comes, the same privileges as those who actually contribute to the support and the defence of the government. The gentleman has referred to the services of the militia which I had the honour to command-does the gentleman suppose that that militia was composed of this wandering population? No, sir; they were farmers and farmers' sons. I am not anxious to discuss this subject at large, but beg to submit a substitute for the first clause, which goes as far as I think it safe or proper to go. To extend the right of suffrage beyond this, would, in my judgment, at some future time, when the number of inhabitants in this state not owning land, will be vastly greater than that of the land owners, subject the rights of landed property to imminent danger. Mr. Van Rensselaer then submitted the following substitute:

"Every male citizen, of the age of 21 years, who shall have resided in the state one year, and in the city or county where he may claim to vote six months preceding an election; and within the last two years shall have been assessed and paid a state, county, or town tax, together with the sons of citizens qualified as aforesaid, above the age of 21 years, and not exceeding years, who may nei. ther have been assessed nor paid any such tax, shall be entitled to vote for governor, lieutenant-governor, senators, members of assembly, and for every other officer to be elected by the people."

MR. FAIRLIE felt himself called upon by the unusual and improper reference of the gentleman from Genesee, (Mr. Ross,) to the views of the minority in the select committee, and particularly to those of the honourable gentleman from Albany, (Mr. S. Van Rensselaer) to state, that the gentleman from Albany was not alone in that committee in his opposition to the admission to the right of suffrage of militiamen, and persons working on the roads. He had concurred in that opposition, though he did not mean to be understood as saying, that, after a full discussion of the question, he might not feel himself at liberty to vote for the clause as reported.

Cor.. YOUNG moved to amend the substitute offered by the gentleman frors Albany, by inserting the word "white" before citizens.

MR. JAY. The chairman of the select committee has given a fair and candid exposition of the reasons that induced them to make the report now under consideration, and of the motives by which they were governed. He has clearly stated why they were desirous of extending the right of suffrage to some who did not at present enjoy it, but he has wholly omitted to explain why they deny it to others who actually possess it. The omission, however, has been supplied by one of his colleagues, who informed us that all who were not white ought to be excluded from political rights, because such persons were incapable of exercising them discreetly, and because they were peculiarly liable to be influenced and corrupted. These reasons, sir, I shall notice presently. When this Convention was first assembled, it was generally understood that provisions would be made to extend the right of suffrage, and some were apprehensive that it might be extended to a degree which they could not approve. But, sir, it was not expected that this right was in any instance to be restricted, much less was it anticipated, or desired, that a single person was to be disfranchised. Why, sir, are these men to be excluded from rights which they possess in common with their countrymen? What crime have they committed for which they are to be punished? Why are they, who were born as free as ourselves, natives of the same country, and deriving from nature and our political institutions, the same rights and privileges which we have, now to be deprived of all those rights, and doomed to remain forever as aliens among us? We are told, in reply, that other states have set us the example. It is true that other states treat this race of men with cruelty and injustice, and that we have hitherto manifested towards them a disposition to be just and liberal. Yet even in Virginia and North-Carolina, free people of colour are permitted to vote, and if I am correctly informed, exercise that privilege. In Pennsylvania, they are much more numerous than they are here, and there they are not disfranchised, nor has any inconvenience been felt from extending to all men the rights which ought to be common to all. In Connecticut, it is true, they have, for the last three years,

adopted a new constitution which prevents people of colour from acquiring the right of suffrage in future, yet even there they have preserved the right to all those who previously possessed it.

Mr. Chairman, I would submit to the consideration of the committee, whether the proposition of the gentleman from Saratoga is consistent with the constitution of the United States. That instrument provides that "citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." No longer ago than last November, the legislature of this state almost unanimously resolved, that "if the provisions contained in any proposed constitution of a new state, deny to any citizens of the existing states the privileges and immunities of citizens of such new state, that such proposed constitution should not be accepted or confirmed; the same in the opinion of this legislature being void by the constitution of the United States." Now, sir, is not the right of suffrage a privilege? And can you deny it to a citizen of Pennsylvania who comes here and complies with your laws, merely because he is not six feet high, or because he is of a dark complexion?

But we are told by one of the select committee, that people of colour are incapable of exercising the right of suffrage. I may have misunderstood that gentleman; but I thought he meant to say, that they laboured under a physical disability. It is true that some philosophers have held that the intellect of a black man, is naturally inferior to that of a white one; but this idea has been so completely refuted, and is now so universally exploded, that I did not expect to have heard of it in an assembly so enlightened as this, nor do I now think it necessary to disprove it. That in general the people of colour are inferior to the whites in knowledge and in industry, I shall not deny. You made them slaves, and nothing is more true than the ancient saying, “The day you make a man a slave takes half his worth away." Unaccustomed to provide for themselves, and habituated to regard labour as an evil, it is no wonder that when set free, they should be improvident and idle, and that their children should be brought up without education, and without prudence or forethought. But will you punish the children for your own crimes; for the injuries which you have inflicted upon their parents? Besides, sir, this state of things is fast passing away. Schools have been opened for them, and it will, I am sure, give pleasure to this committee to know, that in these schools there is discovered a thirst for instruction, and a progress in learning, seldom to be seen in the other schools of the state. They have also churches of their own, and clergymen of their own colour, who conduct their public worship with perfect decency and order, and not without ability.

This state, Mr. Chairman, has taken high ground against slavery, and all its degrading consequences and accompaniments. There are gentlemen on this floor, who, to their immortal honour, have defended the cause of this oppressed people in congress, and I trust they will not now desert them. Adopt the amendment now proposed, and you will hear a shout of triumph and a hiss of scorn from the southern part of the union, which I confess will mortify me-I shall shrink at the sound, because I fear it will be deserved. But it has been said that this measure is necessary to preserve the purity of your elections. I do not deny that necessity has no law, and that self-preservation may justify in states, as well as in individuals, an infringement of the rights of others. Were I a citizen of one of the southern states, I would not (much as I abhor slavery) advise an immediate and universal emancipation. But where is the necessity in the present instance? The whole number of coloured people in the state, whether free or in bondage, amounts to less than a fortieth part of the whole population. When your numbers are to theirs as forty to one, do you still fear them? To assert this, would be to pay them a compliment which, I am sure, you do not think they deserve. But there are a greater number in the city of New-York. How many? Sir, in even that city, the whites are to the blacks as ten to one. And even of the tenth which is composed of the black population, how few are there that are entitled to vote? It has also been said that their numbers are rapidly increasing. The very reverse is the fact. During the last ten years, in which the white population has advanced with astonishing rapidity, the coloured population of the state has been stationary. This fact

appears from the official returns of the last and the preceding census, and completely refutes the arguments which are founded upon this mis-statement. Will you, then, without necessity, and merely to gratify an unreasonable prejudice, stain the constitution you are about to form, with a provision equally odious and unjust, and in direct violation of the principles which you profess, and upon which you intend to form it? I trust, I am sure, you will not.

GEN. ROOT, after a few introductory remarks, and observations upon the order in which the amendments had been proposed by the honourable gentlemen from Albany and Saratoga, (Messrs. Young and S. Van Rensselaer,) proceeded to explain his views of the social compact.

Sir, said Mr. R. in the formation of a social compact, which generally grows out of exigency, when the people are but a little removed from their barbarous and rude state, they are not particular in enumerating the principles upon which they thus unite; but when they become more enlightened, they will undertake to say who shall belong to their family.

In my judgment, every one who is taken into the bosom of that family, and made to contribute, either in property or personal service, to the benefit of that family, should have a voice in managing its concerns. It cannot be denied, that the preservation of property is a much less consideration, than that of a security in our liberty and independence. Every member of this political family, who is worthy to be one of its members, will prize much higher the freedom of the country, than the preservation of property.

Sir, for the preservation, or protection of property, you require a contribution in property towards the public fund-you do this in the case of an alien, who may hold property and be protected by the laws of your country, in the enjoyment of that property; but he is not allowed to vote. An alien is sometimes permitted, by a particular law to hold property; and if he is an able bodied man, he is required to fight in defence of this country, yet he is not allowed to vote. The reasons are, that notwithstanding he may live among us and enjoy the benefit of our freedom, he may have a partiality for some foreign country; therefore, he is not to partake fully of our privileges till after a certain probationary season. The black population have a right to hold property, and are protected in the enjoyment of it by our laws: but, sir, in case of an invasion or insurrection, neither the alien nor black man is bound to defend your country. They are not called on, because it is supposed there is no reliance to be placed in them, they might desert the standard and join your enemy-they have not any anchorage in your country which the government is willing to trust. Then under this view of the subject, it appears to me they cannot complain at being excluded from voting, inasmuch as they are not bound to assist in the defence of the country; but have their liberty secured to them. It would be improper that they should come forward and vote for the election of a commander in chief, whom they were not bound to obey. We have been told by the honourable gentleman from Westchester, (Mr. Jay) and shall be again told, that we are about to deprive these people of a franchise, with which they are now vested. Sir, it is impossible to remoddle your constitution without changing the relative rights of your citizens. It is said that these people are now entitled to vote under our constitution, and that it is proposed to deprive them of this privilege-Are there not others who are in a measure disfranchised by the report of this committee, which requires nothing but a residence, and to have paid taxes, to qualify a man to vote for governor and senators?

I am not disposed to follow the gentleman, who has referred us to the resolutions of the legislature for the two years past, instructing our members in congress on the subject of the Missouri question. Whatever our legislature may have done, it is not to affect the operations of this Convention, in deciding upon the great question before us. Their wisdom may be considered as worthy of some consideration, still I flatter myself it will not materially vary the result of this question. It is not necessary that we should enquire whether there is a just cause of alarm, for fear that these blacks will hereafter disturb our political family. At present the number of blacks who are voters is so small, that if they were scattered all over the state, there would not be much danger to be apprehended; but if we may judge of the future by the past, I should sup

adopted a new constitution which prevents people of colour from acquiring the right of suffrage in future, yet even there they have preserved the right to all those who previously possessed it.

Mr. Chairman, I would submit to the consideration of the committee, whether the proposition of the gentleman from Saratoga is consistent with the constitution of the United States. That instrument provides that "citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." No longer ago than last November, the legislature of this state almost unanimously resolved, that "if the provisions contained in any proposed constitution of a new state, deny to any citizens of the existing states the privileges and immunities of citizens of such new state, that such proposed constitution should not be accepted or confirmed; the same in the opinion of this legislature being void by the constitution of the United States." Now, sir, is not the right of suffrage a privilege? And can you deny it to a citizen of Pennsylvania who comes here and complies with your laws, merely because he is not six feet high, or because he is of a dark complexion?

But we are told by one of the select committee, that people of colour are incapable of exercising the right of suffrage. I may have misunderstood that gentleman; but I thought he meant to say, that they laboured under a physical disability. It is true that some philosophers have held that the intellect of a black man, is naturally inferior to that of a white one; but this idea has been so completely refuted, and is now so universally exploded, that I did not expect to have heard of it in an assembly so enlightened as this, nor do I now think it necessary to disprove it. That in general the people of colour are inferior to the whites in knowledge and in industry, I shall not deny. You made them slaves, and nothing is more true than the ancient saying, "The day you make a man a slave takes half his worth away." Unaccustomed to provide for themselves, and habituated to regard labour as an evil, it is no wonder that when set free, they should be improvident and idle, and that their children should be brought up without education, and without prudence or forethought. But will you punish the children for your own crimes; for the injuries which you have inflicted upon their parents? Besides, sir, this state of things is fast passing away. Schools have been opened for them, and it will, I am sure, give pleasure to this committee to know, that in these schools there is discovered a thirst for instruction, and a progress in learning, seldom to be seen in the other schools of the state. They have also churches of their own, and clergymen of their own colour, who conduct their public worship with perfect decency and order, and not without ability.

This state, Mr. Chairman, has taken high ground against slavery, and all its degrading consequences and accompaniments. There are gentlemen on this floor, who, to their immortal honour, have defended the cause of this oppressed people in congress, and I trust they will not now desert them. Adopt the amendment now proposed, and you will hear a shout of triumph and a hiss of scorn from the southern part of the union, which I confess will mortify meshall shrink at the sound, because I fear it will be deserved. But it has been said that this measure is necessary to preserve the purity of your elections. I do not deny that necessity has no law, and that self-preservation may justify in states, as well as in individuals, an infringement of the rights of others. Were I a citizen of one of the southern states, I would not (much as I abhor slavery) advise an immediate and universal emancipation. But where is the necessity in the present instance? The whole number of coloured people in the state, whether free or in bondage, amounts to less than a fortieth part of the whole population. When your numbers are to theirs as forty to one, do you still fear them? To assert this, would be to pay them a compliment which, I am sure, you do not think they deserve. But there are a greater number in the city of New-York. How many? Sir, in even that city, the whites are to the blacks as ten to one. And even of the tenth which is composed of the black population, how few are there that are entitled to vote? It has also been said that their numbers are rapidly increasing. The very reverse is the fact. During the last ten years, in which the white population has advanced with astonishing rapidity, the coloured population of the state has been stationary. This fact