It is not on military necessity alone that the concession is made. Many, as they read the Constitution now, see its powers over Slavery more clearly than before. The old superstition is abandoned; and they join with Patrick Henry, when, in the Virginia Convention, he declared the power of manumission accorded to Congress. He did not hesitate to argue against the adoption of the Constitution, because it accorded this power. And shall we be less perspicacious for Freedom than this Virginia statesman for Slavery? Discerning the power, he confessed his dismay: let us confess our joy. We have already seen that Slavery finds no support in the Constitution. Glance now at positive provisions by which it is brought completely under control of Congress. * * * * * 1. First among the powers of Congress, and associated with the power to lay and collect taxes, is that to “provide for the common defence and general welfare.” It is questioned whether this is a substantive power, or simply incident to that with which it is associated. But it is difficult, if not absurd, to insist that Congress has not this substantive power. Shall it not provide for the common defence? Shall it not regard the general welfare? If powerless to do these things in a great crisis, it had better abdicate. In the Virginia Convention, Mr. George Mason, a most decided opponent of the Constitution, said: “That Congress should have power to provide for the general welfare of the Union _I grant_.”[275] The language of Patrick Henry, to which allusion has just been made, was more explicit. He foresaw that this power would be directed against Slavery, and did not hesitate to declare:-- “Slavery is detested. We feel its fatal effects. We deplore it with all the pity of humanity. Let all these considerations, at some future period, press with full force on the minds of Congress; let that urbanity which, I trust, will distinguish America, and the necessity of national defence,--let all these things operate on their minds; they will search that paper [the Constitution] and see if they have power of manumission. And have they not, Sir? Have they not power _to provide for the general defence and welfare_? May they not think that these call for the abolition of slavery? May they not pronounce all slaves free? And will they not be warranted by that power? This is no ambiguous implication or logical deduction. _The paper speaks to the point. They have the power in clear, unequivocal terms, and will dearly and certainly exercise it._”[276] Language could not be more positive. To all who ask for the power of Congress over Slavery, here is a sufficient answer; and remember that this is not my speech, but the speech of Patrick Henry, who says that the Constitution “speaks to the point.” * * * * *