| 1743 -- 1790
_With the Declaration of Independence_
January 6, 1821
At the age of 77, I begin to make some memoranda and state some recollections
of dates & facts concerning myself, for my own more ready reference & for the
information of my family.
The tradition in my father's family was that their ancestor came to this
country from Wales, and from near the mountain of Snowdon, the highest in Gr.
Br. I noted once a case from Wales in the law reports where a person of our name
was either pl. or def. and one of the same name was Secretary to the Virginia
company. These are the only instances in which I have met with the name in that
country. I have found it in our early records, but the first particular
information I have of any ancestor was my grandfather who lived at the place in
Chesterfield called Ozborne's and ownd. the lands afterwards the glebe of the
parish. He had three sons, Thomas who died young, Field who settled on the
waters of Roanoke and left numerous descendants, and Peter my father, who
settled on the lands I still own called Shadwell adjoining my present residence.
He was born Feb. 29, 1707/8, and intermarried 1739. with Jane Randolph, of the
age of 19. daur of Isham Randolph one of the seven sons of that name & family
settled at Dungeoness in Goochld. They trace their pedigree far back in England
& Scotland, to which let every one ascribe the faith & merit he chooses.
My father's education had been quite neglected; but being of a strong mind,
sound judgment and eager after information, he read much and improved himself
insomuch that he was chosen with Joshua Fry professor of Mathem. in W. & M.
college to continue the boundary line between Virginia & N. Caroline which had
been begun by Colo Byrd, and was afterwards employed with the same Mr. Fry to
make the 1st map of Virginia which had ever been made, that of Capt Smith being
merely a conjectural sketch. They possessed excellent materials for so much of
the country as is below the blue ridge; little being then known beyond that
ridge. He was the 3d or 4th settler of the part of the country in which I live,
which was about 1737. He died Aug. 17. 1757, leaving my mother a widow who lived
till 1776, with 6 daurs & 2. sons, myself the elder. To my younger brother he
left his estate on James river called Snowden after the supposed birth-place of
the family. To myself the lands on which I was born & live. He placed me at the
English school at 5. years of age and at the Latin at 9. where I continued until
his death. My teacher Mr. Douglas a clergyman from Scotland was but a
superficial Latinist, less instructed in Greek, but with the rudiments of these
languages he taught me French, and on the death of my father I went to the revd
Mr. Maury a correct classical scholar, with whom I continued two years, and then
went to Wm. and Mary college, to wit in the spring of 1760, where I continued 2.
years. It was my great good fortune, and what probably fixed the destinies of my
life that Dr. Wm. Small of Scotland was then professor of Mathematics, a man
profound in most of the useful branches of science, with a happy talent of
communication, correct and gentlemanly manners, & an enlarged & liberal mind.
He, most happily for me, became soon attached to me & made me his daily
companion when not engaged in the school; and from his conversation I got my
first views of the expansion of science & of the system of things in which we
are placed. Fortunately the Philosophical chair became vacant soon after my
arrival at college, and he was appointed to fill it per interim: and he was the
first who ever gave in that college regular lectures in Ethics, Rhetoric &
Belles lettres. He returned to Europe in 1762, having previously filled up the
measure of his goodness to me, by procuring for me, from his most intimate
friend G. Wythe, a reception as a student of law, under his direction, and
introduced me to the acquaintance and familiar table of Governor Fauquier, the
ablest man who had ever filled that office. With him, and at his table, Dr.
Small & Mr. Wythe, his amici omnium horarum, & myself, formed a partie quarree,
& to the habitual conversations on these occasions I owed much instruction. Mr.
Wythe continued to be my faithful and beloved Mentor in youth, and my most
affectionate friend through life. In 1767, he led me into the practice of the
law at the bar of the General court, at which I continued until the revolution
shut up the courts of justice. [For a sketch of the life & character of Mr.
Wythe see my letter of Aug. 31. 20. to Mr. John Saunderson]
In 1769, I became a member of the legislature by the choice of the county in
which I live, & continued in that until it was closed by the revolution. I made
one effort in that body for the permission of the emancipation of slaves, which
was rejected: and indeed, during the regal government, nothing liberal could
expect success. Our minds were circumscribed within narrow limits by an habitual
belief that it was our duty to be subordinate to the mother country in all
matters of government, to direct all our labors in subservience to her
interests, and even to observe a bigoted intolerance for all religions but hers.
The difficulties with our representatives were of habit and despair, not of
reflection & conviction. Experience soon proved that they could bring their
minds to rights on the first summons of their attention. But the king's council,
which acted as another house of legislature, held their places at will & were in
most humble obedience to that will: the Governor too, who had a negative on our
laws held by the same tenure, & with still greater devotedness to it: and last
of all the Royal negative closed the last door to every hope of amelioration.
On the 1st of January, 1772 I was married to Martha Skelton widow of Bathurst
Skelton, & daughter of John Wayles, then 23. years old. Mr. Wayles was a lawyer
of much practice, to which he was introduced more by his great industry,
punctuality & practical readiness, than to eminence in the science of his
profession. He was a most agreeable companion, full of pleasantry & good humor,
and welcomed in every society. He acquired a handsome fortune, died in May,
1773, leaving three daughters, and the portion which came on that event to Mrs.
Jefferson, after the debts should be paid, which were very considerable, was
about equal to my own patrimony, and consequently doubled the ease of our
circumstances.
When the famous Resolutions of 1765, against the Stamp-act, were proposed, I
was yet a student of law in Wmsbg. I attended the debate however at the door of
the lobby of the H. of Burgesses, & heard the splendid display of Mr. Henry's
talents as a popular orator. They were great indeed; such as I have never heard
from any other man. He appeared to me to speak as Homer wrote. Mr. Johnson, a
lawyer & member from the Northern Neck, seconded the resolns, & by him the
learning & the logic of the case were chiefly maintained. My recollections of
these transactions may be seen pa. 60, Wirt's life of P. H., to whom I furnished
them.
In May, 1769, a meeting of the General Assembly was called by the Govr., Ld.
Botetourt. I had then become a member; and to that meeting became known the
joint resolutions & address of the Lords & Commons of 1768 -- 9, on the
proceedings in Massachusetts. Counter-resolutions, & an address to the King, by
the H. of Burgesses were agreed to with little opposition, & a spirit manifestly
displayed of considering the cause of Massachusetts as a common one. The
Governor dissolved us: but we met the next day in the Apollo of the Raleigh
tavern, formed ourselves into a voluntary convention, drew up articles of
association against the use of any merchandise imported from Gr. Britain, signed
and recommended them to the people, repaired to our several counties, & were re
elected without any other exception than of the very few who had declined assent
to our proceedings.
Nothing of particular excitement occurring for a considerable time our
countrymen seemed to fall into a state of insensibility to our situation. The
duty on tea not yet repealed & the Declaratory act of a right in the British
parl to bind us by their laws in all cases whatsoever, still suspended over us.
But a court of inquiry held in R. Island in 1762, with a power to send persons
to England to be tried for offences committed here was considered at our session
of the spring of 1773. as demanding attention. Not thinking our old & leading
members up to the point of forwardness & zeal which the times required, Mr.
Henry, R. H. Lee, Francis L. Lee, Mr. Carr & myself agreed to meet in the
evening in a private room of the Raleigh to consult on the state of things.
There may have been a member or two more whom I do not recollect. We were all
sensible that the most urgent of all measures was that of coming to an
understanding with all the other colonies to consider the British claims as a
common cause to all, & to produce an unity of action: and for this purpose that
a commee of correspondce in each colony would be the best instrument for
intercommunication: and that their first measure would probably be to propose a
meeting of deputies from every colony at some central place, who should be
charged with the direction of the measures which should be taken by all. We
therefore drew up the resolutions which may be seen in Wirt pa 87. The
consulting members proposed to me to move them, but I urged that it should be
done by Mr. Carr, my friend & brother in law, then a new member to whom I wished
an opportunity should be given of making known to the house his great worth &
talents. It was so agreed; he moved them, they were agreed to nem. con. and a
commee of correspondence appointed of whom Peyton Randolph, the Speaker, was
chairman. The Govr. (then Ld. Dunmore) dissolved us, but the commee met the next
day, prepared a circular letter to the Speakers of the other colonies, inclosing
to each a copy of the resolns and left it in charge with their chairman to
forward them by expresses.
The origination of these commees of correspondence between the colonies has
been since claimed for Massachusetts, and Marshall II. 151, has given into this
error, altho' the very note of his appendix to which he refers, shows that their
establmt was confined to their own towns. This matter will be seen clearly
stated in a letter of Samuel Adams Wells to me of Apr. 2., 1819, and my answer
of May 12. I was corrected by the letter of Mr. Wells in the information I had
given Mr. Wirt, as stated in his note, pa. 87, that the messengers of Massach. &
Virga crossed each other on the way bearing similar propositions, for Mr. Wells
shows that Mass. did not adopt the measure but on the receipt of our proposn
delivered at their next session. Their message therefore which passed ours, must
have related to something else, for I well remember P. Randolph's informing me
of the crossing of our messengers.
The next event which excited our sympathies for Massachusets was the Boston
port bill, by which that port was to be shut up on the 1st of June, 1774. This
arrived while we were in session in the spring of that year. The lead in the
house on these subjects being no longer left to the old members, Mr. Henry, R.
H. Lee, Fr. L. Lee, 3. or 4. other members, whom I do not recollect, and myself,
agreeing that we must boldly take an unequivocal stand in the line with
Massachusetts, determined to meet and consult on the proper measures in the
council chamber, for the benefit of the library in that room. We were under
conviction of the necessity of arousing our people from the lethargy into which
they had fallen as to passing events; and thought that the appointment of a day
of general fasting & prayer would be most likely to call up & alarm their
attention. No example of such a solemnity had existed since the days of our
distresses in the war of 55. since which a new generation had grown up. With the
help therefore of Rushworth, whom we rummaged over for the revolutionary
precedents & forms of the Puritans of that day, preserved by him, we cooked up a
resolution, somewhat modernizing their phrases, for appointing the 1st day of
June, on which the Port bill was to commence, for a day of fasting, humiliation
& prayer, to implore heaven to avert from us the evils of civil war, to inspire
us with firmness in support of our rights, and to turn the hearts of the King &
parliament to moderation & justice. To give greater emphasis to our proposition,
we agreed to wait the next morning on Mr. Nicholas, whose grave & religious
character was more in unison with the tone of our resolution and to solicit him
to move it. We accordingly went to him in the morning. He moved it the same day;
the 1st of June was proposed and it passed without opposition. The Governor
dissolved us as usual. We retired to the Apollo as before, agreed to an
association, and instructed the commee of correspdce to propose to the
corresponding commees of the other colonies to appoint deputies to meet in
Congress at such place, _annually_, as should be convenient to direct, from time
to time, the measures required by the general interest: and we declared that an
attack on any one colony should be considered as an attack on the whole. This
was in May. We further recommended to the several counties to elect deputies to
meet at Wmsbg the 1st of Aug ensuing, to consider the state of the colony, &
particularly to appoint delegates to a general Congress, should that measure be
acceded to by the commees of correspdce generally. It was acceded to,
Philadelphia was appointed for the place, and the 5th of Sep. for the time of
meeting. We returned home, and in our several counties invited the clergy to
meet assemblies of the people on the 1st of June, to perform the ceremonies of
the day, & to address to them discourses suited to the occasion. The people met
generally, with anxiety & alarm in their countenances, and the effect of the day
thro' the whole colony was like a shock of electricity, arousing every man &
placing him erect & solidly on his centre. They chose universally delegates for
the convention. Being elected one for my own county I prepared a draught of
instructions to be given to the delegates whom we should send to the Congress,
and which I meant to propose at our meeting. In this I took the ground which,
from the beginning I had thought the only one orthodox or tenable, which was
that the relation between Gr. Br. and these colonies was exactly the same as
that of England & Scotland after the accession of James & until the Union, and
the same as her present relations with Hanover, having the same Executive chief
but no other necessary political connection; and that our emigration from
England to this country gave her no more rights over us, than the emigrations of
the Danes and Saxons gave to the present authorities of the mother country over
England. In this doctrine however I had never been able to get any one to agree
with me but Mr. Wythe. He concurred in it from the first dawn of the question
What was the political relation between us & England? Our other patriots
Randolph, the Lees, Nicholas, Pendleton stopped at the half-way house of John
Dickinson who admitted that England had a right to regulate our commerce, and to
lay duties on it for the purposes of regulation, but not of raising revenue. But
for this ground there was no foundation in compact, in any acknowledged
principles of colonization, nor in reason: expatriation being a natural right,
and acted on as such, by all nations, in all ages. I set out for Wmsbg some days
before that appointed for our meeting, but was taken ill of a dysentery on the
road, & unable to proceed. I sent on therefore to Wmsbg two copies of my
draught, the one under cover to Peyton Randolph, who I knew would be in the
chair of the convention, the other to Patrick Henry. Whether Mr. Henry
disapproved the ground taken, or was too lazy to read it (for he was the laziest
man in reading I ever knew) I never learned: but he communicated it to nobody.
Peyton Randolph informed the convention he had received such a paper from a
member prevented by sickness from offering it in his place, and he laid it on
the table for perusal. It was read generally by the members, approved by many,
but thought too bold for the present state of things; but they printed it in
pamphlet form under the title of "A Summary view of the rights of British
America." It found its way to England, was taken up by the opposition,
interpolated a little by Mr. Burke so as to make it answer opposition purposes,
and in that form ran rapidly thro' several editions. This information I had from
Parson Hurt, who happened at the time to be in London, whether he had gone to
receive clerical orders. And I was informed afterwards by Peyton Randolph that
it had procured me the honor of having my name inserted in a long list of
proscriptions enrolled in a bill of attainder commenced in one of the houses of
parliament, but suppressed in embryo by the hasty step of events which warned
them to be a little cautious. Montague, agent of the H. of Burgesses in England
made extracts from the bill, copied the names, and sent them to Peyton Randolph.
The names I think were about 20 which he repeated to me, but I recollect those
only of Hancock, the two Adamses, Peyton Randolph himself, Patrick Henry, &
myself. (* 1) The convention met on the 1st of Aug, renewed their association,
appointed delegates to the Congress, gave them instructions very temperately &
properly expressed, both as to style & matter; and they repaired to Philadelphia
at the time appointed. The splendid proceedings of that Congress at their 1st
session belong to general history, are known to every one, and need not
therefore be noted here. They terminated their session on the 26th of Octob, to
meet again on the 10th May ensuing. The convention at their ensuing session of
Mar, '75, approved of the proceedings of Congress, thanked their delegates and
reappointed the same persons to represent the colony at the meeting to be held
in May: and foreseeing the probability that Peyton Randolph their president and
Speaker also of the H. of B. might be called off, they added me, in that event
to the delegation.
(* 1) See Girardin's _History of Virginia,_ Appendix No. 12, note.
Mr. Randolph was according to expectation obliged to leave the chair of
Congress to attend the Gen. Assembly summoned by Ld. Dunmore to meet on the 1st
day of June 1775. Ld. North's conciliatory propositions, as they were called,
had been received by the Governor and furnished the subject for which this
assembly was convened. Mr. Randolph accordingly attended, and the tenor of these
propositions being generally known, as having been addressed to all the
governors, he was anxious that the answer of our assembly, likely to be the
first, should harmonize with what he knew to be the sentiments and wishes of the
body he had recently left. He feared that Mr. Nicholas, whose mind was not yet
up to the mark of the times, would undertake the answer, & therefore pressed me
to prepare an answer. I did so, and with his aid carried it through the house
with long and doubtful scruples from Mr. Nicholas and James Mercer, and a dash
of cold water on it here & there, enfeebling it somewhat, but finally with
unanimity or a vote approaching it. This being passed, I repaired immediately to
Philadelphia, and conveyed to Congress the first notice they had of it. It was
entirely approved there. I took my seat with them on the 21st of June. On the
24th, a commee which had been appointed to prepare a declaration of the causes
of taking up arms, brought in their report (drawn I believe by J. Rutledge)
which not being liked they recommitted it on the 26th, and added Mr. Dickinson
and myself to the committee. On the rising of the house, the commee having not
yet met, I happened to find myself near Govr W. Livingston, and proposed to him
to draw the paper. He excused himself and proposed that I should draw it. On my
pressing him with urgency, "we are as yet but new acquaintances, sir, said he,
why are you so earnest for my doing it?" "Because, said I, I have been informed
that you drew the Address to the people of Gr. Britain, a production certainly
of the finest pen in America." "On that, says he, perhaps sir you may not have
been correctly informed." I had received the information in Virginia from Colo
Harrison on his return from that Congress. Lee, Livingston & Jay had been the
commee for that draught. The first, prepared by Lee, had been disapproved &
recommitted. The second was drawn by Jay, but being presented by Govr
Livingston, had led Colo Harrison into the error. The next morning, walking in
the hall of Congress, many members being assembled but the house not yet formed,
I observed Mr. Jay, speaking to R. H. Lee, and leading him by the button of his
coat, to me. "I understand, sir, said he to me, that this gentleman informed you
that Govr Livingston drew the Address to the people of Gr Britain." I assured
him at once that I had not received that information from Mr. Lee & that not a
word had ever passed on the subject between Mr. Lee & myself; and after some
explanations the subject was dropt. These gentlemen had had some sparrings in
debate before, and continued ever very hostile to each other.
I prepared a draught of the Declaration committed to us. It was too strong
for Mr. Dickinson. He still retained the hope of reconciliation with the mother
country, and was unwilling it should be lessened by offensive statements. He was
so honest a man, & so able a one that he was greatly indulged even by those who
could not feel his scruples. We therefore requested him to take the paper, and
put it into a form he could approve. He did so, preparing an entire new
statement, and preserving of the former only the last 4. paragraphs & half of
the preceding one. We approved & reported it to Congress, who accepted it.
Congress gave a signal proof of their indulgence to Mr. Dickinson, and of their
great desire not to go too fast for any respectable part of our body, in
permitting him to draw their second petition to the King according to his own
ideas, and passing it with scarcely any amendment. The disgust against this
humility was general; and Mr. Dickinson's delight at its passage was the only
circumstance which reconciled them to it. The vote being passed, altho' further
observn on it was out of order, he could not refrain from rising and expressing
his satisfaction and concluded by saying "there is but one word, Mr. President,
in the paper which I disapprove, & that is the word _Congress_," on which Ben
Harrison rose and said "there is but on word in the paper, Mr. President, of
which I approve, and that is the word _Congress._"
On the 22d of July Dr. Franklin, Mr. Adams, R. H. Lee, & myself, were
appointed a commee to consider and report on Ld. North's conciliatory
resolution. The answer of the Virginia assembly on that subject having been
approved I was requested by the commee to prepare this report, which will
account for the similarity of feature in the two instruments.
On the 15th of May, 1776, the convention of Virginia instructed their
delegates in Congress to propose to that body to declare the colonies
independent of G. Britain, and appointed a commee to prepare a declaration of
rights and plan of government.
In Congress, Friday June 7. 1776. The delegates from Virginia moved in
obedience to instructions from their constituents that the Congress should
declare that these United colonies are & of right ought to be free & independent
states, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown, and
that all political connection between them & the state of Great Britain is &
ought to be, totally dissolved; that measures should be immediately taken for
procuring the assistance of foreign powers, and a Confederation be formed to
bind the colonies more closely together.
The house being obliged to attend at that time to some other business, the
proposition was referred to the next day, when the members were ordered to
attend punctually at ten o'clock.
Saturday June 8. They proceeded to take it into consideration and referred it
to a committee of the whole, into which they immediately resolved themselves,
and passed that day & Monday the 10th in debating on the subject.
It was argued by Wilson, Robert R. Livingston, E. Rutledge, Dickinson and
others
That tho' they were friends to the measures themselves, and saw the
impossibility that we should ever again be united with Gr. Britain, yet they
were against adopting them at this time:
That the conduct we had formerly observed was wise & proper now, of deferring
to take any capital step till the voice of the people drove us into it:
That they were our power, & without them our declarations could not be
carried into effect;
That the people of the middle colonies (Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylva, the
Jerseys & N. York) were not yet ripe for bidding adieu to British connection,
but that they were fast ripening & in a short time would join in the general
voice of America:
That the resolution entered into by this house on the 15th of May for
suppressing the exercise of all powers derived from the crown, had shown, by the
ferment into which it had thrown these middle colonies, that they had not yet
accommodated their minds to a separation from the mother country:
That some of them had expressly forbidden their delegates to consent to such
a declaration, and others had given no instructions, & consequently no powers to
give such consent:
That if the delegates of any particular colony had no power to declare such
colony independant, certain they were the others could not declare it for them;
the colonies being as yet perfectly independant of each other:
That the assembly of Pennsylvania was now sitting above stairs, their
convention would sit within a few days, the convention of New York was now
sitting, & those of the Jerseys & Delaware counties would meet on the Monday
following, & it was probable these bodies would take up the question of
Independance & would declare to their delegates the voice of their state:
That if such a declaration should now be agreed to, these delegates must
retire & possibly their colonies might secede from the Union:
That such a secession would weaken us more than could be compensated by any
foreign alliance:
That in the event of such a division, foreign powers would either refuse to
join themselves to our fortunes, or, having us so much in their power as that
desperate declaration would place us, they would insist on terms proportionably
more hard and prejudicial:
That we had little reason to expect an alliance with those to whom alone as
yet we had cast our eyes:
That France & Spain had reason to be jealous of that rising power which would
one day certainly strip them of all their American possessions:
That it was more likely they should form a connection with the British court,
who, if they should find themselves unable otherwise to extricate themselves
from their difficulties, would agree to a partition of our territories,
restoring Canada to France, & the Floridas to Spain, to accomplish for
themselves a recovery of these colonies:
That it would not be long before we should receive certain information of the
disposition of the French court, from the agent whom we had sent to Paris for
that purpose:
That if this disposition should be favorable, by waiting the event of the
present campaign, which we all hoped would be successful, we should have reason
to expect an alliance on better terms:
That this would in fact work no delay of any effectual aid from such ally,
as, from the advance of the season & distance of our situation, it was
impossible we could receive any assistance during this campaign:
That it was prudent to fix among ourselves the terms on which we should form
alliance, before we declared we would form one at all events:
And that if these were agreed on, & our Declaration of Independance ready by
the time our Ambassador should be prepared to sail, it would be as well as to go
into that Declaration at this day.
On the other side it was urged by J. Adams, Lee, Wythe, and others
That no gentleman had argued against the policy or the right of separation
from Britain, nor had supposed it possible we should ever renew our connection;
that they had only opposed its being now declared:
That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independance, we
should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact
which already exists:
That as to the people or parliament of England, we had alwais been
independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our
acquiescence only, & not from any rights they possessed of imposing them, & that
so far our connection had been federal only & was now dissolved by the
commencement of hostilities:
That as to the King, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this
bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of parliament, by which he
declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us, a fact which
had long ago proved us out of his protection; it being a certain position in law
that allegiance & protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is
withdrawn:
That James the IId. never declared the people of England out of his
protection yet his actions proved it & the parliament declared it:
No delegates then can be denied, or ever want, a power of declaring an
existing truth:
That the delegates from the Delaware counties having declared their
constituents ready to join, there are only two colonies Pennsylvania & Maryland
whose delegates are absolutely tied up, and that these had by their instructions
only reserved a right of confirming or rejecting the measure:
That the instructions from Pennsylvania might be accounted for from the times
in which they were drawn, near a twelvemonth ago, since which the face of
affairs has totally changed:
That within that time it had become apparent that Britain was determined to
accept nothing less than a carte-blanche, and that the King's answer to the Lord
Mayor Aldermen & common council of London, which had come to hand four days ago,
must have satisfied every one of this point:
That the people wait for us to lead the way:
That _they_ are in favour of the measure, tho' the instructions given by some
of their _representatives_ are not:
That the voice of the representatives is not always consonant with the voice
of the people, and that this is remarkably the case in these middle colonies:
That the effect of the resolution of the 15th of May has proved this, which,
raising the murmurs of some in the colonies of Pennsylvania & Maryland, called
forth the opposing voice of the freer part of the people, & proved them to be
the majority, even in these colonies:
That the backwardness of these two colonies might be ascribed partly to the
influence of proprietary power & connections, & partly to their having not yet
been attacked by the enemy:
That these causes were not likely to be soon removed, as there seemed no
probability that the enemy would make either of these the seat of this summer's
war:
That it would be vain to wait either weeks or months for perfect unanimity,
since it was impossible that all men should ever become of one sentiment on any
question:
That the conduct of some colonies from the beginning of this contest, had
given reason to suspect it was their settled policy to keep in the rear of the
confederacy, that their particular prospect might be better, even in the worst
event:
That therefore it was necessary for those colonies who had thrown themselves
forward & hazarded all from the beginning, to come forward now also, and put all
again to their own hazard:
That the history of the Dutch revolution, of whom three states only
confederated at first proved that a secession of some colonies would not be so
dangerous as some apprehended:
That a declaration of Independence alone could render it consistent with
European delicacy for European powers to treat with us, or even to receive an
Ambassador from us:
That till this they would not receive our vessels into their ports, nor
acknowledge the adjudications of our courts of admiralty to be legitimate, in
cases of capture of British vessels:
That though France & Spain may be jealous of our rising power, they must
think it will be much more formidable with the addition of Great Britain; and
will therefore see it their interest to prevent a coalition; but should they
refuse, we shall be but where we are; whereas without trying we shall never know
whether they will aid us or not:
That the present campaign may be unsuccessful, & therefore we had better
propose an alliance while our affairs wear a hopeful aspect:
That to await the event of this campaign will certainly work delay, because
during this summer France may assist us effectually by cutting off those
supplies of provisions from England & Ireland on which the enemy's armies here
are to depend; or by setting in motion the great power they have collected in
the West Indies, & calling our enemy to the defence of the possessions they have
there:
That it would be idle to lose time in settling the terms of alliance, till we
had first determined we would enter into alliance:
That it is necessary to lose no time in opening a trade for our people, who
will want clothes, and will want money too for the paiment of taxes:
And that the only misfortune is that we did not enter into alliance with
France six months sooner, as besides opening their ports for the vent of our
last year's produce, they might have marched an army into Germany and prevented
the petty princes there from selling their unhappy subjects to subdue us.
It appearing in the course of these debates that the colonies of N. York, New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and South Carolina were not yet
matured for falling from the parent stem, but that they were fast advancing to
that state, it was thought most prudent to wait a while for them, and to
postpone the final decision to July 1. but that this might occasion as little
delay as possible a committee was appointed to prepare a declaration of
independence. The commee were J. Adams, Dr. Franklin, Roger Sherman, Robert R.
Livingston & myself. Committees were also appointed at the same time to prepare
a plan of confederation for the colonies, and to state the terms proper to be
proposed for foreign alliance. The committee for drawing the declaration of
Independence desired me to do it. It was accordingly done, and being approved by
them, I reported it to the house on Friday the 28th of June when it was read and
ordered to lie on the table. On Monday, the 1st of July the house resolved
itself into a commee of the whole & resumed the consideration of the original
motion made by the delegates of Virginia, which being again debated through the
day, was carried in the affirmative by the votes of N. Hampshire, Connecticut,
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, N. Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, N. Carolina, &
Georgia. S. Carolina and Pennsylvania voted against it. Delaware having but two
members present, they were divided. The delegates for New York declared they
were for it themselves & were assured their constituents were for it, but that
their instructions having been drawn near a twelvemonth before, when
reconciliation was still the general object, they were enjoined by them to do
nothing which should impede that object. They therefore thought themselves not
justifiable in voting on either side, and asked leave to withdraw from the
question, which was given them. The commee rose & reported their resolution to
the house. Mr. Edward Rutledge of S. Carolina then requested the determination
might be put off to the next day, as he believed his colleagues, tho' they
disapproved of the resolution, would then join in it for the sake of unanimity.
The ultimate question whether the house would agree to the resolution of the
committee was accordingly postponed to the next day, when it was again moved and
S. Carolina concurred in voting for it. In the meantime a third member had come
post from the Delaware counties and turned the vote of that colony in favour of
the resolution. Members of a different sentiment attending that morning from
Pennsylvania also, their vote was changed, so that the whole 12 colonies who
were authorized to vote at all, gave their voices for it; and within a few days,
the convention of N. York approved of it and thus supplied the void occasioned
by the withdrawing of her delegates from the vote.
Congress proceeded the same day to consider the declaration of Independance
which had been reported & lain on the table the Friday preceding, and on Monday
referred to a commee of the whole. The pusillanimous idea that we had friends in
England worth keeping terms with, still haunted the minds of many. For this
reason those passages which conveyed censures on the people of England were
struck out, lest they should give them offence. The clause too, reprobating the
enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance to South
Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of
slaves, and who on the contrary still wished to continue it. Our northern
brethren also I believe felt a little tender under those censures; for tho'
their people have very few slaves themselves yet they had been pretty
considerable carriers of them to others. The debates having taken up the greater
parts of the 2d 3d & 4th days of July were, in the evening of the last, closed
the declaration was reported by the commee, agreed to by the house and signed by
every member present except Mr. Dickinson. As the sentiments of men are known
not only by what they receive, but what they reject also, I will state the form
of the declaration as originally reported. The parts struck out by Congress
shall be distinguished by a black line drawn under them; & those inserted by
them shall be placed in the margin or in a concurrent column.
A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of America, in
General Congress Assembled.
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to
dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to
assume among the powers of the earth the separate & equal station to which the
laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the
opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that
they are endowed by their creator with *inherent and* [certain] inalienable
rights; that among these are life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness: that to
secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government
becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or
abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such
principles, & organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most
likely to effect their safety & happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that
governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes;
and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to
suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the
forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses &
usurpations *begun at a distinguished period and* pursuing invariably the same
object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their
right, it is their duty to throw off such government, & to provide new guards
for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these
colonies; & such is now the necessity which constrains them to *expunge* [alter]
their former systems of government. The history of the present king of Great
Britain is a history of *unremitting* [repeated] injuries & usurpations, *among
which appears no solitary fact to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest but
all have* [all having] in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny
over these states. To prove this let facts be submitted to a candid world *for
the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood.*
He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome & necessary for the
public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate & pressing
importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be
obtained; & when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of
people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the
legislature, a right inestimable to them, & formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable,
and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of
fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly *& continually* for
opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time after such dissolutions to cause others to be
elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have
returned to the people at large for their exercise, the state remaining in the
meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without & convulsions
within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose
obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners, refusing to pass others
to encourage their migrations hither, & raising the conditions of new
appropriations of lands.
He has *suffered* [obstructed] the administration of justice *totally to
cease in some of these states* [by] refusing his [assent to laws for
establishing judiciary powers.
He has made *our* judges dependant on his will alone, for the tenure of their
offices, & the amount & paiment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new offices *by a self assumed power* and sent
hither swarms of new officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us in times of peace standing armies *and ships of war*
without the consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the military independant of, & superior to the
civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our
constitutions & unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of
pretended legislation for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us; for
protecting them by a mock-trial from punishment for any murders which they
should commit on the inhabitants of these states; for cutting off our trade with
all parts of the world; for imposing taxes on us without our consent; for
depriving us [ ] [in many cases] of the benefits of trial by jury; for
transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences; for abolishing
the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein
an arbitrary government, and enlarging it's boundaries, so as to render it at
once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into
these *states* [colonies]; for taking away our charters, abolishing our most
valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments; for
suspending our own legislatures, & declaring themselves invested with power to
legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here *withdrawing his governors, and declaring us
out of his allegiance & protection*. [by declaring us out of his protection, and
waging war against us.]
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, & destroyed
the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to
compleat the works of death, desolation & tyranny already begun with
circumstances of cruelty and perfidy [ ] [scarcely paralleled in the most
barbarous ages, & totally] unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear
arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends &
brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
He has [excited domestic insurrection among us, & has] endeavored to bring on
the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule
of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, & conditions
*of existence.*
*He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow-citizens, with the
allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of our property.*
*He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most
sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never
offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or
to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical
warfare, the opprobium of INFIDEL powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king
of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought &
sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt
to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of
horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very
people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has
deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he also obtruded them: thus
paying off former crimes committed against the LIBERTIES of one people, with
crimes which he urges them to commit against the LIVES of another.*
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the
most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated
injuries.
A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a
tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a [ ] [free] people *who mean to be free.
Future ages will scarcely believe that the hardiness of one man adventured,
within the short compass of twelve years only, to lay a foundation so broad & so
undisguised for tyranny over a people fostered & fixed in principles of
freedom.*
Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have
warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend *a* [an
unwarrantable] jurisdiction over *these our states* [us]. We have reminded them
of the circumstances of our emigration & settlement here, *no one of which could
warrant so strange a pretension: that these were effected at the expense of our
own blood & treasure, unassisted by the wealth or the strength of Great Britain:
that in constituting indeed our several forms of government, we had adopted one
common king, thereby laying a foundation for perpetual league & amity with them:
but that submission to their parliament was no part of our constitution, nor
ever in idea, if history may be credited: and*, we [ ] [have] appealed to their
native justice and magnanimity *as well as to* [and we have conjured them by]
the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations which *were likely
to* [would inevitably] interrupt our connection and correspondence. They too
have been deaf to the voice of justice & of consanguinity, *and when occasions
have been given them, by the regular course of their laws, of removing from
their councils the disturbers of our harmony, they have, by their free election,
re-established them in power. At this very time too they are permitting their
chief magistrate to send over not only soldiers of our common blood, but Scotch
& foreign mercenaries to invade & destroy us. These facts have given the last
stab to agonizing affection, and manly spirit bids us to renounce forever these
unfeeling brethren. We must [We must therefore] endeavor to forget our former
love for them, and hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in
peace friends. We might have been a free and a great people together; but a
communication of grandeur & of freedom it seems is below their dignity. Be it
so, since they will have it. The road to happiness & to glory is open to us too.
We will tread it apart from them, and* acquiesce in the necessity which
denounces our *eternal* separation [ ] [and hold them as we hold the rest of
mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.]!
We therefore the representatives We therefore the representatives
of the United States of of the United States of
America in General Congress America in General Congress
assembled do in the name & assembled, appealing to the
by authority of the good supreme judge of the world
people of these *states reject for the rectitude of our
& renounce all allegiance & intentions, do in the name, & by
subjection to the kings of the authority of the good
Great Britain & all others people of these colonies,
who may hereafter claim by, solemnly publish & declare that
through or under them: we these united colonies are &
utterly dissolve all political* of right ought to be free &
*connection which may independent states; that they
heretofore have subsisted are absolved from all allegiance
between us & the people or to the British crown,
parliament of Great Britain: and that all political
& finally we do assert & connection between them & the
declare these colonies to be free state of Great Britain is, &
& independent states,* & that ought to be, totally
as free & independent states, dissolved; & that as free &
they have full power to levy independent states they have
war, conclude peace, contract full power to levy war,
alliances, establish commerce, conclude peace, contract
& to do all other acts & alliances, establish commerce &
things which independent to do all other acts & things
states may of right do. which independent states
may of right do.
And for the support of And for the support of this
this declaration we mutually declaration, with a firm
pledge to each other our reliance on the protection of
lives, our fortunes, & our divine providence we mutually
sacred honor. pledge to each other our
lives, our fortunes, & our
sacred honor.
The Declaration thus signed on the 4th, on paper was engrossed on parchment,
& signed again on the 2d. of August.
Some erroneous statements of the proceedings on the declaration of
independence having got before the public in latter times, Mr. Samuel A. Wells
asked explanations of me, which are given in my letter to him of May 12. 19.
before and now again referred to. I took notes in my place while these things
were going on, and at their close wrote them out in form and with correctness
and from 1 to 7 of the two preceding sheets are the originals then written; as
the two following are of the earlier debates on the Confederation, which I took
in like manner.
On Friday July 12. the Committee appointed to draw the articles of
confederation reported them, and on the 22d. the house resolved themselves into
a committee to take them into consideration. On the 30th. & 31st. of that month
& 1st. of the ensuing, those articles were debated which determined the
proportion or quota of money which each state should furnish to the common
treasury, and the manner of voting in Congress. The first of these articles was
expressed in the original draught in these words. "Art. XI. All charges of war &
all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defence, or general
welfare, and allowed by the United States assembled, shall be defrayed out of a
common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several colonies in proportion
to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex & quality, except Indians not
paying taxes, in each colony, a true account of which, distinguishing the white
inhabitants, shall be triennially taken & transmitted to the Assembly of the
United States."
Mr. [Samuel] Chase moved that the quotas should be fixed, not by the number
of inhabitants of every condition, but by that of the "white inhabitants." He
admitted that taxation should be alwais in proportion to property, that this was
in theory the true rule, but that from a variety of difficulties, it was a rule
which could never be adopted in practice. The value of the property in every
State could never be estimated justly & equally. Some other measure for the
wealth of the State must therefore be devised, some standard referred to which
would be more simple. He considered the number of inhabitants as a tolerably
good criterion of property, and that this might alwais be obtained. He therefore
thought it the best mode which we could adopt, with one exception only. He
observed that negroes are property, and as such cannot be distinguished from the
lands or personalities held in those States where there are few slaves, that the
surplus of profit which a Northern farmer is able to lay by, he invests in
cattle, horses, &c. whereas a Southern farmer lays out that same surplus in
slaves. There is no more reason therefore for taxing the Southern states on the
farmer's head, & on his slave's head, than the Northern ones on their farmer's
heads & the heads of their cattle, that the method proposed would therefore tax
the Southern states according to their numbers & their wealth conjunctly, while
the Northern would be taxed on numbers only: that negroes in fact should not be
considered as members of the state more than cattle & that they have no more
interest in it.
Mr. John Adams observed that the numbers of people were taken by this article
as an index of the wealth of the state, & not as subjects of taxation, that as
to this matter it was of no consequence by what name you called your people,
whether by that of freemen or of slaves. That in some countries the labouring
poor were called freemen, in others they were called slaves; but that the
difference as to the state was imaginary only. What matters it whether a
landlord employing ten labourers in his farm, gives them annually as much money
as will buy them the necessaries of life, or gives them those necessaries at
short hand. The ten labourers add as much wealth annually to the state, increase
it's exports as much in the one case as the other. Certainly 500 freemen produce
no more profits, no greater surplus for the paiment of taxes than 500 slaves.
Therefore the state in which are the labourers called freemen should be taxed no
more than that in which are those called slaves. Suppose by any extraordinary
operation of nature or of law one half the labourers of a state could in the
course of one night be transformed into slaves: would the state be made the
poorer or the less able to pay taxes? That the condition of the laboring poor in
most countries, that of the fishermen particularly of the Northern states, is as
abject as that of slaves. It is the number of labourers which produce the
surplus for taxation, and numbers therefore indiscriminately, are the fair index
of wealth. That it is the use of the word "property" here, & it's application to
some of the people of the state, which produces the fallacy. How does the
Southern farmer procure slaves? Either by importation or by purchase from his
neighbor. If he imports a slave, he adds one to the number of labourers in his
country, and proportionably to it's profits & abilities to pay taxes. If he buys
from his neighbor it is only a transfer of a labourer from one farm to another,
which does not change the annual produce of the state, & therefore should not
change it's tax. That if a Northern farmer works ten labourers on his farm, he
can, it is true, invest the surplus of ten men's labour in cattle: but so may
the Southern farmer working ten slaves. That a state of one hundred thousand
freemen can maintain no more cattle than one of one hundred thousand slaves.
Therefore they have no more of that kind of property. That a slave may indeed
from the custom of speech be more properly called the wealth of his master, than
the free labourer might be called the wealth of his employer: but as to the
state, both were equally it's wealth, and should therefore equally add to the
quota of it's tax.
Mr. [Benjamin] Harrison proposed as a compromise, that two slaves should be
counted as one freeman. He affirmed that slaves did not do so much work as
freemen, and doubted if two effected more than one. That this was proved by the
price of labor. The hire of a labourer in the Southern colonies being from 8 to
pound 12. while in the Northern it was generally pound 24.
Mr. [James] Wilson said that if this amendment should take place the Southern
colonies would have all the benefit of slaves, whilst the Northern ones would
bear the burthen. That slaves increase the profits of a state, which the
Southern states mean to take to themselves; that they also increase the burthen
of defence, which would of course fall so much the heavier on the Northern. That
slaves occupy the places of freemen and eat their food. Dismiss your slaves &
freemen will take their places. It is our duty to lay every discouragement on
the importation of slaves; but this amendment would give the jus trium liberorum
to him who would import slaves. That other kinds of property were pretty equally
distributed thro' all the colonies: there were as many cattle, horses, & sheep,
in the North as the South, & South as the North; but not so as to slaves. That
experience has shown that those colonies have been alwais able to pay most which
have the most inhabitants, whether they be black or white, and the practice of
the Southern colonies has alwais been to make every farmer pay poll taxes upon
all his labourers whether they be black or white. He acknowledges indeed that
freemen work the most; but they consume the most also. They do not produce a
greater surplus for taxation. The slave is neither fed nor clothed so
expensively as a freeman. Again white women are exempted from labor generally,
but negro women are not. In this then the Southern states have an advantage as
the article now stands. It has sometimes been said that slavery is necessary
because the commodities they raise would be too dear for market if cultivated by
freemen; but now it is said that the labor of the slave is the dearest.
Mr. Payne urged the original resolution of Congress, to proportion the quotas
of the states to the number of souls.
Dr. [John] Witherspoon was of opinion that the value of lands & houses was
the best estimate of the wealth of a nation, and that it was practicable to
obtain such a valuation. This is the true barometer of wealth. The one now
proposed is imperfect in itself, and unequal between the States. It has been
objected that negroes eat the food of freemen & therefore should be taxed.
Horses also eat the food of freemen; therefore they also should be taxed. It has
been said too that in carrying slaves into the estimate of the taxes the state
is to pay, we do no more than those states themselves do, who alwais take slaves
into the estimate of the taxes the individual is to pay. But the cases are not
parallel. In the Southern colonies slaves pervade the whole colony; but they do
not pervade the whole continent. That as to the original resolution of Congress
to proportion the quotas according to the souls, it was temporary only, &
related to the monies heretofore emitted: whereas we are now entering into a new
compact, and therefore stand on original ground.
Aug 1. The question being put the amendment proposed was rejected by the
votes of N. Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode island, Connecticut, N. York, N.
Jersey, & Pennsylvania, against those of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North &
South Carolina. Georgia was divided.
The other article was in these words. "Art. XVII. In determining questions
each colony shall have one vote."
July 30. 31. Aug 1. Present 41. members. Mr. Chase observed that this article
was the most likely to divide us of any one proposed in the draught then under
consideration. That the larger colonies had threatened they would not
confederate at all if their weight in congress should not be equal to the
numbers of people they added to the confederacy; while the smaller ones declared
against a union if they did not retain an equal vote for the protection of their
rights. That it was of the utmost consequence to bring the parties together, as
should we sever from each other, either no foreign power will ally with us at
all, or the different states will form different alliances, and thus increase
the horrors of those scenes of civil war and bloodshed which in such a state of
separation & independance would render us a miserable people. That our
importance, our interests, our peace required that we should confederate, and
that mutual sacrifices should be made to effect a compromise of this difficult
question. He was of opinion the smaller colonies would lose their rights, if
they were not in some instances allowed an equal vote; and therefore that a
discrimination should take place among the questions which would come before
Congress. That the smaller states should be secured in all questions concerning
life or liberty & the greater ones in all respecting property. He therefore
proposed that in votes relating to money, the voice of each colony should be
proportioned to the number of its inhabitants.
Dr. Franklin thought that the votes should be so proportioned in all cases.
He took notice that the Delaware counties had bound up their Delegates to
disagree to this article. He thought it a very extraordinary language to be held
by any state, that they would not confederate with us unless we would let them
dispose of our money. Certainly if we vote equally we ought to pay equally; but
the smaller states will hardly purchase the privilege at this price. That had he
lived in a state where the representation, originally equal, had become unequal
by time & accident he might have submitted rather than disturb government; but
that we should be very wrong to set out in this practice when it is in our power
to establish what is right. That at the time of the Union between England and
Scotland the latter had made the objection which the smaller states now do. But
experience had proved that no unfairness had ever been shown them. That their
advocates had prognosticated that it would again happen as in times of old, that
the whale would swallow Jonas, but he thought the prediction reversed in event
and that Jonas had swallowed the whale, for the Scotch had in fact got
possession of the government and gave laws to the English. He reprobated the
original agreement of Congress to vote by colonies and therefore was for their
voting in all cases according to the number of taxables.
Dr. Witherspoon opposed every alteration of the article. All men admit that a
confederacy is necessary. Should the idea get abroad that there is likely to be
no union among us, it will damp the minds of the people, diminish the glory of
our struggle, & lessen it's importance; because it will open to our view future
prospects of war & dissension among ourselves. If an equal vote be refused, the
smaller states will become vassals to the larger; & all experience has shown
that the vassals & subjects of free states are the most enslaved. He instanced
the Helots of Sparta & the provinces of Rome. He observed that foreign powers
discovering this blemish would make it a handle for disengaging the smaller
states from so unequal a confederacy. That the colonies should in fact be
considered as individuals; and that as such, in all disputes they should have an
equal vote; that they are now collected as individuals making a bargain with
each other, & of course had a right to vote as individuals. That in the East
India company they voted by persons, & not by their proportion of stock. That
the Belgic confederacy voted by provinces. That in questions of war the smaller
states were as much interested as the larger, & therefore should vote equally;
and indeed that the larger states were more likely to bring war on the
confederacy in proportion as their frontier was more extensive. He admitted that
equality of representation was an excellent principle, but then it must be of
things which are coordinate; that is, of things similar & of the same nature:
that nothing relating to individuals could ever come before Congress; nothing
but what would respect colonies. He distinguished between an incorporating & a
federal union. The union of England was an incorporating one; yet Scotland had
suffered by that union: for that it's inhabitants were drawn from it by the
hopes of places & employments. Nor was it an instance of equality of
representation; because while Scotland was allowed nearly a thirteenth of
representation they were to pay only one fortieth of the land tax. He expressed
his hopes that in the present enlightened state of men's minds we might expect a
lasting confederacy, if it was founded on fair principles.
John Adams advocated the voting in proportion to numbers. He said that we
stand here as the representatives of the people. That in some states the people
are many, in others they are few; that therefore their vote here should be
proportioned to the numbers from whom it comes. Reason, justice, & equity never
had weight enough on the face of the earth to govern the councils of men. It is
interest alone which does it, and it is interest alone which can be trusted.
That therefore the interests within doors should be the mathematical
representatives of the interests without doors. That the individuality of the
colonies is a mere sound. Does the individuality of a colony increase it's
wealth or numbers. If it does, pay equally. If it does not add weight in the
scale of the confederacy, it cannot add to their rights, nor weigh in argument.
A. has pound 50. B. pound 500. C. pound 1000. in partnership. Is it just they
should equally dispose of the monies of the partnership? It has been said we are
independent individuals making a bargain together. The question is not what we
are now, but what we ought to be when our bargain shall be made. The confederacy
is to make us one individual only; it is to form us, like separate parcels of
metal, into one common mass. We shall no longer retain our separate
individuality, but become a single individual as to all questions submitted to
the confederacy. Therefore all those reasons which prove the justice &
expediency of equal representation in other assemblies, hold good here. It has
been objected that a proportional vote will endanger the smaller states. We
answer that an equal vote will endanger the larger. Virginia, Pennsylvania, &
Massachusetts are the three greater colonies. Consider their distance, their
difference of produce, of interests & of manners, & it is apparent they can
never have an interest or inclination to combine for the oppression of the
smaller. That the smaller will naturally divide on all questions with the
larger. Rhode isld, from it's relation, similarity & intercourse will generally
pursue the same objects with Massachusetts; Jersey, Delaware & Maryland, with
Pennsylvania.
Dr. [Benjamin] Rush took notice that the decay of the liberties of the Dutch
republic proceeded from three causes. 1. The perfect unanimity requisite on all
occasions. 2. Their obligation to consult their constituents. 3. Their voting by
provinces. This last destroyed the equality of representation, and the liberties
of great Britain also are sinking from the same defect. That a part of our
rights is deposited in the hands of our legislatures. There it was admitted
there should be an equality of representation. Another part of our rights is
deposited in the hands of Congress: why is it not equally necessary there should
be an equal representation there? Were it possible to collect the whole body of
the people together, they would determine the questions submitted to them by
their majority. Why should not the same majority decide when voting here by
their representatives? The larger colonies are so providentially divided in
situation as to render every fear of their combining visionary. Their interests
are different, & their circumstances dissimilar. It is more probable they will
become rivals & leave it in the power of the smaller states to give
preponderance to any scale they please. The voting by the number of free
inhabitants will have one excellent effect, that of inducing the colonies to
discourage slavery & to encourage the increase of their free inhabitants.
Mr. [Stephen] Hopkins observed there were 4 larger, 4 smaller, & 4
middle-sized colonies. That the 4 largest would contain more than half the
inhabitants of the confederated states, & therefore would govern the others as
they should please. That history affords no instance of such a thing as equal
representation. The Germanic body votes by states. The Helvetic body does the
same; & so does the Belgic confederacy. That too little is known of the ancient
confederations to say what was their practice.
Mr. Wilson thought that taxation should be in proportion to wealth, but that
representation should accord with the number of freemen. That government is a
collection or result of the wills of all. That if any government could speak the
will of all, it would be perfect; and that so far as it departs from this it
becomes imperfect. It has been said that Congress is a representation of states;
not of individuals. I say that the objects of its care are all the individuals
of the states. It is strange that annexing the name of "State" to ten thousand
men, should give them an equal right with forty thousand. This must be the
effect of magic, not of reason. As to those matters which are referred to
Congress, we are not so many states, we are one large state. We lay aside our
individuality, whenever we come here. The Germanic body is a burlesque on
government; and their practice on any point is a sufficient authority & proof
that it is wrong. The greatest imperfection in the constitution of the Belgic
confederacy is their voting by provinces. The interest of the whole is
constantly sacrificed to that of the small states. The history of the war in the
reign of Q. Anne sufficiently proves this. It is asked shall nine colonies put
it into the power of four to govern them as they please? I invert the question,
and ask shall two millions of people put it in the power of one million to
govern them as they please? It is pretended too that the smaller colonies will
be in danger from the greater. Speak in honest language & say the minority will
be in danger from the majority. And is there an assembly on earth where this
danger may not be equally pretended? The truth is that our proceedings will then
be consentaneous with the interests of the majority, and so they ought to be.
The probability is much greater that the larger states will disagree than that
they will combine. I defy the wit of man to invent a possible case or to suggest
any one thing on earth which shall be for the interests of Virginia,
Pennsylvania & Massachusetts, and which will not also be for the interest of the
other states.
* * *
These articles reported July 12. 76 were debated from day to day, & time to
time for two years, were ratified July 9, '78, by 10 states, by N. Jersey on the
26th. of Nov. of the same year, and by Delaware on the 23d. of Feb. following.
Maryland alone held off 2 years more, acceding to them Mar 1, 81. and thus
closing the obligation.
Our delegation had been renewed for the ensuing year commencing Aug. 11. but
the new government was now organized, a meeting of the legislature was to be
held in Oct. and I had been elected a member by my county. I knew that our
legislation under the regal government had many very vicious points which
urgently required reformation, and I thought I could be of more use in
forwarding that work. I therefore retired from my seat in Congress on the 2d. of
Sep. resigned it, and took my place in the legislature of my state, on the 7th.
of October.
On the 11th. I moved for leave to bring in a bill for the establishmt of
courts of justice, the organization of which was of importance; I drew the bill
it was approved by the commee, reported and passed after going thro' it's due
course.
On the 12th. I obtained leave to bring in a bill declaring tenants in tail to
hold their lands in fee simple. In the earlier times of the colony when lands
were to be obtained for little or nothing, some provident individuals procured
large grants, and, desirous of founding great families for themselves, settled
them on their descendants in fee-tail. The transmission of this property from
generation to generation in the same name raised up a distinct set of families
who, being privileged by law in the perpetuation of their wealth were thus
formed into a Patrician order, distinguished by the splendor and luxury of their
establishments. From this order too the king habitually selected his Counsellors
of State, the hope of which distinction devoted the whole corps to the interests
& will of the crown. To annul this privilege, and instead of an aristocracy of
wealth, of more harm and danger, than benefit, to society, to make an opening
for the aristocracy of virtue and talent, which nature has wisely provided for
the direction of the interests of society, & scattered with equal hand through
all it's conditions, was deemed essential to a well ordered republic. To effect
it no violence was necessary, no deprivation of natural right, but rather an
enlargement of it by a repeal of the law. For this would authorize the present
holder to divide the property among his children equally, as his affections were
divided; and would place them, by natural generation on the level of their
fellow citizens. But this repeal was strongly opposed by Mr. Pendleton, who was
zealously attached to ancient establishments; and who, taken all in all, was the
ablest man in debate I have ever met with. He had not indeed the poetical fancy
of Mr. Henry, his sublime imagination, his lofty and overwhelming diction; but
he was cool, smooth and persuasive; his language flowing, chaste & embellished,
his conceptions quick, acute and full of resource; never vanquished; for if he
lost the main battle, he returned upon you, and regained so much of it as to
make it a drawn one, by dexterous man;oeuvres, skirmishes in detail, and the
recovery of small advantages which, little singly, were important altogether.
You never knew when you were clear of him, but were harassed by his perseverance
until the patience was worn down of all who had less of it than himself. Add to
this that he was one of the most virtuous & benevolent of men, the kindest
friend, the most amiable & pleasant of companions, which ensured a favorable
reception to whatever came from him. Finding that the general principle of
entails could not be maintained, he took his stand on an amendment which he
proposed, instead of an absolute abolition, to permit the tenant in tail to
convey in fee simple, if he chose it: and he was within a few votes of saving so
much of the old law. But the bill passed finally for entire abolition.
In that one of the bills for organizing our judiciary system which proposed a
court of chancery, I had provided for a trial by jury of all matters of fact in
that as well as in the courts of law. He defeated it by the introduction of 4.
words only, _"if either party chuse."_ The consequence has been that as no
suitor will say to his judge, "Sir, I distrust you, give me a jury" juries are
rarely, I might say perhaps never seen in that court, but when called for by the
Chancellor of his own accord.
The first establishment in Virginia which became permanent was made in 1607.
I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until about 1650. The first
brought here as slaves were by a Dutch ship; after which the English commenced
the trade and continued it until the revolutionary war. That suspended, ipso
facto, their further importation for the present, and the business of the war
pressing constantly on the legislature, this subject was not acted on finally
until the year 78. when I brought in a bill to prevent their further
importation. This passed without opposition, and stopped the increase of the
evil by importation, leaving to future efforts its final eradication.
The first settlers of this colony were Englishmen, loyal subjects to their
king and church, and the grant to Sr. Walter Raleigh contained an express
Proviso that their laws "should not be against the true Christian faith, now
professed in the church of England." As soon as the state of the colony
admitted, it was divided into parishes, in each of which was established a
minister of the Anglican church, endowed with a fixed salary, in tobacco, a
glebe house and land with the other necessary appendages. To meet these expenses
all the inhabitants of the parishes were assessed, whether they were or not,
members of the established church. Towards Quakers who came here they were most
cruelly intolerant, driving them from the colony by the severest penalties. In
process of time however, other sectarisms were introduced, chiefly of the
Presbyterian family; and the established clergy, secure for life in their glebes
and salaries, adding to these generally the emoluments of a classical school,
found employment enough, in their farms and schoolrooms for the rest of the
week, and devoted Sunday only to the edification of their flock, by service, and
a sermon at their parish church. Their other pastoral functions were little
attended to. Against this inactivity the zeal and industry of sectarian
preachers had an open and undisputed field; and by the time of the revolution, a
majority of the inhabitants had become dissenters from the established church,
but were still obliged to pay contributions to support the Pastors of the
minority. This unrighteous compulsion to maintain teachers of what they deemed
religious errors was grievously felt during the regal government, and without a
hope of relief. But the first republican legislature which met in 76. was
crowded with petitions to abolish this spiritual tyranny. These brought on the
severest contests in which I have ever been engaged. Our great opponents were
Mr. Pendleton & Robert Carter Nicholas, honest men, but zealous churchmen. The
petitions were referred to the commee of the whole house on the state of the
country; and after desperate contests in that committee, almost daily from the
11th of Octob. to the 5th of December, we prevailed so far only as to repeal the
laws which rendered criminal the maintenance of any religious opinions, the
forbearance of repairing to church, or the exercise of any mode of worship: and
further, to exempt dissenters from contributions to the support of the
established church; and to suspend, only until the next session levies on the
members of that church for the salaries of their own incumbents. For although
the majority of our citizens were dissenters, as has been observed, a majority
of the legislature were churchmen. Among these however were some reasonable and
liberal men, who enabled us, on some points, to obtain feeble majorities. But
our opponents carried in the general resolutions of the commee of Nov. 19. a
declaration that religious assemblies ought to be regulated, and that provision
ought to be made for continuing the succession of the clergy, and superintending
their conduct. And in the bill now passed was inserted an express reservation of
the question Whether a general assessment should not be established by law, on
every one, to the support of the pastor of his choice; or whether all should be
left to voluntary contributions; and on this question, debated at every session
from 76 to 79 (some of our dissenting allies, having now secured their
particular object, going over to the advocates of a general assessment) we could
only obtain a suspension from session to session until 79. when the question
against a general assessment was finally carried, and the establishment of the
Anglican church entirely put down. In justice to the two honest but zealous
opponents, who have been named I must add that altho', from their natural
temperaments, they were more disposed generally to acquiesce in things as they
are, than to risk innovations, yet whenever the public will had once decided,
none were more faithful or exact in their obedience to it.
The seat of our government had been originally fixed in the peninsula of
Jamestown, the first settlement of the colonists; and had been afterwards
removed a few miles inland to Williamsburg. But this was at a time when our
settlements had not extended beyond the tide water. Now they had crossed the
Alleghany; and the center of population was very far removed from what it had
been. Yet Williamsburg was still the depository of our archives, the habitual
residence of the Governor & many other of the public functionaries, the
established place for the sessions of the legislature, and the magazine of our
military stores: and it's situation was so exposed that it might be taken at any
time in war, and, at this time particularly, an enemy might in the night run up
either of the rivers between which it lies, land a force above, and take
possession of the place, without the possibility of saving either persons or
things. I had proposed it's removal so early as Octob. 76. but it did not
prevail until the session of May. '79.
Early in the session of May 79. I prepared, and obtained leave to bring in a
bill declaring who should be deemed citizens, asserting the natural right of
expatriation, and prescribing the mode of exercising it. This, when I withdrew
from the house on the 1st of June following, I left in the hands of George Mason
and it was passed on the 26th of that month.
In giving this account of the laws of which I was myself the mover &
draughtsman, I by no means mean to claim to myself the merit of obtaining their
passage. I had many occasional and strenuous coadjutors in debate, and one most
steadfast, able, and zealous; who was himself a host. This was George Mason, a
man of the first order of wisdom among those who acted on the theatre of the
revolution, of expansive mind, profound judgment, cogent in argument, learned in
the lore of our former constitution, and earnest for the republican change on
democratic principles. His elocution was neither flowing nor smooth, but his
language was strong, his manner most impressive, and strengthened by a dash of
biting cynicism when provocation made it seasonable.
Mr. Wythe, while speaker in the two sessions of 1777. between his return from
Congress and his appointment to the Chancery, was an able and constant associate
in whatever was before a committee of the whole. His pure integrity, judgment
and reasoning powers gave him great weight. Of him see more in some notes
inclosed in my letter of August 31. 1821, to Mr. John Saunderson.
Mr. Madison came into the House in 1776. a new member and young; which
circumstances, concurring with his extreme modesty, prevented his venturing
himself in debate before his removal to the Council of State in Nov. 77. From
thence he went to Congress, then consisting of few members. Trained in these
successive schools, he acquired a habit of self-possession which placed at ready
command the rich resources of his luminous and discriminating mind, & of his
extensive information, and rendered him the first of every assembly afterwards
of which he became a member. Never wandering from his subject into vain
declamation, but pursuing it closely in language pure, classical, and copious,
soothing always the feelings of his adversaries by civilities and softness of
expression, he rose to the eminent station which he held in the great National
convention of 1787. and in that of Virginia which followed, he sustained the new
constitution in all its parts, bearing off the palm against the logic of George
Mason, and the fervid declamation of Mr. Henry. With these consummate powers
were united a pure and spotless virtue which no calumny has ever attempted to
sully. Of the powers and polish of his pen, and of the wisdom of his
administration in the highest office of the nation, I need say nothing. They
have spoken, and will forever speak for themselves.
So far we were proceeding in the details of reformation only; selecting
points of legislation prominent in character & principle, urgent, and indicative
of the strength of the general pulse of reformation. When I left Congress, in
76. it was in the persuasion that our whole code must be reviewed, adapted to
our republican form of government, and, now that we had no negatives of
Councils, Governors & Kings to restrain us from doing right, that it should be
corrected, in all it's parts, with a single eye to reason, & the good of those
for whose government it was framed. Early therefore in the session of 76. to
which I returned, I moved and presented a bill for the revision of the laws;
which was passed on the 24th. of October, and on the 5th. of November Mr.
Pendleton, Mr. Wythe, George Mason, Thomas L. Lee and myself were appointed a
committee to execute the work. We agreed to meet at Fredericksburg to settle the
plan of operation and to distribute the work. We met there accordingly, on the
13th. of January 1777. The first question was whether we should propose to
abolish the whole existing system of laws, and prepare a new and complete
Institute, or preserve the general system, and only modify it to the present
state of things. Mr. Pendleton, contrary to his usual disposition in favor of
antient things, was for the former proposition, in which he was joined by Mr.
Lee. To this it was objected that to abrogate our whole system would be a bold
measure, and probably far beyond the views of the legislature; that they had
been in the practice of revising from time to time the laws of the colony,
omitting the expired, the repealed and the obsolete, amending only those
retained, and probably meant we should now do the same, only including the
British statutes as well as our own: that to compose a new Institute like those
of Justinian and Bracton, or that of Blackstone, which was the model proposed by
Mr. Pendleton, would be an arduous undertaking, of vast research, of great
consideration & judgment; and when reduced to a text, every word of that text,
from the imperfection of human language, and it's incompetence to express
distinctly every shade of idea, would become a subject of question & chicanery
until settled by repeated adjudications; that this would involve us for ages in
litigation, and render property uncertain until, like the statutes of old, every
word had been tried, and settled by numerous decisions, and by new volumes of
reports & commentaries; and that no one of us probably would undertake such a
work, which, to be systematical, must be the work of one hand. This last was the
opinion of Mr. Wythe, Mr. Mason & myself. When we proceeded to the distribution
of the work, Mr. Mason excused himself as, being no lawyer, he felt himself
unqualified for the work, and he resigned soon after. Mr. Lee excused himself on
the same ground, and died indeed in a short time. The other two gentlemen
therefore and myself divided the work among us. The common law and statutes to
the 4. James I. (when our separate legislature was established) were assigned to
me; the British statutes from that period to the present day to Mr. Wythe, and
the Virginia laws to Mr. Pendleton. As the law of Descents, & the criminal law
fell of course within my portion, I wished the commee to settle the leading
principles of these, as a guide for me in framing them. And with respect to the
first, I proposed to abolish the law of primogeniture, and to make real estate
descendible in parcenary to the next of kin, as personal property is by the
statute of distribution. Mr. Pendleton wished to preserve the right of
primogeniture, but seeing at once that that could not prevail, he proposed we
should adopt the Hebrew principle, and give a double portion to the elder son. I
observed that if the eldest son could eat twice as much, or do double work, it
might be a natural evidence of his right to a double portion; but being on a par
in his powers & wants, with his brothers and sisters, he should be on a par also
in the partition of the patrimony, and such was the decision of the other
members.
On the subject of the Criminal law, all were agreed that the punishment of
death should be abolished, except for treason and murder; and that, for other
felonies should be substituted hard labor in the public works, and in some
cases, the Lex talionis. How this last revolting principle came to obtain our
approbation, I do not remember. There remained indeed in our laws a vestige of
it in a single case of a slave. It was the English law in the time of the
Anglo-Saxons, copied probably from the Hebrew law of "an eye for an eye, a tooth
for a tooth," and it was the law of several antient people. But the modern mind
had left it far in the rear of it's advances. These points however being
settled, we repaired to our respective homes for the preparation of the work.
Feb. 6. In the execution of my part I thought it material not to vary the
diction of the antient statutes by modernizing it, nor to give rise to new
questions by new expressions. The text of these statutes had been so fully
explained and defined by numerous adjudications, as scarcely ever now to produce
a question in our courts. I thought it would be useful also, in all new
draughts, to reform the style of the later British statutes, and of our own acts
of assembly, which from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their
involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their
multiplied efforts at certainty by _saids_ and _aforesaids_, by _ors_ and by
_ands_, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and
incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to the lawyers themselves. We
were employed in this work from that time to Feb. 1779, when we met at
Williamsburg, that is to say, Mr. Pendleton, Mr. Wythe & myself, and meeting day
by day, we examined critically our several parts, sentence by sentence,
scrutinizing and amending until we had agreed on the whole. We then returned
home, had fair copies made of our several parts, which were reported to the
General Assembly June 18. 1779. by Mr. Wythe and myself, Mr. Pendleton's
residence being distant, and he having authorized us by letter to declare his
approbation. We had in this work brought so much of the Common law as it was
thought necessary to alter, all the British statutes from Magna Charta to the
present day, and all the laws of Virginia, from the establishment of our
legislature, in the 4th. Jac. 1. to the present time, which we thought should be
retained, within the compass of 126 bills, making a printed folio of 90 pages
only. Some bills were taken out occasionally, from time to time, and passed; but
the main body of the work was not entered on by the legislature until after the
general peace, in 1785. when by the unwearied exertions of Mr. Madison, in
opposition to the endless quibbles, chicaneries, perversions, vexations and
delays of lawyers and demi-lawyers, most of the bills were passed by the
legislature, with little alteration.
The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to
a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason
& right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the
preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that it's
protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares
that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion,
an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it
should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our
religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they
meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it's protection, the Jew and the
Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every
denomination.
Beccaria and other writers on crimes and punishments had satisfied the
reasonable world of the unrightfulness and inefficacy of the punishment of
crimes by death; and hard labor on roads, canals and other public works, had
been suggested as a proper substitute. The Revisors had adopted these opinions;
but the general idea of our country had not yet advanced to that point. The bill
therefore for proportioning crimes and punishments was lost in the House of
Delegates by a majority of a single vote. I learnt afterwards that the
substitute of hard labor in public was tried (I believe it was in Pennsylvania)
without success. Exhibited as a public spectacle, with shaved heads and mean
clothing, working on the high roads produced in the criminals such a prostration
of character, such an abandonment of self-respect, as, instead of reforming,
plunged them into the most desperate & hardened depravity of morals and
character. -- Pursue the subject of this law. -- I was written to in 1785 (being
then in Paris) by Directors appointed to superintend the building of a Capitol
in Richmond, to advise them as to a plan, and to add to it one of a prison.
Thinking it a favorable opportunity of introducing into the state an example of
architecture in the classic style of antiquity, and the Maison quarree of
Nismes, an antient Roman temple, being considered as the most perfect model
existing of what may be called Cubic architecture, I applied to M. Clerissault,
who had published drawings of the Antiquities of Nismes, to have me a model of
the building made in stucco, only changing the order from Corinthian to Ionic,
on account of the difficulty of the Corinthian capitals. I yielded with
reluctance to the taste of Clerissault, in his preference of the modern capital
of Scamozzi to the more noble capital of antiquity. This was executed by the
artist whom Choiseul Gouffier had carried with him to Constantinople, and
employed while Ambassador there, in making those beautiful models of the remains
of Grecian architecture which are to be seen at Paris. To adapt the exterior to
our use, I drew a plan for the interior, with the apartments necessary for
legislative, executive & judiciary purposes, and accommodated in their size and
distribution to the form and dimensions of the building. These were forwarded to
the Directors in 1786. and were carried into execution, with some variations not
for the better, the most important to which however admit of future correction.
With respect of the plan of a Prison, requested at the same time, I had heard of
a benevolent society in England which had been indulged by the government in an
experiment of the effect of labor in _solitary confinement_ on some of their
criminals, which experiment had succeeded beyond expectation. The same idea had
been suggested in France, and an Architect of Lyons had proposed a plan of a
well contrived edifice on the principle of solitary confinement. I procured a
copy, and as it was too large for our purposes, I drew one on a scale, less
extensive, but susceptible of additions as they should be wanting. This I sent
to the Directors instead of a plan of a common prison, in the hope that it would
suggest the idea of labor in solitary confinement instead of that on the public
works, which we had adopted in our Revised Code. It's principle accordingly, but
not it's exact form, was adopted by Latrobe in carrying the plan into execution,
by the erection of what is now called the Penitentiary, built under his
direction. In the meanwhile the public opinion was ripening by time, by
reflection, and by the example of Pensylva, where labor on the highways had been
tried without approbation from 1786 to 89. & had been followed by their
Penitentiary system on the principle of confinement and labor, which was
proceeding auspiciously. In 1796. our legislature resumed the subject and passed
the law for amending the Penal laws of the commonwealth. They adopted solitary,
instead of public labor, established a gradation in the duration of the
confinement, approximated the style of the law more to the modern usage, and
instead of the settled distinctions of murder & manslaughter, preserved in my
bill, they introduced the new terms of murder in the 1st & 2d degree. Whether
these have produced more or fewer questions of definition I am not sufficiently
informed of our judiciary transactions to say. I will here however insert the
text of my bill, with the notes I made in the course of my researches into the
subject.
Feb. 7. The acts of assembly concerning the College of Wm. & Mary, were
properly within Mr. Pendleton's portion of our work. But these related chiefly
to it's revenue, while it's constitution, organization and scope of science were
derived from it's charter. We thought, that on this subject a systematical plan
of general education should be proposed, and I was requested to undertake it. I
accordingly prepared three bills for the Revisal, proposing three distinct
grades of education, reaching all classes. 1. Elementary schools for all
children generally, rich and poor. 2. Colleges for a middle degree of
instruction, calculated for the common purposes of life, and such as would be
desirable for all who were in easy circumstances. And 3d. an ultimate grade for
teaching the sciences generally, & in their highest degree. The first bill
proposed to lay off every county into Hundreds or Wards, of a proper size and
population for a school, in which reading, writing, and common arithmetic should
be taught; and that the whole state should be divided into 24 districts, in each
of which should be a school for classical learning, grammar, geography, and the
higher branches of numerical arithmetic. The second bill proposed to amend the
constitution of Wm. & Mary College, to enlarge it's sphere of science, and to
make it in fact an University. The third was for the establishment of a library.
These bills were not acted on until the same year '96. and then only so much of
the first as provided for elementary schools. The College of Wm. & Mary was an
establishment purely of the Church of England, the Visitors were required to be
all of that Church; the Professors to subscribe it's 39 Articles, it's Students
to learn it's Catechism, and one of its fundamental objects was declared to be
to raise up Ministers for that church. The religious jealousies therefore of all
the dissenters took alarm lest this might give an ascendancy to the Anglican
sect and refused acting on that bill. Its local eccentricity too and unhealthy
autumnal climate lessened the general inclination towards it. And in the
Elementary bill they inserted a provision which completely defeated it, for they
left it to the court of each county to determine for itself when this act should
be carried into execution, within their county. One provision of the bill was
that the expenses of these schools should be borne by the inhabitants of the
county, every one in proportion to his general tax-rate. This would throw on
wealth the education of the poor; and the justices, being generally of the more
wealthy class, were unwilling to incur that burthen, and I believe it was not
suffered to commence in a single county. I shall recur again to this subject
towards the close of my story, if I should have life and resolution enough to
reach that term; for I am already tired of talking about myself.
The bill on the subject of slaves was a mere digest of the existing laws
respecting them, without any intimation of a plan for a future & general
emancipation. It was thought better that this should be kept back, and attempted
only by way of amendment whenever the bill should be brought on. The principles
of the amendment however were agreed on, that is to say, the freedom of all born
after a certain day, and deportation at a proper age. But it was found that the
public mind would not yet bear the proposition, nor will it bear it even at this
day. Yet the day is not distant when it must bear and adopt it, or worse will
follow. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these
people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free,
cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible
lines of distinction between them. It is still in our power to direct the
process of emancipation and deportation peaceably and in such slow degree as
that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their place be pari passu filled up
by free white laborers. If on the contrary it is left to force itself on, human
nature must shudder at the prospect held up. We should in vain look for an
example in the Spanish deportation or deletion of the Moors. This precedent
would fall far short of our case.
I considered 4 of these bills, passed or reported, as forming a system by
which every fibre would be eradicated of antient or future aristocracy; and a
foundation laid for a government truly republican. The repeal of the laws of
entail would prevent the accumulation and perpetuation of wealth in select
families, and preserve the soil of the country from being daily more & more
absorbed in Mortmain. The abolition of primogeniture, and equal partition of
inheritances removed the feudal and unnatural distinctions which made one member
of every family rich, and all the rest poor, substituting equal partition, the
best of all Agrarian laws. The restoration of the rights of conscience relieved
the people from taxation for the support of a religion not theirs; for the
establishment was truly of the religion of the rich, the dissenting sects being
entirely composed of the less wealthy people; and these, by the bill for a
general education, would be qualified to understand their rights, to maintain
them, and to exercise with intelligence their parts in self-government: and all
this would be effected without the violation of a single natural right of any
one individual citizen. To these too might be added, as a further security, the
introduction of the trial by jury, into the Chancery courts, which have already
ingulfed and continue to ingulf, so great a proportion of the jurisdiction over
our property.
On the 1st of June 1779. I was appointed Governor of the Commonwealth and
retired from the legislature. Being elected also one of the Visitors of Wm. &
Mary college, a self-electing body, I effected, during my residence in
Williamsburg that year, a change in the organization of that institution by
abolishing the Grammar school, and the two professorships of Divinity & Oriental
languages, and substituting a professorship of Law & Police, one of Anatomy
Medicine and Chemistry, and one of Modern languages; and the charter confining
us to six professorships, we added the law of Nature & Nations, & the Fine Arts
to the duties of the Moral professor, and Natural history to those of the
professor of Mathematics and Natural philosophy.
Being now, as it were, identified with the Commonwealth itself, to write my
own history during the two years of my administration, would be to write the
public history of that portion of the revolution within this state. This has
been done by others, and particularly by Mr. Girardin, who wrote his
Continuation of Burke's history of Virginia while at Milton, in this
neighborhood, had free access to all my papers while composing it, and has given
as faithful an account as I could myself. For this portion therefore of my own
life, I refer altogether to his history. From a belief that under the pressure
of the invasion under which we were then laboring the public would have more
confidence in a Military chief, and that the Military commander, being invested
with the Civil power also, both might be wielded with more energy promptitude
and effect for the defence of the state, I resigned the administration at the
end of my 2d. year, and General Nelson was appointed to succeed me.
Soon after my leaving Congress in Sep. '76, to wit on the last day of that
month, I had been appointed, with Dr. Franklin, to go to France, as a
Commissioner to negotiate treaties of alliance and commerce with that
government. Silas Deane, then in France, acting as agent (* 2) for procuring
military stores, was joined with us in commission. But such was the state of my
family that I could not leave it, nor could I expose it to the dangers of the
sea, and of capture by the British ships, then covering the ocean. I saw too
that the laboring oar was really at home, where much was to be done of the most
permanent interest in new modelling our governments, and much to defend our
fanes and fire-sides from the desolations of an invading enemy pressing on our
country in every point. I declined therefore and Dr. Lee was appointed in my
place. On the 15th. of June 1781. I had been appointed with Mr. Adams, Dr.
Franklin, Mr. Jay, and Mr. Laurens a Minister plenipotentiary for negotiating
peace, then expected to be effected thro' the mediation of the Empress of
Russia. The same reasons obliged me still to decline; and the negotiation was in
fact never entered on. But, in the autumn of the next year 1782 Congress
receiving assurances that a general peace would be concluded in the winter and
spring, they renewed my appointment on the 13th. of Nov. of that year. I had two
months before that lost the cherished companion of my life, in whose affections,
unabated on both sides, I had lived the last ten years in unchequered happiness.
With the public interests, the state of my mind concurred in recommending the
change of scene proposed; and I accepted the appointment, and left Monticello on
the 19th. of Dec. 1782. for Philadelphia, where I arrived on the 27th. The
Minister of France, Luzerne, offered me a passage in the Romulus frigate, which
I accepting. But she was then lying a few miles below Baltimore blocked up in
the ice. I remained therefore a month in Philadelphia, looking over the papers
in the office of State in order to possess myself of the general state of our
foreign relations, and then went to Baltimore to await the liberation of the
frigate from the ice. After waiting there nearly a month, we received
information that a Provisional treaty of peace had been signed by our
Commissioners on the 3d. of Sept. 1782. to become absolute on the conclusion of
peace between France and Great Britain. Considering my proceeding to Europe as
now of no utility to the public, I returned immediately to Philadelphia to take
the orders of Congress, and was excused by them from further proceeding. I
therefore returned home, where I arrived on the 15th. of May, 1783.
(* 2) His ostensible character was to be that of a merchant, his real one
that of agent for military supplies, and also for sounding the dispositions of
the government of France, and seeing how far they would favor us, either
secretly or openly. His appointment had been by the Committee of Foreign
Correspondence, March, 1776.
On the 6th. of the following month I was appointed by the legislature a
delegate to Congress, the appointment to take place on the 1st. of Nov. ensuing,
when that of the existing delegation would expire. I accordingly left home on
the 16th. of Oct. arrived at Trenton, where Congress was sitting, on the 3d. of
Nov. and took my seat on the 4th., on which day Congress adjourned to meet at
Annapolis on the 26th.
Congress had now become a very small body, and the members very remiss in
their attendance on it's duties insomuch that a majority of the states,
necessary by the Confederation to constitute a house even for minor business did
not assemble until the 13th. of December.
They as early as Jan. 7. 1782. had turned their attention to the monies
current in the several states, and had directed the Financier, Robert Morris, to
report to them a table of rates at which the foreign coins should be received at
the treasury. That officer, or rather his assistant, Gouverneur Morris, answered
them on the 15th in an able and elaborate statement of the denominations of
money current in the several states, and of the comparative value of the foreign
coins chiefly in circulation with us. He went into the consideration of the
necessity of establishing a standard of value with us, and of the adoption of a
money-Unit. He proposed for the Unit such a fraction of pure silver as would be
a common measure of the penny of every state, without leaving a fraction. This
common divisor he found to be 1 -- 1440 of a dollar, or 1 -- 1600 of the crown
sterling. The value of a dollar was therefore to be expressed by 1440 units, and
of a crown by 1600. Each Unit containing a quarter of a grain of fine silver.
Congress turning again their attention to this subject the following year, the
financier, by a letter of Apr. 30, 1783. further explained and urged the Unit he
had proposed; but nothing more was done on it until the ensuing year, when it
was again taken up, and referred to a commee of which I was a member. The
general views of the financier were sound, and the principle was ingenious on
which he proposed to found his Unit. But it was too minute for ordinary use, too
laborious for computation either by the head or in figures. The price of a loaf
of bread 1 -- 20 of a dollar would be 72. units.
A pound of butter 1 -- 5 of a dollar 288. units.
A horse or bullock of 80. D value would require a notation of 6. figures, to
wit 115,200, and the public debt, suppose of 80. millions, would require 12.
figures, to wit 115,200,000,000 units. Such a system of money-arithmetic would
be entirely unmanageable for the common purposes of society. I proposed
therefore, instead of this, to adopt the Dollar as our Unit of account and
payment, and that it's divisions and sub-divisions should be in the decimal
ratio. I wrote some Notes on the subject, which I submitted to the consideration
of the financier. I received his answer and adherence to his general system,
only agreeing to take for his Unit 100. of those he first proposed, so that a
Dollar should be 14 40 -- 100 and a crown 16. units. I replied to this and
printed my notes and reply on a flying sheet, which I put into the hands of the
members of Congress for consideration, and the Committee agreed to report on my
principle. This was adopted the ensuing year and is the system which now
prevails. I insert here the Notes and Reply, as shewing the different views on
which the adoption of our money system hung. The division into dimes, cents &
mills is now so well understood, that it would be easy of introduction into the
kindred branches of weights & measures. I use, when I travel, an Odometer of
Clarke's invention which divides the mile into cents, and I find every one
comprehend a distance readily when stated to them in miles & cents; so they
would in feet and cents, pounds & cents, &c.
The remissness of Congress, and their permanent session, began to be a
subject of uneasiness and even some of the legislatures had recommended to them
intermissions, and periodical sessions. As the Confederation had made no
provision for a visible head of the government during vacations of Congress, and
such a one was necessary to superintend the executive business, to receive and
communicate with foreign ministers & nations, and to assemble Congress on sudden
and extraordinary emergencies, I proposed early in April the appointment of a
commee to be called the Committee of the states, to consist of a member from
each state, who should remain in session during the recess of Congress: that the
functions of Congress should be divided into Executive and Legislative, the
latter to be reserved, and the former, by a general resolution to be delegated
to that Committee. This proposition was afterwards agreed to; a Committee
appointed, who entered on duty on the subsequent adjourn-ment of Congress,
quarrelled very soon, split into two parties, abandoned their post, and left the
government without any visible head until the next meeting in Congress. We have
since seen the same thing take place in the Directory of France; and I believe
it will forever take place in any Executive consisting of a plurality. Our plan,
best I believe, combines wisdom and practicability, by providing a plurality of
Counsellors, but a single Arbiter for ultimate decision. I was in France when we
heard of this schism, and separation of our Committee, and, speaking with Dr.
Franklin of this singular disposition of men to quarrel and divide into parties,
he gave his sentiments as usual by way of Apologue. He mentioned the Eddystone
lighthouse in the British channel as being built on a rock in the mid-channel,
totally inaccessible in winter, from the boisterous character of that sea, in
that season. That therefore, for the two keepers employed to keep up the lights,
all provisions for the winter were necessarily carried to them in autumn, as
they could never be visited again till the return of the milder season. That on
the first practicable day in the spring a boat put off to them with fresh
supplies. The boatmen met at the door one of the keepers and accosted him with a
How goes it friend? Very well. How is your companion? I do not know. Don't know?
Is not he here? I can't tell. Have not you seen him to-day? No. When did you see
him? Not since last fall. You have killed him? Not I, indeed. They were about to
lay hold of him, as having certainly murdered his companion; but he desired them
to go up stairs & examine for themselves. They went up, and there found the
other keeper. They had quarrelled it seems soon after being left there, had
divided into two parties, assigned the cares below to one, and those above to
the other, and had never spoken to or seen one another since.
But to return to our Congress at Annapolis, the definitive treaty of peace
which had been signed at Paris on the 3d. of Sep. 1783. and received here, could
not be ratified without a House of 9. states. On the 23d. of Dec. therefore we
addressed letters to the several governors, stating the receipt of the
definitive treaty, that 7 states only were in attendance, while 9. were
necessary to its ratification, and urging them to press on their delegates the
necessity of their immediate attendance. And on the 26th. to save time I moved
that the Agent of Marine (Robert Morris) should be instructed to have ready a
vessel at this place, at N. York, & at some Eastern port, to carry over the
ratification of the treaty when agreed to. It met the general sense of the
house, but was opposed by Dr. Lee on the ground of expense which it would
authorize the agent to incur for us; and he said it would be better to ratify at
once & send on the ratification. Some members had before suggested that 7 states
were competent to the ratification. My motion was therefore postponed and
another brought forward by Mr. Read of S. C. for an immediate ratification. This
was debated the 26th. and 27th. Reed, Lee, [Hugh] Williamson & Jeremiah Chace
urged that ratification was a mere matter of form, that the treaty was
conclusive from the moment it was signed by the ministers; that although the
Confederation requires the assent of 9. _states_ to _enter into_ a treaty, yet
that it's conclusion could not be called _entrance into it_; that supposing 9.
states requisite, it would be in the power of 5. states to keep us always at
war; that 9. states had virtually authorized the ratifion having ratified the
provisional treaty, and instructed their ministers to agree to a definitive one
in the same terms, and the present one was in fact substantially and almost
verbatim the same; that there now remain but 67. days for the ratification, for
it's passage across the Atlantic, and it's exchange; that there was no hope of
our soon having 9. states present; in fact that this was the ultimate point of
time to which we could venture to wait; that if the ratification was not in
Paris by the time stipulated, the treaty would become void; that if ratified by
7 states, it would go under our seal without it's being known to Gr. Britain
that only 7. had concurred; that it was a question of which they had no right to
take cognizance, and we were only answerable for it to our constituents; that it
was like the ratification which Gr. Britain had received from the Dutch by the
negotiations of Sr. Wm. Temple.
On the contrary, it was argued by Monroe, Gerry, Howel, Ellery & myself that
by the modern usage of Europe the ratification was considered as the act which
gave validity to a treaty, until which it was not obligatory. (* 3) That the
commission to the ministers reserved the ratification to Congress; that the
treaty itself stipulated that it should be ratified; that it became a 2d.
question who were competent to the ratification? That the Confederation
expressly required 9 states to enter into any treaty; that, by this, that
instrument must have intended that the assent of 9. states should be necessary
as well to the _completion_ as to the _commencement_ of the treaty, it's object
having been to guard the rights of the Union in all those important cases where
9. states are called for; that, by the contrary construction, 7 states,
containing less than one third of our whole citizens, might rivet on us a
treaty, commenced indeed under commission and instructions from 9. states, but
formed by the minister in express contradiction to such instructions, and in
direct sacrifice of the interests of so great a majority; that the definitive
treaty was admitted not to be a verbal copy of the provisional one, and whether
the departures from it were of substance or not, was a question on which 9.
states alone were competent to decide; that the circumstances of the
ratification of the provisional articles by 9. states, the instructions to our
ministers to form a definitive one by them, and their actual agreement in
substance, do not render us competent to ratify in the present instance; if
these circumstances are in themselves a ratification, nothing further is
requisite than to give attested copies of them, in exchange for the British
ratification; if they are not, we remain where we were, without a ratification
by 9. states, and incompetent ourselves to ratify; that it was but 4. days since
the seven states now present unanimously concurred in a resolution to be
forwarded to the governors of the absent states, in which they stated as a cause
for urging on their delegates, that 9. states were necessary to ratify the
treaty; that in the case of the Dutch ratification, Gr. Britain had courted it,
and therefore was glad to accept it as it was; that they knew our constitution,
and would object to a ratification by 7. that if that circumstance was kept
back, it would be known hereafter, & would give them ground to deny the validity
of a ratification into which they should have been surprised and cheated, and it
would be a dishonorable prostitution of our seal; that there is a hope of 9.
states; that if the treaty would become null if not ratified in time, it would
not be saved by an imperfect ratification; but that in fact it would not be
null, and would be placed on better ground, going in unexceptionable form, tho'
a few days too late, and rested on the small importance of this circumstance,
and the physical impossibilities which had prevented a punctual compliance in
point of time; that this would be approved by all nations, & by Great Britain
herself, if not determined to renew the war, and if determined, she would never
want excuses, were this out of the way. Mr. Reade gave notice he should call for
the yeas & nays; whereon those in opposition prepared a resolution expressing
pointedly the reasons of the dissent from his motion. It appearing however that
his proposition could not be car-ried, it was thought better to make no entry at
all. Massa-chusetts alone would have been for it; Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and
Virginia against it, Delaware, Maryland & N. Carolina, would have been divided.
(* 3) Vattel, L. 2, 156. L, 77. I. Mably Droit D'Europe, 86.
Our body was little numerous, but very contentious. Day after day wa |