USA > Virginia > A history of Virginia : from its discovery and settlement by Europeans to the present time. Vol. II > Part 20
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33
308
A CHANGE NEEDED.
[CHAP. V.
as France and Holland. All these expected to be paid, if not the principal, at least the interest of their debts; but Congress had no power to raise money ; the states had the power but not the will ; and the effect was national disgrace and humilia- tion. The republic, from which so much had been hoped, became contemptible in the eyes of the old world, and of her own most virtuous citizens. If there was no positive repudiation of debts at this time, there occurred what was equivalent,-a refusal to take any steps to meet payments which were justly due. None of the states complied with the entreaties of Congress ; Rhode Island was specially intractable, and New Jersey at one time passed an act expressly refusing the aid demanded.ª
The Federal Government sought by every means within its reach to sustain the national character ; but it was impotent; its arms were pinioned. France looked on in sorrow and doubt. Holland began to fear she would lose her money. English monopolists secretly rejoiced in the failure of the great republican experiment, and were already busy in seeking gain from its downfall. Under these circumstances, the wise men of America could no longer doubt that a change was necessary if they would avert ruin. All believed that the " Articles of Confederacy" needed revising, and many thought that the proper remedy could be found in the adoption of a new and well-digested Constitution. A happy concurrence of events led
a Madison Papers, ii. 711-713; Virginia Debates, 1788, page 32.
309
GOVERNMENT.
1786.]
to the last, and it must now, for a season, engross our thoughts.
It is unfortunate that man should have found it necessary to yield himself at all to the dominion of his fellow-mortals. There is but one perfect go- vernment in existence, and that is the government of God. This is a pure monarchy. The Sove- reign unites in himself all powers, and infinite per- fections. He is all-wise to conceive proper laws, all-benevolent to enact them, and almighty to en- force them. And had his moral creatures on earth retained the purity originally bestowed upon them, his dominion would have been the only rule they would have needed. There would have been no necessity for subordinate jurisdictions, for all men would have pursued the path of virtue. No un- holy passion, no selfish motive, no craving appetite, would have seduced them from their duty. In every thought and feeling, and therefore in every word and act, they would have been perfectly con- formed to Divine law. Not the slightest inequality would have disturbed the moral mechanism. But man has become depraved, and his very depravity compels him to submit to human government. The Deity is no longer obeyed; he does not directly in- terpose ; he reserves the enforcement of his law for the retributions of the future. And as men have forgotten God, they need a government which shall come in immediate contact with them, and restrain, in some measure, their wickedness; otherwise so- ciety could not long subsist. The existence of kings, rulers, magistrates, law-makers, and statute-
310
GOVERNMENT.
[CHAP. V.
books, courts of justice, and executive officers, are all so many illustrations of the great revealed doc- trine of human depravity. The infidel sees this as well as the believer, and in admitting it, uncon- sciously bears testimony to the truth.'
But though man is now compelled to establish government on earth, it does not follow that it should be a system of pure monarchy, like the government of God. The same innate wickedness which re- quires the establishment of human sovereignty, will make dangerous its exercise by any single man. In order to secure the happiness of its sub- jects, government must have the three qualities of wisdom, goodness, power. Wisdom to suggest the best means of promoting the public welfare, good- ness to impel to their adoption, and power to make them efficacious. It must have a head to direct, a heart to feel, and a hand to execute. And the only reason why the Divine Government is perfect, is because it at once unites, in their fulness, all these qualities. But it will be impossible to find them in any one of the three principal forms of sovereignty that have been known on earth. An absolute king may be powerful, but he may be a Sardanapalus in folly, or a Nero in depravity ; an oligarchy may have wisdom, but it may be corrupt and impotent like that of Venice; a simple demo- cracy may put forth some signs of virtue, but it
a "Society is produced by our in its best state, is but a necessary wants, and government by our evil; in its worst state, an intole- rable one." Paine's Common Sense, Polit. Works, i. 19. wickedness. Society in every state is a blessing ; but government, even
311
DEBATE IN PERSIA.
1786.]
will have neither wisdom nor strength. Therefore a mixed government, combining in proper propor- tions the incidents of the three great forms, has been found to be the best, perhaps the only system that promises to secure the welfare of the human race.
Two thousand three hundred and sixty-eight years ago, a debate on government took place, which proved that the distinctions between the three prevalent forms were then well known, and yet neither at that time, nor for twenty-one cen- turies thereafter, did speculations on the subject lead to results of practical value. The " father of history" tells us, that after the death of Cambyses, King of Persia, and of Smerdis, the Magus, who by fraud had obtained the throne, a meeting of seven of the highest chiefs of the kingdom was held to discuss public affairs. They were first to decide the question of government. Otanes opened the debate, and in a set speech urged the claims of democracy ; he reminded them of the insolence, the injustice, the debauchery and cruelty of kings, how often they had violated the chastity of women, and put to death innocent men; he told them that if the magistrates were elected by the people, they would serve them faithfully, and always be mode- rate in their conduct.ª
Then followed Megabyzus, who was in favour of aristocracy. Like Otanes, he disapproved of mo- narchy, but he equally distrusted the people; he thought the multitude would always be stupid and
a Herodotus, edit. Lipsiæ, 1839, lib. iii. cap. 80.
312
-DEBATE IN PERSIA.
[CHAP. V.
insolent; a blind monster, governed by nothing but its appetites and passions. He urged them to adopt a government conducted by a few virtuous men, who would by their wisdom provide for the public happiness.a
Next came Darius, an open advocate for mo- narchy. He agreed with Megabyzus, that the people at large could not be trusted ; but he feared also the factions of an oligarchy. He contended that a king could keep his own counsel, but that among several, emulation would prevail, jealousies would arise, sedition would creep in ; hence mur- der, and at last a necessity for a monarch.b
This last counsel prevailed. By a vote of four to three, monarchy was selected as the form of their government; and after this wise decision, they adopted even a wiser mode of choosing the king to whom their liberties were to be entrusted ! They resolved that all should assemble the next morning at a certain spot, and that he whose horse neighed first should be their monarch ! As a closing commentary, we may add that Darius, triumphant in debate, was victor also in the equine contest. Taking learned counsel of his groom, he brought the charms of a young mare to act upon his steed, who on reaching the spot in the morn- ing, forthwith neighed aloud !' Thus was made the King of Persia.
Until the American Revolution had wrought out
a Herodotus, lib. iii. cap. 81.
b Herodotus, lib. iii. cap. 82, pages 279-283; see also Burlamaqui's
Nat. and Polit. Law, ii. 64-66, edit. 1823; Nugent's Trans.
" Herodotus, lib. iii. cap. 85, page 283.
313
BRITISH CONSTITUTION.
1786.]
its principles, men had never learned so to combine the elements of "the three forms," as to obtain at once strength for the government and liberty for the people. The British Constitution had unques- tionably approached more nearly to this than any other, and there were many on each side of the Atlantic, who believed it to embody all that the wisdom of man could accomplish for human sove- reignty. This Constitution was not written-that is, it was not drawn out on paper in articles, and sections, and clauses,-but it was written in the history of five centuries,-in the charter wrested from John, in the blood which ran from the scaffold of Charles the First, in the compact between Wil- liam of Orange and the people who received him. Yet this government was a monarchy, and it could never have been fitted to the wants of the Ameri- can nation.
When the defects of the Confederacy became apparent, the change required was one which would, of necessity, give greater strength to govern- ment; and it was this fact that placed the conduct of America in bold relief, and caused it to differ from all the experience of the past. The sovereign- ties of the Old World had been apparently built up by accident, but whenever a change did occur, it always involved a struggle of the government against the people. The government sought to increase or to retain its powers; the people sought to weaken them. It is believed that the measures of 1787 and '88, in the United States, present the first instance in which a nation of four millions of
314
VIRGINIA'S
[CHAP. V.
people prepared to reject a weak, and to assume a strong government. To do this immediately after emerging from a bloody war, waged for liberty, and to accomplish it not in enthusiasm or passion, but by a written constitution, definite in all points, and bearing perpetual testimony that their conduct was deliberate ! such a scene exhibits the highest triumph of reason; it is a standing proof that the people, in a proper sense, are capable of self- government. It merited the reward it has actually gained, in producing a system of sovereignty, beautiful in its very complication, and happily combining the essentials of wisdom, virtue, and power.
In this work, we have so long been viewing Vir- ginia alone, first as a Colony and then as a State, that we shall be the better able to understand the relation she bears to the Federal Government, which was soon to be adopted. During the colo- nial period, she had been governed by her Assem- blies, subject to the negative of the King, and to the general control of the British Parliament. But the moment the dominion of England was thrown off, she became sovereign, possessing within her- self every power that can belong to an independent nation. She had a right to erect such a govern- ment as she pleased, and exercised it by adopting a Bill of Rights and Constitution, in which her people first reserved certain privileges and immu- nities to themselves, and then vested the residue of sovereignty in their rulers. And her people and her government together form the complex idea
315
SOVEREIGNTY.
1786.]
which, in this work, we express by the word " State." If after this, she deemed it expedient to unite with other states, and to form a Federal Government, it is evident that, as to herself, such government would have only the powers she dele- gated to it, and that she would lose only the powers she consented to resign. For the federal system would have no natural existence ; it would derive its being and its power entirely from the people and the state governments; from the people, who had reserved to themselves some of the incidents of sovereignty, and from the state governments, which held the remainder. There- fore, prior to the adoption of a Federal Constitution, her people and her government together, held all the powers of sovereignty that could be exercised within the limits of Virginia. The paper contain- ing this Constitution, if it gained her assent, would define the extent to which these powers were to be affected for the future. If she granted a power to the general government, and denied it to herself, then that government could exercise the power, and she could not; if she granted a power, and yet did not deny it to herself, then the general government might exercise the power, and she might also; their powers would be concurrent. If on any subject of legislation she granted no power to the Federal Government, then from no other source could that government possibly obtain it, and an attempt to exercise it would be vain. A most delicate task, therefore, was the making of this Constitution. Virginia saw not the full results
316
CONVENTION PROPOSED.
[CHAP. V.
of her course, when she introduced the measures which led to the new government.
In March, 1785, the Legislature had appointed Commissioners to meet similar delegates from Ma- ryland, at Alexandria, and to form, if possible, a compact between the two states, as to the naviga- tion of the Potomac and Pocomoke rivers, and as to trade in the upper part of Chesapeake Bay. While at Mount Vernon, the Commissioners resolved to recommend the appointment of deputies from all the states, to meet at some convenient time and place, and suggest measures as to trade and com- merce for the benefit of the Union.a On the 21st January, 1786, Virginia met this suggestion by appointing deputies, and in September, Edmund Randolph, St. George Tucker, and James Madison, joined Commissioners from four other states at An- napolis. They had not long debated, ere they found that improvement in trade was beyond their reach, while the federate government remained as it was; accordingly, they recommended that the states should appoint Commissioners to form a Convention in Philadelphia, in May, 1787, and there to devise and suggest such changes and im- provements as might be necessary for the Articles of Union. Acting in accordance with this advice, on the 4th of December, Virginia elected seven de- puties, to meet those appointed by the other states, for the purpose of " devising and discussing all such alterations and farther provisions as may be neces-
a Marshall's Washington, edit. 1832, ii .- 105.
b Marshall, ii. 122, 123; Madison Papers, ii. 697.
317
FEDERAL CONVENTION.
1787.]
sary to render the Federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of the Union."a
(1787, May 25.) At the appointed time the Con- vention assembled in Philadelphia. Deputies were present from all the states except Rhode Island ; with her wonted intractability, she had refused to concur. From Virginia, the Commissioners were George Washington, Edmund Randolph, John Blair, James Madison, George Mason, George Wythe, and James McClurg. General Washing- ton was elected President of the body. Mr. Madi- son had determined to preserve notes of a debate, which he foresaw would be one of the most impor- tant that men had ever conducted. He took his seat in a suitable place in front of the President's chair, and losing no time either in or out of the meetings, he wrote a clear record of the discussion, which, since his death, has been given to the public.
It would be foreign to our purpose, to give even a rapid sketch of these celebrated debates, but a single allusion may show, that the wisest of states- men cannot look into futurity. From the whole course of reasoning adopted by the speakers on state interests, it is evident that they believed that the small states were in danger of being devoured by the large. Hence the struggles to obtain for all the states an equal representation, which finally re- sulted in the judicious clause which made the Senate the peculiar guardian of state rights. What
a Madison Papers, ii. 706. Mr. Madison was himself the author of this resolution.
318
EXCITEMENT.
[CHAP. V.
conflict of interest would have induced the large states to prey upon their small neighbours, it is not easy to discover, but this fear filled the minds of many delegates from Connecticut and New Jersey, Maryland and Delaware. Luther Martin, of Ma- ryland, spoke two days on the subject, and ex- hausted all appeals from law and conscience in maintaining the rights of the little members.a Sub- sequent experience has shown, that the conflict has been not between the large and the small states, but between the northern and the southern, the free and the slave, the manufacturing and the pro- ducing. Mr. Madison alone seems to have appre- hended this tendency.b
On the 17th September, the labours of the Con- vention closed; they had prepared a Form of Go- vernment which was now to be submitted to the people. Of the Virginia delegates, only George Washington, James Madison, and John Blair, signed the Constitution. The others all disap- proved of it on points concerning which they could admit no compromise, though afterwards two of them at least became advocates for its adoption.c
The Form of Government having been engrossed and duly authenticated, was to be debated in Con- ventions elected by the people of the individual states, and by them ratified or rejected. In Vir- ginia, the highest excitement and anxiety prevailed ; we may judge from the division among the dele-
a Madison Papers, ii. 974-977.
b Ibid, ii. 978-983.
c Governor Randolph and Mr.
Wythe, Virginia Debates, 1788, 419, 420, and passim.
319
EXCITEMENT.
1787.]
gates, how serious would probably be the conflict of opinion in the masses of society from which they came. Preparations were immediately made to elect delegates from the several counties to serve in the State Convention, which was to decide upon the new government. Deep feelings were roused ; the people were stirred to the soul; meetings were held in all parts of the state, and every where the one great theme was the Plan of Union. It is said that even in the churchyard, and on the Sabbath, the absorbing subject could not be suppressed ; at home and abroad, in public and private, men thought, spoke, contended concerning little save the States and the Confederacy ; the checks and the balances; the executive; the legislative; the judiciary.ª In America the people have long gloried in the privilege of meeting in popular assemblies, and hearing debated before them all matters affect- ing their interests; but we have reason to believe that the discussions of 1787 and '88 were the first general displays of the kind that Virginia had known, and thus, in addition to their other charms, they had the zest of novelty. Orators travelled abroad, sending messages before them to call the people together, and to invite a contest with some opponent. Thousands assembled at the day and place appointed, and when we remember what minds were then in the state, we readily believe that these mental tournaments were equal in bril- liancy to the shock of steel-clad man and horse, in the days of knight-errantry. .
* Wirt, 186.
320
CONVENTION IN VIRGINIA.
[CHAP. V.
(1788.) On the 2d day of June, the Convention assembled at the public buildings in Richmond, and prepared to enter upon its high duties. When fully organized, this body contained one hundred and sixty-eight members, and its character for talents and patriotism has become a part of our proverbial knowledge. It will not be necessary to give a preliminary sketch even of the more promi- nent individuals who composed it, inasmuch as they have often been under our notice in years through which we have passed, and as they will successively present themselves upon the stage in the debate that is to follow. Edmund Pendleton, venerable in years, yet still unclouded in mind, was unanimously elected President, John Beckley was made Secretary, and Rev. Abner Waugh was appointed Chaplain, to read morning prayers.a
Then, after some preliminaries, commenced the struggle. In its very threshold, Patrick Henry in- sisted that the Federal Convention had exceeded its powers : appointed merely to revise the old system, it had concocted one perfectly new; but Mr. Pen- dleton answered, that from whatever source the proposed form had come, the people had sent them to decide upon it, and that if it had "dropt from one of the planets," it was yet competent for them to accept it.b With great propriety it was resolved, in the beginning of the debate, that the Constitution should be discussed regularly, article by article, and clause by clause, but this rule was wholly dis- regarded in practice, and more than half the session
ª Virginia Debates, 1788, page 13. b Ibid. 17, 38.
321
PATRICK HENRY.
1788.]
1
passed before the parts were taken up in natural order. The minds of members were too full of the whole subject to be confined for debate to an iso- lated clause. They sought to grapple with each other throughout the length and breadth of the field; those who defended the Constitution, pre- sented it as a system beautifully adapted to their wants, and well fitted to cover the chasm left by the Confederation ; those who opposed it, declaimed against it as a monster, dangerous in his single traits, and in his full developement.
This free mode of discussion made their conflicts animated and keen. The combatants darted from point to point with the quickness of thought; they used every weapon that the laws of honourable warfare would admit,-the pointed sarcasm, the witty jest, the vivid flash of repartee, the trenchant blade of argument, the thunder of declamation. From time to time the battle grew hot, and passion rose high. Mr. Henry bore down with vigour upon Edmund Randolph, criticised his expressions with severity, and attributed to him inconsistency in opposing the government in Philadelphia, and yet supporting it at home. To this the Governor re- plied with deep feeling, and retorting the charge, used the words, " If our friendship must fall, let it fall like Lucifer, never to rise again.". Yet mutual concessions soon restored peace between them ; great minds cannot long cherish malice against those they are compelled to respect.
The large liberty allowed in the first part of the
* Virginia Debates, 1788, p. 140.
VOL. II.
21
322
GEORGE NICHOLAS.
[CHAP. V.
debate, soon brought the whole body of the Con- stitution, in detached members, to the view of the House. They debated in a committee of all, and George Wythe was generally in the chair. The disputants passed, quick as lightning, from standing armies to militia trainings, from taxes to treaties, from disunion to consolidation, from the " ten miles square" to the mouth of the Mississippi. But gradually, as the first overflow of feeling and argu- ment exhausted itself, the debate assumed a more regular form; thought was condensed, logic was triumphant, and truth was unfolded.
George Nicholas had opened the argument of the general subject, in a speech of high order for clearness of detail, and strength of reasoning. He maintained that the democratic feature of the Con- stitution was all that could be desired ; that the basis of the people was broad and permanent. He showed an intimate acquaintance with the British representative system, and drew a happy contrast between the delusive democracy which apparently elects the House of Commons, and the real repub- licanism of Congress.ª Through the whole con- test he was the calm advocate for the government, and did much for its adoption.
Governor Randolph held a position peculiar, and not a little embarrassing. He had been so much displeased with some parts of the Constitution, that he had refused to sign it; nevertheless, when he found that eight states had adopted it, and that party spirit threatened to rend asunder the Union, he threw
a Debates, 18, 26-28.
323
1788.]
RANDOLPH-LEE-CORBIN.
aside minor objections, and lent his powers to the support of the plan. In his speeches he exposed the defects of the "Confederacy" with searching skill, and after becoming warmed in the cause, he seemed to lose sight even of the difficulties which had before pressed upon him. It is certain that his arguments were among the best for the entire system that were delivered during the debate, and at its close he had a right to claim from pos- terity a verdict affirming the soundness of his motives.ª
General Henry Lee, of Westmoreland, was pro- minent in supporting the plan. He was the well- known " Legion Harry," of Revolutionary times ; he had often led his dragoons to the charge, and crossed sabres with tories and Englishmen ; yet he was withal a fine scholar, and a competent states- man. His speeches sometimes exhibited the spirit of the camp and the battle-ground ; he was fond of personal encounter, and took special delight in throwing himself before the breach made by the great guns of Patrick Henry.b His firm sense, and military knowledge, made him a valuable ally to those who possessed only civic talents.
Francis Corbin sustained the plan. Without the genius and the eloquence of others, he had a well-balanced mind, and habits of industry which brought masses of historic facts to his aid. He spoke strongly of the derangement of finance, and reminded the House of a motion introduced into the Legislature in 1784, to `compel the states by a Debates, 466. b Ibid., 41, 197, 238.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.