the whole project made itself manifest in Kent county.[508] In
Chatham, the county town, a meeting of protest was held. The plans of
the Elgin Association were condemned and a resolution was passed
setting forth objections to selling any of the public domain "to
foreigners, the more so when such persons belong to a different branch
of the human family and are black." A vigilance committee was
appointed to watch the operations of the Elgin Association while the
various township councils interested were requested to advance the
necessary funds for carrying on the campaign. That there was some
dissent, however, even in Chatham is shown by the fact that one Henry
Gouins was allowed to speak in favor of the Association. The vigilance
committee soon issued a small pamphlet, made up chiefly of the
speeches and resolutions of the public meeting. The name of Edwin
Larwill, member of Parliament for the county of Kent, appears as one
of those most active in opposition to the settlement plan. Larwill had
a record for hostility to the colored people though at election times
he was accustomed to parade as their friend. In 1856 he introduced in
the House of Assembly a most insulting resolution[509] calling for a
report from the government on "all negro or colored, male or female
quadroon, mulatto, samboes, half breeds or mules, mongrels or
conglomerates" in public institutions. Larwill was at once called to
account for his action and a resolution was introduced calling upon
him to retract.
The opposition of Larwill and his supporters failed to impede the
progress of the Association and a tract of about 9000 acres, lying to
the south of Chatham and within a mile or two of Lake Erie, was
purchased. This was surveyed and divided into small farms of fifty
acres each, roads were cut through the dense forest and the first
settlers began the arduous work of clearing. The colonists were
allowed to take up fifty acres each at a price of $2.50 per acre,
payable in ten annual instalments.[510] Each settler was bound within
a certain period to build a house at least as good as the model house
set up by the Association, to provide himself with necessary
implements and to proceed with the work of clearing land. The model
house after which nearly all the dwellings were copied was 18 by 24
feet, 12 feet in height and with a stoop running the length of the
front. Some of the settlers were ambitious enough to build larger and
better houses but there were none inferior to the model. The tract of
country upon which the settlers were located was an almost unbroken
forest. The ground was level, heavily timbered with oak, hickory,
beech, elm, etc. Part of the soil was a deep rich black loam. Trees
two to four feet in diameter were common and the roads cut through to
open up settlement were hardly more than wide lanes. Rev. Mr. King
thought that one reason for the colony's success was the fact that so
many of the settlers were good axe men. Their industry was remarkable
and some of the more industrious paid for their land in five or six
years and took up more to clear.[511]
There are several contemporary references to the sobriety and morality
of the colonists. The _New York Tribune_ correspondent in 1857 was
able to report that liquor was neither made nor sold in the colony and
that drunkenness was unknown. There was no illegitimacy and there had
been but one arrest for violation of the Canadian laws in the seven
years of the colony's history. Though the Presbyterian church gave
special attention to the Buxton colony this did not hinder the growth
of other sects, Methodists and Baptists both being numerous, though
the best of feeling seems to have prevailed and many who retained
their own connection were fairly regular attendants at Mr. King's
services.
The _Tribune_ article gives an interesting description of the homes.
The cabins, though rough and rude, were covered with vines and
creepers with bright flowers and vegetable gardens round about.
Despite the pioneer conditions there abounded comfort and plenty of
plain homemade furniture. Pork, potatoes and green corn were staple
items of the menu. Of King's former slaves the _Tribune_ reports that
three had died, nine were at Buxton, one was married and living in
Chatham and two others in Detroit were about to return. The _Tribune_
reports on one case as typical of what was being achieved by the
colony. A colored man, fourteen years before a slave in Missouri and
who had been at Buxton six years, reported that he had 24 acres out
of his plot cleared, fenced and under cultivation. On six acres more
the trees were felled. He had paid four installments on his farm,
owned a yoke of oxen, a wagon and a mare and two colts. His
fourteen-year-old boy was at school and was reading Virgil. In the
home, besides bed and bedding, chairs and tables, there was a rocking
chair and a large, new safe. Water was brought to the visitor in a
clean tumbler, set upon a plate. A neighboring cabin had carpet on the
floor and some crude prints on the walls. All the cabins had large
brick fireplaces. Rev. Mr. King's own house, built of logs with high
steep roof, dormer windows and a porch the whole length, was somewhat
larger than the others.[512]
What these people actually accomplished at Buxton amid conditions so
different from what they had known in the past is altogether
remarkable. Some had known little of farm work before coming to the
colony while all of them must have found the Canadian climate
something of a hardship even in the summer. Outside of the farm work
they showed ability as mechanics and tradesmen. One who visited them
in the fifties says:[513]
"The best country tavern in Kent is kept by Mr. West, at Buxton.
Mr. T. Stringer is one of the most enterprising tradesmen in the
county, and he is a Buxtonian, a colored man. I broke my carriage
near there. The woodwork, as well as the iron, was broken. I
never had better repairing done to either the woodwork or the
ironwork of my carriage, I never had better shoeing than was done
to my horses, in Buxton, in Feb., 1852, by a black man, a native
of Kentucky--in a word, the work was done after the pattern of
Charles Peyton Lucas. They are blessed with able mechanics, good
farmers, enterprising men, and women worthy of them and they are
training the rising generation to principles such as will give
them the best places in the esteem and the service of their
countrymen at some day not far distant."
A few years sufficed to remove most of the prejudice that had shown
itself in the opposition of the Larwill faction at Chatham at the
inception of the colony. When Rev. S. R. Ward visited the colony in
the early fifties he found that instead of lowering land values of
adjoining property as some had predicted would result from
establishing a Negro colony in Kent county, the Buxton settlement had
actually raised the value of adjoining farms. The Buxton settlers were
spoken of by the white people as good farmers, good customers and good
neighbors. There were white children attending the Buxton school and
white people in their Sunday church services.
Perhaps no finer testimony to the success of the whole undertaking is
recorded than that of Dr. Samuel R. Howe who came to Canada for the
Freedmen's Inquiry Committee.
"Buxton is certainly a very interesting place," he wrote.
"Sixteen years ago it was a wilderness. Now, good highways are
laid out in all directions through the forest, and by their side,
standing back 33 feet from the road, are about 200 cottages, all
built in the same pattern, all looking neat and comfortable;
around each one is a cleared place of several acres which is well
cultivated. The fences are in good order, the barns seem well
filled, and cattle and horses, and pigs and poultry, abound.
There are signs of industry and thrift and comfort everywhere;
signs of intemperance, of idleness, of want nowhere. There is no
tavern and no groggery; but there is a chapel and a schoolhouse.
Most interesting of all are the inhabitants. Twenty years ago
most of them were slaves, who owned nothing, not even their
children. Now they own themselves; they own their houses and
farms; and they have their wives and children about them. They
are enfranchised citizens of a government which protects their
rights.... The present condition of all these colonists as
compared with their former one is remarkable.... This settlement
is a perfect success. Here are men who were bred in slavery, who
came here and purchased land at the government price, cleared it,
bought their own implements, built their own houses after a model
and have supported themselves in all material circumstances and
now support their schools in part.... I consider that this
settlement has done as well as a white settlement would have
done under the same circumstances."[514]
The Buxton settlement had its part in the John Brown affair. A letter
written by John Brown, Jr., from Sandusky, Ohio, August 27, 1859, and
addressed to "Friend Henrie," (Kagi), speaks of men in Hamilton,
Chatham, Buxton, etc., suitable for the enterprise.
"At Dr. W's house (presumably in Hamilton) we formed an
association," he says, "the officers consisting of chairman,
treasurer and corresponding secretary, the business of which is
to hunt up good workmen and raise the means among themselves to
send them forward.... No minutes of the organization nor any of
its proceedings are or will be preserved in writing. I formed
similar associations in Chat--and also at B-x-t-n."
John Brown, Jr., also speaks of going to Buxton where he found "the
man, the leading spirit in that affair."
"On Thursday night last" said he, "I went with him on foot 12
miles; much of the way through mere paths and sought out in the
bush some of the choicest. Had a meeting after ten o'clock at
night in his house. His wife is a heroine and he will be on hand
as soon as his family can be provided for."[515]
Such is the earlier history of the experiment in Canada of taking
bondmen and placing before them the opportunity not alone to make a
living in freedom but also to rise in the social scale. How well these
people took advantage of their opportunity is shown not only by the
material progress they made but by the fact that they gained for
themselves the respect of their white neighbors, a respect that
continues today for their many descendants who still comprise the
Buxton community in Kent county, Ontario.
FRED LANDON
PUBLIC LIBRARIAN, LONDON, CANADA, AND LECTURER IN AMERICAN HISTORY IN
WESTERN UNIVERSITY, LONDON.
FOOTNOTES:
[507] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, 1856, p. 292.
[508] Documents in Canadian Archives Department.
[509] _Toronto Weekly Globe_, January 1, 1858.
[510] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, 1856, pp. 292-293.
[511] The slaves who had been freed by Mr. King formed the nucleus of
the colony but others came as soon as the land was thrown open. The
advances made by this colony during the first years of its existence
were remarkable. The third annual report for the year 1852, showed a
population of 75 families or 400 inhabitants, with 350 acres of land
cleared and 204 acres under cultivation. A year later, the fourth
annual report showed 130 families or 520 persons, with 500 acres of
land cleared and 135 partially cleared, 415 acres being under
cultivation in 1853. The live stock was given as 128 cattle, 15
horses, 30 sheep and 250 hogs. The day school had 112 children
enrolled and the Sabbath School 80.
The fifth report, for the year 1854, showed 150 families in the colony
or immediately adjoining it, 726 acres of land cleared, 174 acres
partially cleared and 577 acres under cultivation. In the year there
had been an increase of cleared land amounting to 226 acres and of
land under cultivation of 162 acres. The livestock consisted of 150
cattle and oxen, 38 horses, 25 sheep and 700 hogs. The day school had
147 on the roll and the Sabbath School 120. A second day school was
opened that year.
The sixth annual report (1855) shows 827 acres of land cleared and
fenced and 216 acres chopped and to go under cultivation in 1856.
There were 810 acres cultivated that year while the live stock
consisted of 190 cattle and oxen, 40 horses, 38 sheep and 600 hogs.
The day school had an enrollment of 150. Among the advances of this
year was the erection of a saw and grist mill which supplied the
colony with lumber and with flour and feed. The building of the saw
mill meant added prosperity, for an estimate made in 1854 placed the
value of the standing timber at $127,000.
A representative of the _New York Tribune_ visited the colony in 1857
and his description of what he saw was reprinted in the _Toronto
Globe_ of November 20, 1857. The colony was then seven years old and
had a population of about 200 families or 800 souls. More than 1,000
acres had been completely cleared while on 200 acres more the trees
had been felled and the land would be put under cultivation the next
spring. The acreage under cultivation in the season of 1857 he gives
as follows: corn, 354 acres; wheat, 200 acres; oats, 70 acres;
potatoes, 80 acres; other crops, 120 acres. The live stock consisted
of 200 cows, 80 oxen, 300 hogs, 52 horses and a small number of sheep.
The industries included a steam sawmill, a brickyard, pearl ash
factory, blacksmith, carpenter and shoe shops as well as a good
general store. There were two schools, one male and one female. The
latter, which had been open only about a year, taught plain sewing and
other domestic subjects. The two schools had a combined enrollment of
140 with average attendance of 58. It was being proposed to require a
small payment in order to make the schools self-supporting. The
Sabbath school had an enrollment of 112 and an average attendance of
52.--Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, pp. 293-297.
[512] _The New York Tribune._
[513] Ward, _Autobiography of a Fugitive Negro_, 1855, p. 214.
[514] Howe, _Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, 1864, pp. 70-71.
[515] _Toronto Weekly Globe_, November 4, 1859.
FIFTY YEARS OF HOWARD UNIVERSITY[516]
PART II
The crisis in the financial affairs of the University, already
mentioned, was the natural result of over confidence in the readiness
of philanthropists to rally to the aid of a needy cause. This
disappointment, however, was a valuable experience, for it became
clear that philanthropists were not inclined to grant very generous
aid to an institution established under the patronage of the Federal
Government, especially in the face of the frequent and insistent
appeals from less fortunate institutions serving the same people. It
was an incorrect assumption, however, that the United States Treasury
was paying the current expenses, for it must be remembered that no
part of the original grants of the Freedmen's Bureau was or could be
invested as permanent endowment or used for salaries, equipment or
maintenance; and that during the first decade of the existence of the
University no public funds were appropriated for these purposes. In
spite of this, its reputation as a ward of the United States
Government was, to its great disadvantage, accepted by philanthropists
as justified.
When, in 1873, the Freedmen's Bureau was abolished, General Howard
resigned from the presidency of the University to enter the army. Not
desiring to accept his resignation immediately, however, the trustees
granted him an indefinite leave of absence.[517] At the same meeting
it was decided to revive the office of Vice-President, which had been
discontinued and John M. Langston, then Dean of the Howard Law School,
was elected to that position. "It had been hoped," says one, "that
the experiment of placing an able colored man in this high position
would stimulate his own race and the minds of white philanthropists to
sustain the institution in its perilous struggles." But the lack of
funds continued. Convinced that a permanent president must be at once
secured, Mr. Langston resigned the vice-presidency in 1875.
An unfortunate combination of conditions that might well baffle the
ablest administrators then obtained. The outlook was so gloomy that it
was difficult to find a person both capable and willing to succeed to
the position left vacant. Upon Mr. Langston's resignation, Reverend
George Whipple, Secretary of the American Missionary Association was
elected president but after due consideration declined the honor. On
December 16, 1875, Edward P. Smith, a trustee of the University and a
member of the Executive Committee, was elected. After serving a few
weeks he departed on an expedition for the American Missionary
Association to the west coast of Africa where he died, June 15, 1875.
Meanwhile Senator Pomeroy acted as chairman of the board of trustees
and Professor Frederick W. Fairfield served efficiently as acting
president, having supervision over matters purely educational. This
was the period of the most rigid retrenchment in expenses.
But Howard was to find a way out of this difficulty and move onward.
The second epoch in the history of the University began when, on April
25, 1876, the Reverend Doctor William W. Patton was elected president.
His administration, lasting over a term of twelve years, was a period
of recovery and consolidation, and an era of good feeling. Dr. Patton
came to his task equipped with just the qualities needed at that time.
He possessed intense sympathy for the ideals for which the University
stands; sufficient business ability to keep its finances safe; and a
personality that inspired respect, confidence and love.
Carefully administering the affairs of the institution, Dr. Patton was
able to restore confidence in the minds of the public and of Congress.
This accomplished, he was justified in arguing for federal aid on the
ground that through this means alone was it possible to make the best
use of the large and expensive plant which the Government had already
provided. The result was that for the year beginning July 1, 1879,
Congress appropriated $10,000 toward current expenses. Since that date
appropriations have been regularly made and have so increased that the
institution now receives from the United States Government an annual
allowance of over $100,000.
It was during the administration of Dr. Patton that Howard University
rounded out its organization and developed as a university.
Previously, however, the various departments particularly had made
interesting history. An active faculty was organized in the Medical
School, June 17, 1867, and the first session opened in November, 1868,
in the same rented building already referred to as housing the first
academic classes of the University.[518] Here lectures were given in
the evening to a class of eight students. The permanent Medical
Building was then in the course of erection. Under an able faculty and
with excellent facilities it is not surprising that the Medical School
has been able to maintain a very high standard of efficiency and that
it now meets fully the requirements of the Association of American
Medical Colleges.
The Law Department was organized October 12, 1868, with Mr. John M.
Langston[519] as professor and dean. In December of the same year, A.
G. Riddle was associated with him on the faculty and the school began
actual instruction on January 6, 1869.[520] During the years of the
financial difficulties of the University, however, the Law School
passed through a distressing experience. The attendance of the
students was uncertain, falling off rapidly when the Freedmen's Bureau
passed out of existence; for many of the students who were employees
serving the Bureau during the day attended lectures at night. These
left in large numbers when the Bureau closed, depriving the Law School
of a part of its estimated income. Losing thus this revenue, this
department was either actually suspended or barely kept open with a
single teacher and a handful of students. Mr. Langston retained his
position as dean under the then trying conditions until 1874, when he
resigned.
The department gradually recovered with the mending fortunes of the
University under President Patton and as a result of the demand in the
District of Columbia for a school of law admitting students without
racial restrictions. In 1881 B. F. Leighton was appointed to the
deanship of this department, a position which he has to the present
time filled with marked success. He took charge of the department when
it was barely existing and brought it to its present position of
usefulness. For many years he had associated with him A. A. Birney one
of the most distinguished members of the District of Columbia bar.
From that reconstruction of the department dates the period of its
real growth. In 1881 these two professors lectured to a class of seven
students, five of whom were graduated at the close of the session.
Since that time the courses have been broadened in keeping with the
advancing standards of legal study, the student body has increased ten
fold and the faculty has been strengthened in accordance with these
demands.
Although the Theological Department was the first in the plan of the
founders of the University, it was not put into operation until
January 6, 1868, when D. B. Nichols and E. W. Robinson, both
clergymen, began without pay, to give theological instruction twice a
week to a number of men already accredited as preachers and others
looking forward to that work. Shortly afterwards, at the request of
the Board of Trustees, a course of study was drawn up and adopted.
Lectures in accordance with this plan were started immediately
thereafter by General Eliphalet Whittlesey.[521] It was not until
1871, however, that the Theological Department was officially
announced by the University as actively in operation. In this
announcement, Dr. John B. Reeve is named as dean, supported by a
faculty of four lecturers and a roster of twelve students. Three years
later in 1874, seven of these twelve students received their
certificates of graduation.
The Theological Department has always been barred from the use of
United States funds for its current expenses and has, therefore,
depended upon scholarships and special contributions made by
individuals and philanthropic organizations. The American Missionary
Association has always been its chief support since the crisis of
1873. Because of the financial stress under which the University was
working at that time, the first act of Dr. Lorenzo Wescott, the new
dean appointed in 1875, was to make arrangements to have the
Presbytery of Washington assume the responsibility of the school. This
appeal was favorably acted upon and a committee of the Presbytery took
charge of the affairs of the department in December, 1875. This step
was rendered necessary because, from 1872 to 1874 the American
Missionary Association, on account of financial embarrassment, was
compelled, temporarily, to withdraw its support. In November, 1877,
this organization was again able to resume part of the responsibility
and the bodies worked in harmony until June, 1887, when the American
Missionary Association was again ready to bear the entire
expense.[522]
Dr. Patton resigned in May, 1889, but consented to continue in office
until the end of the year or until his successor should be elected.
The selection of his successor was made in November and Dr. Patton
retired, hoping to rest and do literary work. He died, however, on the
last day of the year 1889. On November 15, 1889, the trustees elected
the Reverend Doctor Jeremiah E. Rankin[523] to the presidency, taking
him from the pastorate of the First Congregational Church of
Washington. His term of office extended through thirteen years, a
period of slow but steady growth.
Under President Rankin other changes were made in the course of the
development of the University. At the close of the session in 1899 the
University altered its policy with reference to the work of training
teachers. To this end the work of the Normal Department, at first
provided for this purpose, was reorganized as the pedagogical
department of the college under the deanship of Professor Lewis B.
Moore who had come to the faculty five years prior to this time from
the University of Pennsylvania, where he had pursued graduate studies
and obtained the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. After several years
of growth the department was designated as the Teachers College and
given academic rank with the College of Arts and Sciences. When the
Normal Department was discontinued the English Department was
established to care for those who wished to pursue the common branches
without professional aim. In 1903, it was merged with the newly
established Commercial Department under Dean George W. Cook.
It was during this administration that with funds obtained as private
donations the permanent residence for the president and the Andrew
Rankin Memorial Chapel were erected, the former costing approximately
$20,000 and the latter $22,000. The chapel is a memorial to the one
whose name it bears, Andrew E. Rankin, the brother of President Rankin
and the deceased husband of Mrs. H. T. Cushman of Boston, a generous
donor toward its erection.
Because of failing health Doctor Rankin resigned in 1903. Reverend
Teunis N. Hamlin, pastor of the Church of the Covenant, Washington,
District of Columbia, and the president of the board of trustees,
served as acting president for a short time pending the selection of a
permanent incumbent. The Reverend Doctor John Gordon, the president of
Tabor College in Iowa was selected for the presidency and was formally
inaugurated in 1904. It was hoped that the incoming president would
infuse new life into the institution, for the occasion demanded a
successful administrator, an efficient educator and a man able to
command increased financial support for the institution. As Doctor
Gordon had none of these qualities, it soon became evident that he
would be able to accomplish little of benefit to the University. He
failed entirely to understand its mission and its ideals. Serious
friction between the president on the one hand and the faculty and
students on the other grew to such proportions that Dr. Gordon, after
a term of office covering a little over two years, resigned.
After an examination of available material in the search for a
suitable man for this position, the trustees were happy in the
selection of the Reverend Doctor Wilbur P. Thirkield[524] who accepted
the offer and took up the duties of president in 1906. He was
inaugurated November 15, 1907, on the occasion of the fortieth
anniversary of the founding of the institution. With this ceremony
began an infusion of new life into Howard University. Advantage of
this occasion was taken to introduce the institution concretely to a
group of notables who had hitherto known of it only in a casual way.
And having once brought the institution to the attention of the world,
President Thirkield never allowed the world to forget it.
With keen insight he realized at the very beginning of his term of
office that the great and basic need of the University was material
expansion. He saw the need of a more extensive plant with modern
equipment and served by a larger faculty. With characteristic energy
he sought to bring the University into a still closer alliance with
the Federal Government. So successfully was the case presented that
during his administration of six years he succeeded in raising the
annual Congressional appropriation for current expenses from less than
$50,000 in 1906 to over $100,000 in 1912. The pressing need for
facilities in the teaching of the sciences was met by the erection in
1910 of a science hall from special appropriations amounting to
$80,000.[525] In 1909, the Carnegie Library was erected. This building
was the gift of Mr. Andrew Carnegie and cost $50,000.
About this time the improvement of the dormitories was begun by the
installation of adequate systems of sanitary plumbing and electric
lights. By arrangement with Freedmen's Hospital the heating and
lighting plant was enlarged at a cost of approximately $100,000 to
such capacity that steam and current were supplied to all the
University buildings. In addition to these improvements in housing and
equipment, the grounds were improved and beautified in accordance with
a definite scheme.[526] To provide for the constantly growing work in
technical and industrial branches the Hall of Applied Sciences was
built in 1913 at a cost of $25,000 thus releasing the old Spaulding
Hall for other purposes. A special department of music under Miss Lulu
Vere Childers was established in 1909 and given a building in 1916.
Possibly the most striking result of the educational awakening under
President Thirkield was the rapid growth of the College Department. In
1876 for example, the roster of the department shows thirty-five
students and four graduates. In 1907, forty years later, the
corresponding figures were, seventy-five and eight, a gain of about
one hundred per cent in forty years or two and a half per cent a year.
In 1911 these figures had grown to two hundred and forty-three, and
thirty-one respectively, a gain during the period of six years covered
by this administration, of about two hundred and forty per cent in
students and nearly three hundred per cent in graduates. This is
approximately a gain per year of forty per cent in enrollment and
forty-eight per cent in graduates. While much of this remarkable
growth is due to the general awakening of the University, yet no small
part of the credit belongs to the inspiration of Professor Kelly
Miller who became Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences in 1907
near the beginning of the period under consideration. Through his
efforts and reputation as a writer the claims of the University and
the College of Arts and Sciences were brought to the attention of
aspiring youth throughout the country.[527] Upon the resignation of
Dr. Thirkield to become Bishop of the Methodist Church in 1912, the
Reverend Doctor Stephen M. Newman was chosen as the head of the
university. He has served in that position for five years.[528]
Serviceable as have been many of the educators connected with Howard
University it has had and still has many problems. Its chief
difficulty, however, is a financial one. Although it is impossible to
figure out how the University could have succeeded without the aid of
the United States Government, this connection of the institution has
been in some respects a handicap. National aid seems to have
permanently excluded the institution from the circle of the
beneficiaries of those great philanthropic agencies which have played
such a prominent part in the support of education during the last half
century. With the exception of the Theological Department, which
receives no part whatever of the Congressional appropriation, the
income to the institution from benevolent sources has played but a
minor part in its development. On the other hand, the United States
Government has never appropriated sufficient funds to maintain the
University as a first class institution. The present appropriation of
$100,000 a year falls far short of what the school needs to function
properly. It seems, therefore, that the United States Government,
should adequately support the institution and make its appropriations
legally permanent.[529]
Some remarks about the general policy of Howard University may be
enlightening. The idea of racial representation among the
administrative officers and faculty is indicated by the fact that
membership in a particular race has never been considered a
qualification for any position in the University. For many years the
board of trustees has had persons of both races as members. No colored
man has served a regular term as president, however, unless we include
the short experience of Professor Langston already referred to. The
treasurer has always been white but the office of secretary has been
filled by members of both races. Neither the Theological nor the
Medical School has had a Negro as dean although Dr. Charles B. Purvis
was elected to that office in the latter in 1900 but declined it.
The faculties of all departments are mixed, the proportion of Negroes
growing as available material from which to choose becomes more
abundant. The policy of maintaining mixed faculties, however, is not
dictated entirely by the lack of men and women of color competent to
fill all positions on the faculty; for today the supply of such
material is adequate. It seems that the governing body considers it in
the best interest of the University to preserve the racial mixture in
the offices and faculties in order that the students may receive the
peculiar contribution of both races and that the institution may have
its interests concretely connected with those of the dominant race.
Whether or not Howard has amply justified its existence during its
first half century; whether its ideals have been the best for the race
whose interests it primarily serves; whether its administrative
policies have been wise--these are questions whose answers lie outside
the scope of this sketch. As institutions of learning go, fifty years
is a short time upon which to base conclusions. It is a period of
beginnings. With schools of the character of Howard, with its peculiar
duties to perform and its peculiar problems to solve in a field
entirely new, these fifty years make up a period of experiment.
Whatever the future relative to this educational experiment may be,
Howard has given to America nearly four thousand graduates from its
various departments most of whom are now doing the class of work in
all fields of endeavor which demand trained minds, broad human
sympathy and the spirit of service.
DWIGHT O. W. HOLMES.
FOOTNOTES:
[516] Part I of _Fifty Years of Howard University_ appeared in the
April Number of the JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY.
[517] The resignation was accepted the following year after General
Howard had been appointed to the command of the Department of the
Columbia.
[518] It was realized at the beginning that a hospital in connection
with the department was an absolute necessity. This was provided for
through the relationship established between the Medical School and
Freedmen's Hospital. The Campbell Hospital, as it was formerly called,
was located, at the close of the war, at what is now the northeast
corner of Seventh Street and Florida Avenue. Prior to that time it was
directly connected with the War Department. In 1865, in connection
with the various hospitals and camps for freedmen in the several
States, it was placed under the Freedmen's Bureau. In 1869 it was
moved to buildings expressly erected for it by the Bureau upon ground
belonging to the University on Pomeroy Street, including and adjacent
to the site of the Medical Building. This new home consisted of four
large frame buildings of two stories each to be used as wards; and in
addition the Medical Building itself, a brick structure of four and
one half stories, quite commodious and well arranged with lecture
halls and laboratories for medical instruction. Dr. Robert Reyburn,
who was chief medical officer of the Freedmen's Bureau from 1870 to
1872 was surgeon in chief, from 1868 to 1875. He was followed in order
by Drs. Gideon S. Palmer, Charles B. Purvis, Daniel H. Williams,
Austin M. Curtis and Wm. H. Warfield. Dr. Warfield, the present
incumbent was appointed in 1901 and is the first graduate of the
Howard University Medical School to hold this position. Only the first
two named, however, were white. In 1907 the hospital was moved to its
new home in the reservation lying on the south side of College Street
between Fourth and Sixth Streets, the property of the University.
"The new Freedmen's Hospital was then built at a cost of $600,000. It
has the great advantage of being designed primarily for teaching
purposes, as practically all the patients admitted are utilized freely
for instruction. The hospital has about three hundred beds and
contains two clinical amphitheatres, a pathological laboratory,
clinical laboratory and a room for X-Ray diagnostic work and X-Ray
therapy. The Medical Faculty practically constitutes the Hospital
Staff."--_Howard University Catalog_, 1916-17, p. 163; 1917-18, p.
168.
[519] Mr. Langston was graduated at Oberlin with the degree of A.B. in
1852 and in theology in 1853. He studied law privately and was
admitted to practice in Ohio in 1854. In April, 1867, he was appointed
general inspector of the Freedmen's Bureau, serving for two years,
during which he travelled extensively through the South. From 1877 to
1885 he was Minister to Haiti and from 1885 to 1887 President of the
Virginia Normal and Collegiate Institute. He was elected to Congress
from the Fourth District of Virginia and seated, September 23, 1890,
after a contest. He died November 15, 1897, at his home near Howard
University.
[520] For a number of years after its organization the school held its
sessions in the main building of the University. Later a more
convenient location was secured in the building occupied by the Second
National Bank on Seventh Street. After remaining there for a
considerable period, it moved to Lincoln Hall, at Ninth and D Streets,
where it remained until 1887 when the building was destroyed by fire.
The authorities then decided to purchase for the department a
permanent home conveniently located and adequate to its accommodation.
As a result the present Law Building on Fifth Street, opposite the
District Court House, was purchased, and fitted up for school
purposes.
[521] General Eliphalet Whittlesey was Colonel of the 46th United
States Colored Regiment in 1865. He had been on the staff of General
Howard during the last year of the campaign through the South and was
brevetted Brigadier General at the close of the war. He was Assistant
Commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau and later Adjutant General under
General Howard at Washington. He assisted in the selection of the site
for the University, was the first professor in the College Department
and organized the Department of Theology.
Reverend Danforth B. Nichols, whose name has appeared frequently in
this sketch, was, at the close of the war, engaged in missionary work
among the "contrabands" who tilled the abandoned lands just across the
Potomac from Washington. When Howard University was founded he was one
of the most active and enthusiastic workers for the successful
launching of the venture. Beside being a founder, a trustee and a
professor, he received the degree of M.D. with the first class
graduated by its medical department.
[522] While the Presbytery was in charge the department received a
gift or $5,000 from Mrs. Hannah B. Toland. In 1879 Reverend J. G.
Craighead became dean of the department and filled the position until
his resignation in 1891. During his administration the department
received $5,000 from the estate of Wm. E. Dodge of New York. On
October 1, 1883, the treasurer of the University was authorized to pay
the American Missionary Association $15,000, "out of moneys due from
the United States as compensation for University land taken for the
reservoir," or such part as might be requisite to complete the
endowment of the "Stone Professorship" in the Theological Department.
This amount was added to a fund of $25,000 which came from the estate
of Daniel P. Stone, of Boston, Massachusetts, upon the fulfillment of
the term of the gift.
[523] Dr. Rankin was a writer and poet of note, his most famous
production being the hymn, "God be with you till we meet again."
[524] Dr. Thirkield received his A.M. degree from Ohio Wesleyan in
1879. He studied theology at Boston University, graduating with the
degree of S.T.B. in 1881. He entered the ministry in the M. E. Church
in 1878. As the first president of Gammon Theological Seminary,
Atlanta, Georgia, from 1883 to 1899 he secured endowment for that
institution to the amount of $600,000. He was called to the presidency
of Howard after several years of successful service first as General
Secretary of the Epworth League and later as General Secretary of the
Freedmen's Aid and Southern Educational Society.
[525] This building was dedicated as "Science Hall" but by vote of the
trustees the name was changed to "Thirkield Hall" in honor of
President Thirkield when the latter resigned in 1912.
[526] Much of the credit for the improvements to grounds and buildings
is due to the experience and business acumen of Professor George W.
Cook who became secretary and business manager in 1908. Professor Cook
has enjoyed an extensive and unique connection with the University
from his matriculation in the Preparatory Department in 1873 to the
present. He is a graduate of three departments and holds the degrees
of A.B., A.M., LL.B. and LL.M. He has been dean of the Normal, the
English and the Commercial Departments successively. Since 1908 he has
been secretary and business manager of the University.
[527] Professor Miller is a product of Howard and one of her most
distinguished sons. He was graduated from Preparatory Department in
1882 and from College in 1886 after which he pursued advanced studies
at Johns Hopkins University. He is one of the most conspicuous
publicists of the race, being the author of several books and numerous
pamphlets, beside making frequent contributions to periodicals, both
in America and abroad. His most important books are _Race Adjustment_
and _Out of the House of Bondage. The Disgrace of Democracy_, an open
letter to President Wilson, published in 1917, has been pronounced one
of the most important documents produced by the great war.
[528] Dr. Newman was graduated from Bowdoin College, the alma mater of
General Howard, in 1867, with the A.B. degree, receiving the A.M. in
1870 and D.D. in 1877. He studied theology at Andover, finishing in
1871. He served as pastor in Taunton, Massachusetts, Ripon, Wisconsin
and the First Congregational Church of Washington, District of
Columbia. He was president of Eastern College, Fort Royal, Virginia,
1908-9, and Kee Mar College for Women, Hagerstown, Maryland, 1909-11.
He is a member of a number of learned societies and a distinguished
pulpit orator.
[529] President Taft considered the support of the University a
national obligation. In his address at the commencement exercises, May
26, 1909, he said, in part:
"Everything that I can do as an executive in the way of helping along
the University I expect to do. I expect to do it because I believe it
is a debt of the people of the United States, it is an obligation of
the Government of the United States, and it is money constitutionally
applied to that which shall work out in the end the solution of one of
the greatest problems that God has put upon the people of the United
States."
DOCUMENTS
WHAT THE FRAMERS OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION THOUGHT OF THE NEGRO
The first important discussion in the Convention of 1787 to reflect
the attitude of the framers of the Federal Constitution toward the
Negro, was whether or not slaves should be considered a part of the
population in apportioning representation in Congress on that basis. A
precedent had been set in the Articles of Confederation in the
provision for counting five slaves as three whites to determine the
rate of taxation on the population basis. The free States contended
that only the free inhabitants should be counted, but the slave States
urged the recognition of slaves as a part of the population to secure
to the South the power which it wielded until the Civil War.[530]
Taking up this important question soon after the convention assembled,
The following resolution was then moved by Mr. Randolph, Resolved
that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to
be proportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number
of free inhabitants, as the one or the other rule may seem best
in different cases.
It was moved by Mr. Hamilton seconded by Mr. Spaight that the
resolution be altered so as to read
Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature
ought to be proportioned to the number of free inhabitants
It was moved and seconded that the resolution be postponed--and
on the question to postpone it passed in the affirmative
The following resolution was moved by Mr. Randolph seconded by Mr
Madison Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national
legislature ought to be proportioned--it was moved and seconded
to add the words "and not according to the present system"--On
the question to agree to the amendment it passed in the
affirmative. (Ayes--7 noes--0.)[531]
It was then moved and seconded so to alter the resolution that it
should read
Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature
ought not to be according
It was then moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of
the last resolution--And, on the question to postpone, it passed
in the affirmative The following resolution was then moved by Mr
Madison seconded by Mr. G Morris.
Resolved that the equality of suffrage established by the
articles of confederation ought not to prevail in the national
legislature and that an equitable ratio of representation ought
to be substituted.
It was moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the
last resolution.
(The following Resolution being the 2d. of those proposed by Mr.
Randolph was taken up. viz--"that the rights of suffrage in the
National Legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of
contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants, as the one or
the other rule may seem best in different cases.")
Mr. M(adison) observing that the words ("_or to the number of_)
_free inhabitants_." might occasion debates which would divert
the Committee from the general question whether the principle of
representation should be changed, moved that they might be struck
out.
Mr King observed that the quotas of contribution which would
alone remain as the measure of representation, would not answer;
because waving every other view of the matter, the revenue might
hereafter be so collected by the general Govt. that the sums
respectively drawn from the States would (not) appear; and would
besides be continually varying.
Mr. Madison admitted the propriety of the observation, and that
some better rule ought to be found.
Col. Hamilton moved to alter the resolution so as to read "that
the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought to be
proportioned to the number of free inhabitants. Mr. Spaight
2ded. the motion.
It was then moved that the Resolution be postponed, which was
agreed to.
Mr. Randolph and Mr. Madison then moved the following
resolution--"that the rights of suffrage in the national
Legislature ought to be proportioned."
It was moved and 2ded to amend it by adding "and not according to
the present system"--which was agreed to.
It was then moved and 2ded. to alter the resolution so as to read
"that the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought
not to be according to the present system."
It was then moved & 2ded. to postpone the Resolution moved by Mr.
Randolph & Mr. Madison, which being agreed to;
Mr. Madison, moved, in order to get over the difficulties, the
following resolution--"that the equality of suffrage established
by the articles of Confederation ought not to prevail in the
national Legislature, and that an equitable ratio of
representation ought to be submitted" This was 2ded. by Mr. Govr.
Morris, (and being generally relished, would have been agreed to
when,)
Mr. Reed moved that the whole clause relating to the point of
Representation be postponed; reminding the Come. that the
deputies from Delaware were restrained by their commission from
assenting to any change of the rule of suffrage, and in case a
change should be fixed on, it might become their duty to retire
from the Convention.
Mr. Govr. Morris observed that the valuable assistance of those
members could not be lost without real concern, and that so early
a proof of discord in the convention as a secession of a State,
would add much to the regret; that the change proposed was
however so fundamental an article in a national Govt. that it
could not be dispensed with.
Mr. M(adison) observed that whatever reason might have existed
for the equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal one
among sovereign States, it must cease when a national Governt.
should be put into the place. In the former case, the acts of
Congs. depended so much for their efficacy on the cooperation of
the States, that these had a weight both within & without
Congress, nearly in proportion to their extent and importance. In
the latter case, as the acts of the Genl. Govt. would take effect
without the intervention of the State legislatures, a vote from
a small State wd. have the same efficacy & importance as (a vote)
from a large one, and there was the same reason for (different
numbers) of representatives from different States, as from
Counties of different extents within particular States. He
suggested as an expedient for at once taking the sense of the
members on this point and saving the Delaware deputies from
embarrassment, that the question should be taken in Committee,
and the clause on report to the House (be postponed without a
question there). This however did not appear to satisfy Mr. Read.
By several it was observed that no just construction of the Act
of Delaware, could require or justify a secession of her
deputies, even if the resolution were to be carried thro' the
House as well as the Committee. It was finally agreed however
that the clause should be postponed: it being understood that in
the event the proposed change of representation would certainly
be agreed to, no objection or difficulty being started from any
other quarter (than from Delaware).
The motion of Mr. Read to postpone being agreed to
The Committee then rose. The chairman reported progress, and the
House having resolved to resume the subject in Committee
tomorrow,[532]
(Adjourned to 10 OClock)
* * * * *
The next question was on the following resolve:
In substance that the mode of the present representation was
unjust--the suffrage ought to be in proportion to number or
property.
To this Delaware objected, in consequence of the restrictions in
their credentials, and moved to have the consideration thereof
postponed, to which the house agreed.[533]
McHenry records for the thirtieth of May that the Committee then
proceeded to consider the second resolution in Mr. Randolph's paper.
That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to
be proportioned to the quotas of contribution or to the number
of free inhabitants as the one or the other rule may seem best
in different cases.
As this gave the large States the most absolute controul over the
lesser ones it met with opposition which produced an adjournment
without any determination.[534]
After frequent discussion and the failure to reach an agreement to
safeguard the interests of the small States while giving due weight to
the population of the large the effort to apportion representation in
the national legislature assumed this form in the Committee of the
Whole:
It was moved by Mr. King, seconded by Mr Rutledge to agree to the
following resolution, namely:
Resolved that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the
national Legislature ought not to be according to the rule
established in the articles of confederation; but according to
some equitable ratio of representation
And on the question to agree to the same
it passed in the affirmative (Ayes--7; noes--3; divided--1.)
It was then moved by Mr. Rutledge seconded by Mr Butler to add
the following words to the last resolution
"namely, according to the quotas of contribution"
It was moved by Mr Wilson seconded by Mr C. Pinckney to postpone
the consideration of the last motion in order to introduce the
following words, after the words "equitable ratio of
representation" namely.
"in proportion to the whole number of white and other 'free
Citizens' and inhabitants of every age, sex and condition,
'including those bound to servitude for a term of years', and
three fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the
foregoing description, except Indians, not paying taxes 'in each
State.'"
On the question to postpone
it passed in the affirmative. (Ayes--10; noes--1.)
On the question to agree to Mr Wilson's motion
It passed in the affirmative (Ayes--9; noes--2.)
It was then moved by Mr Wilson seconded by Mr Hamilton to adopt
the following resolution, namely,
"resolved that the right of suffrage in the second branch "of the
national Legislature ought to be according to the rule
"established for the first"
On the question to agree to the same it passed in the affirmative
(Ayes--6; noes--5.)[535]
In the Committee of the Whole on the eleventh of June:
It was then moved by Mr. Rutlidge 2ded. by Mr. Butler to add to
the words "equitable ratio of representation" at the end of the
motion just agreed to, the words "according to the quotas of
Contribution. On motion of
_Mr. Wilson_ seconded by Mr. C. Pinckney, this was postponed; in
order to add, after, after the words "equitable ratio of
representation" the words following "in proportion to the whole
number of white & other free Citizens & inhabitants of every age
sex & condition including those bound to servitude for a term of
years and three fifths of all other persons not comprehended in
the foregoing description, except Indians not paying taxes, in
each State." this being the rule in the Act of Congress agreed to
by eleven States, for apportioning quotas of revenue on the
States, and requiring a census only every 5--7, or 10 years.
Mr. Gerry thought property not the rule of representation. Why
then shd, the blacks, who were property in the South be in the
rule of representation more than the cattle & horses of the
North.
On the question.
Mass: Con: N. Y. Pen: Maryd. Virga. N. C. S. C. and Geo: were in
the affirmative: N. J. & Del: in the negative. (Ayes--9;
noes--2.) Mr. Sherman moved that a question be taken whether each
State shall have (one) vote in the 2d. branch. Every thing he
said depended on this. The smaller States would never agree to
the plan on any other principle (than an equality of suffrage in
this branch. Mr. Ellsworth seconded the motion.) On the question
for allowing each State (one) vote in the 2d. branch.
Massts, no. Cont, ay. N. Y. ay. N. J. ay. Pa. no. Del. ay Md. ay.
Va. no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no. (Ayes--5; noes--6.)
(Mr. Wilson & Mr. Hamilton moved that the right of suffrage in
the 2d. branch ought to be according to the same rule as in the
1st. branch.)
On this question for making the ratio of representation the same
in the 2d. as in the 1st. branch (it passed in the affirmative:)
Massts. ay. Cont. no. N. Y. no. N. J. no. Pa. ay. Del. no. Md.
no. Va. ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay. (Ayes--6; noes--5.)[536]
On the same day
Mr. Wilson was of opinion, and therefore moved, _that the mode of
representation of each of the states ought to be from the number
of its free inhabitants, and of every other description three
fifths to one free inhabitant_. He supposed that the impost will
not be the only revenue--the post office he supposes would be
another substantial source of revenue. He observed further, that
this mode had already received the approbation of eleven states
in their acquiescence to the quota made by congress. He admitted
that this resolve would require further restrictions, for where
numbers determined the representation a census at different
periods of 5, 7 or 10 years, ought to be taken.
Mr. Gerry. The idea of property ought not to be the rule of
representation. Blacks are property, and are used to the
southward as horses and cattle to the northward; and why should
their representation be increased to the southward on account of
the number of slaves, than horses or oxen to the north?
Mr. Madison was of opinion at present, to fix the standard of
representation, and let the detail be the business of a
sub-committee.
Mr. Rutledge's motion was postponed.[537]
Discussing whether the apportionment should be according to taxation
or numbers, Wilson considered
Either Rule good--by Numbers best to ascertain the Right of
Representn. this agreeably to the Sentiments of 11 States--Impost
alone will not be sufficient to answer the national
Exigencies--Revenues arising from Postage--The present Quota not
a lasting Rule--People to be numbered at fixed Periods--A Rule
arising from Property and Numbers--
Gerry. Rule of Taxation not the Rule of Representation--4 might
then have more Voices than ten--Slaves not to be put upon the
Footing of freemen--Freemen of Massts. not to be put upon a
Footing with the Slaves of other States--Horses and Cattle ought
to have the Right of Representn. Negroes--Whites--[538]
On the thirteenth of June Randolph submitted another resolution agreed
to in the Committee of the Whole.
Resolved that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the
national Legislature ought not to be according to the rule
established in the articles of confederation; but according to
some equitable ratio of representation--namely in proportion to
the whole number of whites and other free citizens and
inhabitants, of every age, sex and condition, including those
bound to servitude for a term of years and three fifths of all
other persons not comprehended in the foregoing description,
except Indians, not paying taxes in each State.[539]
The following propositions from New Jersey moved by Patterson closely
connected the apportionment of requisitions with that of
representation:
3. Resd. that whenever requisitions shall be necessary, instead
of the rule for making requisitions mentioned in the articles of
Confederation, the United States in Congs. be authorized to make
such requisitions in proportion to the whole number of white &
other free citizens & inhabitants of every age sex and condition
including those bound to servitude for a term of years & three
fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the foregoing
description, except Indians not paying taxes; that if such
requisitions be not compiled with, in the time specified therein,
to direct the collection thereof in the non complying States &
for that purpose to devise and pass acts directing & authorizing
the same; provided that none of the powers hereby vested in the
U. States in Congs. shall be exercised without the consent of at
least[540]
Again on the fifteenth of June it was suggested that
3. The rule of apportioning Requis: on the States shall be the
Whites 3/5 of all others--if the Req. is in arrear in any State,
Congress shall have authority to devise & pass acts remedial in
such case.
On the fifth of July the committee considering the question of
representation reported on the 40,000 basis which repeatedly came
before the Convention. It provided:
That in the first branch of the legislature, each of the states
now in the union, be allowed one member for every 40,000
inhabitants, of the description reported in the seventh
resolution of the committee of the whole house--That each state,
not containing that number, shall be allowed one member.[541]
Reporting on this question the fifth of July, the Committee of the
Whole decided to submit:
That the subsequent propositions be recommended to the
Convention, on condition that both shall be generally adopted.
1st That in the first branch of the Legislature each of the
States now in the Union be allowed one Member for every forty
thousand inhabitants of the description reported in the seventh
resolution of the Committee of the whole House. That each State
not containing that number shall be allowed one Member--That all
Bills for raising or appropriating money and for fixing the
salaries of the Officers of the Government of the United States,
shall originate in the first Branch of the Legislature, and shall
not be altered or amended by the second Branch and that no money
shall be drawn from the public Treasury but in pursuance of
appropriations to be originated by the first Branch. 2ndly That
in the second Branch of the Legislature each State shall have an
equal Veto.
Discussing this question on the sixth of July:
Mr. Pinkney saw no good reason for committing. The value of land
had been found on full investigation to be an impracticable rule.
The contributions of revenue including imports & exports, must be
too changeable in their amount; too difficult to be adjusted; and
too injurious to the non-commercial States. The number of
inhabitants appeared to him the only just & practicable rule. He
thought the blacks ought to stand on an equality with whites: But
wd.--agree to the ratio settled by Congs. He contended that
Congs. had no right under the articles of Confederation to
authorize the admission of new States; no such cases having been
provided for.[542]
On the ninth of July, according to Madison, Mr. Gorham said:
Some provision of this sort was necessary in the outset. The
number of blacks & whites with some regard to supposed wealth
was the general guide. Fractions could not be observed. The
Legislre. is to make alterations from time to time as justice &
propriety may require. Two objections prevailed agst. the rate of
1 member for every 40,000 inhts. The 1st. was that the
Representation would soon be too numerous: the 2d. that the
Western States who may have a different interest, might if
admitted on that principal by degrees, out-vote the Atlantic.
Both these objections are removed. The number will be small in
the first instance and maybe continued so, and the Atlantic
States having ye Govt. in their own hands, may take care of their
own interest by dealing out the right of Representation in safe
proportions to the Western States. These were the views of the
Committee.[543]
On the tenth of July the following interesting comment was made.
Mr. Dayton observed that the line between the Northn. & Southern
interest had been improperly drawn: that Pa. was the dividing
State, there being six on each side of her.
Genl. Pinkney urged the reduction, dwelt on the superior wealth
of the Southern States, and insisted on its having its due weight
in the Government.
Mr. Govr. Morris regretted the turn of the debate. The States he
found had many Representatives on the floor. Few he fears were to
be deemed the Representatives of America. He thought the Southern
States have by the report more than their share of
representation. Property ought to have its weight; but not all
the weight. If the (Southn. States are to) supply money. The
Northn. States are to spill their blood. Besides, the probable
Revenue to be expected from the S. States has been greatly
overrated. He was agst. reducing N. Hampshire.[544]
In connection with determining the basis of representation the
following was offered on the eleventh of July:
"Resolved That in order to ascertain the alterations that may
happen in the population and wealth of the several States a
census shall be taken of the free inhabitants of each State, and
three fifths of the inhabitants of other description on the first
year after this form of Government shall have been adopted--and
afterwards on every term of ____ years; and the Legislature shall
alter or augment the representation accordingly"
It was moved and seconded to strike out the words
"three fifths of"
which passed in the negative. (Ayes--3; noes--7.)
It was moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the
resolution proposed in order to take up the following namely.
Resolved That at the end of ____ years from the meeting of the
Legislature of the United-States and at the expiration of every
____ years thereafter the Legislature of the United States be
required to apportion the representation of the several States
according to the principles of their wealth and population.
On the question to postpone, it passed in the negative (Ayes--5;
noes--5;)
It was moved and seconded to agree to the first clause of the
resolution namely.
"That in order to ascertain the alterations that may happen in
the population and wealth of the several States a "Census shall
be taken of each State"
which passed in the affirmative (Ayes--6; noes--4.)
(To adjourn. Ayes--1; noes--9.)
It was moved and seconded to agree to the following clause of the
resolution, namely
"and three fifths of the inhabitants of other description"
which passed in the negative. (Ayes--4; noes--6.)
It was moved and seconded to agree to the following clause of the
resolution, namely
"On the first year after this form of government shall "have been
adopted"
which passed in the affirmative (Ayes--7; noes--3.)
It was moved and seconded to fill up the blank with the word
"fifteen" which passed unanimously in the affirmative (Ayes--10;
noes--0.)
It was moved and seconded to add after the words fifteen years
the words "at least"
which passed in the negative (Ayes--5; noes--5.)
It was moved and seconded to agree to the following clause of the
resolution namely
"and the Legislature shall alter or augment the representation
accordingly"
which passed unanimously in the affirmative (Ayes--10; noes--0.)
On the question to agree to the resolution as amended it passed
unanimously in the negative. (Ayes--0; noes--10.) and then the
House adjourned till tomorrow at 11 o'clock A.M.[545]
Taking up the question, Mr. Williamson urged again on the eleventh of
July the counting of five Negroes as three white persons.
Mr. Williamson was for making it the duty of the Legislature to
do what was right & not leaving it at liberty to do or not do it.
He moved that Mr. Randolph's proposition be postponed, in order
to consider the following "that in order to ascertain the
alterations that may happen in the population & wealth of the
several States, a census shall be taken of the free white
inhabitants and 3/5ths of those of other descriptions on the 1st
year (after this Government shall have been adopted) and every
year thereafter; and that the Representation be regulated
accordingly.[546]
* * * * *
Mr. Butler & Genl. Pinkney insisted that blacks be included in
the rule of Representation, _equally_ with the whites: (and for
that purpose moved that the words "three fifths" be struck
out.)[547]
Mr. Gerry though that 3/5 of them was to say the least the full
proportion that could be admitted.
Mr. Ghorum. This ratio was fixed by Congs. as a rule of taxation.
Then it was urged by the Delegates representing the States having
slaves that the blacks were still more inferior to freemen. At
present when the ratio of representation is to be established, we
are assured that they are equal to freemen. The arguments on ye.
former occasion had convinced him that 3/5 was pretty near the
just proportion and he should vote according to the same opinion
now.
Mr. Butler insisted that the labour of a slave in S. Carola. was
as productive & valuable as that of a freeman in Massts., that as
wealth was the great means of defence and utility to the Nation
they are equally valuable to it with freemen; and that
consequently an equal representation ought to be allowed for them
in a Government which was instituted principally for the
protection of property, and was itself to be supported by
property.
Mr. Mason could not agree to the motion, notwithstanding it was
favorable to Virga. because he thought it unjust. It was certain
that the slaves were valuable, as they raised the value of land,
increased the exports & imports, and of course the revenue, would
supply the means of feeding and supporting an army, and might in
cases of emergency become themselves soldiers. As in these
important respects they were useful to the community at large,
they ought not to be excluded from the estimate of
Representation. He could not, however, regard them as equal to
freemen and could not vote for them as such. He added as worthy
of remark, that the Southern States have this peculiar species of
property over & above the other species of property common to all
the States.
Mr. Williamson reminded Mr. Ghorum that if the Southn. States
contended for the inferiority of blacks to whites when taxation
was in view, the Eastern States on the same occasion contended
for their equality. He did (not) however either then or now,
concur in either extreme, but approved of the ratio of 3/5.
On Mr. Butlers motion for considering blacks as equal to Whites
in the apportionment for Representation
Massts. no. Cont. no. (N. Y. not on floor.) N. J. no. Pa. no.
Del. ay. Md. No. (Va. no) N. C. no. S. C. ay. Geo. ay. (Ayes--3;
noes--7.)
Mr. Govr. Morris said he had several objections to the
proposition of Mr. Williamson. 1. It fettered the Legislature too
much. 2. It would exclude some States altogether who would not
have a sufficient number to entitle them to a single
Representative. 3. It will not consist with the Resolution passed
on Saturday last authorizing the Legislature to adjust the
Representation from time to time on the principles of population
& wealth or with the principles of equity. If slaves were to be
considered as inhabitants, not as wealth, then the sd Resolution
would not be pursued: If as wealth, then why is no other wealth
but slaves included? These objections may perhaps be removed by
amendments. His great objection was that the number of
inhabitants was not a proper standard of wealth. The amazing
difference between the comparative numbers & wealth of different
Countries, renderd all reasoning superfluous on the subject.
Numbers might with greater propriety be deemed a measure of
strength, than of wealth, yet the late defence made by G. Britain
agst. her numerous enemies proved in the clearest manner, that it
is entirely fallacious even in this respect.
Mr. King thought there was great force in the objections of Mr.
Govr. Morris: he would however accede to the proposition for the
sake of doing something.
Mr. Rutlidge contended for the admission of wealth in the
estimate by which Representation should be regulated. The Western
States will not be able to contribute in proportion to their
numbers, they shd. not therefore be represented in that
proportion. The Atlantic States will not concur in such a plan.
He moved that "at the end of ____ years after the 1st meeting of
the Legislature, and of every ____ years thereafter, the
Legislature shall proportion the Representation according to the
principles of wealth & population"
Mr. Sherman thought the number of people alone the best rule for
measuring wealth as well as representation; and that if the
Legislature were to be governed by wealth, they would be obliged
to estimate it by numbers. He was at first for leaving the matter
wholly to the discretion of the Legislature; but he had been
convinced by the observations of (Mr. Randolph & Mr. Mason) that
the _periods_ & the _rule_ of revising the Representation ought
to be fixt by the Constitution
Mr. Reid thought the Legislature ought not to be too much
shackled. It would make the Constitution like Religious Creeds,
embarrassing to those bound to conform to them & more likely to
produce dissatisfaction and Scism, than harmony and union.
Mr. Mason objected to Mr. Rutlidge motion, as requiring of the
Legislature something too indefinite & impracticable, and leaving
them a pretext for doing nothing.
Mr. Wilson had himself no objection to leaving the Legislature
entirely at liberty. But considered wealth as an impracticable
rule.
Mr. Ghorum. If the Convention who are comparatively so little
biased by local views are so much perplexed, How can it be
expected that the Legislature hereafter under the full biass of
those views, will be able to settle a standard. He was convinced
by the argument of others & his own reflections, that the
Convention ought to fix some standard or other.
Mr. Govr. Morris. The argts. of others & his own reflections had
led him to a very different conclusion. If we can't agree on a
rule that will be just at this time, how can we expect to find
one that will be just in all times to come. Surely those who come
after us will judge better of things present, than we can of
things future. He could not persuade himself that numbers would
be a just rule at any time. * * * * * * * Another objection with
him agst admitting the blacks into the census, was that the
people of Pena. would revolt at the idea of being put on a
footing with slaves. They would reject any plan that was to have
such an effect. Two objections had been raised agst. leaving the
adjustment of the Representation from time to time, to the
discretion of the Legislature.[548]
The question of counting three-fifths of the Negroes as whites,
however, would not down. According to Madison:
Mr. King, being much opposed to fixing numbers as the rule of
representation, was particularly so on account of the blacks. He
thought the admission of them along with Whites at all, would
excite great discontents among the States having no slaves. He
had never said as to any particular point that he would in no
event acquiesce in & support it; but he wd. say that if in any
case such a declaration was to be made by him, it would be in
this. He remarked that in the (temporary) allotment of
Representatives made by the Committee, the Southern States had
received more than the number of their white & three fifths of
their black inhabitants entitled them to.
Mr. Sherman. S. Carola. had not more beyond her proportion than
N. York & N. Hampshire, nor either of them more than was
necessary in order to avoid fractions or reducing them below
their proportion. Georgia had more; but the rapid growth of that
State seemed to justify it. In general the allotment might not be
just, but considering all circumstances, he was satisfied with
it.
Mr. Ghorum supported the propriety of establishing numbers as the
rule. He said that in Massts. estimates had been taken in the
different towns, and that persons had been curious enough to
compare these estimates with the respective numbers of people;
and it had been found even including Boston, that the most exact
proportion prevailed between numbers and property. He was aware
that there might be some weight in what had fallen from his
colleague, as to the umbrage which might be taken by the people
of the Eastern States. But he recollected that when the
proposition of Congs for changing the 8th art. of Confedn. was
before the Legislature of Massts. the only difficulty then was to
satisfy them that the negroes ought not to have been counted
equally with whites instead of being counted in the ratio of
three fifths only.
Mr. Wilson did not well see on what principle the admission of
blacks in the proportion of three fifths could be explained. Are
they admitted as Citizens? Then why are they not admitted on an
equality with White Citizens? Are they admitted as property, then
why is not other property admitted into the computation? These
were difficulties however which he thought must be overruled by
the necessity of compromise. He had some apprehensions also from
the tendency of the blending of the blacks with the whites, to
give disgust to the people of Pena. as had been intimated by his
colleagues (Mr. Govr. Morris). But he differed from him in
thinking numbers of inhabts. so incorrect a measure of wealth. He
had seen the Western settlemts. of Pa. and on a comparison of
them with the City of Philada. could discover little other
difference, than that property was more unequally divided among
individuals here than there. Taking the same number in the
aggregate in the two situations he believed there could be little
difference in their wealth and ability to contribute to the
public wants.
Mr. Govr. Morris was compelled to declare himself reduced to the
dilemma of doing injustice to the Southern States or to human
nature, and he must therefore do it to the former. For he could
never agree to give such encouragement to the slave trade as
would be given by allowing them a representation for their
negroes, and he did not believe those States would ever
confederate on terms that would deprive them of that trade.
On question for agreeing to include 3/5 of the blacks Masts, no
Cont. ay N. J. no. Pa. no Del. no. Mard. no Va. ay. N. C. ay. S.
C. no. Geo. ay (Ayes--6; noes--4.)[549]
On the twelfth of July the following clause was proposed:
"Provided always that direct Taxation ought to be proportioned
according to representation"
which passed unanimously in the affirmative.
It was moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the
first clause in the report from the first grand Committee
which passed in the affirmative.
It was moved and seconded to add the following amendment to the
last clause adopted by the House namely "and that the rule of
contribution by direct taxation for the support of the government
of the United States shall be the number of white inhabitants,
and three fifths of every other description in the several
States, until some other rule that shall more accurately
ascertain the wealth of the several States can be devised and
adopted by the Legislature[550]
* * * * *
On the motion of Mr. Randolph, the vote of Saturday last (July 7)
authorizing the Legislre. to adjust from time to time, the
representation upon the principles of _Wealth_ and numbers of
inhabitants was (reconsidered by common consent in order to
strike our "Wealth" and adjust the resolution to that requiring
periodical revisions according to the number of whites & three
fifths of the blacks: the motion was in the words following--"But
as the present situation of the States may probably alter in the
number of their inhabitants, that the Legislature of the U. S. be
authorized from time to time to apportion the number of
representatives: and in case any of the States shall hereafter be
divided or any two or more States united or new States created
within the limits of the U. S. shall hereafter be divided or any
two or more States united or new States created within the limits
of the U. S. the Legislature of U. S. shall possess authority to
regulate the number of Representatives in any of the foregoing
cases, upon the principle of their number of inhabitants;
according to the provisions hereafter mentioned.")
Mr. Govr. Morris opposed the alteration as leaving still an
incoherence. If Negroes were to be viewed as inhabitants, and the
revision was to proceed on the principle of numbers of inhbts.
they ought to be added in their entire number, and not in the
proportion of 3/5. If as property, the word wealth was right, and
striking it out would produce the very inconsistency which it was
meant to get rid of.--The train of business & the late turn which
it had taken, had led him he said, into deep meditation on it,
and He wd. candidly state the result. A distinction had been set
up & urged between the Nn. & Southn. States. He had hitherto
considered this doctrine as heretical. He still thought the
distinction groundless. He sees however that it is persisted in;
and that the Southn. Gentleman will not be satisfied unless they
see the way open to their gaining a majority in the public
Councils. The consequence of such a transfer of power from the
maritime to the interior & landed interests will he forsees be
such an oppression of commerce, that he shall be obliged to vote
for ye. vicious principle of equality in the 2d. branch in order
to provide for some defence for the N. States agst. it. But to
come now more to the point, either this distinction is fictitious
or real: if fictitious let it be dismissed & let us proceed with
due confidence. If it be real, instead of attempting to blend
incompatible things, let us at once take a friendly leave of each
other. There can be no end of demands for security if every
particular interest is to be entitled to it. The Eastern States
may claim it for their fishery, and for other objects, as the
Southn. States claim it for their peculiar objects. In this
struggle between the two ends of the Union, what part ought the
Middle States in point of policy to take; to join their Eastern
brethren according to his ideas. If the Southn. States get the
power into their hands, and be joined as they will be the
interior Country they will inevitably bring on a war with Spain
for the Mississippi. This language is already held. The interior
Country having no property nor interest exposed on the sea, will
be little affected by such a war. He wished to know what security
the Northn. & middle States will have agst. this danger. It has
been said that N. C. S. C. and Georgia only will in a little time
have a majority of the people of America. They must in that case
include the great interior Country, and every thing was to be
apprehended from their getting the power into their hands.[551]
The Committee of Detail finally brought forward for the apportionment
of direct taxes and representation in the House a plan for taking the
Negroes into account.
(Direct Taxation shall always be in Proportion to Representation
in the House of Representatives.)
The proportions of direct Taxation shall be regulated by the
whole Number of white and other free Citizens and Inhabitants, of
every Age, Sex and Condition, including those bound to Servitude
for a Term of Years, and three fifths of all other Persons not
comprehended in the foregoing Description; which Number shall,
within the Term of every ten Years afterwards, be taken in such
manner as the said Legislature shall direct.[552]
This, as is shown below, is substantially what Rutledge as Chairman of
the committee to report a constitution reported.
Sect. 3. The proportions of direct taxation shall be regulated by
the whole number of white and other free citizens and
inhabitants, of every age, sex and condition, including those
bound to servitude for a term of years, and three fifths of all
other persons not comprehended in the foregoing description,
(except Indians not paying taxes) which number shall, within six
years after the first meeting of the Legislature, and within the
term of every ten years afterwards, be taken in such manner as
the said Legislature shall direct.[553]
The same appears also in the report of the Committee on Style.
Sect. 3. The proportions of direct taxation shall be regulated by
the whole number of free citizens and inhabitants, of every age,
sex and condition, including those bound to servitude for a term
of years, and three fifths of all other persons not comprehended
in the foregoing description, (except Indians not paying taxes)
which number shall, within three years after the first meeting of
the Legislature, and within the term of every ten years
afterwards, be taken in such manner as the said Legislature shall
direct.
(b) Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among
the several states which may be included within this Union,
according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined
by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those
bound to servitude for a term of years, and excluding Indians not
taxed, three fifths of all other persons. The actual enumeration
shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the
Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term
of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct. The
number of representatives shall not exceed one for every forty
thousand, but each state shall have at least one representative:
and until such enumeration shall be made, the state of
New-Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts
eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantation one, Connecticut
five, New-York six, New-Jersey, four, Pennsylvania eight,
Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North-Carolina five,
South-Carolina five and Georgia three.[554]
What these framers said in explaining their intentions thereafter when
discussing the constitution in ratifying conventions, legislatures and
Congress, is further illuminating. Before the Maryland convention
called to ratify the constitution Luther Martin said:
S: 2. Slaves ought never to be considered in Representation,
because they are property. They afford a rule as such in
Taxation; but are Citizens intrusted in the General Government,
no more than Cattle, Horses, Mules or Asses: and a Gentleman in
Debate very pertinently observed that he would as soon enter into
Compacts, with the Asses Mules, or Horses of the Ancient Dominion
as with their Slaves--When there is power to raise a revenue by
direct Taxation, each State ought to pay an equal Ratio; Whereas
by taxing Commerce some States pay greatly more than others,[555]
Before the South Carolina House of Representatives C. C. Pinckney
said:
We are at a loss, for some time, for a rule to ascertain the
proportionate wealth of the states. At last we thought that the
productive labor of the inhabitants was the best rule for
ascertaining their wealth. In conformity to this rule, joined to
a spirit of concession, we determined that representatives should
be apportioned among the several states, by adding to the whole
number of free persons three fifths of the slaves. We thus
obtained a representation for our property; and I confess I did
not expect that we had conceded too much to the Eastern States,
when they allowed us a representation for a species of property
which they have not among them.[556]
In the New York Convention considering the ratification of the
constitution, Hamilton said:
The first thing objected to is that clause which allows a
representation for three fifths of the negroes.... The regulation
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.[557]
On July 24, 1788, in the North Carolina convention, Davie said:
... The gentleman "does not wish to be represented with negroes."
This, sir, is an unhappy species of population; but we cannot at
present alter their situation. The Eastern States had great
jealousies on this subject. They insisted that their cows and
horses were equally entitled to representation; that the one was
property as well as the other. It became our duty, on the other
hand, to acquire as much weight as possible in the legislation of
the Union; and, as the Northern States were more populous in
whites, this only could be done by insisting that a certain
proportion of our slaves should make a part of the computed
population. It was attempted to form a rule of representation
from a compound ratio of wealth and population; but, on
consideration, it was found impracticable to determine the
comparative value of lands and other property, in so extensive a
territory, with any degree of accuracy; and population alone was
adopted as the only practicable rule or criterion of
representation. It was urged by the deputies of the Eastern
States, that a representation would be unequal and
burdensome--that, in a time of war, slaves rendered a country
more vulnerable, while its defence devolved upon its free
inhabitants. On the other hand, we insisted that, in time of
peace, they contributed by their labor, to the general wealth, as
well as other members of the community--that, as rational beings,
they had a right of representation, and, in some instances, might
be highly useful in war. On these principles the Eastern States
gave the matter up, and consented to the regulation as it has
been read. I hope these reasons will appear satisfactory. It is
the same rule or principle which was proposed some years ago by
Congress, and assented to by twelve of the States....[558]
In the House of Representatives in 1820 C. C. Pinckney of South
Carolina said:
Among the reasons which have induced me to rise, one is to
express my surprise. Surprise, did I say? I ought rather to have
said, my extreme astonishment, at the assertion I heard made on
both floors of Congress, that, in forming the Constitution of the
United States, and particularly that part of it which respects
the representation on this floor, the Northern and Eastern
States, or, as they are now called, the non-slaveholding States,
have made a great concession to the Southern in granting them a
representation of three-fifths of their slaves; that they saw the
concession was a very great and important one at the time, but
that they had no idea it would so soon have proved itself of such
consequence; that it would so soon have proved itself to be by
far the most important concession that had been made. They say,
that it was wrung from them by their affection to the Union, and
their wish to preserve it from dissolution or disunion; that they
had, for a long time, lamented they had made it; and that, if it
was to do over, no earthly consideration should again tempt them
to agree to so unequal and so ruinous a compromise....
It was, sir, for the purpose of correcting this great and
unpardonable error; unpardonable, because it is a wilful one, and
the error of it is well known to the ablest of those who make it;
of denying the assertion, and proving that the contrary is the
fact, and that the concession, on that occasion, was from the
Southern and the Northern States, that, among others, I have
risen.
It is of the greatest consequence that the proof I am about to
give should be laid before this nation; for, as the inequality of
representation is the great ground on which the Northern and
Eastern States have always, and now more particularly and
forcibly than ever, raised all their complaints on this subject,
if I can show and prove that they have not even a shadow of right
to make pretences or complaints; that they are as fully
represented as they ought to be; while, we, the Southern members,
are unjustly deprived of any representation for a large and
important part of our population, more valuable to the Union, as
can be shown, than any equal number of inhabitants in the
Northern and Eastern States, can, from their situation, climate,
and productions, possibly be. If I can prove this, I think I
shall be able to show most clearly the true motives which have
given rise to this measure; to strip the thin, the cobweb veil
from it, as well as the pretended ones of religion, humanity, and
love of liberty; and to show, to use the soft terms the decorum
of debate oblige me to use, the extreme want of modesty in those
who are already as fully represented here as they can be, to go
the great lengths they do in endeavoring, by every effort in
their power, public and private, to take from the Southern and
Western States, which are already so greatly and unjustly
deprived of an important part of the representation, a still
greater share; to endeavor to establish the first precedent,
which extreme rashness and temerity have ever presumed, that
Congress has a right to touch the question and legislate on
slavery; thereby shaking the property in them, in the Southern
and Western States, to its very foundation, and making an attack
which, if successful, must convince them that the Northern and
Eastern States are their greatest enemies; that they are
preparing measures for them which even Great Britain in the heat
of the Revolutionary War, and when all her passions were roused
by hatred and revenge to the highest pitch never ventured to
inflict upon them. Instead of a course like this, they ought, in
my judgment, sir, to be highly pleased with their present
situation; that they are fully represented, while we have lost so
great a share of our representation; they ought sir, to be highly
pleased at the dexterity and management of their members in the
Convention, who obtained for them this great advantage; and,
above all, with the moderation and forbearance with which the
Southern and Western States have always borne their many bitter
provocations on this subject, and now bear the open, avowed, and,
by many of the ablest men among them, undisguised attack on our
most valuable rights and properties....
* * * * *
Before I proceed to the other parts of this question, I have thus
endeavored to give a new view of the subject of representation in
this House; to show how much more the Eastern and Northern States
are represented than the Southern and Western....
The supporters of the amendment contend that Congress have the
right to insist on the prevention of involuntary servitude in
Missouri; and found the right on the ninth section of the first
article, which says "the migration or importation of such persons
as the States now existing may think proper to admit, shall not
be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax
or duty may be imposed on such importation not exceeding ten
dollars."
In considering this article, I will detail, as far as at this
distant period is possible, what was the intention of the
Convention that formed the Constitution in this article. The
intention was, to give Congress a power, after the year 1808, to
prevent the importation of slaves either by land or water from
other countries. The word _import_, includes both, and applies
wholly to slaves. Without this limitation Congress might have
stopped it sooner under their general power to regulate commerce;
and it was an agreed point, a solemnly understood compact, that,
on the Southern States consenting to shut their ports against the
importation of Africans, no power was to be delegated to
Congress, nor were they ever to be authorized to touch the
question of slavery; that the property of the Southern States in
slaves was to be as sacredly preserved, and protected to them, as
that of land, or any other kind of property in the Eastern States
were to be to their citizens.
The term, or word, migration, applies wholly to free whites; in
its Constitutional sense, as intended by the Convention, it means
"voluntary change of servitude," from one country to another. The
reasons of its being adopted and used in the Constitution, as far
as I can recollect, were these; that the Constitution being a
frame of government, consisting wholly of delegated powers, all
power, not expressly delegated, being reserved to the people or
the States, it was supposed, that, without some express grant to
them of power on the subject, Congress would not be authorized
ever to touch the question of migration hither, or emigration to
this country, however pressing or urgent the necessity for such a
measure might be; that they could derive no such power from the
usages of nations, or even the laws of war; that the latter would
only enable them to make prisoners of alien enemies, which would
not be sufficient, as spies or other dangerous emigrants, who
were not alien enemies, might enter the country for treasonable
purposes, and do great injury; that, as all governments possessed
this power, it was necessary to give it to our own, which could
alone exercise it, and where, on other and much greater points,
we had placed unlimited confidence; it was, therefore, agreed
that, in the same article, the word migration should be placed;
and that, from the year 1808, Congress should possess the
complete power to stop either or both, as they might suppose the
public interest required; the article, therefore, is a _negative
pregnant_, restraining for twenty years, and giving the power
after.
The reasons for restraining the power to prevent migration hither
for twenty years, were, to the best of my recollections, these;
That, as at this time, we had immense and almost immeasurable
territory, peopled by not more than two millions and a half of
inhabitants, it was of very great consequence to encourage the
emigration of able, skilful, and industrious Europeans. The wise
conduct of William Penn, and the unexampled growth of
Pennsylvania, were cited. It was said, that the portals of the
only temple of true freedom now existing on earth should be
thrown open to all mankind; that all foreigners of industrious
habits should be welcome, and none more so than men of science,
and such as may bring to us arts we are unacquainted with, or the
means of perfecting those in which we are not yet sufficiently
skilled--capitalists whose wealth may add to our commerce or
domestic improvements; let the door be ever and most
affectionately open to illustrious exiles and sufferers in the
cause of liberty; in short, open it liberally to science, to
merit, and talents, wherever found, and receive and make them
your own. That the safest mode would be to pursue the course for
twenty years, and not, before that period, put it at all into the
power of Congress to shut it; that, by that time, the Union would
be so settled, and our population would be so much increased, we
could proceed on our own stock, without the farther accession of
foreigners; that as Congress were to be prohibited from stopping
the importation of slaves to settle the Southern States, as no
obstacles was to be thrown in the way of their increase and
settlement for that period, let it be so with the Northern and
Eastern, to which, particularly New York and Philadelphia it was
expected most of the emigrants would go from Europe: and it so
happened, for, previous to the year 1808, more than double as
many Europeans emigrated to these States, as of Africans were
imported into the Southern States.
* * * * *
Connecting the question of importing slaves with that of counting them
to determine the representation in the national legislature, the
framers engaged in a heated debate as to whether or not the Southern
States would always have a majority in that body by encouraging the
slave trade. Carolina and Georgia, however, stood firm for the right
to import slaves.
On July 23 General Pinckney reminded the Convention that if the
Committee should fail to insert some security to the Southern
States agst. an emancipation of slaves, and taxes on exports, he
shd. be bound by duty to his State to vote agst. their
Report--The appt. of a Come. as moved by Mr. Gerry, Agd. to nem.
con.[559]
The Committee of Detail, therefore, reported:
2 no prohibitions or (such) (ye) Importations of such inhabitants
(or people as the sevl. States think proper to admit)
No Tax or Duty shall be laid by the Legislature, on Articles
exported from any State; nor on the emigration or importation of
such Persons as the several States shall think proper to admit;
nor shall such emigration or importation be prohibited.
No Capitation Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the
Census herein before directed to be taken.
The draft of the constitution reported on August 6 carried:[32]
Sect. 4. No tax or duty shall be laid by the Legislature on
articles exported from any State; nor on the migration or
importation of such persons as the several States shall think
proper to admit; nor shall such migration or importation be
prohibited.
On the eighth of August, King remarked:[560]
Mr. King wished to know what influence the vote just passed was
meant have on the succeeding part of the Report, concerning the
admission of slaves into the rule of Representation. He could not
reconcile his mind to the article if it was to prevent objections
to the latter part. The admission of slaves was a most grating
circumstance to his mind, & he believed would be so to a great
part of the people of America. He had not made a strenuous
opposition to it heretofore because he had hoped that this
concession would have produced a readiness which had not been
manifested, to strengthen the Genl. Govt. and to mark a full
confidence in it. The Report under consideration had by the tenor
of it, put an end to all these hopes. In two great points the
hands of the Legislature were absolutely tied. The importation of
slaves could not be prohibited--exports could not be taxed. Is
this reasonable? What are the great objects of the Genl. System?
1. defence agst. foreign invasion. 2 agst. internal sedition.
Shall all the States then be bound to defend each; & shall each
be at liberty to introduce a weakness which will render defence
more difficult? Shall one part of the U. S. be bound to defend
another part, and that other part be at liberty not only to
increase its own danger, but to withhold the compensation for the
burden? If slaves are to be imported shall not the exports
produced by their labor, supply a revenue the better to enable
the Genl. Govt. to defend their masters?--There was so much
inequality & unreasonableness in all this, that the people of the
N(orthern) States could never be reconciled (to it). No candid
man could undertake to justify it to them. He had hoped that some
accommodation wd. have taken place on this subject; that at least
a time wd. have been limited for the importation of slaves. He
never could agree to let them be imported without limitation &
then be represented in the Natl. Legislature. Indeed he could so
little persuade himself of the rectitude of such a practice, that
he was not sure he could assent to it under any circumstances. At
all events, either slaves should not be represented, or exports
should be taxable.
Mr. Sherman regarded the slave-trade as iniquitous; but the point
of representation having been settled after much difficuty &
deliberation, he did not think himself bound to make opposition;
especially as the present articles as amended did not preclude
any arrangement whatever on that point in another place of the
Report.
Mr. Govr. Morris moved to insert "free" before the word
"inhabitants." Much he said would depend on this point. He never
would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious
institution--It was the curse of heaven on the States where it
prevailed. Compare the free regions of the Middle States, where a
rich & noble cultivation marks the prosperity & happiness of the
people, with the misery & poverty which overspread the barren
wastes of Va. Maryd & the other States having slaves. (Travel
thro' ye whold Continent & you behold the prospect continually
varying with the appearance and disappearance of slavery. The
moment you leave ye E Sts. & enter N. York, the effects of the
institution become visible; Passing thro' the Jerseys and
entering Pa--every criterion of superior improvement witnesses
the change. Proceed Southwdly, & every step you take thro' ye
great regions of slaves, presents a desert increasing with ye
increasing proportion of these wretched beings.)
Upon what principle is it that the slaves shall be computed in
the representation? Are they men? Then make them Citizens & let
them vote? Are they property? Why then is no other property
included? The Houses in this City (Philada.) are worth more than
all the wretched slaves which cover the rice swamps of South
Carolina. The admission of slaves into the Representation when
fairly explained comes to this: that inhabitant of Georgia and S.
C. who goes to the Coast of Africa and in defiance of the most
sacred laws of humanity tears away his fellow creatures from
their dearest connections & dam(n)s them to the most cruel
bondages, shall have more votes in a Govt. instituted for
protection of the rights of mankind, than the Citizens of Pa or
N. Jersey who views with a laudable horror, so nefarious a
practice. He would add that Domestic slavery is the most
prominent feature in the aristocratic countenance of the proposed
Constitution. The vassalage of the poor has ever been the
favorite offspring of Aristocracy. And What is the proposed
compensation to the Northern States for a sacrifice of every
principle of right, of every impulse of humanity. They are to
bind themselves to march their militia for the defence of the S.
States; for their defence agst those very slaves of whom they
complain. They must supply vessels & seamen, in case of foreign
Attack. The Legislature will have indefinite power to tax them by
excises, and duties on imports; both of which will fall heavier
on them than on the Southern inhabitants; for the bohea tea used
by a Northern freeman, will pay more tax than the whole
consumption of the miserable slave, which consists of nothing
more than his physical subsistence and the rag that covers his
nakedness. On the other side the Southern States are not to be
restrained from importing fresh supplies of wretched Africans, at
once to increase the danger of attack, and the difficulty of
defence; nay they are to be encouraged to it by an assurance of
having their votes in the Natl Govt increased in proportion, and
are at the same time to have their exports & their slaves exempt
from all contributions for the public service. Let it not be said
that direct taxation is to be proportioned to representation. It
is idle to suppose that the Genl Govt. can stretch its hand
directly into the pockets of the people scattered over so vast a
Country. They can only do it through the medium of exports
imports & excises. For what then are all these sacrifices to be
made? He would sooner submit himself to a tax for paying for all
the Negroes in the U. States, than saddle posterity with such a
Constitution.
Mr. Dayton 2ded. the motion. He did it he said that his
sentiments on the subject might appear whatever might be the fate
of the amendment.
Mr. Sherman, did not regard the admission of the Negroes into the
ratio of representation, as liable to such insuperable
objections. It was the freemen of the Southn. States who were in
fact to be represented according to the taxes paid by them, and
the Negroes are only included in the Estimate of the taxes. This
was his idea of the matter.
Mr. Pinkney, considered the fisheries & the Western frontier as
more burdensome to the U. S. than the slaves--He thought this
could be demonstrated if the occasion were a proper one.
Mr Wilson, thought the motion premature--An agreement to the
clause would be no bar to the object of it.
Question On Motion to insert "free" before "inhabitants."
N. H.--no. Mas. no. Ct. no. N. J. ay. Pa. no. Del. no. Md. no.
Va. no. S. C. no. N. C. no. Geo. no. (Ayes--1; noes--10.)[561]
* * * * *
Luther Martin (some days thereafter), proposed to vary the sect:
4. art VII so as to allow a prohibition or tax on the importation
of slaves,
1. As five slaves are to be counted as 3 free men in the
apportionment of Representatives; such a clause wd. leave an
encouragement to this traffic.
2. slaves weakened one part of the Union which the other parts
were bound to protect: the privilege of importing them was
therefore unreasonable--
3. it was inconsistent with the principles of the revolution and
dishonorable to the American character to have such a feature in
the Constitution.
Mr Rutlidge did not see how the importation of slaves could be
encouraged by this section. He was not apprehensive of
insurrections and would readily exempt the other States from the
(obligation to protect the Southern against them.).--Religions &
humanity had nothing to do with this question--Interest alone is
the governing principle with Nations--The true question at
present is whether the Southn. States shall or shall not be
parties to the Union. If the Northern States consult their
interest, they will not oppose the increase of Slaves which will
increase the commodities of which they will become the carriers.
Mr. Ellsworth was for leaving the clause as it stands, let every
State import what it pleases. The morality or wisdom of slavery
are considerations belonging to the States themselves--What
enriches a part enriches the whole, and the States are the best
judges of their particular interest. The old confederation had
not meddled with this point, and he did not see any greater
necessity for bringing it within the policy of the new one:
Mr Pinkney. South Carolina can never receive the plan if it
prohibits the slave trade. In every proposed extension of the
powers of Congress, that State has expressly & watchfully
excepted that of meddling with the importation of negroes. If the
States be all left at liberty on this subject, S. Carolina may
perhaps by degrees do of herself what is wished, as Virginia &
Maryland have already done.[562]
Adjourned
Art. VII sect 4. resumed. Mr. Sherman was for leaving the clause
as it stands. He disapproved of the slave trade: yet as the
States were now possessed of the right to import slaves, as the
public good did not require it to be taken from them, & as it was
expedient to have as few objections as possible to the proposed
scheme of Government, he thought it best to leave the matter as
we find it.[34] He observed that the abolition of slavery seemed
to be going on in the U. S. & that the good sense of the several
States would probably by degrees complete it. He urged on the
Convention the necessity of despatch(ing its business.)