Volume I Part 50 (1/2)

As usual, Henry ended with a fearsome picture and prophecy, this time of the danger to and destruction of Southern interests at the hands of the Northern majority. This, said he, ”is a picture so horrid, so wretched, so dreadful, that I need no longer dwell upon it”; and he ”dreaded the most iniquitous speculation and stock-jobbing, from the operation of such a system” as the Const.i.tution provided.[1264] Madison replied--the first spontaneous part he had taken in the debate.[1265]

The next morning the opposition centered their fire on the Mississippi question. Henry again demanded that the members of the Convention who had been in Congress should tell what had been done.[1266] The members of Congress--Lee, Monroe, Grayson, and Madison--then gave their versions of the Jay-Gardoqui transaction.[1267]

The Const.i.tutionalists rightly felt that ”the whole scene has been conjured by Henry to affect the ruin of the new Const.i.tution,”[1268] and that seasoned gladiator now confirmed their fears. He astutely threw the blame on Madison and answered the charge of the Const.i.tutionalists that ”we [the opposition] are scuffling for Kentucky votes and attending to local circ.u.mstances.” With all of his address and power, Henry bore down upon the Mississippi question. Thus he appealed for Kentucky votes: ”Shall we appear to care less for their interests than for that of distant people [the Spaniards]?”

At Henry's word a vision rose before all eyes of the great American valley sustaining ”a mighty population,” farms, villages, towns, cities, colleges, churches, happiness, prosperity; and ”the Mississippi covered with s.h.i.+ps laden with foreign and domestic wealth”--a vision of a splendid West ”the strength, the pride, and the flower of the Confederacy.” And then quickly succeeded on the screen the picture of the deserted settlers, the West a wilderness, the Father of Waters flowing idly to the sea, unused by commerce, unadorned by the argosies of trade. Such, said he, would be the Mississippi under the Const.i.tution ”controlled by those who had no interest in its welfare.”[1269]

At last the Const.i.tutionalists were stunned. For a while no one spoke.

Pendleton, ”his right hand grasping his crutch, sat silent and amazed.”[1270] Nicholas, the dauntless, was first to recover himself, and repeated Marshall's argument on the Mississippi question. Evidently the opposition had lobbied effectively with the Kentucky members on that sore point; for, exclaimed Nicholas, ”we have been alarmed about the loss of the Mississippi, in and _out_ of doors.”[1271]

The Const.i.tutionalists strove mightily to break the force of Henry's _coup_ on the Kentucky delegates. He had ”seen so many attempts made,”

exclaimed Randolph, ”and so many wrong inducements offered to influence the delegation from Kentucky,” that he must speak his mind about it.[1272] Corbin called the Mississippi trick ”reprehensible.” And well might the Const.i.tutionalists tremble; for in spite of all they could do, ten out of fourteen of the Kentucky delegates voted against ratifying the Const.i.tution.

That night Pendleton fell ill and John Tyler, ”one of the staunchest opponents of the new Const.i.tution,” was elected Vice-President.[1273]

The Mississippi question was dropped for the moment; the Const.i.tutionalists rallied and carried Corbin's motion to debate the new Government clause by clause in accordance with the original resolution.

Several sections of the first article were read and debated, Henry, Mason, and Grayson for the opposition; Madison bearing the burden of the debate for the Const.i.tutionalists.

The rich man and the poor, the State Government a thing of the ”people”

and the National Government something apart from the ”people,” were woven throughout the Anti-Const.i.tutionalists' a.s.saults. ”Where,”

exclaimed Henry, ”are the purse and the sword of Virginia? They must go to Congress. What has become of your country? The Virginian government is but a name.... We are to be consolidated.”[1274]

The second week's debate closed with the advantage on the side of the opposition. Gouverneur Morris, the New York Const.i.tutionalist, who, still on the ground, was watching the fight in Richmond and undoubtedly advising the Virginia Const.i.tutionalists, reported to Hamilton in New York that ”matters are not going so well in this State as the Friends of America could wish.” The Anti-Const.i.tutionalists had been making headway, not only through Henry's tremendous oratory, but also by other means; and the Const.i.tutionalists acknowledged that their own arguments in debate were having little or no effect.

”If, indeed, the Debates in Convention were alone attended to,” wrote Gouverneur Morris, ”a contrary Inference would be drawn for altho M^r.

Henry is most warm and powerful in Declamation being perfectly Master of 'Action Utterrance and Power of Speech to stir Men's Blood' yet the Weight of Argument is so strong on the Side of Truth as wholly to destroy even on weak Minds the Effects of his Eloquence. But there are as you well know certain dark Modes of operating on the Minds of Members which like contagious Diseases are only known by their Effects on the Frame and unfortunately our moral like our phisical Doctors are often mistaken in their Judgment from Diagnostics. Be of good Chear. My Religion steps in where my Understanding falters and I feel Faith as I loose Confidence. Things will yet go right but when and how I dare not predicate. So much for this dull Subject.”[1275]

”We have conjectured for some days,” Madison advised Hamilton, ”that the policy is to spin out the Session in order to receive overtures from your [New York's] Convention: or if that cannot be, to weary the members into a adjournment without taking any decision. It [is] presumed at the same time that they do not despair of carrying the point of previous amendments which is preferable game. The parties continue to be nearly balanced. If we have a majority at all, it does not exceed three or four. If we lose it Kentucke will be the cause; they are generally if not unanimously against us.”[1276]

On the back of Madison's letter, Henry Lee wrote one of his own to the New York Const.i.tutionalist chieftain. ”We possess as yet,” said Lee, ”in defiance of great exertions a majority, but very small indeed. A correspondence has certainly been opened thro a Mr. O.[swald] of Philad^a from the Malcontents of B. & N. Y. to us--it has its operation, but I believe we are still safe, unless the question of adjournment should be introduced, & love of home may induce some of our friends to abandon their principles.”[1277]

”The business is in the most ticklish state that can be imagined,”

Madison informed Was.h.i.+ngton; ”the majority will certainly be very small on whatever side it may finally lie; and I dare not encourage much expectation that it will be on the favorable side. Oswald of Philad^a has been here with letters for the anti-Federal leaders from N. York and probably Philad^a. He Staid a very short time here during which he was occasionally closeted with H----y M--s--n &c.”[1278]

On Monday the Anti-Const.i.tutionalists were first in the field. They were by now displaying improved tactics. Henry opened on the dangers of a standing army. ”If Congress shall say that the general welfare requires it, they may keep armies continually on foot.... They may billet them on the people at pleasure.” This is ”a most dangerous power! Its principles are despotic.”[1279] Madison followed,[1280] and Mason, Corbin, and Grayson also spoke,[1281] the latter a.s.serting that, under the Const.i.tution, the States could not ”command the militia” unless by implication.

Here Marshall again took part in the debate.[1282] He asked whether Grayson was serious in stating that the Const.i.tution left no power in the States over the militia unless by implication. Under the Const.i.tution, State and National Governments ”each derived its powers from the people, and each was to act according to the powers given it.”

Were ”powers not given retained by implication?” asked Marshall. Was ”this power [over the militia] not retained by the states, as they had not given it away?”

It is true, he admitted, that ”Congress may call forth the militia” for National purposes--”as to suppress insurrections and repel invasions”; but the power given the States by the people ”is not taken away, for the Const.i.tution does not say so.” The power of Congress over the ten miles square where the National Capital was to be located is ”exclusive ...

because it is expressed [in the Const.i.tution] to be exclusive.” Marshall contended that any power given Congress which before was in the States remained in both unless the Const.i.tution said otherwise or unless there was incompatibility in its exercise. So the States would have the same control over the militia as formerly. ”When invaded or in imminent danger they [the States] can engage in war.”

Grayson had said, declared Marshall, that if the National Government disciplined the militia, ”they will form an aristocratic government, unsafe and unfit to be trusted.” Grayson interrupted Marshall in an unsuccessful attempt to squirm out of the position in which the latter had placed him. He had only said that in its military features the Const.i.tution ”was so constructed as to form a great aristocratic body.”

Marshall retorted that ”as the government was drawn from the people, the feelings and interests of the people would be attended to”; and, therefore, there would be no military aristocracy. ”When the government is drawn from the people and depending on the people for its continuance, oppressive measures will not be attempted,” argued Marshall, ”as they will certainly draw on their authors the resentment of those on whom they depend.” No! cried he: ”On this government, thus depending on ourselves for its existence, I will rest my safety.”

Again Marshall expressed his military experience and instincts. If war should come ”what government is able to protect you?” he asked. ”Will any state depend on its own exertions?” No! If the National Government is not given the power ”state will fall after state and be a sacrifice to the want of power in the general government.” Uttering the motto of American Nationalism, which, long years afterward, he declared to have been the ruling maxim of his entire life, Marshall cried, ”_United we are strong, divided we fall._” If the National militia cannot ”draw the militia of one state to another ... every state must depend upon itself.... It requires a superintending power, ... to call forth the resources of all to protect all.”