendered them perhaps more good than evil. To fulfil this object, the colony of Sierra Leone promises well, and that of Mesurado adds to our prospect of success. Under this view, the Colonization Society is to be considered as a missionary society, having in view, however, objects more humane, more justifiable, and less aggressive on the peace of other nations, than the others of that appellation.

The second object, and the most interesting to us, as coming home to our physical and moral characters, to our happiness and safety, is to provide an asylum, to which we can, by degrees, send the whole of that population from among us, and establish them under our patronage and protection, as a separate, free, and independent people, in some country and climate friendly to human life and happiness. That any place on the coast of Africa should answer the latter purpose, I have ever deemed entirely impossible. And without repeating the other arguments which have been urged by others, I will appeal to figures only, which admit of no controversy. I shall speak in round numbers, not absolutely accurate, yet 003636not so wide from truth as to vary the result materially. There are in the United States a million and a half of people of color in slavery. To send off the whole of these at once, nobody conceives to be praciticable for us, or expedient for them. Let us take twenty-five years for its accomplishment, within which time they will be doubled. Their estimated value as property, in the first place, (for actual property has been lawfully vested in that form, and who can lawfully take it from the possessors?) at an average of two hundred dollars each, young and old, would amount to six hundred millions of dollars, which must be paid or lost by somebody. To this, add the cost of their transportation by land and sea to Mesurado, a year's provision of food and clothing, implements of husbandry and of their trades, which will amount to three hundred millions more, making thirty-six millions of dollars a year for twenty-five years, with insurance of peace all that time, and it is impossible to look at the question a second time. I am aware that, at the end of about sixteen years, a gradual detraction from this sum will commence, from the gradual diminution of breeders, and go on during the remaining nine years. Calculate this deduction, and it is still impossible to look at the enterprise a second time.

I do not say this to induce an inference that the getting rid of them is forever impossible; for that is neither my opinion nor my hope; but only that it cannot be done in this way. There is, I think, a way in which it can be done--that is, by emancipating the after-born, leaving them, on due compensation, with their mothers, until their services are worth their maintenance, and then putting them to industrious occupations until a proper age for deportation. This was the result of my reflections on the subject five-and-forty years ago, and I have never yet been able to conceive any other practicable plan. It was sketched in the Notes on Virginia, under the fourteenth query. The estimated value of the new-born infant is so low, (say twelve dollars and fifty cents,) that it would probably be yielded by the owner gratis, and would thus reduce the six hundred millions of dollars--the first head of expense--to thirty-seven millions and a half; leaving only the expenses of nourishment while with the mother, and of transportation. And from what fund are these expenses to be furnished? Why not from that of the lands which have been ceded by the very States now needing this relief?--and ceded on no consideration, for the most part, but that of the general good of the whole. These cessions already constitute one-fourth of the States of the Union. It may be said that these lands have been sold, are now the property of the citizens composing those States, and the money long ago received and expended. But an equivalent of lands in the territories since acquired may be appropriated to that object, or so much, at least, as may be sufficient; and the object, although more important to the slave States, is highly so to the others also, if they were serious in their arguments on the Missouri question. The slave States, too, if more interested, would also contribute more by their gratuitous liberation, thus taking on themselves alone the first and heaviest item of expense. In the plan sketched in the Notes on Virginia, no particular place of asylum was specified, because it was thought possible that, in the revolutionary state of America, then commenced, events might open to us some one within practicable distance. This has now happened. St. Domingo has become independent, and with a population of that color only; and if the public papers are to be credited, their chief offers to pay their passage, to receive them as free citizens, and to provide them employment. This leaves, then, for the general Confederacy, no expense but of nurture with the mother a few years, and would call, of course, for a very moderate appropriation of the vacant lands. Suppose the whole annual increase to be of sixty thousand effective births; fifty vessels, of four hundred tons burden each, constantly employed in that short run, would carry off the increase of every year, and the old stock would die off in the ordinary course of nature, lessening from the commencement until its final disappearance. In this way, no violation of private right is proposed. voluntary surrenders would probably come in as fast as the means to be provided for their care would be competent to it. Looking at my own State only--and I presume not to speak for the others--I verily believe that this surrender of property would not amount to more, annually, than half our present direct taxes, to be continued fully about twenty or twenty-five years, and then gradually diminishing for as many more, until their final extinction; and even this half tax would not be paid in cash, but by the delivery of an object which they have never yet known or counted as part of their property; and those not possessing the object will be called on for nothing. I do not go into all the details of the burdens and benefits of this operation. And who could estimate its blessed effects? I leave this to those who will live to see their accomplishment, and to enjoy a beatitude forbidden to my age. But I leave it with this admonition, [?]and be doing. A million a half are within their control; but six millions, (which a majority of those now living will see them attain,) and one million of these fighting men, will say, "We will not go."

I am aware that this subject involves some constitutional scruples; but a liberal construction, justified by the object, may go far, and an amendment of the Constitution the whole length necessary. The separation of infants from their mothers, too, would produce some scruples of humanity; but this would be straining at a gnat, and swallowing a camel.

I am much pleased to see that you have taken up the subject of the duty on imported books. I hope a crusade will be kept up against it, until those in power shall become 003737sensible of this stain on our legislation, and shall wipe it from their code, and from the remembrance of man, if possible.

I salute you with assurances of high respect and esteem. Th. Jefferson [ Page 388.]Extract from a letter, written by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to Edward Coles.I had always hoped that the younger generation, receiving their early impressions after the flame of liberty had been kindled in every breast, and had become, as it were, the vital spark of every American, that the generous temperament of youth, analogous to the motion of their blood, and above the suggestions of avarice, would have sympathized with oppression wherever found, and proved their love of liberty beyond their own share of it.

But my intercourse with them, since my return, has not been sufficient to ascertain that they had made, towards this point, the progress I had hoped. Your solitary but welcome voice is the first which has brought this sound to my ear; and I have considered the general silence which prevails on this subject as indicating an apathy unfavorable to every hope. Yet the hour of emancipation is advancing, in the march of time. It will come; and, whether brought on by the generous energies of our own minds, or by the bloody process of St. Domingo, excited and conducted by the power of our present enemy, if once stationed permanently within our country, and offering asylum and arms to the oppressed, is a leaf of our history not yet turned over.

As to the method by which this difficult work is to be effected, if permitted to be done by our selves, I have seen no proposition so expedient, on the whole, as that of emancipation of those born after a given day, and of their education and expatriation at a proper age.

I am sensible of the partialities with which you have looked towards me, as the person who should undertake this salutary but arduous work. But this, my dear sir, is like bidding old Priam to buckle the armor of Hector: "Trementibus eve humeris et inutile ferrum cingitur. " No; I have overlived the generation with which mutual labors and perils beget mutual confidence and influence. This enterprise is for the young--for those who can follow it up, and bear it through to its consummation.

It shall have all my prayers, and these are the only weapons of an old man; but, in the mean time, are you right in abandoning this property, and your country with it? I think not.

My opinion has ever been, that until more can be done for them, we should endeavor, with those whom fortune has thrown on our hands, to feed and clothe them well, protect them from ill usage, require such reasonable labor only as is performed by free men, and be led by no repugnances to abdicate them, and our duties to them. The laws do not permit us to turn them loose, if that were for their good; and to commute them for other property is to commit them to those whose usage to them we cannot control. I hope, then, my dear sir, you will reconcile yourself to your country and its unfortunate condition, and that you will not lessen its stock of sound disposition by withdrawing your proportion from the mass; that, on the contrary, you will come forward in the public councils, become the missionary of the doctrine truly Christian, insinuate and inculcate it softly but steadily, through the medium of writing and conversation, associate others in your labors, and when the phalanx is formed, bring on and press the proposition perseveringly until its accomplishment. It is an encouraging observation, that no good measure was ever proposed, which, if duly pursued, failed to prevail in the end. We have proof of this, in the history of the endeavors of the British Parliament to suppress that very trade which brought this evil on us. And you will be supported by the religious precept, "Be not weary in well-doing." That your success may be speedy and complete, as it will be of honorable and immortal consolation, I shall fervently and sincerely pray, as I assure you of my great friendship and respect.Thomas Jefferson.

The people of North Carolina are justly proud of the fame of the wise and good Judge Gaston. He was distinguished alike for talents, attainments, and moral worth. they will therefore receive, with attention and respect, his warning admonition upon the subject of slavery. In an address to the students of the University at Chapel Hill, in June, 1832, he used the following language:

On you, too, will devolve the duty, which has been too long neglected, but which cannot with impunity be neglected much longer, of providing for the migration and (is it too much to hope for in North Carolina?) for the ultimate extirpation of the worst evil that afflicts the Southern part of our Confederacy. Full well do you know to what I refer; for on this subject there is, with all of us, a morbid sensitiveness which gives warning even of an approach to it. Disguise the truth as we may, and throw the blame where we will, it is slavery which, more than any other cause, keeps us back in the career of improvement. It stifles industry and represses enterprise; it is fatal to economy and providence; it discourages skill, impairs our strength as a community, and poisons morals at the fountain head. How this evil is to be encountered, how subdued, is indeed a difficult and delicate inquiry, which this is not the time to examine nor the occasion to discuss. I felt, however, that I could not discharge my duty without referring to this subject, as one which ought to engage the prudence, moderation, and firmness, of those who sooner or later, must act decisively upon it.

ANNALS OF FIRST CONGRESS.Thursday, February 11, 1790.

Mr. Fitzsimmons presented the address to the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, of the people called Quakers, in their annual assembly convened; signed in and on behalf of the Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the western parts of Maryland and Virginia, held by adjournments from the 28th day of the ninth month, to the 3d day of the tenth month, inclusive, 1789, by Nicholas Waln, clerk to the meeting this year.

Mr. Lawrence also presented an address from the Society of Friends in the city of New York, in which they set forth their desire of co-operating with their Southern brethren in their protest against the slave trade.

Mr. Hartley, of Pa., moved to refer the address of the annual assembly of Friends, held at Philadelphia, to a committee. He thought it a mark of respect due to so numerous and repectable a part of the community.

Mr. White, of Va., Seconded the motion.

Mr. Parker, of Va. I hope, Mr. Speaker, the petition of these respectable persons will be attended to with all the readiness the importance of its objects demands; and I cannot help expressing the pleasure I feel in finding so considerable a part of the community attending to matters of such momentous concern to the future prosperity and happiness of the people of America. I think it my duty, as a citizen of the Union, to espouse their cause; and it is incumbent upon every member of this House to sift the subject well, and to ascertain what can be done to restrain a practice so nefarious. The Constitution has authorized us to levy a tax upon the importation of such persons as the States shall authorize to be admitted. I would willingly go to that extent; and if anything further can be devised to discountenance the trade, consistent with the terms of the Constitution, I shall cheerfully give it my assent and support.

Mr. Madison, of Va. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fitzsimmons] has put this question on its proper ground. If gentlemen do not mean to oppose the commitment tomorrow, they may as well acquiesce in it today; and I apprehend gentlemen need not be alarmed at any measure it is likely Congress will take; because they will recollect that the Constitution secures to the individual States the right of admitting, if they think proper, the importation of slaves into their own territory, for eighteen years yet unexpired; subject, however, to a tax, if Congress are disposed to impose it, of not more than ten dollars on each person. The petition, if I mistake not, speaks of [artif?] used by self-interested persons to carry on this trade; and the petition from New York states a case that may require the consideration of Congress. If anything is within the Federal authority to restrain such violation of the rights of nations and of mankind as is supposed to be practiced in some parts of the United States, it will certainly tend to the interest and honor of the community to attempt a remedy, and is a proper subject for our discussion. It may be that foreigners take the advantage of the liberty afforded them by the American trade, to employ our shipping in the slave trade between Africa and the West Indies, when they are restrained from employing their own by restrictive laws of their nation. If this is the case, is there any person of humanity that would not wish to prevent them? Another consideration why we should commit the petition is, that we may give no ground of alarm by a serious opposition, as if we were about to take measures that were unconstitutional.-- Pages 1182 to 1191.Friday, February 12, 1790.The following memorial of the Pennsylvania Society for promoting the Abolition of Slavery, the relief of free negroes unlawfully held in bondage, and the improvement of the condition of the African race, was presented and read:

The memorial respectfully showeth--That, from a regard for the happiness of mankind, an association was formed several years since, in this State, by a number of her citizens, of various religious denominations, for promoting the abolition of slavery, and for the relief of those unlawfully held in bondage. A just and acute conception of the true principles of liberty, as it spread through the land, produced accessions to their numbers, many friends to their cause, and a legislative co-operation with their views, which by the blessings of Divine Providence, have been successfully directed to the relieving from bondage a large number of their fellow creatures of the African race. They have also the satisfaction to observe, that in consequence of that spirit of philanthropy and genuine liberty which is generally diffusing its beneficial influence, similar institutions are forming, at home and abroad.

The mankind are all formed by the same Almighty Being, alike objects of his care, and equally designed for the enjoyment of happiness, the Christian religion teaches us to believe, and the political creed of Americans fully coincides with the position. Your memorialists, particularly engaged in attending to the distresses arising from slavery, believe it their indispensable duty to present this subject to your notice. They have observed, with real satisfaction, that many important and salutary powers are vested in you, for "promoting the welfare and securing the blessings of liberty to the people of the United States;" and as they conceive that these blessings ought rightfully to be administered, without distinction of color, to all descriptions of people, so they indulge themselves in the pleasing expectation that nothing which can be done for the relief of the unhappy objects of their care will be either omitted or delayed.

From a persuasion that equal liberty was 003939originally the portion and is still the birth-right of all men, and influenced by the strong ties of humanity and the principles of their institution, your memorialists conceive themselves bound to use all justifiable endeavors to loosen the bands of slavery, and promote a general enjoyment of the blessings of freedom. Under these impressions, they earnestly entreat your serious attention on the subject of slavery; that you will be pleased to countenance the restoration of liberty to those unhappy men, who alone, in this land of freedom, are degraded into perpetual bondage, and who, amidst the general joy of surrounding freemen, are groaning in servile subjection; that you will devise means for removing this inconsistency from the character of the American people; that you will promote mercy and justice towards this distressed race, and that you will step to the very verge of the power vested in you for discouraging every species of traffic in the persons of our fellow-men.

Benj. Franklin, President. Philadelphia, February 3, 1790.Mr. Hartley then called up the memorial presented yesterday, from the annual meeting of Friends at Philadelphia, for a second reading; whereupon the same was read a second time, and moved to be committed.

Mr. Seney, of Md., denied that there was anything unconstitutional in the memorial; at least, if there was, it had escaped his attention, and he should be obliged to the gentleman to point it out. Its only object was, that Congress should exercise their constitutional authority to abate the horrors of slavery, as far as they could; indeed, he considered that all altercation on the subject of commitment was at an end, as the House had impliedly determined yesterday that it should be committed.

Mr. Page, of Va., was in favor of the commitment. He hoped that the designs of the respectable memorialists would not be stopped at the threshold, in order to preclude a fair discussion of the prayer of the memorial. He observed that gentlemen had founded their arguments upon a misrepresentation; for the object of the memorial is not declared to be the total abolition of the slave trade, but that Congress will consider whether it be not in reality within their power to exercise justice and mercy, which, if adhered, to, they cannot doubt, must produce the abolition of the slave trade. If, then, the prayer contained nothing unconstitutional, he trusted the meritorious effort of the petitioners would not be frustrated.

With respect to the alarm that was apprehended, he conjectured there was none; but there might be just cause, if the memorial was not taken into consideration. He placed himself in the case of a slave, and said that, on hearing that Congress had refused to listen to the decent suggestions of a respectable part of the community, he should infer that the General Government (from which was expected great good would result to every class of citizens) had shut their ears against the voice of humanity, and he should despair of any alleviation of the miseries he and his posterity had in prospect; if anything could induce him to rebel, it must be a stroke like this, impressing on his mind all the horrors of despair. But if he was told that application was made in his behalf, and that Congress was willing to hear what could be urged in favor of discouraging the practice of importing his fellow-wretches, he would trust in their justice and humanity, and wait the decision patiently. He presumed that these unfortunate people would reason in the same way; and he therefore conceived the most likely way to prevent danger was to commit the petition. He lived in a State which had the misfortune of having in her bosom a great number of slaves; he held many of them himself, and was as much interested in the business as any gentleman in South Carolina and Georgia; yet if he was determined to hold them in eternal bondage, he should feel no uneasiness or alarm on account of the present measure, because he should rely upon the virtue of Congress, that they would not exercise any unconstitutional authority.

Mr. Madison, of Va. The debate has taken a serious turn, and it will be owing to this alone if an alarm is created; for, had the memorial been treated in the usual way, it would have been considered, as a matter of course, and a report might have been made, so as to have given general satisfaction. If there was the slightest tendency, by the commitment, to break in upon the Constitution, he would object to it; but he did not see upon what ground such an event was to be apprehended. The petition prayed, in general terms, for the interference of Congress, so far as they were constitutionally authorized; but even if its prayer was in some degree unconstitutional, it might be committed, as was the case on Mr. Churchman's petition--one part of which was supposed to apply for an unconstitutional interference by the General Government. He admitted that Congress is restricted by the Constitution from taking measures to abolish the slave trade; yet there are a variety of ways by which it could countenance the abolition, and regulations might be made in relation to the introduction of them into the new States to be formed out of the Western Territory. He thought the object well worthy of consideration.The question on the commitment being about to be put, the yeas and nays were called for, and were as follows:

Yeas--Messrs. Ames, Benson, Boudinot, Brown, Cadwalader, Clymer, Fitzsimmons, Floyd, Foster, Gale, Gerry, Gilman, Goodhue, Griffin, Grout, Hartley, Hathorn, Heister, Huntington, Lawrence, Lee, Leonard, Livermore, Madison, Moore, Muhlenburg, Page, Parker, Partridge, Rensselaer, Schureman, Scott, Sedgwick, Seney, Sherman, Sinnickson, Smith of Maryland, Sturgis, Thatcher, Trumbull, Wadsworth, White, and Wynkoop--43.Nays--Messrs. Baldwin, Bland, Burke, Coles,004040Huger, Jackson, Matthews, Sylvester, Smith of South Carolina, Stone, and Tucker--11.

The memorials were referred accordingly.[Pages 1197 to 1205, inclusive.]Friday, March 5, 1790.Mr. Foster, from the committee appointed for the purpose, made a report on the petitions of the people called Quakers, and also of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery.- Page 1413.Monday, March 8, 1790.Mr. Hartley moved that the report of the committee on the memorials of the people called Quakers should be taken up for a second reading; which motion being adopted, it was read, as follows, viz:REPORT.That, from the nature of the matters contained in those memorials, they were induced to examined the powers vested in Congress, under the present Constitution, relating to the abolition of slavery, and are clearly of opinion--

First. That the General Government is expressly restrained from prohibiting the importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, until the year 1808.

Secondly. That Congress, by a fair construction of the Constitution, are equally restrained from interfering in the emancipation of slaves, who already are, or who may, within the period mentioned, be imported into or born within any of the said States.

Thirdly. That Congress have no authority to interfere in the internal regulations of particular States, relative to the instruction of slaves in the principles of morality and religion, to their comfortable clothing, accommodation, and subsistence; to the regulation of their marriages, and the prevention of the violation of the rights thereof, or to the separation of children from their parents; to a comfortable provision in the case of sickness, age, or infirmity, or to the seizure, transportation, or sale, of free negroes; but have the fullest confidence in the wisdom and humanity of the Legislatures of the several States, that they will revise their laws, from time, to time, when necessary, and promote the objects mentioned in the memorials, and every other measure that may tend to the happiness of slaves.

Fourthly. That, nevertheless, Congress have authority, if they shall think it necessary, to lay, at any time, a tax or duty, not exceeding ten dollars for each person, of any description, the importation of whom shall be by any of the States admitted as aforesaid.

Fifthly. That Congress have authority to interdict, or (so far as it is or may be carried on by citizens of the United States, for supplying foreigners) to regulate the African trade, and to make provision for the human treatment of slaves, in all cases, while on their passages to the United States or to foreign ports, as far as it respects the citizens of the United States.

Sixthly. That Congress have also authority to prohibit foreigners from fitting out vessels in any part of the United States, for transporting persons from Africa to any foreign port.

Seventhly. That the memorialists be informed that in all cases, to which the authority of Congress extends, they will exercise it for the human objects of the memorialists, so far as they can be promoted on the principles of justice humanity, and policy.[Pages 1414 to 1417, inclusive].Wednesday, March 17, 1790.The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the report of the committee to whom was referred the memorial of the people called Quakers, &c., (Mr. Benson in the chair.)

The question of order was put, when it was determined that Mr. Tucker's last amendment was not in order.

The report was then taken up by paragraphs. The first proposition being read-

Mr. White, of Va., moved that it be struck out. He did this, he said, because he was against entering into a consideration, at this time, of the powers of Congress. He thought it would be time enough for this, when the powers are called in question. He then read the next, which he said was entirely unnecessary, as it contains nothing more than what is contained in express terms in the Constitution. He passed on to the third, which he said was equally unnecessary; and to the fourth, which was provided for by the Constitution. He said that he should agree to the fifth and sixth, with certain modifications. Agreeable to this idea, he offered those two in a different form. He disagreed to the seventh proposition, as unnecessary and improper. He concluded by observing that his wish was to promote the happiness of all mankind, and, among the rest, those who are the objects of the present consideration; but this he wished to do in conformity to the principles of justice, and with a due regard to the peace and happiness of others. He would contribute all in his power to their comfort and well-being while in a state of slavery; but he was fully of opinion that Congress has no right to interfere in the business, any further than he proposed by the two propositions as modified. He did not, however, anticipate the difficulties from a total prohibition which some gentlemen seem to apprehend; and if Congress had it in their power to interdict this business at the present moment, he did not think the essential interests of the Southern States would suffer. Twenty years ago, he supposed the idea he now suggested would have caused universal alarm. Virginia, however, about twelve years since, prohibited the importation of negroes from Africa, and the consequences apprehended never were realized; on the contrary, the agriculture of that State was never in a more flourishing situation.

Friday, March 19, 1790.The House then went again into a Committee on the Quakers' memorial, &c. (Mr. Benson in the chair.)

The fourth proposition, respecting a duty of ten dollars on slaves imported, being read, it was moved that it be struck out; which motion, after much debate, was adopted.

Several modifications of the fifth proposition were offered, but the following, in substance, offered by Mr. Madison, was agreed to, viz: Congress have authority to restrain the citizens of the United States, who are concerned in the African trade, from supplying foreigners with slaves, and to provide for their humane treatment while on their passage to the United States.

The Committee then rose, and the House adjourned till Monday next.- Page 1466.Monday, March 22, 1790.The House again went into a Committee of the Whole of the Quakers' memorial, &c. (Mr. Benson in the chair.)

The sixth article was further discussed.Mr. Scott commenced the debate, advocating the prayer of the memorialists, and was replied to by several of the Southern members.- Page 1466.

It was moved that the sixth article be struck out, but the motion was negatived. The Committee than agreed to the proposition. The seventh article was, on motion, struck out.

The Committee then rose, and made their report to the House, which was laid on the table.- Page 1471.Tuesday, March 23, 1790.It was then moved that the House should take up the report of the Committee of the Whole on the report of the committee to whom was referred the memorials of the people called Quakers, and of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery.

This motion was opposed by Mr. Jackson of Ga., Mr. Smith of S. C., Mr. Burke of Ga., and Mr. Bland. They severally observed that the discussion of the subject has already excited a spirit of dissension among the members of the House, and that every principle of policy and concern for the dignity of the House, and the peace and tranquillity of the United States, concur to show the propriety of dropping the subject, and letting it sleep where it is. On the other hand, Mr. Vining of Del., Mr. Hartley of Pa., and Mr. Page of Va., observed that there was the same propriety in taking up the subject at the present moment, and bringing it to a conclusion, as there was for first taking it up; that it has been so fully discussed, it cannot be supposed, gentlemen will go over the same ground again; it may soon be determined; to pass it over will be unprecedented, and will leave the public mind in the same state of uncertainty from which so much danger is apprehended.The motion for taking up the report was warmly contested in a lengthy debate, and finally passed in the affirmative, by a majority of one. Whereupon, on motion that the said report of the committee, and also the report of the Committee of the Whole House, of amendments to said report, be inserted on the Journal, it was resolved in the affirmative--29 votes to 25. The yeas and nays were as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative were-Messrs. Boudinot, Brown, Cadwalader, Contee, Floyd, Foster, Gerry, Gilman, Goodhue, Griffin, Hartley, Hathorn, Heister, Huntington, Lawrence, Lee, Leonard, Madison, Muhlenburg, Parker, Partridge, Schureman, Scott, Sedgwick, Sherman, Sylvester, Sinnickson, Vining, and Wynkoop.

Those who voted in the negative were--Messrs. Ames, Baldwin, Benson, Bland, Burke, Carroll, Coles, Gale, Grout, Jackson, Livermore, Matthews, Moore, Page, Van Rensselaer, Smith of Maryland, Smith of South Carolina, Stone, Sturges, Sumter, Thatcher, Trumbull, Tucker, White, and Williamson.Report of the Committee of the Whole House.The Committee of the Whole House, to whom was referred the report of the committee on memorials of the people called Quakers, and of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, report the following amendments:

Strike out the first clause, together with the recital thereto, and in lieu thereof insert, "That the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, cannot be prohibited by Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight."

Strike out the second and third clauses, and in lieu thereof insert, "That Congress have no authority to interfere in the emancipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them within any of the States, it remaining with the several States alone to provide any regulations therein which humanity and true policy may require."

Strike out the fourth and fifth clauses, and in lieu thereof insert, "That Congress have authority to restrain the citizens of the United States from carrying on the African trade, for the purpose of supplying foreigners with slaves, and of providing, by proper regulations, for the humane treatment, during their passage, of slaves imported by the said citizens into the States admitting such importation."

Strike out the seventh clause.-- Page 1472 to 1474, inclusive.THIRD CONGRESS.Monday, January 20, 1794.Quakers' Memorial.A memorial was read, from the people called Quakers. The substance of this memorial is, to request that Congress would pass a law to prohibit the citizens of the United States from transporting slaves from the coast of Africa to the West India islands.

The petition was read by the Speaker. 004242Mr. Giles wished that it might be referred to a select committee.

Mr. Bourne wished that it should lie on the table for a day or two. He did not, by this, mean to oppose the principle of the memorial; but he understood that another of the same tenor was to be presented to the Senate. He therefore wished that it might be deferred, till the House could see whether the Senate should take it up. If they did not, he should then move that it should be referred to a select committee.

The petition was ordered to lie on the table.- Page 249.Tuesday, January 21, 1794.Ordered, That the memorial of the people called Quakers, at their yearly meeting, held in Rhode Island, in the year 1793, which lay on the table, be referred to Mr. Trumbull, Mr. Ward, Mr. Giles, Mr. Talbot, and Mr. Grove; that they do examine the matter thereof, and report the same with their opinion thereupon, to the House.- Page 253.Tuesday, January 28, 1794.A memorial of the delegates from the several societies formed in different parts of the United States for promoting the abolition of slavery, in convention assembled, at Philadelphia, on the 1st instant, was presented to the House and read, praying that Congress may adopt such measures as may be the most effectual and expedient for the abolition of the slave trade. Also, a memorial of the Providence Society for abolishing the slave trade, to the same effect.

Ordered, That the said memorials be referred to Mr. Trumbull, Mr. Ward, Mr. Giles, Mr. Talbot, and Mr. Grove; that they do examine the matter thereof, and report the same, with their opinion thereupon, to the House.-- Page 349.Tuesday, February 11, 1794.Mr. Trumbull, from the committee to whom were referred the memorials of the people called Quakers, at their yearly meeting, held in Rhode Island, in the year 1793, of the delegates from the several societies for promoting the abolition of slavery, in convention assembled, at Philadelphia, on the 1st day of January last, and of the Providence Society for abolishing the slave trade, made a report; which was read, and ordered to be committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.-- Page 448.Monday, February 17, 1794.The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole House, on the report of the committee to whom were referred the memorials of the people called Quakers, at their yearly meeting, held in Rhode Island, in the year 1792; of the delegates from the several societies for promoting the abolition of slavery, in convention assembled, at Philadelphia, on the 1st day of January last; and of the Providence Society for abolishing the slave trade; and, after some time spent therein, the Chairman reported that the Committee had had the said report under consideration, and come to a resolution thereupon; which was twice read, and agreed to by the House, as follows:

Resolved, That a committee be appointed to prepare and bring in a bill or bills to prohibit the fitting out of any ship or vessel, in any port of the United States, either by citizens of the United States or foreigners, for the purpose of procuring, from any kingdom or country, the inhabitants of such kingdom or country, to be transported to any foreign parts or places of the world, to be sold or disposed of as slaves.

Ordered, That Mr. Trumbull, Mr. Ward, Mr. Giles, Mr. Talbot, and Mr. Grove, be a committee pursuant to the said resolution.- Page 455.Friday, February 28, 1794.Mr. Trumbull, from the committee appointed, presented a bill to prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from the United States to any foreign place or country; which was read twice, and committed.- Page 469.Thursday, March 6, 1794.The House went into Committee of the Whole on the bill to prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from the ports of the United States--Mr. Boudinot in the chair.

The two first sections of the bill were agreed to, with one alteration, moved by Mr. Trumbull, which was, to give the District Court, as well as the Circuit Courts, cognizance of the offence.

The third section-which relates to the penalty, &c.-it was moved should be struck out.

This motion was negatived.It was then moved to insert the word foreign before "ship or vessel;" which was agreed to.

The Committee proceeded through the bill, which was reported to the House with sundry amendments. These were agreed to by the House, and the bill ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.- Page 483.DEBATE ON EMANCIPATION, IN THE VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE, IN 1832.The debate in the Virginia Legislature, at the session of 1831-'32, on the subject of Emancipation, was occasioned by the Southampton insurrection, which occurred in the preceding August. The minds of the people were awakened by that event to the continual insecurity and danger of a state of society in which one half of the people are made the natural enemies of the other; and the press almost unanimously broke forth in condemnation of a system to which they justly traced the dilapidation and decay of agriculture, the absence of arts, manufactures, and internal improvements, and the prevalent ignorance among the body of the people. The condition of Virginia was contrasted with that of the Northern States in these particulars, and her 004343poverty and degeneracy demonstrated on the incontestable authority of official statistics. The debate occupied many consecutive days at the session, and must be regarded, by all who perase it, as one of the ablest, and, owing to the vital importance of the subject, one of the most interesting that has ever occurred on the continent. The Virginian of the present day, who would bury in oblivion all recollection of this debate, is untrue to the honor and renown of his country. Nowhere has genius and liberty been more closely allied than in the Old Dominion. It would be difficult to find one illustrious name in all her history, which is not identified with freedom in the broadest sense of the term; while those who have signalized themselves as the champions of slavery are stars of a lesser magnitude.

Foremost in the ranks of the Emancipation party was the distinguished editor of the Richmond Enquirer, Thomas Ritchie, Esq., a gentleman of high character, a cool, cautious, and wary politician, whose influence was, perhaps, at that time and subsequently, greater than that of any man in Virginia. Side by side with the Enquirer stood the Richmond Whig, edited by the gallant and impetuous John Hampden Pleasants, a man of brilliant genius, who, for dashing and racy editorial writing, has never been excelled in this country. The press of Norfolk, Charlottesville, and other places, responded in manly strains to the Richmond papers: and I believe I shall not be invidious in saying that a majority of enlightened men in the State took a decided stand in favor of Emancipation.

Among the most distinguished advocates of Emancipation, in the House of Delegates, were Mr. Moore of Rockbridge, Mr. Bolling of--, Mr. Randolph of Albemarle, Mr. Rives of Campbell, General Brodnax of Dinwiddie, Mr. Powell, Mr. Faulkner, and Mr. Summers of Kanawha.From the Richmond Enquirer, Jan. 7, 1832.-- Editorial.It is probable, from what we hear, that the Committee on the Colored Population will report some plan for getting rid of the free people of color. But is this all that can be done? Are we forever to suffer the greatest evil which can scourge our land, not only to remain, but to increase in its dimensions? "We may shut our eyes and avert our faces, if we please, (writes an eloquent South Carolinian, on his return from the North, a few weeks ago,) but there it is, the dark and growing evil at our doors; and meet the question we must, at no distant day. God only knows what it is the part of wise men to do on that momentous and appalling subject. Of this I am very sure, that the difference--nothing short of frightful--between all that exists on one side of the Potomac and all on the other, is owing to that cause alone. The disease is deep seated--it is at the heart's core--it is consuming, and has all along been consuming, our vitals; and I could laugh--if I could laugh on such a subject--at the ignorance and folly of the politician who ascribes that to an act of the Government which is the inevitable effect of the eternal laws of Nature. What is to be done? Oh! my God, I do not know, but something must be done."

Yes, something must be done, and it is the part of no honest man to deny it--of no free press to affect to conceal it. When this dark population is growing upon us; when every new census is but gathering its appalling numbers upon us; when, within a period equal to that in which this Federal Constitution has been in existence, these numbers will increase to more than two millions within Virginia; when our sister States are closing their doors upon our blacks for sale, and when our whites are moving westwardly in greater numbers than we like to hear of; when this, the fairest land on all this continent, for soil, and climate, and situation, combined, might become a sort of garden spot, if it were worked by the hands of white men alone, can we, ought we, to sit quietly down, fold our arms, and say to each other, "Well, well, this thing will not come to the worst in our day; we will leave it to our children, and our grandchildren, and greatgrandchildren, to take care of themselves, and to brave the storm." Is this to act like wise men? Heavens knows we are no fanatics-we detest the madness which actuated the Amies des Noirs; but something ought to be done. Means, sure but gradual, systematic but discreet, ought to be adopted, for reducing the mass of evil which is pressing upon the South, and will still more press upon her, the longer it is put off. We ought not to shut our eyes, nor avert our faces, and though we speak almost without a hope that the committee of the Legislature will do anything at the present session to meet this question, yet we say now, in the utmost sincerity of our hearts, that our wisest men cannot give too much of their attention to this subject, nor can they give it too soon.

I shall give only a few extracts from the debate. It will be found in full in the Richmond Enquirer for 1832, in the State Department.

Mr. Moore, of Rockbridge, said: * * * Permit me, now, sir, to direct your attention to some of the evil consequences of slavery, by way of argument in favor of our maturely deliberating on the whole subject, and adopting some efficient measures to remove the cause from which those evils spring. In the first place, I shall confine my remarks to such of those evils as affect the white population exclusively. And even in that point of view, I think that slavery, as it exists among us, may be regarded as the heaviest calamity which has ever befallen any portion of the human race. If we look back through the long course of time which has elapsed since the creation to the present moment, we shall scarcely be able to point out a people whose situation was not, 004444in many respects, preferable to our own, and that of the other States in which negro slavery exists. True, sir, we shall see nations which have groaned under the yoke of despotism, for hundreds and thousands of years; but the individuals composing those nations have enjoyed a degree of happiness, peace, and freedom from apprehension, which the holders of slaves in this country can never know. * * * If, sir, we compare the face of the country in Virginia with that of the Northern States, we shall find the result greatly to the advantage of the latter. We shall see the Old Dominion, though blessed by nature with all the advantages of a mild climate, a fruitful soil, and fine navigable bays and rivers, generally declining in all that constitutes national wealth. In that part of the State below tide-water, the whole face of the country wears an appearance of almost utter desolation, distressing to the beholder. Tall and thick forests of pines are everywhere to be seen encroaching upon the once cultivated fields, and casting a deep gloom over the land, which looks as if nature mourned over the misfortunes of man.

Mr. Rives, of Campbell, said: * * * On the multiplied and desolating evils of slavery he was not disposed to say much. The curse and deteriorating consequences were within the observation and experience of the members of the House and the people of Virginia, and it did seem to him that there could not be two opinions about it. But there were strong objections to discussing this branch of the subject in its details, and he would content himself with giving a brief attention to the strange political effects produced by the existence of this unnatural connection of master and slave, &c., &c.

Mr. Powell said: * * * I can scarcely persuade myself that there is a solitary gentleman in this House who will not readily admit that slavery is an evil, and that its removal, if practicable, is a consummation most devoutly to be wished. I have not heard, nor do I expect to hear, a voice raised in this Hall to the contrary. Sir, the gentleman from Buckingham a few days ago sketched to us, and sketched it, too, with a masterly hand, a picture of the withering and blighting effects of slavery. That picture is before this House, and I will not attempt to add to it a shade, or another tint; I will not, sir, lest, instead of adding to its effect, I might, with a less skillful hand, diminish it. Sir, Virginia, the much-loved, the venerated mother of us all, from being the first State in this great Confederacy, is now the third, possibly the fourth; and her declining fortunes have long been the source of melancholy reflection to her patriotic sons. What, sir, is the cause of this decline? Whatever others may think, to my mind it is clear that the answer to this interrogatory is, her slave population. Hine illac lachrymie. Here lies the source of all her misfortunes. This is the clog that has weighed her down, and prevented her onward march pari passu with her sister States, in their career of improvement.

Mr. Preston said: * * * Sir, Mr. Jefferson, whose hand drew the preamble to the Bill of Rights, has eloquently remarked that we had invoked for ourselves the benefit of a principle which we had denied to others. He saw and felt that slaves, as men, were embraced within this principle.

Mr. Summers, of Kanawha. * * * But, sir, the evils of this system cannot be enumerated. It were unnecessary to attempt it. They glare upon us at every step. When the owner looks to his wasted estate, he knows and feels them. When the statesman examines the condition of his country, and finds her moral influence gone, her physical strength diminished, her Physical Power waning, he sees and must confess them. They may be viewed, written on the nations's map. Contrast the condition of the Southern States with that which those of the Northern and Middle present. Examine them in relation to general education, the state of their agriculture, manufactures, foreign and domestic commerce--you have here the problem worked out on a large scale. * * * Sir, we should take courage from the goodness of the cause in which we are engaged. It is one on which Heaven will smile. We shall not be left unaided in our exertions. Slavery is a national calamity. Such it has been regarded by those who are entirely free from the evil. Nine of the non-slaveholding States have generously offered to the South the Common treasury for the removal of this common evil. Such , too, was the purport of the resolutions submitted to the Senate of the United States by Rufus King, at the close of his long and useful public life.Extract from the speech of John A. Chandler, of Norfolk Country.It is admitted by all who have addressed this House, that slavery is a curse, and an increasing one. That it has been destructive to the lives of our citizens, history, with unerring truth, will record. That its future increase will create commotion, cannot be doubted.

The time, then, sir, has arrived, when the salus populi applies, and every consideration of patriotism requires us to act upon it. This principle--this fundamental principle, the safety of the people--embraces not only the present race, but posterity also. The gentleman from Brunswick, with great force and eloquence, has insisted that the master has property, not only in the female slave, but in the issue, and infinitum. And, sir, we have an interest, not only in our own welfare, but in that of our posterity. We are bound to legislate for them as well as for ourselves.

This principle, that posterity are interested in the acts of their ancestors, is recognised in the Bill of Rights, in the very first section of it. That instrument is hollowed by its antiquity--by the double confirmation of the people of this Dominion. I may say, it is superior to the Constitution itself, as that professes to be based upon the Bill of Rights. 004545

What says that instrument? "That man has certain inalienable rights, of which, when he enters into society, he cannot by any compact deprive his posterity: namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and of purszing and obtaining happiness and safety." Has slavery interfered with our means of enjoying life, liberty, property, happiness, and safety? Look at Southampton. The answer is written in letters of blood, upon the floors of that unhappy county. Under these circumstances, may we not inquire into the right of our ancestors to inflict this curse upon us, seeing that it has interfered so essentially with the first article of the Bill of Rights?

But, sir, will this evil--this curse--not increase? Will not the life, liberty, prosperity, happiness, and safety, of those who may come after us be endangered, in a still greater degree, by it? How, then, can we reconcile it to ourselves, to fasten this upon them? Do we not endanger our very national existence, by entailing slavery upon them?

Sir, the gentleman from Brunswick very emphatically asked, "Are not our slaves our property?" And the gentleman from Dinwiddie, sustaining his position, said, in that integrity and firmness which characterizes all his actions, that he would own no property respecting which he was afraid to show his title papers. He even invited discussion upon this question of title to slaves as property. As a Virginian, I do not question the master's title to his slave; but I put it to the gentleman, as a man, as a moral man, as a Christian man, whether he has not some doubt of his claim being as absolute and unqualified as that of other property? I do this, not for the purpose of raising an argument to sustain the power of the Legislature to remove them, which I think I have satisfactorily shown, but mainly to call his attention to the title, that if a doubt as to that should be created, it may operate in some measure in withdrawing opposition to the removal of the slaves. Let us, sir, in the investigation of this title, go back to its origin. Whence came the slaves into this country? From Africa. Were they free men there? At one time they were. How came they to be converted into slaves? By the stratagem of war and the strong arm of the conqueror; they were vanquished in battle, sold by the victorious party to the slave trader, who brought them to our shores, and disposed of them to the planter of Virginia. Had the conqueror an absolute and unqualified right to them?

The gentleman from Campbell, [Mr. Daniel,] in arguing this part of the subject, stated that ancient authors insisted upon two modes by which a free man might become a slave, viz: by voluntary compact, and by conquest; but he was in the end compelled, by the course of his reasoning, to admit that those doctrines have been exploded by modern writers. If, then, liberty, rightfully, cannot be converted into slavery, may I not question whether the title of the master to the slave is absolute and unqualified, and beyond the disposition of the Government? I general cases, the derivative title cannot be better than the primitive. If the warrior had no absolute right to the person of his captive, may there not be some doubt whether the Virginia planter has an unqualified one?

What, sir, would be thought, at the present day, if an elephant were taken, by force or fraud, from its true owner, on the coast of Africa, and brought to our country, and an individual, knowing of the circumstances, were to purchase it--would it not be said that he participated in the crime? Would not the old adage, "that the receiver of stolen goods is as bad as the thief," apply? And, sir, the reasoning different when the subject is a human being--when a man has been taken, by force or fraud, from his native shore, and sold in your market? It may be said that our ancestors did not know the circumstances under which the slave lost his liberty. I hope they did not. It will, in some measure, extenuate the crime, but cannot enhance the title. The truth is, that our ancestors had no title to this property, and we have acquired it only by legislative enactments, sanctioned by the necessity of the case.

It may be argued, that length of time has created a title. Some thirty years ago, a frigate, which had been captured from the French by the valor and skill of our gallant tars, after having been brought into port, was refitted, and sailed on a cruise; she has never been heard of since. Imagine, for a moment, that it was now announced to this nation that the ship had foundered on the coast of Africa, and her crew, or part of them, were alive, slaves to some pretty monarch in that country. Think you, sir, that we would listen to the plea of length of time? No; the voice of a mighty people, with resistless force, would proclaim that freemen can never be made slaves, and the hum of preparation to demand our long-lost brethren, would soon resound throughout the land. And, sir, but for the degradation and absence of nationality in Africa, one of the most interesting principles of international law might be presented to the American people, which has ever engaged the attention of the statesman--a principle that would be advocated by the good and wise throughout the Union. Were Africa erected into a sovereign and independent State, and recognised as a nation by the potentates of the world, to make a demand upon our Government for her long-lost and enslaved children, accompanied with a recital of all the circumstances of fraud by which they were taken from their native country, it would present a claim too strong to be discussed--a demand too just to be denied by the free-born sons of Virginia. These reflections I have thrown out, Mr. Speaker, in the hope that, if masters of slaves should perceive some defect in their title, they may be inclined "to let them go."

I have, Mr. Speaker, entered into but few statistical details; the course of my argument, 004646I trust, made it unnecessary. One estimate, however, I will mention; it is this: that if the slave population increases as it had done for some years past, in the year 1880--less than fifty years hence--there will be, in the seven States of Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi, something more than 5,000,000 of slaves, of which Virginia alone will possess largely upwards of 1,000,000--an amount too great, too appalling, for a statesman not to apprehend some danger from. I acknowledge, I tremble for the fate of my country at some future day, "unless we do something!"Extracts from the speech of Thomas J. Randolph, of Albemarle.I will quote, in part, the statistics of the gentleman from Dinwiddie, whose accuracy cannot be questioned. Judging the future by the past, in forty years the colored population in Eastern Virginia will exceed the white 200,000. In the last forty years, the whites in the same district have increased 51 per cent., the blacks 186 per cent. Forty years ago, the whites exceeded the colored 25,000; the colored now exceeds the whites 81,000--a net gain of the blacks over the whites, in forty years, of 106,000; and these results, too, during an exportation of near 260,000 slaves since the year 1790--now perhaps the fruitful progenitors of half a million in other States. By reference to Document No. 16, on your table, you will perceive that, in the year 1830, of that part of the population of ten years old and under, the blacks exceed the whites 26 per cent,; over that age, only 3 per cent. What a change will not eighteen years make for the worse, when those children shall be grown; what a change will not forty years, with its geometrical progression, evolve, when they shall become fathers and mothers, and some of them grandmothers? If exportation ceases, some of those now within the hearing of my voice may live to see the colored population of Virginia 2,000,000, or 2,500,000; children now born may live to see them 3,000,000, determining their increase by their average increase in the United States in the last forty years.

Sir, is not this the case of the salus populi, demonstrated to exist in the certain future? Who will be so hardy as to assert that, when the time arrives, a remedy can be applied? Who will say that 2,000,000 can be attempted to be removed? They will say to you, long before that, "We will not go." Here, sir, applies that wise maxim of the law, "Venicnti occurite morbo," (meet the coming ill.)

The gentleman has spoken of the increase of the female slaves being a part of the profit. It is admitted; but no great evil can be averted, no good attained, without some inconvenience. It may be questioned how far it is desirable to foster and encourage this branch of profit. It is a practice--and an increasing practice in parts of Virginia--to rear slaves for market. How can an honorable mind, a patriot, and a lover of his country, bear to see this ancient Dominion, rendered illustrious by the noble devotion and patriotism of her sons to the cause of Liberty, converted into one grand menagerie, where men are to be reared for market like oxen in the shambles? Is it better--is it not worse--than the slave trade--that trade which enlisted the labor of the good an the wise of every creed and every clime to abolish it? The trader receives the slave--a stranger in language, aspect, and manner--from the merchant, who has brought him from the interior. The ties of father, mother, husband, and child, have all been rent in twain. Before he receives him, his soul has become callous.

But here, sir, individuals, whom the master has known from infancy, with whom he has been sporting in the innocent gambols of childhood, who has been accustomed to look to him for protection, he tears from the mother's arms, and sells into a strange country, among strange people, subject to cruel task-masters. In my opinion, sir, it is much worse.

He has compared slave property to a capital in money. I wish it were money, sir, or anything else than what it is. It is not money; it is labor--it is the labor which produces that for which money is the representative. The interest on money is 4 to 6 per cent. The hire of male slaves is about 15 per cent. upon their value. In ten years, or less you have returned your principal, with interest. Thus it is with much of the one hundred millions of property, the loss of which the gentleman has so eloquently depicted in ruining the country. He has attempted to justify slavery here, because it exists in Africa, and has stated that it exists all over the world. Upon the same principle, he could justify Mahometanism, with its plurality of wives, petty wars for plunder, robbery, and murder, or any other of the abominations and enormities of savage tribes. Does slavery exist in any part of civilized Europe? No, sir, in no part of it. America is the only civilized Christian nation that bears the opprobrium. In every other country, where civilization and Christianity have existed together, they have erased it from their codes, they have blotted it from the page of their history.

The gentleman has appealed to the Christian religion in justification of slavery. I would ask him upon what part of those pure doctrines does he rely, to which of those sublime precepts does he advert, to sustain his position? Is it that which teaches charity, justice, and good will to all; or is it that which teaches, "that ye do unto others as ye would they should do unto you?"Extracts from the speech of Henry Berry, of Jefferson. Sir, I believe that no cancer on the physical body was ever more certain, steady, and fatal in its progress, than is the cancer on the political body of the State of Virginia. It is eating into her vitals. And shall we admit 004747that the evil is past remedy? Shall we act the past of a puny patient, suffering under the ravages of a fatal disease, who would say the remedy is too painful, the dose too nauseous, I cannot bear it; who would close his eyes in despair, and give himself up to death? No, sir; I would bear the knife and the cautery, for the sake of health.

I believe it is high time that this subject should be discussed and considered by the people of Virginia. I believe that the people are awakened on the subject, but not alarmed; I believe they will consider it calmly, and decide upon it correctly. Sir, I have no fears, now, for any general results from any efforts at insurrection, by this unfortunate class of our population. I know that we have the power to crush any such effort at a blow. I know that any such effort on their part, at this day, will end in the annihilation of all concerned in it; and I believe our greatest security now, is in their knowledge of these things--in their knowledge of their own weakness.

Pass as severe laws as you will, to keep these unfortunate creatures in ignorance, it is vain, unless you can extinguish that spark of intellect which God has given them. Let any man who advocates slavery, examine the system of laws which were have adopted (from stern necessity, it may be said) towards these creatures, and he shed a tear upon that; and would to God, sir, the memory of it might be blotted out forever. Sir, we have as far as possible, closed every avenue by which light might enter their minds; we have only to go one step further to extinguish the capacity to see the light, and our work would completed; they would then be completed; they would then be reduced to the level of the beasts of the field, and we should be safe; and I am not certain that we would not to it, if we could find out the necessary process--and that under the plea of necessity. But, sir, this is impossible. And can man be in the midst of freeman, and not know what freedom is? Can he feel that he has the power to assert his liberty, and will he not do it? Yes, sir; with the certainty of the current of time will he do it, whenever the has the power. Sir, to prove that the time will come, I need offer no other argument than that of arithmetic, the conclusions from which are clear demonstrations on this subject. The data are before us all, and every man can work out the process for himself. Sir, a death-struggle must come between the two classes, in which the one or the other will be extinguished forever. Who can contemplate such a catastrophe as even possible, and be indifferent?Extract from the speech of Thomas Marshall, of Fauquier.Wherefore, then, object to slavery? Because it is ruinous to the whites--retards improvement, roots out an industrious population, banishes the yeomanry of the country, deprives the spinner, the weaver, the smith, the shoemaker, the carpenter, of employment and support. The evil admits of no remedy. It is increasing, and will continue to increase, until the whole country will be inundated with one black wave, covering its whole extent, with a few white faces here and there floating on the surface. The master has no capital but what is vested in human flesh; the father, instead of being richer for his sons, is at a loss to provide for them. There is no diversity of occupations, no incentive to enterprise. Labor of every species is disreputable, because performed mostly be slaves. Our towns are stationery, our villages almost everywhere declining; and the general aspect of the country marks the curse of a wasteful, idle, reckless population, who have no interest in the soil, and care not how it is impoverished. Public improvements are neglected, and the entire continent does not present a region for which nature has done so much, and art so little.Extracts from the speech of James McDowell, jr., of Rockbridge.Who, sir, that looks at this property as a legislator, and marks its effect upon the national advance, but weeps over it as the worst of patrimonies? Who that looks to this unhappy bondage of our unhappy people in the midst of our society, and thinks of its incidents and its issues, but weeps over it as a curse upon him who inflicts as upon him who suffers it?

If I am to judge from the tone of our debate, from the concessions on all hands expressed, there is not a man in this body--not one, perhaps, that is even represented here--who would not have thanked the generations that have gone before us, if, acting as public men, they had brought this bondage to a close--who would not have thanked them, if, acting as private men, on private notions, they had relinquished the property which their mistaken kindness has devolved upon us. Proud as are the names, for intellect and patriotism, which enrich the volumes of our history, and reverentially as we turn to them at this period of waning reputation, that name, that man, above all parallel, would have been the chief, who could have blotted out this curse from his country--those, above others, would have received the homage of an eternal gratitude, who, casting away every suggestion of petty interest, had broken the yoke which in an evil hour had been imposed, and had translated, as a free man, to another continent, the outcast and the wretched being who burdens ours with his presence, and defiles it with his crimes.But, sir, it has been otherwise appointed. Slavery has come down to us from our fathers; and the question now is, shall we, in turn, hand it over to them, aggravated with every attribute of evil? Shall we perpetuate the calamity we deplore, and become to posterity the objects, not of kindness, but of cursing?Sir, you may place the slave where you please--you may dry up, to your utmost, the 004848fountain of his feelings, the springs of his thought--you may close upon his mind every avenue to knowledge, and cloud it over with artificial night--you may yoke him to your labor, as an ox which liveth only to work, and worketh only to live--you may put him under any process, which, without destroying his value as a slave, will debase and crush him as a rational being--you may do this, and the idea that he was born to be free will survive it all. It is allied to his hope of immortality--it is the ethereal part of his nature, which oppression cannot reach--it is a torch lit up in his soul by the hand of the Deity, and never meant to be extinguished by the hand of man. * * *

If gentlemen do not feel nor see the evil of slavery whilst this Federal Union lasts, they will see and feel it when it is gone; they will see and suffer it then, in a magnitude of desolating power, to which the "pestilence that walketh at noonday" would be a blessing--to which the malaria that is now threatening extinction to the "eternal city" as the proud one of the Pontiffs and the Caesars is called, would be as refreshing and as balmy as the first breath of spring to the chamber of disease.

It has been frankly and unquestionably declared, from the very commencement of this debate, by the most decided enemies of abolition themselves, as well as others, that this property is an"evil "--that it is a dangerous property. Yes, sir; so dangerous has it been represented to be, even by those who desire to retain it, that we have been reproached for speaking of it otherwise than in fireside whispers--reproached for entertaining debate upon it in this Hall; and the discussion of it with open doors, and to the general ear, has been charged upon us as a climax of rashness and folly, which threatens issues of calamity to our country. It is, then, a dangerous property. No one disguises the danger of this property--that it is inevitable, or that it is increasing. How, then, is the Government to avert it? By a precautionary and preventive legislation, or by permitting it to "grow with our growth" until it becomes intolerable, and then [com??] it by the sword? In the one way or the other--by the peaceful process of legislation or the bloody of the bayonet--our personal and public security must be maintained against the dangers of this property.

[After meeting, in an impressive and dignified manner, the facetious remarks of another member of the House, who considered the insurrection as a " petty affair," and wished, by his wit, to turn the whole scene into ridicule, J. McDowell read a number of extracts from letters, written by and to the most distinguished characters in the State, respecting the dismay and terror which almost universally pervaded the minds of the citizens in every part of the State. He then proceeded:]

Now, sir, I asked you--I asked gentlemen--in conscience to say, was this a " petty affair?" I ask you whether that was a petty affair which startled the feelings of your whole population; which threw a portion of it into alarm--a portion of it into panic; which wrung out from an affrighted people the thrilling cry, day after day conveyed to your Executive, "We are in peril of our lives, send us arms for defence." Was that a "petty affair," which drove families from their homes, which assembled women and children in crowds, and without shelter, at places of common refuge, in every condition of weakness and infirmity, under every suffering which want and pain and terror could inflict, yet willing to endure all--willing to meet death from famine, death from climate, death from hardships--preferring anything, rather, to the horrors of meeting it from a domestic assassin? Was that a "petty affair," which erected a peaceful and confiding portion of the State into a military camp; which outlawed from pity the unfortunate beings whose brothers had offended; which barred every door, penetrated every bosom with fear or suspicion; which so banished every scene of security from every man's dwelling, that, let a hoof or a horn but break upon the silence of the night, and an aching throb would be driven to the heart, the husband would look to his weapon, and the mother would shudder and weep upon her cradle!

Was it the fear of Nat Turner, and his deluded drunken handful of fellows, which produce, such effects? Was it this that induced distant counties, where the very name of Southampton was strange, to arm and equip for a struggle? No, sir; it was the suspicion eternally attached to the slave himself--the suspicion that a Nat Turner might be in every family; that the same bloody deed could be acted over at any time, and in any place; that the materials for it were spread through the land, and always ready for a like explosion. Nothing but the force of this withering apprehension--nothing but the paralyzing and deadening weight with which it falls upon and prostrates the heart of every man who has helpless dependents to protect--nothing but this could have thrown a brave people into consternation, or could have made any portion of this powerful Commonwealth, for a single instant, to have quailed and trembled.

This Commonwealth, in the late war, stood the shock of England's power, and the skill of England's veterans, with scarce a moment of public disquiet. Admiral Cockburn, with his incendiary spirit, and backed by his incendiary myrmidons, alarmed not the State--struck no fear into its private families; and had his spirit been ten--fold more savage than it was, and his army an hundred--fold stronger, and had he piled every energy and pledged every faculty of his soul to the destruction of the State, he could not have produced one moment of that terror for private security which seizes upon all at the cry of insurrection. He would have been our enemy in the field, would have warred an open combat with the disciplined and the gallant of the land. But an insurgent enemy wars at the fireside, makes his battle-ground in the 004949chamber, and seeks, at the hour of repose, for the life of the slumbering and the helpless. No wonder, sir, that the gentleman from Brunswick, [Mr. Gholson,] with his sensibilities aroused by the acts and the full energies of such an enemy as this, should have said that "they filled the mind with the most appalling apprehensions." * * *

Why, from the earliest period of our history to the massacre of Southampton, was a silence, deep and awful as that as death, observed upon this subject? Why was it forbidden in legislative debate or to the public press, and spoken only in mysterious whispers around the domestic hearth? Because a sense of security required, or was thought to require, this course. Why, sir, is this mystery now dispelled? Why has the grave opened its "ponderous and marble jaws?" Why is the subject openly and freely discussed, in every place and under every form? Because a general sense of insecurity pervades the land, and our citizens are deeply impressed with the belief that something must be done. The numerous petitions and memorials which crowd your table furnish abundant evidence of this truth. They may mistake the remedy, but they indicate most clearly that some action is imperiously required at our hands--that the evil has attained a magnitude which demands all the skill and energy of prompt and able legislation. It is contended, on the other hand, that nothing efficient can be accomplished, and that any proceedings by this legislature will reduce the value of the property, and endanger the security of the people. With respect to the first consideration, he would say that the price of property can never be injuriously affected by a system which would operate on that portion only of the slaves who belong to masters desirous to liberate them, or to sell them for their own benefit, at a reduced price. The effect, if any, upon the residue, must be to enhance their value. As to the other and more serious objection, he would remark that it constitutes and must forever constitute, an obstacle to abolition, requiring all the wisdom and discretion of Legislature and people; but the removal of free blacks, or the purchase and deportation of slaves, can involve no danger. If, indeed, the whole fabric shall totter to its fall, when touched by the gentlest hand, it must rest on a precarious foundation. If danger lurks under just, benignant legislation, aiming to relieve both master and slave--to combine justice with humanity--will the period ever comewhen it will be safe to act?

But, admitting the subject cannot be approached without danger now, the great question for us to determine is, whether, by delay, it may not become fearfully worse, and in process of time attain a magnitude for transcending our feeble powers. We owe it to our children to determine whether we or they shall incur the hazard of attempting something. Gentlemen say, let things alone; the evil will correct itself. Sir, we may let things alone, but they will not let us alone. We cannot correct the march of time, nor stop the current of events. We cannot change the course of nature, nor prevent the silent but sure operation of causes now at work.Extracts from the speech of Philip A. Bolling, of Buckingham.The time will come--and it may be sooner than many are willing to believe--when this oppressed and degraded race cannot be held as they now are--when a change will be effected, by means abhorrent, Mr. Speaker, to you, and to the feelings of every good man.

The wounded adder will recoil, and sting the foot that tramples upon it. The day is fast approaching, when those who oppose all action upon this subject, and, instead of aiding in devising some feasible plan for freeing their country from an acknowledged curse, cry "impossible" to every plan suggested, will curse their perverseness and lament their folly.

Those gentlemen who hug slavery to their bosoms, and "roll it as a sweet morsel under their tongues," have been very lavish in their denunciations of all who are for stirring one inch on this subject.

There is sir, a "still, small voice," which speaks to the heart of man in a tone too clear and distinct to be disregarded. It tells him that every system of slavery is based upon injustice and oppression. If gentlemen disregard it now, and lull their consciences to sleep, they may be aroused to a sense of their danger when it is too late to repair their errors.

However the employment of slave labor might be defended, gentlemen would not, could not, justify the traffic in human beings. High-minded men should disdain to hold their fellow-creatures as articles of traffic, disregarding all the ties of blood and affection, tearing asunder all those sympathies dear to men--dividing husbands and wives, parents and children, as they would cut asunder a piece of cotton cloth. They have hearts and feelings like other men. How many a broken heart, how many a Rachel, mourns because her house is left unto her desolate! The time has come when these feelings cannot suppressed--the day would come when they could not be resisted. Slavery was, and had long been, offensive to the moral feelings of a large proportion of the community. Their lips had been sealed, but their minds had been unfettered; many had thought, and thought deeply, on the subject. This, sir, is a Christian community. They read in their Bibles, " Do unto all men as you would have them do unto you:" and this golden rule and slavery are hard to reconcile. Gentlemen may, perhaps, curl the lip of scorn at such considerations; but such a feeling existed in Virginia.Extracts from the speech of Mr. Brodnax, of Dinwiddie.That slavery in Virginia is an evil, and a transcendent evil, it would be idle, and more than idle, for any human being to doubt or deny. It is a mildew which has blighted in its course every region it has touched, from the creation of the world. Illustrations, from the history of other countries and other times might be instructive and profitable, had we the time to review them; but we have evidences tending to the same conviction nearer at hand, and accessible to daily observation, in the short histories of the different States in this great Confederacy, which are impressive in their admonitions and conclusive in their character. That Virginia--originally the first-rated State in the Union--the one which, in better days, led the councils and dictated the measures of the Federal Government, had been gradually razeed to the condition of a third-rate State, and was destined soon to yield precedency to another, among the youngest of her daughters; that many of the finest portions, originally, of her territory, now (as was so glowingly depicted the other day) exhibited scenes wide-spread desolation and decay; that many of her most valuable citizens are removing to other parts of the world--have certainly been attributed to a variety of causes. But who can doubt that it is principally slavery that is at the bottom of all--that this is the uncubus which paralyzes her energies and retards her every effprt at advancement? I presume that everybody is prepared to admit and regret the existence of this evil, and that something should be done to alleviate or exterminate it, if anything can be done by means less injurious or dangerous than the evil itself. But, sir it is on this point on which so much diversity of opinion exists among us. All would remove it, if they could. Some seem to think this immediately and directly attainable, while others conclude that it is a misfortune (not a crime, for we are not responsible for its introduction among us) which no effort can remove or reduce, and that we must content ourselves to submit to it forever, and avert our eyes from the consequences which are hereafter to follow.

Believing, however, that there is an entire coincidence of public opinion on the preliminary question involved, I deem it useless to enter into a long abstract discussion of the origin of slavery, or the evil effects which result from it. All will admit its extinction desirable, if attainable.Extracts from a speech of Hon. Chas. J. Faulkner, now a member of the House of Representatives, delivered in the Virginia House of Delegates, January 20th, 1832.Sir, there is one point in which I do must sincerely agree with those who are arrayed against me in this discussion. It is, that the proposed inquiry is one of great delicacy and of transcendent importance. I will go further, and say it is, in my judgment, the most momentous subject of public interest which has ever occupied the deliberations of this body. Indeed, sir, (if I may be pardoned the extravagance of the expression,) I will say, notwithstanding the horror with which the inquiry is regarded by some gentlemen, it is the ONLY subject which at this time, and under the present attitude of affairs in Virginia, is worthy of the serious gravity of legislation. When and upon what previous occasion did a question so grand, so all-pervading in its consequences, absorb the consideration of this House? The Revolution which agitated this Commonwealth fifty years ago, great and important as it was, involved in its results but a change of our political relations with the mother country. This measure (should it prove successful, and that it must, sooner or later, no individual in this House can reasonably doubt) must involve in its consequences a moral, physical, and political revolution in this State-a revolution which will be beneficially felt by every great interest in the Commonwealth, and by every slaveholding State upon this continent. Sir, I care not what may be the feelings of other gentlemen, but I glory that it is given to me to participate in this measure. I shall ever reckon it among the proudest incidents of my life, that I have contributed my feeble aid to forward a incidents of my life, that I have contributed my life feeble aid to forward revolution so grand and patriotic in its results. But sir, at the same time that I do accord with those gentlemen who have preceded me in this debate, on the opposite side of the question, in the all-absorbing magnitude of the topic under consideration, I cannot think, with them, that on that account it is not a FIT subject of inquiry. Its very importance appeals to us, and demands inquiry. Let that inquiry be cautious; let it be deliberate; let it be guarded; above all, let it be conducted with a sacred regard to the rights of private property, so far at least as those rights can, upon an occasion of this sort, be legitimately recognised. But, still, let the inquiry go on. The people demand it--their safety requires it. Mystery in State affairs I have always considered impolitic and unwise. It is unsuited to the genius of this Government, which is based upon the right of the people to a free and full examination of whatever concerns their interest and happiness. Sir, they pay you for your counsel--they have a right to do it. If there be danger, let us know it, and prepare for the worst. If slavery can be cradicated, in God's name let us get rid of it. If it cannot, let that melancholy fact be distinctly ascertained; and let those who we have been told are now awaiting with painful solicitude the result of your deliberation, pack up their household goods, and find among the luxuriant forests and prairies of the West that security and repose which their native land does not afford.

Again, sir, I ask, what new fact has occurred--what new light has dawned upon the gentleman from Mecklenburg--that we should be called upon to retrace our course, and to disappoint the hopes which our first manly decision gave? Does not the same evil exist? Is it not increasing? Does not every day give it permanency and force? It is not rising like a heavy and portentous cloud above the horizon, extending its deep and sable volumes athwart the sky, and gathering in its impenetrable folds the active materials of elemental 005051war? And, yet, shall we be requested to close our eyes to the danger, and without an effort--without even an inquiry--to yield to the impulses of a dark and withering despair? Sir, is this mainly legislation? Is it correct--is it HONEST--legislation? Is it acting with that fidelity to our constituents which their sacred interest requires?

Sir, if this evil, great as it is, was even stationary--if the worthy gentleman from Mecklenburg and Brunswick [Mr. Gholson] could give us any assurance that it would not increase until it reaches a point which it is horrible to contemplate--I might be induced to acquiesce in the course which their pathetic appeals suggest. But, when they know it is otherwise --when they know that each successive billow is detracted from the small space of ground left between us and the angry ocean chating at our feet--how can they advise us--how can they advice their own constituents--to remain still, when the next advancing wave may overwhelm them and us in hopeless ruin and desolation?

Sir, if the gentleman from Mecklenburg was not satisfied when he submitted his resolution, he must now be convinced that this is one of those question which no parliamentary adroitness can smother. The spirit of free inquiry is abroad upon the earth; and Governments and all the institutions connected with them must be sustained, not by any mystical and superstitious reference for the, as existing institutions, but as they ascertained, after a severe and searching scrutiny, to subserve the great ends of POPULAR weal The same question which is now convulsing Europe to its centre--which is purifying that most gifted country from the despotism which has for so many centuries hung over it--is, in somewhat modified shape, operating upon the present inquiry. As with them, it is asked, Why have we so long tolerated the unequal and oppressive institutions of our country? Why have we suffered ourselves to be ground into dust that others may be pampered in luxury and ease? Of what use are crowns and hereditary aristocracies? Do they answer any great end of society? Do they conduce to the happiness of the PEOPLE? So with us the inquiry must be, Is slavery a beneficial institution? Is the prosperity of a nation promoted by nourishing within her bosom half a million if bondsmen, alien to her in interest, hostile to her in feeling, and prepared, at any favorable moment, to deluge the country in blood, and dance upon the ruins of Public Liberty? In other words, Are we better with or without slaves? It must come to that point at last. If slavery can be sustained as an institution conducive to the great interests of society, it will be tolerated; if not, it must bow before the majesty of that power which is supreme. But, sir, vain and idle is every effort to strangle this inquiry As well might you attempt to chain the ocean, or stay the avenging thunderbolts of Heaven, as to drive the people from any inquiry which may result in their better condition. This is too deep, too engrossing a subject of consideration. It addresses itself too strongly to our interests, to our passions, and to our feelings. There is not a country, not a town, not a newspaper, not a fireside, in the State, where the subject is not fully and fearlessly canvassed; and shall we, the constitutional inquest of the Commonwealth, sworn to make true inquiry into all the grievances of the people, and to the best of our abilities apply the remedy, shall we alone be found to shrink from this inquiry? And here permit me to advert to a remark which fell (I am sure inadvertently) from the gentleman from Brunswick. Because, forsooth, in asking this inquiry we have chosen to depart from the folly of our ancestors, and to discuss this question--not with closed doors; not in low and breathless whispers; not with all the mummery of an Oriental Divan--we have been told that we are treating the subject"flippantly"--not as was done in the better days of the Commonwealth. If flippancy, sir, in the vocabulary of that gentleman, signifies a free and open discussion of that which they have a right to know, I plead guilty to this charge--most certainly not otherwise.

Sir, uniformity in political views, feelings, and interests, in all the parts of this widely-extended State, would, I admit, be extremely desirable. But that uniformity is purchased at too dear a rate, when the bold and intrepid forester of the West must yield to the slothful and degraded African, and those hills and valleys which until now have re-echoed with the songs and industry of freeman shall have become converted into desolation and barrenness by the withering footsteps of slavery.

Sir, it is to avert any such possible consequence to my country, that I, one of the humblest, but now the least determined, of the Western delegation, have raised my voice for emancipation. Sir, tax our lands, vilify our country, carry the sword of extermination through our now defenceless villages; but spare us, I implore you, spare us the curse of slavery, that bitterest drop from the chalice of the destroying angel!

Sir, we have lands, we have houses, we have property, and we are willing to pledge them all to any extent, to aid you in removing this evil. Yet, we will not that you shall extend to us the same evils under which you labor. We will not that you shall make our fair domain the receptacle of your mass of political filth and corruption. No, sir; before we can submit to such terms, violent convulsions must agitate this State.

The gentleman from Brunswick and the gentleman from Dinwiddie hold their slaves, not by any patent from God, as the latter gentleman on yesterday assumed, but solely by virtue of the acquiescence and consent of the society in which they live.

But, sir, it is said that society having conferred this property on the slaveholder, it cannot now take it from him without an adequate 005152compensation, by which is meant full value. I may be singular in the opinion, but I defy the legal research of the House to point me to a principle recognised by the law, even in the ordinary course of its adjudications, where the community pays for property which is removed or destroyed because it is a nuisance, and found injurious to that society. There is I humbly apprehend, no such principle. There is no obligation upon society to continue your right one moment after it becomes injurious to the best interests of society; nor to compensate you for the loss of that, the deprivation of which is demanded by the safety of the State, and in which general benefit you participate as members of the community. Sir, there is to my mind a manifest distinction between condemning private property to be applied to some beneficial public purpose, and condemning or removing private property which is ascertained to be a positive wrong to society. It is a distinction which pervades the whole genius of the law; and is founded upon the idea, that any man who holds property injurious to the peace of that society of which he is member, thereby violates the condition upon the observance of which his right to the property is alone guarantied. For property of the first class condemned, there ought to be compensation; but for property of the latter class none can be demanded upon principle, none accorded as a matter of right, although none can be considerations of humanity, and a spirit of compromise, may dictate some compensation.

Sir, does not that plan of emancipation which proposes freedom at a future period, and which guaranties to the slaveholder the present enjoyment and profit of that most pernicious species of property, contain within itself a principle of compensation--a fair and just proposition of compromise? I think it does, and I exhibit my views thus: It is conceded that, at this precise moment of our legislation, slaves are injurious to the interests and threaten the subversion and ruin of this Commonwealth. Their present number, their increasing number, all admonish us of this. In different terms, and in more measured language, the same fact has been conceded by all who have yet addressed this House. Something must be done," emphatically exclaimed the gentleman from Dinwiddie; and I thought I could perceive a response to that declaration, in the countenance of a large majority of this body. And why must something be done? Because if not, says the gentleman from Campbell, [Mr. Rives,] the throats of all the white people of Virginia will be cut. No, says the gentleman from Dinwiddie--"The whites cannot be conquered--the throats of the blacks will be cut." It is a trifling difference, to be sure, sir, and matters not to the argument. For the fact is conceded, that one race or the other must be exterminated.

Sir, such being the actual condition of this Commonwealth, I ask if we would not be justified now, supposing all considerations of policy and humanity concurred, without even a moment's delay, in staving off this appalling and overwhelming calamity? Sir, if this immense negro population were now in arms, gathering into black and formidable masses of attack, would that man be listened to, who spoke about property, who prayed you not to direct your artillery to such or such a point, for you would destroy some of his property? Sir, to the eye of the statesman, as to the eye of Omniscience, dangers pressing, and dangers that must necessarily press, are alike present. With a single glance he embraces Virginia now, with the elements of destruction reposing quietly upon her bosom, and Virginia lighted from one extremity to the other with the torch of servile insurrection and massacre. It is not sufficient for him that the match is not yet applied. It is enough that the magazine is open, and the match will shortly be applied.

Sir, it is true in national as it is in private contracts, that loss and injury to one party may constitute as fair a consideration as gain to the other. Does the slaveholder, while he is enjoying his slaves, reflect upon the deep injury and incalculable loss which the possession of that property inflicts upon the true interests of the country? And does he not perceive that society, in tolerating that evil say for thirty years longer, for his benefit, is, in the shape of injury to herself and benefit to him, giving him a full and adequate compensation? It is the only compensation which, so help me God! as a slaveholder, I will ever accept from the Commonwealth of Virginia. It is the only compensation which, as a lawgiver, I will ever dispense to others.

Sir, it is, in my judgment, the true and proper ground of compromise between the slaveholding and anti-slaveholding interests of this Commonwealth; and by anti-slaveholding interest here, I mean to comprehend every interest, except that mere pecuniary interest which the master has in the property of his slave. Slavery, it is admitted, is an evil--it is an institution which presses heavily against the best interests of the State. It banishes free white labor, it exterminates the mechanic, the artisan, the manufacturer. It deprives them of occupation. It deprives them of bread. It converts the energy of a community into indolence, its power into imbecility, its efficiency into weakness. Sir, being thus injurious, have we not a right to demand its extermination? Shall society suffer, that the slaveholder may continue to gather his crop of human flesh? What is his mere pecuniary claim, compared with the great interests of the commonweal? Must the country languish, droop, die, that the slaveholder may flourish? Shall all interests be subservient to one--all rights subordinate to those of the slaveholder? Has not the mechanic, have not the middle classes their rights-rights incompatible with the existence of slavery?

Sir, so great and overshadowing are the evils of slavery--so sensibly are they felt by those who have traced the causes of our national 005253decline--so perceptible is the poisonous operation of its principles in the varied and diversified interests of this Commonwealth, that all, whose minds are not warped by prejudice or interest, must admit that the disease has now assumed that mortal tendency, as to justify the application of any remedy which, under the great law of State necessity, we might consider advisable.

Sir, I am gratified to perceive that no gentleman has yet risen in this Hall, the avowed advocate of slavery. The day has gone by when such a voice could be listened to with patience, or even with forbearance. I even regret, sir, that we should find those amongst us who enter the lists of discussion as its apologists, except alone upon the ground of uncontrollable necessity. And yet, who could have listened to the very eloquent remarks of the gentleman from Brunswick, without being forced to conclude that he at least considered slavery, however not be defended upon principle, yet as being divested of much of its enormity, as you approach it in practice?

Sir, if there be one who concurs with that gentleman in the harmless character of this institution, let me request him to compare the condition of the slaveholding portion of this Commonwealth-barren, desolate, and seared as it were by the avenging hand of Heaven-with the descriptions which we have of this same country from those who first broke its virgin soil. To what is this change ascribable? Alone to the withering and blasting effects of slavery. If this does not satisfy him, let me request him to extend his travels to the Northern States of this Union, and beg him to contrast the happiness and contentment which prevail throughout that country, the busy and cheerful sound of industry, the rapid and swelling growth of their population, their means and institutions of education, their skill and proficiency in the useful arts, their enterprise and public spirit, the monuments of their commercial and manufacturing industry; and, above all, their devoted attachment to the Government from which they derive their protection-with the division, discontent, indolence, and poverty, of the Southern country. To what, sir is all this ascribable? To that voice in the organization of society, by which one-half of its inhabitants are arrayed in interest and feeling against the other half--to that unfortunate state of society in which freemen regard labor as disgraceful, and slaves shrink from it as a burden tyrannically imposed upon them--"to that condition of things in which half a million of your population can feel no sympathy with the society in the prosperity of which they are forbidden to participate, and no attachment to a Government at whose hands they receive nothing but injustice."

If this should not be sufficient, and the curious and incredulous inquirer should suggest that the contrast which has been adverted to, and which is so manifest, might be traced to a difference of climate, or other causes distinct from slavery itself, permit me to refer him to the two States of Kentucky and Ohio. No difference of soil, no diversity of climate, no diversity in the original settlement of those two States, can account for the remarkable disproportion in their natural advancement. Separated by a river alone, they seem to have been purposely and providentially designed to exhibit in their future histories the difference which necessarily results from a country free from, and a country afflicted with, the curse of slavery. The same may be said of the two States of Missouri and Illinois.

Sir, if still he should hesitate in the apprehension of this important political truth, that slavery is a curse, which no local advantages can counterbalance, let me invite him back again to his native State, and point to the tragedy of Southampton. There, sir, undisguised and clear to the vision of all men are the evils of slavery, written in blood. There may be seen a practical commentary upon that institution, as it actually exists among us. The gentleman from Dinwiddie has called it a "petty affair." It does not appear so to me. The more I reflect upon it, the more am I convinced that it is an important, a most momentous affair. Sixty-one white native inhabitants of Virginia, in a few hours, in the face of day, in a county as well protected as most of the counties east of the Blue Ridge, attacked, butchered, mangled, in a style of which the records of atrocity can scarcely furnish a parallel. This a petty affair? Sir, it may suit the modesty of those whose valor and energy suppressed that insurrection, to underrate its importance; but to the statesman, who knows that like causes will produce like effects, it must appear fraught with useful and important instruction. Let it not be said that these instructions rarely occur, and that a similar one may not take place for insurrections rarely occur, and that a similar one may not take place for half a century to come. To us, no more than to the murdered citizens of Southampton, is it given to know the day and the hour. It is sufficient that such an evil may occur; and that no vigilance of your police can prevent its recurrence.

Sir, the evils of slavery stand confessed before us. The only question with a Virginia statesman should be, Is there any remedy, and what shall that remedy be? The gentleman from Albemarle has exhibited one scheme, the gentleman from Dinwiddie has presented another. Other and perhaps less-exceptionable projects will be submitted, as soon as it is understood that we are disposed to apply some remedy. The only question now before us is, Shall we be permitted to make the inquiry? Shall we be allowed to prosecute our investigations in the select committee? Let us manifest the will--the means will assuredly follow. I never could despair, sir, in a cause so just as this. I never could despair of accomplishing that which eight States--although, it is true, under more favorable circumstances--have already accomplished. I never could despair of doing that which the venerable fathers of our Republic have told us is not only practicable, 005354but have admonished us must be done, if we mean to save the Commonwealth from ruin. With a steady perseverance, failure is impossible. The sympathies and support of the world would gather around us. The smiles of Heaven and our honest feelings would sustain us.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, permit me again to repeat, that although I am decidedly in favor of some scheme of manumission that will ultimately relieve my country from the catastrophe which threatens it let no gentleman suppose, from what has fallen from me, that I am in favor of any rash, violent, or hasty legislation. I am for action, but it must be sober, circumspect, well-considered action. I am for no plan which is not mild, gradual, prospective in its operation. I shall advocate no scheme that does not respect the right of property, so far as it is entitled to be respected, with a just regard to the safety and resources of the State. I would approach the subject as one of great magnitude and delicacy, as one whose varied and momentous consequences demand the calmest and most deliberate investigation. But still, sir, I would approach it--aye, delicate as it be, encompassed as it may be with difficulties and hazards, I would still approach it. The people demand it. Their security requires it. In the language of the wise and prophetic Jefferson, "You must approach it--you must bear it-- you must adopt some plan of emancipation, or worse will follow."

I next quote from the Nashville Banner, then the domestic organ of General Jackson:From the Nashville Banner of the 30th of June, 1834, then edited by the late Samuel H. Laughlin."Emancipation.--The agitators and fanatics of the East have been recently engaged in some highly reprehensible measures. All the sober friends of gradual and prospective emancipation and who see the alarming and horrid consequence of immediate of forcible abolition, have been open in the condemnation of their measure in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. Those wretches have set themselves up as the open enemies of the Colonization Society, and speak in open derision of its principles and its measures. In this State, we have nothing to fear from such men; they dare not show their faces. Here, the great moral principle is at work which in the end, will inevitably accomplish the great work in a lawful and constitutional way. The warmest friends of the cause here only wish to go a little in advance of the present spirit of the age. The only weapon they pretend to employ are religion, expediency, reason, and moral duty. It is in this spirit that Mr. Stephenson's benevolent protest, introduced in the Convention, has been drawn, which in the benignancy of its purposes is unanswerable, and in point of reason and argument--for the hand of a man who has matured his subject is apparent in it--says everything that can be said in favor of what it proposes, at this time. These are merely our opinions; but the subject generally is one upon which we have read and reflected, more perhaps than upon any other not immediately connected with our daily avocations in life. We have become thoroughly convinced, that nothing but time, and the future operation of moral principles, carried out in wise legislation, founded upon the principle of compensation, or some other principle of justice, which may become, hereafter, acceptable to the owners, will ever enable the work to be done. Let restraints, however, upon voluntary emancipation be as few as the safety of society will permit--upon colonization, none."

The Nashville Republican also a Jackson paper at the time, spoke as follows, on the 20th of February, 1834:

"It is supposed that efforts will be made to insert a provision for the gradual abolition of slavery, and perhaps the colonization of our colored population. Upon the propriety of this step we shall not at present decide. Much would depend upon the nature of the provision, whether well adapted to our present and future condition. The legislation of Tennessee has already taken up the cause of colonization, and made, perhaps, as liberal aprovision for it as our finances permitted. The nature of things, the march of public opinion, the voice of religion, all have said that American slavery must have an end. What shall be the legislative measures to that effect, and when they shall begin, are questions for prudence to determine."

The State Convention declined to do anything at the time towards emancipation, though the evils of slavery were generally acknowledged. Mr. Stephenson, a prominent politician of the time, entered a protest against this non-action. Mr. Laughlin, the editor of the Banner, and a prominent friend of General Jackson, pronounced the protest "wise and benevolent." The following are extracts from this document:

"One of its (The Bible) excellent rules is, 'As you would that men should do unto you, do you even so unto them.' Now, to apply this golden rule to the case of the master and slave, we have just to place each in the other's stead, then ask the question honestly, 'What would I that my servant thus placed in power, would do to me?" Surely, (if I durst,) I would say, 'When I had paid to you, with usury, a full equivalent for all you have expended in procuring me, and providing for my support and comfort, you ought to be satisfied; this is all stern justice can require, and humanity and a regard for the rights of man would require no more. Why, then, do you not permit me to go out free to pursue happiness my own way?'" 005455

Again, I read in this "benevolent protest," (which, in the benignancy of its purposes, was unanswerable, according to Mr. Laughlin,) as follows:

"The undersigned do not admit that the refusal or neglect of other States to remove an existing evil is a justification for us. It is written, when the Jews desired a king, one of their reasons was, that they might be like the heathen natives around them; but this then was declared by the words of unerring thought not to be good. In the Bible we have an account of people once in bondage; and when the great God called for their deliverance, the cry of their oppressors was, (as we believe, in the spirit of the report,) 'They be idle, they be idle.' God hath said, 'Let the oppressed go free;' and he that oppresseth the poor, reproacheth his Maker."

The report supposes it a dangerous experiment; the command is, nevertheless, Go forward, although the Red Sea, starvation, degradation, with all the train of horrors so eloquently set forth in the report, stare you in the face. Is it better to obey God, or man? As wise men, judge ye.

Mr. Laughlin remarked, in reference to the subject;

"Here (in Tennessee) the great moral principle is at work, which, in the end, will inevitably accomplish the great work (of emancipation) in a legal and constitutional way. The warmest friends of the cause here only want to go a little in advance of the present spirit of the age. The only weapons they pretend to employ are religion, expediency, reason and moral duty."

The debate in the Virginia Legislature in 1832, and in the Convention a year or two before together with the above extracts, will serve to illustrate the spirit of Democracy, and Whiggery too, in the palmy days of Jackson and Clay.From Tucker's Blackstone.ON THE STATE OF SLAVERY IN VIRGINIA.By St. George Tucker, Professor of Law in the University of William and Mary, and one of the Judges of the General Court in Virginia. [Extract.]Note H.In the preceding inquiry into the absolute rights of the citizens of United America, we must not understood as if those rights were equally and universally the privilege of all the inhabitants of the United States or even of all those who may be challenged this land of freedom as their native country. Among the blessings which the Almighty hath showered down on these States, there is a large portion of the bitterest draught that ever flowed from the cup of affliction. Whilst America hath been the land of promise to Europeans and their descendants, it hath been the vale of death to millions of the wretched sons of Africa. The genial light of Liberty, which hath here shone with unrivalled lustre on the former, hath conducted the former to the most enviable state of human existence. Whilst we were offering up vows at the shrine of Liberty and sacrificing hecatombs upon her altars; whilst we swore irreconcilable hostility to her enemies, and hurled defiance in their faces, whilst we adjured the God of Hosts to witness our resolution to live free, or die, and imprecated curses on their heads who refused to unite with us in establishing the empire of Freedom, we were imposing upon our fellowmen, who differ in complexion from us a slavery thousand times more cruel than the utmost extremity of those grievances and oppression of which we complained. Such are the inconsistencies of human nature; such the blindness of those who pluck not the beam out of their own eyes, whilst they can espy a moat in the eyes of their brother; such that partial system of morality which confines rights and injuries to particular complexions; such the effect of that self-love which justifies or condemns, not according to principle, but to the agent. Had we turned our eyes inwardly when we supplicated the Father of Mercies to aid the injured and oppressed; when we invoked the Author of Righteousness to attest the purity of our motives and the justice of our cause; and implored the God of Battles to aid our exertions in its defence should we not have stood more self-convicted than the contrite publican? Should we not have left our gift upon the altar, that we might first be reconciled to our brethren whom we held in bondage? Should we not have loose their chains and broken their fetters? Or if the difficulties and dangers of such an experiment prohibited the attempt during the convulsions of a revolution, is it not our duty to embrace the first moment of constitutional health and vigor to effectuate so desirable an object, and to remove from us a stigma with which our enemies will never fail to upbraid us, nor our consciences to reproach us?

This note is very long, and embraces and elaborate plan of emancipation.LETTER FROM HENRY CLAY.The following letter of Mr. Clay is copied from a newspaper of 1849. It was published widely at the time of its appearance:New Orleans, February 17, 1849.Dear Sir: Prior to my departure from home in December last in behalf of yourself and other friends, you obtained from me a promise to make a public exposition of my views and opinions upon a grave and important question which, it was then anticipated, would be much debated and considered by the people of Kentucky, 005556during this year, in consequence of the approaching Convention, summoned to amend their present Constitution. I was not entirely well when I left home, and owing to that cause, and my confinement several weeks, during my sojourn in this city, from the effects of an accident which befel me, I have been delayed in the fulfilment of my promise, which I now propose to execute.

The question to which I allude is, whether African slavery, as it now exists in Kentucky shall be left to a perpetual or indefinite continuance, or some provision shall be made, in the new Constitution, for its gradual and ultimate extinction?

A few general observations will suffice my present purpose, without entering on the whole subject of slavery, under all its bearings and in every aspect of it. I am aware that there are respectable persons who believe that slavery is a blessing, that the institution ought to exist in every well-organized society, and that it is even favorable to the preservation of liberty. Happily, the number who entertain these extravagant opinions is not very great, and the time would be uselessly occupied in an elaborate refutation to them. I would, however, remark that, if slavery be fraught with these alleged benefits, the principle on which it is maintained would require that one portion of the white race should be reduced to bondage, to serve another portion of the same race, when black subjects of slavery could not be obtained; and that in Africa, where they may entertain as great a preference for their color as we do for ours, they would be justified in reducing the white race to slavery, in order to secure the blessings which that state is said to diffuse.

An argument, in support of reducing the African race to slavery is sometimes derived from their alleged intellectual inferiority to the white races; but, if this argument be founded in fact, (as it may be, but which I shall not now examine.) it would prove entirely too much. It would prove that any white nation, which had made greater advances in civilization, knowledge, and wisdom, than another white nation, would have a right to reduce the latter to a state of bondage. Nay, further: if the principle of subjugation founded upon intellectual superiority be true, and be applicable to races and to nations, what is to prevent its being applied to individuals? And then the wisest man in the world would have a right to make slaves of all the rest of mankind.

If indeed we possess this intellectual superiority, profoundly grateful and thankful to Him who has bestowed it, we ought to fulfil all the obligations and duties which it imposes; and these would require us, not to subjugate or deal unjustly by our fellow men who are less blessed than we are, but to instruct, to improve, and to enlighten them.

A vast majority of the people of the United States, in every section of them. I believe, regret the introduction of slavery into the colonies, under the authority of our British ancestors, lament that a single slave treads our soil, deplore the necessity of the continuance of slavery in any of the States, regard the institution as a great evil to both races, and would rejoice in the adoption of any safe, just, and practicable plan for the removal of all slaves from among us. Hitherto no such satisfactory plan has been presented. When, on the occasion of the formation of our present Constitution of Kentucky, in 1799, the question of the gradual emancipation of slavery in that State was agitated, its friends had to encounter a great obstacle, in the fact that there then existed no established colony to which they could be transported. Now, by the successful establishment of flourishing colonies on the western coast of Africa, that difficulty has been obviated. And I confess that, without indulging in any undue feelings of superstition, it does seem to me that it may have been among the dispensations of Providence to permit the wrongs, under which Africa has suffered, to be inflicted, that her children might be returned to their original home, civilized, imbued with the benign spirit of Christianity, and prepared ultimately to redeem that great continent from barbarism and idolatry.

Without undertaking to judge for any other State, it was my opinion in 1799 that Kentucky was in a condition to admit of the gradual emancipation of her slaves; and how deeply do I lament that a system with that object had not been then established. If it had been, the State would now be nearly rid of all slaves. My opinion has never changed, and I have frequently publicly expressed it. I should be most happy, if what was impracticable at that epoch could now be accomplished.

After full and deliberate consideration of the subject, it appears to me that three principles should regulate the establishment of a system of gradual emancipation. The first is, that it should be slow in its operation, cautious and gradual, so as to occasion no convulsion, nor any rash or sudden disturbance in the existing habits of society. Second, that, as an indispensable condition, the emancipated slaves should be removed from the State to some colony. And, thirdly, that the expenses of their transportation to such colony, including an outfit for six months after their arrival at it, should be defrayed by a fund to be raised from the labor of each freed slave.

Nothing could be more unwise than the immediate liberation of all the slaves in the State, comprehending both sexes and all ages, from that of tender infancy to extreme old age. It would lead to the most frightful and fatal consequences. Any great change in the condition of society should be marked by extreme care and circumspection. The introduction of slaves into the colonies was an operation of many years duration; and the work of their removal from the United States can only be effected after the lapse of a great length of time.

I think that a period should be fixed when all born after it should be free at a specified 005657age, all born before it remaining slaves for life. That period, I would suggest, should be 1855, or even 1860; for on this and other arrangements of the system, if adopted, I incline to a liberal margin, so as to obviate as many objections and to unite as many opinions as possible. Whether the commencement of the operation of the system be a little earlier or later, it is not so important as that a day should be permanently fixed, from which we could look forward with confidence to the final termination of slavery within the limits of the Commonwealth.

Whatever may be the day fixed, whether 1855 or 1860, or any other day, all born after it I suggest should be free at the age of twenty-five, but be liable afterwards to be hired out, under the authority of the State, for a term not exceeding three years, in order to raise a sum sufficient to pay the expenses of their transportation to the colony, and to provide them an outfit for six months after their arrival there.

If the descendants of those who were themselves to be free at the age of twenty-five, were also to be considered as slaves until they attained the same age, and this rule were continued indefinitely as to time, it is manifest that slavery would be perpetuated instead of being terminated. To guard against this consequence, provision might be made that the offspring of those who were to be free at twenty-five, should be free from their birth, but upon the condition that they should be apprenticed until they were twenty-one, and be also afterwards liable to be hired out a period not exceeding three years, for the purpose of raising funds to meet the expense to the colony and their subsistence for the first six months.

The Pennsylvania system of emancipation fixed the period of twenty-eight for the liberation of slaves, and provided, or her courts have since interpreted the system to mean, that the issue of all who were to be free at the limited age, were from their births free. The Pennsylvania system made no provision for colonization.

Until the commencement of the system which I am endeavoring to sketch, I think all the legal rights of the proprietors of slaves, in their fullest extent, ought to remain unimpaired and unrestricted. Consequently, they would have the right to sell, devise, or remove them from the State; and in the latter case, without their offspring being entitled to the benefit of emancipation, for which the system provides.

2d. The colonization of the free blacks, as they successively arrive, from year to year, at the age entitling them to freedom, I consider a condition absolutely indispensable. Without it, I should be utterly opposed to any scheme of emancipation. One hundred and ninety odd thousand blacks, composing about one-fourth of the entire population of the State, with their descendants, could never live in peace, harmony, and equality, with the residue of the population. The color, passions, and prejudices, would forever prevent the two races living together in a state of cordial union. Social, moral, and political degradation would be the inevitable lot of the colored race. Even in the free States, (I use the terms free and slave States not in any sense derogatory from one class, or implying any superiority in the other, but for the sake of brevity,) that is their present condition. In some of those free States, the penal legislation against the people of color is quite as severe, if not harsher, than it is in some of the slave States. As nowhere in the United States are amalgamation and equality between the two races possible, it is better that there should be a separation, and that the African descendants should be returned to the native land of their fathers.

It will have been seen that the plan I have suggested proposes the annual transportation of all born after a specified day, upon their arrival at the prescribed age, to the colony which may be selected for their destination; and this process of transportation is to be continued, until the separation of the two races is completed. If the emancipated slaves were to remain in Kentucky until they attained the age of twenty-eight, it would be about thirty-four years before the first annual transportation began, if the system commenced in 1855; and about thirty-nine years, if its operation began in 1860.

What the number thus to be annually transported would be, cannot be precisely ascertained. I observe it stated by the auditor, that the increase of slaves in Kentucky last year was between three and four thousand. But, as that statement was made upon a comparison of the aggregate number of all the slaves in the State, without regard to births, it does not, I presume, exhibit truly the natural increase, which was probably larger. The aggregate was affected by the introduction and still more by the exportation of slaves. I suppose that there would not be less, probably more, than five thousand to be transported the first year of the operation of the system; but, after it was in progress some years, there would be a constant dimination of the number.

Would it be practicable annually to transport five thousand persons from Kentucky? There cannot be a doubt of it, or even a much larger number. We receive from Europe annually emigrants to an amount exceeding two hundred and fifty thousand, at a cost for the passage of about ten dollars per head, and they embark at European ports more distant from the United States than the western coast of Africa. It is true that the commercial marine employed between Europe and the United States affords facilities, in the transportation of emigrants, at that low rate, which that engaged in the commerce between Liberia and this country does not now supply; but that commerce is increasing; and by the time the proposed system, if adopted, would go into operation, it will have greatly augmented.

If there were a certainty of the annual transportation of not less than five thousand persons to Africa, it would create a demand for 005758transports, and the spirit of competition would, I have no doubt, greatly diminish the present cost of the passage. That cost had been stated, upon good authority, to be at present fifty dollars per head, including the passage and six months' outfit after the arrival of the emigrant in Africa. Whatever may be the cost, and whatever the number to be transported, the fund to be raised by the hire of the liberated slave, for a period not exceeding three years, will be amply sufficient. The annual hire, on the average may be estimated at fifty dollars, or one hundred and fifty for the whole term.

Colonization will be attended with the painful effect of the separation of the colonists from their parents and in some instances from their children; but from the latter it will be only temporary, as they will follow, and be again reunited. Their separation from their parents will not be until after they have attained a mature age, nor greater than voluntarily takes place with emigrants from Europe, who leave their parents behind. It will be far less distressing than what frequently occurs in the state of slavery, and will be attended with the animating encouragement, that the colonists are transferred from a land of bondage and degradation for them, to a land of liberty and equality.

And 3d. The expense of transporting the liberated slave to the colony, and of maintaining him there for six months, I think ought to be provided for by a fund derived from his labor, in the manner already indicated. He is the party most benefited by emancipation. It would not be right to subject the non-slave-holder to any part of that expense; and the slaveholder will have made sufficient sacrifices, without being exclusively burdened with taxes to raise that fund. The emancipated slaves could be hired out for the time proposed, by the sheriff, or other public agent, in each county, who should be subject to strict accountability. And it would be requisite that there should be kept a register of all births of all children of color, after the day fixed for the commencement of the system, enforced by appropriate sanctions. It would be a very desirable regulation of law, to have the births, deaths, and marriages, of the whole population of the State, registered and preserved, as is done in most well-governed States.

Among other considerations which unite in recommending to the State of Kentucky a system for the gradual abolition of slavery, is that arising out of her exposed condition, affording great facilities to the escape of her slaves into the free States and into Canada. She does not enjoy the security which some of the slave States have, by being covered in depth by two or three slave States intervening between them and free States. She has a greater length of border on free States than any other slave State in the Union. That border is the Ohio river, extending from the mouth of the Big Sandy to the mouth of the Ohio, a distance of near six hundred miles, separating her from the already powerful and growing States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois.

Vast numbers of slaves have fled from most of the countries in Kentucky, from the mouth of Big Sandy to the mouth of the Miami, and the evil has increased and is increasing. Attempts to recover the fugitives lead to the most painful and irritating collisions. Hitherto, countenance and assistance to the fugitives have been chiefly afforded by persons in the State of Ohio; but it is to be apprehended, from the progressive opposition to slavery, that, in process of time, similar facilities to the escape of slaves will be found in the States of Indiana and Illinois. By means of railroads, Canada can be reached from Cincinnati in the little more than twenty-four hours.

In the event of a civil war breaking out, or in the more direful event of a dissolution of the Union, in consequence of the existence of slavery, Kentucky would become the theatre and bear the brunt of the war. She would doubtless defend herself with her known valor and gallantry; but the superiority of the numbers by which she would be opposed would lay waste and devastate her fair fields. Her sister slave States would fly to her succor; but, even if they should be successful in the unequal conflict; she never could obtain any indemnity for the inevitable ravages of the war.

It may be urged that we ought not, by the gradual abolition of slavery, to separate ourselves from the other slave States, but continue to share with them in all their future fortunes. The power of each slave State, within its limits, over the institution of slavery, is absolute, supreme, and exclusive--exclusive of that of Congress or that of any other State. The Government of each slave State is bound, by the highest and most solemn obligations, to dispose of the question of slavery so as best to promote the peace, happiness, and prosperity, of the people of the State. Kentucky being essentially a farming State, slave labor is less profitable.

If, in most of the other slave States, they find that labor more profitable in the culture of the staples of cotton and sugar, they may perceive a reason in that feeling for continuing slavery, which it cannot be expected should control the judgment of Kentucky, as to what may be fitting and proper for her interests. If she should abolish slavery, it would be her duty, and I trust that she would be as ready as she now is, to defend the slave States in the enjoyment of all their lawful and constitutional rights. Her power, political and physical, would be greatly increased; for the one hundred and ninety odd thousand slaves, and their descendants, would be gradually superseded by an equal number of white inhabitants, who would be estimated per capita, and not by the Federal rule of three-fifths prescribed for the colored race in the Constitution of the United States.

I have thus, without reserve, freely expressed my opinion and presented my views. The interesting 005859subject of which I have treated would have admitted of much enlargement, but I have desired to consult brevity. The plan which I have proposed will hardly be accused of being too early in its commencement or too rapid in its operation. It will be more likely to meet with contrary reproaches. If adopted, it is to begin thirty-four or thirty-nine years from the time of its adoption, as the one period or the other shall be selected for its commencement. How long a time it will take to remove all the colored race from the State, by the annual transportation of each year's natural increase, cannot be exactly ascertained. After the system had been in operation some years, I think it probable, from the manifest blessings that would flow from it, from the diminished value of slave labor, and from the humanity and benevolence of private individuals prompting a liberation of their slaves and their transportation, a general disposition would exist to accelerate and complete the work of colonization.

That the system will be attended with some sacrifices on the part of the slaveholders, which are to be regretted, need not be denied. What great and beneficial enterprise was ever accomplished without risk and sacrifice? But these sacrifices are distant, contingent, and inconsiderable. Assuming the year 1860 for the commencement of the system, all slaves born prior to that time would remain such during their lives, and the personal loss of the slave-holder would be only the difference in value of a female slave whose offspring, if she had any, born after the first day of January, 1860, should be free at the age of twenty-five, or should be slaves for life.

In the mean time, if the right to remove or sell the slaves out of the State should be exercised, that trifling loss would not be incurred. The slaveholder, after the commencement of the system, would lose the difference in value between slaves for life and slaves until the age of twenty-five. He might also incur some inconsiderable expense in rearing, from their birth, the issue of those who were to be free at twenty-five, until they were old enough to be apprenticed out; but as it is probable that they would be most generally bound to him, he would receive some indemnity for their services until they attained their majority.

Most of the evils, losses, and misfortunes of human life have some compensation or alleviation. The slaveholder is generally a land-holder, and I am persuaded that he would find, in the augmented value of his land, some, if not full indemnity for losses arising to him from emancipation and colonization. He would also liberally share in the general benefits, accuring to the whole State, from the extinction of slavery. These have been so often and so fully stated, that I will not, nor is it necessary to dwell upon them extensively. They may be summed up in a few words. We shall remove from among us the contaminating influences of a servile and degraded race, of different color; we shall enjoy the proud and conscious satisfaction of placing that race where they can enjoy the great blessings of liberty, and civil, political, and social equality; we shall acquire the advantage of the diligence, the fidelity, and the constancy, of free labor, instead of the carelessness, the infidelity, and the unsteadiness, of slave labor; we shall elevate the character of white labor, and elevate the social condition of the white laborer; augment the value of our lands, improve the agriculture of the State, attract capital from abroad to all the pursuits of commerce, manufacturers, and agriculture; redress, as far and as fast as we prudently could, any wrongs which the descendants of Africa have suffered at our hands; and we should demonstrate the sincerity with which we pay indiscriminate homage to the great cause of the liberty of the human race.

Kentucky enjoys high respect and honorable consideration throughout the Union and throughout the civilized world; but, in my humble opinion, no title which she has to the esteem and admiration of mankind, no deeds of her former glory, would equal, in greatness and grandeur, that of being the pioneer State in removing from her soil every trace of human slavery, and in establishing the descendants of Africa within her jurisdiction in the native land of their forefathers.

I have thus executed the promise I made, alluded to in the commencement of this letter; and I hope that I have done it calmly, free from intemperance, and so as to wound the sensibilities of none. I sincerely hope that the question may be considered and decided, without the influence of party or passion. I should be most happy to have the good fortune of coinciding in opinion with a majority of the people of Kentucky; but if there be a majority opposed to all schemes of gradual emancipation, however much I may regret it, my duty will be to bow in submission to their will.

If it be perfectly certain and manifest that such a majority exists, I should think it better not to agitate the question at all, since that, in that case, it would be useless, and might exercise a pernicious collateral influence upon the fair consideration of other amendments which may be proposed to our Constitution. If there be a majority of the people of Kentucky, at this time, adverse to touching the institution of slavery, as it now exists, we, who had thought and wished otherwise, can only indulge the hope that at some future time, under better auspices, and with the blessing of Providence, the cause which we have so much at heart may be attended with better success.

In any event, I shall have the satisfaction of having performed a duty to the State, to the subject, and to myself, by placing my sentiments permanently upon record.

With great regard, I am your friend and obedient servant,H. Clay.Richard Pindell, Esq.