Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-01-15
-

rights and franchises OF British subjact Taxation
and representation were in the estimation of every
true Englishman, inseparable; and the violation of
the great principle would afford just cause for break
ing loose from the mother country, in the opinion not
only of the people of England but of France and
Spain, to whichss is evident from the letters and me.
moranda of the times, mainly looked for succor
during the conea while those nations might be sup.
posed TO hesitate in approving the temper OF paper
the abstract doctrines Of which might lead to the abo
lition Of slavery in their colonies and to the over
throw Of their governments at home. But we will
say more at present than 10 refer the reader to the
arguments of Mr.. r., who never speaks at random,
but who we think, has been insensibly led by his af
fiction for Washington and Jefferson 10 press some
what harder Lee than is agreeable TO our love for
that great patriot.
We must hasten in our course although we would
willingly dwell on each chapter Of the Life, if our
limits allo we'd us. The sixth chapter has interest
yet deeper than any that precede it. 1t embraces
three of the most eventful and honorable years
Of Jeursons career, and extends from l776 to 1879.
If Jefferson had done nothing before or after those
memorable years, he would still have achieved a re-.
putntion law -gver, superior to that of any pub
lie man Of the eighteenth century. We aude to bis
career in the House of Delegates of Virginia. And
it affords pleasure to say that his great services
during that period have been recorded by Mr.. Ran
dali with great funess, with eminent ability, and in
proper spirit Of appreciation. Whoever desires TO
trace Jefferson as legislator whether in the House
Of Delegates, or Revisor OF the Laws, will find
in this chapter nearly all that he wishes to know.
But, We wish this work to be in the hands of every
reading man in the country, and to be as accurate
and full as possible, we will make one or two re
marks by the way. We wish Mr.. X. had stated re.
specting the Preamble to the Constitution of l776,
drafted by Jefferson, that it retained by the sub.
sequent Conventions of Virginia, and still holds IFS
honored place. In speaking Of the measures of the
House Of Delegates Mr. r. ntimstes the possibility
that R. II. Lse might have had hand in the act
reducing the Delegates in Congress from seven TO
four. So far from his having any connection with
that scheme, which we believe was honestly design.
ed by Jefferson to expense and Ia curtai too
numerous delegation. he complains in letter TO
Henry, in hs Red Hill papers, that he believed that
twas aimed expressly at him. Mr.. Jefferson states
in his Memoir that two OF the Revisors, not being
lawyers, Mason and Ludws Lee.) declined taking
part. He was followed in this statement by Professor
Tucker and Mr.. r. although he furnishes HE reader
with the means of correcting the error, follows the
Professor. The fact is that Ludwell Lee able
lawyer, and was elected of the Judges of the Ge
neral Court, some formidable opponents n fact
mentioned by Mr. K. in his account Of the Judiciary
Of Virginia. On page 2l4 it is stated that the articles
of confederation ratified by the Assembly anan.
mousiy. We cannot blame Mr. K. for making a
statement which seems to be confirmed by the jour
nails Of the Assembly; yet it is certain that there was
opposition, and it was manifested by the same men
who opposed the Declaration of independence. This
fact is expressly stated by Henry in letter to r. H.
Lse dated December, Is, l777; and we may add that
it plain from this statement of Henry hatf he had
himself hestated in the cause of independence he
would have been the last living TO cas reproach
upon those who acted with him on that occasion, MIR.
r. quotes from the memoir of Jefferson his account Of
the debate on the bill creating Court Of Chancery
in which Jefferson statss that Pcndleton bad enas
culated the bill by an amendment in four words-1
either party choose. Now, it is certain that Jefersons
memory deceived him. There are no such words
in the bill a. it passed the Assembly. As Pendeton
came defeating The act abolishing entails by an
auio.I,o-' ~r g.. 1919 =. - r~--''i '""' "" Us
fersou may have coniounded the two cases, or it may
have happened that the amendment was really adopt
ed in the House where the battle was fought, and
struck out by the Senate.
One record of Mr.. K. deserves n special notice. 1t
is well known that Henry Lee the son of Gen. Henry
Lee in his volume of auimadversions on the charac
ter of jefferson, quoted the remark of Wickham
that the part Of the revision of The laws performed
by Pendleton, distinguished by its superior pre-
cision. Mr.. Randall shows that the whole of Pen.
detons part was rewritten by Wythe and Jefferson;
and, as we know Jeffersons readiness and dispatch,
it highly probable that the greater portion of the
work done by him. 50 the. compliment TO Pen
deton, which Henry Lee quoted in derogaton of JEFF
ferson s In all probability, actually due TO Jefferson
himself.
In the course of the sixth chapter, Mr. K. traces
the progress of the reformation Of the church estab
lshment, and brings together the opinions of the lead
ing Virginia Statesmen Of that age that the reader
at glance how fathers thought and acted
both sides of that remarkable controversy. better
notion of De divisions OF sentiment on the question
of church establishments and of assessments, can be
gathered from HE account, than from any other
written by layman and republican of the Jeffer
sonan stamp. In connexion with the law of entails
and in allusion to the famous sentiment attributed
falsely to George Mason Mr.. r. states a fact which
will he new 10 most of readers that Jefferson had
son born four months within The time of the passage
Of the law against entails and that he did have three
children born after ts passage; and navely remarks
that Jefferson could not have known in advance that
of them would be
On page l95, Mr.. X. quotes letter of Wythe 10
Jefferson dated July 81 1876 in which he says that
tbs Constitution just adopted, required reformation,
and that he hoped that he tJeifersonl would effect
that change in October. Mr. r. ialicises the last eI.
preston; and it is unquestionaby most significant,
ehowng that Wythe believed it practicable and pro-
per amend the Constitution at the October session
of the General Assembly. The question suggested
by the ializaton of Mr.. r. then arises, whether
Wythe believed In the competency of ordinary
Legislature to amend the Constitution We answer,
no; and point to his memorable decision eome time
after that law in conflict with the Constitution
void. How, then, can the plain and unequivocal
language Of Wythe be explained! We think the
panstion is this. The Convention of May, l776,
which framed The Constitution, and adjourned on the
5h OF July, did not adjourn sine die, but till the
frat Monday in October next, then to meet in the
such other place as the Governor, with the advice of
the Prvy Council, shall appoint" The members
had been elected in April to serve one entire year;
and as the enemy, at the time of adjournment was
still within the waters Of the Commonwealth, it
might happen that the elections, under the Conaitu
ton, might not take place, and the State be left with
out Legislature. Hence, the Convention adjourned
from July to October, but, before adjourning, the
members had elected and induoed Governor and
the Council and had ordered the election Of the mem
bers of the new Senate But the Convention did
not order an election of members of the House OF
Delegates, but what seems odd enough in our times,
when the mode of making Constitutions is familiar TO
school boys, aciaally became Tie frst Houseot Dele
gates under TIE Constitution wh'ch It framed. It is
probable that the examples of the Convention par