Skip Navigation

Debates and Proceedings
of the
First Constitutional Convention
of West Virginia

December 9, 1861

The Convention was opened with prayer by Rev. Gideon Martin, of the M. E. Church.

Journal read and approved.

MR. DERING. Mr. President, I hold in my hand a petition signed by a large number of very respectable and loyal citizens of my county; and although the Convention has acted on the subject matter of the petition and granted the prayer of the petitioners, yet, sir, I hold the right of petition so sacred that I desire it to be read and laid on the table.

The petition was read as follows:

"We, the undersigned, citizens of Monongalia county, pray the Convention to have a provision engrafted in the Constitution for our new State which will debar all traitors from the privilege of voting, until pardoned by the Government of the United States, and then put them on probation, the same as foreigners, by law, so far as voting is concerned; and we consider all persons traitors who have voluntarily taken up arms against the government of the United States, or abetted in bringing on this deplorable rebellion."

(Signed) A. MILLER and others.

THE PRESIDENT. When the Convention adjourned on Saturday, it had under consideration the report of the Committee on Boundary.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. Mr. President, I believe the first resolution, as amended, was adopted. The next business in order, I presume, is the second resolution. I move the Convention now take it up for consideration.

MR. BATTELLE. Mr. President, allow me to suggest sir, if it would not be as well to permit this report to lie on the table for the present. We have been driving at it for several days, and perhaps we could make more rapid headway with something else; and if we could, it would be very desirable, I conceive, to let this remain on the table for the present.

THE PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest that the resolution is not up yet. The motion -

MR. BATTELLE. Is to take it up.

THE PRESIDENT. It would perhaps be better to make a motion to pass by the second resolution.

MR. BATTELLE. I was speaking to that very proposition - whether the Convention should now take up the report of the Committee on Boundary. Am I in order? (Pausing for reply but receiving none, resuming.) I was speaking to the question whether the Convention should now take up the report of the Committee on Boundaries. Am I in error in supposing that would be proper?

THE PRESIDENT. The motion would be proper to pass by the report of the committee, or to pass by any of its resolutions.

MR. BATTELLE. Very well, sir, I will make then that motion, as a substitute for the motion of the gentleman from Doddridge, to pass by for the present the report of the Committee on Boundaries. I do not know that I need include in my motion the taking up of any other subject for consideration; but I would suggest that we have two reports that might be properly considered now, either the report of the Committee on Fundamental and General Provisions or the report of the Committee on the Executive Department. I merely make the suggestion, Mr. President, without any reference to the merits of the proposition contained yet unacted upon in the report of the Committee on Boundary; but because I suppose we may in the end gain time by permitting this report to lie for the time. The country is making history very fast, sir, now-a-days. There may be some difficulties removed out of our way in reference to this very question of boundary.

I make that motion: that the Convention pass by for the present the report of the Committee on Boundary.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. I hope it will not be the pleasure of the Convention to pass by as the gentleman's amendment suggests. It is necessary, gentlemen, that this question should be now settled in order to let other committees make their reports. The Committee on the Legislative Department and the Committee on the Judiciary cannot report until the boundaries are settled and determined upon. We have got the question now up; and I cannot see that we can gain any more light; and as we have the subject up for discussion already, the sooner we settle this question the sooner the other committees will be able to report to this body. It does strike me that this is the first step we should take: to settle this question of boundary. I can see nothing to be gained by passing it by, but everything to lose. The question is now up before us, under discussion; the attention of members has been called to it; we have been engaged on it, thinking about it. That would be one reason; and the other reason has been assigned: that the committees are waiting for the settlement of this question. And I hope it will now be settled before we pass it by.

MR. STEVENSON of Wood. Mr. President, I would suggest to the gentleman from Ohio that he can accomplish the purpose of his resolution and those who agree with him by voting against taking up the report at the present time. That of course would postpone it.

MR. BATTELLE. I modified my proposition at the suggestion of the Chair; and I believe the suggestion was to consider simply the proposition of the gentleman from Doddridge. I understood the suggestion of the Chair to be that -

THE PRESIDENT. Does the gentleman withdraw his amendment then, to allow the question to be on the motion to take up?

MR. BATTELLE. I do not, sir.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. We have had the action of the Convention delayed already for the want of a determination of this very question before the Convention now. We have found, in fact, that the action of the Legislative Committee was suspended and the report upon this question of boundary brought in, so that the other committees might act. To leave this question and take up something else would be hopping from one thing to another in a way that we would never attain an end. If circumstances shall write "history" that shall change our action then we may modify it when that "history" shall have been written. I know what "history" the gentleman alludes to; but it seems to me we should pursue our course and let "history" take its way.

MR. BATTELLE. I am not tenacious. I have no special object to gain. The proposition which I submitted, I offered in good faith and frankly with the view that the Convention would gain time by adopting it. I think there is nothing wrong in the proposition. It will not hinder the action of the Convention. Though they may not be ready to act on the report of the Judiciary Committee, there are other reports on which they can act without let or hindrance by the boundary question. The report of the Executive Committee would have nothing to do with it. The principles governing the executive department will be identically the same whether we do or do not include additional territory. So in reference to the unfinished report of the Committee on Fundamental and General Provisions. There is abundance to do in which the Convention can make progress without this report; and my proposition is with a view that this question need not be embarrassed at all by delay, and the minds of the members may meanwhile become more clearly convinced as to their duty one way or the other.

The motion made by Mr. Battelle, to pass by, was not agreed to; and the motion made by Mr. Stuart of Doddridge, to take up the report prevailed, and the consideration of the report was resumed.

The second resolution was reported as follows:

"RESOLVED, That the district comprising the counties of Craig, Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Russell, Lee, and Scott shall be included in and constitute part of the proposed new State, provided a majority of the votes cast within the said district, at elections to be held for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a majority of the said counties, are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution, to be submitted to this Convention."

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I move that the counties of Wise and Buchanan be added to that list.

MR. VAN WINKLE. It will be remembered, sir, that there was an understanding of that kind, when they were stricken from the first table, they would be inserted in the second; and I presume the motion of the gentleman from Kanawha is merely to place them in there as if they had been so reported and that they be subject to any motion that may relate to them and others included with them. It can be done, sir, by general understanding, I suppose, that these counties are in this resolution as if originally so reported.

THE PRESIDENT. The object of the gentleman from Wood then is to dispense with the necessity of a vote?

MR. VAN WINKLE. Yes, sir, I ask the general consent of the Convention, to simplify the matter, that the counties of Wise and Buchanan be included in the second resolution of the report as if originally so reported, it having been the understanding that they should be taken out of the one and included in the other. That will not hinder any motion that may hereafter be made in regard to them.

MR. PRESIDENT. Without objection that will be taken as the sense of the Convention.

The question then will be on the adoption of the resolution.

MR. STEVENSON of Wood. Mr. President, I wish to state as briefly as I can a few general objections which I have to the passage of this resolution and to embracing the counties named in it; and my remarks may apply to the counties named in the fourth resolution also, as I think they all involve the same principle.

The legal questions arising out of this matter have been discussed here already at great length and with ability. I do not now, sir, propose to say anything, even if I were able to do so, on that portion of the subject; but, sir, I wish to take another, and, as it seems to me, an equally important view of this case. I propose, sir, to examine it as a practical question. I propose to examine it just as we would examine any one of the ordinary business transactions of everyday life - just as if we were going to add some acres to our farms, or introduce a number of new partners into our business; for I contend, sir, the matter of utility is after all to settle this question. If, sir, you could extend the boundaries of this new State and yet violate no principle of law involved in the case - if you could do it without acting in bad faith to any compact that had heretofore been entered into - I say if you could without violating a principle of law, extend the boundaries of this new State from the Ohio river to the Blue Ridge mountains, you would inflict a serious if not fatal injury on this whole new State movement, unless you can satisfy this Convention that the geographical position of these counties proposed to be taken in now by the remaining resolutions, the industrial and social habits of their people and their trade and commercial intercourse are such as to make a union with them desirable, profitable and lasting.

Now, sir, if I understand this report, it proposes to go beyond anything that "was claimed here in the discussion on Saturday. The discussion then seemed to involve the argument - and it had a good deal of force in it I am willing to admit - that the interest and safety of this new State required that it should possess all the territory up to that great natural breast-work, the Alleghany mountains, behind which gentlemen tell us our people were to take refuge in time of war and public danger. But now, sir, it is proposed to extend our outposts far beyond the range of these mountain barriers into the very heart of - I must say, and I can use no milder term - an unfriendly country. We propose now to make a sort of "reconnoisance in force" to the very top of the Blue Ridge mountains. If I understand this report, sir, it carries us over the Alleghany mountains. It embraces all the counties lying around the eastern base of those mountains from the Maryland line, down to the lines of Kentucky and Tennessee; and from the Maryland line, again, down to the middle, or beyond the middle of the valley - all the counties clean across to the top of, or at least somewhere on the Blue mountain Ridge - some twenty-five counties. I know, sir, some of those counties lying along down by the Tennessee and Kentucky line may be said to be on the western slope of the mountains, or rather in the mountains; but it does seem to me that they are almost as inaccessible to us as the counties that are properly within the limits of the valley. Now, sir, here are twenty-five counties we propose to take in, having according to the tables presented here a population of over half a million or nearly double the population that is to be found in the thirty-nine counties originally reported by the ordinance which called this Convention together. Now, sir, I am willing to admit that at first sight there seems to be, and I suppose there is, a strong temptation to take in this valley region. I know, sir, that the "sweet fields" that are spread out "in living green" in this beautiful valley of Virginia are desirable, but let me say to this Convention that if we organize a compact State now, having a people whose interests, whose feelings and whose opinions are alike, and put that State in successful operation - put all the state machinery to work - in the process of time, if this valley country is to come to us, it will come in the natural order of events. It seems to me, now, sir, if the intention is to grasp it prematurely, and before either they or we are ready, that we will meet with a disappointment something like that of the man in the fable who ripped up goose that laid the golden eggs.

The first objection, sir, it seems to me against the addition of these counties is to be found in this fact, that their geographical position is such that for a long period of time - for several generations - we can have but little commercial intercourse, or communication otherwise, with the people of that valley region, or they with us. I do not pretend to say the time will never come when we will trade with these people and have sympathies and interests that will be more alike than at present; but I say, sir, that time is not the present. I know that the ingenuity of man, the skill of the civil engineer, and the enterprise of the American people may overcome even such an obstacle as that of the towering mountains of the Alleghany; but, sir, you will discover that now the trade of these people, the great bulk of their trade - and they have an immense trade, amounting to many millions of dollars every year - is with the people of eastern Virginia, and with the people south, some of it going to the State of Maryland; because they are united with these people by great public highways. A number of railroads pass through or over the mountain ridges to the eastern side of the Blue Ridge; and there they are met with railroads at almost every convenient point, because, if you will look you will discover that eastern Virginia is so covered over with internal improvements - and by the way, you helped to build them, particularly the railroads - that it resembles a spider's web. There is a perfect net-work of railroads there, many of them running up to such convenient distances on the eastern side of the Blue Ridge as to connect with the people of this valley country. Now, upon these railroads the products of this country, their fabrics of every kind, and their merchandise of every description, are carried safely and swiftly and cheaply to the great centers of trade in eastern Virginia and at the extreme South. They sell, therefore, their products into that country. Not only do they sell their merchandise, the products of their farms or workshops, but they make their purchases there; and they make large purchases there. You will see from this, sir, that the interests of this people are identified with the interests of a people who are hostile to this new State movement; not only hostile to this new State project, but in open rebellion (and sympathising with those who are) for the very destruction of this whole government. The sources of their wealth, then, are there; and I think I may be permitted to say in the language of Scripture, that "where their treasures are, there will their hearts be also."

Well, now, sir, I will just say here in general terms that the social institutions of that valley country, and the opinions of their people upon them, and the institutions of our people, their habits and kind of industry, and their opinions on them, are just as different and as dissimilar as is the natural geography of the two sections. Now, sir, it seems to me that that is an insurmountable objection - at least it is at present in my mind - to the addition of those counties to the new State.

But, now, sir, there is another matter that I wish to consider here, but before I do that just allow me to say this, that if I have got a correct statement of this matter so far, if this valley country is included with us in this new State, it will inevitably lead to a conflict of interests - just the same war of interests we have always had. Now, do not you see that each section will undertake to control the legislation of this new State and dictate its policy? Well, now, sir, the valley counties have a greater unity of interests than we have, and they have a preponderance of population as I have already shown you; and as a matter of course they will dictate the legislation and policy of this new State. How will they do that? Why, sir, to build up their own institutions and foster their own commerce; to extend the limits of their own trade; to enrich their own people; and the people upon the West slope of the mountains will be taxed as usual to help them. Now, sir, what will the result be? Why, it will have but one result, and that will be to cripple, to hobble and handcuff this new State in every step of its progress.

Now, there is another consideration. It was alluded to here by, I think, the gentleman from Preston, on Saturday, and that is this: that in a majority of the counties proposed to be taken in here, and probably in all of the counties - I do not know how that is - but there seems to be hardly any dispute that the sentiment of a majority of the counties altogether - and in some it is almost unanimous - is against the new State movement, as well as in sympathy with and in many cases giving actual assistance of men and money for the prosecution of this war to overturn the government of which we must form a part. Now, sir, I say for one that I am not of that class alluded to here, nor do I believe there is any man in this Convention who favors the extreme doctrine of exterminating secessionists. If there is any feeling, sir, I should rather it would be on the side of clemency; for I believe, with the great Poet of nature, that

"The quality of mercy is not strained;
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blessed;
It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes:
Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown."

But while I agree to that sentiment, sir, I agree to that other sentiment, that this new State, and the general government of which it must form a part, owes it to its own existence and to its loyal citizens to execute force enough to crush out this rebellion in the shortest time possible; and it is particularly the duty of this Convention, while they do not favor the doctrine of exterminating secessionists that they should be very careful not to put secessionists in a position that they can exterminate us.

Now, sir, the gentleman from Preston exhibited the statistics here; and that argument has not yet been answered, I believe: that so strong was that element of secession, of opposition to this new State, that if those counties were added they would dictate the policy of this new State - dictate the kind of legislation that should be made; and as a matter of course, shape the destiny of this new State hereafter. Now, supposing it to be an extreme case that they can not elect their Governor - supposing they cannot do that - suppose they could not elect a man actually opposed to this new State movement or who actually favored this rebellion. I think you will all admit one thing and that is this, that in the local offices in those particular districts or counties where that element predominates, where it enforces itself on public opinion and that public opinion becomes a part of it, they will control all the county and State offices and all the other places of honor or public trust within the limits of those counties. Now, sir, what condition of things have you there? Why, sir, every office, from the smallest precinct office up to the highest in the district or county - to at least the majority of those offices - are to have men in them who are spies upon the new State and spies upon the general government. You would exhibit the spectacle of a number of counties in the limits of this new State, while they professed to be members of it, that were in successful or open rebellion against its authority. Now, sir, I alluded here the other day - and I intend simply to allude to it now - to another matter that is well worth considering here. If we intend to make this new State, sir, what we have been telling the people it ought to be, and what it will be if we are judicious and cautious in giving it an organic law - if it is ever to become a competitor with the States of Pennsylvania and Ohio or other states that are connected with it by the sympathies of their people, their commerce and institutions, we must have a people and population who are to settle up the wild and waste lands of this new State of ours, and who will bring capital and energy and industry to develop its great natural resources; because you can never have a prosperous State without these. And, sir, I believe that every gentleman present will agree with me - or nearly every one - in reference to this remark. I know, sir, there is a class of men, we find them in every community, and in this community - who have a kind of dread of anything like what they call innovation. Why, sir, the sight of a steamboat carrying a dozen families with their household furniture and agricultural implements almost puts them into spasms. They do not like to see any addition to the population. Their ideas, sir, are with the past; and they are not the men, it seems to me, calculated to build up and make this a prosperous State. They do not believe in manufactories (in large ones); they do not believe in the circulation of a liberal literature; in the freedom of the press or the freedom of speech - in anything of this kind. But, sir, many of them believe just as firmly (almost) as that they have an existence that it is the certain forerunner of bad luck if they happen to see the new moon over the wrong shoulder.

Now, sir, I repeat it, if the great natural wealth which lies within the boundaries of this new State, and we are to have a population - an industrious and enterprising population who will aid in the development of that wealth and make it useful to bring in revenues to the State and enrich it, that you must shape your organic law in such a way as will invite that capital and invite that labor. Now, I do not say you should do anything to injure the people of the new State; I do not say we should adopt anything that would conflict with their true interests; but I do say that we should incorporate such features in this Constitution that while they will be beneficial to our people, they will be an invitation to that class of people to whom I refer. Now, sir, I ask the question, simply here, and I do not intend to answer it - where is this capital and where are these people to come from? I say nothing against the people here of our own country. I believe, if I know myself, I am as much devoted to their welfare as any person can be. They are just as moral, as industrious, as enterprising as any other people placed in similar circumstances; but what I do say is that we have enough of these people; we want a larger population and a greater abundance of capital to put this new State in the pathway of progress and make it successfully vital to those States on its borders. Now, sir, you can answer that question; and when you have determined the source from which this capital is to flow in - the source whence this immigration of population - then I say it would be a wise policy to shape the organic law of tills State so as to hold out inducements to that class of people. I do not think you can do it by adding to this new State these valley counties. If you can I shall willingly listen to the argument that may be urged in favor of their addition; but from all the examination I have been enabled to bestow on this subject, it does seem to me that the result of the annexation or the addition of these counties will not only be to cripple and to hobble the people here as they always have been in their business, in matters of taxation and in their industry; but it will also have the effect from the way the policy will necessarily be shaped by the preponderance given to it by the addition of these counties, to shut out, as it has heretofore, the capital and population from those very places from which we desire to receive them.

I will say here again that there is one other matter to be considered: in making this Constitution, we must be careful not only to make a Constitution that will meet with favor amongst our own people - for that is a very important matter you will admit - but we must make a Constitution that will meet with favor, if possible with little discussion in our own legislature; and more than that, if we are to be successful in the establishment of this new State, we must make a Constitution that will command a majority of the votes of both Houses of Congress and meet with the approval of the President of the United States.

Now, sir, these are some of the considerations which will induce me to vote against the adoption of the second and fourth resolutions, or embracing the counties within them. I shall not say, sir, that I shall not vote for some of the counties in the third resolution; but will reserve my judgment on that matter until their claims are properly canvassed before this Convention.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. Mr. President, I cannot reconcile the gentleman's argument with any other principle than that he lost sight of the resolution before this body. The gentleman set out with his argument that we are attempting to include a portion of people here that is opposed to our government and opposed to the organization of a new State here. Now, sir, if that is a fact the resolution squarely and fairly submits the question to this people; and the argument of the gentleman that we are embracing, or attempting to, a people that is not with us in feeling does not hold good for we do not propose to do any such thing; we do not propose to include this people against their votes and sentiments and will; but it simply submits the question to them whether or not they want to be a part and parcel of the State of West Virginia. Now, sir, there is not one word in the resolution that goes to include those people against their will and consent. Now, sir, if they vote - a majority of them vote to come into the State of West Virginia, why that refutes the argument of the gentleman itself. People who are better acquainted with their circumstances, their wishes and desires than he or I will pass upon this question and tell us whether they want to come or not. Now, does not that settle the question at once? Then the argument that we are attempting to include a people here who are against us in sentiment and interest - against the new State movement - goes for nothing; because we simply propose to ask these people to indicate their wishes.

Another view the gentleman took of it, and another objection he had to it, was that we would be including a people here that would govern us in future legislation - that we would be tied down and they would rule and control the State of West Virginia. Now, sir, it does seem to me the gentleman did not look at the statistics. He certainly did not inform himself on this point. I find in the thirty-nine counties a white population in round numbers of 272,000. I find, sir, in Table B. including the counties proposed to be admitted by the resolution now before the Convention, a white population of 48,539. Can it be argued here for a single moment, if we make a peremptory line, proposing to include them even against their consent and will - can it be said that these people are likely to rule and govern the legislation of West Virginia? Can 48,000 people govern and control 272,000? We will be equally free as they would be; and in framing this Constitution - this "organic law" the gentleman spoke of so much - they did not even have a hand. They are not here to dictate to us; but the proposition we propose to submit to this people is this: are you for forming a new State and adopting the Constitution that we here make. Mind, sir, they are not to frame the Constitution; but we frame the Constitution and submit it to them; and if they adopt our Constitution, is it not proof at once that they are with us in sentiment, in feeling, and in every respect? Are you going to say to this people, if they want to cut loose from the oppression and tyranny of eastern Virginia, that they shall not even have an opportunity of expressing their sentiments and views on this question? If this people do vote to come here, do you not see by not adopting this resolution you preclude them from passing on this thing? You say to men there whose interests are homogeneous with ours - identified with ours, who have been ruled and controlled by the unfair legislation of eastern Virginia - you say to them: you shall remain in your present position. We cut ourselves loose from our brothers who are holding out their hands and asking for relief and help. Sir, if they are opposed to this new State movement and our Government, to the Constitution we frame here, when we submit that question to them if they have an opportunity of passing upon it, they will vote against it and that is the end of it. If they are friendly to the new State, to the Government and to the Constitution we frame here and submit to them, then they will vote for it; and by your action here indicated by the gentleman from Wood, although they are for us in every respect, you say to them, sir, that they shall not come with us, simply because they lie in the Valley of Virginia. I understand, sir, these some five or six counties right along the mountains are in every respect, sir, situated as we have been and as we are now situated. They have been oppressed with the unfair legislation of eastern Virginia, it is true, as we have been. They have controlled the legislation of the people embraced in these counties and their representatives have always been with us. In the convention you recollect, of 1850-51, they sat side by side with us. There, sir, they contended for equal representation, equal rights, a fair basis and a fair taxation. Every one of them was with us. Last winter, sir, in the convention in Richmond, we find this people side by side with us; and I have every reason to believe, this day, sir, if they were differently circumstanced and were left free to act for themselves and were not overrun by this eastern oppression and the armies of this rebellion, they would be today with us; and if it should happen, sir, that this thing can be put aside and they have an opportunity to express themselves against the time that we may sit here, it seems to me unfair, unjust, unwise and impolitic to say they shall not come in. It would be the most unkind treatment I have ever seen towards any people in my life - people who are identified with us in every interest, who have been with us in all the great issues and fights we have ever had for equal rights in western Virginia: they have been side by side with us, and we are not willing to let them say whether or not they will come in the new State. Simply because they are overrun there you want to exclude them. It is unfair. I hope it will not be the sense of this body. I hope, too, gentlemen - although I have very little hope that the question ever can be fairly submitted to them within the time you want your Constitution submitted to the Congress of the United States; but we do not know what may happen between now and then. Let us, at least, act fairly and in the very best spirit we are able to; and if their circumstances do preclude them from coming with us, why, we can say, we have done all that we could; we have done everything they could ask of us and if circumstances preclude them, they cannot blame us for it.

These are my views. I will vote, Mr. President, for this resolution as cheerfully as for any that will come before this body. My heart is in it because I believe those people are with us. I believe their interest is ours and I believe they will so consider it; and if they ever get to pass on this question they will vote to come to West Virginia. It is their natural position. It is a name that has been applied to them as well as us. They are as much western Virginians as we are; and they are identified with us in every respect and in every shape; and they have felt, and feel this day, the oppression of eastern Virginia legislation, just as much as we have felt it. They are a set of counties here that in location and in every interest are identified with us. They are poor; but we are poor. They have never had one dollar of appropriation for internal improvements, as we have never had. They are like us in that respect. I understand that there is no State improvement - or at least, not any great amount passing through those counties. They have been taxed as we have been taxed to build up eastern Virginia. And, now, sir, we seek to cut loose from them and leave them to be taxed and oppressed for all time to come, when we are seeking relief ourselves and not even giving them the opportunity to come with us. I hope this Convention will adopt the resolution.

MR. POMEROY. I rise to make a suggestion. When we consider how precious the time of this Convention is, and remember that this question has been discussed at such great length in the former Convention, and since we have heard an able argument on each side, I would make this suggestion: that we take the vote on this without further discussion, unless some member is extremely anxious that we spend this day on the discussion.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I will not say that I am extremely anxious to discuss this question; and I will say that I feel so unwell that I am scarcely able to attempt it; nevertheless, a sense of duty impels me to express my views, however briefly I must do so.

By reference to the map it will be seen that after having adopted a permanent and fixed boundary - that is to say an unconditional boundary - for this State, which I understand it is the determination of this Convention to do - to be the boundary, without consulting the wishes of any person outside of that boundary, on the hypothesis that those outsiders may be opposed to it - we then further propose in this and in the third resolution to add, by the wishes and consent of the people of the counties, a tier of counties from one end of the State to the other, lying outside of the present fixed boundary and adjoining each other - by reference to the map, I say, it will be seen that this resolution proposes to embrace only half of it; and I will, to raise the question - for I intend to express what I say in reference to the whole of them - I shall move, if in order, that the resolution here be so amended as to adopt both the second and third class, which embrace the entire tier of counties bordering the State from the Maryland to the Tennessee line. The justice and the propriety of it, it seems to me, must be apparent to every eye that looks on the map: that it would be certainly wrong, unjust and unfair for this Convention to cast off one half of this tier of counties on one part of the State and add on the counties bordering on another portion of the State, thereby destroying the equilibrium between the two sections of the State, and throwing the whole weight, both political and physical in the other end.

THE PRESIDENT. Then the Chair understands the gentleman's proposition to embrace both resolutions in one?

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir; to embrace resolutions 2 and 3 in one vote.

MR. VAN WINKLE. To make them one district?

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. No, sir; not to make them one district. I am willing to do that. Even that is a fairer way; but I want to test the sense of the Convention upon the proposition that when we decide it shall decide it all at once; because I am free to say, if the Convention shall feel themselves constrained to vote off one end of this I shall feel myself constrained to vote against the addition of the other end. It is a homogeneous whole - and it should be all adopted or all rejected.

MR. POMEROY. I would like to ask a question. In including the whole in one district, then, according to the proposition, it would require a majority of all the counties embraced in the district to add any of them: might not that operate very injuriously to the feelings and interests of the two counties of Hampshire and Hardy, represented on this floor?

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I think not, sir, these people's interests and fortunes are all allied together and all allied to us; and that is the reason why I stand here to advocate this proposition; that they shall be entitled to the privilege of speaking for themselves. It has been remarked by my friend on the right that the gentleman from Wood, in discussing the proposition, seems to have gone on the hypothesis that we are here attempting to force a Constitution and government upon an unwilling people, against their sentiment. We propose no such thing.

THE PRESIDENT. Would not the object of the gentleman from Kanawha be better effected by striking out the word "Resolved" and consolidating the two resolutions? Amend the second resolution by adding thereto all the third resolution after the word "Resolved."

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir, that embraces the idea.

MR. VAN WINKLE. It would be better accomplished by simply inserting the names of the counties in the third resolution in the second.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. The idea is the same; it is the end I seek, not the formula.

I think then I am distinctly understood in the proposition, that it is to embrace the counties beginning Jefferson, Berkeley, Morgan, Hampshire, Hardy, Pendleton, Highland, Bath, Alleghany, Craig, Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Russell, Lee and Scott.

MR. VAN WINKLE. It is the counties he wants to include in Tables B and G accompanying the report of the Committee on Boundary, with the addition of Buchanan and Wise.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT. The suggestion of the gentleman from Wood is to insert after the counties named in the second resolution (to which were added Buchanan and Wise) the counties embraced in the third resolution.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir; that meets my object.

THE PRESIDENT. The question will then be considered in that way.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Very well, sir. Now, Mr. President, I desire the Convention, in casting their eyes over this map, to remember that beginning at the county of Scott -

MR. VAN WINKLE. The county of Frederick is omitted from the third resolution but is in the table. Either in transcribing or printing it has been omitted from the resolution but is in Table C. Will it be understood that Frederick is included in any remarks the gentleman makes?

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir; I am embracing Frederick. Beginning at the county of Scott, you run but a few miles from the Tennessee line before you reach the top of Clinch mountain, which is a mountain range dividing the Holston and Clinch rivers, and runs almost a straight course in a northeast direction until you strike the corner of the county of Botetourt. You then continue along a range of mountains dividing the valley almost in two equal sections, throwing one tier on the Blue Ridge side and the other on the Alleghany side. You still follow a mountain range - Mill mountain, Short mountain, and North Mountain - until you reach the boundary between Hardy and Shenandoah, and then follow the boundary between Hardy and Shenandoah until you come to Hampshire; and then include Morgan, Berkeley and Jefferson. It gives you a mountain line that divides the Valley from Maryland to Tennessee.

If it be the purpose of this Convention to refuse to extend to the people east of that ridge but still in the Valley of Virginia the privilege of joining this new State if they desire it, then there are high politic reasons why you should adopt this division line. It will be remembered also that as you ascend the Kanawha river from the Ohio you pass through the present boundary line, through the Alleghany mountain, on up through the counties of Giles, Montgomery, Pulaski, Carroll and Grayson, and terminate with its headwaters in the Blue Ridge. The Blue Ridge is the natural boundary between the waters that flow into the Ohio river and the waters that flow into the Atlantic Ocean in that section of the State.

Now, sir, the argument that we are seeking to embrace a hostile people has been fully answered by my friend on the right. That these people are western Virginians as much as we are cannot be questioned; and as brethren they are as dear to me as the gentlemen who live on the Ohio or Pennsylvania border. As citizens of West Virginia they are one common family in every sense. In every battle that we have ever fought with our eastern brethren they have planted themselves on this side of the Blue Ridge with us, and have never failed or faltered. They have always been shoulder to shoulder, as brethren should be, in struggling for the common rights of West Virginians; and when we stand here today to appropriate the name that they together with us have worn I cannot in my conscience say I would be willing to turn them from it or appropriate it to ourselves without giving them an opportunity of saying whether they will still take part in the cause we embark in. It is said that they are diverse from us in interest. In name they are the same; in blood the same. For, sir, let me state to you that these counties of Scott, Tazewell, Giles and Craig furnished the population that have settled the Kanawha Valley from its head to its mouth, and the Guyandotte and Twelve Pole and Coal river, and all the intermediate smaller tributaries. We are then the same in blood relation and in kindred, and, in no small degree, in commerce. Why, then, should we cut loose from these people - our brethren and ancestors, you may say? It said we are diverse in commerce. Now, sir, they are no more diverse from us than they are from the people on the other side of that mountain; because these people are not on the line of the Tennessee Railroad. They have a high mountain barrier, between them and the valley that contains that road. They can be no more diverse from us than they will from those people with whom you are seeking to force them to unite their fortunes for all time to come. And these people having stood by us in every contest for Western rights - cut them off absolutely and leave them to the tender mercies of their eastern brethren, who have heretofore been their foes in every political sense. After we have struggled and fought together twenty or thirty years, till nearly the time to take a vote whereby we shall say the west has the power to determine what shall be the policy of the State, we immediately cut loose, just before that event, and turn them over to the tender mercies of their eastern brothers, in a hopeless minority. We have participated with them in all the benefits and blessings of past years, and we propose to leave them without regard to their wishes and interests and that too upon the merest motive of selfishness that can be adduced. It seems to me, sir, that we ought to have some higher and nobler consideration in the establishment of a new-born state. Gentlemen seem to me to have their ideas based entirely upon the hope of making a State of foreign strangers and people with whom we have no association and of whom we have no knowledge. I love my own fellows and brethren better than strangers; and will give them their rights and justice first; and then I will invite strangers here and if they do not choose to come and unite with us as a family and brethren, then I say to them go and go forever. I seek no alliance with them before our brethren who have struggled with us for equal rights and privileges. I stand here to speak for these people as a Virginian - as one born upon the waters that flow from them; for these people live upon the Kanawha river. I should feel myself, sir, humbled in my own estimation, could I stand here and ask to be cut loose from these people, and not give them the humble privilege of casting - as they have ever heretofore cast - their fortunes with us, for all time to come. As my friend over here says, we have not only fought together but we have borne the common burdens; for they have been taxed as we have been to improve the eastern portion of the state, without having received any benefit from it, for there are such mountain barriers between them and if that it is almost impossible for them to pass. And shall we leave them there to be taxed, with no friends to stand by and support them in the rear? When if we had waited till the Constitutional Convention of 1865, we have the power in our hands to control the whole legislation and destiny of the State. From the beginning they have struggled to attain the end of giving the west her proper representation; and we are now just approximating it; and if we divide we take from them the power to accomplish anything for themselves.

But, Mr. President, there is another view: that in adopting it we should be just to both sections of this new State. That there are some diversities of interest, is a fact that is clear and unquestionable. Why, sir, the people of the new State in this region have a market with Baltimore, and the people of Kanawha valley have their market with Cincinnati. Our waters flow there and we have no other highways anywhere else. West Virginia has been divided into three portions: the northwest, the middle-west and the southwest. We have stood in that region the brethren of both, neither less dear than the other to us - all friends and relatives and brethren for whom we entertain the highest respect and affection; for, sir, there is no superior love towards the one or the other; but we shall look with jealousy if it is sought by the northwest to throw off these friends from us in order to make us tributary to the northwest, to receive at their hands only what they may choose to grant. I want to stand in the new State a freeman, as I have stood of old, upon terms of equality.

I say, therefore, in adopting this tier of counties, justice and propriety demand that if one side is adopted the other shall be, and if one is excluded all shall be. I am for adopting all with heart and hand; and I expect to receive a loud plaudit and earnest greeting from those people at the polls when they record their votes to say they will come with us; and it will rejoice me that I have taken the initiative when they were not able to do it.

But, sir, as I do not wish to speak again on this subject, I will only say that I feel the same considerations of kindness, respect and the disposition to mete out justice, to all the people of Virginia. I wish to make the Blue Ridge the great mountain barrier that is to separate us. That has always been the natural boundary of the two sections. I wish when we adopt the name West Virginia, to adopt it in truth, and carry a falsehood into even the name of our State - when we are only a part of West Virginia. I wish to be just while we are generous, and show that in disposing of the interests of the Commonwealth we will protect the interests of the people who have borne our name and fought our fights and have a common interest with us. I hope that this Convention will not hesitate a moment in saying to our brethren, as we ought to say, that in forming this new State it is not our purpose to cut loose from you, or refuse you, our valley western Virginia brethren, the privilege of voting yourselves in with us if you choose.

MR. SINSEL. If it would be in order, I would offer to amend the resolution, as proposed to be amended by the gentleman from Kanawha by striking out the word "cast," in the 15th line and also in the 22d line - just to strike out the word "cast." It would read then -

The Secretary reported the resolution, as if amended, as fol- lows:

"RESOLVED, That the district comprising the counties of Lee, Scott, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, Tazewell, Bland, Giles, Graig, Allleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick shall be included in and constitute part of the proposed new State, provided a majority of the votes within the said district, at elections to be held for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a majority of the said counties, are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution, to be submitted to this Convention."

THE PRESIDENT. Would it not be better to try it on the other amendment and then bring up this?

MR. SINSEL. Very well; I just wanted to give notice of my intention to make that motion.

MR. VAN WINKLE. What will be the effect of the motion?

MR. SINSEL. The effect will be this, that before that district could come into the new State it would require a majority of the votes within the district, and not a majority of those that voted - that is, the whole of them - a majority of the people to be annexed.

MR. BATTELLE. Allow me to suggest to the gentleman whether his end would not be better attained by striking out the words "votes cast" and inserting the words "qualified voters."

MR. HALL of Marion. I believe it is not in order to offer the amendment at this stage.

Several Members. Yes, sir.

MR. HALL of Marion. O, then, it is but two stories. I was under the impression it was already three stories high.

The hour for vacating the Chair having arrived the Convention took a recess.

THE PRESIDENT (remarking) We have adopted a resolution pledging ourselves to meet here at 2 o'clock and go from here to the Fifth Ward School; and I hope members will bear in mind the adoption of that resolution.


The Convention reassembled.

THE PRESIDENT. When the Convention took a recess, it had under consideration the second resolution of the report of the Committee on Boundary, and the proposition of the gentleman from Kanawha to insert in the second resolution all the counties contained in the third. That proposition was further proposed to be amended by the gentleman from Taylor. Is that amendment still insisted on?

MR. SINSEL. If the Chair decides that it is not in order I will withdraw; but not unless it is decided out of order.

The amendment I wished to move was to strike out "votes cast" and insert "qualified voters."

MR. POMEROY. I hope my friend will withdraw that till this amendment is decided on; and that will come in on the whole resolution together if that fails.

MR. SINSEL. I have no objection to withdraw it.

THE PRESIDENT. The question then is on the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. I again find myself under the necessity of taking exceptions to the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha. The object of the Committee in classifying these counties into various districts was for the purpose of accommodating, as far as possible the feeling and sentiment of the different sections of country. What the amendment of the gentleman now proposes is to include in the second resolution not only the counties of Lee, Scott, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, Tazewell, Bland, Giles and Craig, already contained in it but the counties of Alleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, embraced by the third resolution.

Mr. President, one of my reasons for opposing the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Kanawha is that we tie down these Union counties - counties which we have every reason to suppose are Union - to a set of counties that perhaps would vote them out of the State. The resolution as it stands submits the question to the various districts - requiring a majority of the votes cast and a majority of the counties in favor of the new State to secure their admission. Now, sir, by attaching these counties to the counties of Alleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, you fix them in such a way that they will be influenced by the secession vote of the other counties; and counties that are anxious to come with us will be kept out from the fact that in this large district, as proposed by the gentleman, there will be no possibility for the Union men to carry a majority of these counties; and although nine out of twenty may vote to come into the new State, still the eleven voting against it will carry the nine Union counties out of it.

It seems to me it would be much fairer and better to let these people vote by districts. These counties of Craig, Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Russell, Buchanan, Wise, Scott and Lee lie away down here in what we call the "Southwest." The counties of Frederick, Jefferson, Berkeley, Morgan, Hampshire, etc. lie, sir, in the northern part of the State right along the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. We are more intimately connected with them, and their interests are more identified with ours than the counties down in the southwest. We see one or two of these counties have had an opportunity of expressing partially their views. The counties of Hampshire and Hardy are represented on this floor. We know nothing about the sentiments of the people down here in Giles, Tazewell, Russell, Scott and Lee. We have every reason to suppose - or at least I have - that at the present time those people are adverse to the adoption of the new State. I have every reason to believe the counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Morgan, Berkeley and Jefferson are favorable to the new State and will come with us if they can get an opportunity. And I have every reason to believe that these people will be in a situation in a short period of time to be able to express their opinions. We see a part of them are already cleared of rebels. We have an army right in their midst - in the counties of Hampshire and Hardy; and in all probability before this question is submitted to these people they will have an opportunity of acting. But if you attach them to these other counties in the southwest, by the time you propose to submit this question to them, these other counties cannot even vote, and you tie the hands of the counties that can: and it is virtually saying to these people, you shall not come in. I cannot see why it is the gentleman wants to tie up the people of the northern border here on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, with these southwestern counties.

Now, Mr. President, I believe if this thing can be postponed, and the question submitted to these people at a later day than, probably, it will be, after the rebel army is completely cleared out of the southwest, so that these people can vote new State or no new State - if the question is presented to them in this form, and they have either got to go with the old State or the new - they will vote almost unanimously to come with the new State. But, then, sir, from the circumstances surrounding them, I do not believe they will have the privilege - at least in the time indicated by the Convention, to express their sentiments upon it. Therefore, I do not desire to see one district denied this right which is granted to another. I do not want to see one district which may have an opportunity of expressing their wishes on this matter tied to another that cannot have it. As I before said, it is virtually saying to these counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Morgan, etc. that they shall not come into the new State, unless circumstances change very fast and the armies of the Federal government prevail at a much earlier period than we can now anticipate. It is effectually, gentlemen, discarding the principle of this resolution. It is saying that you do not want to give these people an opportunity. Let them all come up fairly and squarely. Let every section of country express its own sentiments. If one section of country is relieved of the presence of the rebel army and they have an opportunity of being heard, let us hear them. I for my part feel bound to oppose the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kanawha.

MR. POMEROY. If it is ordained by the powers that be that this discussion must go on, I beg leave to offer a few reasons why I will be constrained to cast my vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha. As I think it has been very correctly and very forcibly stated by the gentleman who has just taken his seat there is no propriety that I can conceive in grouping these two districts into one. I do not now recollect the names of all the gentlemen that compose the Committee on Boundary; nor is that material to the great matter in hand. I know the gentleman who has just taken his seat is the Chairman. I have no doubt that they have valid and forcible reasons that weighed upon their minds in coming to the conclusion at which they arrived, that there were certain counties grouped together, because they had in many respects - if not indeed a common interest, that their people mingled freely together; that they had intercourse one with another. Each of them knew the minds of each other; and therefore they were thrown into groups and called a particular district, while another set of counties were thrown into another. And I cannot conceive what is the real reason for offering this amendment. I listened with all the ears I have to the gentleman from Kanawha; but I cannot perceive any valid reason for taking this course. There are twenty counties now grouped together. If eleven of them open no poll whatever, why then, the other nine cannot possibly come in; because the resolution provides that not only must you have a majority of the votes cast, but you must have a majority of the counties. It will take eleven to be a majority of twenty. Therefore, if these counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Berkeley, etc. vote to come into the new State, they are deprived of that privilege by the vote of eleven other counties, wherever they may be. And I think it is not talking in a spirit of persiflage to say that there will be no poll opened. I confess I have read the history of this rebellion wrong if some of these things are exactly to the full intent that the gentlemen in the person of their arguments would appear to wish to show. If there are any counties proposed to be received here that had difficulties in reaching this place it would be the county of Frederick or Berkeley or Jefferson, and yet as early as May we find the delegates from those counties on the floor of a Convention here. But at what time in the history of this proceeding have we seen a man from the county of Craig or Tazewell; but what particular camp of either of these armies was located in these particular counties we never have heard. Why were they not here? Ah, but there is another fact more stubborn than that. Why in the polls of May, the counties of Hampshire, Hardy and Berkeley - and even Jefferson - poll, most of them a majority and in all of them a respectable vote for the Union; but when you come to Tazewell and Craig, the Union votes are "like angels visits." Is this so? If it is, is it not because their sentiments are not with the people here? Because they willingly go at the nod of Jefferson Davis and Company. They have not even a single letter here to show that they wish to have anything to do with us. What is their tone in regard to the provisional government we have established here? "Bogus Government!" If a man is compelled to stay at his home, he is not compelled to give utterance to language like this in regard to a government recognized by the government of the United States. He is not bound by every action when he rises up and when he lies down to be teaching his children and neighbors that this government by which we free ourselves from the bondage to which we have been subjected heretofore is a bogus government. I tell you the secessionists have learned this all over the land. They all sing the same tune everywhere, from the upper end of the Panhandle to the lowest end of the State of Virginia. They all cry out this is a bogus concern; and they are using every effort that men can possibly use for the defeat of the whole thing. And, say gentlemen, these men are our friends! We read somewhere of a man that had friends in former times; and when the battle waxed warm they vanished away. And I think this is the kind of friends we have in Craig and Tazewell.

But I do not want to enter into a full discussion of the merits of these different districts of counties upon the amendment I wish to adhere strictly to a consideration of the amendment that is before us - that is to group all these counties together and let them all stay out unless a majority of them say come in. I am opposed to that. I am opposed to placing counties that have shown some signs of a desire to be with us on the same footing with counties that show none whatever that they want to have anything to do with us - that show, on the other hand, their hostility on every occasion that they can. I will venture this prediction, and I do not fear successful contradiction of it on this floor, because I think I can bring proof to establish it - that upon the streets of Charleston (S. C.) the people did not more rashly rush into the hostile army than did these people from the county of Tazewell and those adjoining. Not content with staying, as they sometimes said, to defend the "sacred soil" of Old Virginia, we find men from these counties fighting at the battle of Piketon, in Kentucky. What made the soil of Kentucky so sacred to these men that had always had such strong affection and were bound by so many ties to the "Old Dominion?" They certainly didn't claim that Piketon belonged to them! Why so eager to meet our army under Nelson and Moore and Harris at Piketon ? Was that to defend the sacred soil of Virginia? It was because they had a love for the soil of the rebellion. I have fears they will open no polls if you make it the third Thursday of April, or the third day of the next January or the last day in the afternoon (Laughter). Then why should we make these loyal men stand or fall with them? They have no desire to be here with you. There is no insuperable barrier that keeps them from being here today, if they wished to be here. The same road that took them to Piketon - it was a very circuitous route - might have been travelled by them. They might have dispatched a messenger in some way that would have expressed their wishes on the floor of this house. But no such expression has come - no desire to be with us. Their interests, it is said, are identical with ours. Strange that they have not manifested it in some way by calling to us in the day of adversity! That man who is a friend only when the sun shines upon me, and whose love is all gone when the day of darkness comes is a professed friend that I would have less confidence in than an open enemy. The man that is a true western Virginian and a true man to those stars and stripes that hang above you, Mr. President, now, is the man that clings to them with tenacity when the day of trouble is upon us. It is easy for a man to be a Union man when there is no secession element around him. It is an easy thing to speak out his sentiments boldly in behalf of that Flag when it is waving in triumph over us; but it is a different thing to stand by it when its enemies trail it in the dust, and bring disgrace and dishonor on it and on those who have hitherto successfully upheld it. It was eloquently said here, not long ago, that there was no Southern Confederacy; and I thank the Lord that there never will be! This Union is "one and inseparable" I know that these eastern Virginians will after while be as loyal as any men, apparently; and this secession element amongst us will not only be loyal, but when they come 'round asking the people to vote for them they will say they were always true to the Union - when they find the current is the other way.

But what evidence have you that these people could open polls on the third Thursday of April? The general government is not directing much attention to such counties as Tazewell and Craig. They have more important points in view. There is no great importance in gaining a victory down there. What would you have gained by a triumph in the counties of Scott, Tazewell and Craig?

They are not going to spend their time in sending bands of men into this rough uncultivated country, to hunt up a few men who are in war against the Government. And you have no evidence whatever that there will be an army march there before April. What evidence have you that these men who have nursed this rebellion and started it, to the present day, will so speedily be brought to repentance that they will have changed their entire course and be willing to come up and say, on the third Thursday of April, it is true from May to December we vilified and abused and exhausted the vocabulary with abuse of, this provisional government, and this idea of a new State; but all at once the scales fell from our eyes and we discovered the error of ways, and we come to you, brethren, in penitence, and say, here receive us. What evidence of that have you, Mr. President? None whatever.

But look at the argument on the opposite side. The other day it was right to go to the Alleghany mountains, because nature had built up a barrier there that could not well be left undefended. We must go up to the Alleghanies, whether the people were willing to come or not. There is a great natural boundary; that is plain upon the map. That was the argument, though, that there was a great natural boundary; and now we have got to that and these same gentlemen want to go over on the other side, so that wherever the enemy comes up we will have to pass over this great natural boundary to defend ourselves over there. Now, isn't it strange what queer creatures we men are - that the argument was that they must come in, witty nitty - that they must not be left to their choice at all. But now the whole aspect of things is changed, and now the gentleman says he will leave it to their own free-will, and if they come, we will say, very well, brother, we receive you and if they say, No, why then the gentleman will say to them depart forever, we want nothing to do with you. Why would not that have done in regard to the other counties? If it is good in one case it is good in the other.

But there is another great objection I have to this: the legislature of the State of Virginia is to give her consent to this matter. When will this legislature give it? If I understand aright the regulations in regard to the Legislature of Virginia, their session is ninety days. Those ninety days don't count by taking five days out of one month and ten out of another, but from the time they assemble it expires in ninety days, unless three-fifths think it necessary to prolong the session. They can prolong for thirty days. Add thirty to ninety, and I think it reaches to about the 28th of March. When do you propose to submit this matter? On the third Thursday of April. Oh, but you are met with the argument that the governor can call the legislature together in extraordinary session. Well, now, would it be wise to hazard this whole new State movement on so many contingencies? To delay until after the third Thursday of April and then risk having the legislature reconvened? I understand - and I believe I am correctly informed - that already a resolution they have introduced looking to an adjournment of that body upon the 19th of the present month. One of the great reasons, I judge, why, is that the action of this Convention may be submitted to the people and come up before them when they assemble again. Suppose they adjourn and meet again sometime before the ninety days expire, go on with other business and still this matter is not ready to come before them - when are we going to get through to Washington? If this matter is to be delayed, contingencies may arise that will be against us. Let me mention a contingency that I think has some weight. The legislature that is now in session does not call itself - I appeal to honorable gentlemen who are members of that body as well as this, they do not call themselves - a legislature of a little part of Virginia; but they say we are members of the legislature of the Old Dominion, from the Eastern Shore to the Ohio. We do not represent any small part of the State, but we represent it all. We are the men that are clothed with power to legislate not for the people within the bounds of West Virginia only, but for the people that live in the city of Richmond, and everywhere else within the bounds of the state. Is not that true? Why is it we have men on the floor of that house even from the banks of the Potomac right from near to the seat of government of the United States? Is it not so? Suppose these men are as cunning as they have manifested themselves in carrying on this rebellion and they say the consent of the legislature has to be granted. They were elected last May in the counties of Rockingham, Rockbridge, etc. members of the legislature as well as the honorable gentlemen that have been sitting in the city of Wheeling. Suppose they come out here and claim their seats and vote on this matter of giving consent - where are you then?

MR. VAN WINKLE. Will they take the oath?

MR. POMEROY. Take the oath? I would as lief swear a rattlesnake never to bite again and let it go as to swear one of these fellows. Take the oath! What is it they are required to swear? An oath of allegiance to the general government and the newly- formed government of Virginia. I think they would take that without having very many scruples about it. Why, they are in a dreadful predicament. They are engaged in a rebellion that they do not see the end of, and they are surrounded by circumstances that might very strongly influence them in taking such an oath and to come out here and say. Yes, we are loyal to the government; and we are loyal to it as we understand it and when we think it is rightly administered and say, we do not grant our consent to this division. I am no prophet, but I tell you this is far more likely to arise than it is that you will get the first vote for this new State in Tazewell county. I would not be afraid to stake my reputation that the one is more likely to occur than the other. If I thought as they do, I would do as they do. If I thought this government was all bogus and spurious, I would have nothing to do with it. They say they think so, and their actions say they do think so. Now I want to say - don't want to consume the time of the Convention; I suggested that the discussion should close this morning, and it would therefore be inconsistent in me to consume much time - I think the members of this Convention are true to the people who sent them here, and that to carry out their views they will vote against this amendment and then let the counties stand upon their merits. It may be that it will be necessary to take out Hampshire and Hardy from this other group of counties. It may be that owing to the peculiar circumstances that surround them it will be necessary to take them out of the group. I do not know that that will be done; but I do hope that this Convention is not going to do that which will materially injure the prospects of the new State at the city of Washington. A man would take up this other and say: why these people say that out there they are just about like we are over in Ohio; that they have the same kind of feelings and interests and institutions that we have. And he will look along and find a certain county included that has more slaves in it than white people. Why, I have been voting for years against this principle, and yet you ask me to vote for it. It is true, you say you are all right; but here you introduce a disloyal element - introduce men that have been warning against us all the time - men saying we ought to be put not only out of power but off of the face of the earth. You ask that these men that have been in actual arms against the general government shall now be admitted with all the rights and privileges of any other commonwealth. And you ask them to receive you. If these counties have claims to come in let them be presented here on the naked resolution reported by the committee.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Please to tell me, sir, what county you allude to that has more black men than white in it.

MR. POMEROY. Clarke county is one of them.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. That is not the group we were speaking of.

MR. POMEROY. That remark is intended in opposition to introducing any of those counties that will prejudice our cause at Washington. Clarke, I think, is on one of the lists.

THE PRESIDENT. The amendment takes in Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, leaving Clarke out.

MR. POMEROY. Well, there is a number of these counties come so near it, it is very plain to any man they will not be received.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Will the gentleman please inform us what counties come near it.

MR. POMEROY. There is a number that have a large colored population. Here is, for instance the little county of Tazewell which has 1,202 slaves.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. What is the number of whites?

MR. POMEROY. The number of whites is 8,627.

I want to say one word, Mr. President, in regard to the position we occupy; and I will use very plain language. I consider that we in this part of Virginia - now called new Virginia - if this application fails before Congress, occupy an extremely ridiculous position. We have been in Convention time and again and we have gone on and made the people believe this new State project was a matter beyond all question and all doubt. We have been assured that if certain things were done - and one of them was argued strenuously by a distinguished member of the former convention, who now holds a prominent position in the Congress of the United States, that if we would keep the boundaries down and not include this foreign and hostile element - our success was beyond a peradventure. But it was said at the same time that if we introduced it, it was in his opinion, to incur certain defeat. Men everywhere that I converse with in this region of country say that every county we add over and beyond those specified in the ordinance for a division of the state and which have expressed by letter or in person a desire to be brought in, is incurring a great risk at the city of Washington or before Congress. Now, why should we do all this? Oh, says a man, if you get these counties of Craig and Giles and Bland, Tazewell, etc. they will help pay the public debt. They will! Will they? If the public debt is apportioned according to population, will they help us. any more than the amount of additional debt which will fall to our share? If a certain county, when the public debt was divided would have a certain amount to pay, if you had another county of the same size and paying the same amount of revenue with the county first named, will you not have just double the amount to pay; and then what will you get? Oh, we are met with the argument, it is a glorious thing to have an extended territory and a big state. There is no telling who will be governor after a while; and it is a great thing to have a big dominion. But the history of this country shows that the states that this day have money in their treasuries and loaned out in addition to their public improvements are the smallest states in the Union. Any gentleman ask what states they are? They are Delaware and Connecticut. They are not only out of debt but have money invested and drawing interest. And are they very large? Ever hear any person saying down in little Delaware they would like to have a few more counties just to have a bigger name? Not at all. The prosperity of a state does not depend on the extent of its territory. It depends on the people being identical in interest and harmonious in action; when they come to legislate through .their representatives, legislating for the good of the whole people and not for the good of a certain portion of the people, who may have preserved the power in their hands, when they know that they are legislating against the interests of the other portion of the people. That is what makes a people prosperous. It is a liberal policy, where the people feel they are all freemen - where they can stand up in their majesty and strength and assert their rights, and having a people that

"Know their rights; and knowing dare maintain."

And such a people we have, if we do not introduce this foreign and hostile element. But if this people are to be voted in, why vote them in as the committee recommends.

I have thus, Mr. President, given very briefly my reasons, that the gentleman from Kanawha may know how I stand. I may have spoken with some warmth; but when I speak, Mr. President, I speak like I was in earnest, but with the best of feelings towards this gentleman and all others. When I speak, I speak as if I meant what I say.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I do not rise to discuss the question. I can very heartily reciprocate the kind feelings of my friend over the way. Most of his argument, it seems to me was predicated on a state of the case that it was not my purpose to present. I shall therefore, to correct that impression, ask for the reading of the resolution as it will stand if the amendment prevail.

The Secretary reported it as follows:

"RESOLVED, That the district comprising the counties of Lee, Scott, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, Tazewell, Bland, Giles, Craig, Alleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, shall be included in and constitute part of the proposed new State; provided a majority of the votes cast within the said district at elections to be held for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a majority of the said counties, are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution to be submitted to this Convention."

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I desire the amendment to conform to this: I do not wish that one of these sections should be the means of defeating the other. That is not my object. I only wish in presenting them to this body, to present them both as a boundary that the people shall have a right to vote upon. If the southwest section does not vote itself in by a majority of the people and counties in that section, I do not wish to force that section in, by tying on a vote at the other end of the district, against their will, and therefore I have drawn up a modification of it, so as to vote on it as two separate districts by inserting after the second resolution complete the words "and that the district comprising the counties of Jefferson" and so on shall be admitted if they vote in by a majority of votes and a majority of the counties casting the vote. It was not my purpose to change the precise relationship in which these two sections stand as first reported by the Committee on Boundary, but that in taking the vote we shall submit them to the Convention both at once.

THE PRESIDENT. That was the object of the Chair in proposing to the gentleman from Kanawha to strike out the word "Resolved," between the two sections.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Then, sir, I will ask to withdraw that amendment and insert this in lieu of it that it may raise the question fairly: Strike out "Resolved" at the beginning of the third resolution and insert "and." That presents the idea complete I believe.

MR. SINSEL. I suppose it will now be proper for my amendment to come in.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. Let us test this amendment first.

MR. SINSEL. But then that cuts mine out.

THE PRESIDENT. The motion is only to amend; and the amendment suggested by the gentleman from Taylor, would be in order at any time between the disposition of this amendment, and the vote on the passage of the resolution.

MR. SINSEL. If I understand the way he has changed it now, it just stands as originally reported by the committee.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. No, sir; it brings on the vote upon both districts at once.

Will the Secretary report the amendment?

The Secretary reported as follows:

"RESOLVED, That the district comprising the counties of Craig, Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Russell, Buchanan, Wise, Lee, and Scott shall be included in and constitute part of the proposed new State, provided a majority of the votes cast within the said district, at elections to be held for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a majority of the said counties, are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution, to be submitted to this Convention; and that the district comprising the counties of Jefferson, Frederick, Berkeley, Morgan, Hampshire, Hardy, Pendleton, Highland, Bath, and Allegheny shall also be included in and constitute part of the proposed new State, provided a majority of the votes cast within the said district, at elections to be held for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a, majority of the said counties are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution to be submitted by this Convention."

MR. VAN WINKLE. I do not feel like saying a great deal on this subject; but I do not like the vote to be taken upon the resolution in the shape it has taken, after such a general course of argument, without a word or two. I hope my friend from Kanawha will withdraw his amendment, and leave these districts as they were. I think the gentleman from Hancock has shown that there is a fairness in that towards the counties interested, and that by leaving them as the committee placed them it will tend to insure a proper expression of the feelings, of the people - or rather the result that will be returned to us will be more in accordance with the wishes of the people, than if the two districts were blended together. There are eleven counties in the one district in the southwest and ten in that which will be the northeast. The eleven counties contain 20,000 white population less 'than the ten counties. But while this double majority is required - which, I suppose, would be very proper if the districts are properly adjusted -

THE PRESIDENT. The impression of the Chair is that while they are all thrown under the one resolution now they would not be counted together on the vote at all. Under this resolution the counties in the northeast district might come in, while those in the other might be thrown out.

MR. VAN WINKLE. Then, I can see no object, sir, in the amendment, unless they are made in one great district, whether they are passed in one resolution or two.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. It is to enable the Convention to vote on both at once.

MR. VAN WINKLE. It is to operate merely on the vote of the Convention, is it? Well, sir, I hope that is not necessary. I want to consider them, sir, separate, and show if I can that there are reasons why each of these districts should have an opportunity to express their opinions separately on this subject. In relation to these southwestern counties, about which the gentleman from Kanawha is very properly anxious, my own impression is - notwithstanding what has been said in relation to their votes and conduct, and judging, sir, from their neighbors and the history of those counties which we have in more detail than from the counties in question - judging that they are a similar people to those around them, and that a mere geographical line, sir, makes but little difference in the opinions and interests of people - and men are governed by these more or less - I should infer, sir, that if an opportunity had been afforded to the people of these counties, as to many other counties, to my own and this, and those in the immediate vicinity - their vote would have been different from what it is reported to have been. We all know, sir, that in a very early period of this struggle the mails were cut off. We know also that their mail facilities have never been very great. Their population is sparse, although some of them in their aggregate will rank with a great many other counties in other portions of the proposed State; but as a general rule, their population is sparse and from the mountainous character of the country is in some degree inaccessible. I do not suppose poll-books could have been sent to those counties for the purpose of taking this vote. The convention of August ordered poll-books to be sent to those counties in which it was proposed to take the vote; but I doubt if there were any sent. We know there was great difficulty in circulating documents in Kanawha up to the last moment. Well, sir, if such was the case with Kanawha, it was certainly so with these more remote counties, without the same facilities. I am therefore, sir, very strongly inclined to believe that when proper information reaches the people of these counties - when the thing is properly explained to them - when they have learned what we have done and what we are proposing to do for them - I apprehend, sir, they will only be too happy to accept it. If they become satisfied in their own minds, sir, that a State is to be set up here - say the thirty-nine with the addition of McDowell and the counties in table A - then their interests would lead them to this connection. I have looked very closely at the map - as closely as I could - at the direction of their water courses, which governs the channel of trade. It governs the leading roads or lines in a county. It is also in their direction that our railroads are built, a great deal with reference to them, because it is only along their valleys that favorable ground can be had. Looking to that, sir, their position with reference to the mountains - seeing that they are cut off, as it were, by a chain of mountains from direct intercourse with what will remain the old state - that the country towards Kentucky, west of them is more open - that their water courses penetrate in that direction - and other things of this kind. I infer at once that their commercial interests would lead them to a connection with the new State. And, sir, so inferring and so believing, I do not feel that we would be doing justice to those counties to exclude them - I do not say from coming into the State; but to exclude them from the opportunity of saying whether they will come or not. It might be a different question in regard to these counties if we were placing them in the same category as those which we acted on Saturday. If we were about to say peremptorily that they should come in, it would indeed be placing them in a different position; but when the question is merely: shall they be permitted to say for themselves, on a principle which I think is as fair as anything that can be offered - that of a majority of the people and of the counties - when it is only to say this to them, sir, I do not feel we would do either justice to them or to ourselves if we withheld from them the opportunity. If they are so averse to a union with us, as the gentleman from Hancock affirmed - if they did not take that view of their interests which it seems to me is the proper view - or if from any other cause they do not incline to the connection - they have only to signify it by their votes, and there is the end of the question so far as relates to them.

It seems to me, sir, then in the absence of positive information as to how they would vote, or as to what their feelings may be in reference to a new state, we have reason to suppose at least that a part of them are favorable to it.

I think again, sir, we should not do justice either to them or to ourselves to withhold from them the mere opportunity of voting themselves in. I have already said, sir, that I do not wish to see the two districts joined together; nor I think it is going to affect the votes of this Convention one way or the other. I think those who are disposed to give the State a liberal share of territory - and that we certainly ought all to seek for - those who are willing to include sufficient population to give her respectability among the other states of the Union - those who are disposed to give this question when it comes before Congress the importance of a suitable population - and, sir, permit me to say that in asking the Congress of the United States to admit us as one of the states of the Union, with a white population of only 272,000, and give that State as they must necessarily give it, two Senators, unless the doctrine of Mr. Cameron, that they can override constitutional provisions prevails - I say, sir, when we go there asking for two Senators with this population, when in the State of New York upwards of three million have but two Senators - in Pennsylvania nearly three million, in Ohio two and a quarter millions, and I believe there are several states that number a million, and there are some that come very near that number - now, sir, if by taking in this territory, that which is embraced in all the resolution, we shall go there with a white population approaching 600,000 - then, sir, we may go before them and with some propriety ask them to admit us and concede to us the usual privileges of a state. We come also with the argument which the new states, or territories erected into states, may use, or which is so necessary that it is not necessary to use it: they come there with a great extent of fertile land; and although at the moment of their admission they may be no greater in population than what we have, yet, sir, there is almost an absolute certainty, which no man will attempt to gainsay, that within a very few years their population will, perhaps, be equal to that of a fourth of the rest of the Union. But, sir, confining ourselves to these thirty-nine counties - considering how much mountainous land we have - considering that perhaps the most valuable occupation of a great portion of it will be the raising of sheep and cattle, and consequently a large population will not be called for - considering all these things - the rugged character of our country, and other circumstances connected with it - we cannot wield the same argument as a new state of prairie country and say we expect within a given time to be a numerous population. We may double in time; but still in comparison with the loyal states of the Union, we must be a small state. I think that is the difficulty which members of Congress will encounter. Because with sixty-four Senators there. New York for instance, has one-thirty-second part. Now, increase that number to one hundred and New York has one-fiftieth part. This is a consideration that they will pay some attention to; and it may be a difficulty between members of Congress and their constituents about admitting so small a territory into the privileges of a separate state.

I am therefore anxious to embrace within these boundaries all the territory that can be properly embraced within it - all that is likely to be of benefit to the new State - all that lies so contiguous and compactly with us as to tend to make our State better than without it. I think, sir, that in reference to those counties which are embraced in table C, there will hardly be a gentleman of this Convention prepared to say he would not have them if he could get them. They are, perhaps, some of them the finest in the new State, and bid fair to be the wealthiest. They also contain within their limits that great public work known as the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, one upon which the prosperity of this section of the State and my own depends, but upon which is ultimately to depend, to a greater or less extent, that of the whole territory we propose to annex.

Sir, I look to see if this new State is erected and the business of the country returns to what it has been - I look to see another branch running from the Baltimore and Ohio Road, at Grafton, or the Northwestern Virginia Road, at Clarksburg, through Weston, through Charleston and away down into Kentucky. That part of the State, and this, perhaps every portion of the thirty-nine or forty-four counties - will have this channel of connection with the seaboard. That will be according to what I have already stated - in the direction of their principal water course, the Ohio river, and therefore in the direction of their trade. If we annex these valley counties, sir, again, that great work will come into play. The railroad now leading from Harper's Ferry to Winchester will be extended to Strasburg, and further will penetrate the valley. In this way, sir, I apprehend the fostering of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad and its connections becomes an interest to every one of the citizens of the present and proposed limits of the new State. It is something, sir, towards the interests of that road - and which cannot be so well understood by members who have not been so directly connected with it as many of us have - but it will be a great thing for the interest of that road whenever it finds itself in the hands of friends. There is no other reason, I believe, why that road has not come up to its great connections further south except the adverse legislation of Virginia. They have set themselves on the erection of other works - those leading to their own capitals in the East - their own seaports; and have endeavored from time to time to throw obstacles in the way of that road. It is natural, sir, they should want to promote their own interests more than the interests of those far remote from them; but as a portion of that road is constructed through what are now the northern counties of Virginia, unless they are brought into the new State, that portion of it must always remain subject to such adverse legislation. It is, therefore, highly important to that interest - highly important to every interest that is now or may become to any extent dependent on that road - and many are dependent on it now indirectly that I hope will become more directly so - it is of importance I say, that that road should be placed wholly within the State of Maryland and the proposed State of West Virginia.

These are considerations which I trust will not be overlooked by the members of this Convention. If the counties below us - below the Little Kanawha river - which no part of that railroad now crosses, are looking forward to that prosperity which seems to be in a great degree dependent on the erection of railroads - if they are looking to have themselves, put on a footing with the states north and west of them - this I think, sir, is their opportunity. I have no faith, sir, that under any circumstances will the erection of the Central road be resumed - that it will progress beyond its present terminus; and my want of faith is on this score: they have pushed and finished with much more zeal and industry the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad. That road is in the direction of a very heavy trade. Up to the day these troubles commenced, Richmond and Norfolk were reaping a very fine harvest from it. That road must have an eastern transportation if it ever succeeds in reaching the Ohio; but it cannot have a western transportation if there is nothing but a few boxes of manufactured tobacco to be carried over it. It crosses the line of trade; and that is enough to show what its fate will be in the future.

I think, therefore, the counties, even those that lie south of the Little Kanawha river, looking to be one day penetrated by a branch of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, (whether belonging to that road or an independent company), knowing at present that it is their shortest and best connection with the east - I apprehend that those gentlemen will overlook minor considerations and join with us in endeavoring to unite those counties to the new State.

I am a little surprised to hear one objection that has been started here on account of the numbers of the slave population. Without wishing to go into an argument on that subject, for it is a somewhat gloomy one, and I deprecate such an argument on this floor, I will merely state: in the first place, if we add all this territory embraced in the recapitulation, including the four tables and the four sets of counties in the tables, to the original thirty-nine counties, the whole slave population will be but eight-and-a- half per cent. And now, sir, what does that amount to? Is there anything in that to raise any question whatever? Is that enough slave population to give it the character of a slave-state? And if it is not practically a slave-state, can even those who long for a free state object to it? But, sir, let us look at another fact in connection with that. In 1850, as the gentleman from Doddridge stated, there was but one vote, if I recollect rightly perhaps not one - but there was but one vote from the whole valley that was not given in favor of the white basis, as the principle of representation. And now what more do gentlemen ask for in relation to that? We have fixed permanently in this Constitution, as a fundamental principle, that the white population are to be the only citizens. If they are willing with that in our Constitution to vote themselves in, this objection becomes a very trifling one.

But, I might go a little further back in history. In 1832 a strong effort was made, not only in Virginia but in Kentucky, to pass a law of gradual emancipation; and it came within eight votes of passing through the legislature of Virginia. Where was the valley then? Sir, inasmuch as the majority of the votes at that time were east of the Blue Ridge, almost every vote of the valley must have been cast in favor of that project.

But, sir, beyond all this, natural causes are working there - aye, sir, something that the word "natural" does not exactly reach: Providential causes are at work; and gentlemen should be willing to leave the result to Providence. To my mind, sir, there is nothing in the existence of that per cent of slave population. It cannot characterize the State one way or the other - after its character, its pursuits, or its business. Agriculture it will be, it must be; and it can be nothing else. It can never be devoted to cotton or rice or sugar planting; and it must be an agricultural state; and we all know that where agriculture is the main business, that institution does not continue to flourish. Let it be, sir; it will die naturally. By the very fact that slave labor is, not profitable in an agricultural country, it will diminish faster that any human laws can make it diminish. That is my view of the subject. And I would call gentlemen to remember the remarks of Mr. Clay, when they were speaking about dividing Texas into additional states. Western Texas was to be divided into three or four states and objection was made on that account. Mr. Clay, I think it was, told them Providence had already settled that matter; and that those states never could become slave-states.

Therefore, sir, if this objection is, as I view it, one that if trifling in its character, that can affect nothing, as it stands, and one that even if there is an evil in it is likely to cure itself, and that very readily, I hope in consideration of the numerous material interests that are involved in saving, as it were, for ourselves this great highway between the East and West, gentlemen will find their interests bound up with the bringing in of those counties into our new State.

And, now, sir, to come back: while there may be a propriety in the connection of the two sections, as the gentleman from Kanawha shows, inasmuch as they lie when thus circumstanced between these natural boundaries, yet, sir, this district becomes so extended when you unite the two as to stretch from the extreme north to the extreme southwest; and it is not to be readily supposed that there has been that intercourse between the people of the two extremities as to properly warrant us in connecting them in the same district. My view in regard to these districts is that we bring those together in each looking to their commercial relations, the formation of the country, and the direction of the watercourses - which last, I have already stated governs in everything. Looking to all these things, we group together counties according to what we suppose to be their commercial and business interests, those that have a common commercial center - if they have any - and who may be supposed to entertain nearly the same views and feelings with reference to their junction with the new State. We offer, then, sir, by the second resolution the counties of Craig, Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Wise, Buchanan, Lee and Scott, the opportunity to come in. They may accept or reject our offer; yet in either event we have a tolerable boundary. I say I would offer it to them more on their own account than from any particularly important benefit we may derive from it. Nevertheless, I think it would improve the boundary in that direction.

Well, sir, we offer it then to the other group - the counties embracing the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in their northern border, and containing a population, in round numbers, of 86,000. We know more in reference to their affairs. Last spring, we know, from more than one of these counties delegates were sent here, and some were thrown into prison and prevented from coming. Hardy and Hampshire are represented here. Morgan had appointed delegates, but I do not know whether they have got here. But other information we can get all leads us to believe the Union feeling in these counties, whether in the majority or not, is yet very strong, and that they would probably choose to unite with us. Again, sir, when this question, of a division of the state has been talked of as long as I remember, the supposed line of division has always been the Blue Ridge. People's thoughts have never been turned to any other boundary, whenever a separation was spoken of. And now, sir, we have changed properly, I have no doubt, the boundary laid down by the ordinance of the convention authorizing this separation. Perhaps it will do some injustice to some of the counties excluded as well as to some that will be brought in. But people's minds have not had time to ripen on that subject. We so stated - warned the convention - in August, that there would not be time; that we were proposing something new; that amid the excitement of war it was not a proper time to take into consideration these things which affect their civil interests. But, sir, we are here for the purpose of doing something in reference to this matter. Those of us who opposed action at that time were overruled; and we are here now to carry out the behests of our constituents. But, now, sir, with an uncertainty about what would be the wishes of the people contained in these districts, seeing that if they should wish to join us it would be proper they should - but with an uncertainty, I say, is it not peculiarly proper - is it not peculiarly a duty which we owe them on account of our former connections in fellow citizenship, that we should at least offer to them - as I said in reference to the counties in the more southern part, the opportunity to join us, if they elect to do so? Sir, it can do no harm - it cannot affect any interest - if they refuse to come with us. If they refuse to take a vote even, it cannot.

And in reference to the difficulty about the legislature. I understand they have a resolution before them to adjourn the session in time to reassemble to take action upon the work of this Convention. That, sir, is the common sentiment: they can meet again, and will meet. And I do not suppose they wish this matter should be hurried through indecorously. A constitution cannot be made in a hurry; and when we pass from this boundary question, the institutions we are about to incorporate in our Constitution should be well canvassed and well debated here. I take great pleasure in saying I have been pleased, consequently, with the debates we have had. I have been instructed by them. The debates here have been, without I believe an exception, to the question on all occasions. There have been no speeches, that I heard, for "buncombe"; none that seemed to be made merely for the sake of making a speech; but every gentleman has addressed himself to the question: and, sir, such debate cannot be unprofitable. This comparison of ideas, that is what we are sent here for: to hear the views of each other and deliberate upon them, and come to some conclusion in which we can all coincide. It is not only I ourselves that will be instructed; but information on these important subjects will be disseminated throughout the country. The members will go from here enlightened - as I confess I have been - and what they have thus gained will be distributed among their constituents. When this new State comes into existence under a Constitution thus made, our people, under the blessing of Providence, will be prepared to accept these provisions which shall have been adopted here, on the sincere conviction that they are the best we could devise for the new State. I trust therefore that not only this but all other questions will be fully canvassed. I am certain the legislature will coincide with us that this thing ought not to be hurried; and if it should require them to return at a future day, I have no doubt every member of that body will cheerfully do so.

I see nothing, sir, then in any of these objections. I see much that calls upon us to go at least as far as I have indicated to offer an opportunity to the districts of counties embraced in each of the tables that are before us. Certainly, sir, we owe that much to them. The very ignorance of their condition and of their views, in connection with the fact that they have always been spoken of as counties that would be likely to form a part of the new State, together with the fact that we have intimations from many of them that there are at least some people there who would be glad to unite with us, demands at our hands that this opportunity should be given to them.

THE PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment of gentleman from Kanawha.

MR. LAMB. Mr. President, I merely desire to make a remark or two in explanation of the vote which I shall give in regard to this second resolution.

I must confess I do not feel much interest in the question whether that resolution is to be adopted or rejected; for whether it be adopted or rejected, it seems to me under the terms of this resolution you cannot have this territory connected with you, in all probability. We propose to submit to the people in Giles, in Craig, Tazewell and other counties the question of whether they will become part of us upon a vote to be taken on the third Thursday of April. Is there any probability, gentlemen, that at that time you will be able to obtain a full and fair expression of public sentiment on this subject there? Is there any probability that within the time that is here enacted you can procure a vote of the people of those counties ratifying your act and consenting to become a part of West Virginia? It is now winter - not a proper season for military operations. The vote in April will have to be taken before the armies can be moved, or at least before they are moving effectively. Nor is this a region of country, according to my ideas and information, in which there will be any important movement of armies for some time to come. But suppose it were the case: suppose a short time before April our armies had moved in and taken possession of the country: will the people of those counties with the sentiments which we know they entertain, with the prejudices which we know they are subject to, with the feelings which we know have been prevalent in that region of country - will they be prepared to come forward to the polls and say. We desire to join the people of western Virginia?

I do not think, therefore, that this resolution presents a practical question before this Convention; at least I fear not; for I do not think, whether this resolution is adopted or rejected by you, that you will have the people of those counties in the situation contemplated by the resolution capable of declaring their consent, within the time now fixed to become part of West Virginia.

The objection, then, which I have to the resolution is not a very important one, it is true; for I think it will lead to no practical effect one way or the other; but I do not think it is proper for this Convention, in this way to be soliciting time and again as we have done, the people of adjoining counties to express their sentiments and become part of the government which we propose to institute. Whenever we can have a fair and full expression of their sentiments on that subject, I would propose it to them. But my plan, I must confess, in regard to this matter would be to leave full power in the hands of the legislature of the new State to act hereafter when circumstances may authorize their action - when the fog is raised from the ground and you can see with some clearness the prospect that lies before you.

My objection to this resolution is pretty much the same objection to the action which was had by the convention in July. I think it is premature. We then proposed to different counties to take a vote in October. The convention was told that a full and fair expression of popular sentiment upon the subject around our borders at the time indicated was impossible. But they proposed it then; and your action, if you propose it now will be premature as was the action then.

THE PRESIDENT. The question was on the adoption of the amendment.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Mr. President, I wish to say a few words in reply to the gentleman last on the floor. Admitting now the propriety of the admission of these counties, if they choose to come in, he argues the impolicy of admitting them because they may possibly not have an opportunity of voting. Now that may be all true. Circumstances may be such when the vote comes to be taken that they cannot vote. If that happens, then they are in no worse position than he proposes to leave them in without the passage of this resolution; but if the circumstances should be so changed that they would have the privilege of voting, then, if we adopt this resolution we shall have secured it to them. On one side every chance is in our favor. On the other side, it may be possible there may be a failure. Certainly if we do not adopt this resolution we must fail in that respect - that is to bring them in. It seems to me therefore that wisdom and prudence decidedly are in favor of adopting the resolution and submitting the question to them; taking the chances of their voting or not voting.

It is argued again that they will not have the opportunity of voting; that because the enemy there is going into winter quarters, there may be no advance of the army in time to afford them relief. I might notice the remark of the gentleman from Hancock, that there was nothing over to this little Tennessee border of such importance as to require the advance of the Federal troops to remove the forces there. Why, has the gentleman forgotten that the Cumberland Gap is just at the tail of Lee and Scott and that this is the great military turning point in the western States and that which the Federal Government is making most gigantic efforts to secure, and which the Confederate States have already occupied in advance? It is now, sir, that we see the armies of the country gathering, like the doves to their nests, in the State of Kentucky, preparatory to an advance on this very spot, the great strategic military point in the western states, that cuts the Lynchburg and Tennessee Railroad, that great southern thoroughfare of trade and transportation, directly in two - that completely cuts the Confederacy in two. Why, sir, the very moment anything is done in the direction of Cumberland Gap, this whole country about which we are talking is relieved; and the same effect equally follows if General McClellan advances on Manassas, if that great Confederate army is driven back on Richmond and thence into North Carolina. That very moment this whole valley is cleared from Winchester to the Cumberland Gap; and every hostile force must immediately retreat or be hemmed in and cut off by the army that is advancing. So that if you advance at either point, if there is to be any forward movement by the armies of the nation, by which you expect to put down this rebellion, it will secure freedom to this people that they may vote and exercise the right of suffrage that we are proposing to give them. It seems to me, therefore, that the arguments here by the gentleman from Hancock, are not well considered. But, sir, if these armies are to meet with disaster; if instead of advancing on Richmond they are to be driven back on Washington, and, as Letcher says in his message, on the Susquehanna; if instead of taking the Cumberland Gap and holding it you are to be driven back to the Ohio river and Louisville is to be captured: then, indeed, I fear our whole State will go by the board. I do not, however, contemplate any such a state of facts, in submitting this Constitution to the people of these counties.

But another objection of my friend from Hancock was his opposition to this tier of counties embracing Craig, and Tazewell, that seemed to be particularly offensive in his sight because there were negroes there. I understand from his remarks that he had no objection to the other tier of counties. That tier I understand he is willing to admit - willing to submit the vote to this people, to say whether they will join in this movement or not. Now, sir, if we look at it on the score of negroes, in the first tier of counties there are 4,813 slaves, and in the other which he is ready to admit there are 12,831: nearly three times the number in the portion he proposes to admit than in that which he proposes to exclude, upon the ground, I understand, that they have negroes in them. A very strange argument and conclusion, it seems to me, sir. Now, sir, I confess I have no apprehension of these negroes in either district. That much the larger majority is here or there does not affect me. I have no apprehension for these few negroes anywhere in the territory of West Virginia. As the gentleman from Wood has said, the existence of eight per cent slave element in our white population is nothing. West Virginia is a white country; and the few slaves scattered within its borders cannot have any effect or control. They never have had, as has been shown. In all the efforts we have made to extend the white basis, these people have never flinched. They have. stood shoulder to shoulder by Brooke and Hancock; and it is only there that we find the only county in the State of Virginia that has not within it a negro, free or slave.

There is another consideration that strikes me, in addition to those urged by the gentleman from Wood. There is East Tennessee, a Union-loving and homogeneous people, precisely as our own all along that Tennessee valley. If the Union is to be preserved their only outlet to the Capital of the country is through that very valley. They have struggled their resources until they have made the Tennessee Railroad. There is but a small gap from where that turns to the right through the Blue Ridge and comes down to Lynchburg to connect them with the valley and give them a continuous line from Tennessee to the Maryland line, with the Blue Ridge on one side and this intermediate range of mountains that splits the valley in two on the left.

Now, why should not these people look to their interests in the extension of these internal improvements on to Richmond or Norfolk, or to Baltimore, the great emporium for this whole country, where they have been seeking an outlet but have never been able to obtain it, because Richmond and Norfolk and the lower seaboard have ever stood in their way, and will still stand in their way.

I believe now, sir, the people of the valley would vote against a division of the state; yet when they find a division of the state is a fixed fact and they have to choose which part they will join, they will come over with us. It presents the question in a very different light to their minds. They have all that natural attachment to the state - for Virginians have ever regarded the State of Virginia in the light of a nation; but they will vote on it when you have settled the question by a vote of the people that it is to be decided, and they have to decide for themselves which part they will join. They will stand hereafter as they have ever stood heretofore, with their brethren with whom they are allied in interest and feeling. The question, then, is: shall we submit it to their suffrages to say on this question what are their preferences?

Another thing: in the county of Kanawha, I think the largest number of the settlers are from the county of Russell, away down there in the corner of the State next to Tennessee. They naturally tend right down the New river valley. Why, then, shall we cut loose from this tier of counties? All I ask is that the people of these eleven counties shall have an opportunity to vote for themselves whether they will cast their fortunes with us. I do not wish to have them forced in here. That is all I ask and all I desire to secure by this amendment; and it seems to me the opportunity to act cannot with justice be denied by this Convention.

MR. LAMB. One word of explanation merely. The argument which I addressed to the Convention was not an argument against the object which the gentleman desires, at all. It was that the resolutions which are now pending before the Convention will not accomplish that object, in all probability; that the only practicable method of accomplishing that object that I saw will be put your new State in operation; put the legislature of the new State in operation, and invest it with full authority to arrange for acquiring new territory hereafter if it may be desirable. They will have all the light which coming events will throw on that question; they will act under different circumstances from those upon which the Convention is now called upon to act.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Then, sir, I desire to know: suppose the people desire to come, and supposing the new State is ready to receive them, are we to obtain the consent of the old state?

MR. LAMB. An explanation on that question would necessarily lead me to occupy much more time than I had intended; but I have no objection to explain my views on that question also.

As soon as you have instituted your new State, whether the rebellion will have been put down or not by that time, it may be absolutely necessary for the Government of the United States - it may be absolutely necessary, as a mere military question - that a loyal government should be instituted in eastern Virginia: a loyal government there representing the loyal citizens, the men who are true to the Union - and we can recognize no other as the governing power in either eastern or western Virginia; the Constitution and the Government of the United States recognizes no other as the governing power than the loyal people of the states - a loyal government established there undoubtedly will be willing to make any arrangement which may be proper. A loyal government originally instituted would include these counties of Hampshire and Hardy along the border - any of the counties in which a loyal element prevails. They would include such counties as were protected by the armies of the United States and in which the people would have an opportunity of expressing their sentiments freely and independently upon any question should they see proper. Then if they wish to join us the matter may be fairly presented and can be fairly decided - not by the parties on one side only - but by both parties. But however this may be I must say the proposition in this resolution will not lead to any practical results. It does not accomplish the gentleman's objects, as well as I can see into what is to succeed; for I do not think that there is any probability scarcely that by April you would be able to obtain a vote of the people within those counties to annex themselves to the new State. They have been set in a particular direction. Their prejudices all lie in a particular direction; and if these secession armies were all cleared out of their territory this day, it would be months, perhaps longer, before a proposition to annex themselves to this new State - if it becomes a State - could even get a hearing among that people.

MR. WILLEY. I desire, sir, before the vote is taken upon this question to make a simple statement of the ground which shall influence me in casting it.

I accord entirely with the gentleman from Ohio who was last on the floor, in his views of the utter impracticability of getting an expression of the sense of this section - table B, I believe it is - before or at the time prescribed in the resolution. I have no idea, sir, that that section of the State will be relieved from the presence of the Confederate military power by that time. The same hindrances and influences which have prevented access to them hitherto will remain until that time I have no doubt. And, sir, I have as little doubt that if all these hindrances were removed and they were at perfect liberty to go to the polls and express their opinions - I have as little doubt that they would vote to stay out by an overwhelming majority - as I have that they will not be permitted to vote at all. Therefore, sir, what is the use of making a proposition to them? If they are necessary to us, let us carry out the principle adopted by this Convention and not ask them to "come in, if you please," but say we have a right to take them in whether they want to come in or not. If they are necessary let us survey them off and include them in our farm. That is the principle established by this Convention; and why not apply it to the people of that section as well as to the people of another section?

But, then, sir, the crowning point I rose to mention was this: if we propose to allow them to come in and they shall not have had an opportunity to come in, and in the meantime we present a state with boundaries including them to Congress asking for admission into the Union, what will that body say? Will they not say: you have acted prematurely? Will they say that you are pressing a little state into the Union that does not contain the boundaries that you by your previous action had enacted as the proper boundaries for this State to include? Sir, I feel myself entirely hampered in expressing my opinions on these questions, lest the opinions I might express here might be quoted in judgment against me in another body. But this I know - and I don't care whether the reporter hears it or not - I would as soon he would not - this I do know - I do not care about its going out of this body - I would prefer it should not - that we are going to have difficulties enough to encounter in Congress to get our State admitted without giving them any other pretext for rejecting us than those that are real and specific. Let it not be quoted as an objection to our admission, that we are acting prematurely and desire to establish a state which does not embrace the boundaries we believe to be necessary for our convenience as a state; as it will be if we go to Congress with our application before these people we propose to extend the privilege to shall have had an opportunity of exercising it. I would prefer seeing them left out entirely. If I believed they wished to come in I would like to see them in; but, sir, you have but to look at the map to see that they do not; for, sir, I must differ with friends from Kanawha and Wood who previously addressed the Convention in regard to the natural connections and the identity of industrial interests and relations between that section of the country and this State. Sir, look how far they lie along and border this Tennessee railroad. Their interests and connections lead them in the direction it leads; and, in my humble estimation they will never desire to be taxed to make long lines of improvements through mountain barriers to get to distant markets when by short lateral works they can connect themselves with the Tennessee railroad, with the seaboard and with all eastern Virginia besides. I do not consider that their industry, mercantile interests and social institutions are identified with ours at all. In feeling they are adverse to us; and so far as my experience goes, I know they are averse to all connection with us. I know that members in the late convention at Richmond from these counties were the bitterest persecutors of northern loyalty in all the State of Virginia.

Therefore it is that I would rather see this measure left out of the question altogether. It is true it would do no harm to allow them to vote except it may be to embarrass our success in Congress by giving an intimation to Congress that we are absolutely pressing upon them a state which does not contain as much territory as we, giving evidence by our course here deem proper to contain in the new State. Therefore, upon the question of expediency, I shall be compelled to vote against including the counties in table B.

MR. PAXTON. Mr. President, amongst the many reasons given here by other gentlemen for the vote they expect to give on this question, there are two - without recurring to the others many of which have an influence over me - that of themselves are paramount with me and either of which would influence my vote. I shall state them very briefly. The first is that I believe - and I will not detain the Convention to give my reason for that opinion - that the adoption of the report of this committee will embarrass, retard, and in all likelihood will defeat this whole new state project. For that reason I shall vote against it.

THE PRESIDENT. The Chair would call the gentleman's attention to the fact that the question will not be on the report of the committee but on the amendment.

MR. PAXTON. Very well, sir; but I shall vote against the amendment and the amended resolution, if the amendment prevails, for one and the same reason.

The other reason is that I really do not desire to have these counties connected with us in this new state movement, even though they would express a disposition to come with us. I am sincerely anxious for the success of this movement. I have been a new state man from the beginning; and I think if we are to be successful, that it is highly important we should have a State the counties and people of which possess a unity of interest; a State within the borders of which the people are homogeneous. I do not believe we can have that, sir, by including these counties within our bounds. I shall therefore vote against the amendment and against the resolution itself when it comes up.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. Just one moment. I presume the gentleman does not know the special amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha is merely to include these counties in the first resolution.

THE PRESIDENT. I think I understood the gentleman as changing that.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. The object of the gentleman is this: that if this Convention sees. cause to vote against the resolution embracing the counties of Giles, Craig, etc., he will feel compelled to vote against the other resolution, from the fact that he does not think it would be doing justice to all sections of country. I desire the Convention to understand that fact; that if we vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha, and the question comes up on the first resolution, upon giving these counties of Giles, Craig, etc., an opportunity of expressing their opinion, and the Convention in voting on that question votes against giving them this opportunity, then the gentleman from Kanawha, with his friends, will vote against the introduction of the other class of counties. He wants to embrace them altogether, so that we shall include all or reject all; but at the same time permitting them to vote in sections. As the gentleman modified his amendment to suit my views, I will vote for it; and I think those favorable to this arrangement ought to do likewise, because it gives us all or none.

Just one moment more. The gentleman from Monongalia objects to giving this class of counties an opportunity of voting themselves into the new State in any form because he thinks it will embarrass the action of the new state men before Congress, and that we are holding out inducements to make them believe we do not embrace the boundaries we ought to have. We have now embraced the boundaries which we undoubtedly should have; and for the sake of humanity we offer these other sections of the country an opportunity to come in if they want to. We say now, our future boundaries outside should be influenced and controlled by the will and wish of the people living outside; and if they want to come in, there should be the boundary; and if they do not our boundary should be just as it is. It certainly would not embarrass us.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. One word in reply to the gentleman from Monongalia. It is this: instead of these additional counties jeopardizing the prospect of success in Congress, it seems to me, if we look at the manifestations that have gone forth from Washington, the larger the territory the more confidently may we look for admission. We see in the -

MR. WILLEY. If the gentleman will allow me: I say if they would come in, let them come; but I concur with the gentleman from Ohio in the perfect impracticability of getting their vote. Hence we would go to Congress after all without their territory; and it would be construed against us.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. If we do not go there with this proposition to submit to them, we certainly will not get them. If we give them an opportunity, it is certainly prejudging the case, to say they will not vote.

But, as I was alluding to the fact, the administration has given forth that West Virginia is naturally, and with their approbation from the Blue Ridge to the Ohio river; and, therefore, when you look at that fact in connection with our success in Congress, the probabilities are highly in favor of our success by enlarging rather than diminishing our territory. The only way you can enlarge it is by giving these people the opportunity of adding their counties to it.

MR. BATTELLE. I was going to say simply that that is just what struck my mind - the inquiry made by the gentleman from Monongalia: if the principle acted on already is a correct one, and we have a right to go around and take what we please, why do not we do it at once? Why this difference in the second and third resolution? Why distinct from the first? Why have one principle in one case and another in another? If we have the power, as seems to have been argued all day on Saturday - and which was established as a principle by the action of the Convention, as I understand it - why not practice upon it now? If we have got the power, why not leave this matter with the body with whom the Constitution of the United States, the authoritative source of power in this case, at least, leaves it - the legislature of the state and the Congress of the United States? And that brings me to this point to which my own mind has been settling down, in spite of the views of some gentlemen here whose opinions I have been accustomed to regard with very great deference, to the conviction that we have been engaged these six days on a question which we have not legitimately before us, which the people did not send us here to settle, and which we have no power to settle because the Constitution of the United States - the authority in the case - expressly declares that that power of regulating boundary is with the legislature of the state and the Congress of the United States.

These are my views, sir, in reference to that matter; that any action we can take here, we all agree, must be merely recommendatory. It is, in truth, a departure from the intent of those who sent us here - who sent us here to make a Constitution for the counties embraced in the ordinance for division upon which they voted; but of course with a proviso that where there were counties outside of the line whose action had been so clear and well defined as to make no dispute they should come in. Yet the question of boundary, as a distinct question, was no part of the purpose for which we here assembled; and I am more and more of opinion that we are embarrassing the new state movement. We embarrass the creation of a new State; and I am just as clear that we will embarrass the new State after it is created. Some gentlemen tell us here they want no distracting element introduced into our deliberations. Do they reflect that they themselves, all unwittingly it may be - and I will give them credit for so acting - are by pressing this measure, introducing an inevitable element of distraction.

But there is another remark I wish to make not bearing particularly on the amendment. I am following the course pursued by every one who has spoken. It strikes me that these resolutions, by the condition they contain - though I wish particularly to say not I believe so intended - do contain a delusion and a snare. They tell us: "provided a majority of the votes cast within the said district * * * are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution," and so on. Well, now, it is perfectly obvious to every gentleman that in reference to the second resolution, or in reference to the third - or, if the gentleman's amendment obtains, in reference to all of them - it is perfectly competent for one hundred men in these twenty counties to decide this whole question. What is easier than, if a poll be opened, for a few dozen to go to one poll and vote; and in the absence of any other voters they decide the whole question. A few dozen may go to another poll, in the same way; and so on throughout the whole district. And that, it seems very likely to me, might be the case, sir. I cannot say of course that it is likely one hundred men might decide it; but still it is possible. What is the state of the fact? The secessionists within these bounds - and, by the way, notwithstanding all the declarations to the contrary by the gentleman from Kanawha, yet in this secession business they have been to a man against us - except away down there on the railroad: I believe all the delegates from the valley and, sir, all these counties voted for secession, and their people since then have been and today are for secession.

But as I was going on to say, you may tender to these secessionists an opportunity to vote, but what will be their answer? They will not recognize your government, as my colleague says, for they call it a "bogus government." They will not recognize it by voting. Suppose the State of Ohio should give the people of Ohio and Marshall counties an opportunity of voting whether they would go into Ohio or not - I should not go to the polls at all. I would not recognize the validity of the act even by going to the polls to vote against it. Well, now, the whole history of this case shows that these secessionists feel just that way in reference to your new state movement. They will not vote at all. What is the result? Why a few Union men - patriots though they may be and may have been - suffering Union men though they may be - and you may say every other good thing of them you please and I will endorse it - the trouble is there cannot be enough of them - but it is possible, I repeat that one hundred in this whole district may decide this whole question.

Am I not right, then, in saying that this condition, plausible as it appears - and I again especially disclaim any imputations on gentlemen - is a delusion and snare? I beseech you, gentlemen, trust not to it!

I expect to vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha. I shall then vote for the amendment suggested by the gentleman from Taylor, if it is proposed, instead of "votes cast" insert "qualified voters," or something equivalent to it, with the desire to make the proposition as acceptable to myself as possible with the expectation, however, of voting against the whole business (Laughter); for I do not want those people in.

MR. POMEROY. I would suggest, the gentleman from Kanawha certainly misunderstood me. I did not indicate how I would vote. I did indicate very clearly that I would vote against putting the two together so that they had to stand or fall together. I indicated that clearly; but that was what I wished to convey: that I did not wish to group them together, to unite them; and I am really astonished at my friend from Doddridge taking the view he now does that there is an important point to be gained by putting them together. The two stand on entirely different bases, I think; and therefore while I did not indicate that I should vote for either of the districts without some amendments, I wanted it to be understood that I was opposed to bringing both districts in together. And I do hope the Convention will now, before we adjourn, take the vote upon this, as the whole merits of the question will come up, after this is voted on, upon the motion to adopt section B.

THE PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment.

MR. STEVENSON of Wood. I call for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered and taken; and resulted:

YEAS - Messrs. Hall of Mason (President), Brown of Kanawha, Brumfield, Chapman, Carskadon, Dolly, Hall of Marion, Ruffner, Stuart of Doddridge, Walker - 10.

NAYS - Messrs. Brown of Preston, Battelle, Caldwell, Cassady, Dering, Dille, Hansley, Haymond, Harrison, Hubbs, Hervey, Hagar, Irvine, Lamb, Lauck, Montague, Mahon, O'Brien, Parsons, Powell, Parker, Paxton, Pomeroy, Sinsel, Simmons, Stevenson of Wood, Stewart of Wirt, Sheets, Soper, Taylor, Trainer, Van Winkle, Willey, Warder, Wilson - 35.

So the amendment was rejected.

MR. POWELL. Mr. President, I now move we adjourn.

MR. LAMB. I hope we may be able to dispose of this resolution first.

MR. POWELL. I think there are to be some amendments proposed, and that we had better adjourn.

MR. LAMB. I would like to stay here and vote on it.

MR. POWELL. There are other amendments to be offered, I think.

The question was put; the motion was agreed to; and the Convention adjourned.

November 26, 1861
November 27, 1861
November 29, 1861
November 30, 1861
December 2, 1861
December 3, 1861
December 4, 1861
December 5, 1861
December 6, 1861
December 7, 1861
December 9, 1861
December 10, 1861
December 11, 1861
December 12, 1861
December 13, 1861
December 14, 1861
December 16, 1861
December 17, 1861
December 18, 1861
December 19, 1861
December 20, 1861
January 7, 1862
January 8, 1862
January 9, 1862
January 10, 1862
January 11, 1862
January 13, 1862
January 14, 1862
January 15, 1862
January 16, 1862
January 17, 1862
January 18, 1862
January 20, 1862
January 21, 1862
January 22, 1862
January 23, 1862
January 24, 1862
January 25, 1862
January 27, 1862
January 28, 1862
January 29, 1862
January 30, 1862
January 31, 1862
February 1, 1862
February 3, 1862
February 4, 1862
February 5, 1862
February 6, 1862
February 7, 1862
February 8, 1862
February 10, 1862
February 11, 1862
February 12, 1862
February 13, 1862
February 14, 1862
February 15, 1862
February 17, 1862
February 18, 1862
February 12, 1863
February 13, 1863
February 14, 1863
February 16, 1863
February 17, 1863
February 18, 1863
February 19, 1863
February 20, 1863

Chapter Eleven: First Constitutional Convention of West Virginia

A State of Convenience

West Virginia Archives and History