USA > Virginia > The history of the Virginia federal convention of 1788, with some account of eminent Virginians of that era who were members of the body, Vol. I > Part 24
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 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39
other Poems"; "The Country," a poem; "The Life of James L. Pet- tigru," (New York, 1866), and is supposed to have been the author of a narrative poem entitled " Marion." Colonel William Grayson, by his will, emancipated all negroes owned by him who were born after the Declaration of Independence. The executors of his will were: Benj. Orr Grayson, Robert Hanson Harrison, and it was witnessed by Spence Grayson .- Benjamin Orr Grayson married Miss Bronaugh. He was the second of Armistead Thomson Mason in the fatal duel of the latter with his cousin, John Mason McCarty .- ED.
184 This fear of the House, if I may so call it, was plainly perceptible in the manner of those who came forth early in the debate on the basis of representation in the Convention of 1829-30. There was a tremu- lousness even in Randolph in his first speech. Other men of real ' ability absolutely failed in that debate ; but, as the fear of the House wore off, and the debate passed from the basis question into a more limited range, the number and the freedom of the speakers were quite as great as was desirable, and the same result to a certain extent will presently appear in this body.
W
212
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
manner as to throw the unpopular ones on the back lands, to divide the rest of the domestic debt among the different States, and to call for requisitions only for the interest of the foreign debt. If, contrary to this maxim, force is necessary to govern men, I then did propose as an alternative, not a monarchy like that of Great Britain, but a milder government; one which, under the idea of a general corruption of manners and the con- sequent necessity of force, should be as gentle as possible. I showed, in as strong a manner as I could, some of the principal
defects in the Constitution. The greatest defect is the opposition For let of the component parts to the interest of the whole. gentlemen ascribe its defects to as many causes as their imagina- tions may suggest, this is the principal and radical one. I urged that to remedy the evils which must result from this new gov- ernment, a more equal representation in the legislature, and proper checks against abuse, were indispensably necessary. I do not pretend to propose for your adoption the plan of govern- ment which I mentioned as an alternative to a monarchy, in case mankind were incapable of governing themselves. I only meant that if it were once established that force was necessary to gov- ern men, that such a plan would be more eligible for a free peo- ple than the introduction of crowned heads and nobles. Having premised thus much to obviate misconstruction, I shall proceed to the clause before us with this observation, that I prefer a com- plete consolidation to a partial one, but a Federal Government to either."
He proceeded to discuss the sections under consideration, and declared that the State which gives up the power of taxation has nothing more to give. "The people of that State," he said, " which suffer any but their own immediate government to inter- fere with the sovereign right of taxation are gone forever. Giving the right of taxation is giving the right to increase the miseries of the people. Is it not a political absurdity to suppose that there can be two concurrent legislatures, each possessing the supreme power of direct taxation ? If two powers come in con- tact, must not the one prevail over the other? Must it not strike every man's mind that two unlimited, co-equal, co-ordinate authorities over the same objects cannot exist together ? But we are told that there is one instance of co-existent powers in cases of petty corporations as well here as in other parts of the world."
213
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
He examined this example, and showed that it was wholly inap- plicable to two powers possessing each an unlimited right of taxation. He then turned to the case of Scotland, which had been brought up by the friends of the Constitution as a case in point, and showed that it also was inapplicable, as the limit of taxation was fixed in the articles of union, which provide that when England pays four shillings on the pound, Scotland only pays forty-five thousand pounds sterling. He referred to the minor jurisdictions in England, the stannary courts and others, and showed that they had no application whatever to the case of two supreme legislatures in a single country. After showing that the judicious exercise of such a power, according to the received maxims of representation, was impracticable, he placed his opponents in the dilemma, either of being compelled to with- hold this power from the Federal Government, or of surrendering the first maxims of representation, that those who lay the taxes should bear their proportion in paying them. A tax that might with propriety be laid and collected with ease in Delaware, would be highly improper in Virginia. The taxes cannot be uniform through the States without being oppressive to some. If they be not uniform, some of the members will lay taxes, in the pay- ment of which they will bear no proportion. The members of Delaware may assist in laying taxes on our slaves ; but do they return to Virginia ?
Following closely in the track of Madison's speech, delivered the day before, he thus replied to the argument derived from our probable position as a neutral power, which had been argued so ably by that gentleman : " We are then told," he said, " of the armed neutrality of the Empress of Russia, the opposition to it by Great Britain, and the acquiescence of other powers. We are told that, in order to become the carriers of contending nations, it will be necessary to be formidable at sea-that we must have a fleet in case of a war between Great Britain and France. I think that the powers which formed that treaty will be able to support it. But, if we were certain that this would not be the case, still I think that the profits that would arise from such a transient commerce would not compensate for the expense of rendering ourselves formidable at sea, or the dangers that would probably result from the attempt. To have a fleet in the present limited population of America is, in my opinion, impracticable and inex-
214
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
pedient. Is America in a situation to have a fleet ? I take it to be a rule founded on common sense that manufacturers, as well as sailors, proceed from a redundancy of inhabitants. Our numbers, compared to our territory, are very small indeed. I think, therefore, that all attempts to have a fleet, till our western lands are fully settled, are nugatory and vain. How will you induce your people to go to sea ? Is it not more agreeable to follow agriculture than to encounter the dangers and the hard- ships of the ocean ? The same reason will apply, in a great degree, to manufacturers. Both are the result of necessity. It would, besides, be dangerous to have a fleet in our present weak, dispersed, and defenceless situation. The powers of Europe, which have West India possessions, would be alarmed at any extraordinary maritime exertions ; and, knowing the danger of our arriving at manhood, would crush us in our infancy. In my opinion, the great objects most necessary to be promoted and attended to in America are agriculture and population. First, take care that you are sufficiently strong by land to guard against European partitions. Secure your own house before you attack that of another people. I think that the sailors, who could be prevailed upon to go to sea, would be a real loss to the commu- nity. Neglect of agriculture and loss of labor would be the certain consequence of such an irregular policy. I hope that, when these objections are thoroughly considered, all ideas of having a fleet in our infant situation will be given over. When the American character is better known, and the Government established on permanent principles-when we shall be suffi- ciently populous, and our situation secure-then come forward with a fleet ; not with a small one, but with one sufficient to meet any of the maritime powers."1
185 These early opinions on the subject of a navy have much interest in connection with the controversies that were soon to be waged on that topic. Adam Stephen was the first of our politicians to predict glory from the establishment of a navy. In a letter to R. H. Lee, dated February 3, 1775, he says : " We only want a navy to give law to the world, and we have it in our power to get it." John Adams is usually considered the father of the navy; but in his letters he insists that "the navy is the child of Jefferson." The resolutions of 1799 gave it a blast, which was followed by the action of Mr. Jefferson. When one of our prominent politicians, near the close of the last cen-
1
د
215
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
He next adverted to an opinion of Madison on the revenue likely to flow from imposts, and as this passage shows the views held by two of the first political economists in the Convention on the amount of revenue to be expected from the customs, we will give it in full : " The honorable gentleman (Madison)," he said, "has told us that the impost will be less productive hereafter, on account of the increase of population. I shall not controvert this principle. When all the lands are settled and we have manu- factures sufficient, this may be the case ; but I believe that for a very long time this cannot possibly happen. In islands and thickly-settled countries, where they have manufactures, the principle will hold good, but will not apply in any degree to our country. I apprehend that among us, as the people in the lower country find themselves straightened, they will remove to the frontiers, which will, for a considerable period, prevent the lower country from being very populous, or having recourse to manu- factures. I cannot, therefore, but conclude that the amount of imposts will continue to increase, at least for a great many years."186
He next came to the relief of Henry and Mason in sustaining the inferences which they had drawn from Holland, and went into an explanation of the state of parties in that country-the party of the Prince of Orange and the Louvestein faction-Eng- land taking the side of one and France of the other; and main-
tury, was charged with having said that the union ought to be dissolved, he denied that he made the remark, except with the qualification that "in the contingency of the Federal Government building three seventy- . fours." Though now long dead, he lived to read the bulletins of Hull, Decatur, Stewart, Perry, McDonough, and their gallant compatriots.
186 It is not uninstructive to recur to the opinions held by our early statesmen on the rate of duties to be laid upon imports. If the States had assented to the plan of vesting in the old Confederation the right to levy five per cent. upon imports (which Virginia assented to), in all human probability the Federal Constitution would not have been called into existence. In the course of his present speech Grayson expressed the opinion that two and a half per cent. would put more money into the treasury than five, as the high rate would encourage smuggling. As late as 1792, Pendleton, in his letter on a Federal tariff. thought that five per cent. was as high as the Federal Government ought to go. It is very plain that in framing a government the wisest men sometimes see but a very little way ahead.
N
المتحولة
216
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
tained that the difficulties of the Dutch were produced by that unnatural contest, and were not the result of the particular con- struction of their federal alliance. As for the slowness with which our own requisitions were paid, will any patriot blame a non-compliance during the war, when our ports were block- aded, when all 'means of getting money were destroyed, when our country was overrun by the enemy, when almost every arti- cle which the farmer could raise was seized to sustain the armies in the field ? And since the war the flourishing States have very fairly complied with requisitions. Others have delayed to pay from inability to make the payment. Massachusetts attempted to correct the nature of things by extracting from the people more than they were able to part with ; and what was the result ? A revolution that shook that State to its centre ; a revolution from which she was rescued by that abhorred and contemned system which gentlemen are anxious to supersede ; for it was a vote of Congress for fifteen hundred men, which, aided by the executors of the State, put down all opposition, and restored the public tranquility.
.
.
He adverted to an argument which Pendleton had urged as a means of relief against maladministration in the Federal Govern- ment : " We are told," he said, "that Conventions gave and Con- ventions can take away. This observation does not appear to me to be well-founded. It is not so easy to dissolve a government like that upon the table. Its dissolution may be prevented by a trifling minority of the people of America. The consent of so many States is necessary to obtain amendments, that I fear they will with great difficulty be obtained." He scanned the clause of the Constitution which sets apart the ten miles square. "I would not deny," he said, "the propriety of vesting the Govern- ment with exclusive jurisdiction over this territory, were it prop- erly guarded. Perhaps I am mistaken ; but it occurs to me that Congress may give exclusive privileges to merchants residing in the ten miles square, and that the same exclusive power of legis- lation will enable them to grant similar privileges to merchants within the strongholds of the State. Such results are not with- out precedent. Else, whence have issued the Hanse Towns, Cinque Ports, and other places in Europe, which have peculiar privileges in commerce as well as in other matters? I do not offer this sentiment as an opinion, but a conjecture; and in this
¢
217
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
doubtful agitation of mind on a point of such infinite magnitude, I only ask for information from the framers of the Constitution whose superior opportunities must have furnished them with more ample lights on the subject than I am possessed of.''167 He discussed the question of the relative safety of the right of navi- gating the Mississippi under the old and the new system ; and maintained that under the Confederation nine States were neces- sary to cede that right away, but that under the new five States · only were required for the purpose, as ten members were two- thirds of a quorum in the Senate, and five States send ten mem- bers.188 "In my opinion," he said, "the power of making treaties by which the territorial rights of the States may be essentially affected, ought to be guarded against every possi- bility of abuse; and the precarious situation to which those rights will be exposed is one reason with me, among a number of others, for voting against the adoption of this Constitution.'' 189
Tradition has represented this speech as one of the most argu- mentative, most eloquent, and most effective delivered during the session ; and from the meagre skeleton of it that has come down to us, we can easily see that it deserved the highest praise. It is said that it gave a new impulse to the opposition, and its influ- ence may be clearly traced in the subsequent discussions.
As soon as Grayson took his seat, Pendleton, who, when the House was in committee, always sat near the chair, caught the eye of Wythe, and, placed upon his crutches, proceeded to deliver the most elaborate of all the speeches which he made upon the floor.190
187 In his vaticinations he came very near embracing the case of the Cohens v. the State of Virginia, WHEATON, Vol. -.
188 The opposition of New England to the acquisition of Louisiana is an instance within the range of his fears.
189 I may say here that I do not refer to the page in Robertson's De- bates, partly because the book, which has been out of print for thirty years, may be reprinted ere long in a different form, when my refer- ences would lead astray ; but mainly because I record each day's ses- sion and the order of the speakers on the floor. Elliot's Debates are also out of print, and their paging does not correspond with Robertson's. If there had been a new edition of the debates, I would have cited the page for the convenience of the student.
190 It was interesting to behold the eagerness of the members on both sides of the House in their endeavors to assist Pendleton in his efforts
D
218
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
He began by brushing away the driftwood which had been floating on the stream of debate ; and which defiled the face of the waters. The venerable speaker had not relished the laugh which Henry had raised by ridiculing his scheme of calling a Convention to withdraw the powers of a Government, the presi- dent of which. at the head of a well-equipped and devoted army, was marching against the people of a State which had no arms in its possession, and he followed Henry in the course of his speech. He regretted that such expressions as those which likened the people to a HERD had been used, and he wished the gentleman (Henry) had felt himself at liberty to let it pass. " We are assembled by the people." he said, " to contemplate in the calm lights of mild philosophy what government is best cal- culated to promote their happiness and secure their liberty. We should not criticize harshly the expressions which may es- cape in the effusions of honest zeal. On the subject of govern- ment the worthy member (Henry) and myself differ on the threshold. I think government necessary to protect liberty. He supposes the American spirit all-sufficient for the purpose. Do Montesquieu, Locke, and Sidney agree with the gentleman ? They have presented us with no such idea. They denounce cruel and excessive punishments, but they recommend that the ligaments of government should be firmer and the execution of the laws more strict in a republic than in a monarchy. Was I not then correct in my inference that such a government and liberty were friends and allies, and that their common enemy was faction, turbulence and violence ? A republican government is the nursery of science. It turns the bent of it to eloquence as a qualification for the representative character, which is, as it ought to be, the road to our public offices. I differ from the gentleman in another respect. He professes himself an advo- cate for the middle and lower classes of men. I profess to be a friend to the equal liberty of all men from the palace to the cottage, without any other distinction than between good and bad men." He then referred to an expression which Mason had quoted from a friend of the Constitution. "Why introduce -
to rise. He took a seat near the chair for the convenience of ascend- ing and descending from it at the beginning and at the end of each day's session.
.
4
0
W
219
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
such an expression as well-born ? None such are to be found in the paper on your table. I consider every man well-born who comes into the world with an intelligent mind, and with all his parts perfect. Whether a man is great or small, he is equally dear to me. I wish for a regular government for the protection of the honest and industrious planter and farmer. I am old enough to have seen great changes in society. I have often known those who commenced life without any other stock than industry and economy attain to opulence and wealth. This could only. happen in a regular government. The true princi- ple of republicanism, and the greatest security of liberty, is reg- ular government. What become of the passions of men when they enter society? Do they leave them? No; they bring them with them, and their passions will overturn your govern- ment without an adequate check." He recurred to the use of the word " illumined " by Henry, and charged him with incon- sistency in its use. "The gentleman has made a distinction between the illumined and the ignorant. I have heard else. where with pleasure the worthy gentleman expatiate on the advantages of learning, among other things as friendly to liberty. I have seen in our code of laws the public purse applied to cher- ish private seminaries. This is not strictly just; but with me the end sanctified the means, and I was satisfied. 191 But did we thus encourage learning to set up those who attained its bene- fits as butts of invidious distinction? Surely, the worthy mem- ber on reflection will disavow the idea. Am I still suspected of a want of attachment to my fellow-citizens, whom the gentleman calls peasants and cottagers? Let me rescue them from the ignominy to which he consigns them. He classes them with the Swiss, who are born and sold as mercenaries to the highest bid- der; with the people of the Netherlands, who do not possess that distinguished badge of freedom, the right of suffrage; and with the British, who have to a small extent the right of suffrage, but who sell it for a mess of pottage. Are these people to be compared to our worthy planters and farmers who draw food
191 This is a hit at Henry, but I know not to what it refers, unless to Hampden.Sidney, of which Henry was one of the trustees, or to Ques- nay, the builder of the first Richmond academy, whom Henry be- friended.
IT
220
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
and raiment, and even wealth, from the inexhaustible stores which a bountiful Creator has placed beneath their feet?"
He maintained that the happiness and safety of the people were the objects of the plan under consideration, and they were, therefore, regarded by it as the source of power. But, as the people cannot act in a body, they must act through their repre- sentatives ; and he showed that a representative government was the only true and safe mode of administering the affairs of a people ; that, if the Confederation had rested on a popular basis, we should [have found that peace and happiness which we are now in quest of. In the State Constitution you commit the sword to the executive and the purse to the legislature, and everything else without a limitation. In both cases the repre- sentative principle is preserved, and you are safe. Legislatures may sometimes do wrong. They have done wrong. Here his voice fell to a low tone, and then became inaudible. His physical suffering had for a moment repressed the faculties of his fine intellect. It was a scene that appealed to the sensibilities of all present. It was the first time that voice, which for the third of a century had been the delight of friends and terror of foes, ever faltered in debate. When he rallied, he was understood to say that his brethren of the judiciary felt great uneasiness in their minds to violate the Constitution by such a law.192 They had prevented the operation of some unconstitutional acts. Still, preserve the representative principle in your government, and you are safe. He said he had made his remarks as introductory to the consideration of the paper on the table. "I conceive," he said, " that in those respects, where our State Constitution has not been disapproved of, objections will not apply against that on your table. In forming our State Constitution we looked only to our local circumstances ; but in forming the plan under consideration we must look to our connection with the neighboring States.
192 He had just mentioned the case of Philips when he ceased to be heard. If in continuation he referred to that case, which I hardly think is probable, it is one of the most singular instances on record of indi- viduals imagining feelings which they never felt ; for it is unquestionable that Philips, in company with four or five others, was indicted for highway robbery and condemned, after a fair trial, by the ordinary laws of the land, and not by attainder.
.
221
VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1788.
We have seen the advantages and blessings of the union. God grant we may never see the disadvantages of disunion !"
On the subject of direct taxation, he said that "if it was necessary for our interests to form an union, then it was necessary to cede adequate powers to attain the end in view. We must delegate the powers appropriate to the end. And to whom do we delegate those powers ? To our own representatives. Why should we fear more from our representatives there than from our representatives here ? But a gentleman (Monroe) has said that the power of direct taxation is unnecessary, because the back lands and the impost will be sufficient to answer all Federal pur- poses. What, then, are we disputing about ? Does the gentleman think that Congress will lay direct taxes if other funds are suffi- cient ? It will remain a harmless power on paper, and do no injury. If it should be necessary, will gentlemen run the risk of the union by withholding it?" When he had rescued the sub- ject of requisitions and taxation from the misrepresentations which he alleged had been made in the committee, re-established his position respecting the probable harmony of the two judi- ciary systems, and showed that it was the interest of the General Government to strengthen the government of the States, he dis- cussed the Mississippi question, then passed to the judiciary, and ended with an expression of his opinion, which he sustained by arguments in favor of subsequent amendments.
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.