thermometer, and found, by actual experiment, that the air was colder within the cells, than on the outside of the prison. This was owing to the strong current, which was created by the stoves in the corridor adjoining. They would have perished - they must have perished, had it not been for the kindness of the citizens, who sent them hot drinks, and a plenty of warm food; and also lamps to burn day and night, that the cheering light, and slight warmth, might, in some degree, alleviate the sufferings of those miserable men. Their food was better than at Providence, and it was, perhaps, sufficient to sustain life; but they never had enough to satisfy the cravings of hunger of ordinary appetites.

Is it not strange that such gross outrages upon the rights of humanity, should have been committed in the face and eyes of the whole world, and so little have been said about it? A whole political party, either openly advocated, or resolutely shut their eyes upon the facts; and where were the Abolitionists, the professed philanthropists of the North, that they did not enter their protest against these proceedings?

If a band of colored men had been marched through the streets of Providence, under the same circumstances all New England would have been in a blaze. I have yet to learn, that black men are better than white men, or that their rights are any more sacred!

CHAPTER XVI.

OUTLINES OF HISTORY.

DURING the June Session of the General Assem-' bly, a report reached that body, that a very large force was gathered at Acote Hill, for the purpose of sustaining the People's Constitution. According to their established mode of operation, that of relinquishing their usurped power only upon compulsion, the Convention was immediately convened for the purpose of framing a Constitution, and the work was pushed through in such a manner, as to occasion several mistakes. The Constitution was finally adopted, by the Convention assembled at Newport, in September, 1842—a law having been passed, sanctioning its adoption by a MINORITY; and this after the Legislature had repeatedly denied their right to move in the matter; that they could do nothing without the authority of their constituents. It is a curious fact, that, after all their ridicule and contempt of the People's Constitution, the learned and sapient Landholders should have made it the model of theirs! and, in fact, have taken it almost entire, only modifying some of its most important provisions, so as to keep the power still in the right place. Here is another presumptive evidence that the Chartists believed that the people had a majority of votes for their Constitution, or why were they at so much pains to assimilate their own to it? They would not have been, had they not considered that Constitution popular. They certainly had sufficient invention; and they embodied a large amouht of learning and talent. Why did they not produce an original document? The reason why is very evident. The People's Constitution had been adopted by a large majority; and, of course, whatever came nearest to

that, would be most likely to succeed. Accordingly, with some very delicate incisions, and some masterly corrections, which were insinuated into the work so softly, as to alarm none but the practised eye, the People's Constitution was again given to the world. I cannot enumerate all the objectionable points, but will name a few of the chief dangers embodied in the present Constitution.

1. The majority, 57,196, are entitled to but 6 Senators, and 39 Representatives, while the minority, 51,642, are entitled to 25 Senators, and 39 Representatives.

2. Foreigners and colored men, if they be freeholders, are allowed a vote after a residence in the / State of one year, while a free native citizen of the United States, if he be not a freeholder, must have resided in the State two years, before he can vote.

3. It excludes Firemen and Revolutionary Soldiers.

4. The People's Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 2, provides not only for the possession, but the transmission of property; a right which is said to be guarded so well, in no other American Constitution. On this the freeholders are silent, notwithstanding they have had so much loud talking, and so much fine writing, about the Rights of Property, and their destined violation by the Suffrage Party.

5. Section 4, of the same Article of the People's Constitution, contains this provision; "That no favor or disfavor ought to be shown in legislation, towards any man, or party, or society, or religious denomination. The laws should be made not for the good of the few, but of THE MANY; and the burdens of the State ought to be fairly distributed among the citizens." The Freeholders are again silent. The idea of legislating for the good of the many, would have been the height of absurdity, to a Convention, who, from sheer habit,

as well as principle, could do no otherwise than act for the minority, leaving the rights of the majority to take care of themselves. In all the proceedings of all her councils, legislatures, and courts, Rhode Island has always acted with regard to the rights of the FEW and that not unfrequently, to the utter exclusion of the rights of the many.

6. Section 12, of the People's Constitution, gives. the accused, in criminal prosecutions, power to obtain witnesses at the public expense, that the poverty of the accused may be no barrier to the free accession of justice. This has not been secured in the corresponding section of the Landholders'.

7. The Landholders' Constitution does not secure the right of trial by jury, to "Any person in this State who may be claimed, or held to service under the laws of any other State."

8. It does not recognise the right of instructing Senators and Representatives by the people, as does the People's, Section 17. This Section corresponds with Section 16 of the Protest of 1790. The rejection of this important right by the Freeholders, seems to show that the Representatives are not to do the will of the People, but THEIR OWN WILL; or, in other words, to act according to the dictates of their especial grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, according to Charter usage. Thus have the Rhode Island Republicans of 1842, refused to recognise a very important principle, and cut off a long-cherished branch of old English Liberty. Is this an evidence. of progress?

9. It does not provide that compensation shall be actually made, if required, before a man's property shall be taken for public uses.

10. It does not prohibit the passing of retrospective civil, as well as criminal laws.

11. It does not protect witnesses from being called

in question for their religious opinions, before the Legislature, or the Courts.

12. In Article 2, Section 2, of the Landholders* Constitution, a blank is left for the future insertion of the word "White." Their first Constitution contained the word, without any special provision for its speedy rejection, as did the People's; nor is it to be presumed that they ever intended to reject it. But when they found themselves in a fearful minority, and knew that their injured fellow citizens were proceeding to demand their rights at the point of the bayonet, they then saw that some concessions must be made; and, in many respects, their second Constitution is far more liberal than their first; but whatever it is, is not due to them, but to their FEARS. In this dilemma they took advantage of the situation of the colored population. Without one particle of friendliness towards the colored race, but from sheer necessity, they extended to them a valuable privilege, reserving by legal enactment, the right to withdraw it at any time they pleased, merely to promote their own selfish and wicked purposes. They made the colored men voters, not because it was their right, but because they needed their help, and when they no longer need it, a law is all ready, to provide for the disenfranchisement of the tools, for which they have no further use. If I could reach the ear of every colored man who has voted under this Constitution, I would tell him that he is a DUPE that he knows not his enemies; that by the very terms of his admission to the right of Suffrage, he is chattelized; and that he is the victim of treachery of the blackest dye.

The Chartists have preached pro-slavery in Washington, and anti-slavery in Rhode Island; and at the very time when Senator Simmons was inflaming the prejudices of the Southern Democrats, by representing the Free Suffrage as an Abolition movement, his