ANALYSIS

Of the Report q the Committee of the Cmss1.


tion on The SUBJECT of .Setdration.
{"character_count": 3792, "word_count": 624, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9672999978065491], "ccnet_perplexity": [1723.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
VI me neport Y We COMfrlHee ~ NE C0NZeN.
ton on The subject of Separation.


Who hath believed urReport,' is the pathstie
breathing OF wounded spirit, than, which ifany
thing so pure could without impiety be applied to
the present extraordinary production nothiag could
be more perfectiyexpressive Of its melancholy tor.
tune. .sM
II was not believed, by the committee, which
prepared it else why did they manifest no more
confidence in its truth !? Ii was not believed by
the individual, Who was the author OF il for be
knew better than any other man, that il was con-
struction OF the act never contemplated by the


legislature. II not believed by the convention,
by which twas adopted. 1t was not even believ.y
ed in caucus. For besides the novelty Of tue des
which till that momen. had struck nohody--its
strangeness, which excited universal surprise, ,snd
the violence OF the construction, which no one pre-.
tended 10 deny,-its falsehood, absurdity and i'm
justice were pointed out to the convention before
its adoption, by gentlemen Of the highest honour
and integrity, Dtne Of them even favourable To,
separation, and desrous at that moment 70 adopt
some proper peasure to effect it-& painted in the
strongest Colours. Some, who gave il their sup.
port, declined 10 give il their sanction and for


bore to express their belief in it, In that conyen-


ton there we're houourable gentlemen invested
elsewhere with Judicial authority.--lhe FIRST icn-


preston with regard to the construction was, that


II was absurd. On second consideration, it appear
| ed ihgenious,-it was plausble-and specious -


bnt It was not pronounced to be correct. II would
answer however to be adopted for some other par-
pose. Itwas not necessary always to adhere to
| severe abstract principles, though il was always
Important TO do right 1t would do to pass and


the legislature would do the re t-So diilideat, az


the committee were, OF attesng the truth OF their
own constructon--so delicate as the convention


were as to giving their to is correctncss


thus dishunored, dscrediied and dsgraced by those
who were responsible for its fdeIity,--sent forth


into the world with this stain upon its birth aud
stigma upon its character,can it be surprising that
II should be considered IN iiegitimate thing and
that che public aiso should refuse it their credence =
II the convention possessed perfect confidence ie
their own construction, where the necessityo Of


hoids'g such menacing language towards the legis-
iature, as they concluded afterwards to qualify
while they at the time proiessed respect for
Its opinion, and admitted the interest of Massachu-
setts in the question? Why was il necessary to


insult that respectable body by saying that no


inconvenience would arise' from consulting it p


or suggest that it might refuse to modify the law,
as Justice should rsqairep Why call upon tito


give thor ac, the desired Interpretation under the
influence and array of the present commanding


maJorlty'f And where was the propriety OF n-


forming that truly honourable assembly, that il
contrary to their expectation, its decision should
prove unfavourablc, they could, at an adjolrneI
session OF the convention, determine for themselves
aad carry the act into execution agreeaby to their
own understanding Of provisions PIT is vain TO


say, that the spiri, of this report is hsnabcd and
suodaed and that it no longer possesses the per-
n'cious properties, formerly ascribed to it. That
report was first published in their own paper as o.
rgnally adopted. II was no candestine maupuvrs
prat'ca publication on the part of the minority.
| to throw odium the convention or prejudice the
public mind. 1t was their own voluntary and even


greedy proceeding. 1t went forth into the world