into the minds of many of the delegates; yet the determined position taken by many, including Washington, to form a "more perfect Union," and to enlarge and centralize the powers-legislative, executive, and judicial-in a National Union, and the intelligent positions taken by them in exposing the insecurity of their liberties, if left to the jobbing political caprice and local jealousies of the thirteen Colonies-unaided by the general forms of government, possessed of all the powers of nationality in the legislation and execution of its laws and authority-plainly showed the necessity of Union.

The Convention, we have seen, met on Friday, May 25th, 1787. The first act was a motion by Robert Morris, of Pennsylvania, that George Washington be elected Chairman of the Convention, which was unanimously agreed to. Upon taking the chair, he modestly declared his embarrassment, never having been in a similar position before, and hoped his errors would be excused, as they would be unintentional.

And now the third great drama in the liberties of America was enacted. The Declaration of Independence had proclaimed to the world that a spirit of freedom had taken hold of the hearts of the colonists; and the triumphal armies of America, now flushed with glorious victory, having, against overwhelming nurabers, conquered the most powerful nation of the earth; and the chief of victory, and also of the army of freedom, now installed as Chairman of this august assemblage, consisting of many of the most illustrious statesmen, warriors and patriots of the New Nation, and guiding the offspring of his valor and patriotism into its new baptism and into the foremost ranks of free nations, was a sublime spectacle.

The Convention continued to meet daily for almost four months-from May 25th, 1787, to September 17th, of the same year-amidst conflicts and discouragements almost dispelling the hopes of the friends of National Government. The Convention missed the able services and wise counsels of two of America's ablest Statesmen, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, both being in Europe as Embassadors. Especially did the friends of freedom miss their influence, for their well known love of human liberty would have insured their voices in favor of the broadest measures of equal rights. The Resolutions of 1784, drawn up by Jefferson in relation to the government of the public lands, and interdicting Slavery within all the Northwestern Territory, was well calculated to inspire his friends with the belief of his hearty coöperation in limiting the influence of the Slave Power in national political affairs.

Early in the Convention, Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, made a lengthy and elaborate speech, showing the defects of the existing Confederation, and on the 29th of May presented a set of fifteen resolutions, as a basis for the form of a new Government. He declared that they were not intended for a Federal Government, but "for a strong, consolidated Union." Randolph's plan being of a character to invest enlarged powers in the national legislative branch, found fierce opposition from the "State Rights Party;" for such a party had already begun to develop itself in the Convention. These resolutions were discussed for about two weeks, and objected to. In the meantime, other members presented other plans of government.

On May 30th, the Convention being in committee of the whole on the "state of the Union," the following resolutions were offered:

"1. Resolved, That a union of the States merely Federal, will not accomplish the objects proposed by the Articles of Confederation, namely: the common defense, security to liberty, and general welfare.

"2. Resolved, That no treaty or treaties among any of the States as sovereign, will accomplish or secure their common defense, liberty, or welfare.

"3. Resolved, That a National Government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme, judicial, legislative, and executive department."

These resolutions met with bitter opposition from Mr. Pinckney, delegate from South Carolina, on the ground that the Convention had no power to create a new Government, as they were there only to amend and revise the Articles of Confederation; the word supreme in the third resolution wanted explanation—was it "intended to annihilate State Governments?"

Suffrage was the next great subject before the Convention; and here was the point that brought the friends of Liberty and the friends of Slavery square to the issue. Every State in the Union at this time had. Slavery in it, except Massachusetts; for, as we have already seen, by the Bill of Rights to the new Constitution of 1780, she had abolished it.

If a new Government was to be established, with. three distinct departments-one executive, one judicial, and one legislative, divided into three branches-how should the "Sovereign States" be represented? Some of those advanced in wealth were in favor of a property basis; others were in favor of basing the representation on population. But here it was objected that the large States would swallow up the small ones. Some members favored that one branch be elected by the people, and that that branch then elect the second branch. But discord presented itself at every step; no harmony

could be obtained, and it became evident to all, that upon one question raised by members from the South, there was an element yet unreconciled, that must either break up the Convention, prevent some States from entering into the Union, or that concessions must be made, and an element of future discord incorporated into the fundamental laws of the New Nation. The veil was drawn aside from this colossus, and the Negro stood forth, backed by an undivided Southern support, to thrust him into the material upon which the new edifice of liberty was to have its foundation. The large Southern slave interests made the institution a power amongst them; and if the national representation was to be based upon "property," then the slaves should be calculated, and if based upon population then enumerated. The delegates from New England and other States asked the Southern representatives if they calculated their slaves as property; to which they replied that they did. "Then," said they, "we do not desire that our merchandise be represented in the councils of the New Nation." "Are they men?" asked the Northern delegates; "are they admitted as citizens?" Then, why not on an equality with citizens. "Are they admitted as property?—then, why not other property be admitted into the Confederation?" asked James Wilson, delegate from Pennsylvania.

There being no hopes of the Convention coming to any terms upon the subject of framing a Constitution that would accord with the general expressed views of the majority, without some compromise being made, Mr. Sherman, of Connecticut, moved that a committee of one delegate from each State be appointed to advise and report upon the subject of the manner of representation. The friends of manhood representation knew