Chapter XXI: Part II (1)

The crisis in the financial affairs of the University, already mentioned, was the natural result of over confidence in the readiness of philanthropists to rally to the aid of a needy cause. This disappointment, however, was a valuable experience, for it became clear that philanthropists were not inclined to grant very generous aid to an institution established under the patronage of the Federal Government, especially in the face of the frequent and insistent appeals from less fortunate institutions serving the same people. It was an incorrect assumption, however, that the United States Treasury was paying the current expenses, for it must be remembered that no part of the original grants of the Freedmen's Bureau was or could be invested as permanent endowment or used for salaries, equipment or maintenance; and that during the first decade of the existence of the University no public funds were appropriated for these purposes. In spite of this, its reputation as a ward of the United States Government was, to its great disadvantage, accepted by philanthropists as justified.

When, in 1873, the Freedmen's Bureau was abolished, General Howard resigned from the presidency of the University to enter the army. Not desiring to accept his resignation immediately, however, the trustees granted him an indefinite leave of absence.[517] At the same meeting it was decided to revive the office of Vice-President, which had been discontinued and John M. Langston, then Dean of the Howard Law School, was elected to that position. "It had been hoped," says one, "that the experiment of placing an able colored man in this high position would stimulate his own race and the minds of white philanthropists to sustain the institution in its perilous struggles." But the lack of funds continued. Convinced that a permanent president must be at once secured, Mr. Langston resigned the vice-presidency in 1875.

An unfortunate combination of conditions that might well baffle the ablest administrators then obtained. The outlook was so gloomy that it was difficult to find a person both capable and willing to succeed to the position left vacant. Upon Mr. Langston's resignation, Reverend George Whipple, Secretary of the American Missionary Association was elected president but after due consideration declined the honor. On December 16, 1875, Edward P. Smith, a trustee of the University and a member of the Executive Committee, was elected. After serving a few weeks he departed on an expedition for the American Missionary Association to the west coast of Africa where he died, June 15, 1875. Meanwhile Senator Pomeroy acted as chairman of the board of trustees and Professor Frederick W. Fairfield served efficiently as acting president, having supervision over matters purely educational. This was the period of the most rigid retrenchment in expenses.

But Howard was to find a way out of this difficulty and move onward. The second epoch in the history of the University began when, on April 25, 1876, the Reverend Doctor William W. Patton was elected president. His administration, lasting over a term of twelve years, was a period of recovery and consolidation, and an era of good feeling. Dr. Patton came to his task equipped with just the qualities needed at that time. He possessed intense sympathy for the ideals for which the University stands; sufficient business ability to keep its finances safe; and a personality that inspired respect, confidence and love.

Carefully administering the affairs of the institution, Dr. Patton was able to restore confidence in the minds of the public and of Congress. This accomplished, he was justified in arguing for federal aid on the ground that through this means alone was it possible to make the best use of the large and expensive plant which the Government had already provided. The result was that for the year beginning July 1, 1879, Congress appropriated $10,000 toward current expenses. Since that date appropriations have been regularly made and have so increased that the institution now receives from the United States Government an annual allowance of over $100,000.

It was during the administration of Dr. Patton that Howard University rounded out its organization and developed as a university. Previously, however, the various departments particularly had made interesting history. An active faculty was organized in the Medical School, June 17, 1867, and the first session opened in November, 1868, in the same rented building already referred to as housing the first academic classes of the University.[518] Here lectures were given in the evening to a class of eight students. The permanent Medical Building was then in the course of erection. Under an able faculty and with excellent facilities it is not surprising that the Medical School has been able to maintain a very high standard of efficiency and that it now meets fully the requirements of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

The Law Department was organized October 12, 1868, with Mr. John M. Langston[519] as professor and dean. In December of the same year, A. G. Riddle was associated with him on the faculty and the school began actual instruction on January 6, 1869.[520] During the years of the financial difficulties of the University, however, the Law School passed through a distressing experience. The attendance of the students was uncertain, falling off rapidly when the Freedmen's Bureau passed out of existence; for many of the students who were employees serving the Bureau during the day attended lectures at night. These left in large numbers when the Bureau closed, depriving the Law School of a part of its estimated income. Losing thus this revenue, this department was either actually suspended or barely kept open with a single teacher and a handful of students. Mr. Langston retained his position as dean under the then trying conditions until 1874, when he resigned.

The department gradually recovered with the mending fortunes of the University under President Patton and as a result of the demand in the District of Columbia for a school of law admitting students without racial restrictions. In 1881 B. F. Leighton was appointed to the deanship of this department, a position which he has to the present time filled with marked success. He took charge of the department when it was barely existing and brought it to its present position of usefulness. For many years he had associated with him A. A. Birney one of the most distinguished members of the District of Columbia bar. From that reconstruction of the department dates the period of its real growth. In 1881 these two professors lectured to a class of seven students, five of whom were graduated at the close of the session. Since that time the courses have been broadened in keeping with the advancing standards of legal study, the student body has increased ten fold and the faculty has been strengthened in accordance with these demands.

Although the Theological Department was the first in the plan of the founders of the University, it was not put into operation until January 6, 1868, when D. B. Nichols and E. W. Robinson, both clergymen, began without pay, to give theological instruction twice a week to a number of men already accredited as preachers and others looking forward to that work. Shortly afterwards, at the request of the Board of Trustees, a course of study was drawn up and adopted. Lectures in accordance with this plan were started immediately thereafter by General Eliphalet Whittlesey.[521] It was not until 1871, however, that the Theological Department was officially announced by the University as actively in operation. In this announcement, Dr. John B. Reeve is named as dean, supported by a faculty of four lecturers and a roster of twelve students. Three years later in 1874, seven of these twelve students received their certificates of graduation.

The Theological Department has always been barred from the use of United States funds for its current expenses and has, therefore, depended upon scholarships and special contributions made by individuals and philanthropic organizations. The American Missionary Association has always been its chief support since the crisis of 1873. Because of the financial stress under which the University was working at that time, the first act of Dr. Lorenzo Wescott, the new dean appointed in 1875, was to make arrangements to have the Presbytery of Washington assume the responsibility of the school. This appeal was favorably acted upon and a committee of the Presbytery took charge of the affairs of the department in December, 1875. This step was rendered necessary because, from 1872 to 1874 the American Missionary Association, on account of financial embarrassment, was compelled, temporarily, to withdraw its support. In November, 1877, this organization was again able to resume part of the responsibility and the bodies worked in harmony until June, 1887, when the American Missionary Association was again ready to bear the entire expense.[522]

Dr. Patton resigned in May, 1889, but consented to continue in office until the end of the year or until his successor should be elected. The selection of his successor was made in November and Dr. Patton retired, hoping to rest and do literary work. He died, however, on the last day of the year 1889. On November 15, 1889, the trustees elected the Reverend Doctor Jeremiah E. Rankin[523] to the presidency, taking him from the pastorate of the First Congregational Church of Washington. His term of office extended through thirteen years, a period of slow but steady growth.

Under President Rankin other changes were made in the course of the development of the University. At the close of the session in 1899 the University altered its policy with reference to the work of training teachers. To this end the work of the Normal Department, at first provided for this purpose, was reorganized as the pedagogical department of the college under the deanship of Professor Lewis B. Moore who had come to the faculty five years prior to this time from the University of Pennsylvania, where he had pursued graduate studies and obtained the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. After several years of growth the department was designated as the Teachers College and given academic rank with the College of Arts and Sciences. When the Normal Department was discontinued the English Department was established to care for those who wished to pursue the common branches without professional aim. In 1903, it was merged with the newly established Commercial Department under Dean George W. Cook.

It was during this administration that with funds obtained as private donations the permanent residence for the president and the Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel were erected, the former costing approximately $20,000 and the latter $22,000. The chapel is a memorial to the one whose name it bears, Andrew E. Rankin, the brother of President Rankin and the deceased husband of Mrs. H. T. Cushman of Boston, a generous donor toward its erection.

Because of failing health Doctor Rankin resigned in 1903. Reverend Teunis N. Hamlin, pastor of the Church of the Covenant, Washington, District of Columbia, and the president of the board of trustees, served as acting president for a short time pending the selection of a permanent incumbent. The Reverend Doctor John Gordon, the president of Tabor College in Iowa was selected for the presidency and was formally inaugurated in 1904. It was hoped that the incoming president would infuse new life into the institution, for the occasion demanded a successful administrator, an efficient educator and a man able to command increased financial support for the institution. As Doctor Gordon had none of these qualities, it soon became evident that he would be able to accomplish little of benefit to the University. He failed entirely to understand its mission and its ideals. Serious friction between the president on the one hand and the faculty and students on the other grew to such proportions that Dr. Gordon, after a term of office covering a little over two years, resigned.

After an examination of available material in the search for a suitable man for this position, the trustees were happy in the selection of the Reverend Doctor Wilbur P. Thirkield[524] who accepted the offer and took up the duties of president in 1906. He was inaugurated November 15, 1907, on the occasion of the fortieth anniversary of the founding of the institution. With this ceremony began an infusion of new life into Howard University. Advantage of this occasion was taken to introduce the institution concretely to a group of notables who had hitherto known of it only in a casual way. And having once brought the institution to the attention of the world, President Thirkield never allowed the world to forget it.

With keen insight he realized at the very beginning of his term of office that the great and basic need of the University was material expansion. He saw the need of a more extensive plant with modern equipment and served by a larger faculty. With characteristic energy he sought to bring the University into a still closer alliance with the Federal Government. So successfully was the case presented that during his administration of six years he succeeded in raising the annual Congressional appropriation for current expenses from less than $50,000 in 1906 to over $100,000 in 1912. The pressing need for facilities in the teaching of the sciences was met by the erection in 1910 of a science hall from special appropriations amounting to $80,000.[525] In 1909, the Carnegie Library was erected. This building was the gift of Mr. Andrew Carnegie and cost $50,000.

About this time the improvement of the dormitories was begun by the installation of adequate systems of sanitary plumbing and electric lights. By arrangement with Freedmen's Hospital the heating and lighting plant was enlarged at a cost of approximately $100,000 to such capacity that steam and current were supplied to all the University buildings. In addition to these improvements in housing and equipment, the grounds were improved and beautified in accordance with a definite scheme.[526] To provide for the constantly growing work in technical and industrial branches the Hall of Applied Sciences was built in 1913 at a cost of $25,000 thus releasing the old Spaulding Hall for other purposes. A special department of music under Miss Lulu Vere Childers was established in 1909 and given a building in 1916.

Possibly the most striking result of the educational awakening under President Thirkield was the rapid growth of the College Department. In 1876 for example, the roster of the department shows thirty-five students and four graduates. In 1907, forty years later, the corresponding figures were, seventy-five and eight, a gain of about one hundred per cent in forty years or two and a half per cent a year. In 1911 these figures had grown to two hundred and forty-three, and thirty-one respectively, a gain during the period of six years covered by this administration, of about two hundred and forty per cent in students and nearly three hundred per cent in graduates. This is approximately a gain per year of forty per cent in enrollment and forty-eight per cent in graduates. While much of this remarkable growth is due to the general awakening of the University, yet no small part of the credit belongs to the inspiration of Professor Kelly Miller who became Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences in 1907 near the beginning of the period under consideration. Through his efforts and reputation as a writer the claims of the University and the College of Arts and Sciences were brought to the attention of aspiring youth throughout the country.[527] Upon the resignation of Dr. Thirkield to become Bishop of the Methodist Church in 1912, the Reverend Doctor Stephen M. Newman was chosen as the head of the university. He has served in that position for five years.[528]

Serviceable as have been many of the educators connected with Howard University it has had and still has many problems. Its chief difficulty, however, is a financial one. Although it is impossible to figure out how the University could have succeeded without the aid of the United States Government, this connection of the institution has been in some respects a handicap. National aid seems to have permanently excluded the institution from the circle of the beneficiaries of those great philanthropic agencies which have played such a prominent part in the support of education during the last half century. With the exception of the Theological Department, which receives no part whatever of the Congressional appropriation, the income to the institution from benevolent sources has played but a minor part in its development. On the other hand, the United States Government has never appropriated sufficient funds to maintain the University as a first class institution. The present appropriation of $100,000 a year falls far short of what the school needs to function properly. It seems, therefore, that the United States Government, should adequately support the institution and make its appropriations legally permanent.[529]

Some remarks about the general policy of Howard University may be enlightening. The idea of racial representation among the administrative officers and faculty is indicated by the fact that membership in a particular race has never been considered a qualification for any position in the University. For many years the board of trustees has had persons of both races as members. No colored man has served a regular term as president, however, unless we include the short experience of Professor Langston already referred to. The treasurer has always been white but the office of secretary has been filled by members of both races. Neither the Theological nor the Medical School has had a Negro as dean although Dr. Charles B. Purvis was elected to that office in the latter in 1900 but declined it.

The faculties of all departments are mixed, the proportion of Negroes growing as available material from which to choose becomes more abundant. The policy of maintaining mixed faculties, however, is not dictated entirely by the lack of men and women of color competent to fill all positions on the faculty; for today the supply of such material is adequate. It seems that the governing body considers it in the best interest of the University to preserve the racial mixture in the offices and faculties in order that the students may receive the peculiar contribution of both races and that the institution may have its interests concretely connected with those of the dominant race.

Whether or not Howard has amply justified its existence during its first half century; whether its ideals have been the best for the race whose interests it primarily serves; whether its administrative policies have been wise--these are questions whose answers lie outside the scope of this sketch. As institutions of learning go, fifty years is a short time upon which to base conclusions. It is a period of beginnings. With schools of the character of Howard, with its peculiar duties to perform and its peculiar problems to solve in a field entirely new, these fifty years make up a period of experiment. Whatever the future relative to this educational experiment may be, Howard has given to America nearly four thousand graduates from its various departments most of whom are now doing the class of work in all fields of endeavor which demand trained minds, broad human sympathy and the spirit of service.

DWIGHT O. W. HOLMES.

FOOTNOTES:

[516] Part I of _Fifty Years of Howard University_ appeared in the April Number of the JOURNAL OF NEGRO HISTORY.

[517] The resignation was accepted the following year after General Howard had been appointed to the command of the Department of the Columbia.

[518] It was realized at the beginning that a hospital in connection with the department was an absolute necessity. This was provided for through the relationship established between the Medical School and Freedmen's Hospital. The Campbell Hospital, as it was formerly called, was located, at the close of the war, at what is now the northeast corner of Seventh Street and Florida Avenue. Prior to that time it was directly connected with the War Department. In 1865, in connection with the various hospitals and camps for freedmen in the several States, it was placed under the Freedmen's Bureau. In 1869 it was moved to buildings expressly erected for it by the Bureau upon ground belonging to the University on Pomeroy Street, including and adjacent to the site of the Medical Building. This new home consisted of four large frame buildings of two stories each to be used as wards; and in addition the Medical Building itself, a brick structure of four and one half stories, quite commodious and well arranged with lecture halls and laboratories for medical instruction. Dr. Robert Reyburn, who was chief medical officer of the Freedmen's Bureau from 1870 to 1872 was surgeon in chief, from 1868 to 1875. He was followed in order by Drs. Gideon S. Palmer, Charles B. Purvis, Daniel H. Williams, Austin M. Curtis and Wm. H. Warfield. Dr. Warfield, the present incumbent was appointed in 1901 and is the first graduate of the Howard University Medical School to hold this position. Only the first two named, however, were white. In 1907 the hospital was moved to its new home in the reservation lying on the south side of College Street between Fourth and Sixth Streets, the property of the University.

"The new Freedmen's Hospital was then built at a cost of $600,000. It has the great advantage of being designed primarily for teaching purposes, as practically all the patients admitted are utilized freely for instruction. The hospital has about three hundred beds and contains two clinical amphitheatres, a pathological laboratory, clinical laboratory and a room for X-Ray diagnostic work and X-Ray therapy. The Medical Faculty practically constitutes the Hospital Staff."--_Howard University Catalog_, 1916-17, p. 163; 1917-18, p. 168.

[519] Mr. Langston was graduated at Oberlin with the degree of A.B. in 1852 and in theology in 1853. He studied law privately and was admitted to practice in Ohio in 1854. In April, 1867, he was appointed general inspector of the Freedmen's Bureau, serving for two years, during which he travelled extensively through the South. From 1877 to 1885 he was Minister to Haiti and from 1885 to 1887 President of the Virginia Normal and Collegiate Institute. He was elected to Congress from the Fourth District of Virginia and seated, September 23, 1890, after a contest. He died November 15, 1897, at his home near Howard University.

[520] For a number of years after its organization the school held its sessions in the main building of the University. Later a more convenient location was secured in the building occupied by the Second National Bank on Seventh Street. After remaining there for a considerable period, it moved to Lincoln Hall, at Ninth and D Streets, where it remained until 1887 when the building was destroyed by fire. The authorities then decided to purchase for the department a permanent home conveniently located and adequate to its accommodation. As a result the present Law Building on Fifth Street, opposite the District Court House, was purchased, and fitted up for school purposes.

[521] General Eliphalet Whittlesey was Colonel of the 46th United States Colored Regiment in 1865. He had been on the staff of General Howard during the last year of the campaign through the South and was brevetted Brigadier General at the close of the war. He was Assistant Commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau and later Adjutant General under General Howard at Washington. He assisted in the selection of the site for the University, was the first professor in the College Department and organized the Department of Theology.

Reverend Danforth B. Nichols, whose name has appeared frequently in this sketch, was, at the close of the war, engaged in missionary work among the "contrabands" who tilled the abandoned lands just across the Potomac from Washington. When Howard University was founded he was one of the most active and enthusiastic workers for the successful launching of the venture. Beside being a founder, a trustee and a professor, he received the degree of M.D. with the first class graduated by its medical department.

[522] While the Presbytery was in charge the department received a gift or $5,000 from Mrs. Hannah B. Toland. In 1879 Reverend J. G. Craighead became dean of the department and filled the position until his resignation in 1891. During his administration the department received $5,000 from the estate of Wm. E. Dodge of New York. On October 1, 1883, the treasurer of the University was authorized to pay the American Missionary Association $15,000, "out of moneys due from the United States as compensation for University land taken for the reservoir," or such part as might be requisite to complete the endowment of the "Stone Professorship" in the Theological Department. This amount was added to a fund of $25,000 which came from the estate of Daniel P. Stone, of Boston, Massachusetts, upon the fulfillment of the term of the gift.

[523] Dr. Rankin was a writer and poet of note, his most famous production being the hymn, "God be with you till we meet again."

[524] Dr. Thirkield received his A.M. degree from Ohio Wesleyan in 1879. He studied theology at Boston University, graduating with the degree of S.T.B. in 1881. He entered the ministry in the M. E. Church in 1878. As the first president of Gammon Theological Seminary, Atlanta, Georgia, from 1883 to 1899 he secured endowment for that institution to the amount of $600,000. He was called to the presidency of Howard after several years of successful service first as General Secretary of the Epworth League and later as General Secretary of the Freedmen's Aid and Southern Educational Society.

[525] This building was dedicated as "Science Hall" but by vote of the trustees the name was changed to "Thirkield Hall" in honor of President Thirkield when the latter resigned in 1912.

[526] Much of the credit for the improvements to grounds and buildings is due to the experience and business acumen of Professor George W. Cook who became secretary and business manager in 1908. Professor Cook has enjoyed an extensive and unique connection with the University from his matriculation in the Preparatory Department in 1873 to the present. He is a graduate of three departments and holds the degrees of A.B., A.M., LL.B. and LL.M. He has been dean of the Normal, the English and the Commercial Departments successively. Since 1908 he has been secretary and business manager of the University.

[527] Professor Miller is a product of Howard and one of her most distinguished sons. He was graduated from Preparatory Department in 1882 and from College in 1886 after which he pursued advanced studies at Johns Hopkins University. He is one of the most conspicuous publicists of the race, being the author of several books and numerous pamphlets, beside making frequent contributions to periodicals, both in America and abroad. His most important books are _Race Adjustment_ and _Out of the House of Bondage. The Disgrace of Democracy_, an open letter to President Wilson, published in 1917, has been pronounced one of the most important documents produced by the great war.

[528] Dr. Newman was graduated from Bowdoin College, the alma mater of General Howard, in 1867, with the A.B. degree, receiving the A.M. in 1870 and D.D. in 1877. He studied theology at Andover, finishing in 1871. He served as pastor in Taunton, Massachusetts, Ripon, Wisconsin and the First Congregational Church of Washington, District of Columbia. He was president of Eastern College, Fort Royal, Virginia, 1908-9, and Kee Mar College for Women, Hagerstown, Maryland, 1909-11. He is a member of a number of learned societies and a distinguished pulpit orator.

[529] President Taft considered the support of the University a national obligation. In his address at the commencement exercises, May 26, 1909, he said, in part:

"Everything that I can do as an executive in the way of helping along the University I expect to do. I expect to do it because I believe it is a debt of the people of the United States, it is an obligation of the Government of the United States, and it is money constitutionally applied to that which shall work out in the end the solution of one of the greatest problems that God has put upon the people of the United States."

DOCUMENTS

WHAT THE FRAMERS OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION THOUGHT OF THE NEGRO

The first important discussion in the Convention of 1787 to reflect the attitude of the framers of the Federal Constitution toward the Negro, was whether or not slaves should be considered a part of the population in apportioning representation in Congress on that basis. A precedent had been set in the Articles of Confederation in the provision for counting five slaves as three whites to determine the rate of taxation on the population basis. The free States contended that only the free inhabitants should be counted, but the slave States urged the recognition of slaves as a part of the population to secure to the South the power which it wielded until the Civil War.[530]

Taking up this important question soon after the convention assembled,

The following resolution was then moved by Mr. Randolph, Resolved
that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to
be proportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number
of free inhabitants, as the one or the other rule may seem best
in different cases.

It was moved by Mr. Hamilton seconded by Mr. Spaight that the
resolution be altered so as to read

Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature
ought to be proportioned to the number of free inhabitants

It was moved and seconded that the resolution be postponed--and
on the question to postpone it passed in the affirmative

The following resolution was moved by Mr. Randolph seconded by Mr
Madison Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national
legislature ought to be proportioned--it was moved and seconded
to add the words "and not according to the present system"--On
the question to agree to the amendment it passed in the
affirmative. (Ayes--7 noes--0.)[531]

It was then moved and seconded so to alter the resolution that it
should read

Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature
ought not to be according

It was then moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of
the last resolution--And, on the question to postpone, it passed
in the affirmative The following resolution was then moved by Mr
Madison seconded by Mr. G Morris.

Resolved that the equality of suffrage established by the
articles of confederation ought not to prevail in the national
legislature and that an equitable ratio of representation ought
to be substituted.

It was moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the
last resolution.

(The following Resolution being the 2d. of those proposed by Mr.
Randolph was taken up. viz--"that the rights of suffrage in the
National Legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of
contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants, as the one or
the other rule may seem best in different cases.")

Mr. M(adison) observing that the words ("_or to the number of_)
_free inhabitants_." might occasion debates which would divert
the Committee from the general question whether the principle of
representation should be changed, moved that they might be struck
out.

Mr King observed that the quotas of contribution which would
alone remain as the measure of representation, would not answer;
because waving every other view of the matter, the revenue might
hereafter be so collected by the general Govt. that the sums
respectively drawn from the States would (not) appear; and would
besides be continually varying.

Mr. Madison admitted the propriety of the observation, and that
some better rule ought to be found.

Col. Hamilton moved to alter the resolution so as to read "that
the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought to be
proportioned to the number of free inhabitants. Mr. Spaight
2ded. the motion.

It was then moved that the Resolution be postponed, which was
agreed to.

Mr. Randolph and Mr. Madison then moved the following
resolution--"that the rights of suffrage in the national
Legislature ought to be proportioned."

It was moved and 2ded to amend it by adding "and not according to
the present system"--which was agreed to.

It was then moved and 2ded. to alter the resolution so as to read
"that the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought
not to be according to the present system."

It was then moved & 2ded. to postpone the Resolution moved by Mr.
Randolph & Mr. Madison, which being agreed to;

Mr. Madison, moved, in order to get over the difficulties, the
following resolution--"that the equality of suffrage established
by the articles of Confederation ought not to prevail in the
national Legislature, and that an equitable ratio of
representation ought to be submitted" This was 2ded. by Mr. Govr.
Morris, (and being generally relished, would have been agreed to
when,)

Mr. Reed moved that the whole clause relating to the point of
Representation be postponed; reminding the Come. that the
deputies from Delaware were restrained by their commission from
assenting to any change of the rule of suffrage, and in case a
change should be fixed on, it might become their duty to retire
from the Convention.

Mr. Govr. Morris observed that the valuable assistance of those
members could not be lost without real concern, and that so early
a proof of discord in the convention as a secession of a State,
would add much to the regret; that the change proposed was
however so fundamental an article in a national Govt. that it
could not be dispensed with.

Mr. M(adison) observed that whatever reason might have existed
for the equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal one
among sovereign States, it must cease when a national Governt.
should be put into the place. In the former case, the acts of
Congs. depended so much for their efficacy on the cooperation of
the States, that these had a weight both within & without
Congress, nearly in proportion to their extent and importance. In
the latter case, as the acts of the Genl. Govt. would take effect
without the intervention of the State legislatures, a vote from
a small State wd. have the same efficacy & importance as (a vote)
from a large one, and there was the same reason for (different
numbers) of representatives from different States, as from
Counties of different extents within particular States. He
suggested as an expedient for at once taking the sense of the
members on this point and saving the Delaware deputies from
embarrassment, that the question should be taken in Committee,
and the clause on report to the House (be postponed without a
question there). This however did not appear to satisfy Mr. Read.

By several it was observed that no just construction of the Act
of Delaware, could require or justify a secession of her
deputies, even if the resolution were to be carried thro' the
House as well as the Committee. It was finally agreed however
that the clause should be postponed: it being understood that in
the event the proposed change of representation would certainly
be agreed to, no objection or difficulty being started from any
other quarter (than from Delaware).

The motion of Mr. Read to postpone being agreed to

The Committee then rose. The chairman reported progress, and the
House having resolved to resume the subject in Committee
tomorrow,[532]

(Adjourned to 10 OClock)

* * * * *

The next question was on the following resolve:

In substance that the mode of the present representation was
unjust--the suffrage ought to be in proportion to number or
property.

To this Delaware objected, in consequence of the restrictions in
their credentials, and moved to have the consideration thereof
postponed, to which the house agreed.[533]

McHenry records for the thirtieth of May that the Committee then proceeded to consider the second resolution in Mr. Randolph's paper.

That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to
be proportioned to the quotas of contribution or to the number
of free inhabitants as the one or the other rule may seem best
in different cases.

As this gave the large States the most absolute controul over the
lesser ones it met with opposition which produced an adjournment
without any determination.[534]

After frequent discussion and the failure to reach an agreement to safeguard the interests of the small States while giving due weight to the population of the large the effort to apportion representation in the national legislature assumed this form in the Committee of the Whole:

It was moved by Mr. King, seconded by Mr Rutledge to agree to the
following resolution, namely:

Resolved that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the
national Legislature ought not to be according to the rule
established in the articles of confederation; but according to
some equitable ratio of representation

And on the question to agree to the same

it passed in the affirmative (Ayes--7; noes--3; divided--1.)

It was then moved by Mr. Rutledge seconded by Mr Butler to add
the following words to the last resolution

"namely, according to the quotas of contribution"

It was moved by Mr Wilson seconded by Mr C. Pinckney to postpone
the consideration of the last motion in order to introduce the
following words, after the words "equitable ratio of
representation" namely.

"in proportion to the whole number of white and other 'free
Citizens' and inhabitants of every age, sex and condition,
'including those bound to servitude for a term of years', and
three fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the
foregoing description, except Indians, not paying taxes 'in each
State.'"

On the question to postpone

it passed in the affirmative. (Ayes--10; noes--1.)

On the question to agree to Mr Wilson's motion

It passed in the affirmative (Ayes--9; noes--2.)

It was then moved by Mr Wilson seconded by Mr Hamilton to adopt
the following resolution, namely,

"resolved that the right of suffrage in the second branch "of the
national Legislature ought to be according to the rule
"established for the first"

On the question to agree to the same it passed in the affirmative
(Ayes--6; noes--5.)[535]

In the Committee of the Whole on the eleventh of June:

It was then moved by Mr. Rutlidge 2ded. by Mr. Butler to add to
the words "equitable ratio of representation" at the end of the
motion just agreed to, the words "according to the quotas of
Contribution. On motion of

_Mr. Wilson_ seconded by Mr. C. Pinckney, this was postponed; in
order to add, after, after the words "equitable ratio of
representation" the words following "in proportion to the whole
number of white & other free Citizens & inhabitants of every age
sex & condition including those bound to servitude for a term of
years and three fifths of all other persons not comprehended in
the foregoing description, except Indians not paying taxes, in
each State." this being the rule in the Act of Congress agreed to
by eleven States, for apportioning quotas of revenue on the
States, and requiring a census only every 5--7, or 10 years.

Mr. Gerry thought property not the rule of representation. Why
then shd, the blacks, who were property in the South be in the
rule of representation more than the cattle & horses of the
North.

On the question.

Mass: Con: N. Y. Pen: Maryd. Virga. N. C. S. C. and Geo: were in
the affirmative: N. J. & Del: in the negative. (Ayes--9;
noes--2.) Mr. Sherman moved that a question be taken whether each
State shall have (one) vote in the 2d. branch. Every thing he
said depended on this. The smaller States would never agree to
the plan on any other principle (than an equality of suffrage in
this branch. Mr. Ellsworth seconded the motion.) On the question
for allowing each State (one) vote in the 2d. branch.

Massts, no. Cont, ay. N. Y. ay. N. J. ay. Pa. no. Del. ay Md. ay.
Va. no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no. (Ayes--5; noes--6.)

(Mr. Wilson & Mr. Hamilton moved that the right of suffrage in
the 2d. branch ought to be according to the same rule as in the
1st. branch.)

On this question for making the ratio of representation the same
in the 2d. as in the 1st. branch (it passed in the affirmative:)
Massts. ay. Cont. no. N. Y. no. N. J. no. Pa. ay. Del. no. Md.
no. Va. ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay. (Ayes--6; noes--5.)[536]

On the same day

Mr. Wilson was of opinion, and therefore moved, _that the mode of
representation of each of the states ought to be from the number
of its free inhabitants, and of every other description three
fifths to one free inhabitant_. He supposed that the impost will
not be the only revenue--the post office he supposes would be
another substantial source of revenue. He observed further, that
this mode had already received the approbation of eleven states
in their acquiescence to the quota made by congress. He admitted
that this resolve would require further restrictions, for where
numbers determined the representation a census at different
periods of 5, 7 or 10 years, ought to be taken.

Mr. Gerry. The idea of property ought not to be the rule of
representation. Blacks are property, and are used to the
southward as horses and cattle to the northward; and why should
their representation be increased to the southward on account of
the number of slaves, than horses or oxen to the north?

Mr. Madison was of opinion at present, to fix the standard of
representation, and let the detail be the business of a
sub-committee.

Mr. Rutledge's motion was postponed.[537]

Discussing whether the apportionment should be according to taxation or numbers, Wilson considered

Either Rule good--by Numbers best to ascertain the Right of
Representn. this agreeably to the Sentiments of 11 States--Impost
alone will not be sufficient to answer the national
Exigencies--Revenues arising from Postage--The present Quota not
a lasting Rule--People to be numbered at fixed Periods--A Rule
arising from Property and Numbers--

Gerry. Rule of Taxation not the Rule of Representation--4 might
then have more Voices than ten--Slaves not to be put upon the
Footing of freemen--Freemen of Massts. not to be put upon a
Footing with the Slaves of other States--Horses and Cattle ought
to have the Right of Representn. Negroes--Whites--[538]

On the thirteenth of June Randolph submitted another resolution agreed to in the Committee of the Whole.

Resolved that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the
national Legislature ought not to be according to the rule
established in the articles of confederation; but according to
some equitable ratio of representation--namely in proportion to
the whole number of whites and other free citizens and
inhabitants, of every age, sex and condition, including those
bound to servitude for a term of years and three fifths of all
other persons not comprehended in the foregoing description,
except Indians, not paying taxes in each State.[539]

The following propositions from New Jersey moved by Patterson closely connected the apportionment of requisitions with that of representation:

3. Resd. that whenever requisitions shall be necessary, instead
of the rule for making requisitions mentioned in the articles of
Confederation, the United States in Congs. be authorized to make
such requisitions in proportion to the whole number of white &
other free citizens & inhabitants of every age sex and condition
including those bound to servitude for a term of years & three
fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the foregoing
description, except Indians not paying taxes; that if such
requisitions be not compiled with, in the time specified therein,
to direct the collection thereof in the non complying States &
for that purpose to devise and pass acts directing & authorizing
the same; provided that none of the powers hereby vested in the
U. States in Congs. shall be exercised without the consent of at
least[540]

Again on the fifteenth of June it was suggested that

3. The rule of apportioning Requis: on the States shall be the
Whites 3/5 of all others--if the Req. is in arrear in any State,
Congress shall have authority to devise & pass acts remedial in
such case.

On the fifth of July the committee considering the question of representation reported on the 40,000 basis which repeatedly came before the Convention. It provided:

That in the first branch of the legislature, each of the states
now in the union, be allowed one member for every 40,000
inhabitants, of the description reported in the seventh
resolution of the committee of the whole house--That each state,
not containing that number, shall be allowed one member.[541]

Reporting on this question the fifth of July, the Committee of the Whole decided to submit:

That the subsequent propositions be recommended to the
Convention, on condition that both shall be generally adopted.

1st That in the first branch of the Legislature each of the
States now in the Union be allowed one Member for every forty
thousand inhabitants of the description reported in the seventh
resolution of the Committee of the whole House. That each State
not containing that number shall be allowed one Member--That all
Bills for raising or appropriating money and for fixing the
salaries of the Officers of the Government of the United States,
shall originate in the first Branch of the Legislature, and shall
not be altered or amended by the second Branch and that no money
shall be drawn from the public Treasury but in pursuance of
appropriations to be originated by the first Branch. 2ndly That
in the second Branch of the Legislature each State shall have an
equal Veto.

Discussing this question on the sixth of July:

Mr. Pinkney saw no good reason for committing. The value of land
had been found on full investigation to be an impracticable rule.
The contributions of revenue including imports & exports, must be
too changeable in their amount; too difficult to be adjusted; and
too injurious to the non-commercial States. The number of
inhabitants appeared to him the only just & practicable rule. He
thought the blacks ought to stand on an equality with whites: But
wd.--agree to the ratio settled by Congs. He contended that
Congs. had no right under the articles of Confederation to
authorize the admission of new States; no such cases having been
provided for.[542]

On the ninth of July, according to Madison, Mr. Gorham said:

Some provision of this sort was necessary in the outset. The
number of blacks & whites with some regard to supposed wealth
was the general guide. Fractions could not be observed. The
Legislre. is to make alterations from time to time as justice &
propriety may require. Two objections prevailed agst. the rate of
1 member for every 40,000 inhts. The 1st. was that the
Representation would soon be too numerous: the 2d. that the
Western States who may have a different interest, might if
admitted on that principal by degrees, out-vote the Atlantic.
Both these objections are removed. The number will be small in
the first instance and maybe continued so, and the Atlantic
States having ye Govt. in their own hands, may take care of their
own interest by dealing out the right of Representation in safe
proportions to the Western States. These were the views of the
Committee.[543]

On the tenth of July the following interesting comment was made.

Mr. Dayton observed that the line between the Northn. & Southern
interest had been improperly drawn: that Pa. was the dividing
State, there being six on each side of her.

Genl. Pinkney urged the reduction, dwelt on the superior wealth
of the Southern States, and insisted on its having its due weight
in the Government.

Mr. Govr. Morris regretted the turn of the debate. The States he
found had many Representatives on the floor. Few he fears were to
be deemed the Representatives of America. He thought the Southern
States have by the report more than their share of
representation. Property ought to have its weight; but not all
the weight. If the (Southn. States are to) supply money. The
Northn. States are to spill their blood. Besides, the probable
Revenue to be expected from the S. States has been greatly
overrated. He was agst. reducing N. Hampshire.[544]

In connection with determining the basis of representation the following was offered on the eleventh of July:

"Resolved That in order to ascertain the alterations that may
happen in the population and wealth of the several States a
census shall be taken of the free inhabitants of each State, and
three fifths of the inhabitants of other description on the first
year after this form of Government shall have been adopted--and
afterwards on every term of ____ years; and the Legislature shall
alter or augment the representation accordingly"

It was moved and seconded to strike out the words

"three fifths of"

which passed in the negative. (Ayes--3; noes--7.)

It was moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the
resolution proposed in order to take up the following namely.

Resolved That at the end of ____ years from the meeting of the
Legislature of the United-States and at the expiration of every
____ years thereafter the Legislature of the United States be
required to apportion the representation of the several States
according to the principles of their wealth and population.

On the question to postpone, it passed in the negative (Ayes--5;
noes--5;)

It was moved and seconded to agree to the first clause of the
resolution namely.

"That in order to ascertain the alterations that may happen in
the population and wealth of the several States a "Census shall
be taken of each State"

which passed in the affirmative (Ayes--6; noes--4.)

(To adjourn. Ayes--1; noes--9.)

It was moved and seconded to agree to the following clause of the
resolution, namely

"and three fifths of the inhabitants of other description"

which passed in the negative. (Ayes--4; noes--6.)

It was moved and seconded to agree to the following clause of the
resolution, namely

"On the first year after this form of government shall "have been
adopted"

which passed in the affirmative (Ayes--7; noes--3.)

It was moved and seconded to fill up the blank with the word
"fifteen" which passed unanimously in the affirmative (Ayes--10;
noes--0.)

It was moved and seconded to add after the words fifteen years
the words "at least"

which passed in the negative (Ayes--5; noes--5.)

It was moved and seconded to agree to the following clause of the
resolution namely

"and the Legislature shall alter or augment the representation
accordingly"

which passed unanimously in the affirmative (Ayes--10; noes--0.)
On the question to agree to the resolution as amended it passed
unanimously in the negative. (Ayes--0; noes--10.) and then the
House adjourned till tomorrow at 11 o'clock A.M.[545]

Taking up the question, Mr. Williamson urged again on the eleventh of July the counting of five Negroes as three white persons.

Mr. Williamson was for making it the duty of the Legislature to
do what was right & not leaving it at liberty to do or not do it.
He moved that Mr. Randolph's proposition be postponed, in order
to consider the following "that in order to ascertain the
alterations that may happen in the population & wealth of the
several States, a census shall be taken of the free white
inhabitants and 3/5ths of those of other descriptions on the 1st
year (after this Government shall have been adopted) and every
year thereafter; and that the Representation be regulated
accordingly.[546]

* * * * *

Mr. Butler & Genl. Pinkney insisted that blacks be included in
the rule of Representation, _equally_ with the whites: (and for
that purpose moved that the words "three fifths" be struck
out.)[547]

Mr. Gerry though that 3/5 of them was to say the least the full
proportion that could be admitted.

Mr. Ghorum. This ratio was fixed by Congs. as a rule of taxation.
Then it was urged by the Delegates representing the States having
slaves that the blacks were still more inferior to freemen. At
present when the ratio of representation is to be established, we
are assured that they are equal to freemen. The arguments on ye.
former occasion had convinced him that 3/5 was pretty near the
just proportion and he should vote according to the same opinion
now.

Mr. Butler insisted that the labour of a slave in S. Carola. was
as productive & valuable as that of a freeman in Massts., that as
wealth was the great means of defence and utility to the Nation
they are equally valuable to it with freemen; and that
consequently an equal representation ought to be allowed for them
in a Government which was instituted principally for the
protection of property, and was itself to be supported by
property.

Mr. Mason could not agree to the motion, notwithstanding it was
favorable to Virga. because he thought it unjust. It was certain
that the slaves were valuable, as they raised the value of land,
increased the exports & imports, and of course the revenue, would
supply the means of feeding and supporting an army, and might in
cases of emergency become themselves soldiers. As in these
important respects they were useful to the community at large,
they ought not to be excluded from the estimate of
Representation. He could not, however, regard them as equal to
freemen and could not vote for them as such. He added as worthy
of remark, that the Southern States have this peculiar species of
property over & above the other species of property common to all
the States.