and the document it was making; the historical fact would appear in a thousand other places.

The Convention was determined, however, to have the socalled "historical fact," and finally, by a vote of 59 to 43, agreed upon the following language:

"The slaves in South Carolina having been emancipated by the action of the United States authorities, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall ever be re-established in this State."

The occasion

the abolition of slavery in South Carolina - had lost its superficial interest, because of the senseless wrangle over a form of words. The fine audience of the early part of the day had wearied and gone away. Only the delegates and a few spectators whom nothing could disgust into forgetfulness of the import of the work in hand remained. The dull equinoctial afternoon was fading into

a dark and dreary evening.

Finally the vote on the main question

the passage

of this clause as Sect. 11 of Article IX. in the new Constitution was called. In all parts of the church men kept tally of those who voted "Nay." They were Messrs. A. P. Aldrich and J. M. Whetstone, of Barnwell District; R. G. M. Dunovant, of Edgefield District; T. J. Goodwyn, of St. Matthew's Parish; J. H. Morgan, of Orange District; Edward Porter, of Williamsburg District; H. S. Sheridan, of St. Bartholomew's Parish; and L. F. Youmans, of St. Luke's Parish. The vote stood 98 Yeas and 8 Nays.

So the fact was accomplished beyond all cavil, and so South Carolina stepped into the ranks alongside Massachusetts, joining hands with her to bear aloft the banner of freedom, bowing to the logic of events rather than that of free speech, — convinced by cannon-balls rather than by arguments; yet, under the circumstances, turning from the things of slavery to the things of liberty with commendable

grace.

+

At the gateway of the church, as I came out, I met an old negro woman, neat, prim, deferential. "Well, Auntie,” said I," the Convention has just said there shall be no more slavery in South Carolina." "How's dat ar?" I repeated the idea in more familiar terms. "Is dat ar true, Massa?" "True as the Bible, Auntie." "Wall now tank de Lord fur dat ar. I's dun gone pray fur dat dese yer forty years. I's hope he come in my time; but 'pears like he idle by de way. Now he come, and I's ready fur my ole man in de hebens. Tank de Lord, tank de Lord!"

W

VIII.

THE BASIS OF REPRESENTATION.

COLUMBIA, September 21, 1865. HAT is the true basis of representation in a republican form of government? This is the profound question over which the Convention has to-day spent a session of about seven hours. Everybody expected a struggle when this matter was reached, for the first day's resolutions showed a very prevalent desire to at least discuss the subject in all its bearings. Yet that the negro could be brought into that discussion seemed never to enter the minds of even some of the oldest and ablest delegates; and his introduction into the assembly this afternoon was followed by scenes both ludicrous and humiliating.

The basis of representation in the Legislature of this State has always been unusual, not to say complex. In the House it was property and population, taxation and white inhabitants, half the members being apportioned on the basis of white population, and the other half on the value of all property, slaves included. In the Senate it was geographi

cal area and territorial extent, modified by the parish system, under which the area occupied by the major part of the slave population received not less than three times as great a representation as the same area mainly occupied by white population.

The committee to which the legislative article of the Constitution was referred reported in favor of retaining the old basis of representation in the House, and of abolishing the parish system of representation in the Senate.

The debate to-day was upon that section fixing the basis of representation in the House; but such range was given it that it embraced, as I have already indicated, the whole question of the true basis of republican representation. The adoption this morning, by a vote of 73 to 36, of a rule limiting each delegate to fifteen minutes in speaking, gave the debate a fragmentary character, and doubtless killed half a dozen lengthy speeches.

Mr. James L. Orr advocated this basis of representation,

white population in the House, and white population and taxation in the Senate, and moved to so amend the article under debate, fixing white population as the basis for the House. The proposition was pretty closely debated on its merits, and the scheme was rejected by Yeas 24, Nays 83.

Mr. Cadwallader Jones, of York, wanted the basis of representation in the Senate to be property, and in the House white population, and submitted a series of amendments to carry out his view. This question was also debated on its merits, with some reference to its advantages for the different sections of the State, and finally rejected-by Yeas 20, Nays 85.

Mr. Robert Dozier, of Georgetown, proposed that the basis for representation in the House should be property, and all the inhabitants, white and black.

This proposition dragged the poor negro right in by the

ears.

His appearance was either very alarming or very dis

tasteful, for the Rev. Dr. Boyce sprang to his feet, and, with indignant haste, moved to lay the amendment on the table, saying he believed every man was ready for instant action. Much to his surprise, apparently, several of the oldest and strongest delegates protested in warm terms against this gag movement, and the Reverend Doctor was forced to withdraw his motion. He renewed it three times during the afternoon, but was obliged to three times more withdraw it; and the discussion upon the right and expediency of admitting the negro into the body politic as an element of representation ran through five long hours. It was no proposition to allow him to vote, or even to allow any one to vote in his name,* or for him; but simply a proposition to allow ten thousand whites living in a district where there are twenty-five thousand negroes, to send as many representatives to the General Assembly as are sent by twenty-five thousand whites living in a district with only ten thousand negroes.

There was during the day a great deal of frothy talk, through which it was found that the proposition stood upon three principal legs, and had several side-supports.

Its effect in State affairs was the medium through which a majority of the speakers saw it. The discovery was soon made that it would ultimately give the control of the House to the low-country. Sectional feeling was, therefore, at once enlisted for or against it; and some of the up-country members made furious speeches against it, while some of the Charleston delegation endeavored to win votes by appealing to the magnanimity of up-country friends who had broken their power in the Senate by the overthrow of the parish system.

The bearings of the amendment upon the question of Congressional representation were also of much interest to various gentlemen. Mr. Dozier himself appeared to be chiefly concerned in this regard. He argued that as negroes are an element in the Congressional representation, it would be

inconsistent to exclude them from the body politic as represented in the State Legislature. On what ground can we ask Congress, said he, to allow us four representatives now, and probably seven, and at least six, after the next census, when our present white population gives us but two, if we deny the right of the negroes to be represented in our local government? This argument, in other phraseology, was used by a dozen or more delegates. On the other hand, it was argued that there is no connection between the two matters; that the apportionment of four representatives two for whites and two for three fifths of the negroes must stand till after the next census; and that then the whole population, black and white, must be counted in assigning the representation, unless Congress meantime amends the Constitution, which it is not at all probable can be done.

The just claim of the negro to representation was advocated by a few members, including three or four of the ablest delegates in the Convention. It was argued that he had heretofore been represented in both houses, directly as property in the lower house, and indirectly through the parish system in the upper house; and that it would be unjust to now cut him off from all representation. "It will be outlawry to do so,” said Chancellor Inglis. On the other hand, it was held that if the negro be admitted into the body politic at all, he must be given a vote. "This is but the entering wedge of negro suffrage," said Colonel Rion, "and I oppose it as such.” "I am sure the mover does not mean it as such, and I am also sure none of those who support it mean it as such," said Mr. Thomson, of Abbeville ; "but I am convinced it is but the stepping-stone to negro suffrage." "You cannot, in my judgment, pass this amendment," said Mr. Orr, "till you are prepared to follow it with one giving the negro the elective franchise, and I shall vote against it on that ground." "Adopt this amendment," said General McGowan, "and you pass the political power of the State