he sense of the convention was such
that the courageous gentleman was unable to engage its attention for
that purpose. Accordingly, therefore, he had printed in pamphlet form
the address that he intended to deliver, and distributed it throughout
the counties of Northwestern Virginia. Among the salient points
therein set forth the following are noteworthy: first, that since the
institution of slavery as it existed within the bounds of Western
Virginia was the mere creature of law, the law was competent to remove
it; and that, therefore, it was fairly and properly a subject for the
consideration of those in convention assembled; second, that the
gradual emancipation of the slaves was both fundamental and vital to
the success of the new State, and in consequence thereof the question
should be settled in the organic law. Mr. Battelle discussed the
question from two points of view, that of principle, and that of
expediency. It was developed that the principle of slavery was wrong
and that the system, therefore, should be abolished. "While
discrimination must be made between the system and the acts of
individuals, the former," he said, "is always bad, is always
inconsistent with the obvious requirements of either justice or
morals."[76]

Considering the proposition in the light of expediency, the question
was asked: "What do the best interests of the people of West Virginia
require from the persons assembled to frame the organic law?" In reply
thereto there was developed the theme that labor was fundamental to
the material prosperity of the commonwealth; that slave labor and free
had always been and would doubtless always be unharmonious and
inconsistent in purpose. Since slave labor, it was pointed out, was
competent to perform only the crudest work and most menial tasks, it
followed that free labor was indispensable to the material progress of
the new State. "Slave labor," Battelle said, "drove out free labor
and tended to make all labor undignified and despised. It should,
therefore, be dispensed with." In reply to the assertion that since
the system was destined to die a quick and certain death no action on
the part of the State was necessary, Mr. Battelle urged that "if that
be true, it furnished an additional reason for the incorporation into
the constitution of a provision terminating slavery." "Such action
would be but just to all parties--to both the proponents and the
opponents of the present system." The argument