having known others who paid it—it was a
mistake to say that it was grievous and op-
pressive. I denied the statement as a state-
ment of fact, because I had lived under the
operations of such a tax. And I do now deny
the statement as a statement of fact, whoever
makes it. it was the law in Virginia, where
resided and acted some of the wisest states-
men of this country, to which the gentleman
himself has already incidentally alluded.
Mr. CHAMBERS. I am very happy to hear
that the gentleman exempts himself—for I
believe "exemption" is the fashionable phrase
now—exempts himself from conscription to
the new doctrine.
Mr. PUGH. I do not exempt myself from
my words, for I repeat them. But I exempt
myself from the interpretation put upon them.
Mr. CHAMBERS. He does not choose to be
classed among those who think that our fore-
fathers were fools, and that the men of the
last Convention were knaves. He exempts
himself from any such imputation as that.
Mr. PUGH. Undoubtedly I do.
Mr. CHAMBERS. I have been taught to be-
lieve in the verity of the old maxim—actions
speak louder than words. Now, where is
the veneration for the patriarchs who have
gone down to the grave Bill of honor, and
whose names will be borne to posterity with
reverence? At least I trust so; God forbid
that this irreverent generation should propa-
gate that particular characteristic of itself.
Where is the reverence for such men? What
are we doing? Treading their work under
our feet; denouncing it as incompetent;
adopting notions which they never enter-
tained. Never entertained? Which they
repudiated; which they denounced; which
they abjured; which they considered hereti-
cal. And we glory in it. We have all know-
ledge with us; we are the first to pioneer a
new road, an untrodden path. We go to
glory by steps which our forefathers knew
nothing of, or rather which they thought not
fit to tread. Now, the gentleman exempts
himself from that. But that does not at all
change the character of my argument.
Mr. President, is there a family, I may al-
most say, is there an individual, who has not
bad motives for personal excitement, for agi-
tation of feeling, for a course of thought ut-
terly inconsistent with the calmness required
in the preparation of a paper, which, as Judge
Marshall says, looks to be immortal, to teach
lessons of political wisdom to those who are
to come after us; telling them what men, not
in a time of war, of strife, of bloodshed, of
carnage and death—but what men, in the
pursuit of their rights of property and person
and reputation, would ask for them? Would
any man go to the camp to prepare a Consti-
tution? Would any man go to the general's
tent, and amid the noise and bustle of con-
flicting armies, undertake to prepare a Con-
stitution for the government of a people for |
all time? This is an extreme proposition;
but sometimes extreme propositions are the
best test of truth. We are in the midst of a
camp. Every day the roar of the cannon
sounds in our ears; every day the news is
brought to us of the death of some beloved
son, some beloved husband, some being upon
whom the wife and the infant child depend
for maintenance and support. We are vir-
tually in the tent; we are virtually in a war
which gives character to our thoughts and
our actions; and which will set our thoughts
and our actions in a direction very different
from that which they ought to take while we
are framing a Constitution for the govern-
ment of future generations. And are not
gentlemen sensible of this fact? Is there a
man within the sound of my voice that does
not feel, that will not affirmatively respond
to this demand made to his conscience ?—
who will not confirm the truth of the state-
ment that he is not in the cool, culm, delib-
erate temper fitted for the performance of
such a duty as this ?
Now, do not let me be misunderstood. I
do not mean that we shall quit the" duty we
are sent here to perform. But I do mean
this: I do say that gentlemen, if they are
sensible of this state of mind, will forbear
to take this action; they will forbear to
interpolate in this constitution principles and
doctrines which never before have been thought
proper to be entertained here, and which no
State in this Union has thought it proper to
adopt in their Constitution.
Now, if there is any reverence for the work
of our ancestors; if there is any charity for
the opinions of our neighbors and our friends;
if there is any sense of incompetency upon
our part to go beyond all others who have
lived in times of calmness and quiet; if there
is any sense of this sort resting with us, I ap-
peal to it as a sufficient reason why gentlemen
should forbear taking such steps as were
never before thought proper to be taken, and
glorying as some gentlemen have done to be
the first to go beyond all the bounds that have
ever been regarded here as including the ac-
tion of other and calmer minds. I say, there-
fore, this is not the proper time for this article.
I say that it is not a proper subject for this
bill of rights. A bill of rights is the enu-
meration of certain principles, which, accord-
ing to the judgment of those who frame it,
should be constantly kept in view for the pro-
tection of the persona, the property, and the
reputations of those for whom it is made.
What is the object of the Government? It is
to secure us in the exercise of our personal
rights, to secure us in the possession of our
acknowledged property; to secure us repara-
tion for injury done to our reputation. Does
this answer any one of those purposes? How
is it to do it? You cannot confer power upon
the General Government; this does not do
that. If you were to enact in the name of |
