PATRICK HENRY AND R. H. LEE.

537

a spirit of opposition to Congress and all its most prominent acts, ever since he left that body. Thus they became, for the time, the living and active exponents of two adverse political systems in both state and national questions. Opposing champions, the rival pretensions of oratory made them, in some sort, the gladiators of the Assembly; and from the homage paid to their age and longer service, as well as from the power and attractions of their eloquence, the privileged rôle of leaders was, by general consent, accorded to them.

They were both members of the House of Delegates, with all the eclat and influence of their traditional leadership, when Mr. Madison returned to it in 1784. At the same time were members, John Marshall, future chief justice of the United States, Spencer Roane, future president of the court of appeals of Virginia, Henry Tazewell, William Grayson, John Taylor, and Wilson Cary Nicholas, future senators of the United States, John Breckenridge, future attorney-general of the United States, Joseph Jones, late colleague of Mr. Madison in Congress, and Braxton, Tyler, Stuart, Ronald, Thruston, Corbin, and Page, all men of unquestioned ability. But, for the most part, they were younger statesmen; and deferring to the claims of the great popular and parliamentary leaders, they willingly stood aside when these veteran champions, with their burnished armour, entered the arena.

NOTE.

THE intimate relations of Mr. Lee and Mr. Henry, previous to their return to the legislature in 1779-1780, and their subsequent cordial union in opposition to the federal constitution of 1788, have led some writers into the error of supposing that they had generally harmonized in their political views, and cooperated on all the great public questions of their time. (See Grigsby's Discourse, p. 145, and Life of R. H. Lee, vol. I. pp. 45, 46.) The representation in the text is, however, abundantly sustained by the contemporaneous correspondence on Mr. Madison's files, as well as by other unquestionable testimony.

Mr. Jones, in a letter to Mr. Madison of the 24th of November, 1780, says:

"We have had a warm debate in the House upon a bill to explain and amend the act of the last session for funding the new bills of credit of Congress under the scheme of the 18th of March. The question agitated, whether those bills, as well as the two millions of State money issued last session, should be a tender in payment of debts; and determined that they should be a legal tender. Henry for the question, Richard Henry Lee against it; and both, aided by their auxiliaries, took up two days or nearly in discussing the question. Indeed, we lose a great deal of time in idle, unnecessary debate."

In another letter to Mr. Madison, dated the 31st of May, 1783, he says:

"Since my last, the bill for postponing to 20th of November next the making distress for the taxes has passed the House of Delegates by a majority of 13, and was, the day before yesterday, assented to by the Senate. Hurtful and dangerous as this step will, I fear, prove, it was warmly espoused by Mr. Henry, opposed by his antagonist, and every effort made to fix the day to an earlier period, but in vain."

Mr. Edmund Randolph, in writing to Mr. Madison on the 1st of June, 1782, says (speaking of Mr. Jefferson) :

"His triumph might certainly be an illustrious one over his former enemies, were he to resume the legislative character; for in the constant division between the two leaders, Henry and Lee, he might incline the scale to whichever side he would.”

To these extracts, taken somewhat at random from Mr. Madison's files, may be added the testimony of another distinguished contemporary witness. Judge Roane, who afterwards married a daughter of Mr. Henry, was, as we have seen, a member of the House of Delegates

RIVALRY OF THE TWO LEADERS.

539

with him and Mr. Lee in 1783 and 1784. In a letter addressed to Mr. Wirt, (see Life of Henry, p. 249,) he says:

"I met with Patrick Henry in the Assembly of May, 1783. I also there met with Richard Henry Lee. I lodged with Mr. Lee one or two sessions, and was perfectly acquainted with him, while I was yet a stranger to Mr. Henry. These two gentlemen were the great leaders in the House of Delegates, and were almost constantly opposed. There were many other great men who belonged to that body; but, as orators, they cannot be named with Henry and Lee."

CHAPTER XVIII.

Motives of Madison for returning to the State Legislature — Made Chairman of Committee on Commerce-Measures for promoting Commerce of the State - Concentration to particular Ports - Mr. Madison proposes Arrangement with Maryland respecting Jurisdiction and Navigation of the Potomac Resolution moved by him for Appointment of Joint Commissioners of the two States, remote Cause of the Federal Convention He introduces preparatory Measures for entering upon the Revision of the LawsSustains a Proposition for Revision of State Constitution - His Views on that Question - Proceedings of the Legislature upon the Subject Measures affecting Religious Freedom - Assessment proposed, but not acted on Question of Incorporation of Religious Societies - Mr. Madison opposed to both Questions of Federal Policy - Mr. Henry favors Invigoration of Federal Authority, with coercive Power in Congress Resolution passed for vesting in Congress Power to prohibit Trade with Nations refusing Reciprocity-Execution of Treaty of Peace with regard to British Debts - Opposed by Mr. Henry - Proposition of Mr. Madison on the Subject - Honors to Washington - Mr. Madison takes a leading part in them His eloquent Inscription for the Statue-General Washington and Mr. Madison exert themselves to obtain a Grant to Paine for his Revolutionary Services - Subsequent Ingratitude of Paine.

MR. MADISON came into the legislature with no ambition of leadership. Animated with a sincere

SERVICE IN STATE LEGISLATURE.

541

and unaffected respect for the abilities and services of his seniors, his sole desire was to conciliate their support, as well as to enlist the coöperation of his younger and able associates, in favor of those objects of public interest which his reflections and experience had led him to consider of the highest importance to the welfare both of the State and of the Confederacy. He has himself given to the world an impressive account of the considerations which induced him to yield to the renewed call of his fellow-citizens for his services in the legislature.

"Having served," he says, "as a member of Congress through the period between March, 1780, and the arrival of peace in 1783, I had become intimately acquainted with the public distresses and the causes of them. I had observed the successful opposition to every attempt to procure a remedy by new grants of power to Congress. I had found, moreover, that despair of success hung over the compromising principle of 1783 for the public necessities, which had been so elaborately planned and so impressively recommended to the States.

"Sympathizing, under this aspect of affairs, in the alarm of the friends of free government, at the threatened danger of an abortive result to the great, and perhaps last, experiment in its favor, I could not be insensible to the obligation to aid, as far as I could, in averting the calamity. With this view, I acceded to the desire of