the equal rights of mankind, and habituates to tyranny and oppression. It was further urged that, by this system of government, every State is to be protected both from foreign invasion and from domestic insurrections; and, from this consideration, it was of the utmost importance it should have the power to restrain the importation of slaves, since in proportion as the number of slaves increased in any State, in the same proportion is the State weakened and exposed to foreign invasion and domestic insurrection; and by so much less will it be able to protect itself against either, and therefore by so much, want aid from, and be a burden to, the Union.

"It was further said, that, in this system, as we were giving the general government power, under the idea of national character, or national interest, to regulate even our weights and measures, and have prohibited all possibility of emitting paper money, and passing insolvent laws, &c. it must appear still more extraordinary that we prohibited the government from interfering with the slave-trade, than which nothing could more affect our national honor and interest.

"These reasons influenced me, both in the committee and in the convention, most decidedly to oppose and vote against the clause, as it now makes part of the system.'

Mr. Martin thought by continuing the traffic we should become indifferent to the common rights of men, and, as their own liberties were considered established, they had already become less sensible to these rights, and that in those States where the trade had already been prohibited, when they found that in their national character they

1Secret Proceedings, p. 64.

must 'share in its disgrace,' they would also wish to share in its benefits."

We will observe, here, if there was such an opposition to the continuance of the slave-trade for twenty years, when the Confederation had no control over it, and it was then in the power of each State to continue it to an indefinite extent, and this power was taken from them, and the whole subject was then placed, as is here intimated, in the power of congress, to put a stop to it in that time, and even a proposition to make preparation for the emancipation of the slaves already in the country, can it be said that these men, or even a majority in the convention, went to work to guarantee its continued existence? No; the excuse was, there was a considerable property engaged in the trade, and more laborers were wanted at the South; and, by a mistaken policy, or a determined wickedness on the part of some, it was suffered to exist, in order that the one might be supplied, and the other have time to be withdrawn, and placed where it could be lucratively employed. No guaranty, we are assured, could have been obtained, or would have been given; and, if the members of the convention would have done it by any of their acts, we shall by and by see the people, by the recommendation of their conventions, and the action of congress, put a veto upon it; and it was urged, in one of these conventions, as a reason why the Constitution should be adopted, that it had given congress a power over the subject that was not possessed under the

Confederation. Without, however, stopping here to argue this point, we will leave the observations of Mr. Martin, and enter upon those made in the convention. We will, however, observe, there does not appear to be any thing reported to have been said on any of the articles that has special reference to slavery. Our quotations, therefore, must comprise those observations only that speak of the general object for which the government was formed. The report of the proceedings of the convention was made by Chief Justice Yates, of New York, for his own use, and was copied from his papers, after his death, by Mr. John Lansing, Jr. There were four propositions made for the consideration of the convention. Mr. Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, offered a series of resolutions as principles on which the Confederation might be amended. In his ideas of government, he would. include freemen only. Mr. Charles Pinckney (S. C.) offered a draft of a federal government : in this draft there is no distinction made; the word "free" is not used before persons. In Mr. Patterson's (N. J.) resolutions it was; in Mr, Hamilton's (N. Y.) it was not.

Mr. C. Pinckney is reported to have said on the 4th resolve,

"It will be necessary to the people of this country. no adequate idea what kind their rights and liberties. rank and fortune in America than in any other country under the sun; and this is likely to continue as long

inquire into the situation of Without this, we can have of government will secure There is more equality of

as the unappropriated western lands remain unsettled. They are equal in rights, nor is the extreme of poverty to be seen in any part of the Union.1

From this situation he thought we could not draw any examples from the governments of Europe; and, there being so few men of fortune, they could not establish a nobility, and equality of others would not admit of the distinction; he therefore laid it down as a settled principle, that equality of condition was a leading axiom in our government." He thought commerce could never interfere with our government, nor give complexion to its councils." He thought we could not copy from Greece or Rome; "we differed from the whole. Our situation was unexampled; and it is in our power, on different grounds, to secure civil and religious liberty; and, when we secure these, we secure every thing that is necessary to establish happiness."

He thought "there might be three classes in this country first, the professional men; second, the commercial men; third, the landed interest; " that the latter would be the governing power, and the other two would be dependent on them. He thought a national government would not suit. them, and, consequently, there would be a mixed interest; and, in that view, there would "in fact be but one order." "Ours must be suitable to the people, and we were the only people who had sense enough to appoint delegates to establish a

1 Secret Proceedings, p. 161.

general government, and he thought the proposition from Virginia would satisfy the people. But a general government must not be dependent on State government."

These observations are quoted, not because they all apply to the case in controversy, but to show that in them there is a continual looking forward to an equality of condition, for which they were aiming, and on which the government was to be founded.

Mr. Wilson observed, on the same section, that,

"The magnitude of the subject was embarrassing; the great system of Henry IV. of France, aided by the greatest of statesmen, is small when compared to the fabric we are now about to erect. In laying the stone amiss we may injure the superstructure; and what would be the consequence if the corner-stone should be loosely placed? It is improper that the State legislature should have the power contemplated to be given them. A citizen of America should be considered in two points of view, as a citizen of the general government, and as a citizen of the particular State in which he may reside. We ought to consider in what character he acts in forming a general government. I am both a citizen of Pennsylvania and of the United States. I must lay aside my State connections, and act for the general good of the whole. We must forget our local habits and attachments. The general government should not depend on State governments. That the powers of peace, war, treaties, coinage, and regulating commerce, ought to reside in that government. And, if we reason in this manner, we shall soon see the impropriety of admitting