NEW YORK CONVENTION.

Mr. M. SMITH. He would now proceed to state his objections to the

clause just read, (section 2, of article 1, clause 3). His objections

were comprised under three heads: 1st, the rule of apportionment is

unjust; 2d, there is no precise number fixed on, below which the house

shall not be reduced; 3d, it is inadequate. In the first place, the

rule of apportionment of the representatives is to be according to the

whole number of the white inhabitants, with three-fifths of all

others; that is, in plain English, each State is to send

representatives in proportion to the number of freemen, and

three-fifths of the slaves it contains. He could not see any rule by

which slaves were to be included in the ratio of representation;--the

principle of a representation being that every free agent should be

concerned in governing himself, it was absurd to give that power to a

man who could not exercise it--slaves have no will of their own: the

very operation of it was to give certain privileges to those people

who were so wicked as to keep slaves. He knew it would be admitted,

that this rule of apportionment was founded on unjust principles, but

that it was the result of accommodation; which, he supposed, we should

be under the necessity of admitting, if we meant to be in union with

the southern States, though utterly repugnant to his feelings.

Mr. HAMILTON. In order that the committee may understand clearly the

principles on which the General Convention acted, I think it necessary

to explain some preliminary circumstances.

Sir, the natural situation of this country seems to divide its

interests into different classes. There are navigating and

non-navigating States--the Northern are properly the navigating

States: the Southern appear to possess neither the means nor the

spirit of navigation. This difference of situation naturally produces

a dissimilarity of interest and views respecting foreign commerce. It

was the interest of the Northern States that there should be no

restraints on the navigation, and that they should have full power, by

a majority on Congress, to make commercial regulations. The Southern

States wished to impose a restraint on the Northern, by requiring that

two-thirds in Congress should be requisite to pass an act in

regulation of commerce: they were apprehensive that the restraints of

a navigation law would discourage foreigners, and by obliging them to

employ the shipping of the Northern States would probably enhance

their freight. This being the case, they insisted strenuously on

having this provision engrafted in the Constitution; and the Northern

States were as anxious in opposing it. On the other hand, the small

States seeing themselves embraced by the confederation upon equal

terms, wished to retain the advantages which they already possessed:

the large States, on the contrary, thought it improper that Rhode

Island and Delaware should enjoy an equal suffrage with themselves:

from these sources a delicate and difficult contest arose. It became

necessary, therefore, to compromise; or the Convention must have

dissolved without effecting any thing. Would it have been wise and

prudent in that body, in this critical situation, to have deserted

their country? No. Every man who hears me--every wise man in the

United States, would have condemned them. The Convention were obliged

to appoint a committee for accommodation. In this committee the

arrangement was formed as it now stands; and their report was

accepted. It was a delicate point; and it was necessary that all

parties should be indulged. Gentlemen will see, that if there had not

been a unanimity, nothing could have been done: for the Convention had

no power to establish, but only to recommend a government. Any other

system would have been impracticable. Let a Convention be called

to-morrow--let them meet twenty times; nay, twenty thousand times;

they will have the same difficulties to encounter; the same clashing

interests to reconcile.

But dismissing these reflections, let us consider how far the

arrangement is in itself entitled to the approbation of this body. We

will examine it upon its own merits.

The first thing objected to, is that clause which allows a

representation for three-fifths of the negroes. Much has been said of

the impropriety of representing men, who have no will of their own.

Whether this be reasoning or declamation, I will not presume to say.

It is the unfortunate situation of the southern States, to have a

great part of their population, as well as property, in blacks. The

regulations complained of was one result of the spirit of

accommodation, which governed the Convention; and without this

indulgence, no union could possibly have been formed. But, sir,

considering some peculiar advantages which we derived from them, it is

entirely just that they should be gratified. The southern States

possess certain staples, tobacco, rice, indigo, &c., which must be

capital objects in treaties of commerce with foreign nations; and the

advantage which they necessarily procure in these treaties will be

felt throughout all the States. But the justice of this plan will

appear in another view. The best writers on government have held that

representation should be compounded of persons and property. This rule

has been adopted, as far as it could be, in the Constitution of New

York. It will, however, by no means, be admitted, that the slaves are

considered altogether as property. They are men, though degraded to

the condition of slavery. They are persons known to the municipal laws

of the States which they inhabit as well as to the laws of nature. But

representation and taxation go together--and one uniform rule ought to

apply to both. Would it be just to compute these slaves in the

assessment of taxes, and discard them from the estimate in the

apportionment of representatives? Would it be just to impose a

singular burthen, without conferring some adequate advantage?

Another circumstance ought to be considered. The rule we have been

speaking of is a general rule, and applies to all the States. Now, you

have a great number of people in your State, which are not represented

at all; and have no voice in your government: these will be included

in the enumeration--not two-fifths--nor three-fifths, but the whole.

This proves that the advantages of the plan are not confined to the

southern States, but extend to other parts of the Union.

Mr. M. SMITH. I shall make no reply to the arguments offered by the

honorable gentleman to justify the rule of apportionment fixed by this

clause: for though I am confident they might be easily refuted, yet I

am persuaded we must yield this point, in accommodation to the

southern States. The amendment therefore proposes no alteration to the

clause in this respect.

Mr. HARRISON. Among the objections, that, which has been made to the

mode of apportionment of representatives, has been relinquished. I

think this concession does honor to the gentleman who had stated the

objection. He has candidly acknowledged, that this apportionment was

the result of accommodation; without which no union could have been

formed.

* * * * *

The Anti-Slavery Examiner, Part 3 of 4 · 第 268 / 294 题