Governor Barbour, of Virginia, in his speech in the U.S.  Senate, on the Missouri question, Jan. 1820, said:  “We are asked why has Virginia changed her policy in reference to slavery?  That the sentiments of our most distinguished men, for thirty years entirely corresponded with the course which the friends of the restriction (of slavery in Missouri) now advocated; and that the Virginia delegation, one of whom was the late President of the United States, voted for the restriction (of slavery) in the northwestern territory, and that Mr. Jefferson has delineated a gloomy picture of the baneful effects of slavery.  When it is recollected that the Notes of Mr. Jefferson were written during the progress of the revolution, it is no matter of surprise that the writer should have imbibed a large portion of that enthusiasm which such an occasion was so well calculated to produce.  As to the consent of the Virginia delegation to the restriction in question, whether the result of a disposition to restrain the slave-trade indirectly, or the influence of that enthusiasm to which I have just alluded, * * * * it is not now important to decide.  We have witnessed its effects.  The liberality of Virginia, or, as the result may prove, her folly, which submitted to, or, if you will, PROPOSED this measure (abolition of slavery in the N.W. territory) has eventuated in effects which speak a monitory lesson. How is the representation from this quarter on the present question?”

Mr. Imlay, in his early history of Kentucky, p. 185, says:  “We have disgraced the fair face of humanity, and trampled upon the sacred privileges of man, at the very moment that we were exclaiming against the tyranny of your (the English) ministry.  But in contending for the birthright of freedom, we have learned to feel for the bondage of others, and in the libations we offer to the goddess of liberty, we contemplate an emancipation of the slaves of this country, as honorable to themselves as it will be glorious to us.”

In the debate in Congress, Jan. 20, 1806, on Mr. Sloan’s motion to lay a tax on the importation of slaves, Mr. Clark of Va. said:  “He was no advocate for a system of slavery.”  Mr. Marion, of S. Carolina, said:  “He never had purchased, nor should he ever purchase a slave.”  Mr. Southard said:  “Not revenue, but an expression of the national sentiment is the principal object.”  Mr. Smilie—­“I rejoice that the word (slave) is not in the constitution; its not being there does honor to the worthies who would not suffer it to become a part of it.”  Mr. Alston, of N. Carolina—­“In two years we shall have the power to prohibit the trade altogether.  Then this House will be unanimous.  No one will object to our exercising our full constitutional powers.”  National Intelligencer, Jan. 24, 1806.