|
Patrick Henry, June 4, 1788
Henry's statesmanship did not end
with the Revolution and the achievement of independence. While
recognizing the need to augment the financial resources of
the confederation congress, he was critical of the extensive
of powers given to the central government by the Constitution
of 1787. Patrick Henry's speech on June 4, 1788, was Henry's
opening speech to the Virginia Convention that was debating
whether to ratify the proposed new Constitution of the United
States. This Convention met in Richmond from June 2 to June
27, 1788. By a vote of 79 to 88 on June 26 the Convention
ratified the Constitution and recommended twenty amendments
and a bill of rights based on the Virginia
Declaration of Rights.
Mr. HENRY. 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 at being brought from that state of full security,
which they enjoyed, to the present delusive appearance of
things. A year ago, the minds of our citizens were at perfect
repose. Before the meeting of the late federal Convention
at Philadelphia, a general peace and a universal tranquillity
prevailed in this country; 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 conceived 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 engagements?--and
for what? I expected to hear the reasons for an event so unexpected
to my mind and many others. Was our civil polity, or public
justice, endangered or sapped? Was the real existence of the
country threatened, or was this preceded by a mournful progression
of events? This proposal of altering our federal government
is of a most alarming nature! Make the best of this new government--say
it is composed by any thing but inspiration--you ought to
be extremely cautious, watchful, jealous of your liberty;
for, instead of securing your rights, you may lose them forever.
If a wrong step be now made, the republic may be lost forever.
If this new government will not come up to the expectation
of the people, and they shall 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 Convention, and the reasons that
actuated its members in proposing an entire alteration of
government, and to demonstrate the dangers that awaited 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 [George Washington], 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 have 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 of
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 could have arisen
under the present Confederation, and what are the causes of
this proposal to change our government.
|
