Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

ceeding, which are relative to personal or private concerns? This we have seen has been attended to in a variety of cases, in the same plan. Adverting, therefore, to the substantial meaning of a bill of rights, it is absurd to allege that it is not found in the work of the convention."

After answering the objection, that it does not go far enough, he adds,

"Whence it must be apparent that much of what has been said on this subject rests merely on verbal and nominal distinctions, entirely foreign to the substance of the thing."

Among the final reasons for adopting the Constitution, Mr. Hamilton adds,—

"The additional securities to republican governments, to liberty, and to property, to be derived from the adoption of the plan, consists chiefly in the restraints which the preservation of the Union will impose upon local factions and insurrections, and upon that ambition of powerful individuals in single States, who might acquire credit and influence enough, from leaders and favorites, to become the despots of the people; in the diminution of the opportunities of foreign intrigue, which the dissolution of the confederacy would incite and facilitate; in the prevention of extensive military establishments, which could not fail to grow out of wars between the States in a disunited situation; in an express guaranty of a republican form of government to each; in the absolute and universal exclusion of titles of nobility; and in the precaution against the repetition of those practices, on the part of the State governments, which

1 Federalist, p. 481.

have undermined the foundation of property and credit, have planted mutual distrust in the breast of all classes of citizens, and have occasioned an almost universal prostration of morals."

From this it appears the conclusive reasons for adopting the Constitution, and the ones which were to cap the climax, were, the States were incapable of defending the individual's rights; they had not power to repel foreign invasions, or overcome the influences which ambitious men might obtain in a single State, or to check the outbreaks of the populace, or to overcome the jealousies that might arise between different States, and which would have a tendency to increase the military, and thereby endanger the good of society, its peace. and happiness.

CHAPTER VII.

EXTRACTS, ETC.

FROM THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE CONVENTION OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS.

WE will now enter upon the discussion had in the several conventions of the States, which were called to take into consideration the subject of adopting the Constitution as promulgated by the convention at Philadelphia, premising, however, the Constitution as adopted was an entirely different thing from what was anticipated by the generality of the people at large: they expected an improvement of the Confederation, not a new system of government, as the Constitution proposed.

In the debates on the Constitution in the convention of Massachusetts, Mr. King said, in the discussion of the third paragraph, 2d section, article 1st, "three fifths of all other persons:

"These persons meant slaves. By this rule is representation and taxation to be apportioned. And it was adopted because it was the language of all America. [That is, that representation and taxation should go together; the greater the representation, the greater the taxation.] According to the Confederation, ratified in 1781, the sums for the general welfare and defence should be apportioned according to the surveyed lands, and improvements thereon in the several States. But

it had never been in the power of congress to follow that rule, the returns from the several States being so very imperfect."1

On a question being asked by Mr. Widgery, “if a boy of six years of age was to be considered a freeman," Mr. King answered,

[ocr errors]

"All persons born free were to be considered freemen; and, to make the idea of taxation by numbers more intelligible, said five negro children of South Carolina are to pay as much tax as the three governors of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut." 3.

66

Judge Dana asked, 'Can that land flourish like this which is cultivated by the hands of freemen? and are not three of these independent freemen of more real advantage to the State than five of those poor slaves ? ' " 4

[ocr errors]

"Mr. Nason remarked, Mr. King ought to have gone further, and have said three of our children in the cradle are to be rated as high as five of the working negroes of Virginia, and it will then appear that this State will pay as great a tax for three children in the cradle as any of the Southern States for five hearty, working negroes; and, as it was hinted we had made a bad bargain before, we ought to make a better one now.

9995

"Mr. Dawes observed, the colored people of the Southern States must be considered as slaves or freemen; if the former, and consequently as so much property, why should it not be wholly represented? but our own laws. and Constitution consider blacks as freemen, and so, also, does our own natural justice. If, then, as freemen, they ought to be wholly represented. In either view, he could

'Elliot's Reports, vol. i. p. 56.

3 Idem, vol. i. p. 57.

5 Idem, vol. i. p. 58.

2 Idem, vol. i. p. 57.

4

Idem, vol. i. p. 58...

not see that northern men would suffer, but directly the contrary. He thought, however, that the passage ought to be considered in the convention with that other portion of the Constitution, that prohibits the slave-trade in 1808, and that it was left to the option of all the States to totally prohibit the introduction of slaves into any of the States; and he asked, what could the convention do more? The members of the Southern States, like ourselves, had their prejudices. It would not do to abolish slavery by an act of congress in a moment, and so destroy what our southern brethren considered as property. But we may say, that although slavery is not smitten by an apoplexy, yet it has received a mortal wound, and will die of consumption."

1

Messrs. King, Gore, and Parsons spoke of the advantage to the Northern States the apportionment of taxes gave them; as also the Hon. Judge Dana, who, in concluding his remarks, observed, "I would rather be annihilated than to give my voice for, or sign my name to, a Constitution which, in the least, would betray the liberties or interest of my country."2

It may, perhaps, be well to remark here, though. we have before entered pretty largely on this question, how completely the southern people have thrown off the advantage which our northern statesmen thought they had gained over the south by this system of taxation. Finding, as undoubtedly they must have done, how onerous it would be to pay a direct tax on each of their slaves, they immediately took advantage of the disposi

Elliot's Reports, vol. i. p. 60.

2 Idem, vol. i. p. 63.

« AnteriorContinuar »