nothing to do but think for slaves, to enjoy the chase and the
race-ground, to extol their pedigree, and traduce labor, and lead
retainers to war--would be a government for the few over the many, an
aristocracy of blood and privilege, of curled moustache and taper fingers;
but not a republic of patriots, of self-made men, of equal privilege and
just laws. It would be a return to semi-barbarism, to the age of Louis
XIV., or even of Charles I.

This is now the strong tendency in the Rebel States: even along our free
border, but below it, such is the system of representation, that a county
containing only about 3,000 inhabitants, sends as many representatives to
the legislature as another county of 30,000, and a single proprietor casts
as many votes as a whole commune. So much liberty of citizens is already
sacrificed to the chevalier, to the system of forced service.

But were a select number of experienced men, of true statesmen, embracing
different pursuits and professions, educated in different parts of the
world, and drawn together by grand national events,--statesmen born in the
age when liberty had its first grand revival, and was guarded by soberness
of thought, and tried by every variety and extent of sacrifice--by men who
had no professional, exclusive interest to provide for, but who expected
to fight and die for their convictions, who sought only to lay the
foundation of a nationality for future generations, and for the world; who
aimed at a healthful union of all popular interests, both among poor and
rich, among masters and dependents; who provided for freedom of action
under law; of worship and education, of commerce, agriculture, and the
arts; for the easy and equitable support of government,--for its
perpetuity indeed, infusing into it elements that appeal powerfully, both
to the self-interest and the patriotism of the citizens,--I say, were such
men, with such ends in view, by such sacrifice, to frame such a