Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, 1787-1788

CHAPTER III. BEFORE THE MEETING OF THE CONVENTION

[Between the day when the convention was called and the day when the convention met, a period of seven weeks elapsed. During this time both the friends and detractors of the con-stitution resorted to every known means of influencing public opinion. Appeals were made to the prejudices, to the fears, to the religious bigotry of the people. The Antifederalists, as they began to be called, found a friend in Eleazer Oswald, and filled his "Independent Gazetteer" with all manner of effusions. The mouth-piece of the Federal party was the "Pennsylvania Packet," and from these two journals the greater part of this chapter is taken. The champion of the kntifederalists was " Centinel," whose name is still unknown. The champion of the Federalists was James Wilson, whose speech in the State House yard was held to be unanswerable. The essays of "Centinel" and the speech of Wilson are, therefore, given in full. But the essays of "Philadelphiensis" and "Old Whig," who supported the Antifederal cause, and of "American Citizen," who wrote on the Federal side, have not, for lack of space, been reprinted.

In place of these will be found a few, and but a few, of the immense number of short pieces that appeared day after day in the " Packet" and the "Gazetteer," and set forth such popular opinions as might be heard any afternoon in the taverns and the coffee-houses. In writings of this sort the Antifederal greatly outnumbered the Federal, and justify the belief that the burden of proof was considered to be with tile party of opposition.]

From the Pennsylvania Gazette.

(By particular desire.)

The former distinction of the citizens of America (says a correspondent) into Whigs and Tories, should be lost in the more important distinction of Federal and Antifederal men. The former are the friends of liberty and independence; the latter are the enemies of liberty and the secret abettors of the interests of Great Britain.

Should the federal government be rejected (AWFUL WORDS), another correspondent has favored us with the following paragraphs, to be published in our paper in the month of June, 1789:

On the 30th ult., his Excellency, David Shays, Esq., took possession of the government of Massachusetts. The execution of — ——, Esq., the late tyrannical governor, was to take place the next day.

Accounts from New Jersey grow every day more alarming. The people have grown desperate from the oppressions of their new masters, and have secretly, it is said, dispatched a messenger to the court of Great Britain, praying to be taken again under the protection of the British Crown.

We hear from Richmond, that the new state house, lately erected there, was burnt by a mob from Berkeley county, on account of the assembly refusing to emit paper money. From the number and daring spirit of the mob, government have judged it most prudent not to meddle with them.

Yesterday 300 ship-carpenters embarked from this city for Nova Scotia, to be employed in his Britannic Majesty's shipyards at Halifax.

We hear from Cumberland, Franklin and Bedford counties, in this State, that immense quantities of wheat are rotting in stacks and barns, owing to the demand for that article having ceased, in consequence of our ships being shut out of all the ports of Europe and the West Indies.

We hear that 300 families left Chester county last week, to settle in Kentucky. Their farms were exposed to sale before they set off, but many of them could not be raised to the value of the taxes that were due on them.

On Saturday last were interred from the bettering-house the remains of Mrs. Mary ——. This venerable lady was once in easy circumstances; but having sold property to the amount of 5,0001. and lodged it in the funds, which, from the convulsions and distractions of our country, have unfortunately become insolvent, she was obliged to retire to the city poor-house. Her certificates were sold on the Monday following her interment, but did not bring as much cash as paid for her winding-sheet.

By a vessel just arrived from L'Orient, we learn that the partition treaty between Great Britain and the Emperor of Morocco was signed on the 25th of April last, at London. The Emperor is to have possession of all the States to the southward of Pennsylvania, and Great Britain is to possess all the States to the eastward and northward of Pennsylvania, inclusive of this middle State. Private letters from London add, that Silas Dean, Esq., is to be appointed Governor of Connecticut, and Joseph Galloway, Esq., is to be appointed Governor of Pennsylvania. The government of Rhode Island was offered to Brigadier-General Arnold, who refused to accept of it, urging, as the reason of his refusal, that he was afraid of being corrupted by living in such a nest of speculators and traitors.

But, adds our correspondent, should the federal government be adopted, the following paragraphs will probably have a place in our paper in the same month, viz., June, 1789:

Yesterday arrived in this city his Excellency the Earl of Surry, from the Court of Great Britain, as Envoy Extraordinary to the United States. He was received by the principal Secretary of State, and introduced to the President-General at the federal State House, who received him with great marks of politeness. His lordship's errand to America is to negotiate a commercial treaty with the United States. The foundation of this treaty is, that all British ports are to be opened to American vessels, duty free, and a proposal to build 200 ships every year in the ports of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Charleston.

Last evening arrived at Billingsport the ship Van Berkel, Nicholas van Vleck, master, from Amsterdam, with loo reputable families on board, who have fled from the commotions which now distress their unhappy country. It is said they have brought cash with them to the amount of 45,0001. sterling, to be laid out in purchasing cultivated farms in this and the neighboring States.

We learn from Cumberland county, in this State, that land in the neighborhood of Carlisle, which sold in the year 1787 for only 51. has lately been sold for 10l. per acre at public vendue. This sudden rise in the value of estates is ascribed to the new mode of taxation adopted by the federal government, as well as to the stability of this government.

Such are the improvements in the roads in this State since the establishment of the federal government, that several loaded wagons arrived in this city in two days from the town of Lancaster.

By a gentleman just arrived from Tioga, we learn that the insurgents in that place were surprised and taken by a party of the federal militia, and that their leaders are on their way to Wyoming, to be tried for their lives.

It appears from the custom-house books of this city, that the exports from this State were nearly double last year, of the exports of the year 1786.

In the course of the present year, it appears that there have arrived in this state 18,923 souls from different parts of Europe.

Several foreigners who attended the debates in the federal Assembly and Senate last Wednesday, declare that they never saw half so much decorum nor heard more noble specimens of eloquence in the House of Lords and Commons, than they saw and heard in our illustrious republican assemblies.

We hear from Fort Pitt, that since the navigation of the Mississippi has been confirmed to the United States by the Court of Spain, the price of wheat has risen from 4s. to 7s. 6d. per bushel in all the counties to the westward of the Allegheny mountains.

In consequence of the new and successful modes of taxation adopted by the United States, public securities of all kinds have risen to par with specie, to the great joy of widows, orphans, and all others who trusted their property in the funds of their country.

We hear that the Honorable Thomas —, Esq., is appointed to deliver the anniversary oration in September next, in honor of the birthday of our present free and glorious federal Constitution—a day that cannot fail of being equally dear to all Americans with the 4th of July, 1776—for while this day gave us liberty, the 17th of September, 1787, gave us, under the smiles of a benignant Providence, a government, which alone could have rendered that liberty safe and perpetual. 1

———

Mr. Oswald.—Having stepped into Mr. ——'s beerhouse, in —— street, on Saturday evening last, I perceived the room filled with a number of decent tradesmen, who were conversing very freely about the members of the federal convention, who, it was said, like good workmen, had finished their work on a Saturday night. As the principles of this company were highly federal, and many of their remarks very shrewd, I took notes of them in my memorandum book, in short-hand, and have since copied them for the use of your truly federal paper.

1. A Sea Captain.—By George, if we don't adopt the federal government we shall all go to wreck.
2. His Mate.—Hold, hold, captain, we are in no danger; Washington is still at the helm.
3. A Continental Lieutenant.—If we don't adopt the new government—why the hardest send off—promotion is always most rapid in a civil war.
4. A Cooper.—If we reject the new government, we shall all go to staves.
5. A Blacksmith.—If we don't submit to the convention, we shall all be burned into cinders.
6. A Shoemaker.—If we do not adopt the alterations in the federal convention now, we shall never have such another opportunity of having it mended.
7. A Mason.—The old fabric must be underpinned, or we shall all go to the devil together.
8. A House Carpenter.—We shall never do well till all the little rooms in the federal mansion house are thrown into one.
9. A Silversmith.—I hate your party-colored metals—the sooner we are all melted into one mass the better.
10. A Baker.—Let me see the man that dares oppose the federal government, and I will soon make biscuit of him.
11. A Butcher.—And I would soon quarter the dog.
12. A Barber.—And I would shave the son of a —.
13. A Cook.—And I would break every bone in his body.
14. A Joiner.—And I would make a wooden jacket for him.
15. A Potter.—And I would grind his dust afterward into a chamber-pot.
16. A Tailor.—And I would throw it into hell. 2

———

From a Correspondent.—I was walking the other day in Second street, and observed a child, of five or six years old, with a paper in his hand, and lisping, with a smile, "Here's what the convention have done." Last evening I was walking down Arch street, and was struck with the appearance of an old man, whose head was covered with hoary locks, and whose knees bent beneath the weight of his body, stepping to his seat by the door, with a crutch in one hand and his spectacles and the new federal constitution in the other. These incidents renewed in my mind the importance of the present era to one-half of the world! I was pleased to see all ages anxious to know the result of the deliberations of that illustrious council, whose constitutions are designed to govern a world of freemen! The unthinking youth, who cannot realize the importance of government, seems to be impressed with a sense of our want of union and system; and the venerable sire, who is tottering to the grave, feels new life at the prospect of having everything valuable secured to posterity.

Ye spirits of ancient legislators! Ye ghosts of Solon, Lycurgus and Alfred! Of the members of the grand Amphictyonic Council of Greece! and of the illustrious Senate of Rome! attend and bear testimony, how important the task of making laws for governing empires! Attend, ye ghosts of Warren, Montgomery, Mercer, and other heroes who offered your lives upon the altar of freedom! Bear witness, with what solicitude the great council of America, headed by a Franklin and a Washington, the fathers of their country, have deliberated upon the dearest interests of men, and labored to frame a system of laws and constitutions that shall perpetuate the blessings of that independence which you obtained by your swords!

"These are the fathers of this western clime !
    Nor names more noble grac'd the walls of fame,
When Spartan firmness braved the wrecks of time,
    Or Rome's bold virtues fanned the heroic flame.
Not deeper thought the immortal sage inspired
    On Solon's lips when Grecian senates hung ;
Nor manlier eloquence the bosom fired
    When genius thundered from the Athenian tongue."

Away, ye spirits of discord! ye narrow views! ye local policies! ye selfish patriots, who would damn your country for a sixpenny duty! In the present state of America, local views are general ruin! Unanimity alone is our last resort. Every other expedient has been tried, and unanimity now will certainly secure freedom, national faith and prosperity. 3

———

[Extract of a letter from a gentleman in Montgomery county to his friend in Philadelphia, dated 24th September, 1787.]

"We hear the petitions which are handing about in favor of the federal constitution, have met with no opposition in your city, except by five persons, who have lived upon the distresses of the people for some time past; you may expect those gentlemen will in time, on finding their little opposition will not avail, become good subjects of the federal government. They were not decided characters in our late glorious revolution, until they found independence would be maintained; it is even said that one of them, who was in Europe early in the contest, was decidedly against us, but, on finding we were able to support our independence, they became the best street whigs you had, and got themselves fixed in fat offices, which they cannot but with reluctance run the risk of losing. We also hear that the only machine for spinning cotton with facility in your city has been bought up by a British rider and put on board a vessel for London. It is to be hoped the Manufacturing Society will have spirit enough to furnish that enemy to our country with a coat of

"TAR AND FEATHERS." 4

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Mr. Oswald: In searching among some old papers a few days ago, I accidentally found a London newspaper, dated in March, 1774, wherein a certain Dean Tucker, after stating several advantages attendent on a separation from the then colonies, now United States of America, proceeds thus: "After a separation from the colonies our influence over them will be much greater than ever it was, since they began to feel their own weight and importance." "The moment a separation takes effect, intestine quarrels will begin;" and "in proportion as their factious republican spirit shall intrigue and cabal, shall split into parties, divide and sub-divide, in the same proportion shall we be called in to become their general umpires and referees."

I stood aghast on perusing this British prophecy, and could not help reflecting how my infatuated countrymen are on the very verge of suffering it to be fulfilled. Already have they in several of the States spurned at the federal government, despised their admonitions, and absolutely refused to comply with their requisitions; nay, they have gone further, and have enacted laws in direct violation of those very requisitions; nor does the present federal constitution give Congress power to enforce a compliance with the most trifling measure they may recommend. Hence, liberty becomes licentiousness (for while causes continue to produce their effects, want of energy in government will be followed by disobedience in the governed). Hence, also, credit, whether foreign or domestic, public or private, bath been abused, and, of course, is reduced to the lowest ebb; Rhode Island faith in particular is become superlatively infamous, even to a proverb. Would to God that censure in this respect were only due to that petty State! Sorry I am to say, several others merit a considerable share of it. Ship-building and commerce no more enrich our country; agriculture is neglected, or what is just the same, our produce, instead of being exported, is suffered to rot in the fields. Britain has dared to retain our frontier posts, whereby she not only deprives us of our fur trade, but is enabled to keep up a number of troops, to take every advantage of any civil broils which may arise in these States; and to close the dismal scene, rebellion, with all its dire concomitants, has actually reared its head in a sister State-such have been the deplorable effects of a weak and impotent government. Perhaps the present situation of America cannot be better described than by comparing her to a ship at sea in a storm, when the mariners tie up the helm and abandon her to the fury of the winds and waves. O, America! arouse! awake from your lethargy! bravely assert the cause of federal unanimity! and save your sinking country! Let it not be said that those men who heroically extirpated tyranny from America, should suffer civil discord to undo all that they have achieved, or to effect more than all the powers of Britain, aided by her blood-thirsty mercenaries, were able to accomplish. Let not posterity say: "Alas, our fathers expended much blood and treasure in erecting the temple of liberty; and when nothing more was wanting but thirteen pillars to support the stately edifice, they supinely neglected this essential part; so has the whole become one mighty heap of ruins, and slavery is entailed on their unhappy offspring." God forbid that this should ever be the case!

Do any of my fellow citizens ask, how may we avert the impending danger? The answer is obvious; let us adopt that federal constitution, which has been earnestly recommended by a convention of patriotic sages, and which, while it gives energy to our government, wisely secures our liberties. This constitution, my friends, is the result of four months' deliber-ation, in an assembly composed of men whose known integrity, patriotism and abilities justly deserve our confidence; let us also remember that the illustrious WASHINGTON was their President. And shall we, my fellow citizens, render all their measures ineffectual by withholding our concurrence? The preservation of ourselves and our country forbid it. Me-thinks I hear every hill from St. Croix to the Mississippi re-echo the praises of this simple but excellent constitution.

Having once adopted this truly federal form of government, Dean Tucker and all the divines in England may prophecy our downfall if they will, we shall not regard them. Then shall commerce revisit our shores; then shall we take a distinguished rank among the nations of the earth; then shall our husbandmen and mechanics of every denomination enjoy the fruits of their industry; and then, and not till then, shall we be completely happy.

A PENNSYLVANIA FARMER.

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Mr. Oswald: An anonymous scribbler, in the Freeman's Journal of last Wednesday, has daringly attacked the new federal constitution, in making objections to supposed faults or defects therein, which this mock-patriot himself acknowledges to be trivial and of very small importance. Why then in the name of wonder has he started them at this awful crisis, when the fate of America depends on the unanimity of all classes of citizens in immediately establishing this hitherto unequalled, and I am happy to add, this popular form of government? Certainly, with a design to sow dissensions among the weak, the credulous and the ignorant, since no other effect can be produced by his antifederal remarks at this stage of the business.

I repeat it, sir, the proposed Federal Constitution is a master-piece in politics, and loudly proclaims the wisdom of its authors. But, even if it were imperfect, none of my fellow-citizens are stupid enough to think it, like the laws of the Medes and Persians, irrevocable and unalterable—no, it has one article which wisely provides for future amendments and alterations whenever they shall appear necessary. I can easily perceive that the author of these silly remarks is the same person who attacked the Convention, under the signature of " Z," before the result of their deliberations was known. Need we wonder, then, to find him carping at their works when published?

This Antifederalist should reflect that his name may yet be known and himself branded with infamy as an enemy to the happiness of the United States. I would therefore advise him to choose some other subject for his remarks in future, if he wishes to escape the just resentment of an incensed people, who perhaps may honor him with a coat of

TAR AND FEATHERS. 6

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

That the opinion of the people becomes of great moment, either to impart applause or obtain condemnation on those who have been signally employed in national service, is a maxim established by experience; but it is generally best understood and attended to by men of base intentions, who to favor some deep design, take care to varnish out a scheme of deception with apparent colors of truth, whereby the multudes seeing the object through false colors alone, are often ensnared and led to adopt sentiments repugnant to their dearest interest. In the Freeman's Journal of Wednesday last, a writer well acquainted with this principle has with daring effrontery attempted to make strictures on our new constitution, in order to tarnish with his corrosive ink extracted from an antifederal heart the lustre of our august Convention. Instigated either by private designs of some party or by hatred to the national character of America, he has set out, with the nimble feet of counterfeit probity, to exhibit imaginary defects, and to raise in the mind of the unthinking citizens groundless conjectures, which, if not checked in time, may become so deeply seated that the joint force of truth and pure demonstration can scarce be able to erase them, or until, perhaps, the injury done to our country be of such magnitude that it will be equally indifferent whether the deception be or be not discovered.

In the exordium he says: "The writer of the following remarks has the happiness and respectability of the United States much at heart, and it is with pleasure he has seen a system promulged by the late Convention, which promises to ensure those blessings; but as perfection is not in the lot of human nature, we are not to expect it in the new federal constitution. Candor must confess, however, that it is a well-wrought piece of stuff; and claims upon the whole the approbation of all the States. Our situation is critical and demands our immediate care. It is therefore to be hoped that every State will be speedy in calling a convention—speedy, because the business is momentous and merits the utmost deliberation." It is pleasant to observe with what affected tenderness and diffidence this writer attempts to remark upon the imperfections of our new constitution; but, with all his candor in allowing it to be a well-wrought piece of stuff, I fear there are some who will be apt to think that his design is to seduce the people; as the devil is painted in his temptation of Saint Anthony in the modest habit of a fair face and the charming form of virgin innocence, but his cloven foot is very visible to those who can take their eyes off the object of seduction. "It is therefore to be hoped (says he) that every State will be speedy in calling a convention"—but for what? Why to follow the example of this writer, to remark upon and to condemn several articles of the new constitution, and finally to reject the whole of such a well-wrought piece of stuff. I appeal to the understanding, and ask, is not this the language and true meaning of the writer?

Before he begins his futile remarks, he says: "The following strictures on the proposed constitution are submitted with diffidence. Excepting a single instance, they regard points of an inferior magnitude only; and as the writer is not possessed of any of the reasons which influenced the convention, he feels the more diffident in offering these remarks." Here is a matter of curiosity, undoubtedly; this gentleman is not possessed of any of the reasons which influenced the convention, and yet, I affirm it, there is not another person in America besides himself unacquainted with them. There is not a man in America or even in Europe possessed of common sense that has heard of the meeting of that honorable body, but knows the reasons and motives which influenced every member of it. Yes, the very enemies of America known them well, and will, I trust, soon feel their effects to their mortification. The reasons and motives which influenced the convention were: "To form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity, and to promote the lasting welfare of that country so dear to us all." These, I say, were their motives; and where is the wretch so base as to suppose they were influenced by any other. Perhaps the writer may pretend to say that he meant no more in this paragraph than he is not possessed of any of the reasons which influenced the convention to adopt those articles on which he has thought proper to make his strictures. Now if this were his meaning, the general answer given above will still apply; for the same motives which influenced the convention to frame the whole body of this noble constitution, must necessarily have influenced them in framing every article of it, namely, the good of their country. Is not such a writer either an insidious enemy to his country or wilfully wicked?

But let us examine what he has to say against the constitution, and we will find that his objections are groundless and absurd. His first remark is upon Art. I, Sec. 2: "The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every 30,000." After exhibiting a long paragraph of unmeaning sentences in the discussion of this subject, he concludes: "In America representation ought to be in a ratio with population." Now the very article against which he objects manifestly provides that the representation shall be in the direct ratio of the population. It seems to me that this gentleman's idea of the term ratio is to be explained by some learned definition of his own, with which I hope he will soon favor the literati, and then perhaps he will demonstrate the representation in America must increase in the duplicate ratio or proportion of the number of inhabitants. Such a learned Antifederal gentleman! O princeps asinorum!

It would indeed be spending time in a useless manner to remark upon all his strictures, which are equally erroneous. I shall therefore pass over his second and third, and conclude with taking some notice of his fourth or last remark, which is on Art. III, Sec. 2: "The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury. I sincerely wished," says he, " the convention had said a jury of thirteen, a majority of whom shall determine the verdict. Is it not extravagantly absurd to expect that twelve men shall have but one opinion among them upon the most difficult case? Common sense revolts at the idea, while conscience shudders at the prostitution of an oath thus sanctioned by law! Starve or be perjured! say our courts. The monstrous attachment of the people to an English jury show how far the force of prejudice can go; and the encomiums which have been so incessantly lavished upon it should caution us against borrowing from others, without the previous conviction of our own minds." Here is a complete specimen of this man of diffidence and candor; here we see him throwing off the mask, and stepping forth with dauntless courage, and attacking, with philosophical declamation, the first privilege of freemen—the noblest article that ever entered the constitution of a free country—a jewel whose transcendant lustre adds dignity to human nature. No, sir, common sense does not revolt at the idea; common sense and experience confirm the excellency of this law every day; in short, your own condemnation of it is manifestly a negative proof of its goodness. Sit perpetua hac lex. But plunge this Janus, this double-faced wretch (who, under the pretence of patriotism and candor, writes only with a view to embarrass the mind, and so prevent the adoption of the new constitution), into the mines a thousand yards deep; and there let the injured ghost of Columbia incessantly torment the monster.

NESTOR.7

———

To the Printer of the Independent Gazetteer.

Sir: I am a FEDERAL MAN in the truest sense of the word. I wish to see the United States in possession of a general government, which may ensure to them strength and liberty at home and respectability abroad. But I do not agree with a writer in your paper of this day that every person who objects to some parts, or even to the whole of the aristocratical plan proposed by the late convention, ought to have "a coat of tar and feathers." Tar and feathers, I believe, never made a convert to any system whatever, whether religious or political; and that must be a most noble form of government indeed which requires such infamous measures to support and establish it! That would be a mob government with a witness.

At the glorious period of our Independence the newspapers were filled with publications against as well as for that salutary measure, and I am clearly of opinion that the LIBERTY OF THE PRESS—the great bulwark of all the liberties of the people—ought never to be restrained (notwithstanding the honorable convention did not think fit to make the least declaration in its favor) and that on every occasion truth and justice should have

FAIR PLAY. 8

28th Sept., 1787.

———

The inhabitants of the Old World, says a correspondent, have long been looking at America to see whether liberty and a republican form of government are worth contending for. The United States are at last about to try the experiment. They have formed a constitution, which has all the excellencies, without any of the defects, of the European governments. This constitution has been pronounced by able judges to be the wisest, most free and most efficient of any form of government that ancient or modern times have produced. The gratitude of ages only can repay the enlightened and illustrious patriots for the toil and time they have bestowed in framing it.

It is remarkable that while the federal government lessens the power of the States it increases the privileges of individuals. It holds out additional security for liberty, property and life in no less than five different articles which have no place in any one of the State constitutions. It moreover provides an effectual check to the African trade in the course of one-and-twenty years. How honorable to America— to have been the first Christian power that has borne a testimony against a practice that is alike disgraceful to religion and repugnant to the true interests and happiness of society!

George Washington, Esq., has already been destined by a thousand voices to fill the place of the first President of the United States under the new frame of government. While the deliverers of a nation in other countries have hewn out a way to power with the sword or seized upon it by stratagems and fraud, our illustrious hero peaceably retired to his farm after the war, from whence it is expected he will be called by the suffrages of three millions of people to govern that country by his wisdom (agreeable to fixed laws) which he had previously made free by his arms. Can Europe boast of such a man ? or can the history of the world show an instance of such voluntary compact between the deliverer and the de-livered of any country as will probably soon take place in the United States? 9

———

Mr. Oswald : I have never interested myself much in the politics of the State, from an idea that the difference between a Constitutionalist and a Republican was of so trifling a nature that it was not worth interesting myself in. I have asked some of the parties what they were contending for: was it the bare name, a shadow, or was there a substance in view? but found they could not tell. It then appeared to me like two men worshipping the same being, but different in the mode, as there were many valuable and worthy men in each party who were worthy members of Republican government.

I have seen with astonishment "a land," I may say, " flowing with milk and honey," a country that can boast of more natural advantages than perhaps any other on the face of the globe, a-going to destruction from the factions and bad policy of its inhabitants: I viewed with pleasure the meeting of the late Federal Convention; a convention composed of our wisest and best men—men perhaps unequaled for wisdom and virtue, with Washington at their head, as the only thing that could save a distressed people from destruction, and from falling an easy prey to foreign powers. The Convention has given us a constitution perhaps superior to any upon earth, and notwithstanding its excellence, it meets the opposition of a factious few, whose lives and conduct have been filled with dissimulation and deceit. These few men have had address sufficient to sway the judgment of nineteen of their creatures, members of the late General Assembly, whose names will be handed down with infamy to posterity. On Friday last, when a vote was to be taken of the utmost importance to Pennsylvania, and to keep them from attending the house contrary to their positive oaths, contrary to religion and virtue, and contrary to the real interest of their constituents, who have unfortunately placed a mistaken confidence in their integrity and patriotism, and who were paying them for their attendance and service as their representatives.

The people will now be convinced that the leaders of this party have not, nor never had, the real interest of Pennsylvania in view; they have clearly shown that their attachments to the Constitution were from its elasticity—they have turned it, and twisted it, as their interest and party views required, into a thousand shapes; and all under the mask of supporting it, have created offices, officers, and place-men to strengthen their party. They have, under a funding bill, loaded the State with debts she never contracted, debts of the neighboring states, in order to enrich a few individuals in Philadelphia. In short, their conduct has been such as show the only spark of patriotism they have is the bare name; I would advise the leaders of this party to take care how they conduct themselves in future, to offer no more injuries—they are well known. The people of Pennsylvania are an easy, good people; but they are a spirited people. Let those enemies to the State and to the United States recollect how Doctor Kearsley was treated in 1775, for his abuses of the people. They may probably share the same fate he did.

The Federal constitution no doubt will put an end to all parties, if it is adopted, as it clearly will. Offices and officers will not be so numerous, nor offices so valuable, as to make it the interest of the people to neglect their business in pursuit of them. The large sums of money paid to a set of supernumerary officers and members of Assembly and Executive Council, will serve to pay our foreign and domestic debts. Our credit at home and abroad will revive; our treasury will be enabled to pay the real creditor, and the Federal treasury, by imposts and indirect taxation, which will not be felt by the people, will be enabled to answer all demands that may be upon it. British gold could not have done more injury to Pennsylvania than a few party men in Philadelphia have done, under the mask of friends to the Constitution and friends to the people. The grievance is great, and must be redressed. The only cure for it is to lay hold of the heads of the faction, do justice to yourselves, inflict the punishment on their persons equal to their demerits, which, by the bye, will not be a small one, and you will soon settle and cure the disease, and after-wards be a happy people.

A MECHANIC. 10

———

To the Printer of the Independent Gazetteer.

Sir: When we had the honor of addressing you, a few days since, we hoped our caution to the modern Tories, alias Anti-Federalists, might not be amiss. It has, however, attracted the notice of your correspondent, " Fair Play," who observes that " we never made a convert, either in religion or politics." Well, sir, it is granted. We would ask this gentleman, whether the sword, either of war or of justice, has ever made proselytes to any opinion ? Certainly not in a greater degree than we have. Yet it is often found expedient to use these means (in punishing those on whom remonstrance and reason were thrown away) for the same purpose that Jehovah sent the deluge in Noah's days. Laughable indeed would it be, to suppose that no villain, however dignified among villains, ought to be punished, but with a view to reclaim him; there is a point of more consequence to be considered, and that is to expel from society a monster who is unfit to associate with men, and thereby to deter others from treading in his steps. That we have frequently, during the Revolution, terrified the Tories, or Anti/federalists of those times, into a moderate line of conduct, is well known. True, indeed, we did not make many converts to Whiggism (although we have often decorated the backs of those gentry); neither did the sword.

If you trace our history, sir, you will find that we have been faithful allies to America, throughout the late war; but were never well relished by the Tories, and a few sham, or lukewarm Whigs. Should our country again demand our aid, we shall cheerfully obey the summons. At the same time permit us to declare, that we will never attack any real friend to America, however different his sentiments may be from the throng; nor will we ever assist in shackling the liberty of the press, but on the contrary, will exert ourselves to the last, in defence of that most invaluable privilege of freemen.

When, on Friday last, eighteen or nineteen human asses, who are a disgrace to Pennsylvania, basely deserted the trust reposed in them, by an unwarrantable revolt from the assembly, we confess candidly that nothing could have given us more pleasure than to have been employed in chastising these disciples of Shays, wretches who were not influenced in their defection by the laudable motives which actuated the citizens of Rome, when they revolted, and were appeased by the institution of those popular magistrates, styled tribunes; nor by that patriotic spirit, which prompted the illustrious English Barons to extort "Magna Charta" from their tyrannical King John. No, sir, those tools of sedition, whose ignorance is still greater than their obstinacy, evidently copied after those despicable incendiaries, Jack Straw and Wat Tyler, in endeavoring to introduce anarchy into these States, that they might be an easy prey to their lord and master, Daniel Shays. Against such traitors to their delegated trust, we would willingly be engaged.

To conclude, we cannot help lamenting the monstrous ingratitude of the Americans in neglecting many of the best friends of the revolution, and among the rest, their faithful allies.

TAR AND FEATHERS. 11

———

To the Printer of the Independent Gazetteer.

Sir: Your correspondent, who has assumed the signature of "Tar and Feathers," seems to allow that his mode of administering justice never made a convert, yet persists in his diabolical plan of endeavoring to inflame the minds of the people against those who happen to differ from him on political subjects. Perhaps, like the fox who lost his tail and strove to persuade the rest of his species to have theirs cut off also, he himself has undergone the discipline he is now so anxious to bestow on others. I wonder whether this gentleman (though I much doubt he has any claim to the epithet) ever had the honor of bearing either "the sword of war or of justice." One would be apt to conclude he never had; otherwise, he could not be so destitute of those excellent qualifications which constitute the character of a good soldier and an impartial judge. Generous minds will ever rouse with indigna-tion against such monsters as wish to interrupt the peace of society by flying in the face of all law and authority; and I must confess the new constitution comes in a very " question-able shape," when attended with such furious advocates as "Tar and Feathers." Brave men and good citizens will never associate with the most abandoned of the humam species, for such we must deem those creatures who contend for mob, governments, to abuse an individual because he entertains a different opinion from themselves, or because he has firmness and honesty enough to show his own sentiments. None but the mere echoes and tools of party and faction would engage in such dirty business.

It is a fact, I believe, that will not be denied, that many of those who arrange themselves under the banner of those who call themselves Federalists, were either downright Tories, lukewarm Whigs, or disaffected to the cause of America and the revolution, and who now eagerly wish to seize the present opportunity to gratify their revenge and to retaliate on the real Whigs of 1775 and 1776. And I am more inclined to espouse this opinion, because the author of "Tar and Feathers" aims to destroy the distinction of Whig and Tory, and to establish one more odious, viz.: Federalists and Anti-Federalists.

The new friends to the tarring and feathering system seem to direct their resentment against the Tories. "Laughable indeed would it be to suppose" that they had not well examined and sought for a few of that class of beings among their own party to begin with. Look at home first, Mr. Tar and Feathers, and try to work a reformation there before you begin to deal damnation abroad. There invoke the Great Jehovah to forgive thy past crimes and follies; and presume no more, thou blasphemous wretch, to compare your infamous doctrine of expedients with the purpose of that Deity, "who sent the deluge in the days of Noah."

I shall conclude for the present, Mr. Oswald, with observing that I consider this demon of discord as some cowardly "villain," "however dignified among villains"—some ferocious monster, whose nerves do not admit of his heading a tarring and feathering mob, but who, at the same time, would rejoice to see anarchy and confusion prevailing and triumphing over peace and good order among the citizens of Philadelphia.

FAIR PLAY. 12

———

We are authorized to declare that the two first pieces published in our paper, signed Tar and Feathers, were received from a different quarter from the two last under the same signature; and that therefore no part of the reply by Fair Play was intended for the author of the two first. He only meant in general to reprobate the idea of raising a commotion among the citizens. 13

A correspondent informs us that a letter has lately been written to the Stadtholder of Holland, inviting him to come over to America, where there is shortly to be a vacancy. It is to be hoped that, as he is so ill-treated by his own countrymen, he will be induced to accept the invitation.

Another correspondent observes that although the tide seems to run so high at present in favor of the new constitution, there is no doubt but the people will soon change their minds when they have had time to examine it with coolness and impartiality.

Among the blessings of the new proposed government, our correspondent enumerates the following: 1. The liberty of the press abolished. 2. A standing army. 3. A Prussian militia. 4. No annual elections. 5. Five-fold taxes. 6. No trial by jury in civil cases. 7. General search warrants. 8. Excise laws, custom-house officers, tide and land waiters, cellar rats, etc. 9. A free importation of negroes for one and twenty years. 10. Appeals to the supreme continental courts, where the rich may drag the poor from the further-most parts of the continent. 11. Elections for Pennsylvania held at Pittsburg, or perhaps Wyoming. 12. Poll taxes for our heads, if we choose to wear them. 13. And death if we dare to complain.

A correspondent who sees with horror the low ribaldry which is daily published against Messrs. Whitehill, Findley and other virtuous characters, cannot but lament the blindness of those who smile at such wretched productions. Let us suppose for a moment that the scene is reverted and that a piece is published in which Robert Morris is styled a rascal, Thomas Fitzsimons a scoundrel, George Clymer a vain fool, etc., a cry of scandalum magnatum will immediately be raised—the people will take the part of the well-born, not from respect or love for their virtues, but from reverence for their WEALTH. O altitudo divitiarum !

A correspondent with pleasure informs the public that John Franklin, of Luzerne county, a refractory member of our late Assembly, was taken a few days ago by a few of the old continental officers, and is now safely lodged with Captain Reynolds in the gaol of this city, where he is to remain without bail or main-prize, until he is impeached with the infamous nineteen members who had the audacity to attempt the breaking up of the late House of Assembly at the close of the last session, after wasting L1067 10s. of the public's money, without finishing any part of the business the House had been sitting upon. 14

Mr. Oswald: I have put on my spectacles and read with attention the proposed federal constitution, and find that the right of citizenship, if it is adopted, will meet with a very material change in one clause in the tenth section, "No person except a natural born citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years and been fourteen years a resident within the United States." Now, I would only ask if this is not very improper? The Americans ought not to be governors, they ought to be governed-let them cultivate the soil, and Europeans govern. What American in the United States is capable of governing or being President? O! it is a horrid constitution! Methinks the whole of it is damnable. What do you think, Mr. Oswald?

A GAUL. 15

———

According to advertisement, a very great concourse of people attended at the state-house on Saturday evening, to fix on a ticket of representatives for the ensuing General Assembly.

Mr. Nixon was chosen chairman and Mr. Tench Cote secretary of the meeting.

Mr. Jackson having spoken, Mr. Gurney reported from a committee that had been previously appointed, the following names, which were separately offered to the consideration of the citizens and approved of, viz.: William Will, Thomas Fitzsimons, George Clymer, Jacob Hiltzheimer, William Lewis.

On motion of Mr. Donaldson, the citizens of the respective wards were requested to meet on Monday evening to appoint proper persons for making out and circulating a sufficient number of tickets in favor of the above persons.

Mr. Wilson then rose and delivered a long and eloquent speech upon the principles of the federal constitution as proposed by the late convention. The outlines of this speech we shall endeavor to lay before the public, as tending to reflect great light upon the interesting subject now in general discussion.

Mr. Chairman and Fellow Citizens: Having received the honor of an appointment to represent you in the late convention, it is perhaps my duty to comply with the request of many gentlemen whose characters and judgments I sincerely respect, and who have urged that this would be a proper occasion to lay before you any information which will serve to explain and elucidate the principles and arrangements of the constitution that has been submitted to the consideration of the United States. I confess that I am unprepared for so extensive and so important a disquisition; but the insidious attempts which are clandestinely and industriously made to pervert and destroy the new plan, induce me the more readily to engage in its defence; and the impressions of four months' constant attention to the subject, have not been so easily effaced as to leave me without an answer to the objections which have been raised.

It will be proper, however, before I enter into the refutation of the charges that are alleged, to mark the leading discrimination between the State constitutions and the constitution of the United States. When the people established the powers of legislation under their separate governments, they invested their representatives with every right and authority which they did not in explicit terms reserve; and therefore upon every question respecting the jurisdiction of the House of Assembly, if the frame of government is silent, the jurisdiction is efficient and complete. But in delegating federal powers, another criterion was necessarily introduced, and the congressional power is to be collected, not from tacit implication, but from the positive grant expressed in the instrument of the union. Hence, it is evident, that in the former case everything which is not reserved is given; but in the latter the reverse of the proposition prevails, and everything which is not given is reserved.

This distinction being recognized, will furnish an answer to those who think the omission of a bill of rights a defect in the proposed constitution; for it would have been superfluous and absurd to have stipulated with a federal body of our own creation, that we should enjoy those privileges of which we are not divested, either by the intention or the act that has brought the body into existence. For instance, the liberty of the press, which has been a copious source of declamation and opposition—what control can proceed from the Federal government to shackle or destroy that sacred palladium of national freedom ? If, indeed, a power similar to that which has been granted for the regulation of commerce had been granted to regulate literary publications, it would have been as necessary to stipulate that the liberty of the press should be preserved inviolate, as that the impost should be general in its operation. With respect likewise to the particular destrict of ten miles, which is to be made the seat of federal government, it will undoubtedly be proper to observe this salutary precaution, as there the legistive power will be exclusively lodged in the President, Senate, and House of Representatives of the United States. But this could not be an object with the Convention, for it must naturally depend upon a future compact, to which the citizens immediately interested will, and ought to be, parties; and there is no reason to suspect that so popular a privilege will in that case be neglected. In truth, then, the proposed system possesses no influence whatever upon the press, and it would have been merely nugatory to have introduced a formal declaration upon the subject—nay, that very declaration might have been construed to imply that some degree of power was given, since we undertook to define its extent.

Another objection that has been fabricated against the new constitution, is expressed in this disingenious form—" The trial by jury is abolished in civil cases." I must be excused, my fellow citizens, if upon this point I take advantage of my professional experience to detect the futility of the assertion. Let it be remembered then, that the business of the Federal Convention was not local, but general—not limited to the views and establishments of a single State, but coextensive with the continent, and comprehending the views and establishments of thirteen independent sovereignities. When, therefore, this subject was in discussion, we were involved in difficulties which pressed on all sides, and no precedent could be discovered to direct our course. The cases open to a trial by jury differed in the different States. It was therefore impracticable, on that ground, to have made a general rule The want of uniformity would have rendered any reference to the practice of the States idle and useless; and it could not with any propriety be said that, " The trial by jury shall be as heretofore," since there has never existed any federal system of jurisprudence, to which the declaration could relate. Besides, it is not in all cases that the trial by jury is adopted in civil questions; for cases depending in courts of admiralty, such as relate to maritime captures, and such as are agitated in courts of equity, do not require the intervention of that tribunal. How, then was the line of discrimination to be drawn? The Convention found the task too difficult for them, and they left the business as it stands, in the fullest confidence that no danger could possibly ensue, since the proceedings of the Supreme Court are to be regulated by the Congress, which is a faithful representation of the people; and the oppression of government is effectually barred, by declaring that in all criminal cases the trial by jury shall be preserved.

This constitution, it has been further urged, is of a pernicious tendency, because it tolerates a standing army in the time of peace. This has always been a topic of popular declamation; and yet I do not know a nation in the world which has not found it necessary and useful to maintain the appearance of strength in a season of the most profound tranquility. Nor is it a novelty with us; for under the present articles of confederation, Congress certainly possesses this reprobated power, and the exercise of that power is proved at this moment by her cantonments along the banks of the Ohio. But what would be our national situation were it otherwise? Every principle of policy must be subverted, and the government must declare war, before they are prepared to carry it on. Whatever may be the provocation, however important the object in view, and however necessary dispatch and secrecy may be, still the declaration must precede the preparation, and the enemy will be informed of your intention, not only before you are equipped for an attack, but even before you are fortified for a defence. The consequence is too obvious to require any further delineation, and no man who regards the dignity and safety of his country can deny the necessity of a military force, under the control and with the restrictions which the new constitution provides.

Perhaps there never was a charge made with less reasons than that which predicts the institution of a baneful aristocracy in the federal Senate. This body branches into two characters, the one legislative and the other executive. In its legislative character it can effect no purpose, without the cooperation of the House of Representatives, and in its executive character it can accomplish no object without the concurrence of the President. Thus fettered, I do not know any act which the Senate can of itself perform, and such dependence necessarily precludes every idea of influence and superiority. But I will confess that in the organization of this body a compromise between contending interests is descernible; and when we reflect how various are the laws, commerce, habits, population and extent of the confederated States, this evidence of mutual concession and accommodation ought rather to command a generous applause, than to excite jealousy and reproach. For my part, my admiration can only be equalled by my astonishment in beholding so perfect a system formed from such heterogeneous materials.

The next accusation I shall consider is that which represents the federal constitution, as not only calculated, but designedly framed, to reduce the State governments to mere corporations, and eventually to annihilate them. Those who have employed the term corporation upon this occasion are not perhaps aware of its extent. In common parlance, indeed, it is generally applied to petty associations for the ease and convenience of a few individuals; but in its enlarged sense, it will comprehend the government of Pennsylvania, the existing union of the States, and even this projected system is nothing more than a formal act of incorporation. But upon what pretence can it be alleged that it was designed to annihilate the State governments? For I will undertake to prove that upon their existence depends the existence of the Federal plan. For this purpose, permit me to call your attention to the manner in which the President, Senate and House of Representatives are proposed to be appointed. The President is to be chosen by electors, nominated in such manner as the legislature of each State may direct; so that if there is no legislature there can be no electors, and consequently the office of President cannot be supplied.

The Senate is to be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature; and, therefore, if there is no Legislature, there can be no Senate. The House of Representatives is to be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several States, and the electors in. each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature; unless, therefore, there is a State Legislature, that qualification cannot be ascertained, and the popular branch of the federal constitution must be extinct. From this view, then, it is evidently absurd to suppose that the annihilation of the seperate governments will result from their union; or, that having that intention, the authors of the new system would have bound their connection with such indissoluble ties. Let me here advert to an arrangement highly advantageous, for you will perceive, without prejudice to the powers of the Legislature in the election of Senators, the people at large will acquire an additional privilege in returning members to the House of Representatives; whereas, by the present confederation, it is the Legislature alone that appoints the delegates to Congress.

The power of direct taxation has likewise been treated as an improper delegation to the federal government; but when we consider it as the duty of that body to provide for the national safety, to support the dignity of the union, and to discharge the debts contracted upon the collected faith of the States for their common benefit, it must be acknowledged that those upon whom such important obligations are imposed, ought in justice and in policy to possess every means requisite for a faithful performance of their trust. But why should we be alarmed with visionary evils? I will venture to predict that the great revenue of the United States must, and always will, be raised by impost, for, being at once less obnoxious and more productive, the interest of the government will be best promoted by the accommodation of the people. Still, however, the objects of direct taxation should be within reach in all cases of emergency; and there is no more reason to apprehend oppression in the mode of collecting a revenue from this resource, than in the form of an impost, which, by universal assent, is left to the authority of the federal government. In either case, the force of civil institutions will be adequate to the purpose; and the dread of military violence, which has been assiduously disseminated, must eventually prove the mere effusion of a wild imagination or a factious spirit. But the salutary consequences that must flow from thus enabling the government to receive and support the credit of the union, will afford another answer to the objections upon this ground. The State of Pennsylvania particularly, which has encumbered itself with the assumption of a great proportion of the public debt, will derive considerable relief and advantage; for, as it was the imbecility of the present confederation which gave rise to the funding law, that law must naturally expire, when a competent and energetic federal system shall be substituted—the State will then be discharged from an extraordinary burthen, and the national creditor will find it to be his interest to return to his original security.

After all, my fellow-citizens, it is neither extraordinary or unexpected that the constitution offered to your consideration should meet with opposition. It is the nature of man to pursue his own interest in preference to the public good, and I do not mean to make any personal reflection when I add that it is the interest of a very numerous, powerful and respectable body to counteract and destroy the excellent work produced by the late convention. All the officers of government and all the appointments for the administration of justice and the collection of the public revenue, which are transferred from the individual to the aggregate sovereignty of the States, will necessarily turn the stream of influence and emolument into a new channel. Every person, therefore, who enjoys or expects to enjoy a place of profit under the present establishment, will object to the proposed innovation; not, in truth, because it is injurious to the liberties of his country, but because it affects his schemes of wealth and consequence. I will confess, indeed, that I am not a blind admirer of this plan of government, and that there are some parts of it which, if my wish had prevailed, would certainly have been altered. But, when I reflect how widely men differ in their opinions, and that every man (and the observation applies likewise to every State) has an equal pretension to assert his own, I am satisfied that anything nearer to perfection could not have been accomplished. If there are errors, it should be remembered that the seeds of reformation are sown in the work itself, and the concurrence of two-thirds of the Congress may at any time introduce alterations and amendments. Regarding it, then, in every point of view, with a candid and disinterested mind, I am bold to assert that it is the best form of government which has ever been offered to the world.

Mr. Wilson's speech was frequently interrupted with loud and unanimous testimonies of approbation, and the applause which was reiterated at the conclusion evinced the general sense of its excellence, and the conviction which it had impressed upon every mind.

Dr. Rush then addressed the meeting in an elegant and pathetic style, describing our present calamitous situation, and enumerating the advantages which would flow from the adoption of the new system of federal government. The advancement of commerce, agriculture, manufactures, arts and sciences, the encouragement of emigration, the abolition of paper money, the annihilation of party, and the prevention of war, were ingeniously considered as the necessary consequences of that event. The doctor concluded with an emphatic declaration—"Were this the last moment of his existence, his dying request and injunction to his fellow citizens would be, to accept and support the offered constitution."

Mr. Gurney moved that a committee be appointed to write and publish answers, under the authority of their names, to the anonymous pieces against the federal constitution. But Mr. Donaldson observing that it would be improper to expose any particular gentleman to a personal attack, Col. Gurney's motion was withdrawn.

The thanks of the meeting being presented to the chairman, the business of the evening was closed.16

———

Messers. Printers—Please to republish the following, and oblige "A Constant Reader:"

The arguments of the Honorable Mr. Wilson, expressed in the speech that he made at the State House on the Saturday preceding the general election, although extremely ingenious, and the best that could be adduced in support of so bad a cause, are yet extremely futile, and will not stand the test of investigation.

In the first place, Mr. Wilson pretends to point out a leading discrimination between the State constitution and the constitution of the United States. In the former, he says, every power which is not reserved is given, and in the latter, every power which is not given is reserved. And this may furnish an answer, he adds, to those who object that a bill of rights has not been introduced in the proposed federal constitution. If this doctrine is true, and since it is the only security that we are to have for our natural rights, it ought at least to have been clearly expressed in the plan of government. The second section of the present articles of confederation says: Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every lower, jurisdiction and right which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled. This declaration (for what purpose I know not) is entirely omitted in the proposed constitution. And yet there is a material difference between this constitution and the present confederation, for Congress in the latter are merely an executive body; it has no power to raise money, it has no judicial jurisdiction. In the other, on the contrary, the federal rulers are vested with each of the three essential powers of government-their laws are to be paramount to the laws of the different States: what then will there be to oppose to their encroachments? Should they ever pretend to tyrannize over the people, their standing army will silence every popular effort; it will be theirs to explain the powers which have been granted to them; Mr. Wilson's distinction will be forgot, denied or explained away, and the liberty of the people will be no more.

It is said in the second section of the third article of the federal plan: "The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution." It is very clear that under this clause, the tribunal of the United States may claim a right to the cognizance of all offences against the general government, and libels will not probably be excluded. Nay, those offences may be by them construed, or by law declared, misprision of treason, an offence which conies literally under their express jurisdiction. Where is then the safety of our boasted liberty of the press? And in case of a conflict of jurisdiction between the courts of the United States, and those of the several commonwealths, is it not easy to foresee which of the two will obtain the advantage?

Under the enormous power of the new confederation, which extends to the individuals as well as to the States of America, a thousand means may be devised to destroy effectually the liberty of the press. There is no knowing what corrupt and wicked judges may do in process of time, when they are not restrained by express laws. The case of John Peter Zenger, of New York, ought still to be present to our minds, to convince us how displeasing the liberty of the press is to men in high power. At any rate, I lay it down as a general rule, that wherever the powers of a government extend to the lives, the persons and properties of the subject, all of their rights ought to be clearly and expressly defined; otherwise, they have but a poor security for their liberties.

The second and most important objection to the federal plan, which Mr. Wilson pretends to be made in a disingenuous form, is the entire abolition of the trial by jury in civil cases. It seems to me that Mr. Wilson's pretended answer is much more disingenuous than the objection itself, which I maintain to be strictly founded in fact. He says, " that the cases open to trial by jury differing in the different States, it was therefore impracticable to have made a general rule." This answer is extremely futile, because a reference might easily have been made to the common law of England, which obtains through every State, and cases in the maritime and civil law courts would, of course, be excepted. I must also directly contradict Mr. Wilson when he asserts that there is no trial by jury in the courts of chancery. It cannot be unknown to a man of his high professional learning, that when-ever a difference arises about a matter of fact in the courts of equity in America or England, the fact is sent down to the courts of common law to be tried by a jury, and it is what the lawyers call a feigned issue. This method will be impracticable under the proposed form of judicial jurisdiction for the United States.

But setting aside the equivocal answers of Mr. Wilson, I have it in my power to prove that under the proposed federal constitution, the trial of facts in civil cases by a jury of the vicinage is entirely and effectually abolished, and will be absolutely impracticable. I wish the learned gentleman had explained to us what is meant by the appellate jurisdiction as to law and fact which is vested in the superior court of the United States? As he has not thought proper to do it, I shall endeavor to explain it to my fellow citizens, regretting at the same time that it has not been done by a man whose abilities are so much superior to mine. The word appeal, if I understand it right, in its proper legal signification includes the fact as well as the law, and precludes every idea of a trial by jury. It is a word of foreign growth, and is only known in England and America in those courts which are governed by the civil or ecclesiastical law of the Romans. Those courts have always been considered in England as a grievance, and have all been established by the usurpations of the eclesiastical over the civil power. It is well known that the courts of chancery in England were formerly entirely in the hands of ecclesiastics, who took advantage of the strict forms of the common law, to introduce a foreign mode of jurisprudence under the specious name of equity. Pennsylvania, the freest of the American States, has wisely rejected this establishment, and knows not even the name of a court of chancery. And, in fact, there cannot be anything more absurd than a distinction between law and equity. It might perhaps have suited those barbarous times when the law of England, like almost every other science, was perplexed with quibbles and Aristotelian distinctions, but it would be shameful to keep up in these more enlightened days. At any rate, it seems to me that there is much more equity in a trial by jury than in an appellate jurisdiction from the fact.

An appeal, therefore, is a thing unknown to the common law. Instead of an appeal from facts, it admits of a second or even third trial by different juries, and mistakes in points of law are rectified by superior courts in the form of a writ of error; and to a mere common lawyer, unskilled in the forms of the civil law courts, the words appeal from law and fact are mere nonsense and unintelligible absurdity.

But, even supposing that the superior court of the United States had the authority to try facts by juries of the vicinage, it would be impossible for them to carry it into execution. It is well known that the supreme courts of the different States, at stated times in every year, go round the different counties of their respective States to try issues of fact, which is called riding the circuits. Now, how is it possible that the supreme continental court, which we will suppose to consist at most of five or six judges, can travel at least twice in every year through the different counties of America, from New Hampshire to Kentucky and from Kentucky to Georgia, to try facts by juries of the vicinage? Common sense will not admit of such a supposition. I am therefore right in my assertion, that trial by jury in civil cases is by the proposed constitution entirely done away and effectually abolished..

Let us now attend to the consequences of this enormous innovation and daring encroachment on the liberties of the citizens. Setting aside the oppression, injustice and partiality that may take place in the trial of questions of property between man and man, we will attend to one single case, which is well worth our consideration. Let us remember that all cases arising under the new constitution and all matters between citizens of different States are to be submitted to the new jurisdiction. Suppose, therefore, that the military officers of Congress, by a wanton abuse of power, imprison the free citizens of the United States of America; suppose the excise or revenue officers (as we find in Clayton's Reports, page 44, Ward's case)—that a constable, having a warrant to search for stolen goods, pulled down the clothes of a bed in which there was a woman and searched under her shift—suppose, I say, that they commit similar or greater indignities, in such cases a trial by jury would be our safest resource, heavy damage would at once punish the offender and deter others from committing the same; but what satisfaction can we expect from a lordly court of justice, always ready to protect the officers of government against the weak and helpless citizens, and who will perhaps sit at the distance of many hundred miles from the place where the outrage was committed? What refuge shall we then have to shelter us from the iron hand of arbitrary power? O! my fellow-citizens, think of this while it is yet time, and never consent to part with the glorious privilege of trial by jury but with your lives.

But Mr. Wilson has not stopped here. He has told us that a standing army, that great support of tyrants, not only was not dangerous, but was absolutely necessary. O, my much respected fellow citizens! and are you then reduced to such a degree of insensibility, that assertions like these will not rouse your warmest resentment and indignation ? Are we then, after the experience of past ages, and the result of the enquiries of the best and most celebrated patriots have taught us to dread a standing army above all earthly evils—are we then to go over all the threadbare, common-place arguments that have been used without success by the advocates of tyranny, and which have been for a long time past so gloriusly refuted? Read the excellent Burgh in his political disquisitions on this hackneyed subject, and then say whether you think that a standing army is necessary in a free country. Even Mr. Hume, an aristocratical writer, has candidly confessed that an army is a moral distemper in a Government, of which it must at last inevitably perish (2d Burgh, 349), and the Earl of Oxford (Oxford the friend of Prance and the Pretender, the attainted Oxford), said in the British parliament, in a speech on the mutiny bill, that, "While he had breath he would speak for the liberties of his country, and against courts martial and a standing army in peace, as dangerous to the Constitution." (Ibid., page 455.) Such were the speeches even of the enemies of liberty when Britain had yet a right to be called free. But, says Mr. Wilson, " It is necessary to maintain the appearance of strength even in times of the most profound tranquillity." And what is this more than a thread-bare hackneyed argument, which has been answered over and over in different ages, and does not deserve even the smallest consideration? Had we a standing army when the British invaded our peaceful shores ? Was it a standing army that gained the battles of Lexington and Bunker Hill, and took the ill-fated Burgoyne ? Is not a well-regulated militia sufficient for every purpose of internal defence ? And which of you, my fellow citizens, is afraid of any invasion from foreign powers that our brave malitia would not be able immediately to repel ?

Mr. Wilson says, that he does not know of any nation in the world which has not found it necessary to maintain the appearance of strength in a season of the most profound tranquillity. If by this equivocal assertion he has meant to say that there is no nation in the world without a standing army in time ofpeace, he has been mistaken. I need only adduce the example of Switzerland, which, like us, is a republic, whose thirteen cantons, like our thirteen States, are under a federal government, and which besides is surrounded by the most powerful nations in Europe, all jealous of its liberty and prosperity. And yet that nation has preserved its freedom for many ages, with the sole help of a militia, and has never been known to have a standing army, except when in actual war. Why should we not follow so glorious example, and are we less able to defend our liberty without an army, than that brave but small nation, which, with its militia alone has hitherto defied all Europe?

It is said likewise, that a standing army is not a new thing in America—Congress even at this moment have a standing army on foot. I answer that precedent is not principle. Congress have no right to keep up a standing army in time of peace. If they do, it is an infringement of the liberties of the people—wrong can never be justified by wrong: but it is well known that the assertion is groundless—the few troops that are on the banks of the Ohio, were sent for the express purpose of repelling the invasion of the savages and protecting the inhabitants of the frontiers. It is our misfortune that we are never at peace with those inhuman butchers of their species, and while they remain in our neighborhood, we are always, with respect to them, in a state of war—as soon as the danger is over, there is no doubt but Congress will disband their handful of soldiers; it is therefore not true that Congress keep up a standing army in a time of peace and profound security.

The objection to the enormous powers of the President and Senate is not the least important of all, but it requires a full discussion and ample investigation. I shall take another op-portunity of laying before the public my observations upon this subject, as well as upon every other part of the new constitution. At present I shall only observe that it is an established principle in America, which pervades every one of our State constitutions, that the legislative and executive powers ought to be kept forever separate and distinct from each other; and yet in this new constitution we find there are two executive branches, each of which has more or less control over the proceedings of the Legislature. This is an innovation of the most dangerous kind upon every known principle of government, and it will be easy for me to convince my fellow citizens that it will, in the first place, create a Venetian aristocracy, and, in the end, produce an absolute monarchy.

Thus I have endeavored to answer to the best of my abilities the principal arguments of Mr. Wilson. I have written this in haste, in a short interval of leisure from my usual avocations. I have only traced the outlines of the subject, and I hope some abler hand will second my honest endeavors.

A DEMOCRATIC FEDERALIST. 17

———

From a Correspondent.—A medical gentleman speaking to one of his frinds about the piece signed Centinel, asked him if he had seen the couching needle. It seems that that gentleman is justly apprehensive that many citizens are afflicted with the cataract, and that this excellent piece will be of great use to remove the inspissation of the crystalline humor of their eyes. (Johnson.)

Those who say that the petition presented to the Legislature, praying them to call a convention to adopt the new federal plan, assert what is not strictly true. There were not above 3,000 signatures from the whole city and Liberties, and it is well known that the city alone contains 5,000 taxables; the districts of Southwark and the Northern Liberties may contain about 2,000, which makes 7,000. Here then are 4,ooo who have not signed; and now deduct from the number of signers the minors, foreigners and old women, who have subscribed this famous petition, and see whether there is any ground for the assertion that was made in the House of Assembly, and echoed and re-echoed afterwards out of doors, and judge also whether there are no more than five persons opposed to this precious new plan.

THE COUCHING NEEDLE. 18

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Mr. Printer: The Centinel in your paper of last Friday, compliments the citizens of Philadelphia when he says, " A Frenzy of enthusiasm has actuated them in their approbation of the proposed federal constitution, before it was possible that it could be the result of a rational investigation." This, however, is trivial, compared with the sequel, wherein he charges the worthy and very patriotic characters of whom the late convention was composed, with a conspiracy against the liberty of their country. Not even the immortal Washington, nor the venerable Franklin, escapes his satire; but both of them, says this insidious enemy to his country, were non compos mentis when they concurred in framing the new federal constitution. When he ventured to make these assertions against characters so very respectable, he should have been able to support the charge. One of his objections to this constitution is, that each State is to have two senators, and not a number proportioned to its inhabitants. Here he has fallen into a terrible inconsistency, not recollecting that such is the mode of electing members of the Supreme Executive Council in this State, where every county appoints one, and only one, without any regard had to the number of taxble inhabitants in the respective counties. Yet he has gone so far in panegyrics upon the constitution of this State, as to maintain that a similar one would be the best that could be devised for the United States.

Had the different members of the Convention entertained sentiments thus narrow, local, contracted and selfish, each would have proposed the constitution of his own State, and they would never have united in forming that incomparable one which is now exhibited to our view, and which, without partiality to any particular State, is adapted to the general circumstances of all.

I am happy to find the distinction of Republican and Constitutionalist in this city has given way to the more important one of Federalist and Antifederalist. Such a worthy example will, I trust, be imitated through every part of this State.

To conclude, sir, if some person of better abilities should not step forth in defence of the form of government proposed by the Convention, I shall hold myself bound, in duty to the welfare of my country, to expose upon a future occasion the weakness and futility of Centinel's arguments, together with the motives which urged him to undertake the infamous job. I shall not, however, retort his torrents of personal invective, but shall take notice of the sophistry he has made use of, so far as it is calculated to mislead the citizens of Pennsylvania, or of the adjacent states.

A FEDERALIST. 19

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Mr. Oswald: I have read without spectacles the proposed Federal Constitution, and I see with the most heartfelt pleasure the resemblance that it bears to that of our much admired Sublime Porte. Your President general will greatly resemble in his powers the mighty Ahdul Ahmed, our august Sultan—the senate will be his divan—your standing army will come in the place of our janizaries—your judges unchecked by vile juries may with great propriety be styled cadis ; and bishop Seabury will be your mufti. Oh ! I am delighted with this new Constitution—is it not a charming, a beautiful form of government? What do you think, Aga Oswald? What do you say, you Christian dog?

Allah ekber, allah illallah, Mohammed resul allah!

A TURK. 20

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Mr. Printer: The authors of a late publication in your paper, signed Centinel, which has represented Doctor Franklin as a fool from age, and General Washington as a fool from nature, and which is replete with the grossest falsehoods and absurdities, have concluded their address with some lines from Shakespeare. The only answer that such an infamous libel upon distinguished merit, truth and liberty, is entitled to, may be taken from the works of a British poet of equal fame.

The Convention

"Did but teach the age to quit their clogs,
By the plain rules of ancient liberty:
When lo! a barbarous noise surrounded them—
Of owls, and cuckows, asses, apes, and dogs."    MILTON 21

Montgomery County, October 8th, 1787.

———

Extract of a letter from Sussex (Delaware), September 29.

" I must not forget to mention by way of postscript, that one of the newspapers of your city, some time in August last, by the accidental transposition of a single letter, occasioned an explanation that has afforded some merriment. The paper, instead of the words United States read Untied States. A farmer of my acquaintance in reading over the paper was at a loss what to make of the matter. " Untied States, Untied States, (said he) what can this mean? certainly it cannot mean that our governments are dissolved." The same evening he carried the paper to old Mr. G——, who, you know, keeps a school in the neighborhood, and desired an explanation. Mr. G——, after putting on his spectacles to prevent a possibility of deception, examined the paragraph, and found what the man said to be true. " It is even as you say, John, (replied he) and I think it can mean nothing more than that the States are, or shortly will be, no longer bound by their old Constitutions: that is, they will be completely untied from them, as soon as the new Constitution comes abroad!" 21

———

A correspondent observes that the opposers of the federal constitution are secretly affecting delay in order to prevent its adoption. In the mean time, they are moving heaven and earth to prejudice the public mind against it. They do not reason, but abuse—General Washington, they (in effect) say, is a dupe, and Doctor Franklin, an old fool—vide the Centinel. They will doubtless in their next publications, assert that Daniel Shays is the best patriot in the United States, and that John Franklin should be king of Pennsylvania.

He further observes, that as delay is the means by which they are contriving to carry their point, they are about sending deputies to find out Lycurgus, the ancient lawgiver of the Spartans, whose death has never been clearly ascertained. Their errand is to invite him among us, that he may form another federal constitution. That until Lycurgus shall come, it will not be proper to adopt the constitution proposed by the convention, as he having lived two thousand years, will be able to frame a better one. They have agreed that when he shall come, they will renounce their offices as too profitable for his frugal plan of government, or will at least take their fees and salaries in iron, instead of gold and silver, pound for pound. But until Lycurgus come, they will hold their present offices and take their fees and salaries in gold and silver, as will be very convenient.

He further asks, whether any man of common sense believes we shall have another federal convention if the present plan is not adopted?—whether the complying States can believe Pennsylvania to be serious in her federal professions, if she rejects a plan recommended by men so experienced, able and upright, as the late convention, especially after so full a consideration of the subject ?

He is curious to know what men will be named who are likely to form a better plan-and whether the nineteen seceding members, the Centinel and the Old Whig, are to be of the number-lastly, if they are, whether they are prepared to give security to their constituents that they will not desert their duty and make another secession when the salvation of their country depends on their keeping their posts. 22

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Were it possible to suppress the honest indignation of patriotism, or to stifle that resentment which arises against the foes of persecuted America, while we behold the boasted freedom of her press prostituted to the purposes of her bitterest enemies—yet would the soldier, who has fought and bled by the side of his beloved chief (while many of these miscreants mingled in the opposing ranks), have cause to reproach himself did he silently suffer his respected name to be thus vilified by the base agents of Europe, or the baser parricides of America, who (under the cloak of concern lest the liberties of this land should be exposed to danger from the determinations of a Washington, a Franklin, a Livingston, a Rutledge, a Dickinson, a Madison, a Morris, a Hamilton), are allowed to act a part for which the laws of Athens would have consigned them to the gibbet. No, Mr. Printer, the honest American, who, in asserting the freedom of the western world, wasted his youth and impaired his fortune, has a right to look for protection from the government in his old age-and he will rather rise in vengeance than submit to be thus abused by the Briton, the Gaul, the Spaniard, the Turk, or the turn-coat American—and whether they act in their distinct capacities of agents for their several countries, or are leagued with the detestable placemen of our own country, in opposing the establishment of the Federal Constitution, that first production of political wisdom and integrity, they are alike the objects of a just resentment, from which neither the gold of Europe, nor the friendship of apostate Americans, will be able to protect them.

DENTATUS. 23

———

Mr. Oswald: Methinks by this time you are more fully convinced of the justice of my remarks on the federal constitution. I am astonished that so many of the Americans were so stupidly ignorant of their real interest as to run headlong with an enthusiastic spirit or mistaken zeal, and sign petitions to the late House of Assembly praying for the calling of a State convention, for the adoption of so wild a system of government; for the Americans, as I observed before, are unfit to govern themselves. Judge B——n, Dr.E——g, C—— P——t, J——n, B. S——b and Johnny S——y, who are the only men of good sense in Pennsylvania, were convinced of the absurdity of such a constitution the moment I discovered to them its design. A writer under the signature of A Turk, shows clearly what designing men would be at. He says: " I see with heart-felt pleasure the resemblance that it 24 bears to our much admired Sublime Porte. Your President-general will greatly resemble in his powers the mighty Abdul Ahmed, our august Sultan; the Senate will be his Divan; your standing army will come in the place of our janizaries; your judges unchecked by vile juries," &c. Such a government no doubt would be pleasing to him, provided he should be chosen the Sultan of the empire. 0! methinks it is damnable. I love our present government from its extensive liberty; as our Supreme Executive Council of this State can appoint me sworn interpreter of the English as well as the foreign languages, with a salary of £5OO a year, to expound the laws to them, and let the people pledge themselves to each other to support and carry into execution the wholesome and wise laws that are made under the present constitution, and there needs be no new form of government in Pennsylvania. What do you think, Mr. Oswald ?

A GAUL. 25

———

Mr. Oswald: I wish your correspondent, Dentatus, would be pleased to tell us who are those bitterest enemies of America, who, while the American soldier fought by the side of his beloved chief, mingled in the opposing ranks, and who now are writing against the proposed federal constitution? Is it not a shame to have recourse to such base lies in order to support the cause of tyranny and aristocratic power? But, Mr. Oswald, to confound your toothless Dentatus and his compeers, I think I am well grounded to assure you that many of the paragraphs and pieces which have appeared in the newspapers in favor of the new constitution, were written by a person who was, during the late war, a sergeant in the British army in America.

MORSUS. 26

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

Mr. Oswald: It is a pretty cunning trick of the aristocratical party to fill the papers with ludicrous pieces under the signatures of "Britons," " Gauls," " Spaniards," and even " Turks," against the proposed federal constitution, in order to make you believe that the opposition that is made to it arises chiefly from foreigners and foreign agents. But I hope my fellow citizens will not suffer themselves to be deceived by this thread-bare piece of political jockeyism. Look around you, Mr. Oswald, ask the British and other foreign agents their opinion of the new constitution, and you will find them all open-mouthed, bellowing forth its praises. How could it be otherwise, when its principles are so similiar to those of the constitutions of their own respective countries, which they have sucked with their milk? It is well known that all the foreign ministers at New York have declared in favor of this new form of government, and it is suspected that they have not been inactive in endeavoring to bring it about. What say the British Consuls in every part of the continent? Are they ever seen to mix or keep company with those who oppose the pretended federal plan ? No; they would think themselves polluted to mix with any of the brave Whigs, who after having defended their liberties from the British tyrant, will not suffer them to be laid prostrate by tyrants of their own creating. This new proposed form of government is much better suited to their views than any other, because it will be much easier for them to deal with a single magistrate and a handful of senators, who are to remain six years in office, and may be re-elected during their lives, than with a a numerous Congress, annually elected, who cannot preserve their appointment longer than three years in six, and consequently are in a constant state of fluctuation. Away then with such perfidious insinuations ! Those who are intent upon pursuing the interest of foreign princes in America will never suffer this country to preserve its liberties. Their most earnest wish is to see us under a tyrannical government, lest we should become too formidable.

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN.27

———

To the Freemen of Pennsylvania.

Friends and Fellow Citizens : Conscious of no other motives than those with which the love of my country in-spires me, permit me to request your candid, impartial and unprejudiced attention, while I address you on business of the utmost importance to every honest American-a busine of no less magnitude than the salvation of the United States.

I need hardly tell you, what is universally allowed, that our situation is now more precarious than it ever has been, even at that time when our country was laid waste by the sanguinary armies of Britain and her mercenary allies, and when our coasts were infested with her hostile fleets. Then a sense of the common danger united every heroic, every patriotic soul in the great cause of liberty. Even selfishness itself, forgetting every narrow, contracted idea, gave way to that diffusive liberality of sentiment, which was so instrumental in procuring peace and independence to America.

But ever since that memorable epoch, unanimity, the great source of national happiness and glory, has been banished from among us, and discord, with all its cursed attendants, has succeeded in its stead. Such a train of calamities issued from this fatal change as at length aroused the virtuous citizens of the different States from their lethargy, and excited in them a desire of exploring, and of removing the cause. Nor was the former a different task. Our distresses were immediately discovered to be inevitable effects of a weak, a disunited, and a despicable federal government. To effect the latter, delegates were sent by twelve of the States to the late Federal Convention, who, after four months' deliberation, at length agreed upon a plan of government for the United States, which is now submitted to your consideration. Upon this proposed federal constitution I mean not to bestow my useless panegyrics at this time. My slender praise might cast an odium upon what is in itself truly excellent, and needs but a candid reading to be admired. Suspended, as the fate of the United States now is, how immensely base must the wretch be, who strains every nerve to disunite his fellow-citizens, and by a long train of sophistical arguments. strives to establish antifederal sentiments in this State ! Yet, however strange it may seem, such there are among us. One antifederal piece signed " Centinel," which is replete with glaring absurdities and complete nonsense, has been industriously circulated among you, in the newspapers and in hand-bills. The author (I should have said authors) of this illiberal and scandalous performance, remarks that a "frenzy of enthusiasm," not "a rational investigation into its principles, actuated the citizens of Philadelphia in their approbation of the proposed plan " of government. As some drunken men think every person they see is intoxicated, and as an illiterate observer on this earth is apt to believe in the sun's motion, not discerning that its apparent revolution is the effect of his own real motion, so has "Centinel" charged others with neglecting that rational investigation, to which he has paid very little attention. For if he carefully examines the proposed constitution, he will find that he has either ignorantly, or designedly, perverted its plain and simple construction. He seems to think that the citizens of Philadelphia ought to have suspended their judgment till they had know the result of his rational investigation. For, says the profound politician, " Those who are competent to the task of developing the principles of government ought to be encouraged to come forward, and thereby the better enable the people to make a proper judgment. For the science of government is so abstruse, that few are able to judge for themselves." He certainly must have forgot that he was addressing American freemen, who enjoy the darling prerogative of thinking for themselves. Such political priestcraft might have answered some purpose in the early ages of ignorance and superstition, when a set of artful and designing monks assumed an absolute control over both the purses and con-sciences of the people. But thanks to heaven ! we live in an enlightened age, and in a free country, where such pernicious doctrine has long since been treated with deserved contempt.

He begins with enumerating "certain privileges secured to you by the constitution of tins Commonwealth," which, notwithstanding his groundless assertions, are not infringed in the smallest degree by the proposed federal constitution, which obliges Congress to guarantee to each State its respective republican form of government. Whatever he may think of the matter, a firm union of all the States is certainly necessary to procure happiness and prosperity to America. In vain do we look up to the constitution or legislature of this State; they cannot alleviate our distresses.

Is it in the power of Pennsylvania to protest her own trade, by entering into commercial treaties with the nations of Europe, and thereby to secure a West India or an European market for her produce? No. Is it in her power to treat with and obtain from Spain a free navigation of the river Mississippi, to which God and nature have given us an undoubted right? The impoverished state of our Western country, where the luxuriant crops of a fertile soil are suffered to rot in the fields, for want of exportation, answers No. Is it in her power to encourage our infant manufactures, to give sustenance to our starving mechanics, to prevent a general bankruptcy, or to raise a revenue, by laying an impost on foreign goods imported into this State? No. All her attempts are liable to be counteracted by any neighboring State; for it is well known that the imposts have been frequently evaded in this State, and always will while Jersey and Delaware open free ports for the reception of foreign wares. So that the exigencies of government must necessarily be provided for by a heavy land tax, which you, my fellow citizens, have groaned under for some years past with surprising patience and resignation. Should some desperate ruffians, as a Shays or a Wyoming Franklin, with an armed banditti at his back, proceed to murder our defenceless inhabitants, has Pennsylvania the means of speedily repelling their ravages? No. Before the necessary steps could be taken for a defence, her towns might be laid in ruins and her fields deluged with the blood of her helpless citizens. And oh! distracting thought! the citizens of the neighboring States would abandon us to our unhappy fate; nor would they deign to shed a tear of pity on our funeral urn. It would be an endless talk to give a detail of all the cases in which the exertions of individual States cannot afford the smallest relief. An idea of thirteen neighboring States being able to exist independent of each other, without a general government, to control, connect and unite the whole, is no less absurd than was the conduct of the limbs, in the fable, which refused to contribute to the support of the belly, and by working its downfall, accelerated their own ruin. Of this every State in the Union is fully convinced, by awful experience, unless we except Rhode Island; for the meridian of which "Centinel" has calculated his Antifederal remarks, which he has had the presumption to address to the freemen of Pennsylvania.

Afraid of investigating the constitution itself, he previously attempts to prejudice you against it by charging the patriotic members of the convention with a design "of lording it over their fellow-creatures" and with "long meditated schemes of power and aggrandizement." Is it possible that the freemen of America would appoint such men as these to so important a trust? No. The public characters of the gentlemen who were chosen by my respectable fellow-citizens in the different States are such as at once justify their con-duct in the choice, and contradict the unjust and ungenerous assertion. This defamer has even dared to let fly his shafts at a Washington and a Franklin, who, he tells you, have been so mean, ignorant and base as to be dupes to the de-signs of the other members. Is not every man among you fired with resentment against the wretch who could under-take a job thus low, infamous and vile, and who was so prone to slander as wantonly to traduce names dear to every American—names, if not respected and esteemed, at least admired even by their enemies?

After having striven to inflame your passions against these worthy men, he then makes a general objection to different branches in government; here again he advances doctrine which has long since been exploded as dangerous and despotic. That a single legislative body is more liable to encroach upon the liberties of the people than two who hold an useful check upon the proceedings of each other he does not attempt to deny, but asserts that one body will be more responsible to the people than two or more can be; therefore, after this body shall have erred, the people can immediately take vengeance of its members, that is, if I may be indulged with a trite saying, after the steed is stolen lock the stable door. Had he proceeded in the same mode of reasoning, he might have proved that an elective monarchy is the best government, for it is certainly the most responsible, since one man is accountable for every grievance. In truth, my friends, you will easily perceive that this responsibility, which he lays so much stress on, is by no means sufficient to secure your liberties. If you enquire into the effects of san-;uinary punishments upon criminals, you will find that instead of reforming they have increased the wickedness of the people.

But the convention, not content with providing punishments for the misdemeanors of government, have done wiser, n endeavoring to prevent these misdemeanors, which was evidently their intention in new modeling the federal government.

He next complains of the too extensive powers of Congress. It will not be controverted," says he, "that the legislative s the highest delegated power in government, and that all others are subordinate to it." In this I perfectly agree with him, and am apt to believe, that had he paused here one moment, he would not have been so ready to fear an aristocracy n any branch of the new federal government; since the most essential parts of legislation are to be vested in the House of Representatives, the immediate servants of the people, with whom all money bills must originate.

He is ready to allow Congress to pay the debts of the Union; but then, they are to have power to lay and collect duties, imposts, &c., which the new constitution declares shall be uniform throughout the United States; here the word collect seems to stick in his stomach. What ! says he, will they have power to enforce the payment of taxes? Oh! it is dangerous to invest them with such authority; they ought to call upon us as heretofore, and leave it at our option to comply with their requisitions or not. Such is the reasoning of this advocate for delinquency, the absurdity of whose political creed is self-apparent, and needs no comment. Happy would it be for Pennsylvania, if the different States were obliged to pay their proportions of the foreign and domestic debt; she would not then be struggling under an enormous land tax, to pay much more than her just quota of the public burthens. But, says he, there is a possibility of having standing armies too. This is quite wrong; let Congress have power to make war, crush insurrections, &c., but let them have no troops for these purposes, unless each State shall think proper to furnish its quota of men; or if we vest the power of raising armies in Congress, let them be tied down, and not permitted to raise a single regiment, until an invasion shall have actually taken place, and the enemy shall have ravaged and spread desolation over five or six of the States; it will then be time enough. Indeed I think we ought immediately to disband the troops stationed on the Ohio, and not raise a man for that service before the savages shall have laid our country waste, as far as Susquehanna at least. Why need we trouble ourselves about the inhabitants on the frontiers? Such truly is the substance of his arguments.

He has further discovered that the trial by jury in civil cases is abolished—that the liberty of the press is not provided for—and that the judicial and legislative powers of the respective States will be absorbed by those of the general government.

As to the first of these, it is well known that the cases which come before a jury, are not the same in all the States; that therefore the Convention found themselves unequal to the task of forming a general rule, among so many jarring interests, and left it with Congress to regulate the conduct of the judiciary in all civil cases. It may not be improper here to remark, that Congress can at any time propose amendments to this Constitution, which shall become a part of it when ratified by the legislatures or Conventions of three-fourths of the States.

True, no declaration in favor of the liberty of the press is contained in the new Constitution, neither does it declare that children of freemen are also born free. Both are alike the unalienable birthright of freemen, and equally absurd would it have been, in the Convention, to have meddled with either.

The ne plus ultra of the powers of Congress, and of the judiciary of the United States, is expressly fixed-therefore, no danger can arise to the legislative or judicial authority of any State in the union. Centinel, in discussing this point, has ransacked his brains, tortured, twisted, and preverted the new plan of government, to support his blundering assertions ; especially where he has quoted sect. 4 of the 1st Art. " The times, places, and manner, of holding elections, for senators, and representatives, shall be prescribed, in each State, by the legislature thereof ; but the Congress may at any time, by law, make or alter such regulations, except as to the place of choosing senators."

"The plain construction of which," says Centinel, "is, that when the State legislatures drop out of sight, from the necessary operation of this government, then Congress are to provide for the election and appointment of representatives, and senators." O amazing result of a rational investigation! I confess he understands the meaning of words much better than I do, if his construction of that section be just. What may Congress "make or alter?" The times, places and manner of holding elections, in the different States. But why is the place of choosing senators excepted? Who are to appoint them? Certainly, the legislatures of the respective States, who are to elect the senators in any place they may think proper, which probably will be, where they meet in their legislative capacity. The existence of every branch of the Federal government depends upon the State legislatures, and both must stand or fall together.

He next attacks the construction of the federal government, says the number of representatives is too few. Others have thought it too many. How was it possible that the Convention, in this, or indeed in any other instance, could please everybody? For my part I am of opinion that the number fixed by the Convention (one for every 30,000) is fully adequate to the task of effectually representing the people; and that a greater number would only clog the wheels, and add to the expenses of government, in which the strictest economy is at all times necessary. That two years is too long a time to continue in office is a mistaken notion; much more inconvenience and expense would be attendant on annual elections throughout this extensive continent. The most strenuous advocates for a parliamentary reform, in Great Britain, never stickled for more than triennial elections, which they deemed fully sufficient to secure the liberties of the people. This body may justly be called the guardians of our liberties, since they are not chosen by the State legislatures, as Congress has hitherto been, but by the freemen at large, in every State. No undue influence can be exercised over them, nor the Senate, for no placeinen, or officers of government, can have a seat among them.

He says the senate is constituted on the most unequal principles, since the smallest State in the Union sends as many senators as the largest. Here is a small concession to the smaller States, which proclaims the liberality of sentiment that prevailed in the convention. Let us, my friends, in the larger States, be satisfied with our superior influence in the House of Representatives. As to the senate being composed of the better sort, the well-born, etc., it is a most illiberal reflection thrown out by this antifederal demagogue against the freemen of America, who, I trust, will always elect to this important trust men of integrity and abilities. But how is there any danger of this body becoming an aristocracy? In their executive capacity they are checked by the President, and in their legislative capacity are checked by the House of Representatives, and of themselves cannot do a single act. He seems apprehensive that the President may form a coalition with the senate, "whose influence might secure his re-election to office." I cannot conceive how they can exercise any influence in his favor, for both senators and representatives are expressly excluded from being electors.

The only objection he makes to the power of the President is that he can grant pardons and reprieves. This prerogative must be and always is vested somewhere in all free governments; to whom then can it be given with more safety than to this officer, who never can have any interest in exercising it to evil purposes? If he should, he will be liable to impeachment, etc.

Previous to his conclusion he attempts to lull us into security; but his sophistry can never operate so far upon our senses as to make us believe that our situation is not "critically dreadful." The most ignorant among us severely feel the miseries which surround us on all sides. That he may be very well pleased with his present situation, I have not the smallest doubt; for it is notorious that the Antifederal junto in Philadelphia is composed of a few self-interested men, who, in the midst of our distresses, are receiving most enormous sums out of the public treasury, and like ravens are preying upon our very vitals.

A FEDERALIST. 28

———

Extract of a letter from a gentleman in the Western country to his friend in this city:

" It hath been reported that a great number of copies of the proposed constitution was directed to be printed in the English and German languages, to be distributed throughout the State. I wish it were done, that the people might have an opportunity of reading it, and judging for themselves. Much time elapses before information can reach the industrious yeomanry of the State that are distant from the seat of government. If a convention is to be chosen, the great body of the people will be ignorant of the plan to be decided upon, and be therefore unable to determine whether they ought to vote for persons who would oppose it or advocate it. If it will bear the examination of the people, who are to be bound thereby, why is such preciptancy used? " 29

———

For the Independent Gazetteer.

The bumble address of the low-born of the United States of
America, to their fellow slaves scattered throughout the world—greeting:

Whereas, it hath been represented unto us that a most dreadful disease hath for these five years last past infected, preyed upon and almost ruined the government and people of this our country; and of this malady we ourselves have had perfect demonstration, not mentally, but bodily, through every one of the five senses: For although our sensations in regard to the mind be not just so nice as those of the well born, yet our feeling, through the medium of the plow, the hoe and the grubbing ax, is as acute as any nobleman's in the world. And, whereas, a number of skillful physicians having met together at Philadelphia last summer, for the purpose of exploring, and, if possible, removing the cause of this direful disease, have, through the assistance of John Adams, Esq., in the profundity of their great political knowledge, found out and discovered that nothing but a new government, consisting of three different branches, namely, king, lords and commons, or, in the American language, President, Senate and Representatives, can save this, our country, from inevitable destruction; and, whereas, it hath been reported that several of our low-born brethren have had the horrid audacity to think for themselves in regard to this new system of government, and, dreadful thought! have wickedly begun to doubt concerning the perfection of this evangelical constitution, which our political doctors have declared to be a panacea, which (by inspiration) they know will infallibly heal every distemper in the confederation, and finally terminate in the salvation of America.

Now we the low born, that is, all the people of the United States, except 6oo or thereabouts, well born, do by this our humble address, declare and most solemnly engage, that we will allow and admit the said 6oo well born, immediately to establish and confirm this most noble, most excellent and truly divine constitution: and we further declare that without any equivocation or mental reservation whatever we will support and maintain the same according to the best of our power, and after the manner and custom of all other slaves in foreign countries, namely by the sweat and toil of our body: nor will we at any future period of time ever attempt to complain of this our royal government, let the consequences be what they may. And although it appears to us that a standing army, composed of the purgings of the jails of Great Britain, Ireland and Germany, shall be employed in collecting the revenues of this our king and goverment; yet, we again in the most solemn manner declare, that we will abide by our present determination of non-assistance and passive obedience; so that we shall not dare to molest or disturb those military gentlemen in the service of our royal government. And (which is not improbable) should any one of those soldiers when employed on duty in collecting the taxes, strike off the arm (with his sword) of one of our fellow slaves, we will conceive our case remarkably fortunate if he leaves the other arm on. And morever, because we are aware that many of our fellow slaves shall be unable to pay their taxes, and this incapacity of theirs is a just cause of impeachment of treason; wherefore in such cases we will use our utmost endeavors, in conjunction with the standing army, to bring such atrocious offenders before our federal judges, who shall have power, without jury or trial, to order the said miscreants for immediate execution; nor will we think their sentence severe unless after being hanged they are also to be both be-headed and quartered. And finally we shall henceforth and forever leave all power, authority and dominion over our persons and properties in the hands of the well born, who were designed by Providence to govern. And in regard to the liberty of the press, we renounce all claim to it forever more, Amen ; and we shall in future be perfectly contented if our tongues be left us to lick the feet of our well born masters.

Done on behalf of three millions of low-born American slaves.

JOHN HUMBLE, Secretary. 30

———

To the Printers of the United States.

Gentlemen: I have been delighted with the noble struggle which the brave and virtuous throughout America have been and still are making to establish the new frame of government. I am charmed with the good sense and humanity of the people at large, who, though they are very generally warmly attached to it, yet they bear with uncommon patience all the insults hitherto thrown out against it and the gentlemen of the late convention.

The friends of the new system are not ashamed to avow their principles and their writings on the subject, while its enemies take every prudent measure to prevent detection.

I know a gentleman in this city, high in office, who has written much against the new system, notwithstanding he has never in company uttered a syllable against it. Hence I conclude that the antifederal junto are conscious of the wickedness of their proceedings—that their cause is that of the devil, and of it they are truly ashamed. It appears by a late eastern paper that the publisher of the Massachusetts Gazette is determined to publish no sentiments on this important subject unless the writers leave their names with the printers, "that any one who may be desirous of knowing the author may be informed." No honest man, no true friend of America or to the liberty or happiness of mankind, can object to this.

For your imitation, gentlemen, I humbly propose the conduct of this your worthy brother, the publisher of the Massachusetts Gazette.

A PENNSYLVANIA MECHANIC.31

26th October, 1787.

———

Mr. Oswald: Since the new constitution of Congress has been published, I have made a journey into the three counties adjoining to us, in which I had many acquaintances among honest men of both the old parties which formerly divided this State. Good manners induced me, where I was hospitably entertained, to avoid broaching the subject of our new federal constitution, as I might possibly spoil the social happiness which I (who am no party man) had been used to enjoy with my good friends, constitutionalists and republicans. My hosts could not bear this my reserve—one and the other exclaimed, "Why do you not talk to me of the new constitution?—I have seen and read it, and though I liked the men who made it, I like the constitution they have given to us much more." Others observed that the good men who have been so often tried and approved by us, may go off this uncertain stage in the course of a few passing years, but they have left a legacy which will make us and our children and our children's children as happy as a good government can make them, for hundreds of years after the framers of it are no more."God be praised!" said an old man (whose benevolence I shall long remember) "my neighbors of the Jerseys, of Delaware, New York and Maryland, will be as happy as myself." He then addressed himself to his younger child, a daughter: "Dolly, my girl, you will not go from home when you go with Jersey Dick, for we are all now one people; I shall not fear as I have done, that we who lie on the borders shall be cutting each other's throats, about bounds, smuggling and trade." One man, indeed, in a corner of one of our friendly circles, who after hunting for an office twenty years, had at last got the office of excise in his county, muttered something of Old Whig, Centinel, sixteen assemblymen, Governor Randolph, lawyer Mason, one Gerry, liberty of the press, jurymen, and that officers who had served but a few years and who had not been paid for their services should be continued for life, and many other things of the same kind, in a sullen, grumbling, ill-natured way, was at length interrupted by a decent elderly man, who as I learned had ever been a friend to his country, never a placeman, a whig from benevolence to his family, his neighbors and all whom he knew, an honest man in the worst of times, who wished the farmer might reap plentiful crops and have a good market, and that trade might flourish, that we might make as many things among ourselves as possible, that tradesmen might fare well, and as he said that the President and Senate might be able to make and keep good and sufficient treaties to insure all these solid benefits to us—says this good man, "My friend the exciseman, there in yon corner, talks of old whigs: no body can doubt of my being one of that sort, for I am an old man and always was a whig since the name was known, and have been, I am bold to say, as good a centinel among our militia in the field of battle, as any man who calls himself a Centinel in a newspaper. I think sixteen men should submit in their opinions to forty-three, when all our States approve of the conduct of the forty-three, and condemn the sixteen: and I will say the men were right who, with the sergeant of the assembly, brought the two men of the sixteen runaways back to the assembly; for if they had not done so sixteen men would have overthrown our government of Pennsylvania. Though I am no scholar, I think the speaker and the forty-three had a power from the good rule of preventing greater evils to force the whole sixteen to attend in their seats. If they have not this power, my friend the exciseman there in the corner, must lose his office, as the government and all offices, and the constitution and all, would be at an end immediately. As to Governor Randolph, I am told he is a cunning man, but no enemy to the new constitution; he only wanted to overreach another man in politics. Lawyer Mason may plead his own cause in Virginia, where it is a chance of about four hundred thousand (that being the number of people in that State) to one, that is lawyer Mason, that he is in the wrong. Besides, I may say, he has the delegates of every State against him into the bargain. That Geary will never get on farther than Rhode Island, where the bad people will keep—him, as the only man they can find out of their State, who is as bad as themselves. The liberty of printing, I find, from Burns' justice and our State constitution, is a thing quite safe already, and so is our trial by jurymen. If so, our convention would have wasted their time and our patience, my friends, if they had spent their time in making new fences where the old ones were strong enough. They had enough to do that was necessary, God knows! My friend, the exciseman, thinks that a man once in office, should continue so for his life. I must needs say, I think he may if he be a good officer; I would give him my vote that he remain exciseman as long as he lives, and longer if it was possible, if that will make him listen to reason; for neither myself nor my children, I hope, will covet any office unless it be such in which we may fight the enemies of our United States. As we begun, my friends, so let us continue united. I have often told my children of the bundle of fagots ; you may break each of them apart like the stem of this pipe (taking hold of the pipe he was then smoking), but if you bind them together, Goliah nor Sampson cannot break them." Wherever I went in this my journey I found all the good people talking in the same honest sensible way; this pleased me I will confess, for it favored an old opinion, that where passion does not twist our understandings, all upright and sensible men think in the same way. In short, that plain downright good sense which governs the honest farmer, miller, tradesman and merchant, governed the honest, tried and approved men, who sat in the late convention of these our United States.

HOMESPUN. 32

———

Mr. Oswald: By inserting the following in your impartial paper, you will oblige yours, &c. To the Citizens of Philadelphia.

Friends, countrymen, brethren and fellow-citizens: The important day is drawing near when you are to elect delegates to represent you in a convention, on the result of whose deliberations will depend in a great measure your future happiness.

This convention is to determine whether or not the commonwealth of Pennsylvania shall adopt the plan of government proposed by the late convention of delegates from the different States which sat in this city.

With a heart full of anxiety for the preservation of your dearest rights, I presume to address you on this important occasion. In the name of sacred liberty, dearer to us than our property and our lives, I request your most earnest attention.

The proposed plan of continental government is now fully known to you. You have read it, I trust, with the attention it deserves. You have heard the objections that have been made to it. You have heard the answers to these objections.

If you have attended to the whole with candor and unbiased minds, as becomes men that are possessed and deserving of freedom, you must have been alarmed at the result of your observations. Notwithstanding the splendor of names which has attended the publication of the new constitution, notwithstanding the sophistry and vain reasonings that have been urged to support its principles, alas! you must at least have concluded that great men are not always infallible, and that patriotism itself may be led into essential errors.

The objections that have been made to the new constitution are these:

1. It is not merely (as it ought to be) a Confederation of States, but a Government of individuals.
2. The powers of Congress extend to the lives, the liberties and the property of every citizen.
3. The sovereignty of the different States is ipso facto destroyed in its most essential parts.
4. What remains of it will only tend to create violent dissensions between the State government and the Congress, and terminate in the ruin of the one or the other.
5. The consequence must therefore be, either that the union of the States will be destroyed by a violent struggle, or that their sovereignty will be swallowed up by silent encroachments into a universal aristocracy; because it is clear, that if two different sovereign powers have a coequal command over the purses of the citizens, they will struggle for the spoils, and the weakest will be in the end obliged to yield to the efforts of the strongest.
6. Congress being possessed of these immense powers, the liberties of the States and of the people are not secured by a bill or Declaration of Rights.
7. The sovereignty of the States is not expressly reserved; the form only, and not the substance of the government, is guaranteed to them by express words.
8. Trial by Jury, that sacred bulwark of liberty, is abolished in civil cases, and Mr. W——, one of the convention, has told you, that not being able to agree as to the form of establishing this point, they have left you deprived of the substance. Here are his own words: "The subject was involved in difficulties. The convention found the task too difficult for them, and left the business as it stands."
9. The Liberty of the Press is not secured, and the powers of Congress are fully adequate to its destruction, as they are to have the trial of libels, or pretended libels against the United States, and may by a cursed abominable Stamp Act (as the Bowdoin administration has done in Massachusetts) preclude you effectually from all means of information. Mr. W—— has given no answer to these arguments.
10. Congress have the power of keeping up a standing army in time of peace, and Mr. W—— has told you that it was necessary.
11. The Legislative and Executive powers are not kept separate, as every one of the American constitutions declares they ought to be; but they are mixed in a manner entirely novel and unknown, even in the constitution of Great Britain; because,
12. In England the king only has a nominal negative over the proceedings of the legislature, which he has never dared to exercise since the days of King William, whereas by the new constitution, both the President-General and the Senate, two executive branches of Government, have that negative, and are intended to support each other in the exercise of it.
13. The representation of the lower house is too small, consisting only of 65 members.
14. That of the Senate is so small that it renders its extensive powers extremely dangerous; it is to consist only of 26 members, two-thirds of whom must concur to conclude any treaty or alliance with foreign powers. Now we will suppose that five of them are absent, sick, dead, or unable to attend; twenty-one will remain, and eight of these (one-third, and one over) may prevent the conclusion of any treaty, even the most favorable to America. Here will be a fine field for the intrigues and even the bribery and corruption of European powers.
15. The most important branches of the executive department are to be put into the hands of a single magistrate, who will in fact be an elective king. The military, the land and naval forces, are to be entirely at his disposal, and therefore,
16. Should the senate, by the intrigues of foreign powers, become devoted to foreign influence, as was the case of late in Sweden, the people will be obliged, as the Swedes have been, to seek their refuge in the arms of the monarch or President-General.
17. Rotation, that noble prerogative of liberty, is entirely excluded from the new system of government, and the great men may and probably will be continued in office during their lives.
18. Annual elections are abolished, and the people are not to re-assume their rights until the expiration of two, four and six years.
19. Congress are to have the power of fixing the time, place and manner of holding elections, so as to keep them forever subjected to their influence.
20. The importation of slaves is not to be prohibited until the year 1808, and slavery will probably resume its empire in Pennsylvania.
21. The militia is to be under the immediate command of Congress, and men conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms may be compelled to perform military duty.
22. The new government will be expensive beyond any we have ever experienced; the judicial department alone, with its concomitant train of judges, justices, chancellors, clerks, sheriffs, coroners, escheators, State attorneys and solicitors, constables, etc., in every State and in every county in each State, will be a burden beyond the utmost abilities of the people to bear, and upon the whole,
23. A government partaking of monarchy and aristocracy will be fully and firmly established, and liberty will be but a name to adorn the short historic page of the halcyon days of America.

These, my countrymen, are the objections that have been made to the new proposed system of government, and if you read the system itself with attention you will find them all to be founded in truth. But what have you been told in answer?

I pass over the sophistry of Mr. W——, in his equivocal speech at the state-house. His pretended arguments have been echoed and re-echoed by every retailer of politics, and victoriously refuted by several patriotic pens. Indeed, if you read this famous speech in a cool dispassionate moment, you will find it to contain no more than a train of pitiful sophistry and evasions, unworthy of the man who spoke them. I have taken notice of some of them in stating the objections, and they must, I am sure, have excited your pity and indignation. Mr. W—— is a man of sense, learning and extensive information; unfortunately for him, he has never sought the more solid fame of patriotism. During the late war he narrowly escaped the effects of popular rage, and the people seldom arm themselves against a citizen in vain. The whole tenor of his political conduct has always been strongly tainted with the spirit of high aristocracy; he has never been known to join in a truly popular measure, and his talents have ever been devoted to the patrician interest. His lofty carriage indicates the lofty mind that animates him-a mind able to conceive and perform great things, but which unfortunately can see nothing great out of the pale of power and worldly grandeur; despising what he calls the inferior order of the people, popular liberty and popular assemblies offer to his exalted imagination an idea of meanness and contemptibility, which he hardly seeks to conceal. He sees at a distance the pomp and pageantry of courts, he sighs after those stately palaces and that apparatus of human greatness which his vivid fancy has taught him to consider as the supreme good. Men of sublime minds, he conceives, were born a different race from the rest of the sons of men; to them and them only, he imagines, high heaven intended to commit the reins of earthly government; the remaining part of mankind he sees at an immense distance; they, he thinks, were born to serve, to administer food to the ambition of their superiors and become the footstool of their power. Such is Mr. W—, and fraught with these high ideas, it is no wonder that he should exert all his talents to support a form of government so admirably contrived to carry them into execution. But when the people, who possess collectively a mass of knowledge superior to his own, inquire into the principles of that government on the establishment or rejection of which depend their dearest concerns, when he is called upon by the voice of thousands to come and explain that favorite system which he holds forth as an object of their admiration, he comes—he attempts to support by reasoning what reason never dictated, and finding the attempt vain, his great mind, made for nobler purposes, is obliged to stoop to mean evasions and pitiful sophistry; himself not deceived, he strives to deceive the people, and the treasonable attempt delineates his true character, beyond the reach of the pencil of a West or Peale, or the pen of a Valerius.

And yet that speech, weak and insidious as it is, is the only attempt that has been made to support by argument that political monster, the proposed constitution. I have sought in vain amidst the immense heap of trash that has been published on the subject, an argument worthy of refutation, and I have not been able to find it. If you can bear the disgust which the reading of those pieces must naturally occasion, and which I have felt in the highest degree, read them, my fellow citizens, and say whether they contain the least shadow of logical reasoning, say (laying your hands upon your hearts) whether there is anything in them that can impress unfeigned conviction upon your unprejudiced minds.

One of them only I shall take notice of, in which I find that argument is weakly attempted. This piece is signed "An American Citizen," and has appeared with great pomp in four succeeding numbers in several of our newspapers. But if you read it attentively, you will find that it does not tell us what the new constitution is, but what it is not, and extols it on the sole ground that it does not contain all the principles of tyranny with which the European governments are disgraced.

But where argument entirely failed, nothing remained for the supporters of the new constitution but to endeavor to inflame your passions. The attempt has been made, and I am sorry to find not entirely without effect. The great names of Washington and Franklin have been taken in vain and shockingly prostituted to effect the most infamous purposes. What! because our august chieftain has subscribed his name in his capacity of president of the convention to the plan offered by them to the States, and because the venerable sage of Pennsylvania has testified by his signature that the majority of the delegates of this State assented to the same plan, will any one infer from this that it has met with their entire approbation, and that they consider it as the master—piece of human wisdom ? I am apt to think the contrary, and I have good reason to ground my opinion on.

In the first place we have found by the publication of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, esquire, one of the signing members of the convention, who has expressed the most pointed disapprobation of many important parts of the new plan of government, that all the members whose names appear at the bottom of this instrument of tyranny have not concurred in its adoption. Many of them might conceive themselves bound by the opinion of the majority of their State, and leaving the people to their own judgment upon the form of government offered to them, might have conceived it impolitic by refusing to sign their names, to offer to the world the lamentable spectacle of the disunion of a body on the decisions of whom the people had rested all their hopes. We know, and the long sitting of the convention tells us, that (as it is endeavored to persuade us) concord and unanimity did not reign exclusively among them. The thick veil of secrecy with which their proceedings have been covered, has left us entirely in the dark, as to the debates that took place, and the unaccountable suppression of their journals, the highest insult that could be offered to the majesty of the people, shows clearly that the whole of the new plan was entirely the work of an aristocratic majority.

But let us suppose for a moment that the proposed government was the unanimous result of the deliberations of the convention—must it on that account preclude an investigation of its merits? Are the people to be dictated to without appeal by any set of men, however great, however dignified? Freedom spurns at the idea and rejects it with disdain. We appeal to the collective wisdom of a great nation, we appeal to their general sense, which is easily to be obtained through the channel of a multitude of free presses, from the opinions of thirty-nine men, who secluded from the rest of the world, without the possibility of conferring with the rest of their fellow—citizens, have had no opportunity of rectifying the errors into which they may have been led by the most designing among them. We have seen names not less illustrious than those of the members of the late convention, subscribed to the present reprobated articles of confederation, and if those patriots have erred, there is no reason to suppose that a succeeding set should be more free from error. Nay, the very men who advocate so strongly the new plan of government, and support it with the infallibility of Doctor Franklin, affect to despise the present constitution of Pennsylvania, which was dictated and avowed by that venerable patriot. They are conscious that he does not entirely approve of the new plan, whose principles are so different from those he has established in our ever—glorious constitution, and there is no doubt that it is the reason that has induced them to leave his respected name out of the ticket for the approaching election.

Now then my fellow—citizens, my brethren, my friends; if the sacred flame of liberty be not extinguished in your breasts, if you have any regard for the happiness of yourselves, and your posterity, let me entreat you, earnestly entreat you by all that is dear and sacred to freemen, to consider well before you take an awful step which may involve in its consequences the ruin of millions yet unborn. You are on the brink of a dreadful precipice—in the name therefore of holy liberty, for which I have fought and for which we have all suffered, I call upon you to make a solemn pause before you proceed. One step more, and perhaps the scene of freedom is closed forever in America. Let not a set of aspiring despots, who make us slaves, and tell us 'tis our charter, wrest from you those in—valuable blessings, for which the most illustrious sons of America have bled and died—but exert yourselves, like men, like freemen, and like Americans, to transmit unimpaired to your latest posterity those rights, those liberties, which have ever been dear to you, and which it is yet in your power to preserve.

AN OFFICER OF THE LATE CONTINENTAL ARMY. 33

Philadelphia, November 3, 1787.

———

[Reply to "An Officer, &c."]

Friend Oswald: Seeing in thy paper of yesterday twenty—three objections to the new plan of federal government, I am induced to trouble the public once more; and shall endeavor to answer them distinctly and concisely. That this may be done with candor, as well as perspicuity, I request thee to reprint them as they are stated by "an officer of the late Continental army," and to place my answers in the same order.

I shall pass over everything that is not in point, and leave the strictures on friend W—— to those who are acquainted with him: I will only observe that "his lofty carriage," is very like to be the effect of habit; for I know by experience that a man who wears spectacles, must keep his head erect to see through them with ease, and to prevent them from falling off his nose.

Now for the objections:

"1. It is not merely (as it ought to be) a Confederation of States, but a Government of Individuals."

Answer 1. It is more a government of the people, than the present Congress ever was, because the members of Congress have been hitherto chosen by the Legislatures of the several States. The proposed representatives are to be chosen " by the people." If therefore it be not a confederation of the States, it is a popular compact, something more in favor of liberty. Art. 1, Sect. 2.

"2. The powers of Congress extend to the lives, the liberties and the property of every citizen."

2. Is there a government on earth, where the life, liberty and property of a citizen may not be forfeited by a violation of the laws of God and man? It is only when justified by such crimes, that the new government has such power; and all crimes (except in cases of impeachment) are expressly to be tried by jury, in the State where they may be committed. Art. 3, Sect. 2.

"3. The sovereignty of the different states is ipso facto destroyed in its most essential parts."

3. Can the sovereignty of each state in all its parts exist, if there be a sovereignty over the whole? Is it not nonsense in terms, to suppose a united government of any kind, over thirteen co—existent sovereignties? "It is obviously impracticable in the federal government of these states, to secure all the rights of independent sovereignty to each, and yet provide for the interest and safety of all." (President's letter.)

"4. What remains of it, will only tend to create violent dissensions between the state governments and the Congress, and terminate in the ruin of the one or the other."

4. No such dissension can happen, unless some state oppose the interests of the whole collectively; and it is to overcome such opposition by a majority of 12 to 1, "to ensure domestic tranquillity, to provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty," that the union is now, and has ever been thought indispensable. (Introduction to the new plan.)

"5. The consequence must therefore be, either that the union of the states will be destroyed by a violent struggle, or that their sovereignty will be swallowed up by silent encroachments into a universal aristocracy; because it is clear, that if two different foreign powers have a co—equal command over the purses of the citizens, they will struggle for the spoils, and the weakest will be in the end obliged to yield to the efforts of the strongest."

5. The preceding petition being eradicated, this consequence falls to the ground. It may be observed, however, that the revenue to be raised by Congress, is not likely to interfere with the taxes of any state. Commerce is the source to which they will naturally apply, because that is one great and uniform object, and they cannot attend to detail. The burden, too, will in this way be scarcely felt by the people. All foreigners who may sell merchandise at a loss (and that often has been, and often will be the case in an extensive degree,) will pay the impost in addition to that loss, and the duties on all that may be sold at a profit, will be eventually paid by the consumers: thus the taxes will be insensibly included in the price, and every man will have the power of refusal, by not consuming the taxed luxuries.

"6. Congress being possessed of these immense powers, the liberties of the states and of the people are not secured by a bill or declaration of rights."

6. Notwithstanding all that has been written against it, I must recur to friend W——'s definition on this subject. A state government is designed for all cases whatsoever, consequently what is not reserved, is tacitly given. A federal government is expressly only for federal purposes, and its power is consequently bounded by the terms of the compact. In the first case a Bill of Rights is indispensable, in the second it would be at best useless, and if one right were to be omitted, it might injuriously grant, by implication, what was intended to be reserved.

"7. The sovereignty of the states is not expressly reserved: the form only, and not the substance of their government, is guaranteed to them by express words."

7. When man emerged from a state of nature, he surely did not reserve the natural right of being the judge of his wrongs, and the executioner of the punishments he might think they deserved. A renunciation of such rights, is the price he paid for the blessings of good government; and for the same reason, state sovereignty (as I have before observed) is as incompatible with the federal union, as the natural right of human vengeance is, with the peace of society.

"The United States shall guarantee to every state a republican form of government." That is, they shall guarantee it against monarchical or aristocratical encroachments ; Congress can go no further, for the states would justly think themselves insulted, if they should presume to interfere in other alterations which may be individually thought more consistent with the good of the people. Art. 4, Sec. 4.

"8. Trial by jury, that sacred bulwark of liberty, is abolished in civil cases, and Mr. W——, one of the convention, has told you, that not being able to agree as to the form of establishing this point, they have left you deprived of the substance. Here is his own words: `The subject was involved in difficulties. The convention found the task too difficult for them, and left the business as it stands.'"

8. Trial by jury has been seen to be expressly preserved in criminal cases. In civil cases, the federal court is like a court of chancery, except that it has original jurisdiction only in state affairs; in all other matters it has "appellate jurisdiction both as to law and fact, with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make." Art. 3, Sec. 2. Nobody ever complained that trials in chancery were not by jury. A court of chancery "may issue injunctions in various stages of a cause," saith Blackstone, "and stay oppressive judgment." Yet courts of chancery are everywhere extolled as the most equitable; the federal court has not such an ex—tent of power, and what it has is to be always under the exceptions and regulations of the United States in Congress.

Friend W—— has well observed that it was impossible to make one imitation of thirteen different models, and the matter seems now to stand as well as human wisdom can permit.

"9. The liberty of the press is not secured, and the powers of Congress are fully adequate to its destruction, as they are to have the trial of libels, or pretended libels against the United States, and may by a cursed abominable stamp act (as the Bowdoin administration has done in Massachusetts) preclude you effectually from all means of information. Mr. W—— has given you no answer to these arguments."

9. The liberty of the press in each state can only be in danger from the laws of that state, and it is everywhere well secured. Besides, as the new Congress can only have the defined powers given, it was needless to say anything about liberty of the press, liberty of conscience, or any other liberty that a freeman ought never to be deprived of. It is remarkable in this instance, that among all the cases to which the federal jurisdiction is to extend (art. 3), not a word is said of "libels or pretended libels." Indeed, in this extensive continent, and among this enlightened people, no government whatever could control the press. For after all that is said about "balance of power," there is one power which no tyranny on earth could subdue if once roused by this great and general grievance, that is, the people. This respectable power has preserved the press in Great Britain in spite of government; and none but a madman could ever think of controlling it in America.

"10. Congress have the power of keeping up a standing army in time of peace, and Mr. W— has told you that it is necessary."

10. The power here referred to is this, "to raise and sup—port armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years."—Art. i, Sect. 8. Thus the representatives of the people have it in their power to disband this army every two years, by refusing supplies. Does not every American feel that no standing army in the power of Congress to raise, could support despotism over this im-mense continent, where almost every citizen is a soldier? If such an apprehension came, my opinion, within the bounds of possibility, it would not indeed become my principles to oppose this objection.

"11. The Legislative and Executive powers are not kept separate, every one of the American constitutions declares they ought to be; but they are mixed in a manner entirely novel and unknown, even to the constitution of Great Britain."

11. The first article of the constitution defines the legislative, the second, the executive, and the third the judicial powers; this does not seem like mixing them. It would be strange indeed if a professed democratist should object, that the president's power is made subject to "the advice and con—sent of two—thirds of the Senate." Art. 2, Sect. 2.

"12. In England, the king only has a nominal negative over the proceedings of the legislature, which he has never dared to exercise since the days of King William, whereas by the new constitution, both the President—General and the Senate, two executive branches of the government, have the negative, and are intended to support each other in the exercise of it."

12. Whoever will read the 7th section of the 4th article, will see that the president has only a conditional negative, which is effectual or not as two—thirds of the Senate and two—thirds of the Representatives may on reconsideration deter—mine. If the "two executive branches" (as they are here called) should agree in the negative, it would not be novel, as to the power of the Senate; for I believe every senate on the continent, and every upper house in the world, may refuse concurrence, and quash a bill before it arrives at the executive department. The king of England has an unconditional negative, and has often exercised it in his former colonies.

"13. The representation of the lower house is too small, consisting only of 65 members."

13. The Congress on the old plan had but 13 voices, and of these, some were frequently lost by equal divisions. If 65 voices be yet too few, it must follow that the new plan has made some progress towards perfection.

"14. That of the Senate is so small that it renders its extensive powers extremely dangerous: it is to consist only of 26 members, two—thirds of whom must concur to conclude any treaty or alliance with foreign powers. Now we will suppose that five of them are absent, sick, dead, or unable to attend, twenty—one will remain, and eight of these (one—third, and one over) may prevent the conclusion of any treaty, even the most favorable to America. Here will be a fine field for the intrigues and even the bribery and corruption of European powers."

14. This like the former objection is mere matter of opinion. The instance as to supposed vacancies does not apply, for "if vacancies happen by resignation or otherwise during the recess of the Legislature of any State, the executive there—of may make temporary appointments until the meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such vacancies." Art. I, Sec. 3. This provision expressly implies that accidental vacancies shall be immediately filled.

"15. The most important branches of the executive department are to be put into the hands of a single magistrate, who will be in fact an elective king. The military, the land and naval forces are to be entirely at his disposal.quot;

15. It was mentioned as a grievance in the 12th objection that this supposed " elective king" had his powers clogged by the conjunction of another branch; here he is called a quot; single magistrate." Yet the new constitution provides that he shall act "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate," Art. 2, Sec. 2, and can in no instance act alone, except in the cause of humanity by granting reprieves or pardons.

"16. Should the Senate, by the intrigues of foreign powers, become devoted to foreign influence, as was the case of late in Sweden, the people will be obliged, as the Swedes have been, to seek their refuge in the arms of the monarch or Pres-ident—General."

16. The comparison of a little kingdom to a great republic, cannot be just. The revolution in Sweden was the affair of a day, and the success of it was owing to its confined bounds. To suppose a similar event in this extensive country, 3000 miles distant from European intrigues, is, in the nature of things, a gross absurdity.

"17. Rotation, that noble prerogative of liberty, is entirely excluded from the new system of government, and great men may and probably will be continued in office during their lives."

17. How can this be the case, when at stated periods the government reverts to the people, and to the representatives of the people, for a new choice in every part of it ?

"18. Annual elections are abolished, and the people are not to re—assume their rights until the expiration of two, four and six years."

18. Annual changes in a federal government would beget confusion; it requires years to learn a trade, and men in this age are not legislators by inspiration. One—third of the Senate, as well as all of the Representatives, are to be elected every two years. Art. 1, Sec. 3.

"19. Congress are to have the power of fixing the time, place, and manner of holding elections, so as to keep them forever subjected to their influence."

19. Congress are not to have power to fix the place of choosing Senators: and the time, place, and manner of electing Representatives are to be fixed by each State itself. Congress, indeed, are to have control to prevent undue influence in elections, which we all know but too often happens through party zeal. Art. 1, Sec. 4.

"20. The importation of slaves is not to be prohibited until the year 18o8, and slavery will probably resume its empire in Pennsylvania."

20. This is fully answered in my letter to Timothy, but it may not be amiss to repeat that Congress will have no power to meddle in the business until 18o8. All that can be said against this offending clause is, that we may have no alteration in this respect for twenty—one years to come; but twenty—one years is fixed as a period when we may be better, and in the meantime we cannot be worse than we are now. Art. 1, Sec. 9.

"21. The militia is to be under the immediate command of Congress, and men conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, may be compelled to perform military duty."

21. Congress may "provide for calling forth the militia, and may provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining it." But the states respectively can only raise it, and they expressly reserve the right of "appointment of officers and of training it." Now we know that men conscientiously scrupulous by sector profession are not forced to bear arms in any of the States, a pecuniary compensation being accepted in lieu of it. Whatever may be my sentiments on the present state of this matter is foreign to the point. But it is certain that whatever redress may be wished for, or expected, can only come from the State Legislature, where, and where only, the dispensing power, or enforcing power, is in the first in—stance placed. Art. I, Sec. 8.

"22. The new government will be expensive beyond any we have ever experienced; the judicial department alone, with its concomitant train of judges, justices, chancellors, clerks, sheriffs, coroners, escheators, state attorneys and solicitors, constables, etc., in every state, and in every county in each state, will be a burden beyond the utmost abilities of the people to bear."

22. This mighty expense would be paid by about one shilling a man throughout the states. The other part of this objection is not intelligible; nothing is said in the new constitution of a judicial department in "states and counties," other than what is already established.

"23. A government partaking of monarchy and aristocracy will be fully and firmly established, and liberty will be but a name to adorn the short historic page of the halcyon days of America."

23. The 5th article expressly provides against every danger, by pointing out a mode of amendment when necessary. And liberty will thus be a name to adorn the long historic page of American virtue and happiness.

Thus I have answered all the objections, and supported my answers by fair quotations from the new constitution; and I particularly desire my readers to examine all the references with accurate attention. If I have mistaken any part, it will, I trust, be found to be an error of judgment, not of will, and I shall thankfully receive any candid instruction on the subject. One quotation more and I have done: "In all our de—liberations on this subject (saith George Washington) we kept steadily in our view, that which appears to us the greatest interest of every true American, the consolidation of our union, in which is involved our prosperity, felicity, safety, perhaps our national existence. This important consideration, seriously and deeply impressed on our minds, led each State in the convention to be less rigid on points of inferior magnitude, than might have been otherwise expected; and thus the constitution which we now present is the result of a spirit of amity, and of that mutual deference and concession which the peculiarity of our political situation rendered in—dispensable."

PLAIN TRUTH. 34

———

[One of the Dissenting Assemblymen.]

From The Pennsylvania Packet and Daily Advertiser, Nov. 14, 1787.

Messrs. Printers: As the Constitution framed by the late Continental Convention is an object of the greatest magnitude, and upon the adoption or rejection of which the happiness or misery of this country greatly depends, I am happy to find it has become a subject of general discussion, and that many able pens are employed in the investigation of its nature and principles; everything, therefore, that hath any relation to this business must be interesting and of importance to the public. The secession of the minority of the late house of assembly having connection with this matter, and being severely reprobated by many who are, perhaps, ignorant of the principles which influenced their conduct, I have taken the liberty, as one of that minority, of stating to the public, through the medium of your paper, the motives which induced us to take such a measure.

In the formation of every good government, every innovation should be carefully guarded against, as it is much easier to prevent than to remedy evils; therefore, in every free government, the power of putting a negative upon particular laws is lodged in such a man or body of men, as have not the power of enacting laws. Thus, in Britain, a complete negative is vested not only in each house of parliament, but also in the king, whereas the concurrence of king, lords, and commons are necessary to enact a law. The despotism of the French monarchy is much restrained by the powers lodged with the parliament of Paris, of preventing the operation of any new laws, by refusing to register them. When the Roman Republic was in the zenith of its glory, the negative of a single tribune was sufficient to prevent the enacting of a law, but the concurrence of twelve tribunes was necessary to make any new law or innovation. In the Republic of Genoa, four-fifths of the Senate must assent to any new law, consequently if even forty should concur in the measure, it might be prevented by eleven.

But to come nearer home. In our neighboring States, the majority of the Senate or upper house have a complete negative over the whole Legislature, which amounts in most cases to one exercising a complete negative over eight, ten, or twelve.

The framers of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, sensible of the necessity of preventing innovations, have also provided sufficient checks; and though our legislature consists of but one branch, and it is not in the power of a single magistrate, or a majority of a small upper house, to put a negative on our laws, or prevent what they might think improper innovations; yet, even in this government which derives its greatest security from responsibility and necessary rotation, no bills can be enacted into laws, except in cases of sudden necessity, without being published for consideration from session to session, and thus laying them before the people, together with the yeas and nays, and reasons for the vote, if any two members require it; but as the house are necessarily judges of the sudden necessity which may exist for enacting laws hastily, the constitution has carefully guarded against any attempt of designing men, who may, from the prevailing influence of some improper or dangerous interest, prostitute the cry of public necessity to cloak their ambition, and thus attempt such innovations as the minority may think unconstitutional and highly mischievous, to prevent which our form of government provides, that a quorum of not less than two-thirds of the whole number elected shall be necessarily present, in order to do business. Thus, a negative check is clearly erected, and the exercise thereof vested in such a minority as shall exist of a little more than one-third of the whole number elected. This is clearly a constitutional check; the legislature have not the power of preventing it, and the members who shall exercise it are responsible to their constituents only for their conduct.

This negative has been often put in practice; there is an instance of its having been done twice in one day; but as, perhaps, the house was not of the greatest importance, or what is more probable, that the majority were not aided by a mob, these instances made very little noise, nor was the exercise of this negative ever attempted to be prevented, until the —— day of ——, 1784; when near the close of the last session of the house, a bill was brought forward for reviving the test laws. This the minority considered as a matter in which their constituents ought to be consulted, and for the enacting of which there was no sudden necessity; they, therefore, considered the enacting thereof in such a manner as a wilful breach of the constitution, and judged it to be their duty to avail themselves of every means which the constitution itself put in their power to preserve it inviolable, and consequently put a stop to the business, until it comes before their constituents; but on this occasion the doors were attempted to be shut, and force was used to detain the members, therefore they did not return to finish the business of the house, apprehending that if they acted under compulsion or the power of a mob, whatever was done would not be binding on the citizens, because freedom of acting is indispensable to the exercise of legislative authority. The case, of course, came before the people, and they decided, by approving of and returning the members who dissented, and by rejecting the majority of those who urged on the business.

The next occasion when this negative was exercised was on the 28th day of September last, being expected (at least by many of the members) to be the last day of the house sitting, when a resolution was proposed by one of the members (who had also been a member of the late Federal Convention) for calling a state convention, to be elected in the greatest part of the State within about ten days, for the purpose of examining and adopting the proposed new constitution for the government of the United States. To offer a resolution of such importance at that late hour, to take it up instantly without giving the members who did not expect such an at-tempt, and were consequently wholly unprepared, time even until the afternoon for advisement, was truly extraordinary. But, when it is considered that the adopting of the proposed plan may, in its consequences, alter, or even annihilate the constitution of our own State under which we act, and which is the rule and measure of our legislative authority, and to preserve which inviolate we had, in the presence of God, and of each other, solemnly plighted our faith; every unprejudiced person will allow we ought to have taken time to deliberate. Even the Council of Censors, who have the constitutional right to propose alterations or amendments to the constitution, yet are strictly prohibited from calling a convention to adopt such alterations or amendments, until they are published at least six months for the consideration of the people. But in the present instance, the assembly were called upon by surprise to propose essential alterations in the forms of government, without having received any new powers for that purpose from the people, but being expressly guarded from doing it, both by the powers delegated to them and by their own solemn oaths, and without permitting the people to know or judge of the importance of those alterations in their government, which they were thus called upon to adopt or reject, or the relative fitness of the persons whom they were about to elect for the proposed convention, or without the shadow of necessity for going into the measure with precipitation, as no injury could arise from deferring the business until the meeting of the new house, who would at least enjoy implied powers for that purpose, and might have sufficient information from the people to enable them to go into the business with a degree of understanding suited to its importance. But taking the matter up at that time and manner was an express violation of the existing confederation, for it is now well known that Congress did not transmit the new constitution to this State until the week after the last house finally rose, and that it was not officially before the legislature until after the present house met. In this situation we, who were of the minority, saw no alternative but either by our presence to assist in breaking the constitution of this State and the confederation of the United States, or else to avail ourselves of that negative check which the constitution itself hath instituted, by constituting a large quorum, and secured the exercise of by preventing the doors from being shut.

If the constitution had not pointed out such an alternative, or if the minority had not thought proper to make use of it, necessity dictated the measure; for before the business was brought forward, and before many of us knew any such matter was designed, the gallery and doors were so unusually crowded as to give ground of surprise, though we had no suspicion of the design until the extraordinary resolution was offered, and the still more extraordinary language that was used to support it, viz.:

"That the citizens who had declined to sign an approbation of the new plan would shortly be dragged forth with public infamy and disgrace; that none would dare to oppose it; that the confederation was dissolved and rotten, and did not exist," etc. I was by that time fully convinced that we were surrounded with a mob, probably collected there for the occasion by those who, being members of the house, had the address to procure seats in the Federal Convention; and these having exceeded the powers delegated to them were intoxicated with such fondness for the creature of their own production, or perhaps for the enjoyment of those offices which they had so liberally provided in the proposed plan, as not only to break through the rules of decency and good order, but every obligation they were under to their constituents.

Under the full persuasion that we were acting under such restraint as was inconsistent with the free exercise of legislative authority, and entirely subversive of the powers with which we were entrusted, when the first paragraph of the plan was pretty largely debated and adopted, and the remaining paragraphs were before us, the house adjourned until the afternoon, which was the only instance of that session in which we were to sit twice in one day. I then determined in my own mind not to return to the house until I could do it with confidence of enjoying personal freedom, steadfastly believing that no law enacted under the evident restraint of a mob could be binding or admitted in a court of justice; but such of us who had opportunity proposed to the speaker of the house, and to the members who moved that hasty business, for to return to the house and finish the business that was regularly brought before the house, upon those gentlemen engaging that the new plan should not be further urged until it would come officially and orderly before them, but this was refused; and it is now notorious, that upon the next day after the resolution was introduced, the mob, after rendezvousing at the State House, marched to and entered by force the lodging of some of the members, and carried off two of them (which was all that fell into their hands), unto the assembly room—then become the guard house of the mob—and after putting them into it kept them there, and when under this restraint they assumed the form of a legislative assembly, and counting upon the imprisoned members as a necessary part of their number, proceeded to complete the resolutions, but with some alteration, for they did not then dare to give so short a day for the election as on the preceding day, and they added an idea to delude the people, as if the proposed plan of government had been transmitted to the house from Congress; but this I have already noticed, and it is now universally known to be true, whilst proceeding on this business the two members who were forced there by the mob were not only under restraint, but one of them prevented from his freedom of going even to the door by one who was both a member of the late Federal Convention and of the assembly, laying forcible hands upon him, and by the mob—cry "stop, stop," &c., and during those transactions so far was the discipline of the house from being exerted, that there was not even a call to order by the Speaker.

Thus it appears that the dissenting members only availed themselves of this constitutional negative in a case where the Constitution itself and the confederation were both at stake, as well as the people's right to information in a case wherein they are to judge for themselves and posterity. The magnitude of the case invited, and forcible necessity drove them to appeal to their constituents, who have already given an uncontrovertible decision in favor of our conduct by re-electing all those members who dissented that had not already served four years in the house, except one man who was left out through a mistaken division of votes, occasioned by a re-cent erection of a county. Thus the people have given the strongest testimony of their approbation which the case admits of.

It is the glory of the American revolution that the respective governments underwent a free and rational discussion, were the fruit of deliberation and choice, and were not dictated by a chieftain, nor hatched in a secret conclave, where the depraved and intriguing generally overreach and circumvent the disinterested and virtuous: they were also generally left open to a regular course of alteration or amendment, according as experience and circumstances dictate the propriety. But who would then have believed that at this early period, within the remembrance, and even when the feelings of the revolution were yet fresh on every sensible patriotic mind, that an attempt should be made in a legislative body to preclude the people who accomplished the revolution, and whose wounds have yet scarcely ceased to bleed, from the means of understanding and judging of the amendments or alterations by which they are to be bound. Future generations will justly censure those who precipitated this business, when the dark designs and ambitious intrigues which have fomented the embarrassments of the Union, and paved the way for the aristocratic attempts of the present day, shall be fully unfolded.

The worst that even an improper exertion of this negative by a minority can do is to postpone the business in question, be it what it will, and so to give further time for advisement.

But what will be the opinion of freemen of the precedent set by the majority of the late house, if a mob may be employed or countenanced in compelling members to attend and act who are necessarily responsible only to the rules of their own house and their constituents. May not the mob by the same rule, if they dislike a business which is likely to be enacted into a law, take out what number of members they please so as to turn the majority to their wishes? or may they not by all the terrors of riot oblige the members to vote as they think fit ? But the consequences are too plain and too dreadful to be dwelt upon.

In some other free countries, mobs have had the audacity to interrupt the legislature, and prevent for a time the progress of some business obnoxious to the populace; but it remained for the legislature of Pennsylvania to suffer, and for the mob of Philadelphia to commit, that kind of outrage which puts an end to constitutional government, and the peace and confidence of society at once: for who can think a deliberative body free in their decisions, which sits in reach of the operations and terrors of such a set of desperadoes?

One of the evils prevalent in the controversies of the present times is, that the supposed merit or demerit of names are urged instead of reason, and detraction instead of argument. For this cause I shall not at present give my real name, but subscribe myself what I really have been,

ONE OF THE DISSENTING ASSEMBLYMEN.

Footnotes:

1. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 20, 1787. Return to text
2. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 20, 1787. Return to text
3. Pennsylvania Packet, Sept. 22. Return to text
4. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 26, 1787. Return to text
5. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 27, 1787. Return to text
6. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 28, 1787. Return to text
7. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 29, 1787. Return to text
8. Independent Gazetteer, Sept. 29, 1787. Return to text
9. Pennsylvania Packet, Sept. 27, 1787. Return to text
10. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 2, 1787. Return to text
11. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 2, 1787. Return to text
12. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 4, 1787. Return to text
13. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 6, 1787. Return to text
14. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 6, 1787. Return to text
15. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 9, 1787. Return to text
16. Pennsylvania Packet, Oct. 10, 1787. Return to text
17. Pennsylvania Packet, Oct. 23, 1787. Return to text
18. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 10, 1787. Return to text
19. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 10, 1787. Return to text
20. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 10, 1787. Return to text
21. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 10, 1787. Return to text
22. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 13, 1787. Return to text
23. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 13, 1787. Return to text
24. The Federal Constitution. Return to text
25. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 13, 1787. Return to text
26. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 15, 1787. Return to text
27. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 15, 1787. Return to text
28. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 25, 1787. Return to text
29. Pennsylvania Packet; Nov. 1, 1787. Return to text
30. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 29, 1787. Return to text
31. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 29, 1787. Return to text
32. Independent Gazetteer, Oct. 31, 1787. Return to text
33. Independent Gazetteer, Nov. 6, 1787. Return to text
34. Independent Gazetteer, Nov. 10, 1787. Return to text