* * * * *

VIRGINIA CONVENTION.

Gov Randolph said, we are told in strong language, of dangers to which we will be exposed unless we adopt this Constitution.  Among the rest, domestic safety is said to be in danger.  This government does not attend to our domestic safety.  It authorizes the importation of slaves for twenty-odd years, and thus continues upon us that nefarious trade.  Instead of securing and protecting us, the continuation of this detestable trade adds daily to our weakness.  Though this evil is increasing, there is no clause in the Constitution that will prevent the northern and eastern States from meddling with our whole property of that kind.  There is a clause to prohibit the importation of slaves after twenty years, but there is no provision made for securing to the southern States those they now possess.  It is far from being a desirable property.  But it will involve us in great difficulties and infelicity to be now deprived of them.  There ought to be a clause in the Constitution to secure us that property, which we have acquired under our former laws, and the loss of which would bring ruin on a great many people.

Mr. Lee.  The honorable gentleman abominates it, because it does not prohibit the importation of slaves, and because it does not secure the continuance of the existing slavery!  Is it not obviously inconsistent to criminate it for two contradictory reasons?  I submit it to the consideration of the gentleman, whether, if it be reprehensible in the one case, it can be censurable in the other?  Mr. Lee then concluded by earnestly recommending to the committee to proceed regularly.

Mr. Henry.  It says, that “no state shall engage in war, unless actually invaded.”  If you give this clause a fair construction, what is the true meaning of it?  What does this relate to?  Not domestic insurrections, but war.  If the country be invaded, a state may go to war; but cannot suppress insurrections.  If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded.—­They cannot therefore suppress it, without the interposition of congress.

Mr. George Nicholas said, another worthy member says, there is no power in the States to quell an insurrection of slaves.  Have they it now?  If they have, does the Constitution take it away?  If it does, it must be in one of the three clauses which have been mentioned by the worthy member.  The first clause gives the general government power to call them out when necessary.  Does this take it away from the States?  No.  But it gives an additional security:  for, besides the power in the State governments to use their own militia, it will be the duty of the general government to aid them with the strength of the Union when called for.  No part of the Constitution can show that this power is taken away.