be adopted by Virginia was not shaken.* Relieved from anxiety at home, he found time to watch the gathering clouds of revolution in Europe, and shaped in his own mind the foreign policy of the republic. His conclusions, which on New Year's day 1788 he confided to Jefferson, his future adviser on the foreign relations of the country, were in substance precisely as follows: The American revolution has spread through Europe a better knowledge of the rights of mankind, the privileges of the people, and the principles of liberty than has existed in any former period; a war in that quarter is likely to be kindled, especially between France and England; in the impending struggle an energetic general government must prevent the several states from involving themselves in the political disputes of the European powers. The situation of the United States is such as makes it not only unnecessary but extremely imprudent for them to take part in foreign quarrels. Let them wisely and properly improve the advantages which nature has given them, and conduct themselves with circumspection. By that policy, and by giving security to property and liberty, they will become the asylum of the peaceful, the industrious, and the wealthy from all parts of the civilized world.t

Nor did Washington cease his vigilant activity to confirm Virginia in federal opinions. Especially to Edmund Randolph, then governor of Virginia and in the height of his popularity, he addressed himself with convincing earnestness, and yet with a delicacy that seemed to leave the mind of Randolph to its own workings.

Madison, likewise, kept up with Randolph a most friendly and persuasive correspondence. As a natural consequence, the governor, who began to see the impossibility of obtaining amendments without endangering the success of the constitution, soon planted himself among its defenders; while Monroe, leaving his inconsistency unexplained, was drawn toward the adversaries of Madison.

* Washington to Lafayette, 10 January 1788.

Washington to Jefferson, 1 January 1788. Compare Washington to Knox, 10 January 1788. MS.

Washington to Edmund Randolph, 8 January 1788. Sparks, ix., 297.

The example of Massachusetts had great influence by its recommendation of amendments; and still more by the avowed determination of the defeated party honestly to support the decision of the majority. But while the more moderate of the malcontents "appeared to be preparing for a decent submission," and even Richard Henry Lee set bounds to his opposition,* the language of Henry was: "The other states cannot do without Virginia, and we can dictate to them what terms we please." "His plans extended contingently even to foreign alliances." +

The report from the federal convention agitated the people more than any subject since the first days of the revolution, and with a greater division of opinion. It was remarked that while in the seven northern states the principal officers of government and largest holders of property, the judges and lawyers, the clergy and men of letters, were almost without exception devoted to the constitution, in Virginia the bar and the men of the most culture and property were divided. In Virginia, too, where the mass of the people, though accustomed to be guided by their favorite statesmen on all new and intricate questions, now, on a question which surpassed all others in novelty and intricacy, broke away from their lead and followed a mysterious and prophetic influence which rose from the heart. The phenomenon was the more wonderful, as all the adversaries of the new constitution justified their opposition on the ground of danger to the liberties of the people.# And over all discussions, in private or in public, there hovered the idea that Washington was to lead the country safely along the untrodden path.

In the time preceding the election the men of Kentucky were made to fear the surrender of the Mississippi by the federal government; and the Baptists, the reunion of church and state. The election of Madison to the convention was

* Compare Cyrus Griffin to Thomas Fitzsimons, 15 February 1788.

+ Carrington to Madison, 18 January 1788.

Monroe to Madison, 13 October 1787.

#Madison, i., 365, 366.

James Madison, Sr., to his son, 30 January 1788; Semple's Baptists in Virginia, 76, 77.

held to be indispensable.* "He will be the main pillar of the constitution," thought Jefferson; "but though an immensely powerful one, it is questionable whether he can bear the weight of such a host." But the plan for a southern confederacy was crushed by the fidelity of South Carolina; and Washington, who had foreseen the issue, cheered Madison on with good words: "Eight affirmatives without a negative carry weight of argument if not eloquence with it that would cause even 'the unerring sister' to hesitate." +

On the day appointed for the meeting of the convention a quorum was present in Richmond. It was auspicious that Edmund Pendleton, the chancellor, was unanimously chosen its president. The building which would hold the most listeners was made the place of meeting, but Henry was alarmed at the presence of short-hand reporters from the Philadelphia press, as he wished" to speak the language of his soul" # without the reserve of circumspection. During the period of the confederation, which had existed but little more than seven years, it had become known that slavery and its industrial results divided the South from the North; and this conviction exercised a subtle influence.

George Mason, following the advice of Richard Henry Lee, and the precedent of Massachusetts, proposed that no question relating to the constitution should be propounded until it should have been discussed clause by clause; and this was acquiesced in unanimously. The debates which ensued cannot be followed in the order of time, for Henry broke through every rule; but an outline must be given of those which foreshadowed the future.

Patrick Henry dashed instantly into the battle, saying: "The constitution is a severance of the confederacy. Its language, 'WE THE PEOPLE,' is the institution of one great consolidated national government of the people of all the states, instead of a government by compact with the states for its agents. The people gave the convention no power to use their name.” A Washington in Rives, ii., 547.

*

Jefferson, Randolph's ed., ii., 270; in Rives, ii., 558.

Washington to Madison, 2 May 1788.

# Penn. Packet, 12 June 1788.

R. H. Lee to G. Mason, 7 May 1788. Life of R. H. L., ii., 89.

A Elliot, iii., 21-23.

"The question," said Randolph, "is now between union and no union, and I would sooner lop off my right arm than consent to a dissolution of the union." * "It is a national government," said George Mason, losing his self-control and becoming inconsistent. "It is ascertained by history that there never was one government cver a very extensive country without destroying the liberties of the people. The power of laying direct taxes changes the confederation. The general government being paramount and more powerful, the state governments must give way to it; and a general consolidated government is one of the worst curses that can befall a nation.” †

6

"There is no quarrel between government and liberty," said Pendleton; "the former is the shield and protector of the latter. The expression We the people' is a common one, and with me is a favorite. Who but the people can delegate powers, or have a right to form government? The question must be between this government and the confederation; the latter is no government at all. Common danger, union, and the spirit of America carried us through the war, and not the confederation of which the moment of peace showed the imbecility. Government, to be effectual, must have complete powers, a legislature, a judiciary, and executive. No gentleman in this committee would agree to vest these three powers in one body. The proposed government is not a consolidated government. It is on the whole complexion of it a government of laws and not of men." +

Madison explained at large that the constitution is in part a consolidated union, and in part rests so completely on the states that its very life is bound up in theirs. And on another day he added: "The powers vested in the proposed government are not so much an augmentation of powers in the general government as a change rendered necessary for the purpose of giving efficacy to those which were vested in it before." #

The opposition set no bounds to their eulogy of the British constitution as compared with the proposed one for America. "The wisdom of the English constitution," said Monroe, "has given a share of the legislation to each of the three branches, Elliot, iii., 25-26. Elliot., iii., 29-33. Elliot, iii., 35-41. #Elliot, iii., 86-97, and 259.

*

which enables it to defend itself and to preserve the liberty of the people. In the plan for America I can see no real checks." * "We have not materials in this country," said Grayson, "for such a government as the British monarchy; but I would have a president for life, choosing his successor at the same time; a senate for life, with the powers of the house of lords; and a triennial house of representatives, with the powers of the house of commons in England."+ "How natural it is," said Henry, "when comparing deformities to beauty, to be struck with the superiority of the British government to the proposed system. In England self-love, self-interest stimulates the executive to advance the prosperity of the nation. Men cannot be depended on without self-love. Your president will not have the same motives of self-love to impel him to favor your interests. His political character is but transient. In the British government the sword and purse are not united in the same hands; in this system they are. Does not infinite security result from a separation?" +

Madison on the fourteenth replied: "There never was, there never will be, an efficient government in which both the sword and purse are not vested, though they may not be given to the same member of government. The sword is in the hands of the British king; the purse in the hands of the parliament. It is so in America, as far as any analogy can exist. When power is necessary and can be safely lodged, reason commands its cession. From the first moment that my mind was capable of contemplating political subjects I have had a uniform zeal for a well-regulated republican government. The establishment of it in America is my most ardent desire. If the bands of the government be relaxed, anarchy will produce despotism. Faction and confusion preceded the revolutions in Germany; faction and confusion produced the disorders and commotions of Holland. In this commonwealth, and in every state in the union, the relaxed operation of the government has been sufficient to alarm the friends of their country. The rapid increase of population strongly calls for a republican or ganization. There is more responsibility in the proposed gov ernment than in the English. Our representatives are chosen *Elliot, iii., 218, 219. Elliot, iii., 279. Elliot, iii., 387, 388.