feelings of others, that in such a state, there being no social compact, the weak cannot always be protected from the violence of the strong, nor the honest and unsuspecting from the arts and intrigues of the selfish and cunning. Hence it is easy to conceive, that men, naturally formed for society, were inclined to enter into mutual compact for the better security of their natural rights. In this state of society, the unalienable rights of nature are held sacred:--And each member is intitled to an equal share of all the social rights. No man can of right become possessed of a greater share: If any one usurps it, he so far becomes a tyrant; and when he can obtain sufficient strength, the people will feel the rod of a tyrant. Or, if this exclusive privilege can be supposed to be held in virtue of compact, it argues a very capital defect; and the people, when more enlightened, will alter their compact, and extinguish the very idea. These opinions, I conceive to be conformable to the sentiments held up in our State Constitution. It is therein declared, that Government is instituted for the common good; not for the profit, honor or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men. And further, all the inhabitants of this Commonwealth, having such qualifications, as shall be established by their Constitution, have an equal right to elect or be elected for the public employments. Before the formation of this Constitution, it had been affirmed as a self evident truth, in the declaration of Independence, very deliberately made by the Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled that, "all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." This declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the States in the Union, and has never been disannulled. May we not from hence conclude, that the doctrine of Liberty and Equality is an article in the political creed of the United States. Our Federal Constitution ordains that, no title of nobility shall be granted by the United States. The framers of that Constitution probably foresaw that such titles, vain and insignificant in themselves, might be in time, as they generally, and I believe always have been, the introductory to the absurd and unnatural claims of hereditary and exclusive privileges. The Republic of France have also adopted the same principle, and laid it as the foundation of their Constitution. That nation having for many ages groaned under the exercise of the pretended right claimed by their Kings and Nobles, until their very feelings as men were become torpid, at length suddenly awoke, from their long slumber, abolished the usurpation, and placed every man upon the footing of equal rights. "All men are born free and equal in rights," if I mistake not, is their language.