FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2047   2048   2049   2050   2051   2052   2053   2054   2055   2056   2057   2058   2059   2060   2061   2062   2063   2064   2065   2066   2067   2068   2069   2070   2071  
2072   2073   2074   2075   2076   2077   2078   2079   2080   2081   2082   2083   2084   2085   2086   2087   2088   2089   2090   2091   2092   2093   2094   2095   2096   >>   >|  
ER insisted that the labor of a slave in South Carolina was as productive and valuable, as that of a freeman in Massachusetts; that as wealth was the great means of defence and utility to the nation, they were equally valuable to it with freemen; and that consequently an equal representation ought to be allowed for them in a government which was instituted principally, for the protection of property, and was itself to be supported by property. Mr. MASON could not agree to the motion, notwithstanding it was favorable to Virginia, because he thought it unjust. It was certain that the slaves were valuable, as they raised the value of land, increased the exports and imports, and of course the revenue, would supply the means of feeding and supporting an army, and might in cases of emergency become themselves soldiers. As in these important respects they were useful to the community at large, they ought not to be excluded from the estimate of representation. He could not, however, regard them as equal to freemen, and could not vote for them as such. He added, as worthy of remark, that the Southern States have this peculiar species of property, over and above the other species of property common to all the States. Mr. WILLIAMSON reminded Mr. GORHAM that if the Southern States contended for the inferiority of blacks to whites when taxation was in view, the Eastern States, on the same occasion, contended for their equality. He did not, however, either then or now, concur in either extreme, but approved of the ratio of three-fifths. On Mr. BUTLER'S motion, for considering blacks as equal to whites in the apportionment of representation,--Delaware, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--3; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, no--7; New York, not on the floor. Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS said he had several objections to the proposition of Mr. WILLIAMSON. In the first place, it fettered the Legislature too much. In the second place, it would exclude some States altogether who would not have a sufficient number to entitle them to a single representation. In the third place, it will not consist with the resolution passed on Saturday last, authorizing the Legislature to adjust the representation from time to time on the principles of population and wealth; nor with the principles of equity. If slaves were to be considered as inhabitants, not as wealth, then the said Resolution would not b
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2047   2048   2049   2050   2051   2052   2053   2054   2055   2056   2057   2058   2059   2060   2061   2062   2063   2064   2065   2066   2067   2068   2069   2070   2071  
2072   2073   2074   2075   2076   2077   2078   2079   2080   2081   2082   2083   2084   2085   2086   2087   2088   2089   2090   2091   2092   2093   2094   2095   2096   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

representation

 
States
 

property

 

Carolina

 

valuable

 

wealth

 

species

 

Legislature

 

slaves

 

Southern


Virginia

 

motion

 

freemen

 

whites

 

principles

 

WILLIAMSON

 

contended

 

Massachusetts

 

blacks

 

apportionment


Georgia

 

Jersey

 

Pennsylvania

 

Connecticut

 

occasion

 

Delaware

 

BUTLER

 

approved

 
Maryland
 

extreme


concur

 

fifths

 
equality
 

resolution

 

passed

 

Saturday

 

consist

 

entitle

 

single

 

authorizing


adjust

 

inhabitants

 
Resolution
 

considered

 

population

 
equity
 

number

 

sufficient

 

MORRIS

 
objections