longer, on trust, than the civilized world will permit it to continue. We should both blush and be ashamed for our ingratitude to those men who assisted us in our distress, on the ground that this country should be a land where the people of all nations should be secure in their individual rights, and every man be able to sit under his own vine and fig-tree, without any to molest or make afraid. Will there, then, be no lawyer who will undertake the task to maintain an action of the kind before the highest court of the country? Can there be no case, either as original or appellate, that can be searched out, and made to be the pioneer of a succession of cases, till freedom to individuals is universally acknowledged? We hope there will be, and the time will not be distant when a decision can be had, and the rights of the slave acknowledged. They can certainly appeal to the observations here made by Mr. Mason, that the courts have power over the subject; that slavery does come within their jurisdiction; and that not only Mr. Mason, but the whole of the Virginia delegation, silently admitted the fact; and, when the suggestion was made, the subject was dropped, as too delicate for further discussion. Can and need there be farther proof that such is the case? Were the men of this assembly too insignificant to be authority in the case ? Was not Madison, Randolph, Munroe, Nicholas, Grayson, Henry, Mason, capable. of discernment?

My colored friends, it is a pity none of you ever discovered this truth, and have not applied your

selves to urge upon the consideration of the courts the wrongs under which you have suffered, and caused them as we think they must have done to have rendered a judgment in your favor.

We are aware it is said the consideration which was given the free States for the continuance of slavery, or, rather, that the three fifths representation should take place, besides the preventing congress passing navigation acts, was, that they in general were small States, while the slave States were comparatively large; consequently they admitted the small States to an equal representation on the floor of the senate. But this cannot amount to much, for it is well known the States had an equal representation under the Confederacy; that is, one State had as many representatives as another, and therefore they did surrender much when they allowed the larger States a greater representation in the house of representatives; for we have seen Mr. Martin, of Maryland, says some of the small States expressly instructed their delegates not to give up an equal representation; as, if they did, they would be swallowed up by the larger States; but they finally consented to the present arrangement. There are now, however, as many large free as there are large slave States; but this, in fact, was not the case: not passing the navigation act was alone a consideration for permitting the slave-trade to be continued till 1808. No other contract, that we have yet been able to discover, was ever entered into the size of the States had no relation to the subject.

Mr. Henry, on the resolution for the ratification of the Constitution, with certain amendments, said,

"The honorable member must forgive me for declaring my dissent from it; because, if I understand it rightly, it admits the new system is defective, and most capitally; for, immediately after the proposed ratification, there comes a declaration that the paper before you is not intended to violate any of these three great rights, -the liberty of religion, the liberty of the press, and the trial by jury. What is the inference, when you enumerate the rights you are to enjoy? That those not enumerated are to be relinquished. There are only three things to be retained, religion, freedom of the press, and jury trial. Will not the ratification carry every thing, without excepting these three things? Will not all the world pronounce that we intended to give up all the rest? Every thing, by way of right, is comprehended in these three things. Your subsequent amendments only go to these three amendments." 1

66

Among the 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 interest. 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

'Elliot's Reports, vol. ii. p. 430.

means in 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; 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 every black man must fight? Did we not see a little of this in the last war? We were not so hard pushed as to make emancipation general; but acts of assembly passed, that every slave that would go to the army should be free. Another thing will bring this 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 urbanity which I trust will distinguish America, and the necessity of national defence, let all these things operate on their minds, and 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 these call for the abolition of slavery? May they not 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 freedom forbids its abolition. I deny 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 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 tran

quillity given away. I repeat it again, that it would rejoice my very soul that every one of my fellow-beings were emancipated. As we ought to acknowledge with gratitude 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 rigors 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 into the hands of those who have no similarity of situation with us. This is a local matter, and I can see no propriety in subjecting it to congress."

These expressions of Mr. Henry probably explain the cause of his action, and his inconsistencies it was that the sympathies of a people afar off- a people who were not of them would undertake to interfere in their domestic concerns. This he did not want to have done: he saw the Constitution gave this power, and, if we believe him sincere in his deploring slavery, he wished to have the sole control over the subject. He labored under the false idea there was property in man, and that the State would be reduced to poverty if the slave should be emancipated.

'Elliot's Reports, vol. ii. p. 431.

In