EconlibThe LibraryOther Sites |
Front Page  Titles (by Subject) NOTES ON VIRGINIA ( Continued ) - The Works, vol. 4 (Notes on Virginia II, Correspondence 1782-1786)
Return to Title Page for The Works, vol. 4 (Notes on Virginia II, Correspondence 1782-1786)The Online Library of LibertyA project of Liberty Fund, Inc.Search this Title:Also in the Library:
NOTES ON VIRGINIA ( Continued ) - Thomas Jefferson, The Works, vol. 4 (Notes on Virginia II, Correspondence 1782-1786) [1905]Edition used:The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition (New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904-5). Vol. 4.
Part of: The Works of Thomas Jefferson, 12 vols.
About Liberty Fund:Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals. Copyright information:The text is in the public domain. Fair use statement:This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
 ITINERARY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THOMAS JEFFERSON 1783–1785
NOTES ON VIRGINIA
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Square miles. | Fighting men. | Delegates. | Senators. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Of these, 542 are on the eastern shore.—T. J. | ||||
| 2Of these, 22,616 are Eastward of the meridian of the mouth of the Great Kanhaway.—T. J. | ||||
| Between the sea - coast and falls of the rivers | 111,205 | 19,012 | 71 | 12 |
| Between the falls of the rivers and Blue Ridge of mountains | 18,759 | 18,828 | 46 | 8 |
| Between the Blue Ridge and the Alleghany | 11,911 | 7,673 | 16 | 2 |
| Between the Alleghany and Ohio | 279,650 | 4,458 | 16 | 2 |
| Total | 121,525 | 49,971 | 149 | 24 |
An inspection of this table will supply the place of commentaries on it. It will appear at once that nineteen thousand men, living below the falls of the rivers, possess half of the senate, and want four members only of possessing a majority of the house of delegates; a want more than supplied by the vicinity of their situation to the seat of government, and of course the greater degree of convenience and punctuality with which [213] their members may and will attend in the legislature. These nineteen thousand, therefore, living in one part of the country, give law to upwards of thirty thousand living in another, and appoint all their chief officers executive and judiciary. From the difference of their situation and circumstances, their interests will often be very different.
3. The senate is, by its constitution, too homogenous with the house of delegates. Being chosen by the same electors, at the same time, and out of the same subjects, the choice falls of course on men of the same description. The purpose of establishing different houses of legislation is to introduce the influence of different interests or different principles. Thus in Great Britain it is said their constitution relies on the house of commons for honesty, and the lords for wisdom; which would be a rational reliance, if honesty were to be bought with money, and if wisdom were hereditary. In some of the American States, the delegates and senators are so chosen, as that the first represent the persons, and the second the property of the State. But with us, wealth and wisdom have equal chance for admission into both houses. We do not [214], therefore, derive from the separation of our legislature into two houses, those benefits which a proper complication of principles is capable of producing, and those which alone can compensate the evils which may be produced by their dissensions.
4. All the powers of government, legislative, executive, and judiciary, result to the legislative body. The concentrating these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, and not by a single one. 173 despots would surely be as oppressive as one. Let those who doubt it turn their eyes on the republic of Venice. As little will it avail us that they are chosen by ourselves. An elective despotism was not the government we fought for, but one which should not only be founded on free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others. For this reason that convention, which passed the ordinance of government [215] laid its foundation on this basis, that the legislative, executive and judiciary departments should be separate and distinct, so that no person should exercise the powers of more than one of them at the same time. But no barrier was provided between these several powers. The judiciary and executive members were left dependent on the legislative, for their subsistence in office, and some of them for their continuance in it. If therefore the legislature assumes executive and judiciary powers, no opposition is likely to be made; nor, if made, can it be effectual; because in that case they may put their proceedings into the form of an act of assembly, which will render them obligatory on the other branches. They have accordingly in many instances, decided rights which should have been left to judiciary controversy: and the direction of the executive, during the whole time of their session, is becoming habitual and familiar. And this is done with no ill intention. The views of the present members are perfectly upright. When they are led out of their regular province, it is by art in others, and inadvertence in themselves. And this will probably be the case for some [216] time to come. But it will not be a very long time. Mankind soon learn to make interested uses of every right and power which they possess, or may assume. The public money and public liberty, intended to have been deposited with three branches of magistracy, but found inadvertently to be in the hands of one only, will soon be discovered to be sources of wealth and dominion to those who hold them; distinguished, too, by this tempting circumstance, that they are the instrument, as well as the object, of acquisition. With money we will get men, said Cæsar, and with men we will get money. Nor should our assembly be deluded by the integrity of their own purposes, and conclude that these unlimited powers will never be abused, because themselves are not disposed to abuse them. They should look forward to a time, and that not a distant one, when a corruption in this, as in the country from which we derive our origin, will have seized the heads of government, and be spread by them through the body of the people; when they will purchase the voices of the people, and make them pay the price. Human nature is the same on every side of the Atlan-[217] tic, and will be alike influenced by the same causes. The time to guard against corruption and tyranny, is before they shall have gotten hold of us. It is better to keep the wolf out of the fold, than to trust to drawing his teeth and talons after he shall have entered. To render these considerations the more cogent, we must observe in addition:
5. That the ordinary legislature may alter the constitution itself. On the discontinuance of assemblies, it became necessary to substitute in their place some other body, competent to the ordinary business of government, and to the calling forth the powers of the State for the maintenance of our opposition to Great Britain. Conventions were therefore introduced, consisting of two delegates from each county, meeting together and forming one house, on the plan of the former house of Burgesses, to whose places they succeeded. These were at first chosen anew for every particular session. But in March 1775, they recommended to the people to choose a convention, which should continue in office a year. This was done, accordingly, in April 1775, and in the July following that convention passed an ordinance for the election of delegates in the month of April annually. It is well known, that in July 1775, a separation from Great Britain and establishment of republican government, had never yet entered into any person’s mind. A convention, therefore, chosen under that ordinance, cannot be said to have been chosen for the purposes which certainly did not exist in the minds of those who passed it. Under this ordinance, at the annual election in April 1776, a convention for the year was chosen. Independance, and the establishment of a new form of government, were not even yet the objects of the people at large. One extract from the pamphlet called Common sense had appeared in the Virginia papers in February, and copies of the pamphlet itself had got in a few hands.1 But the idea had not been opened to the mass of the people in April, much less can it be said that they had made up their minds in its favor.2 So that the electors of April 1776, no more than the legislators of July 1775, not thinking of independance and a permanent republic, could not mean to vest in these delegates powers of establishing them, or any authorities other than those of the ordinary [219] legislature. So far as a temporary organization of government was necessary to render our opposition energetic, so far their organization was valid. But they received in their creation no powers but what were given to every legislature before and since. They could not, therefore, pass an act transcendent to the powers of other legislatures. If the present assembly pass an act, and declare it shall be irrevocable by subsequent assemblies, the declaration is merely void, and the act repealable, as other acts are. So far, and no farther authorized, they organized the government by the ordinance entituled a Constitution or Form of government. It pretends to no higher authority than the other ordinance of the same session; it does not say that it shall be perpetual; that it shall be unalterable by other legislatures; that it shall be transcendent above the powers of those who they knew would have equal power with themselves. Not only the silence of the instrument is a proof they thought it would be alterable, but their own practice also; for this very convention, meeting as a House of Delegates in General assembly with the Senate in the autumn of that year, [220] passed acts of assembly in contradiction of their ordinance of government; and every assembly from that time to this has done the same. I am safe therefore in the position that the constitution itself is alterable by the ordinary legislature. Though this opinion seems founded on the first elements of common sense, yet is the contrary maintained by some persons. I. Because, say they, the conventions were vested with every power necessary to make effectual opposition to Great Britain. But to complete this argument, they must go on, and say further, that effectual opposition could not be made to Great Britain without establishing a form of government perpetual and unalterable by the legislature; which is not true. An opposition which at some time or other was to come to an end, could not need a perpetual institution to carry it on: and a government amendable as its defects should be discovered, was likely to make effectual resistance, as one that should be unalterably wrong. Besides, the assemblies were as much vested with all powers requisite for resistance as the Conventions were. If therefore these powers included that of modelling the form [221] of government in the one case, they did so in the other. The assemblies then as well as the conventions may model the government; that is, they may alter the ordinance of government. 2. They urge that if the convention had meant that this instrument should be alterable, as their other ordinances were, they would have called it an ordinance; but they have called it a constitution, which ex vi termini, means “an act above the power of the ordinary legislature.” I answer that constitutio, constitutum, statutum, lex, are convertible terms. “Constitutio dicitur jus quod a principe conditur.” “Constitutum, quod ab imperatoribus rescriptum statutumve est.” “Statutum, idem quod lex.” Calvini Lexicon juridicum. Constitution and statute were originally terms of the1 civil law, and from thence introduced by Ecclesiastics into the English law. Thus in the statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 19, §. 1, “Constitutions and ordinances” are used as synonimous. The term constitution has many [222] other significations in physics and politics; but in Jurisprudence, whenever it is applied to any act of the legislature, it invariably means a statue, law, or ordinance, which is the present case. No inference then of a different meaning can be drawn from the adoption of this title: on the contrary, we might conclude that, by their affixing to it a term synonimous with ordinance or statute, they meant it to be an ordinance or statute. But of what consequence is their meaning, where their power is denied? If they meant to do more than they had power to do, did this give them power? It is not the name, but the authority which renders an act obligatory. Lord Coke says, ‘an article of the statute, 11. R. II. c. 5. that no person should attempt to revoke any ordinance then made, is repealed, for that such restraint is against the jurisdiction and power of the parliament.’ 4. inst. 42. and again, ‘though divers parliaments, have attempted to restrain subsequent parliaments, yet could they never effect it; for the latter parliament hath ever power to abrogate, suspend, qualify, explain, or make void the former in the whole or in [223] any part thereof, notwithstanding any words of restraint, prohibition, or penalty, in the former; for it is a maxim in the laws of the parliament, ‘quod leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant.’ 4. inst. 43.—To get rid of the magic supposed to be in the word constitution, let us translate it into its definition as given by those who think it above the power of the law; and let us suppose the convention, instead of saying, ‘We the ordinary legislature, establish a constitution,’ had said, ‘We the ordinary legislature, establish an act above the power of the ordinary legislature.’ Does not this expose the absurdity of the attempt? 3. But, say they, the people have acquiesced, and this has given it an authority superior to the laws. It is true that the people did not rebel against it: and was that a time for the people to rise in rebellion? Should a prudent acquiescence, at a critical time, be construed into a confirmation of every illegal thing done during that period? Besides, why should they rebel? At an annual election they had chosen delegates for the year, to exercise the ordinary powers of legislation, and to manage the great contest in which they were engaged. These [224] delegates thought the contest would be best managed by an organized government. They therefore, among others, passed an ordinance of government. They did not presume to call it perpetual and unalterable. They well knew they had no power to make it so; that our choice of them had been for no such purpose, and at a time when we could have no such purpose in contemplation. Had an unalterable form of government been meditated, perhaps we should have chosen a different set of people. There was no cause then for the people to rise in rebellion. But to what dangerous lengths will this argument lead? Did the acquiescence of the colonies under the various acts of power exercised by Great Britain in our infant state, confirm these acts, and so far invest them with the authority of the people as to render them unalterable, and our present resistance wrong? On every unauthoritative exercise of power by the legislature must the people rise in rebellion, or their silence be construed into a surrender of that power to them? If so, how many rebellions should we have had already? One certainly for every session of assembly. The other states in the union have been of opi-[225]nion that to render a form of government unalterable by ordinary acts of assembly, the people must delegate persons with special powers. They have accordingly chosen special conventions to form and fix their governments. The individuals then who maintain the contrary opinion in this country, should have the modesty to suppose it possible that they may be wrong, and the rest of America right. But if there be only a possibility of their being wrong, if only a plausible doubt remains of the validity of the ordinance of government, is it not better to remove that doubt by placing it on a bottom which none will dispute? If they be right we shall only have the unnecessary trouble of meeting once in convention. If they be wrong, they expose us to the hazard of having no fundamental rights at all. True it is, this is no time for deliberating on forms of government. While an enemy is within our bowels, the first object is to expel him. But when this shall be done, when peace shall be established, and leisure given us for intrenching within good forms, the rights for which we have bled, let no man be found indolent enough to de-[226]cline a little more trouble for placing them beyond the reach of question. If anything more be requisite to produce a conviction of the expediency of calling a convention at a proper season to fix our form of government, let it be the reflection:
6. That the assembly exercises a power of determining the quorum of their own body which may legislate for us. After the establishment of the new form they adhered to the Lex majoris partis, founded in1 common law as well as common right. It is the2 natural law of every assembly of men, whose numbers are not fixed by any other law. They continued for some time to require the presence of a majority of their whole number, to pass an act. But the British parliament fixes its own quorum; our former assemblies fixed their own quorum; and one precedent in favor of power is stronger than an hundred against it. The house of delegates, therefore, have3 lately voted that, dur-[227]ing the present dangerous invasion, forty members shall be a house to proceed to business. They have been moved to this by the fear of not being able to collect a house. But this danger could not authorize them to call that a house which was none;4 and if they may fix it at one number, they may at another, till it loses its fundamental character of being a representative body. As this vote expires with the present invasion, it is probable the former rule will be permitted to revive; because at present no ill is meant. The power, however, of fixing their own quorum has been avowed, and a precedent set. From forty it may be reduced to four, and from four to one; from a house to a committee, from a committee to a chairman or speaker, and thus an oligarchy or monarchy be substituted under forms supposed to be regular. ‘Omnia mala exempla ex bonis orta sunt; sed ubi imperium ad ignaros aut minus bonos pervenit, novum illud exemplum ab dignis et idoneis ad indignos et non idoneos fertur.’ When, therefore, it is considered, that there is no legal obstacle to the assumption by the assembly of all the powers legislative, executive, and judiciary, [228] and that these may come to the hands of the smallest rag of delegation, surely the people will say, and their representatives, while yet they have honest representatives, will advise them to say, that they will not acknowledge as laws any acts not considered and assented to by the major part of their delegates.
In enumerating the defects of the constitution, it would be wrong to count among them what is only the error of particular persons. In December 1776, our circumstances being much distressed, it was proposed in the house of delegates to create a dictator, invested with every power legislative, executive, and judiciary, civil and military, of life and of death, over our persons and over our properties: and in June 1781,1 again under calamity, the same proposition was repeated, and wanted a few votes only of being passed.1 —One who entered into this contest from a pure love of liberty, and a sense of injured rights, who determined to make every sacrifice, and to meet every danger, for the re-establishment of those rights on a firm basis, who did not mean to expend his blood and substance for the wretched pur- [229] pose of changing this master for that, but to place the powers of governing him in a plurality of hands of his own choice, so that the corrupt will of no one man might in future oppress him, must stand confounded and dismayed when he is told, that a considerable portion of that plurality had meditated the surrender of them into a single hand, and, in lieu of a limited monarch, to deliver him over to a despotic one! How must he1 find his efforts and sacrifices abused and baffled, if he may still, by a single vote, be laid prostrate at the feet of one man! In God’s name, from whence have they derived this power? Is it from our ancient laws? None such can be produced. Is it from any principle in our new constitution expressed or implied? Every lineament of that expressed or implied, is in full opposition to it. Its fundamental principle is, that the state shall be governed as a commonwealth. It provides a republican organization, proscribes under the name of prerogative the exercise of all powers undefined by the laws; places on this basis the whole system of our laws; and by consolidating them together, chooses that they shall be left to stand or fall together, never [230] providing for any circumstances, nor admitting that such could arise, wherein either should be suspended; no, not for a moment. Our antient laws expressly declare, that those who are but delegates themselves shall not delegate to others powers which require judgment and integrity in their exercise. Or was this proposition moved on a supposed right in the movers, of abandoning their posts in a moment of distress? The same laws forbid the abandonment of that post, even on ordinary occasions; and much more a transfer of their powers into other hands and other forms, without consulting the people. They never admit the idea that these, like sheep or cattle, may be given from hand to hand without an appeal to their own will.—Was it from the necessity of the case? Necessities which dissolve a government, do not convey its authority to an oligarchy or a monarchy. They throw back, into the hands of the people, the powers they had delegated, and leave them as individuals to shift for themselves. A leader may offer, but not impose himself, nor be imposed on them. Much less can their necks be submitted to his sword, their breath be held at his will or caprice. [231] The necessity which should operate these tremendous effects should at least be palpable and irresistible. Yet in both instances, where it was feared, or pretended with us, it was belied by the event. It was belied, too, by the preceding experience of our sister states, several of whom had grappled through greater difficulties without abandoning their forms of government. When the proposition was first made, Massachusets had found even the government of committees sufficient to carry them through an invasion. But we at the time of that proposition, were under no invasion. When the second was made, there had been added to this example those of Rhode-Island, New-York, New-Jersey, and Pennsylvania, in all of which the republican form had been found equal to the task of carrying them through the severest trials. In this state alone did there exist so little virtue, that fear was to be fixed in the hearts of the people, and to become the motive of their exertions, and the principle of their government? The very thought alone was treason against the people; was treason against mankind in general; as rivetting forever the chains which bow down their necks by gi-[232] ving to their oppressors a proof, which they would have trumpeted through the universe, of the imbecility of republican government, in times of pressing danger, to shield them from harm. Those who assume the right of giving away the reins of government in any case, must be sure that the herd, whom they hand on to the rods and hatchet of the dictator, will lay their necks on the block when he shall nod to them. But if our assemblies supposed such a resignation in the people, I hope they mistook their character. I am of opinion, that the government, instead of being braced and invigorated for greater exertions under their difficulties, would have been thrown back upon the bungling machinery of county committees for administration, till a convention could have been called, and its wheels again set into regular motion. What a cruel moment was this for creating such an embarrassment, for putting to the proof the attachment of our countrymen to republican government! Those who meant well, of the advocates for this measure, (and most of them meant well, for I know them personally, had been their fellow-labourers in the common cause, and had [233] often proved the purity of their principles,) had been seduced in their judgment by the example of an antient republic, whose constitution and circumstances were fundamentally different. They had sought this precedent in the history of Rome, where alone it was to be found, and where at length, too, it had proved fatal. They had taken it from a republic rent by the most bitter factions and tumults, where the government was of a heavy-handed unfeeling aristocracy, over a people ferocious, and rendered desperate by poverty and wretchedness; tumults which could not be allayed under the most trying circumstances, but by the omnipotent hand of a single despot. Their constitution, therefore, allowed a temporary tyrant to be erected, under the name of a Dictator; and that temporary tyrant, after a few examples, became perpetual. They misapplied this precedent to a people mild in their dispositions, patient under their trial, united for the public liberty, and affectionate to their leaders. But if from the constitution of the Roman government there resulted to their Senate a power of submitting all their rights to the will of one man, does it follow that [234] the assembly of Virginia have the same authority? What clause in our constitution has substituted that of Rome, by way of residuary provision, for all cases not otherwise provided for? Or if they may step ad libitum into any other form of government for precedents to rule us by, for what oppression may not a precedent be found in this world of the bellum omnium in omnia? Searching for the foundations of this proposition, I can find none which may pretend a colour of right or reason, but the defect before developed, that there being no barrier between the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments, the legislature may seize the whole: that having seized it, and possessing a right to fix their own quorum, they may reduce that quorum to one, whom they may call a chairman, speaker, dictator, or by any other name they please.—Our situation is indeed perilous, and I hope my countrymen will be sensible of it, and will apply, at a proper season, the proper remedy; which is a convention to fix the constitution, to amend its defects, to bind up the several branches of government by certain laws, which, when they transgress, their acts shall [235] become nullities; to render unnecessary an appeal to the people, or in other words a rebellion, on every infraction of their rights, on the peril that their acquiescence shall be construed into an intention to surrender those rights.
QUERY XIV
The administration of justice and the description of the laws?
The state is divided into counties. In every county are appointed magistrates, called justices of the peace, usually from eight to thirty or forty in number, in proportion to the size of the county, of the most discreet and honest inhabitants. They are nominated by their fellows, but commissioned by the governor, and act without reward. These magistrates have jurisdiction both criminal and civil. If the question before them be a question of law only, they decide on it themselves; but if it be a fact, or of fact and law combined, it must be referred to a jury. In the latter case, of a combination of law and fact, it is usual for the jurors to decide [236] the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact. If they be mistaken, a decision against right, which is casual only, is less dangerous to the state, and less afflicting to the loser, than one which makes part of a regular and uniform system. In truth, it is better to toss up cross and pile in a cause, than to refer it to a judge whose mind is warped by any motive whatever, in that particular case. But the common sense of twelve honest men gives still a better chance of just decision, than the hazard of cross and pile. These judges execute their process by the sheriff or coroner of the county, or by constables of their own appointment. If any free person commit an offence against the commonwealth, if it be below the degree of felony, he is bound by a justice to appear before their court, to answer it on indictment or information. If it amount to felony, he is committed to jail; a court of these justices [237] is called; if they on examination think him guilty, they send him to the jail of the general court, before which court he is to be tried first by a grand jury of 24, of whom 13 must concur in opinion; if they find him guilty, he is then tried by a jury of 12 men of the county where the offence was committed, and by their verdict, which must be unanimous, he is acquitted or condemned without appeal. If the criminal be a slave, the trial by the county court is final. In every case, however, except that of high treason, there resides in the governor a power of pardon. In high treason the pardon can only flow from the general assembly. In civil matters these justices have jurisdiction in all cases of whatever value, not appertaining to the department of the admiralty. This jurisdiction is twofold. If the matter in dispute be of less value than 4⅙ dollars, a single member may try it at any time and place within his county, and may award execution on the goods of the party cast. If it be of that or greater value, it is determinable before the county court, which consists of four at the least of those justices and assembles at the court-house of the county on a certain day [238] in every month. From their determination, if the matter be of the value of ten pounds sterling, or concern the title or bounds of lands, an appeal lies to one of the superior courts.
There are three superior courts, to wit, the high court of chancery, the general court, and court of admiralty. The first and second of these receive appeals from the county courts, and also have original jurisdiction, where the subject of controversy is of the value of ten pounds sterling, or where it concerns the title or bounds of lands. The jurisdiction of the admiralty is original altogether. The high court of chancery is composed of three judges, the general court of five, and the court of admiralty of three. The two first hold their sessions at Richmond at stated times, the chancery twice in the year, and the general court twice for business civil and criminal, and twice more for criminal only. The court of admiralty sits at Williamsburg whenever a controversy arises.
There is one supreme court, called the court of appeals, composed of the judges of the three superior courts, assembling twice a year at stated times at Richmond. This court [239] receives appeals in all civil cases from each of the superior courts, and determines them finally. But it has no original jurisdiction.
If a controversy arise between two foreigners of a nation in alliance with the United States, it is decided by the Consul for their State, or, if both parties chuse it, by the ordinary courts of justice. If one of the parties only be such a foreigner, it is triable before the courts of justice of the country. But if it shall have been instituted in a county court, the foreigner may remove it into the general court, or court of chancery, who are to determine it at their first sessions, as they must also do if it be originally commenced before them. In cases of life and death, such foreigners have a right to be tried by a jury, the one-half foreigners, the other natives.
All public accounts are settled with a board of auditors, consisting of three members appointed by the general assembly, any two of whom may act. But an individual, dissatisfied with the determination of that board, may carry his case into the proper superior court. [240]
A description of the laws.
The general assembly was constituted, as has been already shown, by letters-patent of March the 9th, 1607, in the 4th year of the reign of James the first. The laws of England seem to have been adopted by consent of the settlers, which might easily enough be done whilst they were few and living all together. Of such adoption, however, we have no other proof than their practice till the year 1661, when they were expressly adopted by an act of the assembly, except so far as ‘a difference of condition’ rendered them inapplicable. Under this adoption, the rule, in our courts of judicature was, that the common law of England, and the general statutes previous to the 4th of James, were in force here; but that no subsequent statutes were, unless we were named in them, said the judges and other partisans of the crown, but named or not named, said those who reflected freely. It will be unnecessary to attempt a description of the laws of England, as that may be found in English publications. To those which were established here, by the adoption of the legislature, have been since added a number of [241] acts of assembly passed during the monarchy, and ordinances of convention and acts of assembly enacted since the establishment of the republic. The following variations from the British model are perhaps worthy of being specified:
Debtors unable to pay their debts, and making faithful delivery of their whole effects, are released from confinement, and their persons forever discharged from restraint for such previous debts: but any property they may afterwards acquire will be subject to their creditors.
The poor, unable to support themselves, are maintained by an assessment on the titheable persons in their parish. This assessment is levied and administered by twelve persons in each parish, called vestrymen, originally chosen by the housekeepers of the parish, but afterwards filling vacancies in their own body by their own choice. These are usually the most discreet farmers, so distributed through their parish, that every part of it may be under the immediate eye of some one of them. They are well acquainted with the details and œconomy of private life, and they find sufficient inducements to execute [242] their charge well, in their philanthropy, in the approbation of their neighbors, and the distinction which that gives them. The poor who have neither property, friends, nor strength to labour, are boarded in the houses of good farmers, to whom a stipulated sum is annually paid. To those who are able to help themselves a little, or have friends from whom they derive some succours, inadequate however to their full maintenance, supplementary aids are given which enable them to live comfortably in their own houses, or in the houses of their friends. Vagabonds without visible property or vocation, are placed in work houses, where they are well clothed, fed, lodged, and made to labour. Nearly the same methods of providing for the poor prevails through all our states; and from Savannah to Portsmouth you will seldom meet a beggar. In the larger towns, indeed, they sometimes present themselves. These are usually foreigners, who have never obtained a settlement in any parish. I never yet saw a native American begging in the streets or highways. A subsistence is easily gained here: and if, by misfortunes, they are thrown on the charities of the world, those provided by their own country are so comfortable and so certain, [243] that they never think of relinquishing them to become strolling beggars. Their situation too, when sick, in the family of a good farmer, where every member is emulous to do them kind offices, where they are visited by all the neighbors, who bring them the little rarities which their sickly appetites may crave, and who take by rotation the nightly watch over them, when their condition requires it, is without comparison better than in a general hospital, where the sick, the dying and the dead are crammed together in the same rooms, and often in the same beds. The disadvantages, inseparable from general hospitals, are such as can never be counterpoised by all the regularities of medicine and regimen. Nature and kind nursing save a much greater proportion in our plain way, at a smaller expense, and with less abuse. One branch only of hospital institution is wanting with us; that is a general establishment for those laboring under difficult cases of chirurgery. The aids of this art are not equivocal. But an able chirurgeon cannot be had in every parish. Such a receptacle should therefore be provided for those patients: but no others should be admitted. [244]
Marriages must be solemnized either on special licence, granted by the first magistrate of the county, on proof of the consent of the parent or guardian of either party under age, or after solemn publication, on three several sundays, at some place of religious worship, in the parishes where the parties reside. The act of solemnization may be by the minister of any society of christians, who shall have been previously licensed for this purpose by the court of the county. Quakers and Menonists however are exempted from all these conditions, and marriage among them is to be solemnized by the society itself.
A foreigner of any nation, not in open war with us, becomes naturalized by removing to the state to reside, and taking an oath of fidelity: and thereupon acquires every right of a native citizen: and citizens may divest themselves of that character, by declaring, by solemn deed, or in open court, that they mean to expatriate themselves, and no longer to be citizens of this state.
Conveyances of land must be registered in the court of the county wherein they lie, or in the general court, or they are void, [245] as to creditors, and subsequent purchasers.
Slaves pass by descent and dower as lands do. Where the descent is from a parent, the heir is bound to pay an equal share of their value in money to each of his brothers and sisters.
Slaves, as well as lands, were entailable during the monarchy; but, by an act of the first republican assembly, all donees in tail, present and future, were vested with the absolute dominion of the entailed subject.
Bills of exchange, being protested, carry 10 per cent. interest from their date.
No person is allowed, in any other case, to take more than five per centum per annum simple interest for the loan of moneys.
Gaming debts are made void, and monies actually paid to discharge such debts (if they exceed 40 shillings) may be recovered by the payer within three months, or by any other person afterwards.
Tobacco, flour, beef, pork, tar, pitch, and turpentine must be inspected by persons publicely appointed before they can be exported. [246]
The erecting iron-works and mills is encouraged by many privileges; with necessary cautions however to prevent their dams from obstructing the navigation of the water courses. The general assembly have on several occasions shewn a great desire to encourage the opening the great falls of James and Patowmac rivers. As yet, however, neither of these have been effected.
The laws have also descended to the preservation and improvement of the races of useful animals, such as horses, cattle, deer; to the extirpation of those which are noxious, as wolves, squirrels, crows, blackbirds; and to the guarding our citizens against infectious disorders, by obliging suspected vessels coming into the state, to perform quarantine, and by regulating the conduct of persons having such disorders within the state.
The mode of acquiring lands, in the earliest times of our settlement, was by petition to the general assembly. If the lands prayed for were already cleared of the Indian title, and the assembly thought the prayer reasonable, they passed the property by their vote to the petitioner. But if they had not yet been ceded by the Indians, it was neces-[247] sary that the petitioner should previously purchase their right. This purchase the assembly verified, by enquries of the Indian proprietors; and being satisfied of its reality and fairness, proceeded further to examine the reasonableness of the petition, and its consistence with policy; and according to the result either granted or rejected the petition. The company also sometimes, though very rarely, granted lands, independently of the general assembly. As the colony increased, and individual applications for land multiplied, it was found to give too much occupation to the general assembly to inquire into and execute the grant in every special case. They therefore thought it better to establish general rules, according to which all grants should be made, and to leave to the governor the execution of them, under these rules. This they did by what have been usually called the land laws, amending them from time to time, as their defects were developed. According to these laws, when an individual wished a portion of unappropriated land, he was to locate and survey it by a public officer, appointed for that purpose: its breadth was to bear a certain pro- [248] portion to its length: the grant was to be executed by the governor: and the lands were to be improved in a certain manner, within a given time. From these regulations there resulted to the state a sole and exclusive power of taking conveyances of the Indian right of soil; since, according to them an Indian conveyance alone could give no right to an individual, which the laws would acknowledge. The state, or the crown, thereafter, made general purchases of the Indians from time to time, and the governor parcelled them out by special grants, conformed to the rules before described, which it was not in his power, or in that of the crown, to dispense with. Grants, unaccompanied by their proper legal circumstances, were set aside regularly by scire facias, or by bill in Chancery. Since the establishment of our new government, this order of things is but little changed. An individual, wishing to appropriate to himself lands still unappropriated by any other, pays to the public treasurer a sum of money proportioned to the quantity he wants. He carries the treasurer’s receipt to the auditors of public accompts, who thereupon debit the treasurer [249] with the sum, and order the register of the land-office to give the party a warrant for his land. With this warrant from the register, he goes to the surveyor of the county where the land lies on which he has cast his eye. The Surveyor lays it off for him, gives him its exact description, in the form of a certificate, which certificate he returns to the land-office, where a grant is made out, and is signed by the governor. This vests in him a perfect dominion in his lands, transmissible to whom he pleases by deed or will, or by descent to his heirs, if he die intestate.
Many of the laws which were in force during the monarchy being relative merely to that form of government, or inculcating principles inconsistent with republicanism, the first assembly which met after the establishment of the commonwealth, appointed a committee to revise the whole code, to reduce it into proper form and volume, and report it to the assembly. This work has been executed by three gentlemen, and reported; but probably will not be taken up till a restoration of peace shall leave [250] to the legislature leisure to go through such a work.1
The plan of the revisal was this. The common law of England, by which is meant that part of the English law which was anterior to the date of the oldest statutes extant, is made the basis of the work. It was thought dangerous to attempt to reduce it to a text: it was therefore left to be collected from the usual monuments of it. Necessary alterations in that, and so much of the whole body of the British statutes, and of acts of assembly, as were thought proper to be retained, were digested into 126 new acts, in which simplicity of style was aimed at, as far as was safe. The following are the most remarkable alterations proposed:
To change the rules of descent, so as that the lands of any person dying intestate shall be divisible equally among all his children, or other representatives, in equal degree.
To make slaves distributable among the next of kin, as other movables.
To have all public expences, whether of the general treasury, or of a parish or county, (as for the maintenance of the poor, building bridges, court-houses, &c.,) supplied by as-[251] sessments on the citizens, in proportion to their property.
To hire undertakers for keeping the public roads in repair, and indemnify individuals through whose lands new roads shall be opened.
To define with precision the rules whereby aliens should become citizens, and citizens make themselves aliens.
To establish religious freedom on the broadest bottom.
To emancipate all slaves born after passing the act. The bill reported by the revisers does not itself contain this proposition; but an amendment containing it was prepared, to be offered to the legislature whenever the bill should be taken up, and further directing, that they should continue with their parents to a certain age, then be brought up, at the public expence, to tillage, arts, or sciences, according to their geniusses, till the females should be eighteen, and the males twenty-one years of age, when they should be colonized to such place as the circumstances of the time should render most proper, sending them out with arms, implements of household and of the handicraft arts, seeds, pairs of the [252] useful domestic animals, &c. to declare them a free and independant people, and extend to them our alliance and protection, till they shall have acquired strength; and to send vessels at the same time to other parts of the world for an equal number of white inhabitants; to induce whom to migrate hither, proper encouragements were to be proposed. It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expence of supplying by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions, which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race.—To these objections, which are political, may be added others, which are physical and moral. The first difference which strikes us is that of colour. Whether the black of the negro resides in the reticular membrane between the skin and scarfskin, or in the scarfskin itself; [253] whether it proceeds from the colour of the blood, the colour of the bile, or from that of some other secretion, the difference is fixed in nature, and is as real as if its seat and cause were better known to us. And is this difference of no importance? Is it not the foundation of a greater or less share of beauty in the two races? Are not the fine mixtures of red and white, the expressions of every passion by greater or less suffusions of colour in the one, preferable to that eternal monotony, which reigns in the countenances, that immovable veil of black which covers all the emotions of the other race? Add to these, flowing hair, a more elegant symmetry of form, their own judgment in favour of the whites, declared by their preference of them as uniformly as is the preference of the Oran ootan for the black woman over those of his own species. The circumstance of superior beauty, is thought worthy attention in the propagation of our horses, dogs, and other domestic animals; why not in that of man? Besides those of colour, figure, and hair, there are other physical distinctions proving a difference of race. They have less hair on the face and body. They secrete [254] less by the kidnies, and more by the glands of the skin, which gives them a very strong and disagreeable odour. This greater degree of transpiration, renders them more tolerant of heat, and less so of cold than the whites. Perhaps too a difference of structure in the pulmonary apparatus, which a late ingenious1 experimentalist has discovered to be the principal regulator of animal heat, may have disabled them from extricating, in the act of inspiration, so much of that fluid from the outer air, or obliged them in expiration, to part with more of it. They seem to require less sleep. A black after hard labour through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusements to sit up till midnight or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning. They are at least as brave, and more adventuresome. But this may perhaps proceed from a want of forethought, which prevents their seeing a danger till it be present. When present, they do not go through it with more coolness or stea-[255] diness than the whites. They are more ardent after their female; but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An animal whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid: and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous. It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apochryphal on which a judgment is to be [256] formed. It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them, indeed, have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad. The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their [257] imagination glowing and elevated. But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never seen even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites, with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch.1 Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved. Misery is often the parent of the most affecting touches in poetry.—Among the blacks is misery enough, God knows, but no poetry. Love is the peculiar œstrum of the poet. Their love is ardent, but it kindles the senses only, not the imagination. Religion, indeed, has produced a Phyllis Whately2 ; but it could not produce a poet. The compositions published under her name are below the dignity of criticism. The heroes of the Dunciad are to her, as Hercules to the author of that poem. Igna-[258] tius Sancoh3 has approached nearer to merit in composition; yet his letters do more honour to the heart than the head. They breathe the purest effusions of friendship and general philanthropy, and show how great a degree of the latter may be compounded with strong religious zeal. He is often happy in the turn of his compliments, and his style is easy and familiar, except when he affects a Shandean fabrication of words. But his imagination is wild and extravagant, escapes incessantly from every restraint of reason and taste, and, in the course of its vagaries, leaves a tract of thought as incoherent and eccentric, as is the course of a meteor through the sky. His subjects should often have led him to a process of sober reasoning; yet we find him always substituting sentiment for demonstration. Upon the whole, though we admit him to the first place among those of his own color who have presented themselves to the public judgment, yet when we compare him with the writers of the race among whom he lived and particularly with the epistolary class in which he has taken his own stand, we are compelled to enrol him at the bottom of the column. [259] This criticism supposes the letters published under his name to be genuine, and to have received amendment from no other hand; points which would not be of easy investigation. The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life. We know that among the Romans, about the Augustan age especially, the condition of their slaves was much more deplorable than that of the blacks on the continent of America. The two sexes were confined in separate apartments, because to raise a child cost the master more than to buy one. Cato, for a very restricted indulgence to his slaves in this particular,1 took from them a certain price. But in this country the slaves multiply as fast as the free inhabitants. Their situation and manners place the commerce between the two sexes almost without restraint.—[260] The same Cato, on a principle of economy, always sold his sick and superannuated slaves. He gives it as a standing precept to a master visiting his farm, to sell his old oxen, old waggons, old tools, old and diseased servants, and everything else become useless. ‘Vendat boves vetulos, plaustrum vetus, feramenta vetera, servum senem, servum morbosum, si quid aliud supersit vendat.’ Cato de re rusticâ, c. 2. The American slaves cannot enumerate this among the injuries and insults they receive. It was the common practice to expose in the island Æsculapius, in the Tyber, diseased slaves whose cure was like to become tedious.2 The Emperor Claudius, by an edict, gave freedom to such of them as should recover, and first declared that if any person chose to kill rather than to expose them, it should be deemed homicide. The exposing them is a crime of which no instance has existed with us; and were it to be followed by death, it would be punished capitally. We are told of a certain Vedius Pollio, who, in the presence of Augustus, would have given a slave as food to his fish, for having broken a glass.3 With the Romans, the regular method of tak-[261] ing the evidence of their slaves was under torture. Here it has been thought better never to resort to their evidence. When a master was murdered, all his slaves, in the same house, or within hearing, were condemned to death. Here punishment falls on the guilty only, and as precise proof is required against him as against a freeman. Yet notwithstanding these and other discouraging circumstances among the Romans, their slaves were often their rarest artists. They excelled too in science, insomuch as to be usually employed as tutors to their master’s children. Epictetus,1 Terence, and Phædrus, were slaves. But they were of the race of whites. It is not their condition then, but nature, which has produced the distinction.—Whether further observation will or will not verify the conjecture, that nature has been less bountiful to them in the endowments of the head, I believe that in those of the heart she will be found to have done them justice. That disposition to theft with which they have been branded, must be ascribed to their situation, and not to any depravity of the moral sense. The man in whose favour no laws of property exist, probably feels himself less [262] bound to respect those made in favour of others. When arguing for ourselves, we lay it down as a fundamental, that laws, to be just, must give a reciprocation of right: that, without this, they are mere arbitrary rules of conduct, founded in force, and not in conscience; and it is a problem which I give to the master to solve, whether the religious precepts against the violation of property were not framed for him as well as his slave? And whether the slave may not as justifiably take a little from one who has taken all from him, as he may slay one who would slay him? That a change in the relations in which a man is placed should change his ideas of moral right and wrong, is neither new, nor peculiar to the colour of the blacks. Homer tells us it was so 2600 years ago.
-
- Ἠμισυ, γὰρ τ’ ἀρετής ἀποαίνυται εὐρύοπα Ζεὺ
- Ἀφνερος, ευτ’ ἂν μιν ϰατὰ δουλιον ἠμαρ ἓλησιν.
-
—Od. 17, 323.
-
- Jove fix’d it certain, that whatever day
- Makes man a slave, takes half his worth away.
But the slaves of which Homer speaks were whites. Notwithstanding these considerations which must weaken their respect for the laws of property, we find among them numerous [263] instances of the most rigid integrity, and as many as among their better instructed masters, of benevolence, gratitude, and unshaken fidelity. The opinion that they are inferior in the faculties of reason and imagination, must be hazarded with great diffidence. To justify a general conclusion, requires many observations, even where the subject may be submitted to the Anatomical knife, to Optical glasses, to analysis by fire or by solvents. How much more then where it is a faculty, not a substance, we are examining; where it eludes the research of all the senses; where the conditions of its existence are various and variously combined; where the effects of those which are present or absent bid defiance to calculation; let me add too, as a circumstance of great tenderness, where our conclusion would degrade a whole race of men from the rank in the scale of beings which their Creator may perhaps have given them. To our reproach it must be said, that though for a century and a half we have had under our eyes the races of black and of red men, they have never yet been viewed by us as subjects of natural history. I advance it, [264] therefore, as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications. Will not a lover of natural history then, one who views the gradations in all the races of animals with the eye of philosophy, excuse an effort to keep those in the department of man as distinct as nature has formed them? This unfortunate difference of colour, and perhaps of faculty, is a powerful obstacle to the emancipation of these people. Many of their advocates, while they wish to vindicate the liberty of human nature, are anxious also to preserve its dignity and beauty. Some of these, embarrassed by the question, ‘What further is to be done with them?’ join themselves in opposition with those who are actuated by sordid avarice only. Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his [265] master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture.
The revised code further proposes to proportion crimes and punishments. This is attempted in the following scale. [266]
- I. Crimes whose punishment extends to Life.
- 1. High treason. Death by hanging. Forfeiture of lands and goods to the commonwealth.
- 2. Petty treason. Death by hanging. Dissection. Forfeiture of half the lands and goods to the representatives of the party slain.
- 3. Murder.
- 1. By poison. Death by poison. Forfeiture of one-half, as before.
- 2. In duel. Death by hanging. Gibbeting, if the challenger. Forfeiture of one-half as before, unless it be the party challenged, then the forfeiture is to the commonwealth.
- 3. In any other way. Death by hanging. Forfeiture of one-half as before.
- 4. Manslaughter. The second offence is murder.
- II. Crimes whose punishment goes to Limb.
- 1. Rape . . . Dismemberment.
- 2. Sodomy . . . Dismemberment.
- 3. Maiming . . . Retaliation, and the forfeiture of half of the lands and goods to the sufferer.
- 4. Disfiguring . . . Retaliation, and the forfeiture of half of the lands and goods to the sufferer.
- III. Crimes punishable by Labour.
1. Manslaughter, 1st offence. Labor VII. years for the public. Forfeiture of half, as in murder. 2. Counterfeiting money. Labor VI. years. Forfeiture of lands and goods to the commonwealth. [267] 3. Arson Labor V. years. Reparation threefold. 4. Asportation of vessels. 5. Robbery. Labor IV. years. Reparation double. 6. Burglary. 7. House-breaking. Labor III. years. Reparation. 8. Horse-stealing. 9. Grand larceny. Labor II. years. Reparation. Pillory. 10. Petty larceny. Labor I. year. Reparation. Pillory. 11. Pretensions to witchcraft, &c. Ducking. Stripes. 12. Excusable homicide. To be pitied, not punished. 13. Suicide. 14. Apostacy. Heresy. [268]
Pardon and privilege of clergy are proposed to be abolished; but if the verdict be against the defendant, the court in their discretion may allow a new trial. No attainder to cause a corruption of blood, or forfeiture of dower. Slaves guilty of offences punishable in others by labour, to be transported to Africa, or elsewhere, as the circumstances of the time admit, there to be continued in slavery. A rigorous regimen proposed for those condemned to labour.
Another object of the revisal is, to diffuse knowledge more generally through the mass of the people. This bill proposes to lay off every country into small districts of five or six miles square, called hundreds and in each of them to establish a school for teaching, reading, writing, and arithmetic. The tutor to be supported by the hundred, and every person in it entitled to send their children three years gratis, and as much longer as they please, paying for it. These schools to be under a visitor who is annually to chuse the boy of best genius in the school, of those whose parents are too poor to give them further education, and to send him forward to one of the grammar schools, of which twen-[269] ty are proposed to be erected in different parts of the country, for teaching Greek, Latin, geography, and the higher branches of numerical arithmetic. Of the boys thus sent in any one year, trial is to be made at the grammar schools one or two years, and the best genius of the whole selected, and continued six years, and the residue dismissed. By this means twenty of the best geniuses will be raked from the rubbish annually, and be instructed, at the public expence, so far as the grammar schools go. At the end of six years instruction, one half are to be discontinued (from among whom the grammar schools will probably be supplied with future masters); and the other half, who are to be chosen for the superiority of their parts and disposition, are to be sent and continued three years in the study of such sciences as they shall chuse, at William and Mary college, the plan of which is proposed to be enlarged, as will be hereafter explained, and extended to all the useful sciences. The ultimate result of the whole scheme of education would be the teaching all the children of the State reading, writing, and common arithmetic; turning out ten annually, of su- [270] perior genius, well taught in Greek, Latin, geography, and the higher branches of arithmetic; turning out ten others annually, of still superior parts, who, to those branches of learning, shall have added such of the sciences as their genius shall have them led to; the furnishing to the wealthier part of the people convenient schools at which their children may be educated at their own expence.—The general objects of this law are to provide an education adapted to the years, to the capacity, and the condition of every one, and directed to their freedom and happiness. Specific details were not proper for the law. These must be the business of the visitors entrusted with its execution. The first stage of this education being the schools of the hundreds, wherein the great mass of the people will receive their instruction, the principal foundations of future order will be laid here. Instead, therefore, of putting the Bible and Testament into the hands of the children at an age when their judgments are not sufficiently matured for religious inquiries, their memories may here be stored with the most useful facts from Grecian, Roman, European, and American history. The first [271] elements of morality too may be instilled into their minds; such as, when further developed as their judgments advance in strength, may teach them how to work out their own greatest happiness, by shewing them that it does not depend on the condition of life in which chance has placed them, but is always the result of a good conscience, good health, occupation, and freedom in all just pursuits.—Those whom either the wealth of their parents or the adoption of the state shall destine to higher degrees of learning, will go on to the grammar schools, which constitute the next stage, there to be instructed in the languages. The learning Greek and Latin, I am told, is going into disuse in Europe. I know not what their manners and occupations may call for: but it would be very ill-judged in us to follow their example in this instance. There is a certain period of life, say from eight to fifteen or sixteen years of age, when the mind like the body is not yet firm enough for laborious and close operations. If applied to such, it falls an early victim to premature exertion; exhibiting, indeed, at first, in these young and tender subjects, the flattering appearance of their be-[272] ing men while they are yet children, but ending in reducing them to be children when they should be men. The memory is then most susceptible and tenacious of impressions; and the learning of languages being chiefly a work of memory, it seems precisely fitted to the powers of this period, which is long enough too for acquiring the most useful languages, antient and modern. I do not pretend that language is science. It is only an instrument for the attainment of science. But that time is not lost which is employed in providing tools for future operation: more especially as in this case the books put into the hands of the youth for this purpose may be such as will at the same time impress their minds with useful facts and good principles. If this period be suffered to pass in idleness, the mind becomes lethargic and impotent, as would the body it inhabits if unexercised during the same time. The sympathy between body and mind during their rise, progress and decline, is too strict and obvious to endanger our being misled while we reason from the one to the other.—As soon as they are of sufficient age, it is supposed they will be sent on from the grammar schools to the [273] university, which constitutes our third and last stage, there to study those sciences which may be adapted to their views.—By that part of our plan which prescribes the selection of the youths of genius from among the classes of the poor, we hope to avail the state of those talents which nature has shown as liberally among the poor as the rich, but which perish without use, if not sought for and cultivated.—But of all the views of this law none is more important, none more legitimate, than that of rendering the people the safe, as they are the ultimate, guardians of their own liberty. For this purpose the reading in the first stage, where they will receive their whole education, is proposed, as has been said, to be chiefly historical. History, by apprising them of the past, will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views. In every government on earth is some trace of human weakness, some germ of corruption and degene-[274] racy, which cunning will discover, and wickedness insensibly open, cultivate and improve. Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves therefore are its only safe depositories. And to render even them safe, their minds must be improved to a certain degree. This indeed is not all that is necessary, though it be essentially necessary. An amendment of our constitution must here come in aid of the public education. The influence over government must be shared among all the people. If every individual which composes their mass participates of the ultimate authority, the government will be safe; because the corrupting the whole mass will exceed any private resources of wealth; and public ones cannot be provided but by levies on the people. In this case every man would have to pay his own price. The government of Great Britain has been corrupted, because but one man in ten has a right to vote for members of parliament. The sellers of the government, therefore, get ninetenths of their price clear. It has been thought that corruption is restrained by confining the right of suffrage to a few of the wealthier of the people: but [275] it would be more effectually restrained by an extension of that right to such members as would bid defiance to the means of corruption.
Lastly, it is proposed, by a bill in this revisal, to begin a public library and gallery, by laying out a certain sum annually in books, paintings, and statues.
QUERY XV
The colleges and public establishments, the roads, buildings, &c.?
The college of William and Mary is the only public seminary of learning in this State. It was founded in the time of king William and queen Mary, who granted to it 20,000 acres of land, and a penny a pound duty on certain tobaccoes exported from Virginia and Maryland, which had been levied by the statute of 25 Car. II. The assembly also gave it, by temporary laws, a duty on liquors imported, and skins and furs exported. From these resources it received upwards of 3000l communibus annis. The buildings are of brick, sufficient for an indifferent accommo- [276] dation of perhaps an hundred students. By its charter it was to be under the government of twenty visitors, who were to be its legislators, and to have a president and six professors, who were incorporated. It was allowed a representative in the general assembly. Under this charter, a professorship of the Greek and Latin languages, a professorship of mathematics, one of moral philosophy, and two of divinity were established. To these were annexed, for a sixth professorship, a considerable donation by Mr. Boyle, of England, for the instruction of the Indians, and their conversion to Christianity. This was called the professorship of Brafferton, from an estate of that name in England, purchased with the monies given. The admission of the learners of Latin and Greek filled the college with children. This rendering it disagreeable and degrading to young gentlemen already prepared for entering on the sciences, they were discouraged from resorting to it, and thus the schools for mathematics and moral philosophy, which might have been of some service, became of very little. The revenues, too, were exhausted in accommodating those who came only [277] to acquire the rudiments of science. After the present revolution, the visitors, having no power to change those circumstances in the constitution of the college which were fixed by the charter, and being therefore confined in the number of professorships, undertook to change the objects of the professorships. They excluded the two schools for divinity, and that for the Greek and Latin languages, and substituted others; so that at present they stand thus:
A professorship for Law and Police:
Anatomy and Medicine:
Natural Philosophy and Mathematics:
Moral Philosophy, the Law of Nature and Nations, the Fine Arts:
Modern Languages:
For the Brafferton.
And it is proposed, so soon as the legislature shall have leisure to take up this subject, to desire authority from them to increase the number of professorships, as well for the purpose of subdividing those already instituted, as of adding others for other branches of science. To the professorships usually established in the universities of Europe, it [278] would seem proper to add one for the ancient languages and literature of the North, on account of their connection with our own language, laws, customs, and history. The purposes of the Brafferton institution would be better answered by maintaining a perpetual mission among the Indian tribes, the object of which, besides instructing them in the principles of Christianity, as the founder requires, should be to collect their traditions, laws, customs, languages, and other circumstances which might lead to a discovery of their relation with one another, or descent from other nations. When these objects are accomplished with one tribe, the missionary might pass on to another.
The roads are under the government of the county courts, subject to be controuled by the general court. They order new roads to be opened wherever they think them necessary. The inhabitants of the county are by them laid off into precincts, to each of which they allot a convenient portion of the public roads to be kept in repair. Such bridges as may be built without the assistance of artificers, they are to build. If the stream be such as to require a bridge of regular [279] workmanship, the court employs workmen to build it at the expence of the whole county. If it be too great for the county, application is made to the general assembly, who authorize individuals to build it, and to take a fixed toll from all passengers, or give sanction to such other proposition as to them appears reasonable.
Ferries are admitted only at such places as are particularly pointed out by law, and the rates of ferriage are fixed.
Taverns are licensed by the courts, who fix their rates from time to time.
The private buildings are very rarely constructed of stone or brick, much the greatest proportion being of scantling and boards, plaistered with lime. It is impossible to devise things more ugly, uncomfortable, and happily more perishable. There are two or three plans, on one of which, according to its size, most of the houses in the state are built. The poorest people build huts of logs, laid horizontally in pens, stopping the interstices with mud. These are warmer in winter, and cooler in summer, than the more expensive constructions of scantling and plank. The wealthy are attentive to the raising of [280] vegetables, but very little so to fruits. The poorer people attend to neither, living principally on milk and animal diet. This is the more inexcusable, as the climate requires indispensably a free use of vegetable food, for health as well as comfort, and is very friendly to the raising of fruits.—The only public buildings worthy mention are the Capitol, the Palace, the College, and the Hospital for Lunatics, all of them in Williamsburg, heretofore the seat of our government. The Capitol is a light and airy structure, with a portico in front of two orders, the lower of which, being Doric, is tolerably just in its proportions and ornaments, save only that the intercolonnations are too large. The upper is Ionic, much too small for that on which it is mounted, its ornaments not proper to the order, nor proportioned within themselves. It is crowned with a pediment, which is too high for its span. Yet, on the whole, it is the most pleasing piece of architecture we have. The Palace is not handsome without, but it is spacious and commodious within, is prettily situated, and with the grounds annexed to it, is capable of being made an elegant seat. The Col- [281] lege and Hospital are rude, mis-shapen piles, which, but that they have roofs, would be taken for brick-kilns. There are no other public buildings but churches and court-houses, in which no attempts are made at elegance. Indeed, it would not be easy to execute such an attempt, as a workman could scarcely be found here capable of drawing an order. The genius of architecture seems to have shed its maledictions over this land. Buildings are often erected, by individuals, of considerable expence. To give these symmetry and taste, would not increase their cost. It would only change the arrangement of the materials, the form and combination of the members. This would often cost less than the burthen of barbarous ornaments with which these buildings are sometimes charged. But the first principles of the art are unknown, and there exists scarcely a model among us sufficiently chaste to give an idea of them. Architecture being one of the fine arts, and as such within the department of a professor of the college, according to the new arrangement, perhaps a spark may fall on some young subjects of natural taste, kindle up their genius, and produce a reforma- [282] tion in this elegant and useful art. But all we shall do in this way will produce no permanent improvement to our country, while the unhappy prejudice prevails that houses of brick or stone are less wholesome than those of wood. A dew is often observed on the walls of the former in rainy weather, and the most obvious solution is, that the rain has penetrated through these walls. The following facts, however, are sufficient to prove the error of this solution. 1. This dew on the walls appears when there is no rain, if the state of the atmosphere be moist. 2. It appears on the partition as well as the exterior walls. 3. So, also, on pavements of brick or stone. 4. It is more copious in proportion as the walls are thicker; the reverse of which ought to be the case, if this hypothesis were just. If cold water be poured into a vessel of stone, or glass, a dew forms instantly on the outside: but if it be poured into a vessel of wood, there is no such appearance. It is not supposed, in the first case, that the water has exuded through the glass, but that it is precipitated from the circumambient air; as the humid particles of vapour, passing from the boiler of an alembic [283] through its refrigerant, are precipitated from the air, in which they were suspended, on the internal surface of the refrigerant. Walls of brick or stone act as the refrigerant in this instance. They are sufficiently cold to condense and precipitate the moisture suspended in the air of the room, when it is heavily charged therewith. But walls of wood are not so. The question then is, whether air in which this moisture is left floating, or that which is deprived of it, be most wholesome? In both cases, the remedy is easy. A little fire kindled in the room, whenever the air is damp, prevents the precipitation on the walls: and this practice, found healthy in the warmest as well as coldest seasons, is as necessary in a wooden as in a stone or a brick house. I do not mean to say, that the rain never penetrates through walls of brick. On the contrary, I have seen instances of it. But with us it is only through the northern and eastern walls of the house, after a north-easterly storm, these being the only ones which continue long enough to force through the walls. This, however, happens too rarely to give a just character of unwholesomeness to such [284] houses. In a house, the walls of which are of wellburnt brick and good mortar, I have seen the rain penetrate through but twice in a dozen or fifteen years. The inhabitants of Europe, who dwell chiefly in houses of stone or brick, are surely as healthy as those of Virginia. These houses have the advantage, too, of being warmer in winter and cooler in summer than those of wood; of being cheaper in their first construction, where lime is convenient, and infinitely more durable. The latter consideration renders it of great importance to eradicate this prejudice from the minds of our countrymen. A country whose buildings are of wood, can never increase in its improvements to any considerable degree. Their duration is highly estimated at 50 years. Every half century then our country becomes a tabula rasa, whereon we have to set out anew, as in the first moment of seating it. Whereas when buildings are of durable materials, every new edifice is an actual and permanent acquisition to the State, adding to its value as well as to its ornament. [285]
QUERY XVI
The measures taken with regard of the estates and possessions of the rebels, commonly called Tories?
A tory has been properly defined to be a traitor in thought, but not in deed. The only description, by which the laws have endeavoured to come at them, was that of non-jurors, or persons refusing to take the oath of fidelity to the state. Persons of this description were at one time subjected to double taxation, at another treble, and lastly were allowed retribution, and placed on a level with good citizens. It may be mentioned as a proof, both of the lenity of our government, and unanimity of its inhabitants, that though this war has now raged near seven years not a single execution for treason has taken place.
Under this query I will state the measures which have been adopted as to British property, the owners of which stand on a much fairer footing than the Tories. By our laws, the same as the English as in this respect, [286] no alien can hold lands, nor alien enemy maintain an action for money, or other movable thing. Lands acquired or held by aliens become forfeited to the state; and, on an action by an alien enemy to recover money, or other movable property, the defendant may plead that he is an alien enemy. This extinguishes his right in the hands of the debtor or holder of his movable property. By our separation from Great Britain, British subjects became aliens, and being at war, they were alien enemies. Their lands were of course forfeited, and their debts irrecoverable. The assembly, however, passed laws at various times, for saving their property. They first sequestered their lands, slaves, and other property on their farms in the hands of commissioners, who were mostly the confidential friends or agents of the owners, and directed their clear profits to be paid into the treasury: and they gave leave to all persons owing debts to British subjects to pay them also into the treasury. The monies so to be brought in were declared to remain the property of the British subject, and, if used by the state, were to be repaid, unless an improper conduct in Great-Britain should ren- [287] der a detention of it reasonable. Depreciation had at that time, though unacknowledged and unperceived by the Whigs begun in some small degree. Great sums of money were paid in by debtors. At a later period, the assembly, adhering to the political principles which forbid an alien to hold lands in the state, ordered all British property to be sold: and, become sensible of the real progress of depreciation, and of the losses which would thence occur, if not guarded against, they ordered that the proceeds of the sales should be converted into their then worth in tobacco, subject to the future direction of the legislature. This act has left the question of retribution more problematical. In May 1780 another act took away the permission to pay into the public treasury debts due to British subjects.
QUERY XVII
The different religions received into that state?
The first settlers in this country were emigrants from England, of the English church, [288] just at a point of time when it was flushed with complete victory over the religious of all other persuasions. Possessed, as they became, of the powers of making, administering and executing the laws, they shewed equal intolerance in this country with their Presbyterian brethren, who had emigrated to the northern government. The poor Quakers were flying from persecution in England. They cast their eyes on these new countries as asylums of civil and religious freedom; but they found them free only for the reigning sect. Several acts of the Virginia assembly of 1659, 1662, and 1693, had made it penal in parents to refuse to have their children baptized; had prohibited the unlawful assembling of Quakers; had made it penal for any master of a vessel to bring a Quaker into the state; had ordered those already here, and such as should come thereafter, to be imprisoned till they should abjure the country; provided a milder punishment for their first and second return, but death for their third; had inhibited all persons from suffering their meetings in or near their houses, entertaining them individually, or disposing of books which supported their [289] tenets. If no capital execution took place here, as did in New-England, it was not owing to the moderation of the church, or spirit of the legislature, as may be inferred from the law itself; but to historical circumstances which have not been handed down to us. The Anglicans retained full possession of the country about a century. Other opinions began then to creep in, and the great care of the government to support their own church, having begotten an equal degree of indolence in its clergy, two thirds of the people had become dissenters at the commencement of the present revolution. The laws indeed were still oppressive on them, but the spirit of the one party had subsided into moderation, and of the other had risen to a degree of determination which commanded respect.
The present state of our laws on the subject of religion is this. The convention of May 1776, in their declaration of rights, declared it to be a truth, and a natural right, that the exercise of religion should be free; but when they proceeded to form on that declaration the ordinance of government, instead of taking up every principle declared [290] in the bill of rights, and guarding it by legislative sanction, they passed over that which asserted our religious rights, leaving them as they found them. The same convention, however, when they met as a member of the general assembly in October 1776, repealed all acts of parliament which had rendered criminal the maintaining any opinions in matters of religion, the forbearing to repair to church, and the exercising any mode of worship; and suspended the laws giving salaries to the clergy, which suspension was made perpetual in October 1779. Statutory oppressions in religion being thus wiped away, we remain at present under those only imposed by the common law, or by our own acts of assembly. At the common law, heresy was a capital offence, punishable by burning. Its definition was left to the ecclesiastical judges, before whom the conviction was, till the statute of the 1 El. c. 1. circumscribed it, by declaring that nothing should be deemed heresy but what had been so determined by authority of the canonical scriptures, or by one of the four first general councils, or by some other council having for the grounds of their declaration the [291] express and plain words of the scriptures. Heresy, thus circumscribed, being an offence at the common law, our act of assembly of October 1777, c. 17 gives cognizance of it to the general court, by declaring that the jurisdiction of that court shall be general in all matters at the common law. The execution is by the writ De hæretico comburendo. By our own act of assembly of 1705, c. 30, if a person brought up in the christian religion denies the being of a God, or the trinity, or asserts there are more Gods than one, or denies the christian religion to be true, or the scriptures to be of divine authority, he is punishable on the first offence by incapacity to hold any office or employment ecclesiastical, civil, or military; on the second by disability to sue, to take any gift or legacy, to be guardian, executor or administrator, and by three years imprisonment, without bail. A father’s right to the custody of his own children being founded in law on his right of guardianship, this being taken away, they may of course be severed from him and put, by the authority of a court, into more orthodox hands. This is a summary view of that religious slavery [292] under which a people have been willing to remain who have lavished their lives and fortunes for the establishment of their civil freedom. The error seems not sufficiently eradicated, that the operations of the mind, as well as the acts of the body, are subject to the coercion of the laws.1 But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights, only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others.1 But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If it be said his testimony in a court of justice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him. Constraint may make him worse by making him a hypocrite, but it will never make him a truer man. It may fix him obstinately in his errors, but will not cure [293] them. Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error. Give a loose to them, they will support the true religion by bringing every false one to their tribunal, to the test of their investigation. They are the natural enemies of error, and of error only. Had not the Roman government permitted free inquiry, christianity could never have been introduced. Had not free inquiry been indulged, at the æra of the reformation, the corruptions of christianity could not have been purged away. If it be restrained now, the present corruptions will be protected, and new ones encouraged. Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potatoe as an article of food.1 Government is just as infallible, too, when it fixes systems in physics. Galileo was sent to the inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere; the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error however at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared [294] it was whirled round its axis by a vortex. The government in which he lived was wise enough to see that this was no question of civil jurisdiction, or we should all have been involved by authority in vortices. In fact the vortices have been exploded, and the Newtonian principles of gravitation is now more firmly established, on the basis of reason, than it would be were the government to step in and to make it an article of necessary faith. Reason and experiment have been indulged, and error has fled before them. It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors? Fallible men; men governed by bad passions, by private as well as public reasons. And why subject it to coercion? To produce uniformity. But is uniformity of opinion desireable? No more than of face and stature. Introduce the bed of Procrustes then, and as there is danger that the large men may beat the small, make us all of a size, by lopping the former and stretching the latter. Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of a Censor morum over [295] each other. Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned: yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth. Let us reflect that it is inhabited by a thousand millions of people. That these profess probably a thousand different systems of religion. That ours is but one of that thousand. That if there be but one right, and ours that one, we should wish to see the 999 wandering sects gathered into the fold of truth. But against such a majority we cannot effect this by force. Reason and persuasion are the only practicable instruments. To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged; and how can we wish others to indulge it while we refuse it ourselves. But every state, says an inquisitor, has established some religion. “No two, say I, have established the same.” Is this a proof of the infallibility of establishments? Our sister states of Pennsylvania [296] and New York, however, have long subsisted without any establishment at all. The experiment was new and doubtful when they made it. It has answered beyond conception. They flourish infinitely. Religion is well supported; of various kinds indeed, but all good enough; all sufficient to preserve peace and order: or if a sect arises whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play, and reasons and laughs it out of doors, without suffering the state to be troubled with it. They do not hang more male-factors than we do. They are not more disturbed with religious dissentions. On the contrary, their harmony is unparallelled, and can be ascribed to nothing but their unbounded tolerance, because there is no other circumstance in which they differ from every nation on earth. They have made the happy discovery, that the way to silence religious disputes, is to take no notice of them. Let us too give this experiment fair play, and get rid, while we may, of those tyrannical laws. It is true we are as yet secured against them by the spirit of the times. I doubt whether the people of this country would suffer an execution for heresy, or a three years imprisonment for not [297] comprehending the mysteries of the trinity. But is the spirit of the people an infallible, a permanent reliance? Is it government? Is this the kind of protection we receive in return for the rights we give up? Besides, the spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecuter, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going down hill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion. [298]
QUERY XVIII
The particular customs and manners that may happen to be received in that State?
It is difficult to determine on the standard by which the manners of a nation may be tried, whether catholic or particular. It is more difficult for a native to bring to that standard the manners of his own nation, familiarized to him by habit. There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him. From his cradle to his grave he is learning to do what he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive either in his philanthropy or his self-love, for restraining the intemperance of passion towards his slave, it [299] should always be a sufficient one that his child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. The parent storms, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose to the worst of passions, and thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circumstances. And with what execrations should the statesman be loaded, who permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other, transforms those into despots, and these into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, and the amor patriæ of the other. For if a slave can have a country in this world, it must be any other in preference to that in which he is born to live and labour for another: in which he must lock up the faculties of his nature, contribute as far as depends on his individual endeavours to the evanishment of the human race, or entail his own miserable condition on the endless generations proceeding from him. With the morals of the people, their industry also is [300] destroyed. For in a warm climate, no man will labour for himself who can make another labour for him. This is so true, that of the proprietors of slaves a very small proportion indeed are ever seen to labour. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever: that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.—But it is impossible to be temperate and to pursue this subject through the various considerations of policy, of morals, of history natural and civil. We must be contented to hope they will force their way into every one’s mind. I think a change already perceptible, since the origin of the present revolution. The spirit of the master is [301] abating, that of the slave rising from the dust, his condition mollifying, the way I hope preparing, under the auspices of heaven, for a total emancipation, and that this is disposed, in the order of events, to be with the consent of the masters, rather than by their extirpation.
QUERY XIX
The present state of manufactures, commerce, interior and exterior trade?
We never had an interior trade of any importance. Our exterior commerce has suffered very much from the beginning of the present contest. During this time we have manufactured within our families the most necessary articles of cloathing. Those of cotton will bear some comparison with the same kinds of manufacture in Europe; but those of wool, flax and hemp are very coarse, unsightly, and unpleasant: and such is our attachment to agriculture, and such our preference for foreign manufactures, that it be wise or unwise, our people will certainly re- [302] turn as soon as they can, to the raising raw materials, and exchanging them for finer manufactures than they are able to execute themselves.
The political œconomists of Europe have established it as a principle, that every State should endeavour to manufacture for itself; and this principle, like many others, we transfer to America, without calculating the difference of circumstance which should often produce a difference of result. In Europe the lands are either cultivated, or locked up against the cultivator. Manufacture must therefore be resorted to, of necessity, not of choice, to support the surplus of their people. But we have an immensity of land courting the industry of the husbandman. Is it best then that all our citizens should be employed in its improvement, or that one half should be called off from that to exercise manufactures and handicraft arts for the other? Those who labour in the earth are the chosen people of God, if ever he had a chosen people, whose breasts he has made his peculiar deposit for substantial and genuine virtue. It is the focus in which he keeps alive that sacred fire, which otherwise [303] might escape from the face of the earth. Corruption of morals in the mass of cultivators is a phænomenon of which no age nor nation has furnished an example. It is the mark set on those, who not looking up to heaven, to their own soil and industry, as does the husbandman, for their subsistence, depend for it on casualties and caprice of customers. Dependance begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition. This, the natural progress and consequence of the arts, has sometimes perhaps been retarded by accidental circumstances: but, generally speaking the proportion which the aggregate of the other classes of citizens bears in any state to that of its husbandmen, is the proportion of its unsound to its healthy parts, and is a good enough barometer whereby to measure its degree of corruption. While we have land to labour then, let us never wish to see our citizens occupied at a work-bench, or twirling a distaff. Carpenters, masons, smiths, are wanting in husbandry: but, for the general operations of manufacture, let our work-shops remain in Europe. It is better to carry provisions and materials to work- [304] men there, than bring them to the provisions and materials, and with them their manners and principles. The loss by the transportation of commodities across the Atlantic will be made up in happiness and permanence of government. The mobs of great cities add just so much to the support of pure government, as sores do to the strength of the human body. It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigour. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution.1
QUERY XX
A notice of the commercial productions particular to the state, and of those objects which the inhabitants are obliged to get from Europe and from other parts of the world?
Before the present war we exported, communibus annis, according to the best information I can get, nearly as follows: [305]
| Articles. | Quantity. | Price in Dollars. | Amount in Dollars. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1This sum is equal to £850,000; Virginia money, 607,142 guineas.—T. J. | |||
| Tobacco | 55,000 hhds. of 1,000 lbs. | at 30d. per hhd. | 1,650,000 |
| Wheat | 800,000 bushels. | at 5–6d. per bush. | 666,666⅔ |
| Indian corn | 600,000 bushels. | at ⅓ per bush. | 200,000 |
| Shipping | . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 100,000 |
| Masts, planks, scantling shingles, staves | . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 66,666⅔ |
| Tar, pitch, turpentine | 30,000 barrels. | at 1 1/3 per bbl. | 40,000 |
| Peltry, viz., skins of deer, beavers, otters, musk rats, raccoons, foxes | 180 hhds. of 600 lbs. | at 5–12d. per lb. | 42,000 |
| Pork | 4,000 barrels. | at 10d. per bbl. | 40,000 |
| Flax-seed, hemp, cotton | . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 8,000 |
| Pit coal, pig iron | . . . . . . | . . . . | 6,666⅔ |
| Peas | 5,000 bushels. | at ⅔ per bush. | 3,333⅓ |
| Beef | 1,000 barrels. | at ⅓ per bbl. | 3,333⅓ |
| Sturgeon, white shad, herring | . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 3,333⅓ |
| Brandy from peaches and apples, and whiskey | . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 1,666⅔ |
| Horses | . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 1,666⅔ |
| . . . . . . | . . . . . . | 2,833,333⅓1 | |
[306]
In the year 1758 we exported seventy thousand hogsheads of tobacco, which was the greatest quantity ever produced in this country in one year. But its culture was fast declining at the commencement of this war, and that of wheat taking its place: and it must continue to decline on the return of peace. I suspect that the change in the temperature of our climate has become sensible to that plant, which, to be good, requires an extraordinary degree of heat. But it requires still more indispensably an uncommon fertility of soil: and the price which it commands at market will not enable the planter to produce this by manure. Was the supply still to depend on Virginia and Maryland alone, as its culture becomes more difficult, the price would rise, so as to enable the planter to surmount those difficulties and to live. But the western country on the Missisipi, and the midlands of Georgia, having fresh and fertile lands in abundance, and a hotter sun, will be able to undersell these two states, and will oblige them to abandon the raising of tobacco altogether. And a happy obligation for them it will be. It is a culture productive of infinite wretchedness. [307] Those employed in it are in a continual state of exertion beyond the power of nature to support. Little food of any kind is raised by them; so that the men and animals on these farms are illy fed, and the earth is rapidly impoverished. The cultivation of wheat is the reverse in every circumstance. Besides cloathing the earth with herbage, and preserving its fertility, it feeds the labourers plentifully, requires from them only a moderate toil, except in the season of harvest, raises great numbers of animals for food and service, and diffuses plenty and happiness among the whole. We find it easier to make an hundred bushels of wheat than a thousand weight of tobacco, and they are worth more when made. The weavil indeed is a formidable obstacle to the cultivation of this grain with us. But principles are already known which must lead to a remedy. Thus a certain degree of heat, to wit, that of the common air in summer, is necessary to hatch the eggs. If subterranean granaries, or others, therefore, can be contrived below that temperature, the evil will be cured by cold. A degree of heat beyond that which hatches the egg we know will [308] kill it. But in aiming at this we easily run into that which produced putrefaction. To produce putrefaction, however, three agents are requisite, heat, moisture, and the external air. If the absence of any one of these be secured, the other two may safely be admitted. Heat is the one we want. Moisture then, or external air, must be excluded. The former has been done by exposing the grain in kilns to the action of fire, which produces heat, and extracts moisture at the same time: the latter, by putting the grain into hogsheads, covering it with a coating of lime, and heading it up. In this situation its bulk produced a heat sufficient to kill the egg; the moisture is suffered to remain indeed, but the external air is excluded. A nicer operation yet has been attempted; that is, to produce an intermediate temperature of heat between that which kills the egg, and that which produces putrefaction. The threshing the grain as soon as it is cut, and laying it in its chaff in large heaps, has been found very nearly to hit this temperature, though not perfectly, nor always. The heap generates heat sufficient to kill most of the eggs, whilst the chaff commonly restrains it from rising into putrefaction. But all these [309] methods abridge too much the quantity which the farmer can manage, and enable other countries to undersell him, which are not infested with this insect. There is still a desideratum then to give with us decisive triumph to this branch of agriculture over that of tobacco.—The culture of wheat by enlarging our pasture, will render the Arabian horse an article of very considerable profit. Experience has shown that ours is the particular climate of America where he may be raised without degeneracy. Southwardly the heat of the sun occasions a deficiency of pasture, and northwardly the winters are too cold for the short and fine hair, the particular sensibility and constitution of that race. Animals transplanted into unfriendly climates, either change their nature and acquire new senses against the new difficulties in which they are placed, or they multiply poorly and become extinct. A good foundation is laid for their propagation here by our possessing already great numbers of horses of that blood, and by a decided taste and preference for them established among the people. Their patience of heat without injury, their superior wind, fit them better in this and the more southern climates even for the drudge- [310] ries of the plough and wagon. Northwardly they will become an object only to persons of taste and fortune, for the saddle and light carriages. To these, and for these uses, their fleetness and beauty will recommend them.—Besides these there will be other valuable substitutes when the cultivation of tobacco shall be discontinued, such as cotton in the eastern parts of the state, and hemp and flax in the western.
It is not easy to say what are the articles either of necessity, comfort, or luxury, which we cannot raise, and which we therefore shall be under a necessity of importing from abroad, as everything hardier than the olive, and as hardy as the fig, may be raised here in the open air. Sugar, coffee and tea, indeed, are not between these limits; and habit having placed them among the necessaries of life with the wealthy part of our citizens, as long as these habits remain we must go for them to those countries which are able to furnish them. [311]
QUERY XXI
The weights, measures and the currency of the hard money? Some details relating to exchange with Europe?
Our weights and measures are the same which are fixed by acts of parliament in England.—How it has happened that in this as well as the other American States the nominal value of coin was made to differ from what it was in the country we had left, and to differ among ourselves too, I am not able to say with certainty. I find that in 1631 our house of burgesses desired of the privy council in England, a coin debased to twenty-five per cent: that in 1645 they forbid dealing by barter for tobacco, and established the Spanish piece of eight at six shillings, as the standard of their currency: that in 1655 they changed it to five shillings sterling. In 1680 they sent an address to the king, in consequence of which, by proclamation in 1683, he fixed the value of French crowns, rixdollars, and pieces of eight, at six shillings, and the coin of New England at one shilling. That in 1710, 1714, 1727, and 1762 other regulations were made, which will be better presented to the eye stated in the form of a table as follows: [312]
| 1710. | 1714. | 1727. | 1762. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 In the edition of 1853, the following footnote is added: “In the States the Dollar is valued at 6s., the coincidence of their currency with the Greek and Roman moneys is so singular as to be worthy of notice, and to found a suspicion that this object may have had some influence in fixing our moneys at this particular point, at a time when the value of Greek and Roman learning was more justly estimated than at this day. The Penny Lawful is precisely the Roman As, which was their unit; 10 of which, equal to Ten Pence Lawful, made the Attic Drachma, according to Pliny, L. 21, c. 33. In the latter ages of their history the moneys of these two people were interwoven so as to make parts of the same series, which were in some degree decimal. The As (L.) at first Libralis, but latterly ½ an ounce of copper, and called Libella = 1d. lawful. 10 As made the Denarius (X.,) or Attic Drachm = 10d. 100 Denarii made the Mina or Pondo = 1,000d.; or £4 3s. 4d. The Denarius having been divided into fourths of 2½ As each, the fourth was called A Sestertius or Nummus, (LLS., or HS) = 2½. 100 Sesterces made an Aureus latterly = 250d., £1 0s. 10d. 1,000 Sesterces made the Sestertium = £10 8s. 4d. The Libra = 96X. = £4 lawful. The Talent of Silver = 60 Mina = £250. The Talent of Gold was the decuple of the talent of silver, at the proportion of 10 for 1, as among the Romans = £2,500. And was the Military of the Libra, if valued at 16 for 1, as among moderns = 1,000 Libra = £4,000. “It is understood that the Attic Drachm of silver was exactly our Drachm Troy of 60 grains; The Denarius of the Romans was the 7th part of their ounce, which is supposed to have been exactly our Avoirdupois Ounce; but this is of 437½ grains Troy, which would make the Roman Denarius 62½ grains; and consequently 1/24 more than the Attic Drachm, contrary to the testimony of antiquity, that the Denarius and Drachm were equal. We may very probably conjecture that our Troy weight is taken from the Grecians, from whom our physicians derive their science, and, in copying their receipts, would, of course preserve their weights, which fix the quantum and proportion of ingredients. We may as probably affirm that our Avoirdupois weight it taken from the Romans, from whom, through their colonies and conquests in France, Spain, Germany, Britain, we derive our agriculture and commerce. Accordingly we observe that, while we weigh our physic by the Troy or Grecian weights, we use the Avoirdupois or Roman for the productions of agriculture and general articles of commerce; and since antiquity affirms that these two series were united by the equality of the Drachm and Denarius, we must conclude that in progress of time they have become a little separated in use with us, to wit, 1/24 part as before noted. “But the point at which their separation has been arrested and fixed is a very remarkable one: 1,000 ounces avoirdupois make exactly a cubic foot of water. This integral, decimal, and cubical relation induces a presumption, that while deciding amongst the varieties and uncertainties which, during the ruder ages of arts, we know had crept into the weights and measures of England, they had adopted for their standard those which stood so conveniently connected through the medium of a natural element, always at hand to be appealed to. “The ounce Avoirdupois being thus fixed at the thousandth part of a cubic foot of water, the Winchester bushel, of 2,150.4 cubic inches, filled with water, would weigh 77.7 lb Avoirdupois, and, filled with wheat of statute quality, weighed 64 lb. Amidst the varieties discovered between the standard weights, Avoirdupois and Troy, in their different depositories, it would be discovered that all of them were a little over or under this proportion; and this would suffice to give this proportion the preference, and to fix the standard relation between the Avoirdupois and Troy pounds at that which Nature has established between the weights of water and wheat; and the Troy grain, 5,760 of which make the pound Troy, would be so adjusted as that 7,000 of them would make the pound Avoirdupois—for 7,000: 5,760: :77.7:64. Exactly the same proportion is known to exist between the dry and liquid measures—for the corn gallon contains 272 cubic inches, and the ancient liquid gallon of Guildhall 224 cubic inches—so that the system of weights and measures, Avoirdupois and Troy, dry and liquid, are found to be in the simple relation of the weights and measures of the two obvious and natural subjects, water and wheat; that is to say, the Pound Avoirdupoise: Pound Troy: : the weight of water: weight of wheat: : the bulk of the corn gallon : the bulk of the liquid gallon; or, 7,000: 5,760: :77.7: 64: :272: 224. “These weights and measures seem to have been so combined as to render it immaterial whether a commodity was dealt out by weight or measure; for the dry gallon of wheat, and the liquid one of wine, were of the same weight; and the Avoirdupois pound of wheat, and the Troy pound of wine, were of the same measure. A more natural, accurate, and curious reconciliation of the two systems of Greece and Rome, which happened to be found in use, could not have been imagined; and the extension of the connection, from weights and measures to coins, as is done so integrally by our lawful currency, which makes the penny of 6 grains of silver as was the Roman As, has completed the system. “It is true, we find no trace, either in English or American history, that these were the views which determined the relation existing between our weights, measures, and moneys; but it is more difficult to conceive that such a series of combinations should have been merely accidental, and that history should have been silent about them. “I am aware that there are differences of opinion as to the ancient weights and coins. Those here stated are taken from Brerewood, Kennet, Ainsworth, and the Enclyclopedia, and are as likely to have prevailed with our ancestors as the opinions opposed to them.” | ||||
| Guineas | . . . . | 26s. . . . . . . . | ||
| British gold coin not milled, gold coin of Spain and France, chequins, Arabian gold, moidores of Portugal | . . . . | 5s. dwt. | ||
| Coined gold of the empire | . . . . | 5s. dwt. | . . . . | 4s. 3d. dwt. |
| English milled silver money, in proportion to the crown, at | . . . . | 5s. 10d. | 6s. 3d. | |
| Pieces of eight of Mexico, Seville & Pillar, ducatoons of Flanders, French ecus, or silver Louis, crusados of Portugal | 3 3/4 dwt. | . . . . | 4d. dwt. | |
| Peru pieces, cross dollars, and old rix dollars of the empire | 3½d. dwt. | . . . . | 3 3/4 dwt. | |
| Old British silver coin not milled | . . . . | 3 3/4 dwt. | 3131 | |
The first symptom of the depreciation of our present paper-money, was that of silver dollars selling at six shillings, which had before been worth but five shillings and ninepence. The assembly thereupon raised them by law to six shillings. As the dollar is now likely to become the money-unit of America, as it passes at this rate in some of our sister-states, and as it facilitates their computation in pounds and shillings, &c e converso, this seems to be more convenient than its former denomination. But as this particular coin now stands higher than any other in the proportion of 133½ to 125, or 16 to 15, it will be necessary to raise the others in proportion.
QUERY XXII
The public Income and expences?
The nominal amount of these varying constantly and rapidly, with the constant and rapid depreciation of our paper-money, it becomes impracticable to say what they are. We find ourselves cheated in every essay by the depreciation intervening between the [314] declaration of the tax and its actual receipt. It will therefore be more satisfactory to consider what our income may be when we shall find means of collecting what our people may spare. I should estimate the whole taxable property of this State at an hundred millions of dollars, or thirty millions of pounds our money. One per cent on this, compared with anything we ever yet paid, would be deemed a very heavy tax. Yet I think that those who manage well, and use reasonable œconomy, could pay one and a half per cent, and maintain their household comfortably in the meantime, without aliening any part of their principal, and that the people would submit to this willingly for the purpose of supporting their present contest. We may say then that we could raise, and ought to raise, from one million to one million and a half of dollars annually, that is from three hundred to four hundred and fifty thousand pounds, Virginia money.
Of our expences it is equally difficult to give an exact state, and for the same reason. They are mostly stated in paper money, which varying continually, the legislature endeavors at every session, by new cor- [315] rections, to adapt the nominal sums to the value it is wished they would bear. I will state them therefore in real coin, at the point at which they endeavor to keep them.
| Dollars. | |
|---|---|
| 1Altered in edition of 1787 to “12,310.” | |
| 2Altered in edition of 1787 to “7523⅓.” | |
| The annual expenses of the general assembly are about | 20,000 |
| The governor | 3,333½ |
| The council of state | 10,666⅔ |
| Their clerks | 1,166⅔ |
| Eleven judges | 11,000 |
| The clerk of the chancery | 666⅔ |
| The attorney general | 1,000 |
| Three auditors and a solicitor | 5,333⅓ |
| Their clerks | 2,000 |
| The treasurer | 2,000 |
| His clerks | 2,000 |
| The keeper of the public jail | 1,000 |
| The public printer | 1,666⅔ |
| Clerks of the inferior courts | 43,333½ |
| Public levy: this is chiefly for the expenses of criminal justice | 40,000 |
| County levy, for bridges, court-houses, prisons, &c. [316] | 40,000 |
| Members of Congress | 7,000 |
| Quota of the Federal civil list, supposed ⅙ of about 78,000 dollars | 13,000 |
| Expences of collecting, six per cent. on the above | 24,3101 |
| The clergy received only voluntary contributions; suppose them on an average ⅛ of a dollar a tythe on 200,000 tythes | 25,000 |
| Contingencies, to make round numbers not far from truth | 5,523⅓2 |
| $250,000 | |
Dollars or 98,5713 guineas. This estimate is exclusive of the military expence. That varies with the force actually employed, and in time of peace will probably be little or nothing. It is exclusive also of the public debts, which are growing while I am writing, and cannot therefore be now fixed. From these articles if we strike out that of 200,000 dollars for the maintenance of the poor, and 12,000 dollars for its collection, which being merely a matter of charity, cannot be deemed expended in the administration of government; and the 25,000 dollars4 for the services of the clergy which neither makes [317] part of that administration, more than what is paid to physicians, or lawyers, and being voluntary, is either much or nothing as every one pleases, it leaves $223,000, equal to 47,785 guineas, the real cost of the apparatus of government with us. This, divided among the actual inhabitants of our country comes to about two fifths of a dollars, 22d sterling, or 42 sols, the price which each pays annually for the protection of the residue of his property, that of his person and the other advantages of a free government. The public revenues of Great Britain divided in like manner on its inhabitants would be sixteen times greater. Deducting the aggregate sum of 460,000 dollars1 from the million and a half of dollars which we before supposed might be annually paid without distress, we may conclude that this state can contribute one million of dollars annually towards supporting the federal army, paying the federal debt, building a federal navy, or opening roads, clearing rivers, forming safe ports, and other useful works.
To this estimate of our abilities, let me add a word as to the application of them, if, when cleared of the present contest, and of [318] the debts with which that will charge us, we come to measure force hereafter with any European power. Such events are devoutly to be deprecated. Young as we are, and with such a country before us to fill with people and with happiness, we should point in that direction the whole generative force of nature, wasting none of it in efforts of mutual destruction. It should be our endeavor to cultivate the peace and friendship of every nation, even of that which has injured us most, when we shall have carried our point against her. Our interest will be to throw open the doors of commerce, and to knock off all its shackles, giving perfect freedom to all persons for the vent of whatever they may choose to bring into our ports, and asking the same in theirs. Never was so much false arithmetic employed on any subject, as that which has been employed to persuade nations that it is their interest to go to war. Were the money which it has cost to gain, at the close of a long war, a little town, or a little territory, the right to cut wood here, or to catch fish there, expended in improving what they already possess, in making roads, opening rivers, building ports, improving the arts [319] and finding employment for their idle poor, it would render them much stronger, much wealthier and happier. This I hope will be our wisdom. And perhaps, to remove as much as possible the occasions of making war, it might be better for us to abandon the ocean altogether, that being the element whereon we shall be principally exposed to justle with other nations: to leave to others to bring what we shall want, and to carry what we can spare. This would make us invulnerable to Europe, by offering none of our property to their prize, and would turn all our citizens to the cultivation of the earth; and, I repeat it again, cultivators of the earth are the most virtuous and independant citizens. It might be time enough to seek employment for them at sea, when the land no longer offers it. But the actual habits of our countrymen attach them to commerce. They will exercise it for themselves. Wars then must sometimes be our lot; and all the wise can do, will be to avoid that half of them which would be produced by our own follies, and our own acts of injustice; and to make for the other half the best preparations we can. Of what nature should these be? [320] A land army would be useless for offence, and not the best nor safest instrument of defence. For either of these purposes, the sea is the field on which we should meet an European enemy. On that element it is necessary we should possess some power. To aim at such a navy as the greater nations of Europe possess, would be a foolish and wicked waste of the energies of our countrymen. It would be to pull on our own heads that load of military expence which makes the European labourer go supperless to bed, and moistens his bread with the sweat of his brows. It will be enough if we enable ourselves to prevent insults from those nations of Europe which are weak on the sea, because circumstances exist, which render even the stronger ones weak as to us. Providence has placed their richest and most defenceless possessions at our door; has obliged their most precious commerce to pass, as it were, in review before us. To protect this, or to assail, a small part only of their naval force will ever be risqued across the Atlantic. The dangers to which the elements expose them here are too well known, and the greater dangers to which they would be ex- [321] posed at home were any general calamity to involve their whole fleet. They can attack us by detachment only; and it will suffice to make ourselves equal to what they may detach. Even a smaller force than they may detach will be rendered equal or superior by the quickness with which any check may be repaired with us, while losses with them will be irreparable till too late. A small naval force then is sufficient for us, and a small one is necessary. What this should be, I will not undertake to say. I will only say, it should by no means be so great as we are able to make it. Suppose the million dollars, or 300,000 pounds which Virginia could annually spare without distress, to be applied to the creating a navy. A single year’s contribution would build, equip, man, and send to sea a force which should carry 300 guns. The rest of the confederacy, exerting themselves in the same proportion, would equip in the same time 1500 guns more. So that one year’s contributions would set up a navy of 1800 guns. The British ships of the line average 76 guns; their frigates 38. 1800 guns then would form a fleet of 30 ships, 18 of which might [322] be of the line, and 12 frigates. Allowing 8 men, the British average, for every gun, their annual expence, including subsistance, cloathing, pay, and ordinary repairs, would be about 1280 dollars for every gun, or 2,304,000 dollars for the whole. I state this only as one year’s possible exertion, without deciding whether more or less than a year’s exertion should be thus applied.
The value of our lands and slaves, taken conjunctly, doubles in about twenty years. This arises from the multiplication of our slaves, from the extension of culture, and increased demand for lands. The amount of what may be raised will of course rise in the same proportion.
QUERY XXIII
The histories of the state, the memorials published in its name in the time of its being a colony, and the pamphlets relating to its interior or exterior affairs present or antient?
Captain Smith, who next to Sir Walter Raleigh may be considered as the founder [323] of our colony, has written its history, from the first adventures to it till the year 1624. He was a member of the council, and afterwards president of the colony; and to his efforts principally may be ascribed its support against the opposition of the natives. He was honest, sensible, and well informed; but his style is barbarous and uncouth. His history, however, is almost the only source from which we derive any knowledge of the infancy of our State.
The reverend William Stith, a native of Virginia, and president of its college, has also written the history of the same period, in a large octavo volume of small print. He was a man of classical learning, and very exact, but of no taste in style. He is inelegant, therefore, and his details often too minute to be tolerable, even to a native of the country, whose history he writes.
Beverley, a native also, has run into the other extreme, he has comprised our history from the first propositions of Sir Walter Raleigh to the year 1700, in the hundredth part of the space which Stith employs for the fourth part of the period. [324]
Sir William Keith has taken it up at its earliest period, and continued it to the year 1725. He is agreeable enough in style, and passes over events of little importance. Of course he is short, and would be preferred by a foreigner.
During the regal government, some contest arose on the exaction of an illegal fee by governor Dinwiddie, and doubtless there were others on other occasions not at present recollected. It is supposed that these are not sufficiently interesting to a foreigner to merit a detail.
The petition of the council and burgesses of Virginia to the king, their memorials to the lords, and remonstrance to the commons in the year 1764, began the present contest: and these having proved ineffectual to prevent the passage of the stamp-act, the resolutions of the house of burgesses of 1765 were passed declaring the independance of the people of Virginia of the parliament of Great Britain, in matters of taxation. From that time till the declaration of independnce by Congress in 1776, their journals are filled with assertions of the public rights. [325]
The pamphlets published in this state on the controverted question, were,
1766, An Inquiry into the rights of the British Colonies, by Richard Bland.
1769, The Monitor’s Letters, by Dr. Arthur Lee.
1774, A summary View of the rights of British America.1
1774, Considerations &c., by Robert Carter Nicholas.
Since the declaration of independance this State has had no controversy with any other, except with that of Pennsylvania, on their common boundary. Some papers on this subject passed between the executive and legislative bodies of the two states, the result of which was a happy accommodation of their rights.
To this account of our historians, memorials and pamphlets, it may not be unuseful to add a chronological catalogue of American state-papers, as far as I have been able to collect their titles. It is far from being either complete or correct. Where the title alone, and not the paper itself, has come under my observation, I cannot an- [326] swer for the exactness of the date. Sometimes I have not been able to find any date at all, and sometimes have not been satisfied that such a paper exists. An extensive collection of papers of this description has been for sometime in a course of preparation by a gentleman2 fully equal to the task, and from whom, therefore, we may hope ere long to receive it. In the meantime accept this as the result of my labours, and as closing the tedious detail which you have so undesignedly drawn upon yourself. [327]
| 1496, Mar. 5. 11. H. 7. | Pro Johanne Caboto et filiis suis super terra incognita investiganda. 12. Ry. 595. 3. Hakl. 4. 2. Mem. Am. 409. |
| 1498, Feb. 3. 13. H. 7. | Billa signata anno 13. Henrici septimi. 3. Hakluyt’s voiages 5. |
| 1502, Dec. 19. 18. H. 7. | De potestatibus ad terras incognitas investigandum. 13. Rymer. 37. |
| 1540, Oct. 17. | Commission de François I. à Jacques Cartier pour l’establissement du canada. L’Escarbot. 397. 2. Mem. Am. 416. |
| 1548, 2. E. 6. | An act against the exaction of money, or any other thing, by any officer for license to traffique into Iseland and Newfoundland, made in An. 2. Edwardi sexti. 3. Hakl. 131. |
| 1578, June 11. 20. El. | The letters-patent granted by her Majestie to Sir Humphrey Gilbert, knight, for the inhabiting and planting of our people in America. 3. Hakl. 135. |
| 1583, Feb. 6. | Letters-patent of Queen Elizabeth to Adrian Gilbert and others [328] to discover the northwest passage to China. 3. Hakl. 96. |
| 1584, Mar. 25. 26 El. | The letters-patent granted by the Queen’s majestie to M. Walter Raleigh, now knight, for the discovering and planting of new lands and countries, to continue the space of six years and no more. 3. Hakl. 243. |
| Mar. 7. 31. El. | An assignment by Sir Walter Raleigh for continuing the action of inhabiting and planting his people in Virginia. Hakl. 1st. ed. publ. in 1589. p. 815. |
| 1603, Nov. 8. | Lettres de Lieutenant General de l’Acadie et pays circonvoisins pour le Sieur de Monts. L’Escarbot. 417. |
| 1606, Apr. 10. 4. Jac. 1. | Letters-patent to Sir Thomas Gates, Sir George Somers and others of America. Stith. Apend. No. 1. |
| 1607, Mar. 9. 4. Jac. 1. | An ordinance and constitution enlarging the council of the two colonies in Virginia and Amer-[329]ica, and augmenting their authority, M. S. |
| 1609, May 23. 7. Jac. 1. | The second charter to the treasurer and company for Virginia, erecting them into a body politick. Stith. Ap. 2. |
| 1610, April 10. Jac. 1. | Letters-patents to the E. of Northampton, granting part of the island of Newfoundland. 1. Harris. 816. |
| 1611, Mar. 12. 9. Jac. 1. | A third charter to the treasurer and company for Virginia. Stith. Ap. 3. |
| 1617. Jac. 1. | A commission to Sir Walter Raleigh. Qu. |
| 1620, Apr. 7. 18. Jac. 1. | Commissio specialis concernens le garbling herbæ Nocotianæ. 17. Rym. 190. |
| 1620, June 29. 18. Jac. 1. | A proclamation for restraint of the disordered trading of tobacco. 17. Rym. 233. |
| 1620, Nov. 3. Jac. 1. | A grant of New-England to the council of Plymouth. |
| 1621, July 24 Jac. 1. | An ordinance and constitution of the treasurer, council and company in England, for a council [330] of state and general assembly in Virginia. Stith. Ap. 4. |
| 1621, Sept. 10. 20 Jac. 1. | A grant of Nova Scotia to Sir William Alexander. 2. Mem. de l’Amerique. 193. |
| 1622, Nov. 6. 20 Jac. 1. | A proclamation prohibiting interloping and disorderly trading to New England in America. 17. Rym. 416. |
| 1623, May 9. 21 Jac. 1. | De commissione speciali Willelmo Jones militi directa. 17. Rym. 490. |
| 1623. | A grant to Sir Edmund Ployden, of New Albion. Mentioned in Smith’s examination. 82. |
| 1624, July 15. 22. Jac. 1. | De commissione Henrico vicecomiti Mandevill et aliis. 17. Rym. 609. |
| 1624, Aug. 26. 22 Jac. 1. | De commissione speciali concernenti gubernationem in Virginia. 17. Rym. 618. |
| 1624, Sep. 29. 22 Jac. 1. | A proclamation concerning tobacco. 17. Rym. 621. |
| 1624, Nov. 9. 22 Jac. 1. | De concessione demiss, Edwardo Ditchfield et aliis. 17. Rym. 633. [331] |
| 1625, Mar. 2. 22 Jac. 1. | A proclamation for the utter prohibiting the importation and use of all tobacco which is not of the proper growth of the colony of Virginia and the Somer islands, or one of them. 17. Rym. 668. |
| 1625, Mar. 4. 1 Car. 1. | De commissione directa Georgio Yardeley militi et aliis. 18. Rym. 311. |
| 1625, Apr. 9. 1 Car. 1. | Proclamatio de herba Nicotiana. 18. Rym. 19. |
| 1625, May 13. 1 Car. 1. | A proclamation for settlinge the plantation of Virginia. 18. Rym. 72. |
| 1625, July 12. | A grant of the soil, barony, and domains of Nova Scotia to Sir Wm. Alexander of Minstrie. 2. Mem. Am. 226. |
| 1626, Jan. 31. 2 Car. 1. | Commissio directa a Johanni Wolstenholme militi et aliis. 18. Rym. 831. |
| 1626, Feb. 17. 2 Car. 1. | A proclamation touching tobacco. Rym. 848. |
| 1627, Mar. 19. qu? 2 Car. 1. | A grant of Massachusetts bay by the council of Plymouth to Sir Henry Roswell and others. [332] |
| 1627, Mar. 26, 3 Car. 1. | De concessione commissionis specialis proconcilio in Virginia. 18. Rym. 980. |
| 1627, Mar. 30. 3 Car. 1. | De proclamatione de signatione de tobacco. 18. Rym. 886. |
| 1627, Aug. 9. 3 Car. 1. | De proclamatione pra ordinatione de tobacco. 18. Rym. 920. |
| 1628, Mar. 4. 3 Car. 1. | A confirmation of the grant of Massachusetts bay by the crown. |
| 1629, Aug. 16. | The capitulation of Quebec. Champlain pert. 2. 216. 2. Mem. Am. 489. |
| 1630, Jan. 5 Car. 1. | A proclamation concerning tobacco. 19. Rym. 235. |
| 1630, April 30. | Conveyance of Novia Scotia (Port-royal excepted) by Sir William Alexander to Sir Claude St. Etienne Lord of la Tour and of Uarre and to his son Sir Charles de St. Etienne Lord of St. Denniscourt, on condition that they continue s bjects to the king of Scotland under the great seal of Scotland. |
| 1630–31, Nov. 4. 6 Car. 1. | A proclamation forbidding the disorderly trading with the savages in New England in Ame-[333]rica, especially the furnishing the natives in those and other parts of America by the English with weapons and habiliments of warre. 19. Ry. 210. 3. Rushw. 82. |
| 1630, Dec. 5. 6 Car. 1. | A proclamation prohibiting the selling arms, &c., to the savages in America. Mentioned 3. Rushw. 75. |
| 1630, Car. 1. | A grant of Connecticut by the council of Plymouth to the E. of Warwick. |
| 1630, Car. 1. | A confirmation by the crown of the grant of Connecticut [said to be in the petty-bag office in England.] |
| 1631, Mar. 19. 6 Car. 1. | A conveiance of Connecticut by the E. of Warwick to Lord Say, and Seal, and others. Smith’s examination, Appendix, No. 1. |
| 1631, June 27, 7 Car. 1. | A special commission to Edward, Earle of Dorsett, and others, for the better plantation of the colony of Virginia. 19. Ry. 301. [334] |
| 1632, June 29. 7 Car. 1. | Litere continentes promissionem regis ad tradenum castrum et habitationem de Kebec in Canada ad regem Francorum. 19. Ry. 303. |
| 1632, Mar. 29. 8 Car. 1. | Traité entre le roy Louis XIII. et Charles roi d’Angleterre pour la restitution de la nouvelle France, la Cadie et Canada et des navires et merchandises pris de part et d’autre. Fait a St. Germain. 19. Ry. 361. 2 Mem. Am. 5. |
| 1632, June 20. 8 Car. 1. | A grant of Maryland to Cæcilius Calvert, baron of Baltimore in Ireland. |
| 1633, July 3. 9 Car. 1. | A petition of the planters of Virginia against the grant to lord Baltimore. |
| 1633, July 3. | Order of council upon the dispute between the Virginia planters and Lord Baltimore, Votes of repres. Pennsylvania V. |
| 1633, Aug. 13. 9 Car. 1. | A proclamation to prevent abuses growing by the unordered re-[335] tailing of tobacco. Mentioned 3. Rushw. 191. |
| 1633, Sep. 23. 9 Car. 1. | A special commission to Thomas Young to search, discover and find out what ports are not yet inhabited in Virginia and America and other parts thereunto adjoining. 19. Ry. 472. |
| 1633, Oct. 13. 9 Car. 1. | A proclamation for preventing of the abuses growing by the unordered retailing of tobacco. 19. Ry. 474. |
| 1634, Mar. 13. Car. 1. | A proclamation restraining the abusive venting of tobacco. 19. Rym. 522. |
| 1634, May 19. 10 Car. 1. | A proclamation concerning the landing of tobacco, and also forbidding the planting thereof in the king’s dominions. 19. Ry. 553. |
| 1634, Car. 1. | A commission to the Archbishop of Canterbury and 11 others, for governing the American colonies. |
| 1634, June 19. 10 Car. 1. | A commission concerning tobacco. M. S. [336] |
| 1635, July 18. 11 Car. 1. | A commission from Lord Say, and Seal, and others, to John Winthrop to be governor of Connecticut. Smith’s App. |
| 1635, Car. 1. | A grant to Duke Hamilton. |
| 1636, Apr. 2. 12 Car. 1. | De commissione speciali Johanni Harvey militi to pro meliori regemine coloniae in Virginia. 20. Ry. 3. |
| 1637, Mar. 14. Car. 1. | A proclamation concerning tobacco. Title in 3. Rush. 617. |
| 1636–7, Mar. 16. 12 Car. 1. | De commissione speciali Georgio domino Goring et aliis concessâ concernente venditionem de tobacco absque licentiâ regiâ. 20. Ry. 116. |
| 1637, Apr. 30. 13 Car. 1. | A proclamation against disorderly transporting his Majesty’s subjects to the plantations within the parts of America. 20. Ry. 143. 3. Rush. 409. |
| 1637, May 1. 13. Car. 1. | An order of the privy council to stay 8 ships now in the Thames from going to New England. 3. Rush. 409. [337] |
| 1637, Car. 1. | A warrant of the Lord Admiral to stop unconformable ministers from going beyond the sea. 3. Rush. 410. |
| 1638, Apr. 4. Car. 1. | Order of council upon Claiborne’s petition against Lord Baltimore. Votes of representatives of Pennsylvania. vi. |
| 1638, Apr. 6. 14 Car. 1. | An order of the king and council that the attorney general draw up a proclamation to prohibit transportation of passengers to New England without license. 3. Rush. 718. |
| 1638, May 1. 14 Car. 1. | A proclamation to restrain the transporting of passengers and provisions to New England without license. 20. Ry. 223. |
| 1639, Mar. 25. Car. 1. | A proclamation concerning tobacco. Title 4. Rush. 1060. |
| 1639, Aug. 19. 15 Car. 1. | A proclamation declaring his majesty’s pleasure to continue his commission and letters patents for licensing retailers of tobacco. 20. Ry. 348. [338] |
| 1639, Dec. 16. 15 Car. 1. | De commissione speciali Henrico Ashton armigero ét aliis ad amovendum Henricum Hawley gubernatorem de Barbadoes. 20. Rym. 357. |
| 1639, Car. 1. | A proclamation concerning retailers of tobacco. 4. Rush. 966. |
| 1641, Aug. 9. 17 Car. 1. | De constitutione gubernatoris et concilii pro Virginia. 20. Ry. 484. |
| 1643, Car. 1. | Articles of union and confederacy entered into by Massachusetts, Plymouth, Connecticut and Newhaven. 1. Neale. 223. |
| 1644, Car. 1. | Deed from George, Fenwick to the old Connecticut jurisdiction. |
| An ordinance of the lords and commons assembled in parliament, for exempting from custom and imposition all commodities exported for, or imported from New-England, which has been very prosperous and without any public charge to this state, and is likely to prove [339] very happy for the propagation of the gospel in those parts. Tit. in Amer. library 90. 5. No date. But seems by the neighbouring articles to have been in 1644. | |
| 1644, June 20. Car. 2. | An act for charging of tobacco brought from New England with custom and excise. Title in American library. 99. 8. |
| 1644, Aug. 1. Car. 2. | An act for the advancing and regulating the trade of this commonwealth. Tit. in Amer. libr. 99. 9. |
| Sept. 18. 1 Car. 2. | Grant of the Northern neck of Virginia to Lord Hopton, Lord Jermyn, Lord Culpepper, Sir John Berkley, Sir William Moreton, Sir Dudley Wyatt, and Thomas Culpepper. |
| 1650, Oct. 3. 2 Car. 2. | An act prohibiting trade with the Barbadoes, Virginia, Bermudas and Antego. Scobell’s Acts. 1027. |
| 1650, Car. 2. | A declaration of Lord Willoughby, governor of Barbadoes, and [340] of his council, against an act of parliament of 3d of October, 1650. 4. Polit. register. 2. cited from 4 Neal. hist. of the Puritans. App. No. 12 but not there. |
| 1650, Car. 2. | A final settlement of boundaries between the Dutch New Netherlands and Connecticut. |
| 1651, Sept. 26. 3 Car. 2. | Instructions for Captain Robert Dennis, Mr. Richard Bennet, Mr. Thomas Stagge, and Captain William Claibourn, appointed commissioners for the reducing of Virginia and the inhabitants thereof to their due obedience to the commonwealth of England. 1. Thurloe’s state papers, 197. |
| 1651, Oct. 9. 8 Car. 2. | An act for increase of shipping and encouragement of the navigation of this nation. Scobell’s acts, 1449. |
| 1651/2 Mar. 12. 4 Car. 2. | Articles agreed on and concluded at James citie in Virginia for the surrendering and settling of [341] that plantation under the obedience and government of the commonwealth of England, by the commissioners of the council of state, by authoritie of the parliament of England, and by the grand assembly of the governor, council, and burgesse of that state. M. S. [Ante. p. 206.] |
| 1651–2, Mar. 12. 4 Car. 1. | An act of indempnitie made at the surrender of the country [of Virginia] [Ante p. 206.] |
| 1654, Aug. 16. | Capitulation de Port Royal. Mem. Am. 507. |
| 1655, Car. 2. | A proclamation of the protector relating to Jamaica. 3 Thurl. 75. |
| 1655, Sept. 26. 7 Car. 2. | The protector to the commissioners of Maryland. A letter. 4. Thurl. 55. |
| 1655, Oct. 8. 7 Car. 2. | An instrument made at the council of Jamaica, Oct. 8, 1655, for the better carrying on of affairs there. 4. Thurl. 71. [342] |
| 1655, Nov. 3. | Treaty of Westminster between France and England. 6. corps diplom. part 2. p. 121. 2 Mem. Am. 10. |
| 1656, Mar. 27. 8 Car. 2. | The assembly at Barbadoes to the protector. 4 Thurl. 651. |
| 1656, Aug. 9. | A grant by Cromwell to Sir Charles de Saint Etienne, a baron of Scotland, Crowne and Temple. A French translation of it. 2. Mem. Am. 511. |
| 1656, Car. 2. | A paper concerning the advancement of trade, 5 Thurl. 80. |
| 1656, Car. 2. | A brief narration of the English rights to the Northern parts of America. 5. Thurl. 81. |
| 1656, Oct. 10. 8 Car. 2. | Mr. R. Bennet and Mr. S. Matthew to Secretary Thurlow. 5. Thurl. 482. |
| 1656, Oct. 10. 8 Car. 2. | Objections against the Lord Baltimore’s patent, and reasons why the government of Maryland should not be put into his hands. 5. Thurl. 482. |
| 1656, Oct. 10. 8 Car. 2. | A paper relating to Maryland. 5. Thurl. 483. [343] |
| 1656, Oct. 10. 8 Car. 2. | A breviet of the proceedings of the lord Baltimore and his officers and compilers in Maryland, against the authority of the parliament of the commonwealth of England and against his highness the lord protector’s authority, laws and government. 5 Thurl. 486. |
| 1656, Oct. 15. 8 Car. 2. | The assembly of Virginia to secretary Thurlow. 5 Thurl. 497. |
| 1657, Apr. 4. 9 Car. 2. | The governor of Barbadoes to the protector. 6 Thurl. 69. |
| 1661, Car. 2. | Petition of the general court at Hartford upon Connecticut for charter. Smith’s exam. App. 4. |
| 1662, Apr. 23. 14 Car. 2. | Charter of the colony of Connecticut. Smith’s exam. App. 6. |
| 1662/3 Mar. 24. Apr. 4. 15 Cr. 2. | The first charter granted by Charles II. to the proprietaries of Carolina, to wit, to the Earl of Clarendon, Duke of Albemarle, Lord Craven, Lord Berkeley, Lord Ashley, Sir George Carteret, Sir William Berkeley, [344] and Sir John Collecton. 4 Mem. Am. 554. |
| 1664, Feb. 10. | The concessions and agreement of the lords proprietors of the province of New Cæsarea, or New Jersey, to and with all and every of the adventurers and all such as shall settle or plant there. Smith’s New Jersey. App. 1. |
| 1664, Mar. 12. 20 Car. 2. | A grant of the colony of New York to the Duke of York. |
| 1664, Apr. 26. 16 Car. 2. | A commission to Colonel Nichols and others to settle disputes in New England. Hutch. Hist. Mass. Bay, App. 537. |
| 1664, Apr. 26. | The commission to Sir Robert Carre and others to put the Duke of York in possession of New York, New Jersey, and all other lands thereunto appertaining. |
| Sir Robert Carre and others proclamation to the inhabitants of New York, New Jersey, &c. Smith’s N. J. 36. [345] | |
| 1664, June 23. 24. 16 Car. 2. | Deeds of lease and release of New Jersey by the Duke of York to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret. |
| A conveiance of the Delaware counties to William Penn. | |
| 1664, Aug. 19/29, 20/30, 24. Aug. 25. Sept. 4. | Letters between Stuyvesant and Colonel Nichols on the English right. Smith’s N. J. 37–42. |
| 1664, Aug. 27 | Treaty between the English and Dutch for the surrender of the New Netherlands. Sm. N. J. 42. |
| Sept. 3. | Nicoll’s commission to Sir. Robert Carre to reduce the Dutch on the Delaware bay. Sm. N. J. 47. |
| Instructions to Robert Carre for the reducing of Delaware bay and settling the people there under his majesty’s obedience. Sm. N. J. 47. | |
| 1664, Oct. 1. | Articles of capitulation between Sir Robert Carre and the Dutch and Swedes on Delaware bay [346] and Delaware river. Sm. N. J. 49. |
| 1664, Dec. 1. 16 Car. 2. | The determination of the commissioners of the boundary between the Duke of York and Connecticut. Sm. Ex. Ap. 9. |
| 1664. | The New Haven case. Smith’s Ex. Ap. 20. |
| 1665, June 13. 24. 17 Car. 2. | The second charter granted by Charles II. to the same proprietors of Carolina. 4. Mem. Am. 586. |
| 1666, Jan. 26. | Declaration de guerre par la France contre l’Angleterre. 3 Mem. Am. 123. |
| 1666, Feb. 9. 17 Car. 2. | Declaration of war by the king of England against the king of France. |
| 1667, July 31. | The treaty of peace between France and England made at Breda. 7 Corps, Dipl. part 1. p. 51 2. Mem. Am. 32. |
| 1667, July 31. | The treaty of peace and alliance between England and the United Provinces made at Breda. [347] 7. Cor. Dip. p. 1. d. 44. 2. Mem. Am. 40. |
| 1667–8, Feb. 17. | Acte de la session de l’Acadie au roi de France. 2. Mem. Am. 40. |
| 1668, April 21. | Directions from the governor and council of New York for a better settlement of the government on Delaware. Sm. N. J. 51. |
| 1668. | Lovelace’s order for customs at the Hoarkills. Sm. N. J. 55. |
| 16- May 8. 21 Car. 2. | A confirmation of the grant of the northern neck of Virginia to the Earl of St. Albans, Lord Berkeley, Sir William Moreton and John Tretheway. |
| 1672. | Incorporation of the town of Newcastle or Amstel. |
| 1673, Feb. 25. 25 Car. 2. | A demise of the colony of Virginia to the Earl of Arlington and Lord Culpepper for 31 years. M. S. |
| 1673–4. | Treaty at London between king Charles II. and the Dutch. Article VI. [348] |
| Remonstrance against the two grants of Charles II. of Northern and Southern Virginia. Mentd. Beverley 65. | |
| 1674, July 13. | Sir George Carteret’s instructions to Governor Carteret. |
| 1674, Nov. 9. | Governor Andros’s proclamation on taking possession of Newcastle for the Duke of York. Sm. N. J. 78. |
| 1675, Oct. 1. 27 Car. 2. | A proclamation for prohibiting the importation of commodities of Europe into any of his majesty’s plantations in Africa, Asia, or America, which were not laden in England; and for putting all other laws relating to the trade of the plantations in effectual execution. |
| 1676, Mar. 3. | The concessions and agreements of the proprietors, freeholders and inhabitants of the province of West New-Jersey in America. Sm. N. J. App. 2. |
| 1676, July 1. | A deed quintipartite for the division of New Jersey. [349] |
| 1676, Aug. 18. | Letter from the proprietors of New Jersey to Richard Hartshorne. Sm. N. J. 80. |
| Proprietors instructions to James Wasse and Richard Hartshorne. Sm. N. J. 83. | |
| 1676, Oct. 10. 28 Car. 2. | The charter of king Charles II. to his subjects of Virginia. M. S. |
| 1676. | Cautionary epistle from the trustees of Byllinge’s part of New Jersey. Sm. N. J. 84. |
| 1677, Sept. 10. | Indian deed for the lands between Rankokus creek and Timber creek, in New Jersey. |
| 1677, Sept. 27. | Indian deed for lands from Oldman’s creek to Timber creek, in New Jersey. |
| 1677, Oct. 10. | Indian deed for the lands from Rankokus creek to Assunpink creek in New Jersey. |
| 1678, Dec. 5. | The will of Sir George Carteret, sole proprietor of East Jersey ordering the same to be sold. |
| 1680, Feb. 16. | An order of the king in council for the better encouragement of all [350] his majesty’s subjects in their trade to his majesty’s plantations, and for the better information of all his majesty’s loving subjects in these matters—Lond. Gaz. No. 1596. Title in Amer. library. 134. 6. |
| 1680. | Arguments against the customs demanded in New West Jersey by the governor of New York, addressed to the Duke’s commissioners. Sm. N. J. 117. |
| 1680, June 14. 23. 25. Oct. 16. Nov. 4. 8. 11. 18. 20. 23. Dec. 16. 1680–1, Jan. 15. 22. Feb. 24. | Extracts of proceedings of the committee of trade and plantations; copies of letters, reports, &c., between the board of trade, Mr. Penn, Lord Baltimore and Sir John Werden, in the behalf of the Duke of York and the settlement of the Pennsylvania boundaries by the L. C. J. North. Votes of Repr. Pennsyl. vii.-xiii. |
| 1681, Mar. 4. Car. 2. | A grant of Pennsylvania to William Penn. Votes of Represen. Pennsyl. xviii. [351] |
| 1681, Apr. 2. | The king’s declaration to the inhabitants and planters of the province of Pennsylvania. Vo. Repr. Penn. xxiv. |
| 1681, July 11. | Certain conditions or concessions agreed upon by William Penn, proprietary and governor of Pennsylvania, and those who are the adventurers and purchasers in the same province. Votes of Rep. Pennsyl. xxiv. |
| 1681, Nov. 9 | Fundamental laws of the province of West New-Jersey. Sm. N. J. 126. |
| 1681–2, Jan. 14. | The methods of the commissioners for settling and regulation of lands in New Jersey. Sm. N. J. 130. |
| 1681–2, F. 1. 2. | Indentures of lease and release by the executors of Sir George Carteret to William Penn and 11 others, conveying East Jersey. |
| 1682, Mar. 14. | The Duke of York’s fresh grant of East-New-Jersey to the 24 proprietors. [352] |
| 1682, Apr. 25. | The frame of the government of the province of Pennsylvania, in America. Votes of Repr. Penn. xxvii. |
| 1682, Aug. 21. | The Duke of York’s deed for Pennsylvania. Vo. Repr. Penn. xxxv. |
| 1682, Aug. 24. | The Duke of York’s deed for the feoffment of Newcastle and twelve miles circle to William Penn. Vo. Repr. Penn. |
| 1682, Aug. 24. | The Duke of York’s deed of feoffment of a tract of land 12 miles south from Newcastle to the Whorekills, to William Penn. Vo. Repr. Penn. xxxvii. |
| 1682, Nov. 27. 34 Car. 2. | A commission to Thomas Lord Culpepper to be lieutenant and governor-general of Virginia. M.S. |
| 1682, 10th mon, 6th day. | An act of union for annexing and uniting of the counties of Newcastle, Jones’ and Whorekill’s alias Deal, to the province of Pennsylvania, and of naturaliza- [353] tion of all foreigners in the province and counties aforesaid. |
| 1682, Dec. 6. | An act of settlement. |
| 1683, Apr. 2 | The frame of the government of the province of Pennsylvania and territories thereunto annexed in America. |
| 1683, Apr. 17. 27. May 30. June 12. | 1684, Feb. 12. July 2, 16, 23. Sept. 30. Dec. 9. | 1685, Mar. 17. Aug. 18. 26. Sept. 2. Oct. 8, 17, 31. Nov. 7. | Proceedings of the committee of trade and Plantations in the dispute between Lord Baltimore and Mr. Penn. Vo. R. P. xiii-xviii. |
| 1683, July 17. | A commission by the proprietors of East New Jersey to Robert Barclay to be governor. Sm. N. J. 166. |
| 1683, July 26. 35 Car. 2. | An order of council for issuing a quo warranto against the charter of the colony of the Massachusetts bay in New England, with his majesty’s declaration that in case the said corporation of Massachusetts bay shall before prosecution had upon the same quo [354] warranto make a full submission and entire resignation to his royal pleasure, he will then regulate their charter in such a manner as shall be for his service and the good of that colony. Title in American library, 139, 6. |
| 1683, Sept. 28. 35 Car. 2. | A commission to Lord Howard of Effingham to be lieutenant and governor general of Virginia. M. S. |
| 1684, May 3. | The humble address of the chief governor, council and representatives of the island of Nevis, in the West Indies, presented to his majesty by Colonel Netheway and Captain Jefferson, at Windsor. May 3, 1684. Title in Amer. libr. 142. 3. cites Lond. Gaz. No. 1927. |
| 1684, Aug. 2. | A treaty with the Indians at Albany. |
| 1686, Nov. 16. | A treaty of neutrality for America between France and England. 7 Corps Dipl. part 2, p. 44. 2. Mem. Am. 40. [355] |
| 1687, Jan. 20. | By the king, a proclamation for the more effectual reducing and suppressing of pirates and privateers in America, as well on the sea as on the land in great numbers, committing frequent robberies and piracies, which hath occasioned a great prejudice and obstruction to trade and commerce, and given a great scandal and disturbance to our government in those parts. Title Amer. libr. 147. 2. cites Lond. Gaz. No. 2315. |
| 1687, Feb. 12. | Constitution of the council of proprietors of West Jersey. Smith’s N. Jersey. 199. |
| 1687, qu. Sept. 27. 4. Jac. 2. | A confirmation of the grant of the Northern neck of Virginia to Lord Culpepper. |
| 1687, Sept. 5. | Governor Coxe’s declaration to the council of proprietors of West Jersey. Sm. N. J. 190. |
| 1687, Dec. 16. | Provisional treaty of Whitehall concerning America between [356] France and England. 2. Mem. de l’Am. 89. |
| 1687. | Governor Coxe’s narrative relating to the division line, directed to the council of proprietors of West Jersey. Sm. App. No. 4. |
| 1687. | The representation of the council of proprietors of West Jersey to Governor Burnet. Smith. App. No. 5. |
| 1687 | The remonstrance and petition of the inhabitants of East New Jersey to the king. Sm. App. No. 8. |
| The memorial of the proprietors of East New Jersey to the Lords of trade. Sm. App. No. 9. | |
| 1688, Sept. 5. | Agreement of the line of partition between East and West New Jersey. Smith’s N. J. 196. |
| 1691. | Conveiance of the government of West Jersey and territories, by Dr. Coxe, to the West Jersey Society. |
| 1691, Oct. 7. | A charter granted by King William and Queen Mary to the inha-[357] bitants of the province of Massachusetts bay, in New England. 2. Mem. de l’Am. 593. |
| 1696, Nov. 7. | The frame of government of the province of Pennsylvania and the territories thereunto belonging, passed by Gov. Markham. Nov. 7, 1696. |
| 1697, Sept. 20. | The treaty of peace between France and England, made at Ryswick. 7 Corps. Dipl. part 2. p. 399. 2. Mem. Am. 89. |
| 1699, July 5. | The opinion and answer of the Lords of trade to the memorial of the proprietors of East N. Jersey. Sm. App. No. 10. |
| 1700, Jan. 15. | The memorial of the proprietors of East New Jersey to the Lords of trade. Sm. App. No. 11. |
| The petition of the proprietors of East and West New Jersey to the Lords justices of England. Sm. App. No. 12. | |
| 1700, W. 3. | A confirmation of the boundary between the colonies of New- [358] York and Connecticut, by the crown. |
| 1701, Aug. 12. | The memorial of the proprietors of East and West New Jersey to the king. Sm. App. No. 14. |
| 1701, Oct. 2. | Representation of the Lords of trade to the Lords justices. Sm. App. No. 18. |
| 1701. | A treaty with the Indians. |
| 1701–2, Jan. 6. | Report of Lords of trade to king William, of draughts of a commission and instructions for a governor of N. Jersey. Sm. N. J. 262. |
| 1702, Apr. 15. | Surrender from the proprietors of E. and W. N. Jersey, of their pretended right of government to her majesty Queen Anne. Sm. N. J. 211. |
| 1702, Apr. 17. | The Queen’s acceptance of the surrender of government of East and West Jersey. Sm. N. J. 219. |
| 1702, Nov. 16. | Instructions to Lord Cornbury. Sm. N. J. 230. [359] |
| 1702, Dec. 5. | A commission from Queen Anne to Lord Cornbury, to be captain general and governor in chief of New Jersey. Sm. N. J. 220. |
| 1703, June 27. | Recognition by the council of proprietors of the true boundary of the deeds of Sept. 10, and Oct. 10, 1677, (New Jersey.) Sm. N. J. 96. |
| 1703. | Indian deeds for the lands above the falls of the Delaware in West Jersey. |
| Indian deed for the lands at the head of Rankokus river, in West Jersey. | |
| 1704, June 18. | A proclamation by Queen Anne, for settling and ascertaining the current rates of foreign coins in America. Sm. N. J. 281. |
| 1705, May 3. | Additional instructions to Lord Cornbury. Sm. N. J. 235. |
| 1707, May 3. | Additional instructions to Lord Cornbury. Sm. N. J. 258. [360] |
| 1707, Nov. 20. | Additional instructions to Lord Cornbury. Sm. N. J. 259. |
| 1707. | An answer by the council of proprietors for the western division of N. Jersey, to questions proposed to them by Lord Cornbury, Sm. N. J. 285. |
| 1708–9, Feb. 28. | Instructions to Colonel Vetch in his negotiations with the governors of America. Sm. N. J. 364. |
| 1708–9, Feb. 28. | Instructions to the governor of New Jersey and New York. Sm. N. J. 361. |
| 1710, Aug. | Earl of Dartmouth’s letter to governor Hunter. |
| 1711, Apr. 22. | Premieres propositions de la France. 6. Lamberty, 669, 2 Mem. Am. 341. |
| 1711, Oct. 8. | Réponses de la France aux demandes préliminaries de la Grande Bretagne. 6 Lamb. 681. 2 Mem. Amer. 344. |
| 1711, Sept. 27./Oct. 8. | Demandes préliminaries plus particulieres de la Grande-Bretagne, [361] avec les réponses. 2 Mem. de l’Am. 346. |
| 1711, Sept. 27./Oct. 8. | L’acceptation de la part de la Grande-Bretagne. 2 Mem. Am. 356. |
| 1711, Dec. 23. | The Queen’s instructions to the Bishop of Bristol and Earl of Stafford, her plenipotentiaries, to treat for a general peace. 6 Lamberty, 744. 2. Mem. Am. 358. |
| 1712, May 24./June 10. | A memorial of Mr. St. John to the Marquis de Torci, with regard to North America, to commerce, and to the suspension of arms. 7. Recueil de Lamberty 161, 2 Mem. de l’Amer. 376. |
| 1712, June 10. | Réponse du roi de France au memoire de Londres. 7. Lamberty, p. 163. 2. Mem. Am. 380. |
| 1712, Aug. 19. | Traité pour une suspension d’armes entre Louis XIV. roi de France, and Anne, reigne de la Grande-Bretagne, fait à Paris. 8. Corps Diplom. part 1, p. 308. 2. Mem. d’Am. 104. [362] |
| 1712, Sept. 10. | Offers of France to England, demands of England, and the answers of France. 7. Rec. de Lamb. 461. 2 Mem. Am. 390. |
| Mar. 31. / 1713, Apr. 11 | Traité de paix et d’amitié entre Louis XIV. roi de France, et Anne, reine de la Grande-Bretagne, fait à Utrecht. 15 Corps Diplomatique de Dumont, 339. id. Latin. 2 Actes et memoires de la pais d’Utrecht, 457. id. Lat. Fr. 2. Mem. Am. 113. |
| Mar. 31. / 1713, April 11. | Traité de navigation et de commerce entre Louis XIV. roi de France, et Anne, reine de la Grande-Bretagne. Fait à Utrecht. 8 Corps Dipl. part 1. p. 345. 2 Mem. de l’Am. 137. |
| 1726. | A treaty with the Indians. |
| 1728. Jan. | The petition of the representatives of the province of New Jersey, to have a distinct governor. Sm. N. J. 421. |
| 1732. G. 2. | Deed of release by the government of Connecticut to that of New York. [363] |
| 1732, June 9. 20. 5 Geo. 2. | The charter granted by George II. for Georgia. 4 Mem. de l’Am. 617. |
| 1733. | Petition of Lord Fairfax, that a commission might issue for running and marking the dividing line between his district and the province of Virginia. |
| 1733, Nov. 29. | Order of the king in council for commissioners to survey and settle the said dividing line between the proprietary and royal territory. |
| 1736, Aug. 5. | Report of the Lords of trade relating to the separating the government of the province of New Jersey from New York. Sm. N. J. 423. |
| 1737, Aug. 10. | Survey and report of the commissioners appointed on the part of the crown to settle the line between the crown and Lord Fairfax. |
| 1737, Aug. 11. | Survey and report of the commissioners appointed on the part of Lord Fairfax to settle the [364] line between the crown and him. |
| 1738, Dec. 21. | Order of reference of the surveys between the crown and Lord Fairfax to the council for plantation affairs. |
| 1744, June. | Treaty with the Indians of the six nations at Lancaster. |
| 1745, Apr. 6. | Report of the council for plantation affairs, fixing the head springs of Rappahanoc and Potomac, and a commission to extend the line. |
| 1745, Apr. 11. | Order of the king in council confirming the said report of the council for plantation affairs. |
| 1748, Apr. 30. | Articles préliminaries pour parvenir à la paix, signés à Aix-la-Chapelle, entre les ministres de France, de la Grande-Bretagne, et des Provinces-Unies des Pays-Bas. 2 Mem. de l’Am. 159. |
| 1748, May 21. | Declaration des ministres de France, de la Grande-Bretagne, et des Provinces-Unies des Pays- [365] Bas pour rectifier les articles I. et II. des préliminaries, 2. Mem. Am. 165. |
| 1748, Oct. 7–18. 22. G. 2. | The general and definitive treaty of peace concluded at Aix-la-Chapelle. Lon. Mag. 1748. 503. French 2. Mem. Am. 169. |
| 1754. | A treaty with the Indians. |
| 1758, Aug. 7. | A conference between governor Bernard and Indian nations at Burlington. Sm. N. J. 449. |
| 1758, Oct. 8. | A conference between governor Denny, governor Bernard, and others, and Indian nations at Easton. Sm. N. J. 455. |
| 1759, July 25. 33. G. 2. | The capitulation of Niagara. |
| 175-. | The king’s proclamation promising lands to soldiers. |
| 1763, Feb. 10. 3. G. 3. | The definitive treaty concluded at Paris. Lon. Mag. 1763. 149. |
| 1763, Oct. 7. G. 3. | A proclamation for regulating the cessions made by the last treaty of peace. Guth. Geogr. Gram. 623. [366] |
| 1763. | The king’s proclamation against settling on any lands on the waters westward of the Alleghany. |
| 1768, Nov. 3. | Deed from the six nations of Indians to William Trent, and others, for lands betwixt the Ohio and Monongahela. View of the title to Indiana. Phil. Steiner and Cist. 1776. |
| 1768, Nov. 5. | Deed from the six nations of Indians to the crown for certain lands and settling a boundary. M.S. [367.] |
[1 ]Art. 4.—T. J.
[2 ]Art. 7.—T. J.
[3 ]Art. 8.—T. J.
[4 ]Art. 8.—T. J.
[1 ]Yet in the advertisement of the second edition of Paine’s Common Sense, in the Pennsylvania Evening Post of Jan. 25, 1776, is stated: “several hundreds are already bespoke, one thousand for Virginia.”
[2 ]This statement is hardly borne out by Jefferson’s statement at the time, for he wrote to Thomas Nelson from Philadelphia, May 16, 1776: “I wish much to see you here, yet hope you will contrive to bring on as early as you can in convention the great questions of the session. I suppose they will tell us what to say on the subject of independence, but hope respect will be expressed to the right of opinion in other colonies who may happen to differ from them. When at home I took great pains to enquire into the sentiments of the people on that head, in the upper counties I think I may safely say nine out of ten are for it.”
[1 ]To bid, to set, was the ancient legislative word of the English. Ll. Hlotharri and Eadrici. Ll. Inæ. Ll. Eadwerdi. Ll. Æathelstani.—T. J.
[1 ]Bro. Abr. Corporations, 31, 34. Hakewell, 93.—T. J.
[2 ]Puff. Off. hom. L. 2, c. 6, §. 12.—T. J.
[3 ]June 4, 1781.—T. J.
[4 ]In the original proof-sheets of the Notes, now in the New York State Library, this passage reads: “But they might as well have voted that a square inch of linen should be sufficient to make them a shirt, and walk into public view in confidence of being covered by it. Nor would it make the shirt bigger, that they could get no more linen.” The comparison seemed too strong apparently, and all the words after “But,” are stricken out, and in place is inserted in MS. “this danger could not authorize them to call that a house which was none; and if they could fix it at one number, they may at another, till it loses its fundamental character of being a representative body.”
[1 ]“The delegates were then sitting at Staunton, and had voted that 40 of their number should make a house. There were between 40 and 50 present when motion for the dictator was made, and it was rejected by a majority of 6 only.”—Note in the edition of 1853.
[1 ]This story of a dictator was later the subject of controversy. It was first reintroduced to injure Patrick Henry in the political heats of 1798–9, by suggesting him as the proposed dictator. This was at once denied by the Henry adherents, and later Wirt again did so in his Life of Henry. As some of these denials went further than the mere question of the personnel of the dictator, Jefferson endeavored later to obtain accounts of what actually passed, by writing to different friends. In reply to one of these inquiries, Archibald Stuart wrote him (Sparks MSS., Harvard College) from Staunton, Sept. 8, 1818:
“Dear Sir,—I presume you have seen Mr. Wirt’s Sketches of the life of Patrick Henry; and that he denies Mr. H. favored the project of Establishing a Dictator during the revolutionary War.—Even doubts respecting events of such recent date tend greatly to impair the credit of History. There are many living now who witnessed the part Mr. Henry took on that subject.—After the Assembly was dispersed at Charlottesville in the year 1781 it met in Staunton where Mr Geo. Nicholas a member of that body proposed that a Dictator be established in this Commonwealth who should have the power of disposing of the lives and fortunes of the Citizens thereof without being subject to account.—In support of this resolution he observed that the Country was overrum by the Enemy and that the Operation of the Govt was nearly suspended:—That although the powers proposed to be conferred were very great the character he proposed to fill the office would remove all apprehensions arising from the abuse of them—That this character was Genl. Washington—That he was our fellow citizen, that we had a right to command his services and that he had no doubt but that on such an Occasion he would obey the call of his country.—In the course of his speech he refered to the practice of the Romans on similar occasions. After Mr. Nicholas sat down Mr. Henry addressed the Chair; he observed it was immaterial to him whether the Officer proposed was called a Dictator or a Governor with enlarged powers or by any other name yet surely an officer armed with such powers was necessary to restrain the unbridled fury of a licentious enemy and concluded by seconding the Motion.—
“On the other hand it was contended by Mann Page from Spottsylvania and several other Members;—That our Affairs were not desperate, That the pressure we felt was but temporary, That the Govt. was still efficient, That the spirit of the people was unbroken, That it was unbecoming in their representatives to damp their ardor by an Act of despair—That they had equal confidence with the mover of the resolution in the Integrity of Genl. Washington, but that he nor no other man ought to be armed with such unlimited powers.—That they well know he would not accept the office—That if he was willing to accept it, he was better employed at the head of the Army than in the exercise of powers which would render him odious to the people—After a lengthy discussion the proposition was negatived.—
“I was present at this discussion and could easily discover that the proposition was not relished by the people. Their feelings were of a different character; had the enemy advanced they would have risen in mass to repel them.—
“I communicated these facts to you shortly after they took place.—
“I am yours most sincerely
“Arch: Stuart.”
[1 ]Altered to “we” in edition of 1787.
[1 ]This is the Report of the Revisors, prepared by Jefferson, Wythe, and Pendleton, and reported to the legislature June 18, 1779.
[1 ]Crawford.—T. J.
[1 ]The instrument proper to them is the Banjar, which they brought hither from Africa, and which is the original of the guitar, its chords being precisely the four lower chords of the guitar.—T. J.
[2 ]Phillis Wheatley, author of a number of poems, published at different times, some of which were collected into a volume, published in London in 1773, which has been several times reprinted. See Allibone and Gregoire.
[3 ]Born in 1729 on a slaveship, and a resident for many years in England. His Letters, with Memoirs of his Life, were published in London in two volumes, in 1782. Some account of him, with a reply to Jefferson’s criticism of his letters, is given in H. Gregoire’s Enquiry concerning . . . Negroes. Brooklyn: 1810, p. 227.
[1 ]Τȣς δȣλȣȣς εταξεν ὡρισμενȣ νομισματος ὁμιλειν ταις ϑεραπαινισν.—Plutarch. Cato.—T. J.
[2 ]Suet. Claud. 25.—T. J.
[3 ]“Seneca de ira. L. 3, 40; de Clementia 1, 18; Xiphil. Aug., p. 76.” Note in edition of 1853.
[1 ]In the edition of 1853 the names of Diogenes and Phædon are inserted at this point.
[1 ]Furneaux passim.—T. J.
[1 ]“Tamen humani juris et naturalis potestatis est, unicuique quod putaverit, colere; nec alii obest, aut prodest, alterius religio. Sed nec religionis est cogere religionem, quæ sponte suscipi debeat, non vi.—Tertullianus ad Scapulam, cap 2.”—Footnote in the edition of 1853.
[1 ]“Encyclopedia. Article ‘Antimoine’ and ‘Vomissement.’ The Parliament of Paris forbade, on pain of death, any doctrine to be taught contrary to Aristotle’s—3. Millot. Hist. de France, 280.”—Footnote in the edition of 1853.
[1 ]In a letter to Lithgow (Jan. 4, 1805) concerning a revised edition of the Notes, Jefferson wrote:
“I should in that case certainly qualify several expressions in the nineteenth chapter, which have been construed differently from what they were intended. I had under my eye when writing, the manufactures of the great cities in the old countries, at the present time, with whom the want of food and clothing necessary to sustain life, has begotten a depravity of morals, a dependence and corruption, which renders them an undesirable accession to a country whose morals are sound. My expressions look forward to the time when our own great cities would get into the same state. But they have been quoted as if meant for the present time here. As yet our manufactures are as much at their ease, as independent and moral as our agricultural habits, and they will continue so as long as there are vacant lands for them to resort to; because whenever it shall be attempted by the other classes to reduce them to the minimum of subsistence, they will quit their trades and go to laboring the earth. A first question is, whether it is desirable for us to receive at present the dissolute and demoralized handicraftsmen of the old cities of Europe? A second and more difficult one is, when even good handicraftsmen arrive here, is it better for them to set up their trade, or go to the culture of the earth? Whether their labor in their trade is worth more than their labor on the soil, increased by the creative energies of the earth? Had I time to revise that chapter, this question should be discussed, and other views of the subject taken, which are presented by the wonderful changes which have taken place here since 1781, when the Notes on Virginia were written. Perhaps when I retire, I may amuse myself with a serious review of this work; at present it is out of the question. Accept my salutations and good wishes.”
[3 ]Altered in edition of 1787 to “53,571.”
[4 ]In the edition of 1787 from the word “From” to “25,000” dollars is cancelled and the following passage substituted: “So it is the maintenance of the poor, which being merely a matter of charity cannot be deemed expended in the administration of government. And if we strike out the $25,000” etc.
[1 ]Altered in edition of 1787 to read: “Deducting even the double of the expenses of government, as before estimated, from the million and a half,” etc.
[1 ]By the author of these notes.—T. J. See ante, ii, 49.
[2 ]Mr. Hazard.—T. J.