The Southern states of the American union, considered in their relations to the Constitution of the United States and to the resulting union

Chapter I

Introduction — Conclusions tested by authentic historical facts — Early use of the terms the " North" and the " South " — Purpose of the book to give the South its true place in the origin and history of our Government 1-5

Chapter II

Origin of the Colonies and character -of their Governments . . . . . . . . 6-9

Chapter III

Relation of the Colonies to one another — Each separate, making its own laws, with common dependence upon the English Crown and amenability to English law — Colonies drawn into fraternity, and yet necessarily isolated ...... 10-13

Chapter IV

Fruitless efforts for a closer union, with a view to protection against the Indians and the French — Claim of sovereignty by Great Britain — Hostile legislation of Parliament — The stamp tax — Patriotic conduct of Boston — Remonstrances of the Colonies — Decisive action of Virginia — Followed by other Colonies — Activity of South Carolina and Georgia — The Congress of 1765 — Repeal of the Stamp Act — Assertion and exercise of equivalent authority — Colonies indignant and firm — Committees of Correspondence 14-25

VI CONTENTS.

Chapter V. Page

The tax on tea — Action of Boston, Charleston, Philadelphia, and Annapolis — Port of Boston closed — Refusal to allow tea to be sold — Preparation for resistance — Virginia invites a Congress — Resolute acceptance of the Colonies — Functions of the Congress — Declaration of Independence, validity and significance of — Fallacy that all men are created equal — Colonies reorganized the civil corporations into distinct commonwealths — Patriotic sacrifices of the Southern States — Favored by the mother country — Partisan war — Statistics of soldiers furnished — Western campaigns and settlements 26-57

Chapter VI

Fuller statement of the character and functions of the Continental Congress — Exerted no sovereign power, was not strictly a legislative body, made no claim of intercolonial control ..... 58-66

Chapter VII

Articles of Confederation — A more powerful union needed — Surrender of the Northwest Territory by Virginia — The-Convention of 1787 — Ratification of the Constitution by conventions in the several States — Navigation of the Mississippi — What the South did to establish the Government — Magnanimity in surrendering the taxing power — Washington, the illustrious Southerner 67-91

Chapter VIII

Evolution of the two great political parties — Radical differences between them — Real nature of the Federal Union — Meaning of " We, the people " — Hamilton's effort to assimilate the new Government to the British system — Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798-99 92-109

CONTENTS. Vil

Chapter XII

Conservatism of the South — Adherence to the Constitution as a safeguard — Claim of equality — Power of Congress over the Territories — The Missouri compromise — The Wilmot proviso — Squatter sovereignty — Fugitive-slave law — Opinions of Story, Webster, and others — Statement of the views of the North and the South on the slavery question — The Supreme Court as the arbiter in political questions — Indestructible States in an indissoluble Union 148-182

Chapter XIII

Necessary inferences from anti-slavery domination — Steps leading to the organization of the Confederate States — Their constitution, the authoritative exposition of principles and purposes of the seceding States — Defensive not aggressive — Neither new nor revolutionary — Changes of opinions and laws in respect to African slavery . . . , . .183-213

CHAPTER XIV. War between the States ...... 214-218

Vlll CONTENTS.

Chapter XV. Page

Constitutional amendments — States in and out of the Union — Saturnalia of fraud and tyranny — Horrors of reconstruction — Defeat of that policy a blessing to the negroes ...... 219-233

Chapter XVI

Present status of the South — Demonstrated loyalty of her people — Mutual dependence of the sections — Duty of all good citizens . . . . . 234-248

THE SOUTHERN STATES IN THEIR

RELATION TO THE CONSTITUTION

AND THE RESULTING UNION.

Chapter I

This book is not controversial ; nor do I pretend to original research or to the discovery of unknown facts. Its aim is to reconstruct ideas and opinions adverse to the South, insofar as they are founded on ignorance and prejudice.

Freeman said, " When certain prejudices have become parts of our mental furniture, when our primary data and our methods of reasoning imply a set of local, narrow assumptions, the task of getting outside them is almost the task of getting outside of our own skins." Books on Political Science, and Constitutional Law, on the Government, written to sustain a theory, a foregone conclusion, a section, a party or pecuniary interest, often ignore or misconstrue the plainest historical facts. It has been found necessary to bring into light authentic records of official acts, forgotten or obscured or hid away, and to put upon them the original, the natural, and the rational interpretation. Characteristics of institutions, and of constitutional law, may be ascertained from a study of the origin and history of the forces in operation anterior to the Constitution, which forces really were the source of its existence*y^t has therefore seemed f mecessary to go behind 1789, in order to underfstand what led to the adoption of the Constitution, and what kind of government the States established. That conquerors should make laws for the conquered seems a political, as it is the ordinary, consequence of the conquest. It is not so obvious, nor so logical, that they I should make history. It is fortunate that authentic records survive to guide the impartial historian, or the inquirer into political philosophy. /

From an early period, the Colonies of the southern portion of the British possessions were, in the broad phrase, specialized as Southern. In course of time, the South became a geographical term to designate the slave-holding section, and a political term to designate a theory of government, or a peculiar Interpretation of the Constitution. "■ South and North," as descriptive classifications, became fixed in our political vocabulary, and parties were distinguished by local discriminations or epithets. In the Constitutional Convention, Madison said the antagonism between North and South would prove the most deep-seated and enduring of all. " It seems now to be pretty well understood that the real difference of interests lay, not between the large and small, but between the Northern and Southern States.",^/ " The institution of slavery and its consequences tormed the Tine"'of discrirhination." Bancroft says: ( " An ineradicable dread of the coming power of the Southwest lurked in New England, especially in Massachusetts." ^

T;n 1796, the Hartford Courmity an organ of the Federalists, spoke of the '' general opposition of sentiment which distinguishes the two great districts of territory." An " opposition of interest " was " strongly exemplified within the walls of the Constitutional Congress during the Revolutionary War.** In the North Carolina Convention, 1788, Col. Bloodworth said, "When I was in Congress the Northern and Southern interests divided at the Susquehanna." The Ordinance of 1787 drew out many hostile, or suspicious expressions. Distinct political economies in the trading and planting colonies, distinct social and labor systems, differences in habits, thoughts, and interests, awakened, very early, apprehensions and jealousies, and tended to give permanency to geographical issues.

History, po etry, romj.nce, art, public opinion, have been most unjust to the South. TBy perverse reiteration, its annals, its acts, its inner feelings, its purposes, have been grossly misrepresented.vlt is too late to repair the wrong, to atone for the neglect and the injuries of the past. The restoration of the South to its true place in the story of the formation and the history of our government, is the attempt, perhaps, presumptuous, of this volume. The true record of the South, if it can be related with historic accuracy, is rich in patriotism, in intellectual force, in civic and military achievements, in heroism, in honorable and sagacious statemanship, of a proper share in which no American can afford to deprive himself. So much genius in legislation, in administration, in jurisprudence, in war, such great capacities, should expel partisan and sectional prejudices.

It Is my purpose to Inquire, Has the South made any special, distinctive contribution to the Constitution, the Government, Civilization, to Liberty, civil or religious, to National independence and honor, to pivotal epochs in our history? Have its thoughts moulded policy, formed parties, acquired territory, prevented national wrong ? Have its men led armies, become great thinkers, impressed themselves beneficially upon our age and institutions ? The writer disclaims vehemently any wish to re-open settled controversies, to change the legitimate results of the secession war, and especially to arrest the rapid disappearance of sectional prejudices and animosities^ The establishment of truth is never wrong. ^History, as written, if accepted in future years, will consign the South to Infamy. If she were guilty of rebellion or treason, if she adopted and clung to barbar-

{isms, essential sins, and immoralities, then her

people will be clothed, as it were, with the

Tabled shirt of Nessus, fatal to honor, to energy,

to noble development, to true life. The English

* Rebellion of 1640, the Revolution of 1688, the Reformation, the Inquisition, even Wellington at Waterloo, are discussed freely. Is there any sanctity or infallibility in acts and opinions, relating to the South, that they should escape historical criticism, or be exempt from all the tests of truth and justice }

Chapter II

In 1584, Sir Walter Raleigh obtained from Queen Elizabeth the first patent, drawn according to the principles of the feudal law, in which patent he was constituted a lord proprietary with almost unlimited powers, holding jurisdiction over an extensive region, of which he could make grants according to his pleasure/ Raleigh obtained from Parliament a bill confirming his patent of discovery, and entered upon a plan of colonizing Virginia, the name by which his possessions were called in honor of her Majesty. The expedition landed on Roanoke Island ; but the effort was futile and the colony perished.

In 1606, James I. issued an ample patent, ^and under this Virginia charter the whole American coast, to which the English laid claim, was divided into two parts, the Southern part being conferred on the London Company, and the Northern part upon the Plymouth Companyw„ . This division was the origin of the separate history of the Southern and the New England Colonies. ^With the charter as the starting point, ma/ be traced the two diverging lines of development which mark the

*3 Hakluyt, 297-301. i Bancroft, 92. 6

THE SOUTHERN STATES.

constitutional genesis of Virginia and the Southern Colonies on the one hand, and that of Massachusetts and the New England Colonies on the other.^ In 1609 and 16 12, changes were made in the charter of Virginia, which contained the germ of a revolution, in giving to the corporation a democratic form. *' Power was transferred from the Council to the Company, and its sessions became the theatre of j bold and independent discussion." ^/The colo- ^ nists were to have a share in legislation, and in 1619 the first Colonial Assembly met at Jamestown. ''The Governor, the newly appointed/ Council, and two Representatives frorh each of the eleven boroughs, and hence called .Buj:-..; gesses, constituted the first popular representative Assembly of the Western hemisphere. ... . This was the happy dawn of legislative liberty in America. . . . The deliberate and formal concession of legislative liberties was an act of the deepest interest. . . . The system of representative government and trial by jury was esrat)tished as an acknowledged right, "^v! . The ordinance was the basis on which Virginia erected the superstructure of its liberties. Its influences were wide and enduring, and can be traced through all following years of the history of the colony, ("it constituted the plantation, in its infancy, a nursery of freemen. '% The

^ Annals of the A77ierican Academy, April, 1891, pp. 537-8, ^ Fiske, Civil History of the United States Government, 145 ;

Company acquired the distinct character of a body with administrative and legislative functions in the hands of the Council and of a General Assembly. This corporate constitution of an English trading company, with executive, legislative, and judicial functions, furnished the type of the Colonial Constitution of Virginia. yThe general frame of government continued throughout the subsequent history. I I I When the London Company was overthrown I and Virginia became a royal colony, the gov-

Iernmental forms remained substantially the same, although modified in detail, sometimes 1 by royal instructions, but generally b^,_the

I legislation of the people themselves. ^p/ I "By charters of 1620, 162 1, and 1628, the » Plymouth Company, with the new name of the

Massachusetts Bay Company, was substantially

identical with the Virginia Company, and thus

the same form of government became the

model for the Colonies, both in the South and

in New England. The " Fundamental Orders "

of Connecticut in 1639 was, doubtless, the first

example in history of a written constitution,

enacted by the independent authority of the

people, yet the form of government was simply

a reproduction of that of the Massachusetts

U Bay Company. w^Upon territory granted to the

"i\ London Company were afterwards erected the

l\ Colonies of Maryland and the Carolinas.V The

U royal charter granted to Lord Baltimore, in

II 1632, was the basis of all political power and privilege in Maryland. By the ordinance of 1637, issued by the lord proprietor, the political organization was closely modeled after , that of Virginia. The constitutional develop- ' ment of the other Southern Colonies followed, in the main, the same method of growth. The date of the Lords Proprietors' Charter for the Province of Carolina is 1663 ; in 1719, the government was changed to that of a Colony of the King of Englancky^'So by successive steps, with many vicissitudes, with varying fortunes, with some modifications, the general type was adopted, and Massachusetts, New Hamp- ^j shire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, / \ New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, / [ Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and / I Georgia became separate political entities, with a common allegiance to, and dependence upon, ^ the mother country of Great Britain. ' At the beginning of the Revolutionary War, three forms of government existed in the Colonies. In Rhode Island and Connecticut, the Governors were elected by the people. In Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, the Governors were appointed by the proprietors. The King had no officers, except in the Admiralty Courts and in the Customs, and his name was hardly known in the acts of government. In the other colonies the Royal Governors were appointed by the Crown.*

Chapter III

In the colonial period there were thirteen commonwealths, with thirteen local governments. Each colony, distinct in origin, was separate from, and independent of, the others ; each was a dependency, and an integral part of the British Empire ; each was a creature of the British state, and legally subject to its sovereignty. The common bond of union was through the allegiance to the British Crown. Jhe corporations, created by laws of Great Britain, scattered along the Atlantic coast, were as distinct and individual as are different railroad companies, which have severally obtained charters and grants of land from the United States.*/ In all that pertained to the \ regulation of their respective affairs, they acted singly. A British subject, residing within one of the Colonies, had, within the territory of the other Colonies, the common law rights of a British subject, but no more, and not otherwise, than he would have had in a British colony in Asia. Each colony had its legislative assembly, elected by its own people, and its separate judiciary. The basis of representation was different. In Massachusetts townships

^ Dr. Small's Beginnings of American Nationality, p. 14.

THE SOUTHERN STATES. II

were the unit ; in Virginia, counties ; but in each the assembly was a representative body. The laws enacted had force, authority, sanction, only within the limits of the colony, and had no extra-territorial validity. What Massachusetts did had no civil efficacy, no governmental sanction, over Connecticut or Rhode Island.

This common dependence, this amenability to British law, juxtaposition on a remote continent, sense of common danger from neighboring Indian tribes, and community of origin, language, literature, religion, and civil rights, naturally drew the Colonies into relationships of fraternity and friendship. Diversity of climate and productions and interposed mountains sectionalize peoples, raise international problems, and provoke alienations. The economic history of the Colonies, if thoroughly explored, would throw much needful light on their final union. This influence lessened colonial isolation, broadened the horizon of mutual interests, drew toward trade centres, and tended to develop a national character. Inter-communication, also, softened prejudices, promoted social intercourse, expanded trade, created a trend toward colonial fellowship and co-operation. The coast trade supplemented the work and influence of the interior highways, and brought colonial interests into closer unity. Massachusetts, in 1636, the very year in which Hampden resisted the payment of ship money, asserted her exclusive power of taxation.* So did other colonies. In 1623 Virginia asserted the same separate poweK.^'^In 165 1 a treatywas

#made between the Commonwealth of England

f and the Colony of Virginia, by which it was,___ agreed that the Virginia colonist was as free as

^He English subject ; that the Assembly of Vir-/ ginia should transact all of her afTairs ; that her people should have free trade with all nations, as the people of England had ; and that taxes

^should not be imposed, nor forts erected, nor garrisons maintained in Virginia, but by the consent of her Assembly.'^^y^he violation of the"'

\ Navigation Acts of Cromwell and of Charles II., and of the Sugar Act of 1733,^ were proofs of the independent spirit of the colonists, and of their self-government in some economic matters. On the other hand, there were elements, tending not to cohesion, but to division and segregation. In those days, the Colonies skirted thousands of miles of unfamiliar coast ; in the deficiency of means of intercourse, travel was slow, trade and commerce were limited and expensive, and there were not a few local jealousies. With the facilities for travel and trade which are so familiar at the present time, with the practical annihilation of space by steam and electricity, with the demonstrated experiment of a Federal Union, we fail to compre-

*l Burgess, 10, 99.

hend how widely separated were the Colonies in distance, in products, in industries, in social intercourse, in institutions. It has not been very long since our ablest statesmen doubted the feasibility of a government performing safely and wisely its functions over a large territorial area.

Chapter IV

The centripetal forces were the stronger and the more numerous. There gradually grew up a desire for a closer political and commercial union ; and tentative efforts were made, at intervals, to bring about a confederation. As early as 1643, there was the New Engl.an,d_Con^ federacy for tEe recognition and protection of common interests. After this Confederacy ceased to exist, various plans, at different times, between 1684 and 1754, were proposed for a union of the Colonies, chiefly with reference to more efficient action against the Indians and the French. What was known as Franklin's Plan of Union, adopted by the Albany Convention in 1754, was the most important Federal measure in the Colonies prior to the Revolution. Seven colonies were represented. '' America," said Bancroft, '' had never an assembly so venerable for the States that were represented, or for the great and able men who composed it." After several days' debate, the plan was adopted, either unanimously, or with the solitary dissent of Connecticut, as all felt the necessity for some union. " With the exception of such matters of general concern as were to be managed by the Grand Council, each colony was to retain its power of legislation intact." '

It was rejected by all the colonial assemblies, the New England delegates, on the whole, being least disinclined to union. The failure of these attempts to obtain agreement upon plans of co-operation proves that the colonists were far from being ready to merge their separate interests into those of a comprehensive organization. Such an arrangement did not commend itself sufficiently to induce the taking of any effective steps towards it. The Colonies refused to make such corporate recognition of mutual relations as would be involved in the creation of organs for the performance of intercolonial governmental functions.

These incidents serve to illustrate the development of the idea of union, and to show the preparedness of the people for concerted action when the contest with Great Britain became inevitable.

The Parliament of Great Britain never relinquished her claim of right to govern the Colonies, or to collect revenues from them for any expenditures incurred in their behalf. This taxation was strenuously resisted by the Colonies, who, through their agents in London, or the local authorities at home, claimed the exclusive right to tax themselves, and especially as they had no representation in Parliament. In assertion of the imperial claim of sovereign

^ Fiske's Am. Rev.., 8. 10.

^ power over the Colonies, and of the right to

compel them, in whole or in part, to provide for \ the support of their military establishment, on

27th of February, 1765, was passed the Stamp Act, imposing stamp duties on his Majesty's ---- subjects in America and the West Indies. It \ \ seems that not a sinp;le member of either ■^ \ House of Parliament doubted the right to impose the duty, although some sagacious friends of liberty remonstrated against the policy and

(justice of such legislation. ^-CThe Stamp Act was almost self-executory, for unless stamps \ were used, marriages would be null, notes of \ hand valueless, ships at sea prizes to the first ^^"^ \ captors,^ suits at law impossible, transfers of real lestate invalid, inheritances irreclaimable.p<^ ^ Boston,' with a keen instinct for liberty) and a sagacious apprehension of everything that interfered with her rights, which have made her name immortal among the cities which have been most conspicuous in assertion and maintenance of popular freedom, even before the bill had passed, denied with earnestness any right to tax America, and sent a circular letter to the Colonies, exposing the dangers that menaced their essential rights, and desiring united assistance. Before the Bill, advised and proposed by Granville, had become a law, Samuel Adams, — called by Jefferson the Palinurus of the American Revolution — in 1764, drew up, in one of the grandest papers of our whole Revolutionary period, the earHest protest against the Stamp Act in the memorable instructions to the Boston representatives in the General Court : " We claim British rights not by charter only ; we are born to them. Use your endeavors that the weight of other American Colonies may be added to that of this Province, that by united application all may happily obtain redress." * When the bill became a law, resistance was not, however, advised or deemed expedient. Every agent of the Colonies in England believed that the Stamp Act would be peacefully levied. Otis said, " It is our duty to submit, humbly and silently to acquiesce in all the decisions of the supreme legislature." "^ The Legislature of Massachusetts said, " We must yield obedience to the act granting duties." Other colonies yielded to the hard necessity. Not so had Providence decreed, for opinion was fermenting at the North, notwithstanding there was no declared purpose of action. This Stamp Act was in reality the harbinger of our independence./ Virgmia received it with consternation, and ^resolved that it should recoil with damage upon the land which adopted it. The planters, proud of their frugality, banished articles of luxury of English manufacture.^ The Legislature, not content with a verbal protest, was

^ Winthrop's Centennial Oration, July 4, 1876, pp. 15, 33. ' 2 Ban., 286-306 ; I Henry, 94. ^ 2 Ban., 312.

i8 averse to submission to the will of Parliament, tinder the leadership of Patrick Henry, the taxation was declared to be an infringement of the privileges, liberties, and immunities of the colony^, subversive of the fundamental principles of her chartered rights, and destructive of British as well as American freedom. )srhis was the grstjegislative opposition to the scheme of the Stamp Act? The alarm spread throughout America with astonishing quickness, and " the great point of resistance to British taxation was universally established in the Colonies." * Secr^t^ocieties, whose proceedings and actions after awhile transpired, were formed in the several colonies, pledging resistance by all lawful means. Uprisings began in Boston, and were followed by similar disturbances in other towns of Massachusetts, and in other colonies. Before the time arrived when the Act was to go into effect, the standard of resistance had been raised throughout the Colonies ; and Burke,^ in the House of Commons, declared, on the information received from the several Governors, that the Virginia resolutions were the cause of the insurrections. Virginia thus " rang the alarum bell " and " gave the signal for

the continent. "4^

James Otis, of Boston, advised the calling of an American Congress at New York, to consist of Committees from each of the thirteen colo-

* I Life of Henry, 8i 2 I Henry, lOO.

nies, to deliberate upon the Acts of Parliament,- and to consider a united representation to implore relief/ South Carolina heard and heeded the invitation for a conference. '' Had it not been for South Carolina, no Congress would then have happened," said " the great statesman, the magnanimous, unwavering, faultless lover of his country, Christopher Gadsden." '' As the united American people spread through the vast expanse over which their jurisdiction now extends, be it remembered," says Bancroft, "that the blessing of Union is due to the warm-heartedness of South Carolina." In Georgia, against the will of the Governor, the representatives came together and sent, near a thousand miles by land, an express messenger to New York, promising adhesion ; for, said they, " No people, as individuals, can more warmly espouse the common cause than do the people of this Province."

The Congress met on the 7th of October, 1765.^ Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and South Carolina were represented by regularly chosen delegates. Delaware, New Jersey, New York, had less formal delegates. New Hampshire agreed to abide by the result. Georgia sent a special messenger to the body to obtain a copy of the proceedings. Governor Fauquier would not suffer the Assembly of Virginia to come together to express the unanimous voice of her people in behalf of liberty. The members of this first union of the American people were elected by the representatives of the people of each separate colony ; all were commissioned not so regularly. While they formed one body, their power was derived from independent sources. Each of the colonies existed in its individuality, and notwithstanding great differences in their respective populations and extent of territory, as they met in Congress, they recognized each other as equals, without the least claim of pre-eminence, one over the other. The Congress, avoiding the argument for American liberty from royal grants, claiming rights that preceded and would survive charters, in carefully considered documents em- ^bodied the demands of the colonies, and dwelt on the inherent right of trial by jury, and the right of freedom from taxation, except through the respective colonial legislatures.^ The Assembly of South Carolina received the delegates on their return, adopted without change, and, lacking one vote, with unanimity, the resolves of Congress, and transmitted, without delay, to England, " the evidence that South Carolina gave its heart unreservedly to the cause of freedom and union." ^ She wrote to her agent in London : " Every moment is tedious ; should you have to communicate the good news we wish for, send it to us, if possible, by a messenger swifter than the wind."

OF THE AMERICAN UNION.

/ The resolute purpose of the colonists that the Stamp Act should not be enforced so far prevailed that it was repealed by Parliament, many lords and bishops entering their solemn protest, and the King deploring its repeal as the wellspring of all his sorrows. South Carolina voted a statue to Pitt ; Virg inia voted one to the King for his assent, and an obelisk on I I I which were to be engraved the names of those who, in England, had signalized themselves fo r, f reedom. >

The universal joy of America was unfortunately of short duration. The repeal of the Stamp Act was accompanied by a formal assertion of the full power and authority of the King and Parliament to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the Colonies and the people of America, '' in all cases whatsoever." The claim of absolute authority was not long left in inaction. The Legislatures were required to support the soldiers quartered in the Colonies.)*- Besides the billeting Act, port duties were laid on wine, oil, fruits, glass, paper, lead, colors, and tea.^; The Colonies were indignant at this imposition of new taxes, and this continued and offensive assertion of the unlimited power of Parliament.' In Massachusetts resistance was planned, and a Circular Letter to the sister Colonies was adopted. The Assembly of Virginia, which had been prorogued from time to time since its

I session of November, 1766/ was called together in 1768, to devise measures for the prevention of Indian troubles. The Circular of Massachusetts was referred to a Committee of the Whole House. Petitions from freeholders of various counties, remonstrating against Acts of Parliament, fortified the courage of the members, who adopted unanimously memorials to England.^ Massachusetts was commended for her devotion to civil liberty, and the Speaker was directed . to write to the Speakers of all other Assem-

;-* blies, making known her proceedings, and her

^ opinions as to the need of firm and united

opposition to every measure affecting their ■ rights and liberties.^Jn 1769, Washington said [ " something should be done to maintain the [liberty we have derived from our ancestors," and he prepared a scheme, to be offered at the coming session of the House of Burgesses. In this House were Washington, Henry, and Jefferson. /Demands by the Custom-house officers for writs of assistance in collection of revenues were declared illegal by the highest \ y^ court. The Legislature claimed the exclusive right of imposing taxes on the inhabitants, and asserted the lawfulness and expediency of procuring a concert of the Colonies to care for their violated rights. Being dissolved by the Governor, they met together as patriots and friends, and adopted Washington's plan of non-