the court-house, and raising him on their shoulders, carried him about the yard, in a kind of electioneering triumph." His success in the "parson's cause" introduced him at once to an extensive practice; but he never could confine himself to the arduous studies necessary for a thorough knowledge of the law: the consequence was, on questions merely legal his inferiors in talents frequently embarrassed him, and he was required to use all the resources of his master-mind to maintain the position he had reached. In 1765, as a member of the House of Burgesses, Mr. Henry introduced his resolutions against the Stamp Act, which proved the opening of the American Revolution in the colony of Virginia. It was in the midst of the debate upon those resolutions, that he "exclaimed, in a voice of thunder and with the look of a god, 'Cæsar had his BrutusCharles the First his Cromwell-and George the Third-('Treason!' cried the Speaker: 'treason! treason!' echoed from every part of the house. Henry faltered not for an instant, but rising to a loftier attitude, and fixing on the Speaker an eye of the most determined fire, finished his sentence with the firmest emphasis)—may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most of it."* After passing several years successfully upon the legislative floor, Mr. Henry returned to the practice of his profession. On the 4th of September, 1774, the first Congress met in Carpenter's Hall, at Philadelphia. This assembly was composed of the most eminent men of the several colonies, on the wisdom of whose councils was staked the liberties of the colonists and their posterity. The first meeting is described as "awfully solemn. The object which had called them together was of incalculable magnitude." After the organization, in the midst of a deep and death-like silence, every member reluctant to open a business so fearfully momentous, "Mr. Henry rose slowly, as if borne down by the weight of the subject, and, after faltering, according to his habit, through a most impressive exordium, he launched gradually into a recital of the colonial wrongs. Rising, as he advanced, with the grandeur of his subject, and glowing at length with all the majesty and expectation of the occasion, his speech seemed more than that of mortal man. There was no rant, no rhapsody, no labor of the understanding, no straining of the voice, no confusion of the utterance. His countenance was erect, his eye steady, his action noble, his enunciation clear and firm, his mind poised on its centre, his views of his subject comprehensive and great, and his imagination corruscating with a magnificence and a variety which struck even that assembly with amazement and awe. He sat down amid murmurs of astonishment and applause; and as he had been before proclaimed the greatest orator of Virginia, he was now, on every hand, admitted to be the first orator of America." No report of this speech has been preserved. That Congress adjourned in October, and Mr. Henry returned to his home. On the 20th of March following (1775), the Virginia Convention, which had met the previous year at Williamsburgh, then the capital of the State, convened at Richmond. Of this body Mr. Henry was a member. Although the colonies were then laboring under severe grievances, and at the same time were insisting with great firmness upon their constitutional rights, yet they gave the most explicit and solemn pledge of their faith and true allegiance to His Majesty King George the Third, avowed to support him with their lives and fortunes, and were ardent in their wishes for a return of that friendly intercourse from which the colonies had derived so much benefit. These were the sentiments held by those eminent statesmen and patriots on the opening of that convention; but with Mr. Henry it was different. In his judgment, all hopes of a reconciliation were gone. Firm in this opinion, he introduced his celebrated resolutions advocating preparation for a military defence of the colony. Those resolutions he sustained in a powerful speech, and they were adopted; after which a committee, of which Mr. Henry and George Washington were members, was appointed to prepare and report a plan to carry into effect the meaning of the resolutions. After the report was made and the plan adopted, the convention adjourned. On the 20th of April, 1775, in the dead of the night, Lord Dunmore sent one of his naval captains, with a body of marines, into the town of Williamsburgh, carried off twenty barrels of A very curious parallel to this scene occurred in the Legislature of Massachusetts, three years prior to this, on the occasion of the presentation of Otis's remonstrance against the governor and council's making or increasing establishments without the consent of the House. A thrilling account of those proceedings is given in Tudor's Life of James Otis. powder from the public magazine, and placed them on board the armed schooner Magdalen, lying at anchor in James River. The people of the town on learning of the affair early the next morning, became highly exasperated; a considerable body of them taking up arms, determined to compel a restoration of the powder. The council convened, and addressed a letter to Lord Dunmore, asking for its return; but it was not until the 2d day of May, when Mr. Henry, having convened the Independent company of Hanover, by request, addressed them, and being appointed their leader, marched against his lordship, and obtained "three hundred and thirty pounds," the estimated value of the powder. "Thus, the same man, whose genius had in the year 1765 given the first political impulse to the Revolution, had now the additional honor of heading the first military movement in Virginia, in support of the same cause." On the meeting of the Virginia convention in 1776, after the declaration of rights was published, and a plan of government established, Mr. Henry was elected governor of the colony. His career in this office is not marked by any extraordinary operations of his own. Lord Dunmore had evacuated the territory of the colony, and the military operations against the British Crown, which had been carried on during the previous year, were brought to a close. In 1777, and again in 1778, Mr. Henry was re-elected to the office of governor; declining a third re-election in 1779, which had been-tendered him by the Assembly. The first wife of Mr. Henry having died in the year 1775, he sold the farm on which he had been residing in Hanover county, and purchased several thousand acres of valuable land in the county of Henry; a county which had been erected during his administration as governor; and which had taken its name from him, as did afterwards its neighboring county of Patrick. In 1777 he married Dorothea, the daughter of Mr. Nathaniel W. Dandridge, with whom he retired to his new estate; and there resumed the practice of the law, confining himself mainly to the duties of counsellor and advocate, and leaving the technical duties to the care of his junior associates. Shortly after the termination of Mr. Henry's office as governor, he was elected to the State Assembly, in which body he remained until the close of his active life; taking a prominent part in its proceedings, and distinguishing himself by his liberality of feeling and soundness of judgment, not less than by the superiority of his powers in debate. On the close of the Revolution, he proposed in the Assembly, that the loyalists who had left the State during the war, should be permitted to return. This proposition was resisted, but through the influence of Mr. Henry's "overwhelming eloquence," was finally adopted. In the same high-toned spirit he supported and carried, although vigorously opposed, a proposal for removing the restraints upon British commerce. "Why should we fetter commerce?" said he; "a man in chains droops and bows to the earth; his spirits are broken; but let him twist the fetters from his legs and he will stand upright. Fetter not Commerce, Sir; let her be as free as air. She will range the whole creation, and return on the wings of the four winds of heaven to bless the land with plenty." In the year 1784, Mr. Henry introduced into the Assembly, a "bill for the encouragement of marriages with the Indians." The frontier settlements had been subject to the continual depredations of the Indians. Treaties were of no avail; and in this bill, Mr. Henry suggested, as a means to prevent these troubles, intermarriages of the whites and Indians; and held out pecuniary bounty, to be repeated at the birth of every child of such marriages; exemption from taxes, and the free use of an educational institution, to be established at the expense of the State. This bill was rejected. In November of the same year, Mr. Henry was again elected Governor of Virginia; in which office he remained until 1786, when he was compelled by poverty to resign his office, and again return to the practice of the law. However, he did not remain long out of public life. In 1788 he was a member of the convention of Virginia, which adopted the new federal constitution. In this Assembly he opposed the adoption; because, he contended, it consolidated the States into one government, thereby destroying their individual sovereignty. His speeches on this occasion surpassed all his former efforts; and they operated so powerfully that but a small majority voted for the new constitution. Declining a re-election to the Assembly in 1791, Mr. Henry retired from public life. Four years after President Washington offered him the important station of Secretary of State. This ne declined, preferring to remain in retirement. Again, in 1796, he was elected Governor of the State; this he also declined. In the year 1797 his health began to fail, and those energies which had enabled him to withstand the power of Great Britain, and urge onward the glorious Revolution, existed no longer in their original force. The uncertainty of the political issues at this period bore sorely and heavily upon Mr. Henry's sinking spirits. The clash of opposing parties agonized his mind. He was alarmed at the hideous scenes of the revolution then enacting in France, and apprehensive that these scenes were about being enacted over again in his own country. "In a mind thus prepared," says his biographer, "the strong and animated resolutions of the Virginia Assembly in 1798, in relation to the alien and sedition laws, conjured up the most frightful visions of civil war, disunion, blood and anarchy; and under the impulse of these phantoms, to make what he considered a virtuous effort for his country, he presented himself in Charlotte county, as a candidate for the House of Delegates, at the spring election of 1799." On the day of the election, before the polls were opened, he addressed the people of the county to the following effect: "He told them that the late proceedings of the Virginia Assembly had filled him with apprehension and alarm; that they had planted thorns upon his pillow; that they had drawn him from that happy retirement which it had pleased a bountiful Providence to bestow, and in which he had hoped to pass, in quiet, the remainder of his days; that the State had quitted the sphere in which she had been placed by the constitution; and in daring to pronounce upon the validity of federal laws, had gone out of her jurisdiction in a manner not warranted by any authority, and in the highest degree alarming to every considerate man; that such opposition, on the part of Virginia, to the acts of the general government, must beget their enforcement by military power; that this would probably produce civil war; civil war, foreign alliances; and that foreign alliances must necessarily end in subjugation to the powers called in. He conjured the people to pause and consider well, before they rushed into such a desperate condition, from which there could be no retreat. He painted to their imaginations, Washington, at the head of a numerous and well-appointed army, inflicting upon them military execution: 'and where (he asked) are our resources to meet such a conflict? Where is the citizen of America who will dare to lift his hand against the father of his country?' A drunken man in the crowd threw up his arm, and exclaimed that 'he dared to do it.' 'No,' answered Mr. Henry, rising aloft in all his majesty: 'you dare not do it: in such a parricidal attempt, the steel would drop from your nerveless arm!' Mr. Henry, proceeding in his address to the people, asked, 'whether the county of Charlotte would have any authority to dispute an obedience to the laws of Vir ginia; and he pronounced Virginia to be to the Union, what the county of Charlotte was to her. "Having denied the right of a State to decide upon the constitutionality of federal laws, he added, that perhaps it might be necessary to say something of the merits of the laws in question. His private opinion was, that they were 'good and proper.' But, whatever might be their merits, it belonged to the people, who held the reins over the head of Congress, and to them alone, to say whether they were acceptable or otherwise, to Virginians; and that this must be done by way of petition. That Congress were as much our representatives as the Assembly, and had as good a right to our confidence. He had seen, with regret, the unlimited power over the purse and sword consigned to the general government; but that he had been overruled, and it was now necessary to submit to the constitutional exercise of that power. 'If,' said he, 'I am asked what is to be done, when a people feel themselves intolerably oppressed, my answer is ready: Overturn the government. But do not, I beseech you, carry matters to this length, without provocation. Wait at least until some infringement is made upon your rights, and which cannot otherwise be redressed; for if ever you recur to another change, you may bid adieu for ever to representative government. You can never exchange the present government but for a monarchy. If the administration have done wrong, let us all go wrong together rather than split into factions, which must destroy that union upon which our existence hangs. Let us preserve our strength for the French, the English, the Germans, or whoever else shall dare to invade our territory, and not exhaust it in civil commotions and intestine wars.' He concluded, by declaring his design to exert himself in the endeavor to allay the heart-burnings and jealousies which had been fomented, in the State legislature; and he fervently prayed, if he was deemed unworthy to effect it, that it might be reserved to some other and abler hand, to extend this blessing over the community."* This was the last effort of Mr. Henry's eloquence. The polls were opened after he had concluded this speech, and he was elected: but he never took his seat. His health had been declining gradually for two years, when, on the sixth day of June, 1799, he died, full of honors-as a statesman, orator and patriot, unsurpassed and uneclipsed. THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.+ The Preamble and the two first sections of the first article of the Constitution being under consideration, Mr. Henry thus addressed the convention: MR. CHAIRMAN: The public mind, as well as my own, is extremely uneasy at the proposed change of government. Give me leave to form one of the number of those, who wish to be thoroughly acquainted with the reasons of this perilous and uneasy situation, and why we are brought hither to decide on this great national question. I consider myself as the servant of the people of this commonwealth, as a sentinel over their rights, liberty, and happiness. I represent their feelings when I say, that they are exceedingly uneasy, being brought from that state of full security, which they enjoy, to * Experience had taught Mr. Henry that in opposing the adoption of the constitution, he had mistaken the source of public danger; that the power of the states was yet too great, in times of discord and war, for the power of the Union. The constitution, moreover, was the law of the land, and as the present delusive appearance of things. Before the meeting of the late Federal convention sal tranquillity prevailed in this country, and at Philadelphia, a general peace, and an univerthe minds of our citizens were at perfect repose; but since that period, they are exceedingly uneasy and disquieted. When I wished for an appointment to this convention, my mind was extremely agitated for the situation of public affairs. I conceive the republic to be in extreme danger. If our situation be thus uneasy, whence has arisen this fearful jeopardy? It arises from this fatal system; it arises from a proposal to change our government a proposal that goes to the utter annihilation of the most solemn engagements of the States-a proposal of establishing nine States into a confederacy, to the eventual exclusion of four States. It goes to the annihilation of those solemn treaties we have formed with foreign nations. The present circumstances of France, the good Offices rendered us by that kingdom, require our most faithful and most punctual adherence to our treaty with her. We are in alliance with the Spaniards, the Dutch, the Prussians: those treaties bound us as thirteen States, confederated together. Yet here is a proposal to sever that confederacy. Is it possible that we shall abandon all our treaties and national engage such, he had sworn to obey it. He had seen it administered with closed doors until the seventeenth of the following And for what? I expected to have heard the reasons of an event so unexpected to t So general was the conviction that public welfare re- my mind, and many others. Was our civil quired a government of more extensive powers than those polity, or public justice, endangered or sapped? vested in the general government by the articles of confed- Was the real existence of the country threateration, that in May, 1787, a convention composed of dele- ened, or was this preceded by a mournful progates from all the States in the Union, with the exception ofgression of events? This proposal of altering Rhode Island, assembled at Philadelphia, to take the subject our federal government is of a most alarming under consideration. This convention continued its sessions nature: make the best of this new government September, when the Federal Constitution was promulgated.say it is composed of any thing but inspiraThe convention resolved, "That the constitution be laid be- tion-you ought to be extremely cautious, fore the United States, in Congress assembled, and that it is watchful, jealous of your liberty; for, instead the opinion of this convention that it should afterwards be of securing your rights, you may lose them for ever. If a wrong step be now made, the republic may be lost for ever. If this new government will not come up to the expectation of the people, and they should be disappointed, their liberty will be lost, and tyranny must and will arise. I repeat it again, and I beg gentlemen to consider, that a wrong step, made now, will plunge us into misery, and our republic will be lost. It will be necessary for this convention to have a faithful historical detail of the facts that preceded the session of the federal conven submitted to a convention of delegates, chosen in each State by the people thereof, for their assent and ratification;" and in conformity with this recommendation, Congress, on the twenty-eighth of the same month, passed a resolution directing that the constitution should be submitted to conventions, to be assembled in the several States of the Union. The conventions subsequently assembled, and the expediency of adopting the constitution was ably and eloquently dis cussed. This speech was delivered in the Virginia convention, on the fourth of June, 1788. This inquiry was answered by an eloquent and powerful speech from Mr. Randolph; and the debate passed into other hands until the next day, when Mr. Henry continued: MR. CHAIRMAN: I am much obliged to the very worthy gentleman* for his encomium. I wish I were possessed of talents, or possessed of any thing, that might enable me to elucidate this great subject. I am not free from suspicion: I am apt to entertain doubts: I rose yesterday to ask a question, which arose in my own mind. When I asked that question, I thought the meaning of my interrogation was obvious: the fate of this question and of America, may depend on this. Have they said, We, the States? Have they made a proposal of a compact between States? If they had, this would be a confederation: it is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government. The whole question turns, sir, on that poor little thingthe expression, We, the People, instead of the States of America. I need not take much pains to show, that the principles of this system are extremely pernicious, impolitic, and dangerous. Is this a monarchy, like England— a compact between prince and people; with checks on the former to secure the liberty of the latter? Is this a confederacy, like Holland tion, and the reasons that actuated its members | could have arisen under the present confederain proposing an entire alteration of government tion, and what are the causes of this proposal -and to demonstrate the dangers that awaited to change our government. us. If they were of such awful magnitude as to warrant a proposal so extremely perilous as this, I must assert that this convention has an absolute right to a thorough discovery of every circumstance relative to this great event. And here I would make this inquiry of those worthy characters who composed a part of the late federal convention. I am sure they were fully impressed with the necessity of forming a great consolidated government, instead of a confederation. That this is a consolidated government is demonstrably clear; and the danger of such a government is, to my mind, very striking. I have the highest veneration for those gentlemen; but, sir, give me leave to demand, what right had they to say, "We, the People?" My political curiosity, exclusive of my anxious solicitude for the public welfare, leads me to ask, who authorized them to speak the language of, "We, the People," instead of We, the States? States are the characteristics, and the soul of a confederation. If the States be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great consolidated national government of the people of all the States. I have the highest respect for those gentlemen who formed the convention; and were some of them not here, I would express some testimonial of esteem for them. America had on a former occasion put the utmost confidence in them; a confidence which was well placed; and I am sure, sir, I would give up any thing to them; I would cheerfully confide in them as my representatives. But, sir, on this great occasion, I would demand the cause of their conduct. Even from that illustrious man, who saved us by his valor, I would have a reason for his conduct; that liberty which he has given us by his valor, tells me to ask this reason, and sure I am, were he here, he would give us that reason: but there are other gentlemen here, who can give us this information. The people gave them no power to use their name. That they exceeded their power is perfectly clear. It is not mere curiosity that actuates me; I wish to hear the real, actual, existing danger, which should lead us to take those steps so dangerous in my conception. Disorders have arisen in other parts of America, but here, sir, no dangers, no insurrection or tumult, has happened; every thing has been calm and tranquil. But notwithstanding this, we are wandering on the great ocean of human affairs. I see no landmark to guide us. We are running we know not whither. Difference in opinion has gone to a degree of inflammatory resentment, in different parts of the country, which has been occasioned by this perilous innovation. The federal convention ought to have amended the old system; for this purpose they were solely delegated: the object of their mission extended to no other consideration. You must therefore forgive the solicitation of one unworthy member, to know what danger an association of a number of independent States, each of which retains its individual sovereignty? It is not a democracy, wherein the people retain all their rights securely. Had these principles been adhered to, we should not have been brought to this alarming transition, from a confederacy to a consolidated government. We have no detail of those great considerations which, in my opinion, ought to have abounded before we should recur to a government of this kind. Here is a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain. It is as radical, if in this transition, our rights and privileges are endangered, and the sovereignty of the States relinquished. And cannot we plainly see that this is actually * General Lee, of Westmoreland, speaking in reference to Mr. Henry's opening speech, had remarked to the convention, "I feel every power of my mind moved by the language of the honorable gentleman yesterday. The éclat and brilliancy which have distinguished that gentleman, the honors with which he has been dignified, and the brilliant talents which he has so often displayed, have attracted my respect and attention. On so important an occasion, and be fore so respectable a body, I expected a new display of his powers of oratory; but, instead of proceeding to investigate the merits of the new plan of government, the worthy char acter informs us of horrors which he felt, of apprehensions in his mind, which made him tremblingly fearful of the fate of the commonwealth. Mr. Chairman, was it proper to appeal to the fear of this House? The question before us belongs to the judgment of this House. I trust he is come to judge, and not to alarm." |